Declining 8 week vaccinations for my baby - experiences?

[Plasticpineapple]

I don't want this to be about whether you should or shouldn't vaccinate your baby. I have chosen not to and I'm looking for experiences from others who have done the same. What did you say? What did the doctor say? Did you discuss vaccination once the child was older or flat out decline all vaccines?

Is there anything we can be certain of, Bumbley? I'm pretty certain the rate of serious vaccine reaction is very low. I actually overestimated it - it's 1 in a million, or 99.9999% of the pop being safe to vaccinate.

Are you certain of anything Bumbley? How do you evaluate risk? What are your criteria for risk for an 8 year old? You seem very sure that this risk exists!

Again, which do you think would cause more damage - Measles or the Measles vac? Do you even have an opinion yourself?

I don't know what the individual risk is. Do you?

in general, humans are crap at evaluating risk, which i suspect is behind a lot of anti-vax sentiment - essentially a lack of understanding of statistics (leading to a certainty that you will not be in the 'damaged by wild virus' group but could be in the 'damaged by vaccine' group)

sanfairyanne - Oh ok, So you're admitting that you don't actually know and therefore aren't in the position to tell someone that they have made the wrong decision for their child?

Which vaccine are you talking about Aly?

"You seem very sure that this risk exists!"

Are you saying that the risk doesn't exist now? You seemed to acknowledge that it did before.

I've already answered your measles question above.

You've missed a few of mine though:

"Ok, so how/when is the immune disorder/cancer discovered prior to the 8 week old vaccines. Did you fill in a questionnaire or something? Answer questions about family history?"

"How are you establishing risk for the individual child?"

"Do you think it's a waste of time to try to identify susceptible children?"

The Yokohama study show that the rate of autism related conditions is the same in vaccinated and non vaccinati populations. Why wouldn't I link to it?

Anyone else just see: Blah blah blah blah blah blah ?

This is like someone going on to a thread about car seats and telling people it might be safer to put the baby in your arms than in the car seat. Oh just might be, I'm not saying you shouldn't use a car seat, but have you noticed this study that says 0.01% of children might be injured by car seats? hmm? Don;t you think you should decide for yourself, maybe? Hmm? Informed decision, you should't just blindly follow what these so called experts do, they have a vested interest in selling you car seats? Aren't you willing to admit its possible the car seat could hurt them? Why not?

Whats' that, it might be dangerous? Oh, I never said you should do anything. Just pointing out the possibilities.....

Really, you think it's impossible to calculate individual risk? Is that just for vaccines or do you think it's impossible to calculate someone's risk of developing a certain condition/disease or responding to a certain treatment as well?

"the best thing to do for all children is to vaccinate them, except in a very few rare cases where we KNOW they shouldnt be (immuno-suppressed patients for example)"

How do you identify those immuno-suppressed 8 weeks olds?

Is there something that I have written that is factually incorrect?

I'm not trying to persuade people to do anything. Ultimately it's their decision.

Proving my point exactly. Its their decision, not my fault if they listen to my poisonous crap and do what I want!

Really, you think it's impossible to calculate individual risk?

I'm sorry that you'r finding it difficult to understand countess. I'd be happy to answer any of your questions.

Hak - in the population as a whole not in susceptible children.

You're not difficult to understand, you might be purposefully vague but you're very easy to get.
You don't answer any questions.
Calculate each child's individual risk of WHAT?

Countess, individual risk of reacting badly to the vaccine that you are telling them that they should get.

I'll ask again -
"do you think it's impossible to calculate someone's risk of developing a certain condition/disease or responding to a certain treatment as well?"

"poisonous crap" Which part exactly? What have I posted that is factually incorrect? Or are you another person who thinks that certain information should be withheld?

"You don't answer any questions. " Now that's just a lie isn't it? I've answered lots and lots of questions on this thread.

Antibiotics can harm a child. Before you give them out, do you try and calculate each childs individual risk of harm? NO
Painkillers can harm a child. Before you give Calpol do you calculate each childs individual risk of harm. NO
Fucking peanuts can harm a child, do you calculate every childs individual risk of harm before you give them a pb sandwich? NO

I could do this ad infinitum for practically every single substance you put in on or next to every child. It's always a NO.

So why do you witter on and on and on about the same thing with regard to vaccines, WITHOUT EVEN STATING WHAT YOU THINK THIS HARM MIGHT BE?

Answer that question, if you're so obliging.

Bumbley I was asking you how you know that there exists a significant risk for any given child. And how you would calculate that risk. You seem very certain there is a way to calculate it.

There's always a risk in anything we do. There's a risk my ceiling might fall down in me right now. But I know it's quite a low risk, and I'm happy to take it. I don't know exactly what the risk is either.

