Should Vaccination be Mandatory

[JSS2306]

They are afraid of the possibility their child might develop autism.

I can't say I blame them.

I clearly blame them.

What is your rationale? I want to hear your version of Jenny McCarthyism.

 

[Ohdang]

They are afraid of the possibility their child might develop autism.

I can't say I blame them, I did not follow the normal vaccination schedule for my kids. I didn't give them a chickenpox vaccine, among others, until it was time for the to go to school.

I basically gave them as few vaccinations as possible spread over the longest period of time. And there was no chickenpox vaccination when I was a kid, so I simply didn't see the need.

What I find so hard to comprehend is people believe vaccines cause autism in 2015. There was a controversy about it in the late 90s and early 2000s because of a study that was published linking the two, so there was some justifiable skepticism at that time, but in the years since it has been dis-proven over and over again by many other research studies, and the doctor who published the findings was barred from practicing medicine and brought up on fraud charges when it was discovered he was setting himself up to profit immensely from the panic that scare caused. You can google Andrew Wakefield and occupy yourself for days reading about the made up study that this whole anti-vaxxer movement stems from. But Jenny McCarthy is still getting on TV and spewing bullshit and there is a certain sect of people who believe her over a multitude of experts. Its mind boggling.

The argument about people not needing a chicken pox vaccine because everyone was fine without it is ignorant at best. If you get the vaccine, you don't get chicken pox. If you get get chicken pox, you acquire immunity and you just itch and break out once, and our parents and grandparents all had it as kids, so what's the harm right? Well, the harm is the virus laying dormant in your nerve cells for years only to be activated later in life and causing shingles. And guess what! Once that happens you will have outbreaks randomly for the rest of your life as there is no way to get the virus out of your nerve cells. But if you get the vaccine, you don't get chickenpox OR shingles! But you know, whatevs. Vaccines are the devil.

 

[Kyrieville]

Rubella can cause autism. The MMR vaccine thereby, prevents autism.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/747617

 

[OptimusPrime]

 

[theSwayze]

They are afraid of the possibility their child might develop autism.

I can't say I blame them, I did not follow the normal vaccination schedule for my kids. I didn't give them a chickenpox vaccine, among others, until it was time for the to go to school.

I basically gave them as few vaccinations as possible spread over the longest period of time. And there was no chickenpox vaccination when I was a kid, so I simply didn't see the need.

What you did was be an informed and involved parent. That's not anything like denying you child a vaccine out of arrogance and ignorance.

 

[Sebastian]

Rubella can cause autism. The MMR vaccine thereby, prevents autism.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/747617

Nobody has time for no facts. Pish. Logic.

 

[gourimoko]

I clearly blame them.

What is your rationale?

Well...

The science simply isn't there that it is totally safe to vaccinate infants and young children the way we do presently.

For example, we thought it was safe to put Thiomersal into vaccines; and we still put this chemical preservative into flu vaccines. However, this agent is extremely toxic and contains mercury as it's primary component.

--quote--
Thiomersal is very toxic by inhalation, ingestion, and in contact with skin (EC hazard symbol T+), with a danger of cumulative effects. It is also very toxic to aquatic organisms and may cause long-term adverse effects in aquatic environments (EC hazard symbol N).[15] In the body, it is metabolized or degraded to ethylmercury (C2H5Hg+) and thiosalicylate.[7]

Cases have been reported of severe poisoning by accidental exposure or attempted suicide, with some fatalities.[16] Animal experiments suggest that thiomersal rapidly dissociates to release ethylmercury after injection; that the disposition patterns of mercury are similar to those after exposure to equivalent doses of ethylmercury chloride; and that the central nervous system and the kidneys are targets, with lack of motor coordination being a common sign.

Similar signs and symptoms have been observed in accidental human poisonings. The mechanisms of toxic action are unknown. Fecal excretion accounts for most of the elimination from the body. Ethylmercury clears from blood with a half-life of about 18 days in adults. Ethylmercury is eliminated from the brain in about 14 days in infant monkeys. Risk assessment for effects on the nervous system have been made by extrapolating from dose-response relationships for methylmercury.[17]

Methylmercury and ethylmercury distribute to all body tissues, crossing the blood–brain barrier and the placental barrier, and ethylmercury also moves freely throughout the body.[18]

Concerns based on extrapolations from methylmercury caused thiomersal to be removed from U.S. childhood vaccines, starting in 1999
--end quote--

Now several decades ago, it was deemed safe and we the people went to go get our shots. But now it's safety is questioned?

