Is there proof that vaccinations actually harmed a child?

@YARNLADY It is my understanding that there is a VERY slight risk of adverse reaction to any vaccine. That said, the benefits of immunity far outweigh that risk, which is why they are given. Some children have conditions that prevent them from being vaccinated, so they rely on herd immunity to protect them, which is why everyone who is able should get vaccinated.

With any vaccine in any human, child or adult, there is a slight chance of harm, which is far outweighed by the benefit. Don’t forget – vaccinations eliminated Smallpox from the entire world, and but for the non-compliance of certain people, would have done the same for Polio.

To my knowledge, there isn’t any credible evidence from unbiased sources, aside from reactions in those that are allergic to eggs/egg products.

At the beginning of Polio vaccinations children got Polio from the serum, and every year a certain number of children die or become very ill from a vaccination. There is no credible evidence linking Thimerosol or any vaccination with Autism, but certainly there are links to harm.

@dpworkin Some anti-vaccination people claim that the incidence of illnesses declined due to increased awareness of hygene, before innoculations. I’m just interested in the proof that the innoculation harmed the child.

I am a proponent of vaccinations, but I wonder what other Jellies have to say about it.

@YARNLADY All i have to say it’s this: It’s an all american (or maybe british too, i don’t know about that) debate.

That aside vacciantions, like every attempt at tampering with the body, may have repercussions, but it’s a really low chance of failure for a huge benefit.

@YARNLADY The proof can be found on the website of the Center for Disease Control, under Morbidity and Mortality statistics.

I haven’t seen any proof of a definite association for Autism related to vaccinations. In fact, the CDC states that they don’t either. I have heard people say that there is a link, but there have been studies done that say it’s not true (one study is linked on the CDC page I linked). There are adverse reactions that people have to vaccinations (like any other medication). I believe vaccinations are very beneficial and their good outweighs their bad in my opinion.

There is no link to Autism. Period. No reputable scientist thinks there is.

I don’t know but I just finished reading Jodi Picoult’s newest book and it made me wonder. And apparently many others are questioning as well. If I had children it would be a difficult decision for me. It is easy to say only a small percentage have any sort of adverse reaction until it is your kid who has a reaction or coincidentally becomes autistic after inoculations.

I think it is interesting that veterinarians for years have been pushing annual vaccinations, now that is changing, apparently every 3 years is adequate now. That is the trouble living in this world, you just don’t know who to believe, not the government, not doctors or researchers with vested interests.

Vaccine immunizations for the most part are there to stop the wanton spread of a disease hence all the “required” vaccinations to be able to enter our country or attend school. Vaccines will reduce the likelihood a disease will survive in the host where if allowed to run it’s course unabated could mutate into a different more virulent strain.

There are an abundance of anti vaccine websites that will present numerous examples of individuals who had reactions and side effects and even died from purported vaccinations. Quite often what is not disclosed is these patients already had compromised immune systems or undisclosed or unknown medical conditions that contributed to these reactions to the vaccine.

Fluther seems lately to be innundated with folks who instead of simply giving their own opinions, attack others for giving theirs.

@Thammuz – Have you forgotten all the PhD’s in medicine who handed out Thalidomide? History is rife with experts who have made mistakes.

You sound a mite miffed, maybe you need to chill before you have a stroke.

[mod says] Personal attacks are not permitted and have been removed.

@rooeytoo I agree that physicians make terrible mistakes; the difference is that the research on vaccines is retrospective and proves beyond a doubt a highly ameliorative cost/benefit ratio.

I just wanted to clarify my earlier statement. There is a small percentage chance (something like less than 1 in a million) that you might have an adverse reaction to a vaccine. These reactions are UNRELATED to the autism claims. Ask any MD and they will tell you that there is a tiny percentage chance that you might be allergic to the egg proteins involved in the vaccine production. There is NO credible evidence that vaccines cause autism, any MD worth her degree will also tell you that.

The “evidence” for the autism link is anecdotal, and is a result of the coincidence that the first signs of autism occur around the same timeframe in a child’s life as when they begin their vaccinations. In other-words, an unvaccinated child would show signs of autism at the same timeframe when a child his age would be receiving their shots, regardless of whether they actually receive it. Most people eat food when the sun is at it’s peak, this doesn’t mean that having the sun reach it’s daily zenith somehow makes us hungry, it’s just that it corresponds to noon, when most people eat their lunch (same principle correlation ≠ causation).

