parents who dont vaccinate your babies??

[Larkspur]

My daughter had measles twice before having her MMR
She was a little sleepy but that's it

I don't believe that childhood illnesses are as bad as we are led to believe for the majority of people, but like anything an immune compromised person will get it worse, even those illnesses we don't have protection against.

And an ex-boyfriend of mine was a very healthy child but had measles so badly when he was young that he was horrifically scarred all over his chest. He would never take his shirt off, not at the beach, not in bed, ever, because he was so embarrassed. It affected him permanently. Of course, not that many people even knew he was so horrifically scarred because he never took his shirt off.

Personal experience is not really a very good measure to judge by in these things as although it feels like we know a lot of people, our actual pool of reference is incredibly small when compared to the whole population.

 

[ukgirl23]

Genuine question because I don't really understand how it works longterm but:

If everyone who was able to got vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella, would it wipe them out? Or would the fact that people who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons or age aren't vaccinated mean they will stick around? Do vaccinated children still carry measles, mumps and rubella even if they don't get sick themselves or can they not carry it once vaccinated?

Lots of questions lol.

It would make it rare but it wouldnt wipe it out. The reason so many illness which were rare when we grew up such as whooping cough ect are becoming more common was because more people vaccinated their children. Now a days there seems to be a lot more information on line and many parents are choosing to avoid vaccines because of various reasons mentioned in this thread meaning that these illnesses are now spreading amoung children who are not vaccinated and fragile people and becoming more common. Which from a medical point of view is extremely frustrating to watch when you know you have the medicine to avoid a child getting ill and then having one come in to see you with an illness that could have been prevented with either a single vaccine or a series of three vaccines.

hence why I asked why you wouldnt vaccinate your child to prevent an illness that had a prevention cure.. and thank you to those who were brave enough to reply knowing you would get judged by a few small minded people I now know

 

[robinator]

My baby is vaccinated and will continue to be. She may get asthma or something else. A baby who remains unvaxxed may get asthma or something else. We just don't know, nothing is concrete

I do "blindly" trust my doctor; I trust her education, knowledge and experience. I trust her like I would trust my lawyer to know the law and my accountant to know about taxes, etc. I just do.

 

[BlueHadeda]

See when my little girl had chicken pox she had tonnes of blisters. she has ezcema with makes it worse. I counted 300 on her tummy alone. she was really poorly with a temp and flu symptoms and couldnt bend as she had blisters between her legs and under her arms even a few inside down below. She had to lay down straight until the blisters scabbed over. I could say actually her skin was like bubble wrap.. she sat on the toilet seat one day and popped a few so from then until they scabbed she had to pee in a pot. It was really awful. She has scars all over her back and tummy because her ezcema meant her skin never healed properly afterwards.. if we had the vaccine for chicken pox here I would have taken it for my son but when he did catch i he only had a few spots and most were in his hair he wasnt really poorly. But yeh for my poor daughter it was dreadful. Can imagine measles??? Those are ten times worse!!

My son's case of measles certainly sounded MUCH more benign than your daughter's case of chickenpox! Amazing.

My son was vaccinated, so tbh, maybe his case was lighter than it could've been? Though, I doubt it, because he had a perfect textbook case of it. Started off with a very high fever, red teary eyes and sore, red throat. This lasted for exactly 4 days (no wonder it's called the 4-day fever). The only relief was ibuprufen suppositories. But, that was the worst of it. He's been much more ill and in danger when he had scarlet fever.

After the 4 days of high fever, he got the rash. The moment the rash appeared, he was just about healthy again. The rash was bad though. It flowed together all across his upper body, and then down to his arms and legs and up in his face and head. The rash kept on appearing (new spots) until 3 weeks after!! But, it only itched a little, and basically I never needed to "doctor" him with anything after the 4 days of fever. No ointment, no lotion, no medication, nothing. He was as normal as could be, except for this rash. As I said, he was much more ill with scarlet fever.

So I'm not sure why people fear measles so much? If there's no complications, it's actually a self limiting illness. Now, if there were a vaccine against scarlet fever, I'd be first in line!

Was it defiantly measles or was it German measles. The latter is much more mild.

Definitely measles. Confirmed by a dr once the rash appeared. It was the very characteristic measles rash (red flowing together, etc).

It's not that he wasn't ill. He was. For 4 days his fever hovered around 39.5. It's just that comparing it to scarlet fever and when my eldest had pneumonia, measles was actually nothing worse (imo) than the flu or tonsilitis.

