10 Reasons that might not be good enough for parents to stop vaccinating

[Roryrory]

Parents that choose to choose to do so to try to protect their babies.
Parents that choose not to choose not to to try to protect their babies.

Great quote there Inertia. And good point on vaccinating adults as opposed to babies.

[briggsy's girl]

the only problem with vaccinating adults - the rate of transmission amongst adults isn't as prevalent as it is amongst children. so yes, immunising adults is great in theory, but the reality of life is that children pass bugs to each other where adults don't. the immunity in adults won't prevent children in close knit situations (like class rooms or child care) from contracting a nasty bug that the child beside them carries. adults understand (well most do) the need to quarantine themselves and to wash hands to not hand over disease to their friends. kids don't.

as an example - i was checking Miss E's mouth for swelling with her teeth today. clean hands etc. she came at me five minutes later, pulled her slobbery hand out of her mouth, and put it in mind. it's part of being kids. they just hand the bugs around doing what comes naturally to them

don't take this as me arguing for or against vaccinations - each parent will decide what is best for their child - but this is my take on the reason children are vaccinated, not adults

[Trillian]

I just had a quick google search and all the literature I am finding is saying that adult vaccination is just as important than childhood vaccinations. The rate of transmission may not be as prevalent as it is in children, but if anything, adults would probably be the worst ones for spreading illness because they get lazy and don't follow strict handwashing protocols. I found this factsheet that I thought was interesting http://www.ncirs.edu.au/immunisation...et%20FINAL.pdf

[RockinSAHD]

While I disagree with the inference that Doctors are hard done by and struggling to make a living, most of the rest is okayish.

LOL!! I never said some doctors don't do very well for themselves, what I meant is that no doctor is making stack of money giving immunisation injections. The big $'s and fast cars are in private surgery etc...


I didn't mean to preach or attack the AVN, the original article did really irritate me but I just wanted to set things straight. I Didn't say that I was really excited about any the things that I wrote but they're there. Not even my opinion really, more public record, I was quite surprised in the same way I was when I read the AVN article that people say that it's my opinions. The studies have been done, they're on public record, say what you like about the technicalities and motivations. You can read the studies yourself, go to the Medicare website and look up the bonuses for giving immunisations and figure out what the cost would be for a business to give that service in an inner city practice where the rent is astronomical...

One interesting thing I realised (though I'm sorry, I forgot who posted it) thats interesting is that the technical term immune we use in biology is not the same as the domestic word immune. The definition that's been hammered into my head in uni is that immune means to be much stronger against instead of impervious to. No wonder people get confused!!


Thanks for the link Trillian, I'm guessing that originally kids were vaxed because they were easy to track, can you imagine tracking vaccinations for an entire population without using computers and a universal identifier like a TFN? Kids are cute little germ magnets, I heard about this fun study where researchers put some kind of marker paint on little kids noses, asked them not to touch their noses(like they had a cold) and set them loose to play. A few hours later their little painty paw prints were absolutely everywhere (don't ask me for a reference or even if my recounting is accurate!).

[Trillian]

One interesting thing I realised (though I'm sorry, I forgot who posted it) thats interesting is that the technical term immune we use in biology is not the same as the domestic word immune. The definition that's been hammered into my head in uni is that immune means to be much stronger against instead of impervious to. No wonder people get confused!!

See, that's the problem. Mainstream society accepts (and often refuses to challenge) that vaccinations are full protection from the illnesses that they were made to prevent. That's why more should be done to fully inform parents and give them something to consider before they get it done. Never was I given any information that said that vaccines were only x% effective when I dutifully lined up to have my eldest children done. Maybe it is in society's best interest to have most people vaccinated despite the failure rate, but that still comes back the parents making informed consent. If I had of known then what I know now, I wouldn't have rushed in like I did. Even though my eldest children are vaccinated, it is still a concern to me that they could still end up with measles or chicken pox or whooping cough.

[Inertia]

Great quote there Inertia. And good point on vaccinating adults as opposed to babies.

