I don't vaccinate my child because it's my right to determine which diseases come back

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Kimmio said:
So, there is no study in people under 65 and shingles rates so we should just assume that witnessing and experiencing an increase in younger adults getting shingles in our families and communities is a figment of our imagination until a study comes out meanwhile they will just give the vaccine to scores of kids anyway without looking into it which does well for those kids and the drug companies but that still doesn't explain the spike in shingles cases that young people are experiencing and missing work and expensive post secondary education for and in some cases dying young.
Click to expand...

Scientifically speaking, if there is sufficient anecdotal evidence, then that is a sign that someone should get in there and do some research. But anecdotal evidence is often skewed by those who are providing it. Just because someone sees a trend does not mean there is one because they may only see a specific slice of the pie. A healthcare professional may only see the ones who get shingles, not the ones who do not, so really has no sense of what percentage of the population is affected or whether that percentage is changing. If they are seeing more people with shingles in a particular age group, it could be due to demographics or other factors unrelated to vaccination.

So, I'm not saying there is no relationship but without any verifiable, quantifiable evidence of a relationship, all we can say is that we don't know and should look into it.
 
Mendalla said:
Scientifically speaking, if there is sufficient anecdotal evidence, then that is a sign that someone should get in there and do some research. But anecdotal evidence is often skewed by those who are providing it. Just because someone sees a trend does not mean there is one because they may only see a specific slice of the pie. A healthcare professional may only see the ones who get shingles, not the ones who do not, so really has no sense of what percentage of the population is affected or whether that percentage is changing. If they are seeing more people with shingles in a particular age group, it could be due to demographics or other factors unrelated to vaccination.

So, I'm not saying there is no relationship but without any verifiable, quantifiable evidence of a relationship, all we can say is that we don't know and should look into it.
Click to expand...

Well maybe my friend has had some education in this based on studies that I or the rest of us are not aware of. She won't recommend the chicken pox vaccine for young kids - she also won't stop anyone from choosing it - and she also works in hospitals and with parents who have concerns. All I did was ask her and she is a healthcare professional.
 
On another forum I'm on we were discussing this (speaking of anecdotes) and a number of people had kids in their teens who have had shingles (these kids are now in their 20s to mid-fifties).

I'm not sure if shingles is a disease that is tracked - although I would think it is so trends would show up.
 
So the Public Health Agency of Canada had this to say - which seems similar to what has been reflected here:

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/cig-gci/p04-herp-zona-eng.php

National
In recent studies, the lifetime risk of HZ has been estimated to be as high as 30% in the general population. In Canada, it is estimated that each year there are 130,000 new cases of HZ, 17,000 cases of PHN and 20 deaths, which result in 252,000 physician consultations and 2,000 hospitalizations.

The relationship between the introduction of routine childhood varicella immunization programs and the incidence of HZ in adults is unclear. It had been hypothesized that implementation of childhood varicella immunization programs might decrease natural immune boosting of older persons from circulating wild-type VZV and thereby increase the risk of VZV reactivation. However, different jurisdictions have reported increases and decreases in the incidence of HZ over time, and it is likely that multiple other factors contribute to variations in the incidence of HZ including modifications to reporting or diagnostic coding of cases or changes in risk factors.

This is also an easy to understand piece on behalf of the CDC (I quoted parts but not all)

Scientists have proposed various hypotheses to explain this increase. A common hypothesis is that the increase in herpes zoster is associated with the widespread vaccination of children against varicella.[1-5] However, a new CDC study that I will discuss today adds to a growing body of evidence that this is unlikely.
___

A recent CDC study, using Medicare data from 1992 to 2010, found that among adults aged 65 years or older, zoster rates were increasing even before the varicella vaccine was introduced in the United States.[1] Moreover, zoster rates didn't accelerate after the routine varicella vaccination program began.

We also examined whether there was a link between state varicella vaccination coverage and zoster rates. Zoster rates did not accelerate as states increased varicella vaccination coverage. In fact, zoster incidence was the same in states with consistently high vaccination coverage as it was in states with lower vaccination coverage.

Our study adds to a growing body of evidence showing that the increase in zoster rates is not a result of childhood varicella vaccination.[1,2,4,11] CDC continues to study the epidemiology of herpes zoster among adults and children and to monitor the effects of the US varicella and zoster vaccination programs.
 
Well that was one study. Sure better than none. Doesn't shed much light on the occurrance of shingles in younger adults. Anyway, I am juggling between two debates here. This one is less important to me. Not unimportant but we all have our priorities.
 
Kimmio said:
Well that was one study. Sure better than none. Doesn't shed much light on the occurrance of shingles in younger adults. Anyway, I am juggling between two debates here. This one is less important to me. Not unimportant but we all have our priorities.
Click to expand...
Actually I believe that if you count the footnoted studies there are six studies cited in what I quoted :)
 
When we were kids everyone hot chickenpox. I have the scars.

It blows me away that folks don't see the benefits.

Even a minor increase in shingles is better than chicken pox
 
Pinga said:
When we were kids everyone hot chickenpox. I have the scars.

It blows me away that folks don't see the benefits.

Even a minor increase in shingles is better than chicken pox
Click to expand...
Not if it kills working age people, or makes them very sick it isn't. 39% is a major increase in the senior population. It's well worth more attention to the increased occurrance in younger adults as well whatever the cause - they need to look for it. Now that an option is available for protecting young children.
 
Pinga said:
When we were kids everyone hot chickenpox. I have the scars.

It blows me away that folks don't see the benefits.

I have some tiny scars too, very faint. Even a minor increase in shingles is better than chicken pox
Click to expand...
People do see the benefits but the concern was with risks to younger adults. Getting little scars as a kid is less of a big deal than getting shingles as an adult and the shots for kids don't help those of us already adults who had chicken pox. It might not have to do with the shot but it still needs investigating.
 
http://vactruth.com/2014/02/26/unvaccinated-children-healthier/
Studies Prove Without Doubt That Unvaccinated Children Are Far Healthier Than Their Vaccinated Peers
...despite mainstream media and leading government agencies stressing repeatedly that studies comparing vaccinated children to unvaccinated children cannot take place for ethical reasons, groups around the world are taking it upon themselves to do these studies anyway.

All the warnings, from the naturopathic movement, on the fundamental dangers of vaccines, antibiotics and the rest; all the attempts to explain that germs are a result, not a cause, of disease; that asepsis – cleanliness, not antisepsis – was needed; the pleas that a strong constitution and immune system – the product of fresh, organic fruit and veg. etc, – would deal with the ‘infective agents’ – all ignored, ridiculed, laughed at.

So really the question that should be asked on this thread is ... who agrees with Alex Berezow and who does not?

“Parents who do not vaccinate their children should go to jail,” he writes in this USA Today column.

 
For what it is worth - one of my kids had chicken pox at age three and shingles at age twelve. Both diseases confirmed by a doctor.
 
[FONT=Open Sans said:
UnDefinitive][/FONT]
So really the question that should be asked on this thread is ... who agrees with Alex Berezow and who does not?

“Parents who do not vaccinate their children should go to jail,” he writes in this USA Today column.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with imprisonment. I also do not agree with seizing their children. I think that a series of fines should be considered as well as the possibilities of carrying the real financial burden of the illnesses.
 
Will the fines get paid back to them if later studies show different information? Let's start fining people for not giving their kids oat bran to prevent later heart disease. Let's start fining doctors who balked at fish oil until a few years ago and rewarding those who've been taking cod liver oil all along. Point being everyone is trying their best in good conscience with limited information that changes over time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top