Child Vaccinations

[FallonJade21]

Just a quick wondering about peoples opinions of vaccinating. With all the backlash that they've had recently i'm really in two minds whether or not to vaccinate. Please let me know what you think.

@Jaz1993 my son has a severe egg allergy, amongst other allergies, but is fully vaccinated. He is far more likely to die from vaccine preventable illnesses than his allergies. Do you know why? Allergies can be managed and treated but that’s not the case with viruses like whooping cough, measles, meningitis etc. A child with a known severe allergy can have vaccinations at a GP surgery with multiple fully trained and equipped medics there for an emergency - reactions happen quickly. Don’t be an idiot and potentially kill your child because of your ignorance over vaccines.

I'm pretty sure vaccinated kids still catch and spread whooping cough but just don't develop symptoms, so it really has nothing to do with antivaxxers. You can fact check.this easily.

And when you do, it will show you that apart from the small percentage in whom the vaccine doesn’t take and are therefore not immune, and those with waning immunity as they age, vaccinated children can neither catch nor spread whooping cough.

I personally think it is really stupid to do everything without questioning ingredients, risk of reaction etc.
A lot of people here are highly insensitive sheep. No offence.

@JasseyRadlett
Vaccinated children can catch whooping cough, it just decreases the risk but they are not exempt, they just get a milder version. The vaccine doesn't make you immune, as the immunity decreases with time. No doubt the majority of adults are not protected from whooping cough.

@FuzzyAtmosphere
Potentially kill my child? I believe in the power of manifestation and that was an incredibly disgusting thing to say to someone who is merely questioning. As I stated above I have not received proper answers from GP and medical professionals.
We obviously have different feelings about this, please don't tag me again because you type poison.

Why would you risk your child dying or been left disabled from a preventable disease? If your happy to do this don’t bother with car seats or safety gates either.

Vaccinated children can catch whooping cough, it just decreases the risk but they are not exempt, they just get a milder version. The vaccine doesn't make you immune, as the immunity decreases with time. No doubt the majority of adults are not protected from whooping cough.

This is incorrect, again.

DTaP provides complete immunity against pertussis in 80-90% of children in the year after their last vaccine and according to recent studies, 60-70% are still immune 4-7 years after their last booster (preschool in the UK). You are right that the other children, in whom immunity has waned, still have partial immunity so are likely to suffer less severe symptoms.

Immunity wanes significantly more 8 years plus after last booster. But your characterisation is simply false.

@Jaz1993 if you choose to tag me and reply, then I will respond. One of my children died (from something entirely unpreventable and unpredictable) so I really struggle when I see parents intentionally adding to the statics of harm coming to their own child.

JassyRadlett it’s not the questioning that’s the problem, it’s the giving really stupid answers to the questions.

What is the power of manifestation? (Genuine question, google is bringing up different definitions).

@Booboostwo I think you have me confused with @Jaz1993?

Goodness yes, sorry JassyRadlett

We take a very different approach to evidence...

JassyRadlett
And when you do, it will show you that apart from the small percentage in whom the vaccine doesn’t take and are therefore not immune, and those with waning immunity as they age, vaccinated children can neither catch nor spread whooping cough.

I'm afraid the science disagrees with you JassyRadlett.

In their study, Warfel et al. used non-human primates as a model for B. pertussis infection, and found evidence that individuals vaccinated with current acellular B. pertussis vaccines (aP) can become asymptomatically infected, and can then transmit infection to susceptible individuals. The potential for this type of vaccine failure has been observed in humans where reanalyses of aP vaccine studies revealed that individuals vaccinated with components of the aP vaccine were protected against disease, but not bacterial colonization [10, 11].

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4482312/

That’s an interesting piece of modelling, thanks for sharing - I was out of date.

I’m now heading down a rabbit hole on the followups to test the applicability of the mathematical model - there seem to be some really interesting more recent pieces.

Again, thanks for providing the study. Very interesting, particularly given the many constraints and uncertainties they identify.

There are constraints and uncertainties in all areas of science so it bothers me when posters say "I trust the science and not antivaxxers"...yet the science isn't ever sure of itself. I don't trust the science when most of the proof is based on probability etc. My own thesis used Baysian inference to predict the likelihood of glass fragments coming from a specific window, and the best probability I could get was around 88%. Not strong enough to be used in a court of law to convict anyone, yet much weaker probabilities are used as evidence of vaccine efficacy and bandied as "scientific proof they work".

