Stephanie,

I think that your story is an important one in the vaccine debate, and one that rarely gets told. I have a young child and am on the fence about vaccinations. The undecideds in this debate rarely voice their opinion and this pertains to the health of children it is a provocative topic. The passionate responses from each side continually escalate making the debate appear black and white, each side painting the other as imbecilic and dangerous. I feel like your article, while well-written with good-intentions, will have some trouble actually being swayed by your argument. First, because you site many anecdotes and studies, but do not provide the sources (health is a topic that requires primary sources to change deeply held opinion.) Second, while not resorting to name calling, one statement certainly comes off as bitter and will likely close minds that might have otherwise listened: "religious or philosophical exemptions—again, whatever that means." I do not know your pain and frustration. I do know that religious/philosophical exemptions are necessary in a free society, and I know what it means. Trust me, people who obtain them do not do so lightly or easily. Doctors while "required" to grant them do not do so without some heavy guilt-tripping and arm-twisting. Schools while required to accept them do not do so without lots of yearly paperwork. Please, help yourself by linking your sources and by refraining from bitter statements. You'll have a better chance of making a difference even if it is not quite as cathartic.

The issue of vaccination is not science vs. religion nor is it fear-of-autism vs. fear-of-disease. There are those who exist in a gray area of acknowledging that anecdotes on both sides ring true. One of the biggest issues is trust of the medical establishment. For every person who has been saved by medicine there has been another hurt. People have been irreconcilably harmed by unnecessary procedures, improperly tested meds, greedy doctors plugging the next big thing, poor record keeping, failure of guaranteed results, etc. Western germ-theory medicine has been practiced for a relatively short amount of time. It has proven itself in many ways, and done amazing things. But there have also been catastrophic failures and severe side effects (i.e. depression meds that cause suicide and medications that cause birth defects.) This uncertainty causes as much fear as disease does.

Ultimately, very little is certain (other than death and taxes.) It must be incredibly frustrating to not be able to place your son in a wonderful daycare, let alone deal with the pain of caring for him while ill. I do not know what I would do in that situation. In reality though, the daycare is no worse than any other public space, a playground, restaurant, or store. We only hear about the extreme cases. It seems that there are many thousands of vaccinated, undervaccinated, and unvaccinated children all living in relative harmony. The only sign of discord is their parents arguments.

Sincerely and with sympathy,

E

>>For every person who has been saved by medicine there has been another hurt.

Could you cite your primary source for that factoid, please?

You are right. There is no source for this factoid. It is an exaggeration to say that it is one for one.

To ammend:

Among my friends, family, and acquaintances there are many who have been helped by medicine, and many who have been hurt.

ahrucool wrote:

"Among my friends, family, and acquaintances there are many who have been helped by medicine, and many who have been hurt. "

But not by vaccinations. Not one person in a million is hurt by these. If you had lived before vaccinations were invented, you would have known many people who died young or were disabled for life by diseases that are now prevented. Not giving your children immunity to these horrible diseases is insane, and tantamount to child abuse.

Vaccinations and other public measures such as sewers have saved millions of lives and improved everyone's health and welfare. People like you have no idea how beneficial these things are because, frankly, you have no knowledge of history or statistics and you have not lived in places where they have no vaccinations or sewers, which are hellish in ways you cannot begin to imagine.

Exactly, JR. Statements like, "some have been helped and some have been hurt" are not useful.

I know a few people who have been misdiagnosed; prescribed a medicine to which they had a bad reaction; or had a surgical procedure botched.

But IMHO, the fact that without modern medicine most of them would have died by their early 30s tips the balance in favor of medicine.

Ahrucool appears to be one of the fortunate people who have never been in the position of having their lives saved by medicine.

Medicine has twice saved my life. So I'll trust my doctor's word over Jenny McCarthy's any day - even though my doctor doesn't have a Playboy-quality rack.

butterwb wrote:

"I know a few people who have been misdiagnosed; prescribed a medicine to which they had a bad reaction; or had a surgical procedure botched."

So do I. U.S. medical care is in trouble because it is badly organized which give rise to errors, and because many doctors do not take simple precautions such as washing their hands. Ahrucool is quite right that medicine causes harm and carries risk. However, vaccinations are not among the dysfunctional and risky procedures.

Of course they do have some slight risk, regrettably.

People who personally know someone who was hurt by a vaccine may get the notion that such events are widespread. This is called the Misleading Vividness logical fallacy.

ahru,

You REALLY need to read some medical history, even on Wikipedia or other such site. Look up polio, measels, rubella, etc. and see how many people were crippled, get encephalitis, or even die from them. And still do in some parts of the world. There's really NO "debate", just a bunch of uneducated nuts saying vaccines are bad.

The reason their beliefs for the most part haven't come crashing down on them is because the kids around them are vaccinated, but make no mistake, there ARE occasional outbreaks in this country of diseases that have been dormant for years -- and your kids stand a chance of being in one of those outbreak, possibly with disastrous results. And no, that's not fear-mongering, just the sad truth.

You want primary sources? Kay. Here are a couple I turned up with a quick Google search:

<link> (click on the cached version, the original page is no longer online)

<link> (scroll down to the bottom for the summary)

And the CDC has a whole list of studies on the subject. Every single one concludes no link between vaccinations and autism:

<link>

This is not one of those areas where both sides have a good point and there's a difference to be split. This is an area where one side is just wrong. Well-meaning, but wrong.