Furthermore, Thimerisol was removed from vaccines a decade ago, out of an abundance of caution (not because of any real evidence). If Thimerisol was causing autism, we would see a drop in the rate of new autism cases. This didn’t happen, and the rates continued to rise slightly. This is proof that the anti-vaccine people were wrong.

The leading theory on why autism is increasing is because the definition has been expanded. Also, doctors are more aware of the disorder and are better able to recognize and diagnose the problem then they were decades ago. Think about it, when they changed the definition of who an eligible voter was from white land-owning men to all men over the age of (I think it was 21 initially), we suddenly had a lot more eligible voters, and these people didn’t just materialize from nowhere, we merely increased the inclusion rate (same principle).

If I had an autistic child, I would be furious that so much money and energy is being wasted on researching the vaccine link that has already been disproven. I would want them to be taking those research dollars to figure out what is ACTUALLY causing it, and to work towards a cure.

Finally, I want to address people who believe that doctors put money ahead of the well-being of their patients. Given how much time, money, blood, sweat, tears, etc. someone has to put into becoming a doctor, most could have easily made a hell-of-a-lot more doing something else. The vast majority of doctors don’t get into medicine because they’re chasing dollars, they do it because you get satisfaction from helping other human beings. No doctor is going to risk ruining some child’s life with a crippling disorder to make $15 on a vaccine, you can be certain of that. The reason they give vaccines is because all evidence shows that they are critical to keeping our country healthy.

@rooeytoo Sure it is, at least they can figure out what the mistake is. Furthermore, as @dpworkin already pointed out, researches on those idiotic claims have already been made, and they’ve been disproved.

I’m not saying scientists are infalliable, the scientific method,though, is self correcting, if there was any weight to the claims, someone would actually prove them. Too bad the foremost spokesmen for this are people who know jack shit about medicine, like your Jodi Picault, or Jim Carrey and his girlfriend whatever her name is.

Your example is actually quite good for me too: Thalidomide was withdrawn from the market in the space of four years. Vaccinations are still in use today. Thalidomide’s negative effects were corroborated by several independent studies, in consistent ways, while the suggested link between autism and MMR vaccines has been found to be bullshit.

The system works. 4 years is a really short time, considering, and, while this doesn’t retroactively solve the problems it caused, the issue’s been found and acted upon. Vaccinations have been around for much longer and the very few possible issues (Actually possible ones, unlike autism) are by far outweighted by the possibility to be completely immune to several deadly diseases.

Furthermore: you want proof that vaccinations work? Take a look at mortality figures in Europe.
Here in Italy many vacciantions are compulsory, if i recall they’re compulsory in France too, and i’ll get back to you with more data as soon as i find a source other than my personal knowledge on this.

Like any medication children/people can have an adverse side effect or allergy from a vaccine. Generally, I would say if you are willing to pop a pill for an illness, it is the same as being willing to have a vaccination. You probably heard of GBS following the swine flu vaccine back in the 70’s. Actually GBS is still seen with other vaccines, but extremely rare. I had a bad reaction to a tetanus vaccine that was given to me very close together to a previous one. My titer continues to be very high over 10 years later. I have some muscle trouble that I wonder is related to that tetanus shot. I’m not sure. It was not a sudden and distinct onset of problems. But, tetanus overall has been a very safe vaccine for many many years. Some vaccinations have more problems than others. I personally don’t believe in the mercury autism link, but I do think it is possible that it still might be related to something in vaccinations? Until I se some good studies that have postponed vaccinations in a large random sample of kids to 2 years later then typically vaccinated I don’t think we will know.

My mom used to be the one to receive and sort VAERS forms that came into the FDA, and believe me there were adverse reactions, and it is comonly felt that it is under-reported. Still, there are adverse events to common medications like ibuprofen, so I think the benefit of vaccination outweighs the risk, especially for diseases like measles, polio, and others that cause very bad illness, percentages of permanent injury or death are very high, and are extremely contagious.

I skimmed the MMWR report from back in the 90’s http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/ss/ss5201.pdf see page 14.

