- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
Natural Birth
florquevedo
member
Vaccines
florquevedo
member
Hello mamas!
I would like to know if you are planning or have/have not vaccinated your baby
What were your reasons for doing or not doing so? Also, anyone can recommend literature or online resources?
Thank you!
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Vaccines
med-free birth x2, breastfeeding, baby wearing SAHM
My BFP Chart
This. Exactly.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/default.htm
https://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm
Also, you search the cochrane database for studies on specific vaccines.
The Vaccine Book is a decent, overall guide to what's in vaccines and what they are for, but I did not base our decisions on that. I used the above resources more. Good luck. And it's important to make an informed decision on this given your unique situation and your child.
I started Lily on the delayed series recommended by Dr. Bob in The Vaccine Book, but around a year decided to ask my pediatrician to help me work it out that she would be caught up to the standard schedule sooner than later.
This baby will be vaccinated on the regular schedule.
I never had a problem with vaccinations, I just felt nervous about my daughter getting so many at such a young age. In the end though, life is busy and it is a PITA to have to go into the pediatrician so often...also as they get older (and as young as a year) then KNOW what is coming and that is not fun for them or you.
I know it sounds superficial, but the standard schedule is just easier and since she never had one reaction to a vaccine, I am going to assume this one will be the same. If he/she starts to have reactions, we will then change our plan.
We delayed Hep B until DD was 2 weeks. I wanted to get BFing well established and didn't see the benefit of doing it at birth. Everything else she gets/will be getting on time. I will admit that I am pretty wary about things, I only had one u/s when I was pregnant, had a med-free birth, am still BFing, offer mostly organic foods, cloth diaper, use stainless steel sippy cups, etc. But I never even entertained the idea of not vaccinating my child, it's too important.
Part of what made me decide to vaccinate was the realization that my child could get sick with something that present day doctors have very little/no experience treating. That alone made it worth the potential risk, if any.
Actually, the baby's immune system is functioning before 6 months of age. I think you must be referring to the fact that it isn't fully developed until 6 months, which makes the baby more vulnerable to infections. Which is why vaccines are so important before then. The vaccines stimulate the baby's immune system to produce these antibodies.
We follow Health Canada's schedule, which is a bit different than the CDC's, I think.
Sorry I typed the wrong word. Yes it's developed. My son's system is working but he's protected by the antibodies my body gives him through BM. The amount of antibodies he receives from me will decrease and eventually his body will make antibodies of it's own.
Babies who are breastfed continue to receive antibodies via breast milk. Breast milk contains all five types of antibodies, including immunoglobulin A (IgA), immunoglobulin D (IgD), immunoglobulin E (IgE), IgG, and immunoglobulin M (IgM). This is called passive immunity because the mother is "passing" her antibodies to her child. This helps prevent the baby from developing diseases and infections. ( see this website https://www.wellness.com/reference/allergies/newborn-immune-system/ )
Also, I discussed this my doctor and my DSs pediatrician and they both said this were true. However, that by starting at 2 months it jump starts things.
We will vaccinate and do so on schedule. I considered a delayed vaccination schedule like the one suggested by Dr. Sears, but honestly it is a lot to keep up with and I decided it would be easier if I just stayed on schedule. Plus, my own immune system is not the best and I don't want my child to just rely on what I may be passing on (or not) through breastmilk.
The one exception may be the flu vaccine because of concerns regarding potential egg allergy and I will consult with the pediatrician regarding this one given my own allergy history.
Hi.
We don't vaccinate our 4 year old son. He got all the vaccines on time up until 12 months when he had a horrible reaction to the MMR. We did some research and, for our family, we don't feel vaccines are the right choice. I got a lot of helpful advice from www.thinktwice.com.
Good luck with your choice. And just know you'll be criticized no matter what your choice is. There are always people who strongly feel one way or another. It's your job to do the research and make a choice that is right for your baby and your family. Hugs.
I chose to vaccinate DD on a schedule in which she was only getting 1 or 2 shots at a time. This meant she was getting shots every month from months 2-8. Personally, I don't think this put other children around her at risk, as many opponents of spaced-out vaccinations sometimes claim. She still got most of her shots (I'll explain the ones we skipped) and she wasn't really in a situation in which she was in frequent contact with other babies. She was home with either me or a nanny during those months.
This worked for us because she did end up reacting to some of the shots and I was glad to know which ones were responsible for the reactions. I also like to think that the reactions weren't as bad as they might have been if she'd been reacting to several vaccines at once, but I have no evidence to support this since we never did things any other way.