 

[Scottish mum]

I know that if I didn't vaccinate my lo and he fell ill I would never forgive myself I agree the for me the pros outweight the cons in this case

 

[Scottish mum]

Genuine question because I don't really understand how it works longterm but:

If everyone who was able to got vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella, would it wipe them out? Or would the fact that people who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons or age aren't
vaccinated mean they will stick
around? Do vaccinated children
still carry measles, mumps and
rubella even if they don't get sick
themselves or can they not carry it
once vaccinated?

Lots of questions lol.

I don't know, you would think that if an entire generation were vaccinated, there would be no
more need for vaccines. But it
doesn't work that way I guess. But
there is a whole world to consider,
things that are virtually unheard of
in some countries are still risky in
others.

Yes, vaccinated children can carry and spread diseases that they do not actually catch.

Vaccines can wear off, that is why
some people who already got
vaccinated for whooping cough
can still get it, and why you have
to get "boosters" for some
vaccines.

In regards to the bit about children being vaccinated and there still being illnesses spreading that's because people are not vaccinating hence the thread. I know vaccinations don't stop illness but it can stop it being life threatening x

 

[misspriss]

I know that if I didn't vaccinate my lo and he fell ill I would never forgive myself I agree the for me the pros outweight the cons in this case

I guess I feel the same way, if I chose to vaccinate my child and they had a serious or deadly reaction to the vaccine, which I KNEW I was giving them, vs the chance they would contract a disease (which may or may not hurt them), I would never forgive myself either.

 

[Scottish mum]

I know! I'm pro vaccines however it doesn't stop me worrying about what if??

I just feel it could be worse if I didn't go ahead with it x

 

[misspriss]

I know! I'm pro vaccines however it doesn't stop me worrying about what if??

I just feel it could be worse if I didn't go ahead with it x

And I guess that is just the difference, I guess it is just weighing the possible risks and possible benefits, for some people the possible risks of vaccinating outweigh the possible benefits, while for others the possible risks of not vaccinating outweigh the possible risks of vaccinating!

 

[overcomer79]

My dad has stage four lung cancer and undergoing chemo therapy. To me, it is my duty that my kids be vaccinated to protect him. (ukgirl, you mentioned cancer hence why I felt the need to add this).

 

[L.A Mommy]

I think people that choose not to vaccinate should also take time to consider that if they do not vaccinate their own children, they are putting other peoples lives (eg newborn babies) at risk too. Illnesses such as mumps and measles etc are on the rise because fewer people are vaccinating.

If say a child who isnt vaccinated is around a child who is.. then wheres the risk ? Wouldnt the child who is vaccinated be protected be against the unvaccinated child?

 

[pinklightbulb]

I think people that choose not to vaccinate should also take time to consider that if they do not vaccinate their own children, they are putting other peoples lives (eg newborn babies) at risk too. Illnesses such as mumps and measles etc are on the rise because fewer people are vaccinating.

If say a child who isnt vaccinated is around a child who is.. then wheres the risk ? Wouldnt the child who is vaccinated be protected be against the unvaccinated child?

Oh, THIS. So, so, so much this. I have never understood why my un-vaxed child is putting a vaxxed one at risk. How?? Lol. It makes No Sense.

 

[StranjeGirl]

I have never understood the staunch pro/anti vaccine line. The vaccines are all different formulas with different ingredients, made by different companies, to prevent diseases with huge differences in severity. I think you have to look at vaccines one by one, not as a whole.

We did not get the newborn Hep B vaccine. My one day old does not need protection against a disease that is primarily transmitted through sexual contact or shared needles. We will get it, but not until much later.

We will not get the flu vaccine. They rush it through screening and no one knows the long term effects. Every other drug is still in the experimental stage when this vaccine is being injected into millions. On the risk/benefit scale, it's far too much of a risk for me.

We will not get the chicken pox vaccine unless she has not had it by thirteen years old. Honestly, the chicken pox is not much of a threat to children, only adults.

Every other vaccine she is getting. With our next, I will probably do more of a delayed vaccine schedule.

I think if you're going to use the word 'irresponsible' about either side of the argument, you need to realize that it would be irresponsible for you and yours. I know very few people who take this decision lightly. You are injecting chemicals into a developing child. It's one of the most serious decisions we make.

