Jump to content

The thorny issue of needles

  • Please log in to reply
258 replies to this topic

#26 lil_mamakin

Posted 18 April 2009 - 01:04 AM

You know, I think the sun would still rise, we'd all still get out of bed and go to work and life would continue as normal.

And what about years down the track when diseases like polo, mumps, measles and the like start to rise and our children are left to fight them. I can tell you if my child was to ever fall sick or God forbid die of a disease that once was controlled in this country thanks to immunisation....then the sun would not rise for me and my life would not continue on as normal.

As we can now see with whooping cough now rising in numbers, it takes a fair percentage of a community to immunise themselves and their children to help keep the diesease under control - so if we were to all stop we would be allowing these diseases to spread - giving them a breeding ground and I can't understand for the life of me why any parent could entertain that thought.

#27 Island-Kylie

Posted 18 April 2009 - 09:52 AM

A few of my friends have had whooping cough go through the family , including my pediatrician , and although , very distressing , the symptoms were not life threatening.

It most commonly attacks very young children, with a high mortality rate

I'm really glad that your friends came through it so well, unfortunately not everyone is so lucky. The problem with whooping cough is it is highly contagious and it is the babies who are not vaccinated who are most likely to die. Immunisation is not just about stopping your child get the disease, it is about protecting the wider community.

What do you think would happen if we all suddenly stopped immunising our children?
You know, I think the sun would still rise, we'd all still get out of bed and go to work and life would continue as normal.

You're right, the sun would still rise, we would still get out of bed, and the chance of our children contracting a possible life threatening illness (that is in many cases preventable!) would sky rocket. One of the problems with high immunisation rates of the past is we have forgotten what it was like when many of these diseases run rampant. Small pox was horrendous, polio is debilitating, for many the diseases we partially prevent (I'll freely admit vaccination is not 100%) were fatal.

I don't understand people who don't immunise without a medical reason. (ie severe reaction of sibling or such) I'm sure many of you don't understand my absolute belief in it. People who don't immunise are in part relying on me and others like me to help protect their children, to help reduce the chance of the disease.

I did research before I immunised. I will admit, I was most probably in favour of it before I researched and here in  lies another problem. There is so much research and counter research out there that you can find information to support your POV, no matter what it is.

This is one of the best blog entries I've read about immunisation in a long while. I expresses everything I wish I could say half as eloquently!

#28 JohBD

Posted 18 April 2009 - 04:50 PM

Thanks for your comments everyone, and thanks Kylie for posting the link to the blog discussing the vaccination issue. It was very compelling.

I agree with the comments that the sun will still rise and we'll all go to work as normal if we didn't vaccinate our children, but I think our lives would have the added worry of whether or not our children were going to contract a disease that could harm, or even kill, them.

I have looked at research about the risks of vaccination, watched programs and spoken to health professionals about it in my own research as a mother, but also as a woman who returned four consecutive abnormal pap smear results. I was told I probably faced an operation to remove the cells once Ethan was born (the abnormal smears were between the births of both children). For almost three years I worried about cervical cancer and just last week was told my latest smear was normal. It seems being pregnant reversed the disease. So would I have allowed myself to be vaccinated against cervical cancer as a teenager if it was available then? Yes, knowing what I do now after my research.

I am really enjoying reading all these responses to my post.


#29 Prickly

Posted 18 April 2009 - 05:28 PM

OK - I'll bite.........

and it is the babies who are not vaccinated who are most likely to die

Lets put the mortality rate in a bit of perspective - the mortality rate for infants under the age of 6 months who contract whooping cough is .5%.  So 1 child in every 200 who catches whooping cough will die IFthey are under the age of 6 months. Once they are over the age of 6 months, the mortality rate drops to a miniscule risk. However, babies under the age of 6 months do not have adequate protection from the disease until they have had 3 doses of vaccine.
So for older infants and children - yes -whooping cough is not the horrible scary disease that we are led to believe it is. If more children were to catch this disease in childhood, it would mean that many would have lifelong natural immunity. If mothers' have this lifelong natural immunity, then infants under the age of 6 months would have sufficient acquired placental immunity to get them through the first critical 6 months when they at most risk. The first 6 months which AS IT STANDS CURRENTLY they are still at risk of catching the disease until they have had 3 doses of the vaccine.
Whooping cough doesn't actually kill babies - it is a secondary infection that they contract subsequent to whooping cough that kills them - e.g bacterial pneumonia. If the initial infection is treated appropriately then the baby is unlikely to contract a secondary infection. The problem is with medical practitioners who fail to diagnose whooping cough early enough for it to be treated effectively.

