Do you know an 'un'vaccinated child with autism?

SixOfWands

Wed, Feb 08 2017, 4:53 pm

amother wrote:

Did you make that up today or yesterday ?

How many cases of SIDS before the 60s ?

Shall we start with Solomon, and work our way forward?

http://www.scienceclarified.co......html

But the fact is that in the past, the infant mortality rate was so high, no one was looking specifically at SIDS. By the end of the 19th century, the infant mortality rate was as high as 28% in some places.

BTW, the current favorite unscientific theory is that SIDS is caused by gases from baby mattresses. Vaccines, OTOH, are linked to a LOWER SIDS rate. Although no one has claimed a causal relationship that I know of.

Forrealx

Wed, Feb 08 2017, 6:10 pm

Thinking that vaccinations cause autism is totally rubbish seriously. I want to use some more dirty words but I don't do that. Truth is as a wife of a Md and followed subjects in psychology at the university it has never been proven that vaccinations can cause autism. There was one research but this has been rejected long ago but people still want to believe this fairy tale about vaccinations. Well there was autism far before vaccinations. It is a thing in a brain you can live with it, you can cope it. You can't help it. Someone are born with a terrible sight, some are born with one leg and some are born with autism. And you need to learn how to live with and be happy. Btw, it is also very hurtful for people with autism and their families to hear ''oh it is because of vaccination'' like it is your own choice or a fault of your parents. No Hahem has given you these things because He thought it would make you more useful in this world.

Hashem_Yaazor

Wed, Feb 08 2017, 9:12 pm

A couple comments after reading the posts since my other one:

1) Vaccines are NOT legally mandated. They are mandated for school attendance and every state has different rules in terms of schedule and exemptions.

2) To those upset about my post about HPV being my choice whether to give it to my child or not. I KNOW why most places are giving it between 10-11, and I KNOW why it may make sense at that age. I equally KNOW that my 11 yo is in no way at risk of HPV right now, and as a mother it's my responsibility to make medical decisions in his best interest. I'm happy that my state has not added it to the mandated school schedule. My previous state (where schools don't offer exemptions) is working on legislation to make it mandated for school attendance. My 11 yo has a host of other medical immediate concerns to work on, without needing to add something else into the mix that has no bearing on his life right now, when other things like his growth and development and undetected allergies and infected skin are more pressing to work on. It's very nice that a huge chunk of the USA has kids in middle school engaging in activities he doesn't know exist and yay for them for having a vaccine to try to prevent viral infection that can cause certain strains of certain types of cancer (but doesn't stop other STDs :/ ) but that has no relevance to MY childrens' lives right now, and no, I think the worst possible thing is for the government to 'take away' my kids and inject them with what a different subset of the population may need for protection.

3) Some vaccines are not really public health issues but private health issues. Or may be a public health issue in certain populations, but not a concern in mine, in which case my delaying or skipping of a vaccine is not endangering anyone. I would say this for Hep B (given in hospitals because those at risk are those not seeing pediatricians on a regular basis), I would say this for tetanus (which can't be separated), I would say this for pertussis vaccine as it stands now (which is showing more and more to create further spread of the disease due to asymptomatic carriers or mild symptoms being spread without acknowledgement of what it is -- I know firsthand, I am vaccinated and boostered and got it and went to the doctor and discussed my concerns and they didn't even test because it couldn't be pertussis, it was just a bad cough).

amother

Goldenrod

Wed, Feb 08 2017, 9:43 pm

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

As I think some of what you were saying was directed at me... I agree with your points. Where I live Hep B is not given at birth, and HPV is on the schedule but can be delayed. No ramifications for school attendance.

Hashem_Yaazor

Wed, Feb 08 2017, 9:56 pm

Again, that has to do with school schedules, because it's not currently something the government as a whole has really decided. But there is a poster (or more) on here who thinks the government SHOULD mandate the schedule in such a way that parents will lose care of their children so the government can forcibly inject their children on the government schedule..so there is no guarantee in that mindset that whatever schedule the government would determine would not have Hep B at birth or HPV at X age (they're throwing out the notion that it's safe for babies/toddlers too...).

As I said, it's a slippery slope. You are LUCKY that right now you can delay Hep B (though you still have to give it by 5 I assume), and you are LUCKY that your state allows HPV-unvaccinated children in school right now. But no guarantees, the schedule keeps on getting more and more loaded.