I also found this online with stats on adverse reactions. http://www.vaccineawareness.org/VAERS/2001-2005/ But, adverse could be anything from fever to paralzed I think. The table does not break down the different bad reactions.

But, again if you look up any medication in the PDR there are reports of bad reactions, so don’t get all freaked out.

@everyone who feels it is their job to correct my faulty thinking, go back and read what I wrote, I said it would be a difficult decision. I didn’t say NO, I didn’t say NEVER. And the most relevant point of all is that I am 65, never ever wanted children of my own and the adopted ones I’ve had have all been teenagers and well past the time when a decision regarding inoculations needed to be made. I am merely stating my opinion and I still maintain that while the statistics regarding the children who do have adverse reactions are quite low, if it is your kid having the reaction, it changes ones perspective! Last year in Australia when flu shots were being advised, there were many adverse reactions in children, I can’t remember if deaths resulted but numerous illnesses.

@rooeytoo Just because a comment is directed to you doesn’t mean they are trying to correct your thinking – it just means they are presenting opposing views/evidence. That’s what I want here

Thalidomide wasn’t the only mistake doctors have made, there is also DES, which is now reaching into the third generation in our family. Cocaine was once routinely used as a medical treatment.

Do past/current mistakes with other substances make or break the immunization decision?

In recent years, the definition of autism has expanded to include Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PPD) and maybe other disorders. Therefore, the number of kids with autism has jumped dramatically over the past few years, and those opposed to vaccinations can use that statistic to say “Look at how the number of autistic children correlates to all the vaccines children are now recommended to have. Vaccines must therefore cause autism.” However, when you look at the definition of autism the stats are misleading.

@jca Don’t forget us Aspies; a diagnosis that did not hit the DSM IV until the early 1990s. The diagnostic criteria for ASDs are vague, inconsistent, and trying to diagnose Autism is nebulous enough to be kind of like trying to paint a beer fart. I mean, yeah, some cases are pretty damn obvious, but there are also many more that you would never suspect. AS/HFA is almost like homosexuality in that people can often hide it.

But people are rather prone to confusing correlation with causation, even when the correlation is a mere coincidence, so I am not surprised that people blame vaccination for Autism. I’m just waiting for scientists to find out what really causes it, and I will laugh my ass of if it’s something that in found almost exclusively in America; something like “eating Big Macs alters your DNA and makes your kids Autistic” or something like that.

@jerv @jca Besides, biologically speaking, the odds of a pathogen being the cause of autism are the same of me being the first man on uranus.

@jerv Autism is not so rare in Europe either.

Of course. But usually the proof says this happened 1 in 100,000 or 1 in a million. The benefits outweigh the risks. Almost all vaccinations are a blessing. Don’t trust the conspiracy theories. Trusts the majority of reputable scientists and doctors.

@rooeytoo So true that when it is your kid that has the bad reaction all of a sudden the risk has become 100%. About the animals and vaccines, there are certain cancers that develop right where the injections are typically given, but as you point out most likely animals are overvaccinated. Here is the deal with vaccines and medication for that matter. Many times the studies that are conducted are done at a dose they feel is adequate and appropriate, if it works, then they never test to see if they could give a lower dose and it would still be appropriate. Well, never is too finite of a word, not never, but they are not motivated to do more testing if it is working and having low incidence of side effects. With the animals they probably thought better to be safe than sorry and just vaccinate every year.

Like I had a tetanus shot close together, and I had a bad reaction at the time at the injection site, never had had any reaction before, and I have some muscle trouble ongoing (but as I said above I can’t be 100% the ongoing muscle trouble I have was caused by the vaccination). And, my mom at the time og the bad reaction told me to fill out a VAERS form, so I brought it to the hospital like an idiot to just fill out from the record, and when they saw the form, they pulled me aside and basically talked me out of it. Um, that is why I am sure it under reported. I bet there are doctors who don’t even know what a VAERS form is, and ones who don’t want to officially report there was a bad reaction to drug or vaccine, if eventually the patient seems to recover.

It makes me wonder when they say some immunity can wear off if that is really true? I don’t understand why that would be? But, I m not a doctor or scientist. I know I will never take a vaccine without checking the titer (the level of immunity I have). When I was a fertility patient they checked my rubella titer, I would not have taken the vaccine even if it was low (although I would give it to a child of mine) but it didn’t matter, because the titer was well within normal range.