I have first hand experience with this- my 10 week old baby caught whooping cough, and when I presented to my GP with a baby with a persistent cough for 10 days, he failed to test for whooping cough until 4 days later or start treatment until 7 days after the first presentation. ( He was unaware that the test for whooping cough was a simple nasal swab - he intially told me that the only way to test for whooping cough was a blood test, which he didn't want to request as it would be too difficult to get a vein in such a small baby  wacko.gif I had to suggest that a nasal swab was the best way to diagnose). What hope do we as parents have, when medical professionals don't even know the basics of the disease ????
By this stage, I had sought other advice and started treating the whooping cough aggressively with soluble Vit C, orally and through my breastmilk. I spoke with a paediatric physiotherapist and commenced hourly exercises to assist my baby to bring the mucous up.

We have come through the past 4 weeks, luckily unscathed. Yes, it has been a nightmare , but it hasn't changed my mind about vaccinations though. These diseases - if treated appropriately, are not the deadly diseases we are led to believe they are. The problem comes with not recognising them early enough to treat them properly. And I guess to some degree, the inconvenience that comes with dealing with a disease that has effects that go on for several months.

The effectiveness of the vaccine is something I would like to address also - all 3 of my children caught whooping cough, including my eldest, who has had 3 doses of the DTPa vaccine. Something I read last week, but failed to bookmark - indicated that 80% of close contacts (ie household members) would contract whooping cough regardless of their immunisation status. The rate for pre-schools and junior schools was 70% for close contacts (ie playmates and children sitting at a desk grouping). This information came from a research paper from a professor at Westmead Children's Hospital - I just can't seem to find it again. So the vaccine is highly ineffective.

I wonder how many of you that do vaccinate, are aware of the link between the whooping cough vaccine and SIDS ?
A study of 103 babies who died from SIDS revealed that 45% had received the DTPa vaccine within the past 3 days.  70% had received the vaccine in the 3 weeks previous.
(Dr. William Torch - Director of Child Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Nevada School of Medicine)
I find it astounding that this information is not readily disseminated to parents before their children are jabbed with this needle. This only addresses deaths linked to this vaccine - what about diagnosed and treated meningitis and seizure activity. There are many documented case studies on this.

In the USA, 253 SIDS deaths were awarded $61million of compensation. 224 of these deaths were attributed to the DTP vaccine. The association between DPT and SIDS is now even acknowledged by the manufacturers. (ref (Connaught Lab. DPT 1992, l5623).)

I wonder how many of you who claim to have made an informed decision about vaccinations have actually done any research and read any of these studies ?These studies are readily available and are included in reputable medical journals - not just anti-vaccination sites. Or are you just relying on the advice of your GP and health nurses ?

I need to go now - I could continue, but I know that my post will probably fall on deaf ears......

Edited by Prickly, 18 April 2009 - 05:29 PM.

#30 sydneywil

Posted 19 April 2009 - 09:51 AM

The problem here is the belief that parents who dont vaccinate their children are not informed, the opposite in fact is true. The parents who refuse vaccination have done the MOST research and are usually highly educated individuals. They are information seekers who do not just go on the advice of a government website or brochure aimed at people with the reading ability of an 8 year old. Why take advice from a brochure which doesn't even respect parents enough to give references to the studies and statistics which they quote? Why respect a doctor who rolls their eyes when you start a sentence with "Ive done some research?" It seems like for the subject of vaccination, becoming informed past the level of a government brochure is severely frowned upon, a fact which makes the subject of vaccinations even more questionable.

#31 informed9

Posted 19 April 2009 - 10:03 AM

2 things...