Thanks. We are all doing our best, aye.

the only problem with vaccinating adults - the rate of transmission amongst adults isn't as prevalent as it is amongst children. so yes, immunising adults is great in theory, but the reality of life is that children pass bugs to each other where adults don't. the immunity in adults won't prevent children in close knit situations (like class rooms or child care) from contracting a nasty bug that the child beside them carries. adults understand (well most do) the need to quarantine themselves and to wash hands to not hand over disease to their friends. kids don't.

as an example - i was checking Miss E's mouth for swelling with her teeth today. clean hands etc. she came at me five minutes later, pulled her slobbery hand out of her mouth, and put it in mind. it's part of being kids. they just hand the bugs around doing what comes naturally to them

don't take this as me arguing for or against vaccinations - each parent will decide what is best for their child - but this is my take on the reason children are vaccinated, not adults

Work situations are fabulous for spreading illness. Even standing at the wrong check out can get you sick.

Point is that, 75% of confirmed whooping cough cases in Australia are in people over the age of 35. We are looking at 92% vax rates in schools and childcare, which is over the requirement for herd immunity, but our pertussis is out of control. We have the worst proportions in the all the developed nations despite having the same vax rates in children. I can't remember where I read it but it is in the immunisation literature now that children are most likely to catch whooping cough from a parent or grandparent.

I just had a quick google search and all the literature I am finding is saying that adult vaccination is just as important than childhood vaccinations. The rate of transmission may not be as prevalent as it is in children, but if anything, adults would probably be the worst ones for spreading illness because they get lazy and don't follow strict handwashing protocols. I found this factsheet that I thought was interesting http://www.ncirs.edu.au/immunisation...et%20FINAL.pdf

Among other things. Couple of codril and we are 'soldiering on'.

LOL!! I never said some doctors don't do very well for themselves, what I meant is that no doctor is making stack of money giving immunisation injections. The big $'s and fast cars are in private surgery etc...


I didn't mean to preach or attack the AVN, the original article did really irritate me but I just wanted to set things straight. I Didn't say that I was really excited about any the things that I wrote but they're there. Not even my opinion really, more public record, I was quite surprised in the same way I was when I read the AVN article that people say that it's my opinions. The studies have been done, they're on public record, say what you like about the technicalities, motivations, foil hats, aliens, earthquakes... You can read the studies yourself, go to the Medicare website and look up the bonuses for giving immunisations and figure out what the cost would be for a business to give that service in an inner city practice where the rent is astronomical...

One interesting thing I realised (though I'm sorry, I forgot who posted it) thats interesting is that the technical term immune we use in biology is not the same as the domestic word immune. The definition that's been hammered into my head in uni is that immune means to be much stronger against instead of impervious to. No wonder people get confused!!

Was going well until you brought the foil hats and aliens into it. Can you please stop condescending at me. I am not a child. Thanks.

[RockinSAHD]

See, that's the problem. Mainstream society accepts (and often refuses to challenge) that vaccinations are full protection from the illnesses that they were made to prevent. That's why more should be done to fully inform parents and give them something to consider before they get it done. Never was I given any information that said that vaccines were only x% effective when I dutifully lined up to have my eldest children done. Maybe it is in society's best interest to have most people vaccinated despite the failure rate, but that still comes back the parents making informed consent. If I had of known then what I know now, I wouldn't have rushed in like I did. Even though my eldest children are vaccinated, it is still a concern to me that they could still end up with measles or chicken pox or whooping cough.

Thats fair, but ironically if less people get vaccinated because the vaccines aren't 100% effective then they become even less effective because herd immunity is compromised.

Vaccines work on the principle that if you immunise enough people then the germ dissapears, even if the vaccine is only reasonably effective.

[Amity]

Moderator Message »

It's time for everyone to mind their language and be prepared to respect each other's beliefs and stances on this issue.

And just for those who are interested, when strong language is used in response to threads... how about reading about Godwin's Rule here.

[Inertia]

LOL!! I never said some doctors don't do very well for themselves, what I meant is that no doctor is making stack of money giving immunisation injections. The big $'s and fast cars are in private surgery etc...


I didn't mean to preach or attack the AVN, the original article did really irritate me but I just wanted to set things straight. I Didn't say that I was really excited about any the things that I wrote but they're there. Not even my opinion really, more public record, I was quite surprised in the same way I was when I read the AVN article that people say that it's my opinions. The studies have been done, they're on public record, say what you like about the technicalities and motivations. You can read the studies yourself, go to the Medicare website and look up the bonuses for giving immunisations and figure out what the cost would be for a business to give that service in an inner city practice where the rent is astronomical...

