To suggest immunisations should be a legal requirement?

[rednailsredheart]

Look at it like this:

Wearing seatbelts it purely a safety issue. It's also a legal requirement in the UK to protect car passengers.

So why is immunisation not a legal requirement?

Likewise, drinking and driving is a criminal offence, due to the danger to the passengers and other drivers/people around you.

But deliberately choosing to let your child become a carrier of a totally preventable disease, infecting people around them (including those too young for immunisations), is totally fine? If someone doesn't vaccinate their child, then the child subsequently becomes gravely ill, why aren't the parents charged with neglect?

Makes me think of this article

ONION

But deliberately choosing to let your child become a carrier of a totally preventable disease

I completely fail to understand why it is thought that unvaccinated children are considered to carry the diseases. My DD has never had any vaccine, she does not go round infecting anyone. In fact she is very healthy and has had years where she has had 100% attendance at school. She gets less colds and flu than the boys that were vaccinated.

With regard to not letting non vaccinated kids go to school, should they also be banned from university and work too. Maybe going out in public should be discouraged as well.

She is a teen now and vaccination never comes up in conversation. She has not been to the doctors in years so those conversations don't happen either, though my GP supported my view not to vaccinate her.

dutch would be interested to see the evidence. Respectfully a pubmed search suggests that what you are suggesting is nonsense.

calico interested to hear what your DD will do about pregnancy, are you not concerned about the possibility of congenital rubella syndrome in particular?

toobreathless From PubMed: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24277828

Here's a magazine-article summary of the study: www.scientificamerican.com/article/baboon-study-reveals-new-shortcoming-of-pertussis-vaccine/

And here's a similar conclusion in humans, from the CDC Journal: wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/6/5/00-0512_article

I wouldn't recommend that anyone panic over this stuff, but it seems a little hypocritical to shout "protect the herd" when there are heavy question marks hanging over a routinely-used vaccine. Respectfully.

V interesting articles Dutch. Thanks.

toobreathless. It is possible that calico's daughter may have had rubella. It's a very mild illness. Both my boys had it when they were under a year old. Vaccines aren't the only (or the most effective) way of acquiring immunity.

YABU.

My children are vaccinated, fully.

Anti-vaxers are like climate change deniers for me. When I hear another parent hold forth about all they have researched vaccines and have made a measured decision not to have them; I nod, and in my head, I think "dippy." I question their intelligence and judgement on everything else going forward, forever.

There are very young children and people who cannot be vaccinated for health reasons. I vaccinate my own children for their own sake and out of a sense of social responsibility.

However, forcing children to be vaccinated is a step too far. Deny them state schools, nurseries, even being in the GP's waiting room during infant/child clinics. But taking physical control of their bodies against their parents' wishes is a bit too much. Even for me.

"Deny them state schools, nurseries, even being in the GP's waiting room during infant/child clinics."

What about the children who have been vaccinated but aren't immune? Should we be able to exclude them too? What about adults whose immunity has waned? They're can also pass on disease. Although, as Calico has pointed out, just because someone isn't immune to a disease doesn't mean that they're carrying it around with them!

I haven't read the whole thread, but if there's some hysteria going on about pertussis & herd immunity, have a read of the JCVI minutes for the last couple of years. I haven't browsed for a while but last time I did it looked as if they were moving away from herd immunity because the vaccination just doesn't last long enough to make that realistic & instead were changing strategy to one of protecting babies (the group it's dangerous for) & not worrying too much about anyone else.

I'm sort of sniggering at the 'won't allow an unvaccinated child near my offspring line' on here. As in my experience it's my vaccinated child that many parents choose to keep their children away from. (I have seen children ushered very quickly out of the way recently).

I have no issue allowing an unvaccinated child near my children. But I take issue with them having close contact with my baby (not that I have one at present!)

dutch thank you for taking the time to post the links. They are want I thought they might be when I searched last night. The raise interesting points but given the size of the studies & the fact that one was done in baboons and one is essentially a case report I can't see how they are relevant other than to flag up that this is an area where a decent study (in humans) is needed.

I have said before that I am fiercely pro vaccination. I think what really, really, REALLY winds me up are those who chose not to vaccinate for ridiculous reasons. Clearly some children will have genuine reasons not to vaccinate & these children should and could be protected by herd immunity if others were sensible and responsible.

Booboostoo Mon 02-Feb-15 20:43:30
pagwatch no need for a blog! PM me for a link to my books and articles.

I might just do that. I'm having terrible trouble sleeping just atm.
Mind numbing drivel delivered in patronising tones might just do the trick.

Booboostar
Neither was it supposed to be a blueprint, where did I say I expected others to think like me? I am a philosopher, I am trained to think like this. I don't know how it comes across, for me this is fairly basic critical thinking and analysing of possibilities.

The language you used in that post is unequivocal and says that you expect others to think like you. For example: 'These harms should be feared...' and 'The correct response to this risk is...'

If your essay is not intended to tell people how to think, what were the intentions behind it? It's not a reasoned/balanced look at the risks and benefits of vaccinating and comes across as your personal views on why people should vaccinate: what concerns you think they may have and why they should overcome them.

If you are a philosopher, perhaps you could comment on why those who support vaccination and think others should vaccinate too, direct their views at the vaccinations included in the Department of Health's childhood immunisation programme. I don't see any uproar about the lack of people who have selected the varicella vaccine (not currently included in the immunisation programme), or the flu vaccine (only recently included for selected ages), both of which can be fatal and are usually the cause of tens of deaths each year (and in the case of flu, thought also to be 'associated' with sometimes thousands of fatalities per year). I do find it odd that so many people who support vaccination and believe others should be made to vaccinate, manage to have the same views as the Department of Health on which vaccinations are important. People are far more circumspect about judging other government functions and policies (e.g. those related to the treasury, foreign policy, education...).

