Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually we delayed both Heps, but we finished Hep A after K started. My children were not in daycare and did not meet any of the criteria for high risk. Hep A is pretty rare. Below is taken from the CDC website.

Who is at risk for Hepatitis A?
Although anyone can get Hepatitis A, in the United States, certain groups of people are at higher risk, such as those who:
Travel to or live in countries where Hepatitis A is common
Are men who have sexual contact with other men
Use illegal drugs, whether injected or not
Have clotting-factor disorders, such as hemophilia
Live with someone who has Hepatitis A
Have oral-anal sexual contact with someone who has Hepatitis A

So no one your child comes in contact with travels. Your child will never go to someone's house or outing where the parent has just returned from travel. You have asked all your neighbors, family and friends who host you for meals what their status is and if they have had homosexual encounters or used IV drugs. You inquire at restaurants you bring your children to if any of the food workers are in the above categories and inspect their hands as they prepare the food.

If you thought "no, I don't do any of these things", go get your children vaccinated

I did. Just not per the "schedule." Miraculously they lived. Go worry about someone else.

Whatever works for you. Don't worry at all that failure to get vaccines when they are required can end up hurting immunity for all kids. But don't worry, there is a polio-like virus now for which there is no vaccine, thanks in part to overrule of antibiotics and people not getting shots. It's scary.

Please share the connection between a) overuse of abx and/or b) lack of vaccinations to this new virus. What exactly is the scientific consensus on that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The holy than thou pro-vaccine PR rep has spoken - too much. Just as I now accept others opinions who differ from mine; homosexual marriage, transgender teachers, I do expect others to accept my view whether it be religious, or other. Stop expecting others to accept change but if one has a differ view of vaccines they are wrong. Enough

There's a difference between morals and science, though.

To you, yes. To me, no. Please don't force your opinions on me, as I don't force mine upon you.

I meant "overuse" of antibiotics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually we delayed both Heps, but we finished Hep A after K started. My children were not in daycare and did not meet any of the criteria for high risk. Hep A is pretty rare. Below is taken from the CDC website.

Who is at risk for Hepatitis A?
Although anyone can get Hepatitis A, in the United States, certain groups of people are at higher risk, such as those who:
Travel to or live in countries where Hepatitis A is common
Are men who have sexual contact with other men
Use illegal drugs, whether injected or not
Have clotting-factor disorders, such as hemophilia
Live with someone who has Hepatitis A
Have oral-anal sexual contact with someone who has Hepatitis A

So no one your child comes in contact with travels. Your child will never go to someone's house or outing where the parent has just returned from travel. You have asked all your neighbors, family and friends who host you for meals what their status is and if they have had homosexual encounters or used IV drugs. You inquire at restaurants you bring your children to if any of the food workers are in the above categories and inspect their hands as they prepare the food.

If you thought "no, I don't do any of these things", go get your children vaccinated

I did. Just not per the "schedule." Miraculously they lived. Go worry about someone else.

Whatever works for you. Don't worry at all that failure to get vaccines when they are required can end up hurting immunity for all kids. But don't worry, there is a polio-like virus now for which there is no vaccine, thanks in part to overrule of antibiotics and people not getting shots. It's scary.

Anonymous wrote:The holy than thou pro-vaccine PR rep has spoken - too much. Just as I now accept others opinions who differ from mine; homosexual marriage, transgender teachers, I do expect others to accept my view whether it be religious, or other. Stop expecting others to accept change but if one has a differ view of vaccines they are wrong. Enough

If you personally don't agree with gay marriage that doesn't really have an effect on anyone. Gay people can choose not to be aims you and live where it is legal. When you don't vaccinate your children your putting people like child leukemia survivors at risk because of your arrogant presumption that you understand science more than doctors. It's not the same. And I'm just a regular schmo, not a 'vaccine rep.'

Which, actually, is one of the most commonly cited falsehoods against vaccines. In reality big pharma doesn't like researching vaccines because there is usually too much pressure to make it dirt cheap so charities can get it to the third world countries. It's charitable foundations like the gates foundation that get quality vaccines made because they are simply not profitable. One time/two time doses, no vaccine is going to make them viagra money.

Next time you consider delaying a vaccine, think of African mothers who walk 10 miles with a baby on their back to get them in places where get are not routinely available.

Anonymous wrote:The holy than thou pro-vaccine PR rep has spoken - too much. Just as I now accept others opinions who differ from mine; homosexual marriage, transgender teachers, I do expect others to accept my view whether it be religious, or other. Stop expecting others to accept change but if one has a differ view of vaccines they are wrong. Enough

There's a difference between morals and science, though.

The holy than thou pro-vaccine PR rep has spoken - too much. Just as I now accept others opinions who differ from mine; homosexual marriage, transgender teachers, I do expect others to accept my view whether it be religious, or other. Stop expecting others to accept change but if one has a differ view of vaccines they are wrong. Enough

Anonymous wrote:Actually we delayed both Heps, but we finished Hep A after K started. My children were not in daycare and did not meet any of the criteria for high risk. Hep A is pretty rare. Below is taken from the CDC website.

Who is at risk for Hepatitis A?
Although anyone can get Hepatitis A, in the United States, certain groups of people are at higher risk, such as those who:
Travel to or live in countries where Hepatitis A is common
Are men who have sexual contact with other men
Use illegal drugs, whether injected or not
Have clotting-factor disorders, such as hemophilia
Live with someone who has Hepatitis A
Have oral-anal sexual contact with someone who has Hepatitis A

Pretty rare, huh? From the WHO website:

Both medical treatment and work loss account in the United States for an estimated annual US$ 500 million (1997) costs for 63 500 cases of acute hepatitis A. For each hospitalized case, medical care costs sum up to about US$ 6900.7

Hep A is mainly transmitted through poorly washed fruit and vegetables. There's a reason it hasn't been a travel vaccine for the last ten years. If you think the migrant workers just off the boat who live in squalid tenements and pick your produce are vaccinated, I have bridge to sell you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't reject it. Just applied it in a way that made more sense for our particular family.