Read any unbiased source on autism and you will find that it typically presents at the age of 2. This happens to coincide with the MMR vaccine. Studies of unimmunised children vs immunised children show no difference in the rates of autism.

Secondly, one blogger asked why you should be worried about unvaccinated children when your child is vaccinated? Easily answered. There is a very vulnerable group, our precious newborns, who are not vaccinated and wont be fully vaccinated until the age of 1. They are at risk from those who do not vaccinate. Babies end up in intensive care units and even die from preventable diseases. Please show me the last baby that died from being vaccinated and I'll show you many more who died from not being vaccinated...

#32 chookas!

Posted 19 April 2009 - 08:20 PM

Studies of unimmunised children vs immunised children show no difference in the rates of autism.

Could you please post details of these studies? I've been unable to find any studies comparing vacc'ed and non vacc'ed kids, it would be an interesting read.

Edited by Larissa, 19 April 2009 - 08:22 PM.

#33 informed9

Posted 20 April 2009 - 05:02 PM

Studies showing no difference in rates between immunised and non-immunised children

Best summary of the largest study is in New Scientist magazine: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7076 Paper is quoted. You will see this Japanese study quoted widely. This one is hard to refute.

Mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine and the incidence
of autism recorded by general practitioners:
a time trend analysis. Kaye et al, BMJ

Vaccines and the changing epidemiology of autism. Child: Care, Health & Development. 32(5):511-9, 2006 Sep.

Also look up the results of the major class actions and legal cases taken up in the UK, US and Denmark and note that all have failed. The judiciary must be part of the plot...

#34 chookas!

Posted 22 April 2009 - 12:51 PM

You might want to read that study again, it's not comparing vacc'ed and non-vacc'ed kids at all. It's comparing the MMR with separate vaccines  huh.gif Bit of a difference don't you think?
So the obvious conclusion is that the MMR vaccine doesn't cause autism, of course you can't rule out the possibility that it is one component of the vaccine causing or triggering autism.
The study cannot rule out the possibility that MMR triggers autism in a tiny number of children, as some claim, but it does show there is no large-scale effect.

#35 museinmelbourne

Posted 22 April 2009 - 04:32 PM

For those who claim that there is no harm to vaccinated children if their own children remain unvaccinated are unfortunately incorrect.
The greater the number of unvaccinated children, the greater the chance that a preventable disease is alive and well in the general community. Remember, it is not just children who catch these diseases, the older population are also placed at risk.
The best way to prevent these diseases is by having the highest rate of vaccination possible, that way, whooping cough (and others) will be a disease known only to history.

#36 tranquilsoul

Posted 23 April 2009 - 12:12 AM

I'm not going to try and come off all knowledgable and quote this study and that to back me up, I'm just going to tell it from my heart.
My partner & I both agreed that blindly vaccinating our daughter based on medical opinion and brochures given to us by the MCH Nurses didn't feel right, so we decided to research the pros and cons of vaccinating and weighed it up against the risks of not vaccinating. Surely this wasn't the only choice available to us as parents? There HAD TO BE ANOTHER OPTION!
So we did some more research and came across homeoprophlyaxis (Homeopathy) as an alternative. We spoke to medical doctors, homeopaths and naturopaths and did a hell of a lot of reading up on this method. We found studies by Isaac Golden and his book "Vaccination & Homeoprophylaxis? A Review of Risks and Alternatives" particularly informative, among others.
In the end, we have made an informed and well researched decision to immunise our daughter using homeoprophylaxis. It is one that not only feels right to us but we also believe it is the best decision for our daughter, for protection from these nasty childhood diseases AND for her overall health. In her three & a half years she has had 2 colds and a mild case of conjunctivitis. She attends care a couple of days a week and is as healthy as I could ever have hoped my child would be. When I look at all of the children in our Mothers group (there are now 17 and all have been vaccinated with needles, except my daughter) she is by far the healthiest among them.
I STRONGLY urge anyone who is faced with the decision 'to vaccinate.. or not to vaccinate..?' become informed, read up, and consider homeopathy as an alternative.

Oh and I am very interested to hear from others who have chosen the homeoprophylaxis option and what they have to say about it!