I believe in the power of manifestation

Maybe try manifesting yourself a belief in, you know, science and facts and stuff? Will be much more useful to your kid than dying of a preventable disease because you don’t know the difference between a chicken embryo and an egg.

“Manifestation”, good grief

The power of Manifestation is being able to harness your true destinies and desires in life-subconsciously put into vision, and then into reality. Everything you want of the universe is already yours-the clearer your thoughts and thinking on the matter, the more timely and precise the delivery will come.
😂😂😂😂😂
So you question the science of vaccinations but it hasn’t occurred to you to question the veracity of your bullshitunsubstantiated belief system?
Very curious as to your qualifications given how unsatisfactory you have deemed the feedback of people with medical degrees.

JoshLinda I get what you are saying but the right thing to say is I trust the scientific process. So, I trust that a process that is transparent, published, open to being replicated, open to being verified or falsified, open to rational debate, etc. is a robust process of discovering the truth, whereas a process that is irrational, unverifiable or unfalsifiable, not subject to scientific scrutiny and obscure is untrustworthy. Add to this the deeply unethical practices by anti-vaccers: Wakefield taking blood from children at a party and subjecting children to medically unnecessary invasive procedures pales into insignificance at Geier (and son who doesn't even have a medical degree but still practiced medicine) who injected children falsely diagnosed with precocious puberty with Leuprolide in order to counter the mercury in vaccines that supposedly causes autism. When I come across someone using gravely unethical means to make a very dubious scientific point, based both on an unorthodox idea and very poor scientific methodology, that's who I don't trust.

"Most "antivaxxers" were pro vax and vaccinated their kids until there was a severe reacton, injury or death (in their own child or family member), so no longer vaccinate their children."

Those who do not vaccinate based on medical advice (which would consider reactions in the immediate family) are not anti-vaxxers

Booboostwo

And you don't think pharma companies (who do their own research) have ever been unethical? Are you crazy? The only reason they haven't been sued over vaccine mistakes, brain damage and deaths is because they have been given legal exemption from liability since 1988!

The original version of MMR containing the Urabe strain of mumps led to convulsions and aseptic meningitis , deafness and death. The risks were known about before it was introduced in the UK!
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1544592/Vaccine-officials-knew-about-MMR-risks.html

Things pharma have been sued for:
www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/features/biggest-pharmaceutical-lawsuits/

So, I trust that a process that is transparent, published, open to being replicated,
You cite Wakefield negatively however his research was published and has been replicated. His methods may have been flawed yet the link between gut issues and autism has been replicated many times over. The dubious ways in which he carried out his research don't negate his findings.

And what about the flu vaccines which are mass produced in such a hort timescale and based only on assumptions of what might be the prevailing strains? Year on year they are wrong and completely ineffective.

AuntieStella
It has nothing to do with medical advice. There are no longer any contraindications based on family medical history other than for live vaccines if you have an immunocompromised family member. Even then, this advice is largely ignored.

There’s a boy in my DS’ year who if off with the Mumps because his parents are —totally irresponsible— ant-vaxers. They are coming upto their GCSEs so not only is he I’ll and risking infertility and a risk to children, staff and family members with suppressed immunity, he’s missing vital revision work.

You have a responsibility not just to your child but other children as well. Don't be an idiot.

JoshLinda
The Wakefield paper has been retracted by all the other authors and by the Lancet. There is no evidence that 'autistic enterocolitis' exists, even in the original paper there was no pathological evidence that the children had colitis in the first place, this was a fraudulent assumption inserted by Wakefield. A huge amount of money has also been spent trying and failing to replicate a link between autism and the MMR.
That you are not aware of this shows that you are unable to evaluate research even at the most basic level.

Vaccine damage exceptions were introduced to avoid putting pharmaceuticals off from investing in vaccines which make them very little money but could have cost them a lot in the very very rare cases of adverse reactions. In their place there is a public compensation scheme which, rightly, compensated the very few individuals that bear the burdens of harms from the vaccinations that protect the rest of us.

Of course there are unethical and unscientific pharma companies, just like there are unethical and unscientific doctors, researchers and everyday people. The answer is not to argue for self-serving drivel. Be Barry Marshall, not Andrew Wakefield. If you want to take down an 8 billion antacid pharma interest, drink the H. pylori yourself, don't feed to kids!