Genuine question for anti-vaxxers

[Raisinmeup]

I see a lot online about anti-vaxxers and I’m trying to understand where they’re coming from, so this is a genuine question, not rage bait.

My understanding is that some parents choose not to vaccinate their children because they believe vaccines cause harmful side effects, or they just don’t trust the government and big pharma in general.

But what’s the alternative? If everyone stopped vaccinating, wouldn’t we start seeing diseases like polio coming back? That would mean more infant deaths and lifelong disabilities. It just doesn’t seem like a rational trade off?

From what I’ve seen, there seems to be a belief that immune systems can deal with these illnesses naturally, but I wonder if part of that belief comes from the fact that parents of today haven’t actually seen what a world without vaccines looks like. We’ve grown up in a time where infant death from preventable diseases is almost unheard of, so maybe it’s easy to forget how serious these infections really are.

And lastly, if you haven’t vaccinated your child and they then catch one of these illnesses, do you not end up turning to the same big pharma for the medicine or treatment anyway?

I know I don't need it lol
I'm immune!

I remember that thread- the poster whose husband was a GP had phoned him and a little while later he called back to see if the child had gone to hospital

It’s not just about measles, though - if you have DC who are not vaccinated against rubella or mumps, getting it as an adult can lead to infertility (boys and mumps); and stillbirth or foetal deformity (girls/women who might contract rubella whilst pregnant, particularly if travelling in another country where rubella is less controlled).

The other thing about not vaccinating your kids is that you can’t actually control who around you hasn’t vaccinated either!

This. The OP asked for a reasonable discussion and as usual, what followed was a host of people throwing insults at anyone who is not resolutely pro-vax in all ways.

Personally, I'm wary of vaccines and how they may affect me as I have several allergies and react very badly to flu vaccines in particular. I was also ill after my BCG as a teenager. When my children were tiny, I was worried that they could have severe responses to the vaccines I have issues with, too, given the genetic link to allergies and sensitivities, and waited until they were older and stronger to have them. I still feel that the MMR should be available as individual shots, to reduce the risk of adverse reactions (they do happen!) and to more easily distinguish which, if any, are causing them, especially if one of the parents or close family has a history of allergies/ sensitivities.

I was ill for over a year after my Covid jab, unable to work for 7 months. My husband and 3 other members of his family went into multiple organ failure after they received one of the Covid vaccines; 2 of them, including my husband, have died from the damage. He was increasingly ill and disabled for 3 years, and utterly miserable with little quality of life, until he died last year. It was awful.

Vaccines are not always the miracle they are made out to be. They can and do have adverse effects for some people, and having a considered approach to them should not be demonised in the way that it is.

And now I wait for the shade. Just weigh that against the loss of my husband as a direct result of a vaccination before you throw it, though.

This isn’t a very intelligent reply.

The poster has specifically said that she’s done her research and FOR HER doesn’t feel that the risks are outweighed by the benefits.

Of course pharma companies that make the vaccines will recommend them - the whole point of this debate is that people have to give informed consent.

I’m willing to bet you’ve never researched the ingredients of vaccines and blindly follow what you’re told, so I think your criticism of this poster is a bit rich.

As ever theres a lack of reasonable and reasoned debate on this thread.

It’s not either/or - you can be pro certain vaccines and not so keen on others.

For me, you have to weigh up the benefits vs the risks. I had all my DC vaccinated as babies but I didn’t agree for them to have the Covid vaccine because, frankly, the benefit to them simply wasn’t worth it. In my opinion healthy children did NOT need that vaccine.

The thing about unvaccinated kids is they tend to hang around with other unvaccinated kids. I knew a lot of unvaccinated kids back when my first was very young.

I don't suppose you'd know about some of the more likely long term harms. My grandmother was left deaf from measles in the early 20th century. I had it in 1964 and was left partially deaf. I doubt my school friends knew.

This just simply isn’t the case, though. and there has been plenty of debate — and nobody has said they are pro all vaccines (though there are people on the thread who are anti all vaccines).

I had the Covid vaccine, for example, but looked at the safety data and explicitly requested Pfizer because there was an increase risk of thrombosis in my age group for Astra Zeneca. DH had AstraZeneca. When she was eligible, I don’t think DD had one.

The question isn’t about being able to weigh up the risks and benefits. It’s that very many people, including on this thread, do not have the scientific or mathematical literacy to do that accurately. Looking up adjutants tells you almost nothing about the vaccine’s safety. Reading the “corporate media” does even less. None of those on the thread who claim to be “doing their own research” actually seem to be able to get basic facts right (eg. on tetanus, “toxic stress” or whatever else); nor are they doing “research” on any of the publically available data clearly set out by health bodies, or they wouldn’t be making elementary mistakes in medical terminology and immunology. So it’s clear that they aren’t in fact well equipped to understand how vaccines work or the safety profile and risk/benefits of different vaccines. For example, there has been plenty of global research done for decades on ideas like “giving single vaccines allows the body’s immune system to adjust”, which, though it sounds like it makes sense to the layperson, is not backed up by immunological research.

Having a reasoned and informed debate requires people to actually be informed — and large numbers of laypeople will claim they are, but not really have read any scientific information or understood basic things about vaccination at all (as evident here). The answer to that is not “people’s misunderstandings and belief in misinformation should be understood and validated so that they can feel they are having a “grey area” debate”. It’s to look at clear and correct information from accurate sources like the relevant public health data. Saying “oh but I don’t trust the data because Big Pharma” is not a reasoned debate either.

