BlueHadeda
SAHM to 4 precious kids
- Joined
- May 18, 2011
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 0
Some people on this site has implied or said outright, that vaxers have the right to blame unvaxers for not protecting their children by herd immunity. I'm a vaxer, but I've wondered if those people has even thought about the opposite being true as well?
To explain: In a perfect world as mother nature intended it, babies was protected via breastmilk. The mom's immunity excreted into the breastmilk, and everyone did extended breastfeeding until toddlerhood. Once they stopped breastfeeding, their immunity waned, and during age 5-15, these children would be exposed and immunised (by getting the illness) against all the childhood diseases. Before age 5, when it's dangerous to a child to get for example measles, he would be protected. When he reaches adulthood, when it's dangerous again, he would already have been exposed to the disease and built the necessary immunity. Then, for the rest of his life, he would regularly come into contact with said disease, via his children, family's children, community's children, etc. This would boost his immunity every time and make sure immunity doesn't wane. Keeping him safe during adulthood and most importantly, when he's elderly.
Now, vaccinations have messed this process up. Because it's not natural immunity anymore, it doesn't always excrete as it should've, in breastmilk. And the child isn't left unprotected during age 5-15, when it's the optimal time to get this diseases (least dangerous). Then you also don't come into contact with loads of cases of this disease anymore as an adult, that would've boosted your immunity. So when you're elderly, your immunity might've waned, leaving you vulnerable.
So for an unvaxed parent, you vaccinating your children might be problematic. Because her child won't be exposed as it should anymore, leaving them vulnerable at the wrong times of their lives. So you vaccinating, influence their children, just as they not vaccinating, influence your children.
I vaccinate, but I did consider this scenario, and it's one of the (less important) reasons I do vaccinate. I feel forced into it by society that vaccinate! Because their children wouldn't boost my children's immunity as it should've anymore. I feel guilty for "dropping" those that stand by their convictions to not vaccinate.
Excellent post and well said. This is one of the reasons I don't vaccinate but I was way too tired to try to explain all of this. I am fully vaccinated, and I wish I wasn't so I could be giving LO natural immunity to some of these illnesses. I'm sure that plenty of my vaccines have worn off, though, so perhaps I've come into contact with something. Since injected vaccines bypass mucous membranes and go directly into the bloodstream, you can't pass on vaccinated immunity through breastmilk but you can pass on natural immunity.
Quick aside, this study shows that breastmilk contains high levels of antibodies that may help protect children from four childhood diseases in particular, including whooping cough. Assumedly you would have to have natural immunity to these diseases to pass on the antibodies. So while breastmilk cannot fully protect your children from catching diseases (same with vaccination), it certainly helps.
Thank you for that part that I bolded. I never read up on the workings for this, so it's quite interesting. And an even bigger thank you for that link!! You won't believe how much that meant to me. Neisseria meningitis is the biggest meningitis killer in my country (this differs from country to country), so I've always been especially worried about it. So reading that I'm probably giving her at least some protection from it, is such a relief. I think I have to research a bit into how IgA and IgG, etc. works. I'd love to know why the one was higher in breastmilk than it was found in the mother! And why the other one was lower.