It's past my bedtime and searching for that recent flu shot research on my phone isn't fruitful - all I get is CDC PR materials.

Until tomorrow...

Not this - more recent that this, maybe a follow up study?
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/03/study-getting-flu-shot-2-years-row-may-lower-protection

If I'm remembering correctly something about getting a much better immune response if you get it every other year? I'll look more in the AM.

Follow up:
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2014/11/study-adds-more-data-effects-consecutive-year-flu-shots

The problem with new studies is that until they are replicated there can be no scientific concensus. This is an interesting theory but wouldn't seem to solve the problem of large swaths of vulnerable people every year. The flu shot is of course unique and evolving every year with the disease unlike every other vaccine you get though. I will be interested to see how this translates into recommendations for public health if the results are confirmed.

Anonymous wrote:Also, is it really so arrogant to know that my child has an extremely small chance of being exposed to an STD? Never went to daycare. Only babysitters are close family. Etc. And child was completely caught up before starting preschool. We also decided to do most of the rest on schedule. Our ped suggested spacing some out so we did.

No gut feeling. Just a rational evaluation of risk/return.

I never said it was arrogant that you doubt the liklihood of your child contracting an std. I said that there is no reason to not get it on schedule other than putting some faith into the anti vaxx claims that you don't want to 'overload' a child. And that that implicit presumption seems arrogant to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't reject it. Just applied it in a way that made more sense for our particular family.

It's past my bedtime and searching for that recent flu shot research on my phone isn't fruitful - all I get is CDC PR materials.

Until tomorrow...

Not this - more recent that this, maybe a follow up study?
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/03/study-getting-flu-shot-2-years-row-may-lower-protection

If I'm remembering correctly something about getting a much better immune response if you get it every other year? I'll look more in the AM.

Follow up:
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2014/11/study-adds-more-data-effects-consecutive-year-flu-shots

Also, is it really so arrogant to know that my child has an extremely small chance of being exposed to an STD? Never went to daycare. Only babysitters are close family. Etc. And child was completely caught up before starting preschool. We also decided to do most of the rest on schedule. Our ped suggested spacing some out so we did.

No gut feeling. Just a rational evaluation of risk/return.

Anonymous wrote:I didn't reject it. Just applied it in a way that made more sense for our particular family.

It's past my bedtime and searching for that recent flu shot research on my phone isn't fruitful - all I get is CDC PR materials.

Until tomorrow...

Not this - more recent that this, maybe a follow up study?
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/03/study-getting-flu-shot-2-years-row-may-lower-protection

If I'm remembering correctly something about getting a much better immune response if you get it every other year? I'll look more in the AM.

I didn't reject it. Just applied it in a way that made more sense for our particular family.

It's past my bedtime and searching for that recent flu shot research on my phone isn't fruitful - all I get is CDC PR materials.

Until tomorrow...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster.

So it's "junk science" to work with a ped to personalize a vaccine schedule? If they have decided that a particular baby won't need Hep A/B until a little later - that's "junk science".

The CDC creates the schedule to cover the lowest common denominator. If my ped knows my particular child and gives us a modified schedule, I'm going to go with that. So try not to get all hysterical about that.

Some children have compromised immune systems for one reason or another. They need to be on a different schedule sometimes. If your child doesn't meet that criteria and your ped is working with you than they've decided the benefits of getting you vaccinated in the end merit indulging this imagined socially constructed fear. Hard to blame them but yes, it's junk science and they're just indulging you.

It probably won't harm your child or children around you but the mentality is dangerous because it lends credence to the vote beliefs of the anti vaxx movement.

I don't see any harm in questioning. Big gov9't has a history of getting things wrong.

Except this isn't big government. It's worldwide scientific concensus.

It's a worldwide scientific consensus that my newborn child will get an STD? Okey dokey...

Must be the same worldwide scientific consensus that once thought the world was flat, earth was the center of the universe, etc. "They" are always right.

Good thing people continue to question.

Its worldwide scientific concensus that vaccines are safe. You are confusing worldwide scientific concensus with popular concensus. It was scientists who realized things like a flat earth didn't make sense and required more examination.

Yup. Good thing they questioned it.

I feel like you didn't understand my point. If you believe in climate change and evolution you should believe in vaccines, which are probably the single greatest accomplishment in modem medicine (antibiotics right up there).

Ha! I feel like you didn't understand my point. Which was certainly NOT that I don't believe in vaccines. Just that I don't blindly accept everything at face value. I question - which vaccines, why, when? I've done that with many important aspects of my life and my children's lives.

I think it's important for people to question and understand this - and many other things as well.

Flu shots - current thinking is now that it's best not to get them every year now, right? It's all evolving. We are not omniscient.

Actually that's not the current thinking on flu shots. Healthy people in the middle opting out endangers the elderly and the very young. I figured you were either being sarcastic or you didn't understand. I gave you the benefit of the doubt as I have been trying to be factual and unemotional in my responses.

Everyone should think about decisions involving their health, but what you are endorsing is looking at a mountain of scientific evidence and rejecting it due to a gut feeling you have. Or at a less extreme level, that you know how to administer this science better than people who have devoted their lives to studying this. To me, this world view seems arrogant.