I wasn’t allowed most vaccinations as a child for medical reasons (complications caused during a very long labour). As a result I got sick with everything - chicken pox, measles, mumps, shingles etc. I was extremely ill with whooping cough and have had asthma ever since.

I am now in my 50s. Whilst chicken pox etc can be fairly mild, I think people not giving their kids the measles and whooping cough vaccinations are underestimating just how serious they can be if you catch them.

Chicken pox isn't always mild either. A child in my twins class caught it and nearly died of sepsis from an infected spot. This was 3 years ago. We're not talking 1960s or something

Polio can be spread by sewage. If a person defecates in a toilet and it is flushed away that infects the sewage system and if an unvaccinated person comes into contact with the effluent they could contract polio. So vaccinating yourself not only protects you but also a whole community. Polio is devastating just look it up. We are a multinational country and there a quite a few countries that still have polio. Therefore someone unvaccinated could come back from a holiday and infect a large number of the unvaccinated population.

How can you have an intelligent discussion with someone who says they "did their research" but then declines to expand upon what that research was?

Thus far, the only person who has expanded even slightly on that, has basically said that they don't believe that potential complications from illness would be worse than the potential complications from vaccine injury. Because they don't trust the information they have.

What research have you done? I did research. I read up on the stats around deaths and serious complications from illness, and the stats around deaths and serious complications from vaccine injury. As a non-medical or scientific person, I have to go with the information I have that is easily digestible and interpretable for my level of understanding. And that is from medical sources. Not anecdata about how every kid I know that is vaccinated seems to get chicken pox or whatever.

Anti Vaxxers are an Oxymoron - they can’t know the results of their choice until we fully lose herd immunity when enough people stop vaccinating. Thanks to people not vaccinating we have already seen the recurrence of Measles and Whooping Cough (which can both kill, especially newborns, and/or cause horrendous complications). If they carry on then we will see many other diseases return as well. Then maybe they will realise that the very small risks associated with vaccinations were nothing compared to these diseases at full strength - which were once frightening enough to cause the invention of vaccines in the first place. If they are so survivable then why do vaccinations exist?

I’m pretty sure most of them will happily knock down people on their way to get first back in the line for vaccinations - which might not still work once those diseases have had a good old chance to replicate and mutate.

My personal favourite was the comment about how they had ‘noticed’ that their unvaccinated children ‘seemed healthier’ than vaccinated ones and so that was the ‘data’ they were ‘going with.’

You haven’t answered the question though?

How can you have an intelligent discussion with someone who says they "did their research" but then declines to expand upon what that research was?

Gee, I dunno, maybe you could just accept what they're saying? They have done THEIR research, meaning, they've looked into a topic far enough to satisfy their own need to make an informed decision. That doesn't remotely mean they then have to share/justify said research with all and sundry. I mean, seriously, entitled much!?

I think @FunMustard makes a valid and reasonable point and does not sound entitled.

I always think if someone quotes facts and figures here, they should be prepared to put a link to their source material. If they won’t do it, I tend to think they have made it up or guessed or misremembered.

Keep your fingers crossed hoping other children’s vaccinations get you through.

But that was the point of the thread? To ask them why and What’s the alternative if we all just stopped vaccinating!

None of them can ever answer this question or site a single plausible piece of evidence.
The whole point of a debate is to come armed with evidence to support your claim. They NEVER have ANY.

The only fact stated to support anti vax is that rarely there have been negative side effects and injury. That is something that should be looked into further, absolutely. But all the evidence suggests that the risk is massively outweighed.

You can’t have a debate if you have nothing to support your argument. It’s what we’d all expect anyway but perhaps it should make you think.

Respectfully, you can 'think' what you want.

Look at it this way, if someone is staunchly pro-vax, people don't ask: 'What research have you done to determine the jab IS right for you?' And asked to explain their reasoning. No, it's just taken as read that they've made an informed decision.

Yet, people think they have the right to ask the unvaxxed (hate the term 'anti-vax!) 'What research have you done to determine the jab is NOT right for you?' And asked to explain their reasoning. Surely, as above, it just needs to be taken as read that they've made an informed decision?

I think it is very hard to weigh-up the risks of vaccines, especially as a lay-person without expertise.

I don't believe anyone without a PhD in human biochemistry or immunology has the connections to obtain acurate and relevant information, and then would have the knowldege and skills to be able to truly understand the risks that any vaccine ingredients actually pose to a person. This takes YEARS of very specific education and training to obtain and do well.

You are not making a decision based on research because its application of the knowledge in real world situations will be out of your reach. You are making a decision about vaccination because of your gut feeling and how much you trust the experts. That makes sense because it means more to you because its your child, which is something an expert doesn't have to think about.

Probability x harm = Risk and we have grown up in environments where these diseases have not been as common and therefore the perciveved probability is low because of the vaccinated population + advances in healthcare has made us feel safer. I actually don't know how much of that is due to the current vaccine schedule or the historic one, and I don't know where I would be able to find accurate information about how much harm vs good vaccines do.

The only way you can truly know about the experts is whether they get their children vaccinated, and we are not entitiled to know that.

Nobody is being forced to read this thread or respond to it. It’s hardly ambushing people in the street. And I think it’s pretty obvious why people who tend to vaccinate might be a little concerned about what happens when many other people choose not to.

Let’s give an example. The HPV vaccine has a 95% success rate. How will you feel if one of your children get HPV and due to the success of the vaccine, the screening programme is cut right back in the future. How will you feel if your child develops cancer? And do you realise once they are Gillick Competent they can get them behind your back, which plenty do. All those parents out there who don’t know their teenagers are vaccinated……