Change the Schedule!
June 4, 2008 by Kristina Chew, PhD
Filed under Health
“Change the schedule!” This appears to be the rallying cry of today’s Green Our Vaccines rally. CBS news quotes comedian Jim Carrey:
Led by actors Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey, they’re marching against the medical establishment that says there’s no evidence vaccines cause autism, CBS News medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook reports.
“We want to send the message to the CDC and our federal government that vaccinations schedules are not one size fits all for all children and that each child is different,” said concerned parent Michael Williamson.
Their new battle cry: Spread out the vaccine schedule.
“Thirty-six vaccines in the first few years of the life are too many too soon,” Carrey said.
I’ve been wondering what in the world “green our vaccines” meant and I guess that’s as good of an answer as we’ll be getting. It’s not as simple as being “anti-vaccine” (there’s even a “NO GREEN VACCINE” faction, as evinced by this Yahoo group). Today’s Jenny ‘n’ Jim led rally was about vaccine safety and (as revealed by that new battle cry), the schedule. Vaccine safety is said to mean nothing more and less than “change the schedule”—”not so many” at one time—-”spread ‘em out.”
(Which would mean more trips to the doctor’s office for new moms and more office visit co-pays. But I digress.)
This is a rather subtle distinction, one might say, and more popular sorts of media sources (like this) have boiled the point of the rally down to “change” and “aiming to eliminate toxins from children’s vaccines”; one wonders at how effectively the rally got its point across. As for the new battle cry of “change the schedule!”: It does not have quite the inflammatory ring of “vaccines = autism”; it seems, if I may say so, rather watered down and, well, safe. Not only is “vaccine safety” the word at the rally, but “talking safe about vaccines.”
And a question: Seeing as the theme of the rally was “greening vaccines”—-making vaccines cleaner, better for the environment, or some “green-thinking” sort of thing—-what was with those shirts, with that kelly green—???—color? It’s not exactly a “natural” color, but maybe the product of some chemical additives. Last time I saw so much of this shade was at the Honan family reunion of Jim’s mother’s relatives……..
More on the Green Our Vaccines rally here.
“Thirty-six vaccines in the first few years of the life are too many too soon,” Carrey said.”
Why? What mechanistic or causative or even correlative evidence was offered to support this assertion?
Now you might be expecting too much there…….
You’d hope not.
Cliff
Again, these are not people who really LOOK at data the same way I (we) do. I’ve heard everything from 24 to 36 vaccines from this camp and various news show “docs”. —Do they mean actually 36 KINDS of vaccs, or individual administrations of vaccines and their boosters???? The world may never know….
There’s certainly a tendency to inflate numbers (like the count for how many were at the rally).
People unconfortable with the current schedule need only find the right pediatrician. My duaghter recieves all of her vaccines, but on a much more spread out schedule. No combo vaccines. One shot per visit. Delays on non essential vaccines like prevnar and varivax. We talked about this before she was born and he was fine with it. He said that as long as she was getting the shots, he was no problem whatsoever with using a different schedule. He now uses our “alternative schedule” as a way of talking potential non vaxers into getting needed vaccines. His stock line is “This is the schedule developed by the parent of an 11 year old with autism. She is comfortable with her daughter recieving vaxes in this order.” He’s told me my schedule has been a blessing to his office.
You are NEVER going to convince parents to get ANY vaccines when physicians take on an adversarial position against parents. I have six kids and want to space out all the vaccinations. We’re also opting out of polio (told them we’d HAPPILY get OPV), MMR (told them we’d HAPPILY get measles, mumps separate from rubella for religious reasons) and chicken pox vaccines (told them we’d HAPPILY vaccinate kids at 15 if they haven’t gotten it yet). The doctors would fight us at every appointment and finally, it came down to MONEY because the insurance carriers “penalized” (read, no big big bonus) the doctors for not having good immunization rates.