One interesting thing I realised (though I'm sorry, I forgot who posted it) thats interesting is that the technical term immune we use in biology is not the same as the domestic word immune. The definition that's been hammered into my head in uni is that immune means to be much stronger against instead of impervious to. No wonder people get confused!!


Thanks for the link Trillian, I'm guessing that originally kids were vaxed because they were easy to track, can you imagine tracking vaccinations for an entire population without using computers and a universal identifier like a TFN? Kids are cute little germ magnets, I heard about this fun study where researchers put some kind of marker paint on little kids noses, asked them not to touch their noses(like they had a cold) and set them loose to play. A few hours later their little painty paw prints were absolutely everywhere (don't ask me for a reference or even if my recounting is accurate!).

Thank you for the apology and for the change in wording.

On the rest, absolutely I am sure that is not what you meant but it is inferred with the 'barely making a profit'.

Immunisations is a dangerous word for that simple fact alone. It is misleading because the domestic use of immune is not the same. This is why I stick to vaccinations, but Diva's baby book still uses immunisations. You have to admit that some people will become suss when they feel like they are being misled.

Honesty and accountability would go a long way to building trust and maybe shift some non vaxxers into Delay vaxxers instead. Plus if we could get the adult rate up, we could afford to delay the vaccinations a bit more anyway as the babies could then be protected by the herd immunity. We can't sit proudly protected by the potential sacrifice of 2mo babies. We are meant to be protecting them, not the other way around.

[Trillian]

Thats fair, but ironically if less people get vaccinated because the vaccines aren't 100% effective then they become even less effective because herd immunity is compromised.

Vaccines work on the principle that if you immunise enough people then the germ dissapears, even if the vaccine is only reasonably effective.

I'm not saying that parents should avoid vaccination based on that, but it is something they need to be informed about so they can at least be aware that their child may not have enough of an immune response from the vaccination to protect them 100%. And in terms of measles, the 'germs' had dissappeared. The current outbreaks have been caused by people travelling to countries where the illness is still prevalent and then bringing it back into the country with them. So it's not even solely the fault of migrants, but our own population. There hasn't been a locally 'born' outbreak of measles for years. So despite there not being a perfect vaccination rate, it has been enough to stop measles locally. And most of those getting it are young adults and upwards, so more needs to be done to educate adults about vaccination if there were to be true herd immunity. As the systems currently stands, once you are no longer a 'child' there is no onus on you to maintain your immune status anymore.

[willow5]

One interesting thing I realised (though I'm sorry, I forgot who posted it) thats interesting is that the technical term immune we use in biology is not the same as the domestic word immune. The definition that's been hammered into my head in uni is that immune means to be much stronger against instead of impervious to. No wonder people get confused!!

Maybe another reason people get confused, people like me. I have 2 children (fully vaxed) that are 16 and 18 years older than my youngest 16 month old. Now just the way the government advertises immunisation was enough to make me question this time around instead of immunising because " that's what you do" I remember the pamphlets and info the doctors and Mat clinics handed us back then. They claimed that if your kids were immunised they wouldn't catch it, and that immunisation was life long. Now that's different to what we are now told. So yes forgive us for being confused by the information presented to us by the professionals. Along with the scare tactics of, you're basically killing your child and everyone else's if you don't do it. Honestly if I had not had another child now I would probably never have given a second thought to immunising. But because I did and was perplexed by the slightly different info, but still the same scare tactics, I decided to look a little further in to it for DS3.

Was going well until you brought the foil hats and aliens into it. Can you please stop condescending at me. I am not a child. Thanks.

I was thinking the same thing. Do you really think comments like these aimed at people who dare to question what we are being told helps your argument SAHD?

[MsKara]

Thanks OP for your post

But what I would like to add is a little tidbit I saw on a program called The Vaccine War . When a group of parents were interviewed about vaccinating, they overwhelmingly saw it as a personal/parenting choice, not as a societal responsibility. That is, most parents don't want the government or doctors or society telling them what is or is not good for their child. So it's a personal/parenting call, akin to bedtimes, or whether you give your kids red food colouring, or send them to a public vs private school

Thanks for the link! To say that choosing to vaccinate is a personal/parenting choice the same as bedtimes etc just makes me feel ill! What time someone else chooses to send their child to bed, doesn't have the potential to kill my child

Now that's different to what we are now told. So yes forgive us for being confused by the information presented to us by the professionals.