I did not have to pay for extra vaccine visits to the pedi and the pedi's office is about 10 blocks from my house, so going every month for six months straight didn't pose any issues or problems for me.
We skipped the flu shot entirely because it's just not something DH or I have ever gotten or feel convinced about the need for.
We delayed the chicken pox vaccine until DD started preschool because getting the actual illness seems to provide lifelong immunity. The jury's out on how long the effects of the vaccine last.
I did not get DD vaccinated for HepB early on. I may have gotten it as a "catch up" shot along with chicken pox when DD started pre-school, but I can't remember off the top of my head right now. If it's required by NY state to be in school, then she got it.
I think it's important for you to weigh your lifestyle with what you are comfortable with as far as the health and wellness of your child. There are a few good references a pp mentioned for you to do your research on.
As far as me and my family, we are vaccinating but on a modified schedule. I am simply not comfortable with having my child shot up with so many chemicals in one doctor's visit so we are going to spread them out a little bit. That being said, however, my LO will not be in daycare or any kind of group setting with other children until he's a little bit older (about 3 years old--and by then he will have had everything recommended by the CDC up to that point). Also, no one in our family has any communicable diseases like Hep B and we do not plan on traveling out of the country (if the travel plans change, we will be revisiting the vaccination plan). In our opinion, there has not been enough research on the vaccines to determine their long term effects and we are not comfortable with our child receiving 26 doses of various vaccines before he reaches a year old (which is what the CDC's recommended schedule adds up to). This is strictly out opinion though based solely off of everything that we have read. We have decided to go with the Dr. Sear's alternate schedule.
I think what's important is that you make a decision that YOU are comfortable with (after you've done the research to gain the necessary knowledge to make an informed decision) and don't let anyone pressure you into one side or the other. It's a big decision to make and the information is NOT all in black and white.
Be prepared. It took us a while to find a pediatrician who would respect our wishes (he argued with us but we were prepared with our research and our reasons why we want to do what we want to do and he respected our decision).
No, you won't be criticized no matter what your choice is. You'll only be criticized if you willingly put your own child and other children at risk for truly horrific diseases like polio, Hib and pertussis. So please don't.
I'm with you, Erin. This is a major decision, that obviously a lot of parents are not willing to research outside the box. So be it. There will always be those of us burned at the stake for going against what the oh-so-smart-and-powerful authorities say, even if our decisions are more founded in science and recent discoveries about the unknown variables and consequences of introducing pharmaceuticals into our newborns.
If you want to vaccinate your kids, so be it. If I don't want to vaccinate mine for equally as valid reasons, some people better check themselves and their attitudes. This is supposed to be a place of information and support.
To those of you considering not vaccinating, you have valid reasons for taking the time to consider and research this option, so don't let anyone on this board bully you into feeling otherwise just because they are too lazy to analyze ALL PERSPECTIVE ON THE ISSUE.
Thank you ladies for all your input, I really really appreciate it, I am going to keep researching this considering our lifestyle (traveling, no daycare, etc). Right now the delayed schedule sounds good but I do have to do some extensive reading.
What science is your decision based on? My decision to vaccinate is based on published, peer reviewed science as reccomended by the CDC.
Yes, that is scary. I read a news article about a boy whose parents chose not to vax him and who ended up with epiglottitis from Hib, which is when the infection slowly seals off your airway until you suffocate to death. The only doctor who had any experience with Hib was an older one who remembered it from before the Hib vaccine was invented. Although if enough people stop vaccinating, unfortunately more and more doctors will gain new experience with these diseases.
We are going to vaccinate but on our own schedule and not all vaccines. Pick and choose, research A LOT. It always gets me when people get up in arms about how not vaccinating a child is putting everyone else at risk. Vaccines are designed to make someone resistant to a virus; therefore if my child contracts something, your vaccinated child should be fine. On that note let me say I was never vaccinated as a child - still here, still kickin, never hospitalized :-)
Vaccines: Are they really safe and effective? - Niel Miller https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/vaccines-are-they-really-safe-and-effective-neil-z-miller/1102999360
It highlights some great points (Journal of Family Practice and Pediatrics survey shows 87% of dr's don't think Hep B vaccine is necessary for newborns) - but it is very strong in showing stories of families with bad effects from vaccines. I just skimmed over this part because it plays on your emotions, not facts. Research both sides of the story and determine whats good for you - don't let people bully or push your beliefs one way or the other.
