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?

You didn't think that if your child contracted Covid they could spread it exponentially to hundreds of people who also were unvaccinated?

The Covid vaccines did not prevent people from getting Covid, but rather prevented them from becoming seriously ill.

Children were not at risk of becoming seriously ill, therefore the vaccine for them made no sense whatsoever.

Anybody at high risk of complications from Covid would be (hopefully) vaccinated.

This has been an interesting thread and I feel I have gained some insight into the anti-vax position. I said very early in the thread that I felt the covid vaccine was partly responsible and I think that's been born out. We all had our polio and measles vaccines and never caught those diseases. Most of us had covid vaccines and most of us still caught it. It's very hard to measure whether it would have been worse without the vaccine or whether the mutation of the virus to a less potent form was the bigger factor in reducing the mortality rate.

I can understand the theory that there is zero risk of vaccine damage if you don't have any vaccines. A dismissal of the serious nature of some once common but now forgotten diseases because they simply don't have any first hand knowledge of these illnesses. They do also seem to be shamelessly relying on herd immunity to protect their children, this and a vague idea that their children somehow have superior immune systems, the Andrew Tate school of science.

Why don’t you explain why this is naive? Do you think anti-vaccination propaganda is somehow not naive?

I’m in the lucky position of having the qualifications to understand a lot of this data, which is not the case for everyone: but let’s think logically. What do you believe: that hundreds of thousands of doctors and scientists around the globe for the last century are conspiring to hide data on vaccine safety? If so, where is it? Where have they put it? Who has hidden it? What would be the point?

What makes you think there are some other, better data sets out there? Do anti-vaccination campaigners provide it? Where can I view it? Who has it, how did they get it, and why should I trust them more than the hundreds of thousands of people working in this field? What’s the point of having a massive regulatory regime around medical safety if it’s all just some kind of sham?

Also, frankly, my child is not being used as a shield for other people! Covid is the only vaccine I didnt give them. Because for young people the risks are higher than for older people and because their personal risk of the virus is tiny (they'd already had it by the time they were offered a vax)
It's the same reasoning I used when I paid for their CP vaccines. I'm nit using them as boosters for others!
I'm happy for the most part to give my kids vaccines to contribute to herd immunity as long as it benefits them as well. Otherwise no way!

This seems pretty sensible and is clearly not AV logic

But that was the entire stated point of why children were offered the vaccine last and the NHS didn’t much care if they had it or not, plus why they and healthy younger people don’t get offered it any more, surely you realise that?

And, as I said above, the NHS has been trying to introduce varicella into the vaccine programme for years, and the only reason they haven’t already is precisely because of the antivax propaganda. Make up your mind! Do you want vaccines or not? 🤷‍♀️

I have made up my mind! It's not an all or nothing. My kids have had everything offered and some extras I've paid for except covid. I was responding to a PP who implied it was irresponsible to not tax kids against covid because they could be spreading it "exponentially"
I can though, understand (without agreeing) where anti vax views are coming from.

Also I'm nit sure what you mean about the NHS delayed introducing varicella tax because of antivax propaganda. That's untrue. This is taken from the Uni of Cambridge website and explains why it wasn't introduced before
"New modelling research has concluded that the protection from exogenous boosting is likely to last a maximum of 5 years, though this is significantly less than previous estimates. This was applied to a model of varicella vaccination in England with new estimates of quality of life loss due to chickenpox. It was found that the increase in costs and quality of life lost due to the increase in shingles cases was less then the costs and quality of life loss saved by the reduction in chickenpox cases. Therefore, the vaccination programme is cost effective."

It isn't 'reasonable' at all. The 'onus' isn't on anyone to do anything. If there is a 'responsibility' it's on the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries to rebuild the trust in consumers/patients, which was frankly decimated during Covid.

We can wax lyrical about this all we want but what I've learned in the real world is that there are an awful LOT of people who regret taking the Covid jab; I know two staunchly pro-vaxxers, who've had the initial two and several boosters, who have since said 'absolutely no more!'
On the flipside, I'm pretty sure you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone who regrets NOT taking it. In fact, many have gone as far as to say they think they 'dodged a bullet'.

I’ve been told several times by colleagues who worked for (then) Public Health England, that they have been hoping to add varicella for some time as the research on the vaccine and shingles has shifted in favour of giving the vaccine, but that they have decided to pull back from it each time so far because of increases in anti-vax sentiment, and the desire not to jeopardise vaccination drives for other vaccines needed to combat eg. increased circulation of pertussis, etc. There were worrying drops in MMR uptake at various points, but better uptake and coverage currently.

The last thing anyone wants to do is jeopardise herd immunity and leave children not protected from diseases like measles with higher complication rates. I think adding in varicella is a good thing and long overdue — many other countries have had it on the schedule for a while. 🤷‍♀️

I would be interested to know how many people on this thread would still feel the same about not vaccinating if, say, MMR uptake dropped so low that herd immunity for their own children could not be guaranteed by others….

We can wax lyrical about this all we want but what I've learned in the real world is that there are an awful LOT of people who regret taking the Covid jab; I know two staunchly pro-vaxxers, who've had the initial two and several boosters, who have since said 'absolutely no more!'
On the flipside, I'm pretty sure you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone who regrets NOT taking it. In fact, many have gone as far as to say they think they 'dodged a bullet'.

@Jumpingthruhoops I’ve never personally met a single person who regrets having the Covid vaccine, but then I know lots of scientists; and also many people with compromised immunity (or in clinically vulnerable categories), who without the Covid vaccination were having to shield.