What changed?

Our understanding of the science changed, not the substance itself, and not how our bodies would react to it. Injecting mercury is probably not a good idea, but who of those receiving the vaccinations knew beforehand that it was even in the vial?

Now, am I saying that MMR vaccinations lead to autism? No. In fact, studies in Japan have shown that there is absolutely no correlation between the MMR and autism. I take that at value.

But I am saying that I don't think the science is there to make a conclusive argument that it is completely safe (as in, better than 99.999%) to go on injecting children with so many chemical agents and so many vaccines, in such a short time frame. I'm saying this as someone whose entire life is based in the academic pursuit of mathematics and science on multiple fronts, not as someone prone to following irrational beliefs or suppositions.

We know that there have been clinically demonstrated studies that have linked exposure to specific toxic agents with the onset of birth defects, autism, and other neurological disorders. We know that toxic agents have been used in vaccines in the past. And we are actively studying the epidemiology and causes of autism.

As of right now, we are more ignorant than knowledgeable on the subject of autism and other conditions on the autism spectrum.

This lack of data and completed studies is very concerning to me. Therefore, I decided as a parent, not to expose my children to a greater amount of vaccinations than I received in the early 1980s. I also decided to delay the MMR until they were to be enrolled into school (autism and other such diseases would have already manifested by this time).

I didn't make these decisions out of superstition, but simply out of caution. Perhaps I'm being overly cautious. But weighing the risks, I felt that it was riskier to expose my child to something that I myself didn't get as an infant than to simply wait until I felt they were old enough to handle the vaccinations.

I think the decision is a tough one, but one that I felt I had to make for the safety of my kids.

 

[Kyrieville]

Nobody has time for no facts. Pish. Logic.

Those damn scientists think they know it all. Well I read a blog on the internet by a housewife that knew another housewife who said her son's daughter's sister's lizard's wife got the autism from the MMR vaccine.

 

[gourimoko]

What I find so hard to comprehend is people believe vaccines cause autism in 2015. There was a controversy about it in the late 90s and early 2000s because of a study that was published linking the two,

Ohdang, you're minimizing the controversy and overstating the case of one side of the argument. There isn't conclusive science on either side of the issue.

From a scientific perspective, there is no correlation between the MMR vaccination and autism, that has been shown in accepted medical journals thus far.

But as it stands, the fact of the matter is we do not know what causes autism, and until we do, people are simply being cautious.

The argument about people not needing a chicken pox vaccine because everyone was fine without it is ignorant at best. If you get the vaccine, you don't get chicken pox. If you get get chicken pox, you acquire immunity and you just itch and break out once, and our parents and grandparents all had it as kids, so what's the harm right? Well, the harm is the virus laying dormant in your nerve cells for years only to be activated later in life and causing shingles. And guess what! Once that happens you will have outbreaks randomly for the rest of your life as there is no way to get the virus out of your nerve cells. But if you get the vaccine, you don't get chickenpox OR shingles! But you know, whatevs. Vaccines are the devil.

Think about what you're saying.

If a person thinks there is a risk, even 1 in a 1000 (or say, 66 in 10,000) chance that their child could get autism or some other condition from an early chickenpox vaccine - OR - they could just get chickenpox; I think most folks would choose to just get chickenpox.

Again, everything boils down to the cause of these conditions that we simply do not understand.

 

[Kouki]

But as it stands, the fact of the matter is we do not know what causes autism, and until we do, people are simply being cautious.

But why vaccines? Why not....blowing out birthday candles? Think of all the toxic fumes you are creating, burning things causes suspended carbon particles that can cause cancer, hell, maybe autism, I don't know! There should be fear-mongering over blowing out birthday candles!

Why is it that people have this apparent need to think everything is going to kill them? It is because they want to be heard? Is it because of the internet? So many people all of a sudden have opinions and because of the internet, because they can be "heard," they latch on to some silly left-field viewpoint and run with it for the attention.

If enough people saw it I could create nationwide fear-mongering over blowing out birthday cake candles, guarantee it. Fake an article and start one of those email chains to stay-at-home-moms with nothing better to do than sit at home and believe ridiculous rumors and over-protect their children from the slightest threats. Autism shmautism, it's not just this debate, it's everything.

