Pro vaxx vs anti vaxx

[Tleigh]

Hello, I was looking for different opinions regarding vaccinations. Who vaccinated and why and who doesn't vaccinate and why?

I've read previous posts similar and then have gotten quite heated so I ask for your stance on vaccinations and the reason why (and possibly links and research to accompany this) and that's it. Once you have commented please don't question anyone's opinions or anyone's choices. I don't want this thread to turn into a pro vaxx/anti vaxx argument.

TIA
Xx

It depends on whether you want actual research or opinion blogs based on... opinions.

You'll always get individual cases for which:
A) the vaccine didn't work
B) they reacted badly to the vaccine.

It's natural with anything. Even broccoli.

Then, it's easy for anti-vaxers to be complacent about vaccinations when there's herd immunity to keep them safe. The problem is when many people stop vaccinating. Then you get outbreaks and deaths.
But apparently one death is acceptable. Who cares that one child dies?

And, no, putting several vaccines together isn't harmful. Actual research has proven it, and shown that it's better that children aren't left unprotected for longer than necessary.

putting several vaccines together isn't harmful.
We probably won't know this for a very long time.

But apparently one death is acceptable. Who cares that one child dies?

Exactly. Apparently few people care about the one who dies from a severe reaction to a vaccine.

Of course people care. But I care less about one child dying of an extreme reaction to a vaccination (incredibly tragic though it is) than I care about hundreds of children routinely dying or being left with serious disabilities as a result of some of the diseases we vaccinate against. I'm comfortable I have my priorities straight.

I never noticed any pro-vax hysteria (and I don't think hysteria is the word I'd use, probably concern) until the point at which herd immunity rates started falling because of shite like Andrew Wakefield and the growth of the internet, where suddenly everyone is more of an expert than the NHS, WHO et al.

It's worrying as a parent that you can do everything right by your child but if you're surrounded by dicks who take opinion blogs as scientific proof then you might as well be pissing in the wind.

But hey, big pharma and all that right.

Just to reiterate, I'm not anti vaccine, but I think there's been a lot of hysteria from the pro vaccine movement regarding very very very rarely deadly illnesses.

Can’t be fucked arguing what is “very very rarely” deadly (though will note that if you catch measles you have a better chance of dying than a 30-yo woman has of giving birth to a child with Down Syndrome... so not that rare) BUT what you’re ignoring is all the people who don’t die but suffer life-long debilitating effects, from terrible scarring to hearing loss and brain damage. I had a boyfriend who had such bad measles scarring that he never removed his shirt except for in the shower (and I mean NEVER).

Vaccines are not just about preventing deaths from vaccine preventable diseases.

For every death prevented, there are many, many serious, long term conditions and life changing disabilities prevented... and some of those disabilities and long term conditions also raise mortality.

For example, there used to be huge numbers of people who were left deaf, blind, deaf/blind, brain damaged, lame, paralysed, short of breath (lung or heart damage), etc, by diseases which are vaccine preventable.

We probably won't know this for a very long time.

How long do you want? DTP was introduced in 1948 (70 years) and MMR was 1972 (46 yrs), i think they would have found out by now.

Apparently few people care about the one who dies from a severe reaction to a vaccine.

But much less children die from a severe reaction than from the disease without vaccines.
And if one child died from being exposed to a vaccine, wouldn't they also die from exposure to the disease? So, not vaccinating doesn't save lives.
At least the others who'd die from the disease don't.

Anything which works will have side effects. That’s why homeopathy is so safe.

Bertrand, exactly so!

That’s why homeopathy is so safe.

Although, we all know that sugar is the ultimate poison.

This is a super short video that everyone should watch on this conversation

"Apparently few people care about the one who dies from a severe reaction to a vaccine"

I think they do care, well I do. And I also care about the more numerous deaths from the diseases. So in terms of reducing human misery, I'd go with vaccination.

I see everyone has skipped my story.

Here’s the cliff notes:

I am partially deaf for life because I got preventable childhood illnesses.

Vacccinate your kids.

There’s currently a measels our break where I am. Am terrified that DD has only had one of her MMR yet and could still get it and end up like me - wearing a hearing aid at 30.

Nannyogg, sorry to hear that. The same thing happened to one of my family members, at roundabout the time MMR was first introduced.

Re your DD, she’s had one MMR, there’s a fairly good chance she’s already protected against all 3 - I think it’s something like 70% gain full immunity from the first jab, and almost all of the rest gain immunity from the second.

My brother is deaf in one ear due to mumps. He didn't get the mmr as my dad was against vaccines

Those anecdotal examples won't convince vaccination sceptics. They'll need proper scientific studies.

Oh, wait...

Yes- anecdotes only seem to be useful if they are at least one step removed and anti vaccination.

There's no point arguing with anti-vaccination loons. It's the equivalent of pointing out the massed peer-reviewed evidence behind climate change to a climate change denier or doing likewise with a homeopathy advocate who rejects conventional medicine.

They know what they know, and no-one will change their minds. Problem for the rest of us is their stupidity and wilful pig-ignorance impacts on all the rest of us, from the reduction in herd immunity to the impact on precious NHS resources.

There is certainly a strong argument in favour of making these vaccinations mandatory along the lines of Belgium, Latvia and Slovenia.

But they have done their research jeanvaljean

@AnonEvent this might sound like a really stupid question (forgive me, I don't know much about the nature or severity of every infectious or deadly disease), but I often hear people talking about measles as if it's an instant death ticket (my question will come later). My little sister caught the measles as a baby, about 2 weeks before she was due to have her measles vaccine. She was very ill but she didn't die. She wasn't even hospitalised or given any medical intervention - we just had to wait it out. The little girl she caught it from (who was a few years older) also didn't die from it - I saw her the other day, in fact. For this reason, I never thought measles was this 'deadly' disease, which is how I see people talking about it on these threads. Were my sister and the other little girl just lucky, then?

Yes. Because although the death rate from measles is about 1:1000 cases, the complications rate (which can include some pretty life changing things is rather higher. That does mean that most peop,e who catch measles will be fine. But you can't know whether you'll be lucky until afterwards, so why run the risk when you don't have to

And although things like pre-existing medical conditions make your odds of adverse outcome rather worse, being in good health and with good nutrition isn't a guarantee of escaping complications.

@ThisIsTheVoice my mum was raised in a convent in the 60s/70s and only received a few vaccines (nowhere near as many as we, her children, received). She's 52 and hasn't even had chicken pox (my brother and I had it when I we were little, one after the other). She even told me that a lot of the children in the convent, whom she was in close proximity to, had had the measles - not once did she get it. I've always wondered why that was...

@ThisIsTheVoice

'They didn't die from not having been vaccinated'

I understand what you're trying to say. It reminds me of what some guy on YouTube said about treating a headache with painkillers (paracetamol, for example). He said that treating a headache with paracetamol (rather than treating the root cause, which is likely dehydration) would suggest that a headache is the result of a lack of paracetamol - which we all know isn't the case.