Vaccination Brain Picking Question

GreenEyes26

Fri, May 31 2013, 1:15 pm

rydys wrote:

tissues wrote:

But in yiddishkeit there is a klal of "chayecha kodmim", my life comes first. I am obligated to consider my health first before the klal. So if I come to the decision not to vaccinate - not out of laziness, but out of a concern for MY health - I am fulfilling my obligation.

However, I will not disregard the health of others and therefore, if I know I was exposed (or if it was my child) I will keep stay away from others.

Chayecha Kodmin has very specific applications and does not apply in general. The gemara it is based on refers to 2 people in a desert with only enough water for one to survive. The question is, should the water be shared and both die, or should the one who has the water drink it and one will die and one will survive. In that case, chayecha kodmin--the one who has the water should drink it even though the other one will die.

This is not the same as vaccination. The risks from vaccination are very low, but the risks of not vaccinating are much higher. It is not a matter of choosing who will die. The problem today is that we do not see these diseases so much, thanks to vaccines. People don't know today what it was like when they were around. Before measles vaccine, there were thousands of children a year who died from the disease and even more with permanent damage from it. Yes, there was a slight decrease in the numbers due to improved hygiene, but the dramatic drop in numbers from one year to the next was from the introduction to the vaccine.

Again, chayecha kodmin refers to a situation where if I do "A", both of us will suffer but if I do "B" only you will suffer. However, act "B" does not directly cause you to suffer. By not vaccinating, you are not only impacting yourself, you are putting others at risk by possibly exposing them to dangerous diseases. You could be exposed to measles without knowing it and pass it on before getting symptoms. You are not simply a "shev v'al taaseh" and the result is that the other person might suffer, you are actively killing them and this is not mutar.

To explain it using the original gemara, there is a difference between one person drinking all the water, and one person drinking all the water and shooting the other person.

Amazing. Eloquently and cleanly states. And much nicer than I would have Wink

I don't know why I always get sucked into these cockamamie anti-vax debates....it's just a subject that's dear and close to my heart. I may not be able to change the minds of the nutjobs who use things like the above gemara to justify what they're doing, but perhaps we can show an innocent, uneducated person that people who don't vax thier children are the most ignorant of all.

tissues

Fri, May 31 2013, 1:16 pm

rydys wrote:

tissues wrote:

Either I vaccinate and I may suffer. Or I don't vaccinate and you may suffer.

tissues

Fri, May 31 2013, 1:19 pm

GreenEyes26 wrote:

tissues wrote:

mandr wrote:

yogabird wrote:

Am I the only who doesn't think its the end of the world if my kids getting the measles?

Ask your kids, you're not the one experiencing it.

Do you ask your kids before you vaccinate them? They're the ones experiencing it.

When a person is in a frame mind that would even consider a painful and uncomfortable sickness (with a whole host of possible serious, long-term effects, btw) to the minuscule risk and momentary discomfort of the shot invented to prevent it...well there's nothing to say to rise them up from their well of self-righteous delusion.

You clearly do not understand the intention of my question, and I will refrain from explaining to someone who is uninterested in it, as it seems like you'd rather curse than converse.

GreenEyes26

Fri, May 31 2013, 1:21 pm

tissues wrote:

GreenEyes26 wrote:

tissues wrote:

mandr wrote:

yogabird wrote:

Am I the only who doesn't think its the end of the world if my kids getting the measles?

Ask your kids, you're not the one experiencing it.

Do you ask your kids before you vaccinate them? They're the ones experiencing it.

You clearly do not understand the intention of my question, and I will refrain from explaining to someone who is uninterested in it, as it seems like you'd rather curse than converse.

'

I understood perfectly. Your meaning is not that hard to infer.

tissues

Fri, May 31 2013, 1:23 pm

GreenEyes26 wrote:

tissues wrote:

GreenEyes26 wrote:

tissues wrote:

mandr wrote:

yogabird wrote:

Am I the only who doesn't think its the end of the world if my kids getting the measles?

Ask your kids, you're not the one experiencing it.

Do you ask your kids before you vaccinate them? They're the ones experiencing it.

You clearly do not understand the intention of my question, and I will refrain from explaining to someone who is uninterested in it, as it seems like you'd rather curse than converse.

'

I understood perfectly. Your meaning is not that hard to infer.

If what you understood perfectly is what you wrote in the above post, then I repeat, you did NOT understand at all!

