I am sorry to say the author of this article is dead wrong on vaccines. There are many points I need to talk about her. First off we have become a society that so believes in vaccines and that they are always good for a child, we can not see how they could cause any bad. Many children have reactions from very mild to very serve when given vaccines. Most of these children have under laying serve health problems. But for the children who have reactions are healthy, just never make the news or we hear about it. Because, it accepted risk.

We live in a few nation. And that means that the person next to you has the RIGHT NOT to give his kids a vaccine. Simple as that! The story about the child who parents did not give there kids a measles vaccines. Had the right to do that. Those children could have easier become infected by a non vaccinated person coming into contact with them. As tragic and sad as that event was, the people who was infected before they was old enough to get the messes’ vaccines would have gotten infected anyhow. If they come in contract with someone with measles.

My doctor, who is one the best in the nation when dealing with people and vaccines. Is against the chicken pox vaccine for children. First of all it only last ten years. 2nd you are more likely to get complications from the vaccines, than from actually chicken pox. 3rd the vaccine after it wears off can still allow you to contract low level chicken pox and the older you are the worst chicken pox is for you.

Please link to data that indicates patients are more likely to suffer complications from chicken pox (or any other) vaccine than from the disease itself.

This is a public health issue, not an individual choice. The premise of vaccination is that when all or nearly all are protected from the spread of the disease, the risk of an epidemic is eliminated. The greater good of the entire population is served with only minimal risks. It appears you have some penumbral constitutional right, yet to be articulated, that allows one to exercise freedom of choice at the risk of endangering the health of all. If there is ever a a legitimate interest in mandating vaccination, it is the eradication of deadly infection. But your sense of history is too short to recall smallpox and polio and the devastation they wreaked on mankind.

As the mother of an infant who nearly died due to some moron's refusal to vaccinate her children said, "people should have a right not to vaccinate their children... but they should all go live on an island somewhere so they won't kill the rest of us."

I presume you also think that you have the right to set fire to your condo or townhouse? So what if the conflagration spreads to your neighbor's house, right? It's your property; you have the right to set fires as you please.

As a non-vaccinated person, you are a vector for deadly diseases. Why should we tolerate you in our society? Do what you will with your own body and property as long as it doesn't endanger others, but spreading diseases is not one of your rights.

Your assumptions are pretty far off. Complications from vaccines are more rare than the complications from the disease itself. Look up "number needed to treat" and "number needed to harm" - these are epidemiological statistics that allow one to literally measure risk/benefit ratios. Even if a vaccination's protection wears off, one can get re-vaccinated. Tetanus is a perfect example of this - I try to get a tetanus shot every 10 years or so, so I won't contract tetanus if I get injured by something that may cause tetanus. Getting chicken pox later in life is no worse than getting it in childhood. The issue is the late life complication of chicken pox - shingles. The varicella virus after an infection will continue to lay dormant in the spinal cord, and at some point may cause an outbreak along one dermatone. It is very painful, and sometimes causes permanent disfugurement and pain. So it is better to NEVER get infected, rather than get infected.

Part of the point of living in a society with close contact with others is the responsibility we have to the community at large. So to offer another example in addition to the fire example above, my right to swing my fist ends at your nose. Your right to refuse vaccinations ends at your bringing the infection to my medically compromised child, parent, grandparent, or self. Immunocompromised people have rights as well, including the right to assembly with the public at large, taking appropriate precautions against reasonable risks. A trip to the movies shouldn't be a life-threatening endeavor. Neither should the day care.

gwhh76:

...the children who have reactions are healthy, just never make the news or we hear about it. Because, it accepted risk.

This argument could be made about anything beneficial; seat betls, bike helmets, etc. I'm sure most people have heard the horror story about the guy who would have survived the crash if only he had not been wearing his seat belt so he would have been safely ejected from the car.

As far as it being their RIGHT not to get your children vaccinated, I agree with you -- to a point. Like many other people on here have been pointing out: My right to swing my fist ends at your nose.

gwhh76:

My doctor, who is one the best in the nation when dealing with people and vaccines. Is against the chicken pox vaccine for children.

Could you please provide the name of this vaccine authority? I'd be interested in looking over his/her studies.

I am absolutely pro-vaccination. I do think that parents who don't vaccinate their child for major illnesses and don't get booster shots themselves every ten years are getting a free ride because they are taking advantage of the security provided by the vaccinated people around them. Incidentally, the fact that kids and people are vaccinated also provide protection of infants yet too young to be vaccinated.

However, there is a legitimate controversy about the chicken pox vaccine. Getting chicken pox when you're a few years old is usually much milder than if you got it in your teens or as an adult. But not everyone got it when small so, even before there was a vaccine for it, adults were susceptible to getting it and got very sick. I assume that the issue could be resolved by getting booster shots every ten years like we need to get for tetanus?

A bad thing about chicken pox is that the virus remains in your system for life. It resurfaces in the form of shingles, a very painful condition. There is now a vaccine against shingles but that vaccine is only 50% effective (unlike vaccines against major childhood diseases which are pretty much 100% effective). So the future possibility of shingles are another reaon for getting a chicken pox vaccine.

If the vaccine is so great then get your kid the vaccine and stop worrying what other people do with their kids. It's a mute point with me. I'm sorry a kid has cancer, I'm the first to take care of special needs kids and animals throughout my life, but if the kid needs a special situation, then that is the solution not placing the burden on the entire population of forcibly injecting anything into anyone. It stands to reason that it is an individual choice, not by law but by birth right. Period.

Vaccines are great; they have saved millions of lives. Why do you think vaccines aren't great? Would you rather small pox was still around, how about polio?

The purpose of the article was to point out that some kids can't get the vacccine, so those who 'choose' not to get the vaccine put them at risk. That is the reason why they worry about other people not vaccinating thier children, because it can kill someone else. THEY HAVE TO WORRY!

It is a 'moot' point with you, not a 'mute' point

I love your argument that helping needing people excuses your ignorance. Having the entire population vaccinated isn't a burden, it is a lifesaver.

And what about the rights of the poor children who died? They had to die because they were unfortunate enough to be born to parents who didn't believe in science. Anti abortion folks go on and on about the separate rights of the unborn. In their mind those take precidence or are equal to their parents. Well should vaccination not be the same? Does your right to be a refusnik not stop at your child's right not to be maimed or die when science overwhelmingly supports vaccination? Something else to think about...

As a parent I have to worry just as much. You make me laugh, helping needy people is not an excuse but a testament to my concern, and not vaccinating a decision supported by our family doctors.

your argument. So you don't vaccinate your children at all and your doctor supports this? You have a crazy fucked up doctor who needs to stop drinking the woo woo juice.

Lovely and informative post you have written...LOL

You can ONLY get shingles if you got chicken pox vaccines. My mom had a heck of a time time just this year, finding a place that had the shingles vaccine and being able to get. I did not know it was only 50% effective against shingles