The point is the risk is low, so you need extraordinary evidence of risk to justify not giving the huge benefits vaccines confer, both in the individual child and for society at large.

1 in a million relates to DTAP. It came from the CDC in the USA.

What level of risk are you comfortable with, Bumbley? Do you ever cross the road?

"reacting badly to the vaccine"

Thats not actually an answer, now is it? Vague in the extreme. Define "reacting badly"

countess - having an undesirable side effect such as those listed in the vaccine insert and dependent on the specific vaccine being administered.

Yes, I would say people do tend to weigh up risk before they administer things like antibs/painkillers - whether or not they think the child needs them etc. I also know that people have been very cautious about giving their children peanuts as well. Would you bash them too?

Alyosha - still waiting for you to answer a few of mine. See above.

"
Hak - in the population as a whole not in susceptible children."

Presumably those susceptible children are part of tthe population.

Why do you think that the MMR might be an autism trigger in succeptible children?

Yes, but they would get 'lost' in the population seeing as we're only talking about a small subgroup.

I think it's a possibility (alongside other potential environmental triggers). Why do you think it isn't?

Still waiting on an answer to the reaction reporting and tetanus questions...

That's part of the risk, Bumbley. I don't know how they pick it up before 8 weeks (maybe someone here does know). But as the risk of serious adverse reactions are so low, yes I do think it is a waste of time to screen 800,000 babies a year for something that only a handful (if that) will have. And even then the reactions may be inconsequential compared tithe disease. There will be thousands of false negatives and positives even we had such a test.

But of maths for you Bumbley - let's say we have a test that tells you 99.9% accuracy (in both sensitivity and specificity) of the time of a baby will have a negative reaction to vaccines. 1 in a million babies have this reaction. A baby tests positive. What's the likelihood the baby will have the negative reaction?

ATM we don't have this wonder test, so Bumbley How would you screen an 8 week old baby for "susceptibility" to vaccine damage now?

its dead easy to id the immunosuppressed kids btw. they're the ones like my son. on high dose chemo drugs.

The study is enough for me Bumbley. You have nothing at all to back up your conviction that vaccines trigger autism any more than diesel or petrol or pigeon droppings or fleas or intestinal worms. Why do you focus on vaccines? Especially as they have already been researched extensively and are thus the least likely cause on that list.

I'm still waiting for an answer on why you are pretending not to be anti-vax when you so clearly are?
And why you think you know something that a worldwide scientific consensus doesn't?

Aly - Would you think it was a waste of time if it was your baby that was picked up?

My point is that you can't screen them. So all the 'vaccinate unless there is a reason not to' basically just means 'vaccinate and hope for the best'. So why do you think you are in a position to tell someone else to do that for their child and criticise them if they don't feel happy with the risk?

San, so you only consider the ones on chemo drugs as immunosuppressed? What about the ones with allergies? How do you identify them at 8 weeks old?

Which study is enough for you Aly?

I'm not focussing on vaccines - I've said I think they're a possibility among other environmental triggers. I'm just not taking your 'anything but' position on them. Unless you think autism is never triggered by environmental factors?

You're entitled to your opinion about me countess. Even if it is wrong. What do I think I know that a worldwide consensus doesn't?

Again, do you think it is impossible to calculate someone's individual risk of developing a condition/disease/ or how they will respond to a treatment?

I think the fact that you're avoiding it
probably means that you know the answer is no. (Hey, at least you're one up on vlad there! :) )

How do you identify those immuno-suppressed 8 weeks olds?

I can answer that one.

You start with the premis that the child is not immuno-suppressed as the vast majority are not.

You take into consideration the family history and any potential sibling histories that are given more than once from the first antenatal appointment.

You take into consideration the birth circumstances and early care which will have been documented and considered by every HCP who has come into contact with that baby.

If there is any triggering issue identified during the eleven month period of pretty continuous HCP involvement from the child's conception until the time it's due it's first vaccinations, appropriateness of vaccinations will be discussed. Otherwise the question will be asked by the HV, 'Are you planning on having your child vaccinated?' (That is exactly how it was phrased with both my children - it was still introduced as a point for discussion so that the parent could discuss their options).

Even then, when you turn up for the vaccination appointment, the administering nurse asks again about any allergies or recent illnesses your baby has had. You are also given a thorough list of potential side-effects and, if you really want to know the incidence of these side effects, the nurse has it on a piece of paper in front of her.

Short of doing a blood test on every baby, I don't know how much more can possibly be done to identify the babies who could potentially have a bad reaction to the vaccines.

A pretty thorough process which you would be familiar with. If you had your children vaccinated.