GreenEyes26

Fri, May 31 2013, 1:28 pm

tissues wrote:

GreenEyes26 wrote:

tissues wrote:

GreenEyes26 wrote:

tissues wrote:

mandr wrote:

yogabird wrote:

Am I the only who doesn't think its the end of the world if my kids getting the measles?

Ask your kids, you're not the one experiencing it.

Do you ask your kids before you vaccinate them? They're the ones experiencing it.

You clearly do not understand the intention of my question, and I will refrain from explaining to someone who is uninterested in it, as it seems like you'd rather curse than converse.

'

I understood perfectly. Your meaning is not that hard to infer.

If what you understood perfectly is what you wrote in the above post, then I repeat, you did NOT understand at all!

Then why don't you enlighten me? As I understand it, you're saying that just as yogabird should ask her children about going through measels if she "doesn't mind them getting it" (because she won't be experiencing it, they will) you want that poster to, in turn, ask her children if they mind getting the vax for measles. As if GETTING measles and getting PROTECTED against measles are the same thing. As in, both bad. Comparably.

sarachana

Fri, May 31 2013, 1:49 pm

greeneyes26 calm down! take a deep breath, there is good reason to believe that vaccines can be a problem...first off some are not needed, some prevent deseases out of convinience but are not life threatening if gotten and secondly getting too many vaccines at one time is not good at all for any age...in fact its very bad. op do your research based on answering the above stated.

Doctors are limited in there knowledge and no I do not trust every doc out there just cause they went to med school and have a phd. (for example, I know plenty of chrons sufferes who are told by doctors that food has nothing to do with it shock

...that tells me something right there!) So just cause a doc tells me I must administer this and this amount of shots in one day..I dont take it as torah umesini.

Also, and this is important to realize, there is a risk with getting any vaccine. the risk should out way the out come of NOT getting the vaccine. but nonetheless there is risk involved. I know some kids who were no longer the same after being vaccinated..speach delayed, metal toxicity etc, and I have heard of several children dying the day after from some severe reaction they had to the vaccine... however I wouldnt want my kids to get polio, or many other deseases so I take that risk and PRAY that it should go well.

amother

Fri, May 31 2013, 1:51 pm

Look up VAERS. Read.

That should be enough to understand why chayecha kodmin may apply here.

If you don't "believe" in vaccine damages, why do you "believe" in their efficacy?

Have you ever seen a double-blind study (inert placebo, not another vaccine) with vaccines?

Anyone who believes that there is ANY medication without side effects is a certain kind of nuts.

It is my job to decide for my children if the risk of serious side effects outweighs the chance of disease injury.

Thank you.

GreenEyes26

Fri, May 31 2013, 2:21 pm

amother wrote:

I 100% do not negate the possibilities of side effects in vaccines, and that some children (a MUCH smaller percentage than the anti-vaxers would have you believe) are damaged. I still get a sick feeling in my stomach when I bring my DC to the dr for shots.

But - and this is one of my BIGGEST issues with anti-vaxers - the ONLY reason you have the luxury of deciding if the vax "outweighs the chance of disease" is because vaccines eradicated them in the first place. If polio or smallpox were still killing children by the dozens, you wouldn't hesitate to protect your child. But because everyone gets vaxed, the diseases have almost been eradicated - and they would be COMPLETELY eradicated if people would stop no vaxing their children. And so, since other people are taking the chance and vaccinating their children even at the small risk of complications, you have the luxury of leaning back in your seat and saying, "You know what, I think I'll let my neighbors kids take the chance with vaccinations. They'll keep my kids safe." But you know what? It's kids like that who contract and spread the diseases these mothers took the chance to protect in the first place. So not only do they do their due diligence, some idiot's kid comes around, gets measles because their mother didn't vax them, and spreads it around to everyone because vaccines are not foolproof.

It's such a selfish attitude, it boggles the mind.

amother

Fri, May 31 2013, 2:30 pm

GreenEyes26 wrote:

The bolded is my biggest beef with non vaxers as well. They don't want the minute chance that THEIR child should be harmed by the vaccine but they want the rest of us to take that chance with OUR children so that the chance of catching the disease remains practically null.

ElTam

Fri, May 31 2013, 2:52 pm

yogabird wrote:

Quote:

Am I the only who doesn't think its the end of the world if my kids getting the measles?