That doesn’t mean I think vaccination injury doesn’t ever happen — we know it does. But why are all these people you know regretting it, if they haven’t suffered any ill effects (presumably they can’t all have?) Is it just the idea of it they don’t like? The whole point is that after the initial few vaccinations, they don’t largely need them any more anyway. As the disease has now become endemic, the vaccination has already done what it was meant to do. It was never meant as a measles-style preventative vax — you can’t create one of those for Covid (or herd immunity), because the C-19 virus doesn’t behave in the same way as measles does. It was always designed to work like the flu vax does, and not like childhood vaccinations do.

Umm, gosh. Let me explain.

No one’s saying doctors and scientists are ‘conspiring’ or hiding data, or that there aren’t stringent regulatory bodies. This isn’t at that level.

As a PP put so well, medical data can be scientific AND political. You may be able to understand it, but I do think you’re operating from an incredibly naive standpoint if you won’t even consider that the presenting of the data, what is made available to us and when, might not have other complexities around a certain agenda.

The problem with medical and scientific academics and professionals is they often don’t see the political nuances that accompany ‘the science’.

We don’t know whether the vaccine did ‘do its job’ at all. We only know that the virus became endemic. That could have happened anyway as the virus mutated and became milder. The main benefit of the vaccine was that it protected vulnerable people from dying. The rest of us didn’t really need it.

Personally, I had one vaccine and no more, and I wish I hadn’t bothered getting the first one. It didn’t stop me from getting Covid twice more, and it messed up my menstrual cycle. It wouldn’t have stopped me from spreading it to anyone either.

I’m SO glad I stuck to my guns and didn’t let my children have it, especially my teen daughters.

(NB, all my DC have had all other vaccinations)

For example, most GPs will push for women to be on the pill, regardless of whether it is the safest and best option for them. It’s cheap and reliably prevents pregnancy, so it’s a tick from them.

I don't see the logic of this. A GP doesn't care how much a drug costs. I used to have horrendous periods as a teen and several things were tried before I went on the pill (much to the disgust of my mother).

More recently talking to a GP about contraception he said he could prescribe the pill or he could give me the injection or refer me to a clinic for other options.

A GP doesn't care how much a drug costs.

Of course they do! They have budgets.

Ok the thread has moved on - but I'd just like to point out-

1. You came onto a discussion thread about taking vaccinations or not and accuse me of being entitled for expecting people who say they've "done their research" to expand on that? Don't express your views if you don't want to answer them?
2. You then, despite having previously quoted me, say that pro-vax people never explain their own reasoning - when I literally did that?

I think my initial point about intelligent conversation stands if I'm honest.

By the way what I will say is that if you consider that the risk of vaccination injury is higher than the risk of serious complications from the actual illness - that's fine. Even if it might not be a reasoning I agree with, I see your logic.

It's then the justification, using the "I did my research" with literally nothing to qualify that, that is baffling.

As I previously said - I'm not medical or scientific, so I either have to trust the information I have available to me, or not trust it. Yes I do think NHS support pages, media drawn from that, and the data behind it that is available is better than anecdata from acquaintances or similar. I'm happy with my decisions to vaccinate my children and myself and the reasons behind those decisions to share that.

It's then the justification, using the "I did my research" with literally nothing to qualify that, that is baffling.

That's my point: why is it baffling? 'I did my research' is enough of an explanation. The fact you're not happy with that explanation is what the issue is here. People

If I said, 'I've done my research and I've decided to take x jab', nobody would press further and say: 'Oh but what peer reviewed studies did you read to come to that informed decision?' People would just accept what you had said.

I'm saying people just need to accept what those who do not wish to take a vax are saying without demanding explanations all the time.

But why are all these people you know regretting it, if they haven’t suffered any ill effects (presumably they can’t all have?)

A combination of those who've suffered very ill effects (two under 30 now with life-altering heart conditions), those who've noticed a marked change in their general health (constant fatigue and no end of coughs, colds) and those who at the very least know of people who have experienced/are still experiencing all of the above - like the many pro-vaxxers I know who have sworn off any further boosters, that they're being offered.

While I get your general point, I don’t think you tend to hear the specific phrase ‘I’ve done my research’ from people who have the vaccinations because it’s synonymous with the anti-vaccination theories online.

But the poster mentions 'social media conspiracies' not social media.

I'm not talking about in general. I'm talking about this particular thread and similar, where someone is asking why you wouldn't take a vaccine.

And I have twice now detailed why I am happy with my decision to take vaccines and have my children also take them. So the pro-vax people absolutely do cite their sources.

It's not about peer-reviewed studies - @thecatfromneptune obviously reads and understands them. I don't. Because it would too far outside my understanding. But - why can I, as a pro-vaccination person admit that, and say I used e.g. the NHS webpages as guidance but an anti-vaccination person won't ever point to anything? Is it because they know deep down that people will question why they accept Jenny from Utah who just so happens to be flogging something that stops measles is their source for information, but won't accept the NHS page written in a manner for the layperson to understand, which is derived from the peer-reviewed research?

Not picking particularly on you @Jumpingthruhoops but just wanted to point out - it's a strange phenomenon that the anti-vax person knows multitudes of people who have side effects of the vaccination, and the pro-vax person doesn't.

I am pro vax and I know 2 people. A friend in her 40s who had some sort of rheumatoid arthritis triggered by the AZ jab, and my step mother who developed polymyalgia after a flu vaccine.