So it's a HORRIBLE idea to give the control to the government instead of the parents.

amother

Goldenrod

Wed, Feb 08 2017, 10:19 pm

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

I'm not in the US. and HEP B is in 7th grade where I live.

I've never felt that the government has control over me or my children. However, I am very happy that the government here has set consequences to students who aren't immunized (and don't have an exemption).

Also where I live doctors give shots, not government. Doctors can, and do make reasonable assessments to when a shot is not appropriate for a child.

dancingqueen

Wed, Feb 08 2017, 10:21 pm

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

Wait say what? You lost me at not giving the pertussis vaccine. Why anyone would want to risk that in their babies is beyond me. That story posted here about that anti vax mom who thought having pertussis was good for her kids was horrible to read.

And lol let's not get hysterical no one said anything about taking people's kids away. But since we have a current president who has stated that he believes vaccines cause autism I only see the anti vax gaining momentum. And mothers don't always know better than public health experts (who tend to be scientists).

Lastly obviously I wish your son well. But you never know if he (generally anyone) will go through a rebellious phase and you would probably not know about it. It's so easy to get hpv and once exposed that's it, you have the virus potentially for life, which can lead to warts or worse several cancers. And once exposed it's too late for the vaccine.

Hashem_Yaazor

Wed, Feb 08 2017, 10:35 pm

I didn't say we should risk that in babies! I know firsthand what pertussis is about. I'm just saying thinking that all vaccines are public health issues is actually blind to what the reality is. Right now, the current aP vaccine for pertussis is doing its job giving PRIVATE health benefits, but NOT public health benefits, and government mandating that will have no impact on lowering the spread of pertussis, that is it.

Sourstix did say about taking kids away, dancingqueen. I am not getting hysterical, just arguing with her sentiments.

And as far as my son, really, that is my prerogative as a parent. Have no fear that I am on top of my kids in terms of behavior and health, and I will decide as a parent what is in his best interests. I do know that now at 11, he is not at any risk for not having had the vaccine when it was offered at his 10 yo well visit. My only point is that me as a parent is the only one who knows his best interests, not the government who is catering to a different population. I am not blind to the fact that children rebel, but I don't live my life making decisions in the off chance they will years down the line.

Hashem_Yaazor

Wed, Feb 08 2017, 11:11 pm

And for further information on the HPV vaccine in state legislation for school mandates, look here: http://www.ncsl.org/research/h.....17-18

NY has entered some bills to try to mandate it on the school schedule for anyone born in 1996 or later, which is anyone in school...

Assembly bill for kids entering 7th and 12th grade:
No principal, teacher, owner or person in charge of a school
16 shall permit any child to be admitted to such school, or to attend such
17 school, in excess of fourteen days, without the certificate provided for
18 in subdivision five of this section or some other acceptable evidence of
19 the child's immunization against poliomyelitis, mumps, measles, diphthe-
20 ria, rubella, varicella, human papillomavirus (HPV), hepatitis B,
21 pertussis, tetanus, and, where applicable, Haemophilus influenzae type b
22 (Hib), meningococcal disease, and pneumococcal disease; provided, howev-
23 er, such fourteen day period may be extended to not more than thirty
24 days for an individual student by the appropriate principal, teacher,
25 owner or other person in charge where such student is transferring from
26 out-of-state or from another country and can show a good faith effort to
27 get the necessary certification or other evidence of immunization.

Senate bill (which has 1996 in its intro but has 1994 in its language and then 1998 in the end of the bill -- who edited this??) drops the age to be entering 6th grade:
Every person in parental relation to a child in this state born on
or after January first, nineteen hundred ninety-four and entering sixth
grade or a comparable age level special education program with an unas-
signed grade on or after September first, two thousand seven, shall have
administered to such child a booster immunization containing diphtheria
and tetanus toxoids, [and] an acellular pertussis vaccine, AND HUMAN
PAPILLOMAVIRUS (HPV)

I'm not being far-fetched in my slippery slope argument.

This is just schools. You can choose to homeschool.

Can you imagine what would happen if it was legislated as law for permission for the government to administer beyond the school context?!

Last edited by Hashem_Yaazor on Wed, Feb 08 2017, 11:32 pm; edited 1 time in total

Maybe

Wed, Feb 08 2017, 11:40 pm

dancingqueen wrote:

I got the vaccine all my sibling had the cough big deal

Why not join the momentum ?

