Could some of you please share your thoughts with me on when you will be vaccinating your babies, the more and more I read, we are thinking we will vaccinate our child when they are "two and talking"
Thoughts please? Do any of you know if vaccines are required for infant day care?
Re: Vaccines
<a href="http://www.thebump.com/?utm_source=ticker&utm_medium=HTML&utm_campaign=tickers" title="Trying to Conceive"><img src="http://global.thebump.com/tickers/tt1d63ef" alt=" Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker" border="0" /></a>
<a href="http://www.thebump.com/?utm_source=ticker&utm_medium=HTML&utm_campaign=tickers" title="Parenting Advice"><img src="http://global.thebump.com/tickers/tt1d63f0" alt=" Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker" border="0" /></a>
I am not sure if they are required for day care but I am planning on vaccinating on a spread out schedule since I am wary vaccines in general. I haven't gotten too heavy into my research but I am planning on doing research on both sides.
I have found that a lot of the anti-vax things I have read seem very one sided, like they are trying to get a very stringent anti-vax agenda across. I would prefer to read something that presents both pros and cons or isn't written like vaccines are 100% bad. I do see the good in them and I will vax my child close to what is on schedule. I will definitely vax before age 2.
If anyone has any unbiased, factual sources please share!
Every daycare in my state requires updated vaccinations, no exceptions.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/why.htm
Anything not from the government? I am sometimes wary of what the government says is safe (I know, I know). I would love to read other third party sources.
LOL. The CDC is hardly unbiased.
We use an alternative schedule. He gets all vaccines but not so many at once. We did not do hep B at birth.
Not sure if it matters to you but the older your child gets, the tougher it is to give shots. They're a piece of cake when they're babies but as toddlers, they start to look at you like "Mommy, why are you doing this to me?" Kills me. Not saying that should sway your decision (hell, who likes getting shots?)... Just something to think about.
Well, if you're going to nit pick, is there really *any* unbiased source for vaccines out there? I trust the factual information presented by the CDC and use it to help me form my opinion on how we vaccinate our kids.
??? That's not nit-picking. The CDC is pro-vaccine. I never said unbiased sources were easy to come by because they aren't. Some people want more info than just "because the CDC said so." They want both sides.
I will also be vaccinating. I'm not big on debating these issues, my logic has always been... I turned out fine.
We vaccinate, too... so don't think I'm trying to convince you otherwise. BUT, it is worth comparing the number of vaccines you received as a child to the number now recommended. It's increased dramatically. I think that's part of the reason people question the necessity of every single vaccine.
The fact that the CDC is "pro-vaccine" doesn't mean it's biased. You're confusing "biased" with "neutral". A biased source would be, for example, a pharmaceutical company that stands to make money from the vaccines. The CDC is not biased...it has done extensive research and has to come to the conclusion, based on sound science, that vaccines are safe. The CDC doesn't get paid for coming to a particular conclusion about whether something is safe. The reason there aren't very many "neutral" sources is because the science behind the anti-vax movement is so weak.
I would talk to a pediatrician about this.
I know that at the daycares in our area that we looked at, there is no way a baby would be admitted without being vaccinated. I understand you are concerned about the risks of the vaccines, but also be aware of the risks of being unvaccinated and very young. Your child also becomes a risk as a potential carrier to other children who have not been vaccinated yet, either do to age or health reasons.
And I second the PP, shots when DS was younger were so much easier.
FYI, although many day cares require proof of vaccination, a simple waiver means people can skip them. There used to be a requirement for religious exemption, etc. Now, I don't even think parents have to give a reason aside from just not wanting to vaccinate. This may vary by state (I'm in TX.). I would just be careful assuming that just because they ask you for proof of vaccinations that they somehow require them.
I turned out fine and didn't have a single vaccination until I was 25 and got a flu shot and Rubella.
We vaccinate our son but we look at the information on likelihood of coming into contact with it and weigh it against the risk of the actual vaccine. We also spread them out a little bit so that he doesn't get more than two shots at a time. For the most part he's gotten all of his shots except for a couple during his infant stage that we didn't feel the risk of exposure was high enough to justify the risk of complication.