If a person thinks there is a risk, even 1 in a 1000 (or say, 66 in 10,000) chance that their child could get autism or some other condition from an early chickenpox vaccine - OR - they could just get chickenpox; I think most folks would choose to just get chickenpox.

Again, everything boils down to the cause of these conditions that we simply do not understand.

Well think about what he is saying, even if we give you 1/1000 people getting autism, something like 50% of people will get shingles.

And just to be clear I respect you as a poster & person and a lot of my viewpoints are not necessarily directed at you in particular. Just the crazies out there who run with everything they see.

 

[JSS2306]

Well...

The science simply isn't there that it is totally safe to vaccinate infants and young children the way we do presently.

For example, we thought it was safe to put Thiomersal into vaccines; and we still put this chemical preservative into flu vaccines. However, this agent is extremely toxic and contains mercury as it's primary component.

Eh...

Well put as usual but Thiomersal was an early preservative that prevented effects of the staph virus in 1928.

Yeah... I get what you're saying... only I don't.

Thiomersal hasn't been used in the same way since the 1930's . Back then, there weren't the checks and balances that we have now a days. We can pinpoint things at the cellular level that we simply couldn't back then. It was harmful at certain doses (over-doses) at one time but that doesn't equate to scientifically harmful in other doses. Like mercury in tuna.

Anyways, the measles vacccine isn't the same as the flu vaccine, which is the only virus that Thiomersal is used in now-a-days. It is NOT used in MMR vaccines.

That would discredit any reports of autism associated with the preservative, which by the way, is not any point of contention by conspiracy theorist against the MMR vaccination that I've ever heard because it simply doesn't exist within the vaccination. I could be wrong (please show).

So doesn't that completely discredit your response to my question of you sympathizing with people that haven't researched for themselves? Your example is not even of the same vaccine.

Isn't 500,000 cases annually from the 1950's of a harmful virus that can cause permanent brain damage more swaying than the risk of autism with no scientific basis whatsoever?

I think we both logically know the answer.

 

[Ohdang]

Think about what you're saying.

If a person thinks there is a risk, even 1 in a 1000 (or say, 66 in 10,000) chance that their child could get autism or some other condition from an early chickenpox vaccine - OR - they could just get chickenpox; I think most folks would choose to just get chickenpox.

Except you completely left out the part that when you get chickenpox, that's not all you're getting. You're getting herpes in your nerve cells, quite literally (its one of the herpesviridae), that stays with you forever and may end up being a recurrent case of shingles. Its more than likely not going to kill you, but have you ever seen someone with shingles in person? That's pure misery. Other herpesviridae are pathogenic for viral meningitis, and you've got their cousin in your nerve cells. Think about that for a second. There really isn't a good reason not to get it outside of certain medical conditions. These are the kinds of vaccines that we should be focusing on getting as close to 100% of the population as possible immunized. And its so easy to prevent and so safe that its insanity not to get it. This isn't some new experimental vaccine, its got a solid history.

I'm minimizing the controversy because I specialized in the immune system and have extensive knowledge of it, so I know firsthand that it deserves to be minimized. People experience some rhinorrhea and general malaise after they get a flu shot and in their mind the vaccine gave them the flu, because they're ignorant on the subject and confirmation bias takes over. We see this phenomenon in the medical field constantly where people think they know better than the people with the education, experience, and understanding of the situation because they have a smartphone and an hour to kill. The science is pretty conclusive that routine immunizations are safe, whether you choose to accept it or not is on you. That doesn't mean 100% of people will have no ill effects from these vaccines, because human bodies are very unique and can have wildly different reactions to the same toxins/stimulants/medications/etc, but they are safe for the overwhelming majority of people, and for the few people who they aren't safe or aren't effective for, the herd immunity protects them. Well, that's looking like its going to change sometime in our lifetimes if this trend of dipshittery continues and we have large fragments of the population refusing sound science in favor of anecdotal evidence.

This thread has made me consider petitioning for a course on basic immunology to be added to high school curriculum because its clear that most people understand very little about it, and that's something we should address. I'm so distraught by what I've been reading that I'd gladly teach one for free at a community center if people wanted to sign up for it. I really am afraid for the next generation and how this movement will impact their lives.

 

[Kouki]

I feel like the more you tell people something, though, even (especially?) with science, the less they believe it. Is there a word for that? I suck at vocabulary.