SixOfWands

Thu, Feb 09 2017, 9:19 am

Maybe wrote:

The slippery slope, 1st birth control without notifying parents, now HPV vax, what next?

Anything that will sell more pharama products.

http://www.chnnyc.org/wp-conte.....s.pdf

Allowing minors to consent for themselves, not to allow babies or toddlers to be vaccinated without parental consent. Serving a population that accounts for 49% of new HPV infections.

If these young people are consenting to z3xual relations then yes, they absolutely should be able to receive the health care they need, including birth control and HPV vaccines.

Because while I don't want my children to have z3xual relations before marriage, I don't want them to die, or to have an unwanted pregnancy, if they do. Nor am I willing to assume that my children, or most children, are going to come to a parent before becoming z3xually active. And I certainly don't assume that all parents will say, "of course, dear, let's get you on the pill, buy some condoms, and talk about HPV."

And if making birth control accessible to z3xually active minors is providing profits to "big Pharma," I hope they all get very rich.

amother

Gray

Thu, Feb 09 2017, 11:16 am

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

Sourstix, are you serious? What a dangerous slippery slope. You would want the HPV vaccine to be mandated by the government, forcing your children to have it at whatever age they have now determined it's necessary to start in case kids, you know, start exploring by middle school. It's 9-10 now, and they're thinking of lowering the age. Should that not be a parental choice? BTW, it's state mandated for schools in some states, with more working on it in legislation, I'm not pulling this out of my hat.

And if you say that's an exception, then what do you say about Hep B? Should a parent be allowed to delay that as well because they know their child is not yet at risk? If not, why not?

And if you think both should be governmental decisions, is there anything you don't think should be?
What about vaccines in the works for diseases we aren't currently freaking out over?

Is there a limit?

I cannot imagine for a minute the government at large can possibly have my specific child in their best interests. They are about public policy, and rightly so. If I, as a parent, decide it's in my child's best interest to spread things out or delay them or <gasp> skip something because, face it, my kids are not infecting anyone with HPV right now, so I can make an educated decision on that without endangering public health, isn't that my right, nay, my RESPONSIBILITY, as a parent?

Are you opposed to the HPV vaccine? It sounds like you are, and I'm trying to understand why.

amother

Royalblue

Thu, Feb 09 2017, 1:23 pm

gp2.0 wrote:

Another annoying thing about mandated vaccines is burden of proof. My 4 yo DD had chickenpox at 18 months, after which I declined the varicella vaccine because it was irrelevant to my DD. Now, in order to be accepted at school, I either have to give her the vaccine anyway, or she needs to get a blood test to check her titers. I'm leaning toward just giving her a totally unnecessary vaccine because a blood test is more hassle and probably more traumatic to a 4 yo.

I understand why I have to go through this annoying process but I wish I didn't have to.

Do your research. I haven't been in this position but I heard that it's worse to give a vaccine to a child for a disease s/he is already immune to by having had the disease. My dd had mumps when it was going around 7 years ago. I didn't vaccinate her after, but if I would, I'd have left out the mumps vaccine or at least done considerable research about the effects on the body.

amother

Slategray

Thu, Feb 09 2017, 2:08 pm

I see my last post was completely misunderstood.

What I was trying to ask:

Why does it bother you so much if people think autism is a side effect of vaccines? Let's say (in a theoretical nonexistent world) it WAS proven that .1% of those vaccinated have an 80% higher chance of getting autism? (I know it was not, but just play along.)

Would you stop believing that vaccines are important? Or would you answer that better an autistic child than a dead child? Either answer is fine, but accepting that there are risks instead of denying that they exist is a more reasonable approach. The Wakefield study was disproven, but that doesn't mean that a link CAN not exist. It should be irrelevant if it does, as each parent, or a medical professional they trust, should be weighing the risks and benefits for individual children.

The "THERE CAN BE NO LINK BETWEEN VACCINES AND AUTISM" is the true straw man here. Most of those who do the research and decide to selectively vaccinate, delay, or not vaccinate at all, are not doing it because of Wakefield. There are other conditions aside for autism that parents would prefer to avoid. There is a lot more research that gives us pause.

Remember Vioxx? Something approved by the FDA is not automatically safe for everyone.