Edited by tranquilsoul, 23 April 2009 - 12:16 AM.

#37 upup

Posted 23 April 2009 - 12:34 AM

Hi Tranquilsoul,
We have used homepathic medicines for whooping cough only as this is all we really have in our area my choice was to use homeopathic when required.My DD is almost 7months and has never once been sick!

I believe the current system of vaccines is too many too fast. Parents are not given the option to delay and give single vaccines, this leads to a massive life long immunity issue. If you look at the Japanese system they delay vaccination until 2 years and as a results  they have significantly altered illness and death in babies and toddlers.

If anyone is interested a great book called selling sickness is well worth reading about how pharmaceutical companies have created illnesses in order to sell drugs. My DD is almost 7months and has never once been sick!\

Also look up the results of the major class actions and legal cases taken up in the UK, US and Denmark and note that all have failed. The judiciary must be part of the plot...

You might want to research a little further then is a fund set up by the government and pharmaceutical companies in the US to silence and pay out those who react to vaccines! Billions of $ have been paid out to victims.

For those pro vaccinators have you ever wondered why your brand new baby is given HepB at birth?? A sexually or blood transmitted disease? Unless you are a carrier the risk of your baby catching it is basically zero!! Why not wait?

Also many vaccines only need to be administered once to those over 2 years whereas babies need 3 doses as their body processes the vaccine and resulting immunity differently!

Lets think about this issue from all angles not just for and against.

#38 poss71

Posted 23 April 2009 - 01:21 AM

Personally I dont vaccinate - I did a LOT of research to come to this conclusion. I respect parents who vaccinate. If your kids are vaccinated and you believe that they wont get ill why are you so worried about non vaccinated kids?

Please PLEASE stay away - and keep your children away - from any children under the age of 18 months.

My DD2 is only 8wo and not old enough to be protected by vaccinations that your kids could have had if you 'chose'.

One of the reasons horrible, deadly diseases like whooping cough, measles, mumps and diptheria rarely kill Australian children is because of the so-called 'herd effect'. My 8wo is protected by all of the other immunised adults and children. Your unimmunised children could put my baby at risk. I don't choose that, do I?

If you had ever experienced or witnessed the suffering caused by preventable diseases like these, you might see why vaccination is so important, instead of taking advantage of the protection provided by other people who are vaccinated.

This forum unfortunately allows anyone to publish their opinions, no matter how irresponsible, regarding vaccinations.

A study of 103 babies who died from SIDS revealed that 45% had received the DTPa vaccine within the past 3 days. 70% had received the vaccine in the 3 weeks previous.

Hmm, SIDS occurs most prevalently amongst babies under 6 months of age. DTPa is given every 8 weeks from 2mo to 6mo. It's amazing that no-one has noticed that SIDS is caused by DTPa. rolleyes.gif Why don't more babies die from SIDS if they are risking death every 8 weeks?  It's not really a question. original.gif Just because both things happen in the same age range doesn't mean there is a causal link.

Putting it another way, I know a lot of 2yo's who eat excessive amounts of bananas, do you think there could be a link with bananas and autism?

*shakes head*

#39 sydneywil

Posted 23 April 2009 - 09:32 AM

Dear Jo, she didnt say anything about age range she stated that 45% of sids cases occur within 3 days of the DTPa vaccine. I would say that is a pretty big causal link there.
Hey if i ate a 3 month old banana or a dodgy restaurant meal and started vomiting afterwards then i would say there was a pretty strong causal link there too.

*shaking my head back at ya*

My personal stance is that all vaccines shouldnt be put in the same basket. There are some great tried and tested vaccines and there are some that have been pushed onto the market without being fully tested. Its laughable when people use the success of vaccines for smallpox and polio to back up vaccines which are newer on the market. They are often completely different and should be treated as such. original.gif  original.gif  original.gif  original.gif

Edited by sydneywil, 23 April 2009 - 09:34 AM.