While I recognize your position, anecdotal evidence tends to be unreliable.

I appreciate all of your statements. You are all right.

Before vaccinations many people were killed or disabled by diseases that are not prevalent now because of vaccinations.

I have been to a country where vaccinations are not available and seen the health conditions that exist.

I have had the direct experience (multiple times) of medicine saving my life and that of my immediate family members.

I have had the direct experience of medicine killing a friend and harming multiple others.

I am not arguing that vaccinations are bad; I am arguing that this issue is more complicated than it seems.

I am not uneducated, nor am I a nut. I am a healthy functioning educator living in a city (not holed up in the mountains.) I am enjoying the benefits of living in a healthy herd-immune society. I am torn over injecting chemicals live and/or dead bacteria and/or viruses and known allergens into the soft flesh of my baby, and especially doing this at regular intervals in large amounts. How can we be sure of all the effects of these substances when they have been in use in their current combination for such a short period of time.

Once my child is at least two and has built up a decent immune system on his own (through breastmilk, proper diet, etc.) I want to get the pertussis vaccine, because it is virulent and the odds of getting it and being harmed by it are high in relation to having a reaction sway me. But as for HepB vaccine at birth, that does not seem worth it compared to the incredibly small probability of exposure.

This is what I mean by complex: not that the science is bad, not that health care should be mistrusted, that injecting chemicals into a baby that I am completely responsible for is not a decision that I can take lightly.

I was not referring to the supposed link between vaccination and autism. I do not completely trust (nor distrust) medicine for different reasons.

This is what I mean by the issue being complex: not that the science is bad, not that health care should be mistrusted, only that injecting chemicals into a baby that I am completely responsible for is not a decision that I can take lightly.

All right, that's fair, and I guess I overreacted. I get twitchy about this topic, because it drives me crazy seeing people (not you, I'm talking about the folks who keep talking up vaccination-autism) spouting lies that have potentially deadly consequences.

As long as your decision is based on sound science and clear judgement, I respect that. No form of medicine is completely without risk, and it is undeniably wise to make sure there is a real need before proceeding.

ahrucool:

The undecideds in this debate rarely voice their opinion and this pertains to the health of children it is a provocative topic. The passionate responses from each side continually escalate making the debate appear black and white, each side painting the other as imbecilic and dangerous.

This is not a situation where there are two sides to the facts. The fact is that vaccines save lives. Not getting vaccinated increases the chances of something detrimental happening, both to the child in question and to society as a whole. Anyone who believes otherwise IS a dangerous moron.

ahrucool:

I do know that religious/philosophical exemptions are necessary in a free society, and I know what it means.

The problem is that there needs to be a certain amount of coherency for a society to be a society and not a collection of individuals. After all, no one can sacrifice a virgin.... I don't see why people should be allowed to risk those around them simply because of some philosophical viewpoint.

ahrucool:

Trust me, people who obtain them do not do so lightly or easily.

Bullshit. Everyone I've talked to has looked at one or two ancedotal statements and decided that since they don't know anyone who has died from the diseases we vaccinate against that their child shouldn't get it. There was no soul wrenching analysis on their part.

ahrucool:

You'll have a better chance of making a difference even if it is not quite as cathartic.

It doesn't matter. It's like trying to discuss quantum physics with a cat.

ahrucool:

One of the biggest issues is trust of the medical establishment. For every person who has been saved by medicine there has been another hurt.

That's completely and utterly false. I'm not saying that people aren't injured by medical care, but the number of people who were harmed is miniscule compared to the number of people who were saved. All one has to do is look at our infant mortality and life expectancy and compare it to that of someone born in the 1800s, which really is prior to modern health care.

ahrucool:

It seems that there are many thousands of vaccinated, undervaccinated, and unvaccinated children all living in relative harmony.

Until, of course, we see the return of a disease like polio, ruebella or the measles.... With every unvaccinated person the probability of an epidemic increases. And then we all know that the people who didn't get their now dead or disabled children vaccinated will sue because, "They couldn't have possibly known!"

In my opinion, only those children who are unvaccinated due to medical conditions should be allowed to attend public school. If you don't want to participate in society, then don't. But then don't expect to be given the benefits of society when you place everyone at risk.

ahrucool:

But as for HepB vaccine at birth, that does not seem worth it compared to the incredibly small probability of exposure.

But what is the RISK to your child? the hep B vaccine uses a protein from the capsule of the virus, so there is no chance of contracting hepatitis B from the vaccine itself. OTOH, kids tend to get chronic hepatitis when they contract Hep B, and this can lead to cancer or cirrhosis.

So your opinion is that to avoid something with an extremely low risk (anyone could be allergic to a vaccine) you are placing your child at a low but still detectable risk. How does that make sense? You are putting your child at MORE of a risk trying to prevent him from being vaccinated!

PhysicsGirl:

Until, of course, we see the return of a disease like polio, ruebella or the measles.... With every unvaccinated person the probability of an epidemic increases. And then we all know that the people who didn't get their now dead or disabled children vaccinated will sue because, "They couldn't have possibly known!"

That's the part that frosts me, jenny mccarthy et. al. will be out there crying, saying,
"I didn't KNOW, if someone would have just TOLD me! It's all THEIR fault for not trying to EXPLAIN IT all to concerned mothers like ME!"

What a load.