Delayed vax schedule and preschool forms?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its not about being anti or pro vaccine - its doing what is best for you child. There have been incidents of severe complications or even death and its clearly hard for those who have not dealt with it to understand. When you spend days in a hospital with your child due to a reaction, you will understand but by then it may be too late. No one here is saying they do not vaccinate, but they are spreading them out which can be safer for some kids. Use some common sense. The safety risk is far greater if we did them all at once or exposed our chid to the shingles woman who had no common sense to get herself vaccinated and is far more worried about what others do than the choices she makes.

Um, the Chicken Pox vaccine only came out in 1995. My guess is that PP likely had it before the vaccine came out (I had chicken pox in 1987, pre-vaccine). So she didn't have the option to get vaccinated...

If she felt it was a risk to her, she could have gotten it now or gotten the shingles vaccine.

[Anonymous]

Oh honey...once you've had the chicken pox, there is no reason to get the vaccine. You're already immune. And latent chicken pox is what causes shingles. There is no "shingles vaccine." Dear lord...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it's up to the school or the state.

If you're delaying because of actual health reasons, I think you should wait until you're caught up before sending your kid to school, otherwise you are at elevated risk for catching a preventable (and possibly serious) illness if there's an outbreak.

If you are delaying for "philosophical" reasons, you aren't rational so I don't have any advice for you.

Nor do I want my children going to school with yours. And I want to know who you are so I can publicly humiliate and shame you.

There are far worse things parents do to their kids than not getting them vaccines. I would not want my kid to be anywhere near you and question if you should be raising kids given your mentality. No wonder there are so many bullies at school. It starts with parents like you. I don't get into my child's medical history. I just say I am choosing to delay them and that's it. Its none of your business. You wouldn't tell a stranger on the street your business, so why are you entitled to their child's personal information.

This is where you are dead wrong. It is my business. It is our business as a society. Your unvaccinated child poses a risk to others. Do anti-vaxers really not get it?

So, if my child's health care concerns are your issue, please feel free to attend our medical and therapy appointments. We have from 4-8 a week. Please bring your credit card for payment as since as a society it is your business to be in my child's business, I'm sure you will also be more than happy to contribute to the high costs to insure my child's health. We average $1000-1800 a month between co-pays and private services.

You really need to familiarize yourself with the concept of herd immunity before you post flippant replies.

So, basically you want to only attack the part of our medical choices that are important to you. For our child, the therapies and medical care is far more important than my worry about herd immunity. If the herd is immune, then my child should not be a huge impact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it's up to the school or the state.

If you're delaying because of actual health reasons, I think you should wait until you're caught up before sending your kid to school, otherwise you are at elevated risk for catching a preventable (and possibly serious) illness if there's an outbreak.

If you are delaying for "philosophical" reasons, you aren't rational so I don't have any advice for you.

Nor do I want my children going to school with yours. And I want to know who you are so I can publicly humiliate and shame you.

There are far worse things parents do to their kids than not getting them vaccines. I would not want my kid to be anywhere near you and question if you should be raising kids given your mentality. No wonder there are so many bullies at school. It starts with parents like you. I don't get into my child's medical history. I just say I am choosing to delay them and that's it. Its none of your business. You wouldn't tell a stranger on the street your business, so why are you entitled to their child's personal information.

umm, because your child is a public health risk

This is a scare tactic promulgated by the vaccine industry.

An unvaccinated child is a health risk to herself, but she poses no health risk to a vaccinated child.

An unvaccinated child who becomes ill with a vaccine-preventable disease does pose a health risk to other unvaccinated children but not to a vaccinated child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it's up to the school or the state.

If you're delaying because of actual health reasons, I think you should wait until you're caught up before sending your kid to school, otherwise you are at elevated risk for catching a preventable (and possibly serious) illness if there's an outbreak.

If you are delaying for "philosophical" reasons, you aren't rational so I don't have any advice for you.

Nor do I want my children going to school with yours. And I want to know who you are so I can publicly humiliate and shame you.