So, they literally told us we couldn’t go back via certified mail. Now, we’re going to a doctor who is a nice enough guy but not a pediatrician. We’re just going to go once a year. Maybe. Which is different from what I did when my older kids were infants. He doesn’t usually see kids so he doesn’t vaccinate at all.
So who wins? Now instead of skipping three stinkin’ shots, and getting the rest on my schedule, we’re not getting any. Congratulations, medical establishment! Thanks for working with us. I’m sure the insurance company wanted to get doctors to immunize so they wouldn’t have to pay claims, but this strategy backfires.
Don’t wonder why vaccination rates are low among educated and insured people if this is the norm. As an insured person with more than five bucks in the bank, we don’t qualify for the “free” clinic-type vacs either.
I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I agree with Jenny and her ilk on this point. 22 shots (that’s how many I’ve counted) by the age of 2 is just too much for an immature nervous and immune system. I say this as a registered nurse and a mom. Do I believe vaccines cause autism? Certainly not. But I do believe that 22 shots pumped into a tiny body before the age of 2 has the potential to do harm.
My eldest son is vaccinated on schedule, although I always skip the flu vaccine (it’s total crap). My baby will be vaccinated, but he is getting the kind of vaxing that Lara mentions a few posts up, also known in the internet world as delay/selective vaccinating.
And I think that’s the reason that the Green Our Vaccines took on this “softer” note about vaccines—-”change the schedule” is hard not to agree with, not extreme.
I have to say, if you aproach your ped right, most won’t be adverse to stretching out the schedule. I think many parent’s expect a fight and come in to the appointment ready to do battle. Frankly most peds are glad that kids are getting their shots, if the parents are ok with more visits, etc, they don’t really care. Both our sons have autism, and got their shots. I personally don’t feel that the vac’s caused their autism, like you Kristina, I knew L was different very early on, even though he met his milestones, except for talking. Number three, when she gets here, will also get all her vacinations. Will we space them out, I don’t know. But as long as your kids get them, who really cares.
in response to above, here in WI, ANYONE can get their kids vaccinated for free thru public health. Even us with insurance.
Many people here are being grossly misinformed and influenced adversely by this antivax nonsense. First of all, someone noted that prevnar is a “nonessential” vaccine. This is absolutely and completely false. Strep pneumo can cause profoundly serious disease in the very young child.
Second, if you know anything about immunology at all, the “too much for an immature nervous and immune system” is total nonsense. We are battered by innumerable antigens every single day, and the capacity for development of an immune response is efficient and appropriate.
Thirdly, pediatricians are not “in it for the money”. They are at the lowest end of all physicians on the pay scale, despite having the same office overhead, working hours, length and difficulty of residency, and amount of educational debt. These are not the type of people who go into pediatrics for the money.
Fourth, vaccination rates amongst “educated and insured” are not low. Those who refuse vaccines tend to be a fringe element, often clustered amongst those with degrees, but the vast majority of those with brains tend to get their kids vaccinated on time.
The internet has become in retrospect the best and worst thing to happen to medicine in the past quarter century. This, along with the inflated self-esteem of the general public (educated by anti-authority 60’s public school teachers and academics) has led to an astounding number of individuals who know everything.
And when presented with conflicting data, will attack perceived motives as opposed to making a cogent argument.
Very sad, and it is our children who will pay the price.
“while the number of vaccines has increased, they are more targeted due to improved technology and scientific knowledge. Today’s vaccine schedule contains about 150 antigens (immune stimulating proteins), which is less than the 200 proteins that older vaccines contained.”
(From Science-Based Medicine–sorry, no idea how to do links in this comments interface)
The only reason that the antivaccinationists get any traction here is that their lies and emotional gut-punches go unchallenged. The PR line about safer vaccines is just antivaccinationist nonsense in a different wrapper. The only responsible thing to do is vaccinate your children, unless your doctor finds some medically supportable reason while that is specifically contraindicated for that child.
