Why are some parents/families anti vax?

[Sistersis]

Just read an article about the UK no longer being measles free. Just trying to understand what are the reasons that some people are against vaccination.

Not being cheeky here, geniuenly interested. Sorry if this has been done already.

Up until the last few years, the vaccination rates were so high that the chances of a child in the UK getting one of these diseases was very low. Therefore parents who believe the mis-information saw no downside for their child in not being vaccinated. It was a very easy choice for them to believe the perceived "risks" were not worth it as chances of getting measles etc were small.

It is not the same now that these diseases aren't coming back.

I'd imagine if a fully effective vaccine against cancer were developed now, we'd all be queuing up for it. Much the same as people did for for the polio vaccine in the 1960s.

The ones over seen believe

The risk of vaccine damage 1 in 1 million is significant

The risk of measles damage ie 1 in 5000 die, 1 in 4 are hospitalised, 1 in 15 left with long term complications such as deafness, is 'scaremongering' and wont happen to their kid because their kid is so healthy and has a fantastic immune system. Reality is it does hit vulnerable people harder but healthy kids can be affected too.

Still believe the autism link even though this has been disproved to death

Because most havent been exposed to measles they say it is a self limiting mild childhood illness that wont affect children with good diets. They think it was somehow worse in the days before vaccinations because children had poorer diets then

They are worried about chemicals in vaccines

Worried about unknown long term effects of vaccines (other than less death)

Think that deaths from disease is coincidental to introductions of vaccines due to improvements in living conditions and improved diet (ignoring that these would have had similar effects on all diseases at the same time, when in reality each disease dropped after introduction of the specific vaccine which were all at different times)

They think anecdotes and YouTube movies are 'proof' that vaccines are dangerous

In vaccine is 100pc effective at individual level and they see a story about someone who was vaccinated catching measles and think it doesnt work and there is no point (ignoring the fact you are 10x more likely to catch it if you are unvaccinated and it's likely to be much more severe)

At the extreme end they believe that the government are trying to kill their children eg limit population growth / 'big pharma' are trying to make everyone ill so they can sell them their drugs in later life / doctors make money from injecting patients (which has been disproved, they lose money). Conspiracy theories are hardest to argue against as when you point out facts from independent studies they will just say the study is fake / useless as ultimately funded by big pharma etc

*no vaccine is 100pc...

A very few have children who cannot be vaccinated for health reasons.

The rest are just not very good at thinking.

I'd imagine if a fully effective vaccine against cancer were developed now, we'd all be queuing up for it. Much the same as people did for for the polio vaccine in the 1960s.

You don't even need to use hypothetical vaccines, look at the sudden increase in vaccine uptake during localised outbreaks and queues of people waiting to be vaccinated/get their DC vaccinated. Amazing what a bit of actual risk will do in sharpening the mind.

Cause they're thick as pig shit, that's why.

'Because some people believe the autism link.'
There is no autism link.

PinkyU

Of course people have access. Most people in the UK have a doctor they can talk to. Access to the internet.

Yes it's been proven that the measles outbreaks are due to decreases in vaccination levels. Scientists in general have proven there needs to be a specific uptake to confer herd immunity. I think it's over 93pc or something. In the outbreaks last year I think 80 or 90pc of people that caught it were unvaccinated. Given that is just 10pc of the population, it showed unvaccinated people were more likely to catch and spread it

Because a lot of people really aren't that clever

I think it's partly because vaccines have been so successful, the diseases they prevent now feel like an unimaginably distant threat.

I think it's also something to do with 'the cult of the mommy' (especially in America, where the movement really originated). The idea that a mother knows best for her children on all matters is so deified that being antivax becomes a way of showing how pure and devoted to your children (and to motherhood) you are. It's a way of asserting parental power in the face of scary sounding things like pharmaceutical companies and medical terminology.

BBCs article on this shows that LONDON and the richer areas of the U.K. are the areas not vaccinating.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-49393279

Trying to post the graphic.

Because a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

It's mostly people who have access to information but don't have adequate training to understand it or evaluate it.

The same reason why homeopathy is popular among some groups.

Because of generic distrust of anything that is not "natural".

It's the type of people who wouldn't recognise the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide as a joke.

Because you actually have no idea what they are injecting into your children.
You trust that these things are safe, that the government is benign. That the bottle is filled with what the pharmaceutical company say it is filled with. That society has your personal ultimate good in mind when injecting you with this stuff.

That is a lot of trust you are putting in a lot if people you don't know, many of whom are only in it for the money.

Then you find out that some vaccines were grown on embryos (So that means another child died so mine wouldn't get a deadly disease. Absolutely morally unacceptable.) But they don't tell you this stuff, so then you wonder what else they haven't told you. And whether all the other bonkers-sounding stuff is actually true, if this bonkers-sounding thing was true.

And you see why those people in Africa (can't remember the country, Uganda?) refused vaccines because they though they were being given contraceptives on the sly, because that seems like the kind of thing that would be done. I could believe it.

You see what government and medical decisions are made in other areas, and how completely morally off the wall they are, and suddenly what the anti-vaxxers are saying seems quite reasonable.

(All my kids are fully vaccinated on schedule, I just pray that was the right decision)

The only person I know in RL that really worried about vaccines was a friend who's DD had an egg allergy. Even she got them eventually (can't remember if she waited till DD was a bit older or got seperate vaccines/a different brand)

DBro had mumps (twice) as a toddler and it was horrible for him.

Vaccines are not grown on embryos. Other children do not die so that your children can be vaccinated

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_fetal_tissue_in_vaccine_development

They are grown on cells derived from embryos. One in the states and one in the UK, over 50 years ago. The abortions would have happened anyway.

So 2 embryos. An estimated 20 million + lives have been saved from measles vaccine alone since the year 2,000. Even the catholic church has said it's morally acceptable to use these vaccines using cells derived from embryos as it's for the greater good, and urged people to vaccinate their children.

“That the bottle is filled with what the pharmaceutical company say it is filled with”

Why wouldn’t it be?

isit nothing the anti vaxxers say is reasonable. It's just presented in a way that looks like it's professional and medical....but as the saying goes it's all fur coat and no knickers.

Because propaganda works. Facts require background knowledge to understand them. Some people don't rely on facts, they listen to who they trust more than who is telling the truth or using facts.

Vaccines are not grown on embryos. Other children do not die so that your children can be vaccinated

They are grown on cells derived from embryos. One in the states and one in the UK

Are they or aren't they?
That wiki page just confirms what I said. The original was was grown on cells taken from an embryo who then died.

I don’t consider myself an anti vaxxer but I do only want to get the vaccines my children need. There’s no point at all giving them vaccinations for illnesses that aren’t harmful to them. To that end I did refuse the MMR, although would have a single measles vaccine.

Cause they're thick as pig shit, that's why.

This is the correct answer.

Because there are lots of stupid, gullible people about. Some of them are very nice and very planet hugging and vegan and all the rest, but it's pure ignorance.

“That the bottle is filled with what the pharmaceutical company say it is filled with”

Why wouldn’t it be?

I presume it is what it says, but that is a trust thing. Mistakes happen.
(And we've never had any cases of doctors or nurses being mass murderers in this country? Oh wait...)

There’s no point at all giving them vaccinations for illnesses that aren’t harmful to them. To that end I did refuse the MMR, although would have a single measles vaccine.

Please explain.
How do you know which illnesses won't be harmful to your children?

Did you not give them any of the MMR components? Did you or not give the single measles vaccine?

Did you vaccinate them later in life or skipped all the later MMR or similar vaccines?

What do you think makes the MMR different from the single vaccine?