Pediatricians get more firm when parents refuse vaccines

[shira]

We should not focus on failures, because vaccines have helped eradicate diseases all over the world, small pox for an example.

But then again, doctors should not be spreading 1/2 truths.

The doctors statement in the OP implies that if a child is vaccinated, they will not catch the disease, and that simply is not true.

During the recent whooping cough outbreak in California, the majority of the children that contracted whooping cough were fully vaccinated.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/vaccine-response-pertussis/

You're misinterpreting the information in the report. Those with recent vaccinations rarely developed the disease. What apparently happened was that the effectiveness of the booster shots wore off earlier than expected.

The schedule of pertussis vaccination and boosters for US children goes like this: 2 months, 4 months, 6 months; between 15 and 18 months; at 5 years, and again at 12 years. (A booster is recommended for adults, especially ones in professions that bring them in close contact with children, but is not legally required.) Witt and his fellow researchers, who include his son and research assistant Max Witt and Kaiser senior pediatrician Dr. Paul Katz, noted that the spike in cases fell in the longest gap between boosters, and began at almost exactly 3 years after the age-5 dose.

“We found very low rate of clinical pertussis up to age 8, and at that point it skyrocketed, with the attack rate peaking in the 10-12-year-olds,” Dr. Witt said.

In their ICAAC paper, the researchers concluded: “Acellular pertussis boosters are effective but less durable than previously thought. Vaccine guidelines and pertussis control measures need to be reconsidered.”

So the message from the California outbreak is NOT that the pertussis vaccine was ineffective. The message is that pertussis boosters need to be given more frequently.

And note that pertussis is of greatest risk for infants, who either haven't received any vaccinations at all or who haven't received the full set of shots. That's why herd immunity is extremely important: If the non-infant population if fully vaccinated, with up-to-date boosters, the threat to infants is substantially reduced.

Again, the message to everyone is: You MUST be immunized against pertussis (and MMR). This point you're making that vaccines aren't 100% effective is beside the point; vaccines are a hell of a lot more effective at preventing disease than not receiving vaccinations at all.

 

[BoberFett]

Then in the middle you have crazy people who think vaccines are actually used to enslave the populace so the lizard people will take over.

Uhhh, excuse me... We do have a name. We're called libertarians.

 

[Howard]

My reloading press has not been setup in over a decade.

Too bad.

 

[Ausm]

Who is the resident forum vaccinating hater?? I can't remember his name but his posts sure were hilarious.

 

[Texashiker]

Too bad.

Na, not really. For long term storage, factory ammo is best.

If you want to survive a zombie invasion, you need to stockpile ammo for years ahead of time.

 

[senseamp]

Mandating people buy a product so that others are not saddled with risk if they get sick? These doctors must be socialists.

 

[Sunburn74]

If you want to imagine what life is like without the polio vaccine do a little research and trust me you will come running for the needles with your children in hand. Heck polio was so common it was the presumed diagnosis to explain the paralysis FDR, the president of the United states, developed whilst in office as an adult! Now because people don't see the devastation everyday as they did just 50 years ago, they forget and come to all sorts of dumb-ass rationalizations about the worth of the vaccines.

 

[werepossum]

Good analogy. I may have to steal this.

You're certainly welcome to do so. No IP on ATP&N!

 

[shira]

Derp much? He's saying we shouldn't tell people you won't be hurt in an accident because you're wearing a seat belt. Same for vaccine, don't put it out there like it will keep you from getting the disease, explain it greatly lowers your chance but you still can get it.

I didn't see anything saying we should start stressing how they're not completely effective, just that we shouldn't say they are. That would be lying ofc.


Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk

Let me understand the principle here: Whenever a statement is made that MIGHT be misunderstood to be an absolute, those making the statement should be required to qualify the statement? Is that the principle you're stating?

So when the NRA tells us that guns protect you from criminals, they should be REQUIRED to state that the children of some responsible gun-owners die in their home because of gun accidents.

When the Surgeon General tells us that obesity increases the risk for heart disease, diabetes, and cancer, he should be REQUIRED to state that many obese people live until they're 100 and will never get heart disease, diabetes, or cancer.

When law enforcement officials tell us "speed kills," they should be REQUIRED to tell us that most people who speed will never get into a fatal accident.

And those warnings on tobacco products? They should be amended to state, "many smokers never get lung cancer, emphysema, or heart disease."

Is this what you're advocating?

 

[Moonbeam]

Let me understand the principle here: Whenever a statement is made that MIGHT be misunderstood to be an absolute, those making the statement should be required to qualify the statement? Is that the principle you're stating?

So when the NRA tells us that guns protect you from criminals, they should be REQUIRED to state that the children of some responsible gun-owners die in their home because of gun accidents.

When the Surgeon General tells us that obesity increases the risk for heart disease, diabetes, and cancer, he should be REQUIRED to state that many obese people live until they're 100 and will never get heart disease, diabetes, or cancer.

When law enforcement officials tell us "speed kills," they should be REQUIRED to tell us that most people who speed will never get into a fatal accident.

And those warnings on tobacco products? They should be amended to state, "many smokers never get lung cancer, emphysema, or heart disease."

Is this what you're advocating?

People are defective in their ability to assess risk. They exhibit all kinds of denial. This, I think, is just a symptom of the fact we were driven insane as children. We were warned not to do this and that and immediately wanted to do this and that and maybe did and got the crap beaten our of us or didn't and now have all these repressed urges. Folk are just a total mess and as soon as they hear that old should or shouldn't all that craziness comes to the fore. Folk have a hard time distinguishing what to do when an action may be good for their physical being but bad for their ego. Look at all those poor Christian sots who believe that healing comes from God alone and let their kids die to save their egos. Ego always, before reason. No way we'll open that door to all our hidden self hate.