Both kids have been vaccinated on a delayed schedule. We delayed more with DD than with DS, just because I think I overreacted a little bit and spaced out vaccines more than I needed to.
Our current pediatrician does no more than 2 shots per visit. We also didn't start with vaccines until DS was 6 months old, just to give his system a little bit longer to develop.
DD is 4, and is almost entirely caught up on vaccines. She hasn't had the chicken pox vaccine yet, but that's it. DS is 18 months, and he's catching up slowly. We usually do a visit every 3 months. We'll keep up that 3-month schedule until he's caught up. It's not a big deal to have a few extra visits, and he's speech-delayed, too, so I'm glad to have the chance to check in with his pedi regularly on that issue.
Mommy to DD1 (June 2007), DS (January 2010), DD2 (July 2012), and The Next One (EDD 3/31/2015)
Wow. Imagine that. The point being completely missed because you're in the already-made-my-decision-and-i'm-right club.
NVIC works to protect the freedom for citizens to exercise the human right to voluntary, informed consent to any medical intervention or use of pharmaceutical product, such as a vaccine, which carries a risk of injury or death.
https://www.nvic.org
Independent studies are more important to me than peers within the industry reviewing peers trying to make money off the industry.
I understand and respect anyone's choice to vaccinate, and honestly, my husband and I might end up deciding to do the same. What I cannot understand from some ladies on this board is the sheer venom you have for people who might not do things the same way - when you have not bothered to even take a GLIMPSE at the material that might support a conclusion other than your own. I guess I just expected better from a "natural" birth group that is comprised of ladies who already get enough hassle for birthing natural. I just don't see any reason to hassle each other.
First of all, I have researched it. When I was first pg with DS, I did a lot of research. But once I realized there were no reliable sources that proved issues for most people (obviously some cannot receive vaccines due to allergies or chronic illnesses), I follwed the CDC schedule.
Second, my decision to birth med-free does not effect anyone but me and my baby. Choosing not to vax does.
I vaccinate my children on schedule. The ONLY reason not to is if your child is allergic or has a chronic illness. There is NO credible evidence to support not vaccinating.
I normally have a "to each their own" attitude when it comes to parenting decisions but not when it comes to vaccinating. The reason that people get so "up in arms" about it is that your decision to not vaccinate your child CAN have a devastating impact on other people. I have a friend who is allergic to the pertussis vaccine so she had a valid reason for not being vaccinated. When we were in grade school she caught whooping cough and almost died. She was so sick she was in the hospital for months and was held back that year in school.
I am so sick and tired of people claiming their decision to not vaccinate doesn't affect anyone else. That is bvllshit because it does!
To chicken pox, yes. But it leaves you susceptible to shingles for life. If you don't want shingles, then you have to continue getting varicella boosters the rest of your life if you have it or not. Rarely, chicken pox can cause deafness and death in children. The vax is far safer.
With out DD, we vax'd on schedule for everything. With DS, one of the vaxs was brand new, and the previous incarnation was recalled for digestive obstruction, and in addition, it was a vax that is mainly for very young kids who are in contact with other kids. So we skipped that one, and by the time it was "proven," he was too old for it, anyway.
TTC since 6/02 (age 22) K/U instantly despite no AF for 5 months--preemie baby boy 1/03
M/C 11/04 - M/C 05 - M/C 06 - BFP 2/08--fullterm baby girl 10/08 - M/C 4/11 - went to RE at age 31
DX: crappy quality & infrequent ovulation, mild MFI
Stimmed cycle #1 C/P 7/11 - Stimmed cycle #2 C/P 8/11 - Stimmed cycle #4 C/P 10/11
On Stimmed Cycle #5
Always thought I'd be a "mom of many"--now just hoping to be a "mom of one or two more!"
^ this. And, EVERYONE wants to play the 'dead baby/child' card on BOTH sides. We vaccinated on schedule with our first until she had a horrible reaction to the DTAP. The rest were on delays/selective vaccination schedules and no combined. ever. period.
Our son (last born) had a bad reaction to his MMR and had a minor stroke. His eye is now wonky from it and will probably have surgery to repair it.. which carries its own risks... he might never have gotten measles, mumps, or rubella.. but he DOES have astigmatism, and he WILL PROBABLY now need to go under the knife. That sealed the deal for us and we will never vaccinate again.