There are far worse things parents do to their kids than not getting them vaccines. I would not want my kid to be anywhere near you and question if you should be raising kids given your mentality. No wonder there are so many bullies at school. It starts with parents like you. I don't get into my child's medical history. I just say I am choosing to delay them and that's it. Its none of your business. You wouldn't tell a stranger on the street your business, so why are you entitled to their child's personal information.

umm, because your child is a public health risk

This is a scare tactic promulgated by the vaccine industry.

An unvaccinated child is a health risk to herself, but she poses no health risk to a vaccinated child.

An unvaccinated child who becomes ill with a vaccine-preventable disease does pose a health risk to other unvaccinated children but not to a vaccinated child.

Ugh, you are so wrong it hurts my brain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it's up to the school or the state.

If you're delaying because of actual health reasons, I think you should wait until you're caught up before sending your kid to school, otherwise you are at elevated risk for catching a preventable (and possibly serious) illness if there's an outbreak.

If you are delaying for "philosophical" reasons, you aren't rational so I don't have any advice for you.

Nor do I want my children going to school with yours. And I want to know who you are so I can publicly humiliate and shame you.

First PP here, this response is not me. I am not really into public humiliation and shame. Delayed schedules make no sense based on the decades of research into vaccines, and therefore think anyone who does it without a real medical need (child undergoing chemotherapy, child with impaired immune function, etc), is not rational. But maybe a tiny bit of shame should be felt by parents for the fact that they are putting children at risk for their own irrationality.

This type of post appears over and over again on DCUM.

I delayed some vaxes for my kids, and I did it based on extensive research. By the time I was finished, I knew much more about the individual vaccinations than my pediatrician did. When I presented her with my research, she agreed with my choices. I taught her a few things she didn't know.

Your post speaks of ignorance. If you knew as much as I do about vaccines, you'd have some doubts too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh honey...once you've had the chicken pox, there is no reason to get the vaccine. You're already immune. And latent chicken pox is what causes shingles. There is no "shingles vaccine." Dear lord...

So the CDC is just confused?

cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/shingles/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh honey...once you've had the chicken pox, there is no reason to get the vaccine. You're already immune. And latent chicken pox is what causes shingles. There is no "shingles vaccine." Dear lord...

So the CDC is just confused?

cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/shingles/

Trying again

www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/shingles/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it's up to the school or the state.

If you're delaying because of actual health reasons, I think you should wait until you're caught up before sending your kid to school, otherwise you are at elevated risk for catching a preventable (and possibly serious) illness if there's an outbreak.

If you are delaying for "philosophical" reasons, you aren't rational so I don't have any advice for you.

Nor do I want my children going to school with yours. And I want to know who you are so I can publicly humiliate and shame you.

There are far worse things parents do to their kids than not getting them vaccines. I would not want my kid to be anywhere near you and question if you should be raising kids given your mentality. No wonder there are so many bullies at school. It starts with parents like you. I don't get into my child's medical history. I just say I am choosing to delay them and that's it. Its none of your business. You wouldn't tell a stranger on the street your business, so why are you entitled to their child's personal information.

umm, because your child is a public health risk

This is a scare tactic promulgated by the vaccine industry.

An unvaccinated child is a health risk to herself, but she poses no health risk to a vaccinated child.

An unvaccinated child who becomes ill with a vaccine-preventable disease does pose a health risk to other unvaccinated children but not to a vaccinated child.

Ugh, you are so wrong it hurts my brain.

Telling someone they are wrong without any evidence to refute their argument, is a waste of time. When your brain stops hurting, perhaps you'll enlighten me?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it's up to the school or the state.

If you're delaying because of actual health reasons, I think you should wait until you're caught up before sending your kid to school, otherwise you are at elevated risk for catching a preventable (and possibly serious) illness if there's an outbreak.

If you are delaying for "philosophical" reasons, you aren't rational so I don't have any advice for you.

Nor do I want my children going to school with yours. And I want to know who you are so I can publicly humiliate and shame you.