I agree with the hep b. I was so upset about not being able to research at the hospital and the pediatrician talked me into it. For her second one we had switched pediatricians because we moved and he didn't want to give it to her and explained it wasn't necessary right now unless we had been at risk, and we hadn't. I do think chicken pox vaccine is important though as if you have had chicken pox you can later get shingles which can really mess you up. I know someone who lost part of her sight and nerve damage from shingles.

 

[Larkspur]

If say a child who isnt vaccinated is around a child who is.. then wheres the risk ? Wouldnt the child who is vaccinated be protected be against the unvaccinated child?

As the PP noted in part, the people at risk include newborn babies and toddlers too young to have been vaccinated or have finished the schedule, children who cannot be vaccinated due to allergies or chronic illness, children who for one reason or another are vaccine resistant (usually a genetic trait), and people who cannot afford vaccination if they have to pay for it.

For example, my five-month-old will not receive the MMR until he is 15 months old. Until then he is exposed. It seems a bit unreasonable that I must avoid any exposure to children who are around other large groups of children (nursery, school) etc where those diseases tend to break out until he is 15 months old and has had his vaccinations.

 

[special_kala]

I think people that choose not to vaccinate should also take time to consider that if they do not vaccinate their own children, they are putting other peoples lives (eg newborn babies) at risk too. Illnesses such as mumps and measles etc are on the rise because fewer people are vaccinating.

If say a child who isnt vaccinated is around a child who is.. then wheres the risk ? Wouldnt the child who is vaccinated be protected be against the unvaccinated child?

newborns sent vaccinated, some children are allergic to vaccines, some can't have vaccinations because of certain conditions.

 

[staralfur]

I think people that choose not to vaccinate should also take time to consider that if they do not vaccinate their own children, they are putting other peoples lives (eg newborn babies) at risk too. Illnesses such as mumps and measles etc are on the rise because fewer people are vaccinating.

If say a child who isnt vaccinated is around a child who is.. then wheres the risk ? Wouldnt the child who is vaccinated be protected be against the unvaccinated child?

She even gave the example of a newborn child. Do babies get vaccinated for everything as soon as they come out of the womb? No. Those first two months they are susceptible to everything because they cannot be vaccinated until then.

Also anyone receiving certain medical treatments who cannot receive vaccines are vulnerable to the diseases that may be caught and spread by those who are not vaccinated. Like, for example, a young child undergoing chemotherapy for leukemia or something, cannot be immunized because their immune systems can't handle it. There are various reasons children and adults cannot be vaccinated by no choice of their own, there are children whose siblings have had adverse reactions to vaccines and are advised to not receive vaccines, there are newborn babies, etcetera etcetera, all who are essentially at a higher risk of contracting these diseases because the vaccine uptake rate may not be high enough to protect them.

 

[pinklightbulb]

Then a newborn (or anyone compromised) will be at risk anyway, as vaccinated children can and do still shed/spread illness Not all vaccines take. And nobody ever really bothers following up to check. Even if they did, vaccination isn't a guarantee. My brother is deaf as a result of Mum being vaccinated 3x against rubella and it never taking.

 

[Larkspur]

Then a newborn (or anyone compromised) will be at risk anyway, as vaccinated children can and do still shed/spread illness Not all vaccines take. And nobody ever really bothers following up to check. Even if they did, vaccination isn't a guarantee. My brother is deaf as a result of Mum being vaccinated 3x against rubella and it never taking.

Can you link to some evidence of vaccine shedding? From my reading, it seems to be extremely uncommon. Certainly nothing like the risk from 'wild' infection.

 

[onetwothreebp]

...there is a huge difference between an illness such as a cold or something vs the measles or something more serious that most children are vaccinated for

 

[L.A Mommy]

I think people that choose not to vaccinate should also take time to consider that if they do not vaccinate their own children, they are putting other peoples lives (eg newborn babies) at risk too. Illnesses such as mumps and measles etc are on the rise because fewer people are vaccinating.

If say a child who isnt vaccinated is around a child who is.. then wheres the risk ? Wouldnt the child who is vaccinated be protected be against the unvaccinated child?

She even gave the example of a newborn child. Do babies get vaccinated for everything as soon as they come out of the womb? No. Those first two months they are susceptible to everything because they cannot be vaccinated until then.

I should have clerified better.. i wasnt talking about newborns.. i meant older children.. like toddlers, preschoolers etc...