They once have my husband 4 vaccines at once, and I was so upset. If he had had a bad reaction we would not have known which one caused it, and be afriad of all of them?!

Although, overall I believe in the safety of vaccines, especially the ones that have been around for a long time, I think there is nothing wrong with being cautious.

@JLeslie – I think your last sentence says it all!!!

@JLeslie Many people’s idea of “cautious” is to avoid vaccinations altogether. Some go so far as to try to prevent others from getting vaccinated. I think that it’s possible to be too cautious.

To the “risk” people: Do you allow your children to ride in cars – the leading preventable killer of children in the world? It doesn’t make sense to me – avoid something that has a possible 1 in a million chance of harm, as opposed to the 1.5 (one and a half person out of every 100) death rate in an automobile.

@YARNLADY My experience is that the people who are most afraid of risk are those that are least able to do the math.

They probably buy lottery tickets.

@jerv @dpworkin I fucking lol’d

@jerv True, some are too cautious or I would even say irrational in how they look at the vaccine question.

@YARNLADY I think the way the stats feel to people who really worry about the vaccinations is, my kid is supposed to get 30 shots during childhood and if one of them makes them sick forever the risk is too great. Where with a car, they drive out on the road way more than 30 times, they probably drive daily, and so that feels like of the over 3000 days I drive by the time my child is 10 years old, maybe there might be one car crash, maybe, and it is likely not to cause serious injury, although of course it could. It is similar to people who are afraid to fly, even though flying is incredibly safe satistically, if you are on the plane that goes down, it is likely you will die. I am not supporting how they think, just trying to understand their point of view.

For the parent who has heard about the fears related to vaccines, and then lets her baby get vaccinated, and then shortly after the child develops a problem, it is probably torture for that mother that she allowed her child to be vaccinated. This is one of the reasons I think they should change the vaccination schedule, especially for the MMR, which was the one that many felt caused autism. The argument the medical community provided, besides doing some studies, was that it is a coincidence that parents notice signs of autism around the same time/age the vaccine is administered. I think if the medical community it so sure it is not connected, then move that vaccine 6 months later. Alhough the parents who claim this association say the change in their children was drastic, and they actually regressed.

@dpworkin That’s hysterical. LOL.

@JLeslie Good suggestion. I’m surprised they don’t think of.

@YARNLADY Thanks. I think the medical communities reluctance to do this simple change is seen as suspicious. The six months is not going to drasitically change the immunity for those three diseases for society, most children will still be well before school age when vaccinated. Even if it is irrational and proven beyond a shadow of a doubt scientifically, the misinformation and people reluctant to vaccinate at all is much more worrisome then just vaccinating later.

@JLeslie I think the reason they don’t do it 6-months later is because that’s the time when [insert something other than autism] begins to have it’s first symptoms. And 6-months after that it’s something else, etc. Personally, I think we should leave the vaccine schedules up to the immunologists to determine the recommendations for what times are the safest/best.

Just like I don’t want UFO nuts dictating to the FAA to make rules to accommodate alien flight paths, I want them to determine the safest routes base exclusively on facts.

@gorillapaws I find that to be a poor analogy. I understand where you are coming from, you don’t want freaked out, non-medical people dictating medicine. But, the other side of the coin is the medical establishment kind of governs themselves, and not always very well. Of course there is government oversight and rules, but there is problems there also.

I have a close friend who almost died from TSS from a contraceptive sponge that was approved by the FDA, and later pulled from the market. Rely tampons, same thing happened. I think it was Vioxx that had many problems with heart related stuff, not sure if it is still on the market. The stomach medicine Propulsid has been pulled, all having been approved. So that is why the one thing I am hesitant about is “new” anything. New vaccines, new medication, new stints, new name your thing. I would say most doctors believe things to be safe if it is in the market place, I am not that trusting. You know people get angry at Pharmaceutical companies for spending tons of money wooing doctors, maybe we should also be angry that doctors participate in these things, and also that they are allowed to own stock in pharmaceutical companies that have drugs within their specialty, which seems to be a conflict of interest. My mother and my father have each had situations where drugs were prescribed together, very commonly prescribed drugs, that are contraindicated. I doubt the doctors ever looked up the precautions on those drugs.