Well, that depends. Is your child going to get a relatively mild case and just be sick at home or more likely in the hospital for a bit. Or, your child could get a more serious case and chas v'shalom be permanently deaf or brain damaged or even die, which happens in countries with modern medicine?

The latter would be the end of the world for me.

The former also if my child spread measles to someone else who got seriously ill or died.

Last edited by ElTam on Fri, May 31 2013, 6:00 pm; edited 1 time in total

granolamom

Fri, May 31 2013, 2:55 pm

GreenEyes26 wrote:

tissues wrote:

mandr wrote:

yogabird wrote:

Am I the only who doesn't think its the end of the world if my kids getting the measles?

Ask your kids, you're not the one experiencing it.

Do you ask your kids before you vaccinate them? They're the ones experiencing it.

before we call people idiots (or smidiots or whatever), be sure you are fully informed from both sides of the issue
I would be completely SHOCKED if there is any person who refuses vax due to momentary discomfort of the shot. really, people, while they may be misinformed, uninformed or just of different opinion than you, are not idiots.
and y'all are a bit delusional if you think the *reason* someone gets sick is because so and so was unvaccinated and in a toy store. that is only the reason we can see and perceive. if someone is meant to get sick, they will. the person it comes through is just G-ds tool. now, yes, there is hishtadlus, so you can vac yourself and feel safe (measles is not 100% effective, so even vaccinated you can get it and spread it), or you can do other things to help prevent infection. or you might even feel that the risk of vax is greater than you feel comfortable with. so long as this is a free country, that is still an option even if you disagree. and I for one do not want the state mandating my health care. that is a frightening thought if you think through all of the potential ramifications.

and before you say this is prime example of 'self righteous delusion', my kids have most of their shots. measles included. I am not deluded, but open minded. not self righteous, but aware that there is more information and wisdom out there than I am able to synthesize, understand and preach with confidence.

amother

Fri, May 31 2013, 2:56 pm

Some of us are not so convinced that polio was eradicated (look up the symptoms of Guillian Barre) and not convinced that the smallpox vaccine was what stopped the outbreaks (smallpox is only contagious once spots appear - they finally figured out isolation).

With those huge concerns, some of us are rightfully concerned about the veracity of claims regarding other vaccines.

We are also not as concerned about getting childhood illnesses in childhood, when the body can best handle them. We know that there are many contagious diseases around - with no vaccine for (RSV for one kills many) - and don't spend all day worrying about them. Many of them are dangerous for pregnant women (5th disease anyone?) but we don't panic at the thought, even though many kids get and pass it around.

Also keep in mind that it is possible for unvaxed or immunocompromised kids (or your unvaxed baby) to get chicken pox, etc. from YOUR vaccinated child shedding the virus. Do you keep your recently vaccinated children at home to protect others?

We each make the best decisions for our children.

greenhelm

Fri, May 31 2013, 3:02 pm

amother wrote:

There is a vaccine for RSV - it's called synagis. In Ontario, at least, it's only used for certain at-risk populations, like preemies.

rydys

Fri, May 31 2013, 3:33 pm

Guilliane-Barre and polio are two totally different diseases. Yes, both can cause paralysis, but by different mechanisms. Guilliane-Barre usually completely resolves on its own, with a small percentage of people having residual symptoms. I am also not aware of any post-Guilliane-Barre syndrome, like we are seeing now in many people who had paralytic polio.

As far as smallpox, isolation did help but did not eradicate the disease. If that was the case, we should be able to eradicate many other diseases purely through isolation. Patients with smallpox were routinely isolated throughout the history of the disease. Widespread vaccination even in third world countries is what cleared it. Smallpox is also an unusual case as it is only found in humans. Therefore, worldwide vaccinations of humans was able to slow and then stop the disease. Another virus which can be eradicated like this is polio. It was nearly eradicated until several countries in Africa stopped vaccinating. You can look at the graphs and see the spread.

To be fair, we do not have a vaccine for RSV, although it is being worked on. Synagis is an antibody which provides some passive immunity. It is very expensive and has some risks, which is why it is only given to high risk patients. This is a good example of how the medical community DOES weigh the risks and benefits of medications and vaccines.

ally

Sat, Jun 01 2013, 2:20 pm

tissues wrote:

rydys wrote:

tissues wrote:

Either I vaccinate and I may suffer. Or I don't vaccinate and you may suffer.

Why won't you suffer if you don't vaccinate?
Ohhh...because most of the Western world still vaccinates.