#40 vee78

Posted 23 April 2009 - 10:10 AM

As new parents my husband and I didn't think twice about vaccinating our little girl when she was born. We understood that there were risks associated with her vaccinations but those risks were a small price to pay. Reading some of the blogs I have this to say to those of you who 'choose' not to vaccinate. You should all get in contact with each other and move to the same suburb or country this way you can infect each other. I don't mean to be insulting but frankly not vaccinating your children is 'DUMB'. You're relying on parents like us who vaccinate our children to keep infectious diseases away from you, your children and the elderly. We vaccinate to protect our little girl from other people who may be infected. As parents we got our whooping cough vaccinations so we could protect her. To  the non believers do you honestly believe that whooping cough would be running rampant if more people were vaccinated, would the little 4 week old have died? Try telling its parents that the whooping cough vaccination isn't worth having because the risk of an adverse reaction is too great. I would also like to suggest to the bloggers who have unvacinnated children 'please keep them out of day care centres' so your little disease carriers as beautiful as they might be don't infect our children.
ps. Don't leave the house there's a risk you might get hit by a car and die. ddoh.gif

#41 poss71

Posted 23 April 2009 - 01:10 PM

QUOTE (sydneywil)
she didnt say anything about age range she stated that 45% of sids cases occur within 3 days of the DTPa vaccine. I would say that is a pretty big causal link there.
Hey if i ate a 3 month old banana or a dodgy restaurant meal and started vomiting afterwards then i would say there was a pretty strong causal link there too.

*shaking my head back at ya*

You'd better get onto SIDS and Kids and tell them to add vaccinations to their list of things to avoid to reduce the risk of SIDS then, since you've discovered a causal link between the two.

They happen around the same time, that's all. If there was any indication that SIDS was caused by DTPa, then you would know about it.

Government health initiatives would include it in their safety guidelines, SIDS and Kids would mention it. These people have kids too (many have sadly lost babies, in the case of SIDS and Kids). They are not going to ignore something like that.

There are some great tried and tested vaccines and there are some that have been pushed onto the market without being fully tested.

my bold.

How do you know they're not fully tested? What do you consider appropriate or "full" testing of vaccines? What are the research scientists missing?

#42 gabbigirl

Posted 23 April 2009 - 01:34 PM

For those living on the Sunshine Coast (and I think Gold Coast) Coast FM (ABC radio 90.3FM) are hosting a vaccination forum at 9.00am on Monday morning.  Will have experts from both sides of the vaccination debate.  Should be very interesting.

#43 areyouforreal

Posted 23 April 2009 - 04:27 PM

I have to say I am deeply concerned by members on this website advising anyone to get any serious information from a source like avn.org.au

Now before you cry fowl or pro vaccination I am in fact neither. I have no kids but am simply researching the issues around vaccination.

AVN is an aint vaccination website. All the information it is presenting is to support this agenda.

Anyone whom has an agenda (eg bias) is going to present facts in a way that supports their argument. How could you possible trust any of the information presented on this website??

Need proof just look at their name...  AVN Australian Vaccination Network. This leads you to believe they are all about vaccinations both good and bad but they aren’t.

The website is about aint vaccination so a more correct name would be the Aint Vaccination Network.

If you want proper arguments do proper research, read those medical reports and tests. Most are easy to access from proper government and medical websites which will just give you the hard facts. You can draw your own conclusions then.

Please exercise some judgement before blinding trusting a website with an agenda. It is your child’s health you are taking about.

#44 chookas!

Posted 23 April 2009 - 04:59 PM

which will just give you the hard facts

Ha! The pro vaccine sites contain just as much propaganda as the anti vacc sites.  It's extremely difficult to get really clear answers.
The reality is that the current schedule is untested, specific vaccines are tested and declared safe but not when they are all smooshed together. And this current schedule and the number of vaccines our children are currently subjected too just haven't been around very long at all.
If anyone can provide links to any studies I'm happy to be proven wrong.

How do you know they're not fully tested? What do you  consider appropriate or "full" testing of vaccines? What are the research scientists missing?

I'd like to see a study comparing vacc'ed and non-vacc'ed kids, particularly looking at allergies and auto immune diseases. To my knowledge no study has been done and I have to question why.
Just to clarify, I'm not anti vacc and would happily choose some vaccines for my family but that doesn't include quite a few currently on the schedule.

