To think that anti-vaxers may actually being onto something?

[viiz]

I don't have children myself yet but I don't know what I would chose when the time comes. Most of pro vax/anti vax threads turns nasty with people not even willing to try and look at things with others side perspective. Not willing to even consider points of view different than their own and that's a very silly approach. People believed a lot of things that turned out to be false over the years and centuries. Why not to doubt a little?

I was born in early '80s and not in UK. Myself, my siblings and friends were all vaccinated at the time. I don't even remember what I was vaccinated against but had to be pretty basic. Just a few jabs throughout my whole childhood/teen years and nothing 3in1 or 10in1 or whatever they'll bring next.

Now to the point. Reading through hundreds of threads it jumps at me how many children have neurological, behavioural or emotional disorders. No one else sees it really?? I don't know even one person from my childhood including friends, extended family , neighbours etc who would have ADS or ADHD or any other issues like that. I see their children to have it though.

AIBU to consider there could be a link here??

Please be gentle. I hope to have a discussion here. I don't disrespect anyone's views and I only ask to try and ask yourself 'what if'.

Maybe you could at least try dropping this arrogant 'Im right, you're wrong' attitude and admitting that there might be the slightest chance that our modern science/medicine does not know everything yet. Could you honestly say they covered it all and there will be no new findings or change of direction let's say in next 10,20,50 years from now??

Do you really want to make decisions for your kids based on a ‘smallest chance’ that something might be wrong with vaccines, rather than on the overwhelming evidence in support of the benefit they provide?

I don’t doubt there is a long way to go in medicine. Maybe one day we will have advanced so much we won’t need vaccines any more. But we don’t live in the future. We live in the present. And in the present, there is no basis for doubting that vaccines save millions and millions of lives.

I wonder how much of heat in this debate is coming from USA with their shitty healthcare. Even a relatively minor illness can cost enormously, and if requires a hospital stay, then whoa! So if some kids die or get permanently disabled by vaccines - well, too bad - but if it protects the masses from bankrupting medical expenses - may be a worthwhile risk.

So if some kids die or get permanently disabled by vaccines - well, too bad - but if it protects the masses from bankrupting medical expenses - may be a worthwhile risk.

But it’s not protecting the masses from bankruptcy. It’s protecting the masses from dying of or being deformed by measles, polio, tuberculosis etc.

but also flu, chickenpox...

The main reason not to call people idiots is they stop listening to you. Losing the opportunity to make converts just so you can get your outrage junkie fix is… not smart.

Anti-vaxxers aren’t possible converts. (Parents looking for reassurance might be, but they don’t tend to link to dodgy websites or constantly argue about conspiracies. Those threads are generally in the vac topic and are usually short.)

The internet poster child of disinformation and mischief is the anti-vax campaign. Their contributions need robust response. Anything less is exploited as evidence that there is a genuine anti-vax argument. Which there isn’t.

So if some kids die or get permanently disabled by vaccines - well, too bad

So if more kids die or get permanently disabled by people not vaccinating - well, is that just too bad too?

OP do you realise that by people like you spreading this sort of unsubstantiated nonsense, easily influenced people might start to think about not vaccinating and then children might actually die from an easily preventable disease. It's exactly this sort of bullshit that has led to a rise in previously all but eradicated diseases.

I wonder if any of the ones here who think that science shouldn’t be trusted believes in gravity. Or radiation. Or gas. Or cells? They are things that can’t be seen, so how do you KNOW for sure they exist without someone who knows more than you telling you?

If you are such a questioning genius why trust science in one field and not another?

I grew up near some Amish communities, my family bought from them for years (very nice soft apple cider among other things), and - yeah - there were certainly people among them that would be classified as having neurological, behaviour, and emotional issues. That they deal with it differently doesn't mean they aren't there, but they're an easy group to make up a lot of things about.

It's like how certain diagnoses are more common in certain demographics - sometimes they're more at risk and sometimes there are social or cultural reasons why other groups may either not get any diagnosis or a different one. I mean, there is strong evidence from the US that part of the growing numbers of autism diagnosis is because children from marginalized groups were - and some places still are - more likely to be diagnosed with childhood schizophrenia or similar even with the same symptoms and there has been a cultural shift in some groups where any diagnoses was considered shameful or just not possible for certain well-to-do kids.

Yes, life is complicated and we'll likely never know everything about the human body. New things come every day - I find the strong evidence that the measle and later the MMR vaccine is actually a large part responsible of the reduction of several other diseases like scarlet fever very interesting on surprising consequences.

I think how some of the media reports it has really not helped and googling is just full of all sorts. I mean as shown in this thread, Wakefield's unethical experiments were essentially torturing autistic kids, but even when was struck off the media was, in my opinion, a bit softly softly & made it seemed more about falsified data and almost seemed to enjoy fueling the conspiracy theories and ignoring the pain he caused those kids.