If the MMR was delayed 6 months and the onset of autism all of a sudden started being diagnosed 6 months later in children it would be significant. You are implying that we should not change the vaccination schedule because other problems start at the other age possibly, but the real controversy is autism. I think the MMR is give at 12 to 15 months, what is the big harm in moving it to 24 to 26 months?

Do you realize they give Hep B at birth? I don’t understand why. Most people probably don’t even realize their baby received a vaccination in the hospital. Hep B is only transferred by blood. Maybe they assume kids will bite each other? I need to ask someone, I never understood why that is given so early.

@JLeslie As usualy, some good points, but anecdotal evidence is very unreliable. For the medical profession, the best evidence is statistical. My “proof” of the child who had a serious reaction is not really relevant. What my child suffered doesn’t count? Sorry, but no, the thousand who were saved are the ones that count.

@YARNLADY Totally agree. My point is in early testing sometimes things don’t show up. Once it is out in the regular population you get better more valid statistics. But, my experience is once the government approves something, the FDA, doctors seem to accept it as safe, and many times think newer is better, and it is not always true. Newer and better applies more to meds than vaccines. Again, I would vaccinate my child, but I would space things out a little more, and possibly not give the MMR, I think you can give each separately, so I would do measles first, then later Mumps, then later Rubella if that option is available. I know rubella can be given alone, because they give it to adult women sometimes. Again, I do not believe in the mercury connection. But, I do believe there might be something? I am pro-vaccine when it comes down to it though. I think not vaccinating children against diseases like polio is an outrageous risk, unless there is a very very good specific reason not to vaccinate that falls within the guidelines of the vaccine.

@JLeslie YES Every parent needs to insist that their pediatrician evaluate their child as an individual, and not a statistic.

@JLeslie “But, the other side of the coin is the medical establishment kind of governs themselves, and not always very well.” I would disagree with this point.

First, the percentage of drugs/medical devices that are pulled after FDA approval is very small, there are thousands of drugs out there and maybe a few dozen have made headlines. Obviously an error rate of 0 would be preferable, and I certainly hope they’re working on improving their methods, but the reality is that not many slip through the cracks.

And of the ones that do, the “medical establishment” itself has been the one to self-police, recognize the problem, and have it pulled. These drugs are never pulled because some guy with a degree in performing arts says he thinks that their’s something wrong with ingredient x, which he’s incapable of pronouncing; they’re pulled because science is inherently self-correcting.

You don’t see MD’s prescribing stuff that they know is dangerous/ineffective because they own stock in the company, that’s just crazy. Infinitely more likely, a MD finds a drug that seems to work well for her patients and buys stock in it because she knows it’s a strong product and will likely do well.

I realize that Autism is the current controversy, but you have to understand that there have been other unsubstantiated controversies related to vaccines in the past. Vaccines are an inherently scary concept to someone who hasn’t really studied them (and immunology is a very complicated and difficult subject from what I understand). I would bet a lot of money that if the MMR was pushed back by 6 months there would be a totally new controversy that would kick up.

I’m not sure why they give certain vaccines when they do, but I have faith in the system, just like I have faith that my house won’t collapse (even though I’m not an architect) or that the bridge I drive across won’t collapse (even though I’m not a structural engineer), or that the roller coaster I ride on won’t kill me etc. We have to put our faith in the expertise of others, unless we want to live in tents and walk everywhere.

@gorillapaws I absolutely agree. GA. In fact i wouldn’t even call it faith. The results show, and that’s how we know the methods to be reliable.

The obvious answer would be for the FDA to do a whole lot more testing before agreeing to release most drugs. However, they, too, bow to pressure because they don’t want to be seen a holding up the next big cure with a bunch of bureaucratic red tape.

@gorillapaws I agree it is a very small percentage of drugs that make it trhough the system that have problems, but I still say if you have an old drug that is working, why try the new one? I also agree that doctor would never knowingly prescribe something that would cause harm.