#45 Pagan

Posted 23 April 2009 - 07:23 PM

Bizarre how many new members are in here scaremongering about vaccines. Doesn't it get a bit old?

Can't you just go read any of the multitudes of threads on EB before dredging ALL of this up AGAIN?
I reckon.

There is no evidence that vaccines cause autism.
There is very little risk of a serious reaction.
Vaccinations save lives.
But some of the crap getting bandied about here is pretty funny, so keep it coming...

#46 JohBD

Posted 24 April 2009 - 09:47 AM

Thanks ella30 and tranquilsoul for introducing homeopathy to our discussion. It's something I have tried for my own medical issues with little luck, but definitely an option to consider.

#47 lola2

Posted 24 April 2009 - 02:51 PM

Ok, there's no room for diplomacy on this issue...I don't have respect for parents who vaccinate because no intelligent parent could even consider poisoning their child, out of their own ignorance and fear, if they only did some research prior to birth.  
I was confused and scared by my own ignorance but I intuitively knew that it's not a healthy choice and I needed to be able to back up my feelings with information.
I began with an open mind, wanting only the best health for my baby, and I was prepared to vaccinate if I could justify it.  I was overwhelmed by the sheer volume of recommended vaccinations so I started by questioning the most obviously absurd in my mind, Hep. B at birth!?
It was hard finding anyone who didn't vaccinate (mostly out of fear) so I read everything I could, for & against, including the 'special edition' newsletter at www.informedparent.co.uk (not US site) which is packed full of articles addressing all my concerns, including options I wasn't aware of, and confirming all that I suspected about the lunacy of immunisation...it's out of control and only truly INFORMED PARENTS can make a difference.
'Goose-stepping' along with immunisation without your own thorough research is plain irresponsible!  The problem is not only with MMR and autism, the very concept of immunisation is flawed on so many levels...please dare to question and inform yourself so we can stop poisoning our children!

#48 zande

Posted 24 April 2009 - 03:00 PM

Wow, I have never seen so many "new" members in one thread  unsure.gif

My children are fully vaccinated, but I did it with a heavy heart, after much much research and thought. I delayed my DD2's 12 mth injections until she was 2. Thankfully she suffered no side effects. I honestly had a really hard time giving her the 12 mth ones  sad.gif .

A couple of weeks ago I found out my friend's 2 sons both had whooping cough, one was only 9 mths old and fully vaccinated. They are both fine and didn't really get all that sick, but I was really surprised that particularly the baby got it. So I'm wondering how long immunity lasts?

I will be getting the vaccination before my sister has her baby in July, my mum is also getting it.

#49 lola2

Posted 24 April 2009 - 04:43 PM

Zande, I'm really surprised that you can do a lot of research and still vaccinate, just wondering what was your main influence?

#50 zande

Posted 24 April 2009 - 05:42 PM

lola, believe me, I didn't do it because I really wanted to. My DH put his foot down unfortunately. Our doctor was also pressuring us, as were our playgroup.

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


Top 5 Viewed Articles

Essential Baby and Essential Kids is the place to find parenting information and parenting support relating to conception, pregnancy, birth, babies, toddlers, kids, maternity, family budgeting, family travel, nutrition and wellbeing, family entertainment, kids entertainment, tips for the family home, child-friendly recipes and parenting. Try our pregnancy due date calculator to determine your due date, or our ovulation calculator to predict ovulation and your fertile period. Our pregnancy week by week guide shows your baby's stages of development. Access our very active mum's discussion groups in the Essential Baby forums or the Essential Kids forums to talk to mums about conception, pregnancy, birth, babies, toddlers, kids and parenting lifestyle. Essential Baby also offers a baby names database of more than 22,000 baby names, popular baby names, boys' names, girls' names and baby names advice in our baby names forum. Essential Kids features a range of free printable worksheets for kids from preschool years through to primary school years. For the latest baby clothes, maternity clothes, maternity accessories, toddler products, kids toys and kids clothing, breastfeeding and other parenting resources, check out Essential Baby and Essential Kids.