As someone with a graduate degree in immunology, I kind of have to agree with UNCDoc… The immune system is indeed “battered” from the day babies are born, and not from exposure to vaccines, but from exposure to the brand-new environment that they find themselves thrust into. In general (and obviously with exceptions for immuno-compromised individuals) this is a good thing. Now, whether you think that the additives in the vaccines are too much for children to handle is a whole other issue, but I think exposure to the antigens themselves is a bit of a non-issue.
Hello friends -
What I find so curious about the incredulous responses you sometimes see in regards to questioning an advanced vaccine schedule is the notion that at no time will it ever be appropriate to investigate what, if any, long term, unanticipated effects repeated vaccines will have on our children.
There are dozens, if not hundreds of vaccines being developed; will there never be a point to investigate the cumulative effect of these immune challeneges?
- pD
UNCdoc, I can almost see your finger wagging and you peering down your nose over your spectacles through your post.
Did it ever occur to you that not all parents who choose to delay/selectively vax their children are “paranoid” or following internet trends, that maybe, just maybe, it’s because we actually have a brain in our heads and can think for ourselves?
I think David Kirby is full of crap. I straight up said I don’t think vaccines cause autism. Yet here you come, with the standard “I am physician, hear me roar” condescension and tsk tsk tsking because we as parents choose to not be spoon fed every piece of advice you give like good little minions. Some doctors still advise spanking. My own doctor group advises starting solid foods at 4 months of age. I don’t do either of those things. I suppose in your mind that’s irresponsible as well, and my children are “suffering?”
It’s okay for parents to think for themselves, contrary to the howling and mewling of the medical community. Maybe, just maybe, if the medical community weren’t so condescending and paternalistic in their approach all the time, there wouldn’t be such mistrust of the medical model as a whole.
I’m sure we’ve all heard the joke: What’s the difference between God and a doctor? God doesn’t think he’s a doctor.
Too true.
“I can almost see your finger wagging and you peering down your nose over your spectacles through your post.”
Hate docs much, Nurse?
I’m mostly taking this in right now.
We are pretty much battered with antigens from the moment of birth and from my point of view it can be considered serendipity when those antigens are not pathogens.
So I’ve heard the call to “Green vaccines”, but not a lot about what that is…how green is green enough, and at what exactly is the schedule and the safe vaccines being proposed.
Take out the adjuvants, take out preservatives, take out those reagents and media used to manufacture, take out the antigens…what does that leave? Would it still have the immune reaction? What would that schedule look like?
I realize that statement is a bit hyperbolic, but right now much is expressed in generalities and I am wondering about the specifics being proposed.
I have to agree with ASDmomNC on her two points that I don’t think that vaccines cause autism and that I also don’t see the harm in spreading the schedule out.
Medicine is constantly evolving so the current schedule recommendations may change and not only because of pressure from antivaxers.
I vaccinated all 3 of my kids on schedule before we had my oldest son’s AS & ADHD diagnoses. I really gave no thought to the number of vaccines that the kids got. If I were to have a child now, I would probably stretch out the schedule. I haven;t heard anyone present a good reason why this should not be done.
“Hate docs much, Nurse?”
Actually, no. I’m quite fond of most of the physicians I work with, thank you.
What I DON’T like are physicians who assume that because they have said it, it must be so. Who have a sense of entitlement that their word is law, and that all who question it are misguided souls.
Questioning physicians and disliking physicians with all-knowing god complexes is not doc-hating. Nice straw man, though.
NJ is debating vaccine exemptions:
http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080605/NEWS/80605010
Personally, I haven’t done the extensive research that some of you have but as a parent I would feel better with a spread out schedule and then having the option of exempting from others.
Thank you, UNC doc. I was going to post exactly that comment re: “too much for immature immune systems,” but you beat me to it. What they confront from the minute they emerge–especially if it’s in the hospital–is mindboggling.