There are far worse things parents do to their kids than not getting them vaccines. I would not want my kid to be anywhere near you and question if you should be raising kids given your mentality. No wonder there are so many bullies at school. It starts with parents like you. I don't get into my child's medical history. I just say I am choosing to delay them and that's it. Its none of your business. You wouldn't tell a stranger on the street your business, so why are you entitled to their child's personal information.

This is where you are dead wrong. It is my business. It is our business as a society. Your unvaccinated child poses a risk to others. Do anti-vaxers really not get it?

They don't. It is mind boggling. And then something like this happens http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/boy-dies-diphtheria-spain-parents-rejected-vaccine-32069410

I don't mind anti-vaxers putting their own children at risk. What I mind is how that translates as a risk to all.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/woman-dies-measles-first-us-death-12-years-n385946

The woman was vaccinated, but taking medication that caused her immune system to be repressed. She was exposed to someone at the health care facility that had measles because they didn't vaccinate. She contracted measles, and died. All from exposure thanks to an anti-vaxxer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it's up to the school or the state.

If you're delaying because of actual health reasons, I think you should wait until you're caught up before sending your kid to school, otherwise you are at elevated risk for catching a preventable (and possibly serious) illness if there's an outbreak.

If you are delaying for "philosophical" reasons, you aren't rational so I don't have any advice for you.

Nor do I want my children going to school with yours. And I want to know who you are so I can publicly humiliate and shame you.

First PP here, this response is not me. I am not really into public humiliation and shame. Delayed schedules make no sense based on the decades of research into vaccines, and therefore think anyone who does it without a real medical need (child undergoing chemotherapy, child with impaired immune function, etc), is not rational. But maybe a tiny bit of shame should be felt by parents for the fact that they are putting children at risk for their own irrationality.

This type of post appears over and over again on DCUM.

I delayed some vaxes for my kids, and I did it based on extensive research. By the time I was finished, I knew much more about the individual vaccinations than my pediatrician did. When I presented her with my research, she agreed with my choices. I taught her a few things she didn't know.

Your post speaks of ignorance. If you knew as much as I do about vaccines, you'd have some doubts too.

You're pretty impressed with yourself! Let me guess, this "extensive research" consisted of Google searches and reading anti-vax propaganda websites?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it's up to the school or the state.

If you're delaying because of actual health reasons, I think you should wait until you're caught up before sending your kid to school, otherwise you are at elevated risk for catching a preventable (and possibly serious) illness if there's an outbreak.

If you are delaying for "philosophical" reasons, you aren't rational so I don't have any advice for you.

Nor do I want my children going to school with yours. And I want to know who you are so I can publicly humiliate and shame you.

There are far worse things parents do to their kids than not getting them vaccines. I would not want my kid to be anywhere near you and question if you should be raising kids given your mentality. No wonder there are so many bullies at school. It starts with parents like you. I don't get into my child's medical history. I just say I am choosing to delay them and that's it. Its none of your business. You wouldn't tell a stranger on the street your business, so why are you entitled to their child's personal information.

umm, because your child is a public health risk

This is a scare tactic promulgated by the vaccine industry.

An unvaccinated child is a health risk to herself, but she poses no health risk to a vaccinated child.

An unvaccinated child who becomes ill with a vaccine-preventable disease does pose a health risk to other unvaccinated children but not to a vaccinated child.

Except for when that vaccinated child gets cancer or an immune disease. And then they can be easily infected by your unvaccinated kid.
And what about those that cannot be vaccinated, like certain children with dreadful allergic reactions to vaccines? Most of their parents would love it if their child could be vaccinated so they don't have to worry about getting the measles after going to Disneyland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh honey...once you've had the chicken pox, there is no reason to get the vaccine. You're already immune. And latent chicken pox is what causes shingles. There is no "shingles vaccine." Dear lord...

So the CDC is just confused?

cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/shingles/

Trying again

www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/shingles/

Yes there is a shingles vaccine, but it is not approved for people under 50. So I could have transmitted it to my child while he was on steroids, with potentially very bad results. I had chicken pox some time in the 70s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it's up to the school or the state.