But, they might go ahead and do a CAT scan even if it is unlikley to show something because you have good insurance and they are part owners of the imaging facility or have a CT scanner in their office. They may like the pharm rep from pfizer better than Merck, and choose to prescribe the Pfizer drug, that is practically what the whole pharm sales rep job is based on, rapport, and entertainment. Yes, they may actually have a drug with better results, that would be nice. But, as I said I have caught too doctors prescribing contraindicated medications, my dad’s was black box warning, same pharmaceutical company, same doctor, very commonly prescribed. I know that company does plenty of pharm rep visits, because my girlfriend worked for them, that is how I knew the drugs were life threatening together. So that means either the doctor never paid attention while the pharm rep was there presenting their drugs, or the pharm rep failed to discuss dangers realted to the drug. That is inexcusable in my book. I was allergic to synthroid, since the first pill I swallowed, and doctors would not change my med, they wanted to believe I was uncomfortable about the side effects of being on the medication. Why the fuck not just give me another medication?! Let me try it. Finally after months I really confronted a doctor, and pushed him, and he said as he gave me some samples of another drug, “you aren’t going to feel better right away, it takes weeks for your numbers to move.” Flippin’ within 72 hours I was better, the allergic systems were gone, even though I did still have some thryoid symptoms since I was still a little outside of normal. I suffered for nothing. Because that doctor didn’t believe I could be allergic to it. I think you are being naive. Patients need to beware a little. Not paranoid, but not completely trusting.

I think people are taking my cautious thoughts as anti-medicine, or anti-doctor, not at all. And, I appreciate that we use a scientific method for medical testing, I understand the difference between good research and antecdotal evidence.

@JLeslie and that’s why public health care is better ^^

@Thammuz If the federal government is regulating so well, FDA and all, then why are you worried about public health care from the perspective of medication and vaccination. Public health care is better in the sense that money is taken out of the equation for the doctors earnings, he does not earn more because he ordered the CT scan. There is problems with both systems no questions, and there are good and bad doctors in the public system like our military just like the private system. The best medical facilities in our country salary their doctors, Mayo, Johns Hopkins, and more. Yet I have medical freinds who say things like, “what is going to motivate me to be a better doctor if I can not do procedures that will make me more money.” My husband goes to work every day and works his ass off, just like most of America who works for a salary. I am all for good salaries, more money for people who are specialists, and top specialists in their field, but not for getting much more money depending on what part of medicine they are practicing during the day, surgery vs office appointments vs testing.

Too many people go into medicine because it is a profession that you can make a lot of money rather then a true interest in medicine and helping people. I think doctors should be well paid, the time and effort spent on education, internship, residency, it is not to be overlooked, and I respect greatly the intensity of the training, and the knowledge doctors have, but they are human and can make mistakes, we all can. My neighbor yesterday, she is a nurse at a hospital, was just telling me about two medication mistakes that happened in one day at her hospital. 10X dose on one drug, and an adult dose for a young child on another. The child is likely to die. If I was the parent, and was making a pain in the ass of myself to check all viles before put into my child nurses would probably get annoyed, but I might be saving their asses from getting sued. Maybe they should have a different attitude.

I am not going in with the thought that medical professionals are going to screw up, that it is a given. I am only saying that when the mistake happens it can be really bad, better to be cautious, as I said above. I found my military doctors to be much more patient and tolerant with people like me, who want things explained, want to double check.

@JLeslie Yet I have medical freinds who say things like, “what is going to motivate me to be a better doctor if I can not do procedures that will make me more money.” Nice, what else can i say? If they gave two shits about the oath they took they wouldn’t be thinking like that. To me, that alone should be grounds to be denied the possibility to practice.

I am all for good salaries, more money for people who are specialists, and top specialists in their field,
Who wouldn’t be?

but not for getting much more money depending on what part of medicine they are practicing during the day, surgery vs office appointments vs testing.
That depends, personally i think surgeons deserve a little more, their job is really stressful and hard, plus they’re likely to be unable to practice much sooner than other doctors, because surgery needs precision, which with aging goes the way of the dodo. But that’s beside the point.

I absolutely agree on the point that doctors should be much more careful, that’s precisely why i think a public health care system is better. People who get into the medical profession in your system weight the risk of a lawsuit against the huge potential profits of getting money from pharmaceutical companies, plus all the usual benefits and choose. Take out most of the benefits, give them a fixed and honest salary depending on their position in the hospital they work in, forbid them from taking money from pharmaceutical companies and you have a system where the “why should i try when i don’t earn anything more by not trying” douchebags have no incentive to apply. Ending with those who actually give two shits and are likely much more careful by nature.

