Making It Up

Contact

Pondering vaccines at the #bornto conference.

—

by

Jax Blunt
in

I’m at the Save the children blogging conference, listening to a talk on disaster response, sitting in the child friendly area, feeding a baby and pondering vaccines. Tough question. I know that to some ppl they are thought of as a magic wand, I know for others they are considered to be poison. And I confess that I don’t really know which side of the question I come down on.

I don’t have enough medical, historical or scientific knowledge to evaluate the evidence. I don’t know who to believe, and that makes it difficult for me to unequivocally recommend that ppl sign up to the Save the Children e-action. I’m very happy to point out that it exists, though 😉

I think the problem is that vaccines are generally introduced alongside other improvements in basic lifestyles and healthcare, so it’s difficult to disentangle what has had the most effect. I definitely don’t think they should be the only action taken, I’d be much happier to see efforts to improve breastfeeding rates and provide access to safe water sources as the headline activity, but I suppose that’s just not catchy enough for a quick click campaign.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on this, in the usual place.

Comments

17 responses to “Pondering vaccines at the #bornto conference.”

  1. Ailbhe avatar
    Ailbhe

    Breastfed babies still die of measles and whooping cough, if there are enough unvaccinated people in the population to allow the diseases to spread. Which there are. Andrew Wakefield’s dangerous non-science was great at terrifying people and once scared it’s very difficult to reassure people again.

    Reply
    1. Jax avatar
      Jax

      Tbh, it’s not him I’m thinking about, it’s things like mercury in vaccines, and whether they really provide the protection that is claimed for them.

      Reply
  2. Firebird avatar
    Firebird

    Every time anyone questions vaccines Wakefield gets trotted out like MMR/Autism is the ONLY issue. Well it’s NOT! The pro-vaccine lobby want us all to suspend critical thought and accept ALL vaccines as wonderful. Vaccine = good, questioning vaccine = credulous fool/anti-science.
    Even putting aside the questionable chemicals in some vaccines and the doubtful science behind injecting elements of a disease into the blood stream when the normal infection path is through the respiratory system (anti-bodies in the blood are not the entire immune system FFS) there is ALSO the whole, delaying disease until adulthood question, aka the great vaccine time bomb.
    Vaccination stops children getting mumps, when it’s usually a trivial disease, but does not (even at Merk’s most optimistic guess) give protection past early adulthood when it becomes a much more dangerous disease.
    Plus I have some serious questions about adjuvants and the rise in conditions like asthma which are caused by an over active immune system.

    Reply
  3. Luschka avatar
    Luschka

    oh. Vaccines are something I’ve not even addressed on my blog, for a loooong list of reasons. I’ve not vaccinated Kyra, and don’t intend to. What really helped me was two books: Raising a Vaccine Free Child, which looks at all the myths around vaccinations and Your Healthy Child With Homeopathy which gives you step by step help in combatting each of the childhood diseases.
    The ‘problem’ with NOT vaccinating, in my opinion, is that you actually have to be willing to MOTHER your child, and that takes a lot more parenting and gives the parent a lot more responsibility.
    I’m not AGAINST vaccinations for certain things in certain places, but where we live pretty good and pretty wealthy lives, I’m not rushing to chemicalise my child. Mercury is one thing. Aborted fetal tissue is another, and is not for me, thanks.

    Reply
  4. Ailbhe avatar
    Ailbhe

    The issue with Wakefield is that he started a great culture of fearmongering, and even though most people are now aware of how fraudulent his “research” was, the fear remains.
    But if I was only going to consider my *own* children, I might not be as inclined to vaccinate. Sadly I don’t live in isolation but as part of a greater society.

    Reply
  5. Allie avatar
    Allie

    “you actually have to be willing to MOTHER your child, and that takes a lot more parenting and gives the parent a lot more responsibility.”
    Gosh, Luschka, that does sound a little like you think that people who vaccinate don’t have to mother their children! Is that really what you mean?
    FWIW we vaccinate. I’ve been pretty glad of it since we mix with many unvaccinated families and mumps and measles have done the rounds from time to time – even whooping cough. We wanted to avoid those diseases so we vacc’d our kids but, of course, each to their own.