Information always changes once more research is done. That's why 28yrs ago I slept on my stomach in a cot filled with bumpers and a sheep skin rug, yet my younger brother slept on his back in an almost empty cot. It's also why we know that smoking causes cancer, and isn't just a great way to relax.

[PumpkinZulu]

MsKara the fact that you don't think vaccinating a child should be a personal parenting choice makes me feel uneasy. Should parents be forced to vaccinate their children? Do you feel that way about all vaccines? I won't be getting my daughter vaxed for a number of things (others I will), should I be forced to have her vaxed for the ones I don't want for her? Genuinely interested.

To me, it's definitely a very personal choice. Non vaxers are not killing out our population afterall; vaccines do generally work at keeping people alive, we are not dying of many things that we used to afterall, so I don't think people like me who will partially vaccinate or not vaccinate t all are putting lives at risk.

[Inertia]

Thanks for the link! To say that choosing to vaccinate is a personal/parenting choice the same as bedtimes etc just makes me feel ill! What time someone else chooses to send their child to bed, doesn't have the potential to kill my child

Just a warning that this could be viewed harshly.

But to try and put a softer response and hope to save that....

It doesn't have the potential of killing their child either. Non vaxxers children are exposed to the exact same risks.

Whooping cough being the main culprit here, as I stated before, Immunisation Australia themselves advertise that the most likely source of infection for a baby is from a parent or grandparent. 75% of all reported cases in Australia are people over the age of 35 years old. For the children, more vaccinated children present with whooping cough as it is not immunity and basically, there is more vaccinated children - 92% of all Australian children are fully vaccinated.

I have had whooping cough. It is not fun.
But my 2mo niece died less than 12 hours after her first vaccination. That was much harder.

[Trillian]

Thanks OP for your post



Thanks for the link! To say that choosing to vaccinate is a personal/parenting choice the same as bedtimes etc just makes me feel ill! What time someone else chooses to send their child to bed, doesn't have the potential to kill my child

That is really offensive. Please don't attack the choices of those who do not vaccinate. Respect is a two way street and if you want respect for your choice TO choose, please respect our choice to NOT choose. If you are confident that vaccines work, then there is nothing to fear is there? I just can't believe you can disrespect people so much.

[willow5]

Information always changes once more research is done. That's why 28yrs ago I slept on my stomach in a cot filled with bumpers and a sheep skin rug, yet my younger brother slept on his back in an almost empty cot. It's also why we know that smoking causes cancer, and isn't just a great way to relax.

Oh for sure. I do appreciate that, but, That information wasn't up front handed to me. The advertising campaign may have changed to not be worded the same way, but, I had to go looking and ask before I was told. So that in it's self makes me question. Sometimes more reasearch is done because of questioning. So doesn't that make it a good thing? Look at the asbestos issue. Wasn't that finally researched properly and links to illness found because of lots of sick people wanting it looked into? Passive smoking also, was a fight by people claiming they were sick because of passive smoking who were told for a long time that was not possible, but now, hey look they seem to have been right. So I think questioning is a good thing.

[Roryrory]

Totally unrelated to all of the above but I am vaccinated against smallpox. How's them apples!

(bummer is the immunity probably has worn off by now.......)

Now to wade in (in the interests of diplomacy and air-clearing only)

To say that choosing to vaccinate is a personal/parenting choice the same as bedtimes etc just makes me feel ill! What time someone else chooses to send their child to bed, doesn't have the potential to kill my child

It doesn't have the potential of killing their child either. Non vaxxers children are exposed to the exact same risks.

I think the issue is that vaxers blame non-vaxers when disease spreads, rightly or wrongly.

It is such a conundrum, this issue. I will firmly be a vaxer, even though I see so many valid points in the arguments on the non-vaxing side. It breaks my heart to see parents put into this position where our childrens' lives are the things we are trying to save. I shudder to think what would happen if there were an outbreak of polio or something similar. I suspect there would be such an uprising of anger towards non-vaxing parents that it would come to violence.

[MsKara]

I think if you read my post again you'll find what I actually said was that I feel comparing vaccinating vs not vaccinating with what time someone would send their child to bed, scary. The issue is much bigger than that.