As a philospher, can you also shed some light on why people fear not just the complications of disease, but getting the disease itself? Why isn't that same fear attached to contracting other diseases that may result in death, that aren't (or up until recently in the case of flu weren't) included in the childhood immunisation programme? If the varicella vaccine were to be included in the programme in the UK, with a herd immunity requirement, do you think perceptions of the disease would change?

toobreathless the thing that bothers me most about this topic is that we basically all want the same thing: Good information, a trusting relationship with our doctor, and good health for our own children and every other child in the world.

While you're quite right to say that some children will have genuine reasons not to vaccinate... who decides how genuine those reasons are? Me? You? The current government? The previous government? One doctor? A panel of doctors? All voting citizens in a referendum?

My child is one of those who are 'legitimately unable to be vaccinated.' For now. Who knows if his 'excuse' will be acceptable next year. And the year after that, perhaps some tiny person undergoing chemo will be deemed an acceptable risk.

As a member of that group who is (for now) graciously excused from vaccinating, I'd like to say this: If you really cared about my son, a boy who is part of the precious herd, you would stop vaccinating. He will be better protected by a herd that has naturally acquired immunity. He will be better served by the long-term effects of naturally-acquired measles (for instance). If you really cared about people like us, put down the needle.

No? You'd rather do what you feel is best for your own child? Fair enough, I can't blame you at all. But don't you dare call me or any other vaccine refuser selfish for betraying The Herd.

YABU. I'm pro-vaccination, I understand the need for herd immunity but like someone said above I'm also pro-choice. If we say immunisations are required against wishes then where would the line latter be drawn? It's a slippery slope in which all kinds of things can come under scrutiny and be forced on people for the good of the many.

I remember there was a Law and Order episode where someone took her unvaccinated son out to the park where he passed on measles and killed another child. It was controversial but interesting and gave a good view on all sides. They ruled there that it was the mothers choice and right not to vaccinate but they were torn on the fact that she'd happily taken her infected son to an area with other children it- thus putting them at risk. I think she was just cautioned not to take a sick child near others.

fascicle, I think if the varicella vaccine was included on the schedule there would definitely be a change in perception of the disease. Already, because it is used elsewhere and is being considered here, you hear a lot more scare stories about CP and how dangerous it is. When I mentioned the possibility of a CP vaccine being introduced to my medic friends 10 years ago they all laughed and thought it was a silly idea. Not so much now.

." He will be better protected by a herd that has naturally acquired immunity"

Why?

Hakluyt Your question is fair but difficult to answer from my own experience without sharing details of my son's medical history and our family's background - something I'm just not comfortable doing online.

In non-personal terms, naturally-acquired immunity is the foundation upon which all three of the generally accepted mathematical models of herd immunity are built. Vaccine-acquired immunity doesn't support those models: secondary vaccine failure, waning immunity, and imprecise ways of measuring immunity mean there are too many variables to make the model(s) reliable. There are also other factors (for example a herd must remain stable, with no emigration or immigration. Something that isn't practical when applied to human populations).

Reading even the basics of the theories on herd immunity written by the most pro- of vaccine advocates just leaves too many questions open, no matter where a person sits in the overall discussion.

There are - to my mind at least - just too many grey areas to be adequately addressed in a pamphlet picked up at the GPs office.

toobreathless
I have said before that I am fiercely pro vaccination. I think what really, really, REALLY winds me up are those who chose not to vaccinate for ridiculous reasons.

As per Dutch1e's second para. Regardless of vaccination decisions made, parents generally have their children's best interests at heart. And regardless of decision outcome, some parents will have given vaccination no thought; some will have spent hours/days researching.

As for the herd immunity argument - I think this is rarely a primary reason behind a decision to vaccinate.

toobreathless As for the herd immunity argument - I think this is rarely a primary reason behind a decision to vaccinate

You're right. Could it be that we've found a little common ground?

I guess it just makes me sad when the herd immunity thing is used as an acceptable reason to bash those who choose not to vaccinate, but as you said it's rarely a factor when deciding to vaccinate.

It would be like a child having ongoing reactions to antibiotics. Instead of believing the parents that antibiotics are making their kids sick, doctors ridicule them and tell them they are selfish for refusing to administer antibiotics as someone else's child may eventually pick up a communicable disease that could be easily killed by regular doses of antibiotics given to all children.

(Not a brilliant analogy, I know)

"I guess it just makes me sad when the herd immunity thing is used as an acceptable reason to bash those who choose not to vaccinate, but as you said it's rarely a factor when deciding to vaccinate. "

I guess it does depend what you mean by "choose". I have friends who have chosen not to vaccinate because they use homeopathy. Very happy to use herd immunity to bash them. I know someone else who doesn't "because it's not natural" Them too. My sil doesn't vaccinate her children because her sister was vaccine damaged in the 1970s. I think she is wrong, but I wouldn't bang the herd immunity drum with her.

Short essay about Herd Immunity and a mum whose child is autistic. Kind of interesting from a reputable, leftish, US news magazine.

www.slate.com/articles/life/family/2015/02/anti_vaxxers_and_the_measles_outbreak_understanding_why_parents_don_t_vaccinate.html

Toomanyexams Slate is to pro-vaccine what whale.to is to conspiracy theorists. I speak as someone who has been published on Slate - it's far far right on this topic.

If Slate is far right, you won't find anything from a reputable source in the US that you consider centrist even. Folks in the US are pretty upset because of the measles outbreak and the whooping cough. It's getting a little scary for people.

Neat that you were published though. What did you write about? I enjoy reading articles on the site. I don't always agree, but it's good stuff.