If you're delaying because of actual health reasons, I think you should wait until you're caught up before sending your kid to school, otherwise you are at elevated risk for catching a preventable (and possibly serious) illness if there's an outbreak.

If you are delaying for "philosophical" reasons, you aren't rational so I don't have any advice for you.

Nor do I want my children going to school with yours. And I want to know who you are so I can publicly humiliate and shame you.

There are far worse things parents do to their kids than not getting them vaccines. I would not want my kid to be anywhere near you and question if you should be raising kids given your mentality. No wonder there are so many bullies at school. It starts with parents like you. I don't get into my child's medical history. I just say I am choosing to delay them and that's it. Its none of your business. You wouldn't tell a stranger on the street your business, so why are you entitled to their child's personal information.

This is where you are dead wrong. It is my business. It is our business as a society. Your unvaccinated child poses a risk to others. Do anti-vaxers really not get it?

I don't know if this is the same poster who's always spewing venom on DCUM against anyone who does not vaccinate according to the CDC schedule. The problem with these nasty posts is that they don't contain any information.

Please, tell me, PP, what risk does an unvaccinated child pose to others?

And why does a child's vaccine status matter more than other health information about that child? If she has asthma, for example, and gets a lot of colds that can be passed onto other children -- do you have a right to that information? Does all of society need to know that child's health status so they can keep their children away from her? A child who gets colds often is going to be a lot riskier to your child than is a child who is not vaccinated.

Information, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm guessing it's up to the school or the state.

If you're delaying because of actual health reasons, I think you should wait until you're caught up before sending your kid to school, otherwise you are at elevated risk for catching a preventable (and possibly serious) illness if there's an outbreak.

If you are delaying for "philosophical" reasons, you aren't rational so I don't have any advice for you.

Nor do I want my children going to school with yours. And I want to know who you are so I can publicly humiliate and shame you.

There are far worse things parents do to their kids than not getting them vaccines. I would not want my kid to be anywhere near you and question if you should be raising kids given your mentality. No wonder there are so many bullies at school. It starts with parents like you. I don't get into my child's medical history. I just say I am choosing to delay them and that's it. Its none of your business. You wouldn't tell a stranger on the street your business, so why are you entitled to their child's personal information.

This is where you are dead wrong. It is my business. It is our business as a society. Your unvaccinated child poses a risk to others. Do anti-vaxers really not get it?

They don't. It is mind boggling. And then something like this happens http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/boy-dies-diphtheria-spain-parents-rejected-vaccine-32069410

I don't mind anti-vaxers putting their own children at risk. What I mind is how that translates as a risk to all.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/woman-dies-measles-first-us-death-12-years-n385946

The woman was vaccinated, but taking medication that caused her immune system to be repressed. She was exposed to someone at the health care facility that had measles because they didn't vaccinate. She contracted measles, and died. All from exposure thanks to an anti-vaxxer.

This story might make for good journalism, but the science is quite fuzzy. The woman, who had a number of health problems, died of pneumonia, the story said. It said pneumonia can accompany measles, but it did not say that the woman's measles infection caused her pneumonia. It also neglected to say her age or elaborate on her other health conditions.

Why did they test her for measles if she had no symptoms of the disease?

The story also said she had been a patient in a health care facility at the same time as a person who later tested positive for measles. It did not say whether or not that person had been vaccinated for measles. In the California measles outbreak, many of the people who contracted measles were vaccinated for the disease.

It seems to me that the Washington department of health put out this story to scare people into getting vaccinated for measles, but the facts as presented in the news story do not indicate that the woman who died either 1) died of measles or 2) caught measles from an unvaccinated person.

Ergo, I don't think this particular story demonstrates the supposed threat PP is trying to show. The story says the woman tested positive for measles, but that does not mean she died of measles, nor does it prove she contracted measles from another patient.

Assumptions do not make for solid science.