Normally, I don't respond to these threads. They can get ugly and accusatory very quickly. Your kids vaccination status is completely and totally your own business. Some of the resources you find online by either side of the argument can be very informative and correct. At the end of the day, it all depends on your family and your situation and the amount of risk you are comfortable taking with your child, and this goes for EITHER direction you go in. I will pm you our list of questions to ask about vaccination and our reading list.
I want to be your best friend.
I love your response, and you are right. I don't have a problem if others want to vaccinate their children, so why do people have problems if I don't want to vaccinate mine? Thanks for your awesome response.
That's definitely a moot point. The point is herd immunity for those who physically cannot get a vaccine. Some people can't get vaccines because of pregnancy, allergies, immuno-suppression or auto-immune diseases, and so forth. So by choosing not to vaccine your kid it is considered selfish as you are putting others at risk... Not the vaccinated kids... What the heck made you come to that awesome conclusion? lol Strange.
What science is your decision based on? My decision to vaccinate is based on published, peer reviewed science as reccomended by the CDC. Wow. Imagine that. The point being completely missed because you're in the already-made-my-decision-and-i'm-right club.
NVIC works to protect the freedom for citizens to exercise the human right to voluntary, informed consent to any medical intervention or use of pharmaceutical product, such as a vaccine, which carries a risk of injury or death. https://www.nvic.orgIndependent studies are more important to me than peers within the industry reviewing peers trying to make money off the industry. I understand and respect anyone's choice to vaccinate, and honestly, my husband and I might end up deciding to do the same. What I cannot understand from some ladies on this board is the sheer venom you have for people who might not do things the same way - when you have not bothered to even take a GLIMPSE at the material that might support a conclusion other than your own. I guess I just expected better from a "natural" birth group that is comprised of ladies who already get enough hassle for birthing natural. I just don't see any reason to hassle each other.
Alright. I'm going to be blunt... The venom is because you came running into this thread with your approach being preemptively defensive and accusatory. Based on your posts, you get a lot of people that don't listen to your side of the argument. It's because of your approach...
I've researched both sides of the topic and have done so for about 6 years now. In that time, I've changed careers to nursing and have taken a course specifically on vaccines. I've read research papers and studies and performed my own research on the studies. All in all, there doesn't seem to be a solid reason to not vaccine with the exception of having a belief that goes against it, such as not wanting to put something unnatural in one's body.
Pregnancy # 6
4 missed chances
2 loving children
1 on the way
We vaccinate on our provincial schedule.
I don't want my baby to die of something like whooping cough because I was scared to give him a shot at 2 months. Most babies that die are very young - too young for the immunization, or simply unimmunized.
It's a real risk to expose an infant to something that can kill them and is easily prevented. I couldn't live with myself if I took the advice of random internet pages or posters over the established scientific evidence of proper vaccinations and my baby got sick.
Parents that choose not to vaccinate put the most innocent and weakest members of society at risk - not just their own children, but newborn babies, children with cancer and chronic diseases, people with allergies. People without the choice to make themselves safer.
Natural Birth Board FAQs
Cloth Diaper Review Sheet
This is exactly why people should vaccinate. You cannot vaccinate so you are counting on herd immunity to protect your son. If increasing numbers of children are not vaccinated your son is at risk of debilitating diseases.
https://epirev.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/2/265.extract
And the woman above who says that she could not live with herself if she passed on whooping cough to an infant. This is indeed a noble regard for others, and I deeply respect that. I can see how, if this is your belief, you would be drawn to vaccinate for it -- I would too. However, one of the reasons I have chosen not to vaccinate my son for pertussis is due to an equally valid concern regarding the mutation of this disease into a vaccine-resistant, more virulent strand - which is theorized to be the cause for endemic outbreaks in California, Australia and the Netherlands. The health departments are reporting that over half the confirmed cases of pertussis were fully up to date on their vaccination, and that the spread of this disease has a higher correlation to living circumstances than to whether or not the person was vaccinated. This more virulent strand is also more likely to infect teenagers than infants (again, seemingly regardless of the teenager being vaccinated).
We have never eradicated a disease with vaccination. Even smallpox had outbreaks after vaccinations were widely available. I'm not convinced that eradication can be done, but having seen the progression of antibiotic resistant bacteria such as MRSA; I am very concerned for the public welfare if we are creating vaccine-resistant viruses.
