Comments on: Immunisation, bad information, faulty thinking

By: Matthew Stibbe

Matthew Stibbe — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 07:06:32 +0000

@Lady S: I think that’s a pretty good summary of the anti-immunisation case put in a reasonable and friendly way. I don’t agree with the line you take but it’s good to have the debate. It’s an interesting point about the Amish. If true, perhaps it suggests conscientious parents should also get rid of their cars and buy horses.

By: Lady S

Lady S — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 02:05:02 +0000

I think you have to do what’s best for your family. If your child is perfectly healthy before an immunization, and suddenly has food allergies, or a kidney infection, or autism afterwards, you have to blame the immunization (two of those three happened to my own child). Just because it didn’t happen to your child doesn’t mean it’s not true. Look at the Amish–it’s rare their kids have food allergies or autism, asthma or rheumatoid arthritis… it’s rampant in our society. You may be saving a child, but at what cost? Most articles fail to mention that kids who die from these preventable illnesses live in third world countries and do not have proper medical care, or a hospital nearby. Do most people who get chicken pox die from it? I think not. It’s mass hysteria created by the media and smart marketing of phamaceutical companies. Vaccines are a billion dollar business–3-7 billion with each new vaccine added. Most are new, and most doctors don’t know the long term effectiveness of vaccines. I’m not saying, don’t vaccinate, but I’ve read medical journals where doctors suggest waiting until the immune system is developed (after the age of 2) to immunize. I also think we should do things in moderation. When I was a kid, we were required to have 5 immunizations. Now it’s 22, and growing every year. Do your own research. Parents who don’t immunize have usually done the research. It’s very difficult to stand up for what’s right when people go in and blindly follow doctor’s orders. Every child is not the same.

By: dysfunctor

dysfunctor — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:46:15 +0000

I think the insurers would get the deciding vote.

But seriously … the issue isn’t quite as clear-cut as I painted it. There’s the matter of passive immunity conferred by the mother. I’ll ask a paediatrician of my acquaintance about it next time I see him.

By: Matthew Stibbe

Matthew Stibbe — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:17:27 +0000

Yes, I quite like the idea of the “Health and Safety” lobby taking on the “Anti-innoculation” lobby. An irresistable force meeting an immovable object, perhaps.

By: dysfunctor

dysfunctor — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:56:23 +0000

Couldn’t agree more, but you try telling parents who don’t vaccinate, “You’re child is a disease vector. Please don’t let your precious darling within 50m of a child under under 2 years.” and see how far that gets you.

(50m is the approximate range at which measles is contagious. We vaccinate against it at the age of 1.)

Actually, that gives me an idea. If you’re sending a kid to a playschool, ask them whether they have done a risk assessment on a child getting measles….

By: Bad Language / Best of the web

Bad Language / Best of the web — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:00:56 +0000

[...] court rejects autism-vaccine theories. My rants finally [...]

By: Tim Smith

Tim Smith — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:25:31 +0000

The MMR was a hot topic of discussion in the antenatal group we were part of.
The most annoying thing for me was the attitude of:
* If the gov denies there is a problem then there must be a problem because they are denying it
* If the gov admits there’s a problem then there must be a problem bec they’ve admitted it.
So they can never accept that there isn’t a problem.
Likewise, they never spoke of managing risk or taking the least risky option.
Tim

By: Toddie Downs

Toddie Downs — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 22:07:44 +0000

Goodness, them’s fightin’ words, son! I must respectfully disagree with your position. You’re making the assumption that when families make these decisions about vaccinations, they are making a completely informed decision. Yet I doubt that most parents have the NY Times statistics in front of them, or that their doctors educate them on the mortality differences between 2000 and the present.

Furthermore, while there may not be sufficient data linking thimerosal and autism, there is quite a bit of anecdotal evidence — and as copywriters, we know that word-of-mouth can be far more powerful than statistics. While I personally agree that the benefits of vaccinations outweigh the risks, I don’t believe I can make judgments against those families who decide otherwise — which is what the closing headline seems to do.