Also, the "No one would ever want their child to suffer or die" is just not true & I kinda wish people would stop saying it. Kids are maimed and killed by their parents every year. Statistically, girls and disabled children of either sex are at the most risk. It's not nice to think about, but it's the reality we live in. Just like there are risks with any medication, including very small ones like with vaccines or Calpol, but maybe better information on risk analysis would be better to discuss these and making choices than making links & acting like perceived correlations means causation.

It’s funny because most anti-vaxxers would have problem calling an ambulance if their child had meningitis, and they’d be glad of the treatment.

This is a knock on effect of these diseases being extremely rare now, and people not understanding what they can do.

The main reason not to call people idiots is they stop listening to you. Losing the opportunity to make converts just so you can get your outrage junkie fix is… not smart.

The main reason to call their beliefs stupid or idiotic is to be very clear that they are.
When we engage in discussions, and as much as I like to respect other points of view, we give the other side some credence for intellectual honesty and at least some factual basis for the discussion.
Unfortunately neither applies to anti-vaxxers.

I'm happy to put a chicken pox vaccine on the table for discussion. Or discuss the merits of DNA vs protein based vaccines. Or discuss different delivery methods.
I'll even go as far as saying that I don't believe we will ever develop good enough vaccines for many parasites, malaria included.

But that's not what anti-vaxxers are about. They are "anti-vaccines" in principle. Regardless of the evidence. In that sense, they are like flat earthers and creationists.

Also, I'm an "extra-vaxxer"

My son has had all the NHS scheduled ones, plus a few extras (Hep B, TB, chickenpox).

No side effects, no complications - and he is genuinely NEVER ILL. It's a miracle considering "all teh toxinz injected DIRECTLY INTO HIS BLOOSTREAM"

^that was a message to me from an anti-vaxxer upon discovering my extra-vaxxer status. We're no longer in contact, thankfully.

Huggybear16 were you able to find much reasoned information about the chicken pox vaccination? I have been considering it, particularly as it is a standard schedule vaccination in other countries. My only reservation so far is that I haven't been able to find much information about the duration of the immunity and whether ongoing boosters will be necessary into adulthood. I was under the impression that chickenpox is worse in adults than children (in general not all cases) so am a bit wary of committing DC to needing to remember/pay for vaccinations into adulthood so they don't get it as adults - which would undo the point of vaccinating as a child.

Our kids are all fully vaccinated. We don’t have the flu jab however and neither do the kids. I’m prepared to take the risk on vaccination for childhood diseases that require herd vaccination such as polio and the general U.K. childhood vaccinations. However I wouldn’t give my children a flu jab - last year was only twenty five percent effective. I wouldn’t go near the HPV vaccine after reading Doctor David Healy’s information about the harms done by the jab. So I suppose I am on two
Minds about newer versions of vaccinations. I’d say I’m pro herd vaccination when there is a proven safety history but I’m sceptical about new vaccination programmes that either aren’t actually sued by the full herd like flu or have serious harms documented but only quietly broadcast like HPV.
davidhealy.org/hanami-hpv-statement/

OP, re. your last post.

Science is evidence based; there is currently
no evidence that vaccinations can cause autism and a lot of evidence to the contrary.

I am prepared to acknowledge that it is not impossible that, in the future, scientists might discover a link between vaccination and some cases of autism. It's unlikely but not impossible.

But as to whether vaccinations are causing a spike in autism - no, that does not appear possible. The simple reason is that non-vaccinated children are as likely as vaccinated children to be diagnosed as autistic.

How can you believe that vaccines might be a contributor to rising rates of autism diagnosis when the rise is equally great amongst non-vaccinated children? How could that be possible?

There's open-minded and then there's lacking in logic and critical thinking.

One of the problems is that there is a reluctance amongst large parts of the scientific community to be honest about the limits of what we can know. And the reason for that is the media would whip up a 5hitstorm if they were.

Suppose a vaccine reduced the individual's chance of dying by 0.01%. But suppose rare complications mean people having the vaccine had a 0.00001% chance of developing some other serious condition (and to make the stats trickier, a condition that some people will develop anyway). There is no way that statisticians could prove or disprove that sort of causal link. The only way you have a chance of demonstrating anything is if one follows swiftly from the other with notable symptoms, and if you followed up with specific cases and actually identified the causal link.
Statistically, the best you can do is demonstrate that the risks are small enough that you are definitely better off vaccinating.

Suppose the scientific community said that, yes, it is possible 'x' vaccine causes 'y' side effect in very rare cases, but it's so rare that we can't know for certain, and we can demonstrate with great certainty there is a large net benefit.... which bit would make the headlines?

@JasperRising

Huggybear16were you able to find much reasoned information about the chicken pox vaccination?

Enough to convince me that it would be beneficial for us. However, unlike the scheduled vaccinations, I understand why many choose not to get this one.

The studies that I was aware of, at the time, showed a follow up after 15-20 years. The results were favourable in terms of vaccinating with regard to breakthrough cases and their severity. A second vaccination (i.e. two doses in the child's early years - the regimen that is available here and now) will reduce these instances further.