Pertussis is a serious disease, but with proper diagnosis and care, the vast majority of people who contracted this illness - including infants - recover. Looking at the history of the disease, more often the people who died of pertussis had mitigating factors such as no access to health care or unhygenic living conditions. The same may not be true of this new more virulent mutation. I couldn't live with myself if I felt I contributed to the mutation of a serious but treatable illness into something that becomes untreatable and highly fatal. I personally believe we should be learning how reduce the spread of disease and the severity of disease by increase clean, healthy living conditions and access to health care for society as a whole.
You have got to be kidding with this ridiculous reasoning. The reason that there is an outbreak of pertussis is due to people who choose not to vaccinate and those children passing the disease around which allowed it to mutate so now no one is protected. You said "I couldn't live with myself if I felt I contributed to the mutation of a serious but treatable illness into something that becomes untreatable and highly fatal." But that is EXACTLY what you did by choosing not to vaccinate your child. Oh and I am sure parents who have lost their child to pertussis would be glad to know that all they needed to do to protect their child was to keep a cleaner house. This has got to be the most moronic sh!t I have ever read on here.
This.
Mama's Gonna Buy You A Mockingbird
I would love to go head to head, disease by disease, and vaccine by vaccine with some of you (pm me if you're up for it- I will not engage in these clusterfucks). All vaccines aren't created equally and all diseases do not pose the same threat.
I don't know how anyone can be so sure that the ever changing CDC schedule MUST be 100% correct and safe for every single child. The OP was asking about vaccinations, and very little of you offered her any credible resources...but you sure have a strong opinion that anyone who delays or skips a vaccine is a moron.
Hmmm, looks like you didn't do your research on the mutation of pertussis - since it mutated in the 1990s during rates of vaccination coverage of DPT that met the current theorized herd immunity threshold. It was about the same that the accellular vaccine was introduced due to the serious and significant issues with the whole cell vaccine, but the pharmaceutical industry has ignored these findings because it would mean that they would have to (pay for) and research a vaccine that would successfully address the new strand. Good thing the CDC did its research, though, and held a conference in October of last year to declare that an investigation into the mutation was to take place, given the rising incidents in areas around the world with high vaccine coverage. Interestingly, the county health departments that reported confirmed cases in California are showing that over half of those who have pertussis were fully immunized. I find it hard to comprehend how, when the majority of people affected by the outbreak have been fully immunized, you can then blame its mutation on the minority.
What is more likely occurring, and you can do a search on PubMed for peer-reviewed studies that are looking at this possibility, is that the pertussis vaccination is known to have the lowest efficacy of all the vaccinations available. People vaccinated against it are more likely to have an undiagnosed, sub-clinical presentation of the disease that goes untreated because their serum antibody levels are too low to successfully prevent infection but high enough to prevent symptoms that are severe enough for the individual to seek medical treatment (as would be the case in a fully non-immune patient). So these people experiencing subclinical levels of the disease are not being properly quarantined and interacting with the public, spreading the disease -- the mutated disease since the original virus is being unsuccessfully attacked by weakened antibodies and therefore has the chance to mutate to more successfully triumph over the antibodies.
The same thing happens when you take a weak course of antibiotics -- it weakens the bacteria but doesn't kill it. Symptoms go away, but the bacteria remains in the body in a latent state, learning how to create a biofilm that protects it from future antibiotic attacks. This is why disease like Lyme's are so hard to successfully kill. Viruses and bacteria have the ability to adapt, and they adapt to specific stressors - like an ineffective vaccine. Pertussis was discovered in the early 1900s, yet did not mutate until the late 1980s in the presence of a vaccination. If unvaccinated persons were the cause of the mutation, why did it not mutate prior to the widespread availability of vaccines?
But you're probably not interested in pondering these questions, because I'm too much of a moron for studying the history of the disease and its epidemiology for you to give any mind to.
Here are a couple of quotes from the CDC
"The most effective way to prevent pertussis is through vaccination with DTaP for infants and children and with Tdap for pre-teens, teens and adults ? protection from the childhood vaccine fades over time."
"Since the 1980s, there has been an increase in the number of reported cases of pertussis in the U.S., especially among 10-19 year olds and infants younger than 6 months of age."
It sure sounds to me (and I am sure anyone else with a shred of common sense) like it is those that are not protected by the vaccine that are the ones getting sick.
The problem with the pertussis vaccine is that it wares off over time and people are not getting the booster TDaP. The solution to outbreaks is not to skip the vaccine altogether but to make sure you and your child stay current on vaccines.