I can’t stand it when doctors are condescending, but a quick read of what Mary had to post about her behavior with her doctor (see the epic MMR/urban myth posts) would help anyone underestand why doctors end up behaving the way they do. I can’t imagine how they stand it sometimes, what with all the cyberchondriacs and Google U grads out there.
I have yet to see anyone present an iota of evidence that spreading out the schedule or “greening” the vaccines et al. is medically necessary. I just haven’t seen it. Just because it makes parents “feel better” doesn’t make it medically necessary. Personally, I find it harder to get the older children vaccinated because they know what’s coming and it freaks them out. And when there’s delay, sometimes what’s coming is an onslaught of needles just before kindergarten. Bleh.
That said, our pediatricians have never had *any* problem whatsoever with delaying a dose, skipping a dose, not doing a dose, etc. Never. And that’s three different pediatricians in two different states.
I won’t respond to the vitriol posted above, except to say that it is pretty clear that they don’t know me.
No, it’s true, doctors don’t know everything. But at the risk of sounding “arrogant” or “condescending”, most of us do know something.
When presenting evidence from well-designed studies refuting risks of giving vaccinations at the approved schedule, it’s difficult to argue with those who choose to harbor distrust and (as illustrated above) outright resentment, and instead find their “own doctors” or other “health professionals” that will essentially tell you what you want to hear.
This doesn’t affect me or my practice one iota, it’s just a shame to see the “blindness of those who refuse to see”.
There is a lot of charlatanism and corruption in health care today, but I don’t see it amongst the rank-and-file Board certified physicians. The vast majority care deeply for their work, and simply don’t like to see people misled.
I guess that’s just saying I never wish to see another case of congenital rubella or strep meningitis in children whose parents “knew better” than to listen to their MD’s advice.
@rg,
NJ is making it harder to get a religious exemption—-in some places, you might find yourself having to talk to the district’s lawyer in seeking one.
http://www.autismvox.com/a-not-so-religious-exemption/
“Actually, no. I’m quite fond of most of the physicians I work with, thank you.”
Good on you, ASDmomNC, and my bad, then, with apologies for voicing my thought that I had spotted something pattern-driven.
If I were to have a child now, I would probably stretch out the schedule. I haven;t heard anyone present a good reason why this should not be done.
For my part I haven’t seen anyone present a good reason why the current vaccination schedule should be spread out. Thanks to the current machinations of those who fear vaccines, and the disease outbreaks that have resulted from that fear, I now have to worry about my soon to be born child being exposed to a vaccine preventable disease before s/he is old enough to be vaccinated against it. That’s a pretty good argument to me for vaccinating sooner rather than later.
According to the article, “Sponsors say the legislation to be discussed Thursday by the Senate health committee would give parents the right to manage their child’s health as they deem appropriate.” Unless I’m reading it wrong, I think that’s more then just the religious exemption. If so it should be interesting.
The only reason I’d have a problem with a more spread out schedule is because the extra delay of getting the vaccines leaves the child vulnerable for longer to these illnesses, and there’s no evidence that it’s harmful to have them at the current schedule. The risk of the extra time during which the child would be more vulnerable to the illnesses is greater than the risk of unproven speculation that it’d pose a risk to children to have them at the current schedule.
At any given time there are up to 30 million people are not fully vaccinated (10% of the US population. Shoot down the percentage and use another percentage if you want). There is no herd immunity with influenza. All the most recent measles outbreaks have been imported. Spreading out the vaccines will not increase the risks any more then those facts will.
I am amazed that as educated parents we are not making the correlation between the rise in the number of vaccines and the outrageous numbers of children suffering from Austism, asthma, ADD, ADHD, arthritis, Type 1 Diabetes (it is a side effect of one of the vaccines). I think there MUST be studies done to establish the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines by themselves and the cumluative effect of the entire schedule.
I would love to ask the drug company why they insist on using thimersol in the production of the vaccine. I know why, it is a cheap preservative. It is cheaper to use it, ‘chemically filter” it out below the standards and then lie to parents and say the vaccine is mercury free.