    Reply
  6. mamacrow avatar
    mamacrow

    this is a really interesting discussion – asthma is a syptom of an overactive immune system, well OMG OF COURSE! lightbulb!
    And I like that the fact that not all vacines are equal, as it were, is being acknowledged. We do it on a programme by programme basis, hense we HAVE opted for the measels/mumps baby one (though we tend to delay till older) but opted out of the H1N1.
    We still use a variety of alternative remidies and therapies, rarely are ill, hardly ever seriously ill, and don’t see our (very nice) all that much.
    I have to agree with Allie, an decision to vaccinate dosn’t necessarily mean you’re not mothering your children, surely, Luschka?

    Reply
    1. Jax avatar
      Jax

      I’m pretty sure that isn’t what Luschka meant 🙂 does show how difficult a discussion this can be, parenting decisions, especially those around areas of health (or education ime) are incredibly emotive.
      Also makes me wonder what right we have as a society to push this situation on to other countries iyswim?

      Reply
  7. HelenHaricot avatar
    HelenHaricot

    mercury is eliminated from most vaccines, there was never any evidence of harm. there is an enormous wealth of epidemiological studies backing vaccination. I am overwhelmingly pro-vacc
    http://www.vaccineinformation.org/

    Reply
  8. Elizabeth avatar
    Elizabeth

    I think a study of the World Health Organizations stats on how quickly the deaths rates for these diseases goes down, once routine immunizations are started in a society, should be evidence enough.
    http://www.who.int/research/en/

    Reply
  9. Jax avatar
    Jax

    Thank you Helen and Elizabeth. I’ll take a look at both those sites.

    Reply
  10. Tech avatar
    Tech

    *No evidence of harm is not the same as evidence of no harm* a quote which i saw many years ago, from a nurse, that has stayed with me.

    Reply
  11. Alison avatar
    Alison

    I don’t know why it should, it’s pretty meaningless. “No evidence of flying elephants is not the same as evidence of no flying elephants” – aha, very deep! No one can cast aspersions on my belief in flying elephants because you can’t PROVE they don’t exist!
    OTOH, a longitudinal study with matched controls that shows no evidence of the treatment group being harmed *is*, imo, the same as showing evidence of no harm coming to them.
    The only anti-vaxer comments on this page that make any sense are those of Firebird, and I think s/he’s wrong. Luschka’s ideas are just laughable.

    Reply
  12. Tech avatar
    Tech

    ROFL laughable, but predictable, response. Flying elephants are slightly different to being able to show that injecting mercury into a human body does no harm. If we smash a light bulb we are supposed to vacate the room because of the danger from the mercury gases contained within. Mercury thermometers aren’t used any more because of the danger caused to nursing staff when they smash. Many dentists won’t remove amalgam fillings because of the danger to both dentist and patient. Eating a lot of tuna is not recommended because of the potential for mercury build up in the brain. Presumably that means that there is clear evidence that mercury is harmful to the human body? But there’s no evidence that it causes harm when injected via a vaccine so it’s not something to worry about? Sounds like wanting to have your cake and eat it to me – but hey, I’m just a clueless numbskull who you can quite happily come along and take the piss out of for having silly ideas 🙂 Mwah.

    Reply
  13. HelenHaricot avatar
    HelenHaricot

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21252391

    Reply
  14. HelenHaricot avatar
    HelenHaricot

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15146581
    i could go on, but we are really unlikely to agree. the difference is between regular cumulative exposure of a large dose, and a limited exposure to a minute dose.

    Reply
  15. Elizabeth avatar
    Elizabeth

    Tech, exactly which UK immunizations contain thiomersal?
    “The two organic forms of mercury, methylmercury and ethylmercury (in thiomersal), are closely related but they have important differences.
    Methylmercury (found in fish) is more potent; accumulation in the body is more likely because the time taken for the body to eliminate it (known as the half life) is about 50 days.
    Ethylmercury (in thiomersal) does not accumulate in the body to such an extent, because its half life is only about 7-10 days. Ethylmercury is rapidly converted in the body to inorganic mercury and excreted.
    Mercury can have harmful effects on the central nervous system, skin and kidneys, cases of the toxic effects of mercury have been from methylmercury, not ethylmercury.”

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *