Poll: Do you vaccinate? (read thread first)

mig100

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 2:04 pm

JoyInTheMorning wrote:

Well, I vax, but I'm going to disagree with what you wrote above. I've had to research various things for various family members and myself over the past few years, and I have found that the internet and in particular PubMed are invaluable resources. There is good stuff on the internet. You just have to distinguish between good stuff and garbage. The stuff on PubMed is obviously of high quality.

I totally agree. There is lots of high value content on many subjects on the internet

The ones anti-vaxers r busy with r NOT

Rachel Shira

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 2:50 pm

amother [ Vermilion ] wrote:

Doesn't spread out mean delay? As in you don't give all the required shots at one visit so you delay? I feel like I'm obtuse lol.

For me I give two shots at a time, two weeks apart, so my baby is fully vaccinated by two weeks after the recommended time. No big deal. Many people don’t go for well visits exactly on time anyway. The doctor’s only concern with it was making sure not to let any shots get overlooked.

momsrus

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 3:15 pm

amother [ Vermilion ] wrote:

Doesn't spread out mean delay? As in you don't give all the required shots at one visit so you delay? I feel like I'm obtuse lol.

No, I spread out meaning I don’t give all required shots in one visit. However it’s given a month later or so.

People that delay literally give nothing until the kids start school.

amother

Magenta

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 3:31 pm

teachkids wrote:

What does that mean that you stopped because of the outbreak??

Yes because that's when I looked into it. I went to pro vax lectures and listened to all pro vaxxers, and things didn't add up.
But I didn't want to be an anti vaxxer.
At this point I don't trust the vaccines are safe or so necessary.

tweety1

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 3:38 pm

ra_mom wrote:

I need an option for yes on basic schedule but spread out.

That's why I voted I vaccinate but on a slower schedule. I start at 6- 8 months and wait at least 4 months in between each round. Sometimes even more. I'm pro vaccine, Im a big believer in vaccines, but do it at my own pace.

JoyInTheMorning

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 3:44 pm

I am going to cut and paste what I wrote in the Measles: Baltimore thread because this forum is visible to everyone, not just imamother members. It describes the recent massive study showing that there is no connection between MMR and autism:

---
Here's a study -- I linked it already, but possibly in another thread -- showing no link between MMR and autism. More than 650,000 children born in Denmark were followed from birth. Vaccination in Denmark is voluntary and free. This was not a double-blind study, because of the ethics of such a study, but it was as good as it could get. Most children were vaccinated; some were not. Just over 6,500 children were eventually diagnosed with autism. (So, around 1 in 100, which is known to be the risk of autism in our times.) Among those diagnosed with autism, there was no increased risk among those who received the MMR vax vs those who didn't.

There was extensive analysis of various possible risk factors for autism, and indeed correlations between maternal age/paternal age/assisted birth/smoking were discovered. But no association between MMR vax and autism.

That's a good study.

I am going to post three links.

1. A short summary of the study, from NPR. https://www.npr.org/sections/h.....utism

2. An editorial from Annals of Internal Medicine, the journal that published the Danish study.
https://annals.org/aim/fullart.....tions

3. The article describing the Danish study.
https://annals.org/aim/fullart.....study

(Impact factor of Annals of Internal Medicine: 19.384. That's a strong impact factor score. But even more important is the quality of the study.)

I challenge you to find any study of this quality showing evidence of damage from vaccines.

Seashell

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 4:10 pm

For those who vaccinate but spread it out:
Is this your doctors recommendation?
Your own intuition?
Did you do serious research how much /which shots to spread out? Or is it more random?

Asking because I’m genuinely curious. I’m pro vax and give my kids all vaccines on my doctors recommended schedule. My doctor is very strict, don’t think the practice would let me spread them out, and I think they only carry in their office vaccines that are a mix of like 3-4 each. (MMR includes those 3 plus chickenpox in same shot etc.) But I have always wondered and considered spacing out, if I had something solidly researched I’d try to discuss with my doctor.