Mercury is the second most toxic posion on the planet. Plutonium is #1.
I am not afraid of the diseases. I am afraid of neurological damage inflicte by the posions in the shots.
UNCdoc:
I didn’t find your initial post condescending or arrogant Valuable, informative and educated, yes. But then I tend to agree with you about the immune system and it’s amazing ability to filter through and process the barrage of incoming information from the environment. The shopping cart, the sandbox, the public doorknobs, the escalator hand holds, etc. etc. These are the places that bombard us with way more than 21 or 32 or 16 (depending on who you talk to and where you live) different kinds of antigens minute by minute. And we don’t notice it because no one is injecting us with them. I work with docs all the time and find some of them insufferable egomaniacs, and some of them are wonderful and beautifully collaborative. Just like a cross section of any population of people. I work in a hospital as an OT in both outpatient and inpatient. I see kids with Autism, preemies in the NICU, and kids in the PICU with head trauma and the inevitable baby once in a while with Rubella. I’ve said it before, and I will say it again, I would rather have a kid with Autism than a baby with Rubella, smallpox, or measles. Those diseases are not forgotten by those who see them up close, they are burned on your retina. Not to minimize how devastating Autism is. But I’ll take it any day over that. Hug your kids close and be thankful they are breathing.
Hi UncDoc –
“When presenting evidence from well-designed studies refuting risks of giving vaccinations at the approved schedule, it’s difficult to argue with those who choose to harbor distrust and (as illustrated above) outright resentment, and instead find their “own doctors” or other “health professionals” that will essentially tell you what you want to hear.”
I’m curious, could you present me to a study that does study the approved schedule as opposed to simply components of it; or components of it with specific ingredients present or not present? We’ve seen the same thing echoed in this thread again and again, ‘I haven’t seen any studies showing the current schedule is harmful’. Of course not; there haven’t been any studies of the entire schedule at all. If I am incorrect, this should be simple to provide.
For whatever the flaws of the recent primate study / ‘poster session’ or whatever that made the rounds a few weeks ago (there are many); one thing that really bothered me was the statement made that it was the first time primates had been studies with an entire schedule of vaccinations. It is entirely possible this is false; maybe with the far reaching knowledge of research on the vaccine schedule other seem to have, they could point me in the direction of a study on primates that involved the current schedule.
I also have a bit of a problem with the gross, gross oversimplification involved with the notion that because our children are exposed to antigens every day that therefore, vaccines must be safe. To be sure, ‘antivaxers’ are guilty of some oversimplifications; but this is a big one too and I just cannot understand why medical doctors continue to make this argument in the face of the common sense reality that such an anaogy is ridiculous.
By way of example, one of the most common reactions to a vaccine is a fever; getting a fever post vaccination is completely unexpected. My son has been exposed to antigens every minute, every hour, every day of his life, but I cannot remember the last time he got a fever. It has been months, certainly. If we can safely equate everyday exposure and vaccination, what am I to make of this apparent paradox?
- pD
The argument is not that “Vaccines are just fine simply because our immune systems are challenged all the time.” It is that one cannot argue a prima facie “badness” to vaccines based on an assertion of hyperchallenge to the immune system when the immune system is persistently bombarded from birth.
All three of my children have spiked frequent fevers of unknown etiology from infancy, high ones, although they have rarely (or possibly never) done so after a vaccine. They must have excellent immune responses. Of course, that rate has declined as they’ve aged and their B cell memory banks have filled up. My seven-year-old does not spike fevers nearly as often–or ever, really–as my toddler. And neither do we. Something to be said for handling all of those immune challenges.
Veering a bit away from the direction of discussion—-UNCdoc wrote
“The internet has become in retrospect the best and worst thing to happen to medicine in the past quarter century. This, along with the inflated self-esteem of the general public (educated by anti-authority 60’s public school teachers and academics) has led to an astounding number of individuals who know everything.”