 

[Sumac13]

From a scientific perspective, there is no correlation between the MMR vaccination and autism, that has been shown in accepted medical journals thus far.

But as it stands, the fact of the matter is we do not know what causes autism, and until we do, people are simply being cautious.

There is a correlation between autism and exposure to cortisol steroids while in the womb.

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jun/03/boys-with-autism-likely-exposed-to-more-hormones-in-the-womb

Autistic boys exposed to higher levels of hormones in womb, study finds
Research on children in Denmark has found that boys with autism were more likely to have been exposed to higher levels of hormones in their mother's wombs than those who developed normally.

Boys diagnosed with autism and related disorders had, on average, raised levels of testosterone, cortisol and other hormones in the womb, according to analyses of amniotic fluid that was stored after their mothers had medical tests during pregnancy.

The findings add to a growing body of evidence that the biological foundations of autism are laid down well before birth and involve factors that go beyond the child's genetic make-up.

The results may help scientists to unravel some of the underlying causes of autism and explain why boys are four to five times more likely to be diagnosed with the condition, which affects around one percent of the population.

Amniotic fluid surrounds babies in the womb and contains hormones and other substances that they have passed through their urine. The liquid is collected for testing when some women have an amniocentesis around four months into their pregnancy.

Scientists in Cambridge and Copenhagen drew on Danish medical records and biobank material to find amniotic fluid samples from 128 boys who were later diagnosed with autism. Compared to a control group, the boys with autism and related conditions had higher levels of four "sex steroid" hormones that form a biological production line in the body that starts with progesterone and ends with testosterone.

"In the womb, boys produce about twice as much testosterone as girls, but compared with typical boys, the autism group has even higher levels. It's a significant difference and may have a large effect on brain development," said Simon Baron-Cohen, director of the Autism Research Centre at Cambridge University.

Because boys are naturally exposed to more testosterone in the womb, even a small rise in the hormone might put them in the risk range for autism. Levels of the stress hormone, cortisol, were also higher in the autism group. "From this study we can't say this is causal, but it is telling us that part of the biology of autism begins prenatally," Baron-Cohen added.

Previous work in animals has shown that testosterone plays a major role in shaping the male brain in the womb. The latest study, published in Molecular Psychiatry, will now be followed up, to answer whether high levels of hormones lead to more autism in girls, and why levels might rise in the womb in the first place.

The work does not aim to produce a prenatal test for autism, Asperger's syndrome, or milder, related conditions. In the study, some boys exposed to high levels of testosterone in the womb developed perfectly normally, while others exposed to low levels were diagnosed with autism. The results cannot indicate whether an individual will go on to develop autism or not.

Even if a test could predict autism, it would raise serious ethical issues. "A prenatal test that is used to make a decision to terminate a pregnancy could effectively be a form of eugenics. A prenatal test that is used for early detection, with a view to starting intervention in early postnatal life may be less ethically contentious, and would need to be evaluated for its benefits. But we are a long way from that at present," said Baron-Cohen.

He went on to warn that the study does not justify the use of drugs that block sex hormones as a treatment for autism. Drugs that do this have already been offered, inappropriately, to people with autism, but they could have damaging side effects and may do nothing to alter the brain once it has been shaped in the womb.

Richard Sharpe at the MRC Centre for Reproductive Health at Edinburgh University described the work as "pioneering".

"We now know that subtle variations in foetal development are an important determinant of later disease, which may be lifelong. Researching this in humans is incredibly difficult because of the obvious limitations in accessing what is happening in the foetus inside the womb," he said.

 

[Sumac13]

I feel like the more you tell people something, though, even (especially?) with science, the less they believe it. Is there a word for that? I suck at vocabulary.

@IWantAKouki

It is close to the idea of denialism.

Here is a fascinating article from Mother Jones that I think you might enjoy: The Science of Why We Don't Believe Science. It even covers the topic of vaccines and autism (on the last page).

A quote from article that seems to sum it up: "In other words, when we think we're reasoning, we may instead be rationalizing. Or to use an analogy offered by University of Virginia psychologist Jonathan Haidt: We may think we're being scientists, but we're actually being lawyers. Our "reasoning" is a means to a predetermined end—winning our "case"—and is shot through with biases. They include "confirmation bias," in which we give greater heed to evidence and arguments that bolster our beliefs, and "disconfirmation bias," in which we expend disproportionate energy trying to debunk or refute views and arguments that we find uncongenial."