TIA

amother

Cyan

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 4:13 pm

Seashell wrote:

My pediatrician has researched extensively and customizes a schedule for each patient who is interested. No, they don't offer separate vaccines for the ones that typically come in one, like MMR. But they suggest giving the MMR and going back a month later for another vaccine vs doing them all in one day. If anyone wants to use the standard schedule they are welcome to as well. Using their customized schedule, kids are up to date on their vaccines anyway since there is a range for giving each dose. It's all done within the recommended range.

thunderstorm

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 4:15 pm

Seashell wrote:

Sometimes my kids were not feeling well (had a cold) when they had their scheduled well visit. So the doctor themselves would sometimes push off giving certain shots. Or sometimes if my kid wasn't 100% up to date they'd give only two instead of three and have me come back a few weeks later for the third one. It all depended on what symptoms my kids had at the time and what the specific vaccines were.

amother

Saddlebrown

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 4:30 pm

I voted before the last option was added. I'm not sure if I'd be called delayed or just slower. I skipped the rotavirus vaccine because of the research proving that it's unnecessary in a first world country but my prevnar and dtap were pretty much on time just given one at a time. Things like the Hep B shot given after birth I push off until I have no choice but MMR I just wait until 2 years old (unless there's an outbreak). I guess I'm in the middle.

amother

Rose

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 4:36 pm

mig100 wrote:

I totally agree. There is lots of high value content on many subjects on the internet

The ones anti-vaxers r busy with r NOT

Interesting. Can you name a few of the unreliable sources anti-vaxxers get their info from? Did you conduct a study on this? Did you find that most pro vaxxers get their info from reputable sources and most anti-vaxxers get their info from poor sources? I find that most non chaddidish anti-vaxxers genuinely look into it, and most vaxxers are simply following what their doctor said. I agree it is normally a good idea to follow what your doctor says, however be aware that your doctor, who went to medical school for many years, likely never took a single course on vaccines.

My4Jewels

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 4:52 pm

amother [ Magenta ] wrote:

Well I think we would all appreciate it if you could please let us know the town you live in and the school your kids go to. Because Im sure I’m not the only one but I don’t want my family anywhere near your family. I prefer not to get the measles thanks

amother

Floralwhite

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 4:53 pm

amother [ Vermilion ] wrote:

You can't swing it both ways lady.

The issue with reading medical research papers is that you really cannot have the true understanding of its context without a good medical background. The author usually has a strong sense of persuasion, and will stress the points that will appeal to the sensibilities of his base. And you're only reading what he has decided to print. You have no idea if there's information missing, if something is being misconstrued, if he's stressing his preferences while burying the things he's not comfortable with, if there's something he's completely overlooking, etc.

Without medical knowledge in the field, we are subconsciously selecting medical research that fits a preconception we already have formed, or one that is just more to our liking. People go around touting papers as 'proof', when all actually have is a slight insight to what they've just read. It all makes sense to them, because they don't even know what they don't know!

amother

Floralwhite

Fri, Apr 12 2019, 5:07 pm

amother [ Magenta ] wrote:

I've got some questions for you:

When things didn't add up to you, did you go ask for clarification? Did you think that the majority of the world is lacking intelligence, and cannot see that things don't add up? Do you have the medical knowledge to be able to expertly ascertain that things don't add up. And if you do lack the medical knowledge to do so, did you go out and get educated about it? And most of all - Did you apply the same scrutiny for the anti-vax movement, and did things add up there?

I'm asking these questions because your statements fit a perfect stereotype. The particular stereotype of people who have already formed their opinion, but want to ensure that they don't come across as brainwashed, or foolish. So they do some precursory research on the opposition, find something they can sink their teeth into, and then brandish that to the world as proof. And then they choose something dramatic from their viewpoint and brandish that as their evidence for it.

Since they don't know what they don't know, they don't realize how they come across to others, especially those who are in the know. They pat themselves on the back, thinking that they are so much smarter and more understanding than the rest of the society, when in reality, its precisely the opposite.