Am myself the product of many such “anti-authority” teachers but somehow the result is more of an “But indeed I know nothing” (nodding to Socrates).
Hi Emily –
“It is that one cannot argue a prima facie “badness” to vaccines based on an assertion of hyperchallenge to the immune system when the immune system is persistently bombarded from birth.”
Well, I’m not here to argue the ‘badness’ of vaccines per se, so much as the fact that the area is not nearly as well understood as regulatory agencies would like us to believe. I will admit that others might do this, I cannot stop them. Considering how little is known about the physiology of autism, the clear autoimmune component of said physiology, it bothers me to hear again and again that the case has been closed on a series of extreme immune stimulations.
But even still, the analogy fails; the persistent bombardment you speak of (while true), still fails to generate a fever with anything close to the regularity of vaccinations. And, it is a hyperchallenge; that is precisely the reason that the still poorly understood aluminum adjuvants are added to vaccines. Without the hyperchallenge, immunity is often times not achieved.
You say your children spike fevers ‘frequently’. Children get fevers around fifty percent of the time following vaccination; do they spike fevers anywhere close to fifty percent of days? If not, we must conclude there is a significant and definitive difference between everyday exposure and what happens following vaccination. Right?
I won’t argue inherent badness, if you won’t argue inherent equality. Aren’t both strawmen?
In any case, my arguement is not based on the capacity of response; but rather, that we do not fully understand the result of repeated, induced and hyper responses at an early age. Why? Because no one has done a study comparing children who received a full volley of induced, hyper immune responses. Some say, not even on primates. (?) You said you haven’t seen any evidence of a the current schedule being dangerous, and I agree with you; but that is because you haven’t seen any evidence at all; be it of dangers or safety. If I am wrong, please provide a link.
What is being learned is that it isn’t always about the disease; sometimes it is about the immune response itself.
For example, epidemiology tells us that you are more likely to give birth to a child with schizophrenia if you are pregnant during a particularly virulent flu season. Several in vitro and animal studies have recently discovered that that maternal immune response can be the culprit, as opposed to the disease itself. Funny enough, if you are vacinnated against influenza, you receive the same immune response as you do if you happen to catch the flu. The fact that increased levels of IL-6 during pregnancy results in abnormal behavior in animal studies is very recent; as is the knowledge that getting an influenza vaccine results in identical spikes in IL-6.
No amount of ‘greening’ an ifluenza vaccine is going to fix this; it is doing exactly what it is supposed to. I am just having a difficult time believing that this is the last thing we will discover in regards to generating an immune response and an unexpected consequence down the line; especially considering we have no tests comparing populations except with particular challenges or particular ingredients. It isn’t that I think I’m smart, so much that I think everyone is in the dark, including me.
Whew!
- pD
- pD
By way of example, one of the most common reactions to a vaccine is a fever; getting a fever post vaccination is completely unexpected. My son has been exposed to antigens every minute, every hour, every day of his life, but I cannot remember the last time he got a fever. It has been months, certainly. If we can safely equate everyday exposure and vaccination, what am I to make of this apparent paradox?
Fever is expected in about 5% of cases after vaccination. A child has about 4 vaccination visits before age 2. Let’s round that up to 10 to try to be fair. This means a child will get 0.5 fevers due to vaccination in average throughout their childhood. To contrast, a child will have about 8 infections a year.
Oops, if those double post, plz. delete one (and this comment), Kristina. Web strangeness.
[sorry for spammin' everyone]
- pD
Is the current vaccination schedule working? Have the diseases been prevented?
Data addressing this would be a good starting point for this discussion.
The current vaccination schedule is working great! We have more children with neurological damage than childhood disease.
There are some who believe vaccines cause autism. Fortunately for the children of this country the vast majority of Americans do not hold this belief and protect our children with vaccinations.
I don’t mean this in a snide way but as a sincere question.