Actually, the credibility of the CDC has been criticized a lot in the past few years. There have been accusations of research manipulation and fraud. Their own scientists have come forward. There have also been CDC-endorsed vaccines that were pulled off the market after some patients experienced side effects (some died). Some members of the CDC Vaccine Advisory Committee DO get money from vaccine manufacturers (the same goes for the WHO). I'm not a conspiracy theorist, nor am I anti-vax. I'm just saying I don't blame people for wanting to find other sources of information. The worst thing you can do blindly accept truth from any one source.
No motivation? Seriously? How about money? CDC and WHO advisors are financially tied to vaccine companies. They sometimes share vaccine patents, own stock in vaccine companies, take payments for research/academic funding etc. How is that not motivation? The same advisors decide when to declare a pandemic (like H1N1). I'm not saying they're all bad or that they're all corrupt. Even scientists who have witnessed/spoken out about the corruption at the CDC admit that it's not representative of the entire organization... that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I'm saying the financial ties DO exist and a are major conflict of interest. There are politics involved, whether people want to admit it or not. I take the same stance with the FDA. All that means is that I read labels as opposed to just assuming that if I can but it in a store, then it must be safe.
Hopping in at the tail-end of this, but excellent point. The reason we have chosen to vaccinate against these particular diseases is that their incubation period, reproductive rate, and course of disease are shorter than the period needed for a successful primary immune response to be mounted by the body. It doesn't matter how healthy you are, a primary immune response takes 7-10 days to mount an attack on the antigen (disease). That time is too long in the cases of many diseases, as many are already at their most severe, or they have been shed to others before the affected individual becomes symptomatic. (This is why keeping sick kids at home doesn't work.)
The purpose of vaccines is to prepare the body with that primary immune response, as a secondary immune response (elicited by immune memory) is both stronger and faster. This allows the body to recognize and defeat the antigen during the incubation period and, hopefully, prevent shedding of the disease.
For example, I was a perfectly healthy kid at 12-- I was an athlete, was never "sick," got enough sleep, and ate a balanced diet. The flu almost killed me and left me with permanent lung damage (inflammation) that, even with medication, has decreased my lung capacity.
ETA: The point of my story was to say that overall health has very little to do with how these diseases can run their course.
Since much funding for health research comes from companies, many top scientists have been funded at some point in their careers from a company. Others have not. When panels are developed, this information is considered. Potential biases are discussed and aired. Some people may not be selected due to ties. After panel decisions come out, other scientists not on the panel weigh in and provide review and criticism. Different panels do additional reviews. Information is changed when it is bad. This is science, and this is what we have to make decisions. The information in favor of vaccinating is overwhelming and from multiple sources and there is no suggestion of risk. Considering Jenny McCarty or some website as an equivalent source is crazy. You can read the peer-reviewed scientific literature yourself, and if you want to, great. But, as you say, biases in the CDC are not widespread, and we can trust scientists to read and summarize the literature for us if we can't get through the millions of articles ourselves.
Vaccines are not the same as some FDA-allowed supplement or similar because there are not copious studies, panels, and international evidence all pointing in favor of using the supplement. Yes, we need to consider what we put in our bodies, but in the case of vaccines, the evidence is strongly in favor.
I have and will continue to vaccinate my children with all standard vaccines according to standard schedules. Oregon state does require vaccination be completed on time for both daycare facilities and public school, unless a parent claims medical or religious exemption. Children who are not vaccinated can be excluded from school attendance during any period of an outbreak for a virus or bacteria that child has not been vaccinated against (though I greatly appreciate this standard, I would have fully vax'd my children with or without it). My grandparents lost siblings and children to diseases that could easily have been prevented by the vaccines we have now. The hype and conspiracy nonsense thrown about over vaccines are not justified by the few studies that show extremely small risks to a child's health. No delays, no exemptions. Unless one of my children has a bad reaction to a vaccine, they will all continue to receive everything on schedule for as long as I am responsible for their health.