The main reason for vaccinating my son was, however, because of my dad having treatment for cancer.

I am not an immunologist, nor do I work directly with vaccines, but I do work in a closely related field.

I saw a very funny thread from an anti vaxxer in America asking what she could do to protect her children now that there was a measles outbreak in her area? Some very funny responses (who says Americans dont do irony?). Some advised getting a shaman in, shaking holy water on them, or other mumbo jumbo, giving them a small dose of the disease to give them immunity (oh wait....) or furthering survival of the fittest by letting them die.

I always pause when I realise that parents who are protected because they were vaccinated are prepared to sacrifice their own children to these horrendous childhood diseases.

@YoGert

For any particular vaccination furore, each of these possibilities is conceivable:

1. No causal link at all. A few cases where onset of symptoms entirely coincidentally follow post vaccination fever. Tragic, but pure coincidence.

2. An incredibly weak causal link. There is an x% base chance of developing symptoms in the unvaccinated population. There is an 'x+y'% chance of developing symptoms in the vaccinated population. Crucially, y is much, much smaller than x. y is so small that statistically it is impossible to see it being expressed above normal statistical variation in base cases.
   But if y is non-zero there will be the odd rare case where symptoms causally follow post-vaccination fever. Tragic. But if enough people trade a small chance of one disease for an infinitesimal chance of another, there will be some losers. Still worth it. Still tragic.

Note that I know nothing about the particular case you are discussing.
Also note that in either case there can be a huge net benefit to vaccination.

There isn't an increase in the risk of people who are neurodivergent (autistic, have adhd etc) there's just an increase in understanding and diagnosis. Many many people are currently being diagnosed as autistic in their 30's, 40's and beyond. We were all still autistic 30/40years ago as it is A condition we have FROM BIRTH it's just that are difficulties were overlooked and we were labelled as weird, awkward, shy, nerdy etc.

The autism and vaccines study frustrates me so much. The guy who wrote it admitted he made it up, he was discredited within months but it persists years later. Several studies since have assessed over 10,000 children and found NO link at all. The original "study" was a fraction of that. It's misinformation which is actively dangerous.

Also studies aside I find it offensive that people basically deem autism worse than death. That's what you are saying if you don't vaccinate because of the bullshit discredited study. It's one of the most quoted reasons by anti vaccers and basically is saying I'd rather risk my child contracting an illness which can be fatal and/or have life altering consequences than risk the (bullshit) possibility they may become autistic.

By all means read up but read reputable sources. There's even a story somewhere of a girl who had a life altering reaction to a vaccine. In it she encourages EVERYONE to vaccinate their kids.

Suppose the scientific community said that, yes, it is possible 'x' vaccine causes 'y' side effect in very rare cases, but it's so rare that we can't know for certain, and we can demonstrate with great certainty there is a large net benefit

You don't have to suppose. You can read the literature.

Ideally, we'd have individual based medicine, where we could predict reactions and outcomes based on our genome/epigenome/etcome.

Researchers, doctors and health authorities already recognise that some people may not be good recipients for some vaccines and will advise those people against it.
For the rest, the risk is the same as developing a sudden food allergy. Or choking. Or being run by a car. Correction: probably higher for any of these.

If anyone's child has had an adverse reaction to any vaccine, then it is probably a good idea for that child to avoid similar vaccines in future.

However, that doesn't mean that the vaccine itself is unsafe or that it shouldn't be used for the millions of children for whom it's a benefit and not a risk.

My children are almost fully vaccinated, apart from the medics at the time did not think it wise to have the full course of the whooping cough vaccine as my daughter has worsening reactions to the first 2 jabs. In fact the nurse at the clinic refused to do it and sent me to the clinic doc who at the time was able to give it without the whooping cough. I do believe in vaccination, the diseases they protect against are horrible, but I did it in medical advice. The vaccine is not 100 per cent effective anyway, and fortunately neither of mine got it, in fact I don't remember hearing about it at all being around

The way I think about this is to compare vaccinations to other medical procedures. There is a small risk of some adverse side effects as a result of vaccinations (not autism but eg children who respond badly, who are not recommended they have it due to compromised immune systems etc). However, for the vast majority, the risks are very very small and therefore it is worth having it.

Similarly, when Ds had to have surgery aged 3, we went into it knowing that there was a small risk that the surgery, and anaesthetic, could go badly. This is a risk when you agree to undergo surgery. And obviously, the risk for a three year old is worse. HOWEVER, the very very small risk of something going wrong during DS' surgery was much LOWER than the risks we would be incurring by NOT letting him have the surgery.

All of the above is based on medical experience and scientific research, conducted by highly qualified individuals over many years. And I was therefore happy to be guided by the surgeon. Yes, that was the longest 1 hour of my life while he was undergoing it....but I would do it again.

And ditto, a small part of me worries when I vaccinate my children that they'll be one of the very very tiny number who have some kind of adverse effect. But I know the chances are so tiny that I'd be a fool to not give them the vaccinations because of it.