If the concern is with the immune responses and fevers in response to vaccination, then what are is the expectation in the event of infection by wild-type pathogens and the known fevers that result from those? What is the anticipated action in that case for those with “immature immune systems”?
Regan,
I can not answer your questions.
My original query was directed at finding data on the results, in terms of reduced occurrence, of the vaccination schedule. People are suggesting that the schedule be changed. I don’t know what to think about changing without knowing what the current schedule is and what the reductions in occurrence have been.
Hi Regan -
I appreciate your preface, and it is a valid question.
Maybe a better slogan (for me), would be ‘Study the Schedule!’
As for fevers, I was merely using this as the most obvious outward manifestation of the difference between what happens when our bodies respond to the bombardment of antigens we are all exposed to versus what comes from a vial. Of course, with the recent Polling case the onset of fever has ominous overtones; but in my case I was simply using it as a foil for what happens to us on most days when we are exposed to antigens; nothing much. Thus, the analogy is invalid.
One of the answers to the question you raise, I believe, is critical towards why there is so much concern over even questioning of the schedule; because generally, being exposed to these bacteria and viruses is a bad thing. It can lead to serious illness, lifelong impairment, or death.
It is entirely possible that if there are children that are being harmed in ways not understood by vaccination, that in previous generations, these children were the ones most likely to suffer severe, or life ending consequences of natural infection.
But again, there are important differences between what we would expect to see in the real world, and what is being seen in a doctors office; differences that have only been studied additively, instead of cumulatively; and never in a long term fashion. By way of example, on a two month well visit, according to the schedule, we invoke an immune response to diptheria, tetanus, hepatitis, pertusis, Hib, polio, pneumonia, and rotavirus. Is there a child on the planet that has been exposed to all of these things at once, in the real world, two months out of the womb?
Something else that I discovered interesting based on something I read here popped into my head based on your question, namely, that one (unanticpated) result of global, artificial protection is an increase in the likelyhood of hospitilization in the event of real world exposure.
In the recent measles ‘outbreaks’, nearly 20% of the people vaccinated were hospitalized. This struck me as very, very strange; I’d always been told that measles had relatively rare complication rates, along the lines of 1 in 500 to 1 in 2000, nothing, nothing like 1 in 4! It turns out, getting measles as a child is likely to have these rare complication rates; but getting measles as an adult, or an infant, is much more problematic. It further turns out, that as a result of mass vaccination, infants and adults are more likely to get measles when a natural exposure occurs. Very small infants used to be protected by their mothers antibodies, the protection granted by actually getting the disease was much more robust than that from a vaccine. Likewise, once exposed to real measles as a child, surviving adults were granted actual immunity for life; not all adults carry vaccine granted immunity for the rest of their life, and as a result, are very prone to serious complications when exposed later.
I do not believe that these things were anticipated when measles vaccine was developed (maybe?); the goal of eliminating measles was and is laudable and by all objective measures, the vaccine is wildly effective at that task.
I am not saying that the measles vaccine was bad, just that we were not smart enough to understand all of the long term ramifications of its implementation. Likewise, I have very, very difficult time believing we understand everything about todays very advanced schedule; other than the intended effects of disease reduction. Do you believe it is well understood?
With literally dozens of new vaccines being developed, if we do not study the schedule now, will we ever?
Whew!
- pD
I don’t believe that meales is this great killer that the media and the medical community hypes it up to be.. In 1978 if we got the measles, we got chicken noodle soup and Orange Crush, in 2008 if we get the measles, we get rushed into the hospital and revaccinated? Doesn’t seem right.. If the INS/Hospitals are keeping them in the hospital just b/c of measles or fever.. they are so silly. Our bodies heal themselves. We have fevers for a reason. I don’t vax my children. We don’t get sick. And I’m not afraid of measles.
I wonder if someone could tell me when the last time someone in the USA caught wild polio or diptheria?? Just a date would be fine..
And then you can tell us why there would have been few to no cases of either polio or diphtheria in the US.