I can only hope that enough parents in my region continue to vaccinate to prevent the unnecessary spread of these diseases to viable hosts, where they then have the opportunity to multiply and mutate into new strains. Irresponsible people who want to allow pertussis to thrive are developing new strains inside of the bodies of their children, allowing strains that we haven't developed vaccines against to evolve and infect our vaccinated children. The unvaccinated community will also be prohibited from being around my boys until they are at least 6 months old and finished with their first series of DTaP.
Right ovary removed 09.04.2012 via vertical laparotomy
Essure implant placed on remaining tube 06.13.2013; successful followup scan 09.30.2013
Some mainstream discussion of the problems with not vaccinating.
https://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2053517,00.html
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2012/07/23/anti-vaccine-movement-causes-the-worst-whooping-cough-epidemic-in-70-years/
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120423131344.htm
And just for fun: https://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Jenny_McCarthy_Body_Count/Home.html
THIS! I saw him give a keynote address last year and have read his book. Incredibly thought provoking and about as unbiased as it gets. Of course, the problem with calling something "unbiased" is that people tend to feel something is "biased" if they don't agree with it.
I work at the #1 children's hospital in the US. We are asked this question on a daily basis. I regularly refer people to an article by Dr. Paul Offit- he's about as good as it will get when it comes to immunologists.
Here's a link to his response to Dr. Sear's alternative vaccination schedule as published in "Pediatrics". Its free to read and download. https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/123/1/e164.full
I will be vaccinating my child on the recommendations of many many many professionals, agencies, and groups- all of which have determined that there are far more risks of not vaccinating than doing so. I encourage others to gather peer-reviewed, scientifically founded research to make their personal decision.
I totally agree. I couldn't care less what she has to say. I think I'm coming off as being anti-vax when I'm not. We follow a delayed schedule because I don't see the need to give a child 3-4 shots at once. I'm glad we decided this because,as it turns out, he reacts pretty negatively to most of his vaccines. DS got a flu shot and I got mine yesterday. I'm on my parents' and in-laws cases about making sure they get their pertussis boosters before the baby is here in January. What I'm saying is, "because the government says it's best for me" will never be reason enough for me, personally. I don't trust that any one group has zero ulterior motives. I over-research just about everything and I always consider the source. That's just me.
https://www.healthpolicysolutions.org/2012/10/24/whooping-cough-epidemic-triggers-more-than-1000-cases/
Just saying.
THIS!!!!!
The most objective source I've seen.
The CDC is also highly biased in favor of washing your hands after you go to the bathroom. I highly suggest that you look into alternative sources of information, because the soap industry is pushing handwashing big time. We should rely on our natural immunity to keep us safe from fecal bacteria. People survived for hundreds of years without washing their hands and they were fine!
Just FYI, Dr. Sears makes a lot of money hawking supplements and other products. He's not exactly an unbiased source.
He's also not an immunologist.
Can you please tell me about all these instances where a child gets 3-4 shots at a time under the normal schedule? DD is 3 and the only time she got 3 of anything, it was 2 shots and one oral dose.
I'm also curious why you want to specifically wait until 2. If you think you do want to vaccinate, then I would encourage you to look into a delayed schedule, but not to wait until 2. Unless, you have a good reason for waiting until 2, which is why I ask.
FWIW, I'm not unbiased. I am pro-vaccination. I also agree with PP that it is much easier when they are babies. We vaccinated DS according the scheduled recommended by the CDC and my pediatrician. DS never had any problems.
LMFAO @ Dr Sears being the least bit objective...
The rat bastard has come forward and flat out said that his goal is to try and manipulate people who are already deluded enough to be anti-vax to at least "try vaccinating" at what is KNOWN to be a recklessly delayed schedule just to get them to vaccinate - despite the fact that his recommendations can easily result in failure to develop proper immunity and prevent the intended benefits of vaccines.
Dr Sears is a money hungry tonic peddler. So much utter bull.
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/cashing-in-on-fear-the-danger-of-dr-sears/
Right ovary removed 09.04.2012 via vertical laparotomy
Essure implant placed on remaining tube 06.13.2013; successful followup scan 09.30.2013