Personally, the only bad experiences i had with italy’s health care system were when i had to have an ortopedical corset made for me, and the technician was a complete incompetent, who not only turned in a botched corset, but he also had his back covered by the doctor, because the douchebags were friends from college or some shit, and we ended up having to pay the second one (which in the end i didn’t use anyway) because our public health care covers only one of those particular things every 5 years or so. And When i broke my wrist falling down the stairs i would’ve had to wait 6 hours in line in the ER if it hadn’t been for my uncle who’s vice chief of surgery in the hospital where he works, and made me skip the line. Which, i guess, is karmic payback for that corset bit.

@Thammuz Then we are in big agreement here. About the surgeon, I think he should in most instances make more than a non-surgeon, but that his salary is higher, not paid $100 an hour for meeting with me and then $3,000 an hour for the surgical procedure itself.

Look, we have long waits here in America in our private system in many cities in ER’s and for office appointments, there are many things we can criticize in both systems. In my personal experience, some of the things that have happened to me or that are not covered by my private insurance would never happen in a socialized system. Right now I need to get a colonoscopy. My maternal grandfather had colon cancer, I had a polyp when I was 32, and should get a colonscopy every 5 years. My insurance will not cover it fully, because I am under 50 and so they classify it as diagnostic rather than routine. Even though, I am like the 50 year old because of my specific circumstance. I do not have specifically bad cancer systems, just a higher probabality than the average 42 year old of having precancerous polyps or indeed cancer God forbid. Really this is routine for me and people like me to get the procedure. The really disgusting part is if I was symptomatic and could be dying it isn’t covered, only if I appear healthy and am 50 or older is it fully covered. I find that a disgrace and not in line with the oath either. In socialized medicine I don’t believe this would ever happen. B the way under my insurance it is the same for mammograms, if you find a lump you are only partitially covered for the memmogram, if it is a yearly routine mammogram after a certain age, then it is covered 100%.

@JLeslie I certainly think it’s a good idea to be cautious about your health, and I would definitely encourage anyone to seek the second opinion of another doctor if they have any doubts at all. The trap many people fall into is that they seek the 2nd opinion from a non-doctor. If multiple MD’s think I should get vaccine x at a certain time, then I can feel pretty confident that it’s the best decision for my health (just like if multiple engineers confirm that the bridge is safe).

@JLeslie The way it works, here, is that if a doctor prescribes it, it’s covered as long as you do it in a public structure (more or less, it’s a bit more complicated, obviously, but the jist is this).

Another thing i find completely barbaric of insurance based health is the concept that a company will insure you only as long as you aren’t actually ill. It’s like Demon’s souls, where if you die, you lose half the health bar until you beat a boss monster, basically proving you don’t need the other half anyway.

Here, whatever you have, expecially if you have illnesses that need routine therapies or medication, the state at the very least pays part of it, if not all.

Then again that’s the difference between a state that serves the people and a state that serves the companies.

Read this

@jerv Wow, that is some article. How awful that family was harrased after their baby died. I kind of think both sides can be blind, and use scary stories to terrorize people. Look, your article speaks of that baby dying from pertussis, which is a horrible disease, especially in young children, I would vaccinate my child for it, but not everyone dies from it, it’s not small pox. (well, not everyone dies from small pox, but the rates are very high, something like 30 or 40% and even if you don’t die the disease process and problems afterwards are horrendous). But, pertussis is definitely up there with one of the really bad diseases for young children.

Look at the hysteria with swine flu last year, it was ridiculous. Better to be safe than sorry, but I am pretty sure it didn’t kill more people than a typical flu year, although it was hitting younger people worse than past flus.

But, to the articles point I think the anti-vaccine people are too hysterical sometimes, but when they are not being hysterical, just concerned, they are still ignored or belittled too often, and lumped in with the crazies. Let’s not forget Lymes disease was discovered because a bunch of moms got together and realized their children were all being diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis, and they refused to believe all of their children just happened to be getting the disease. Luckily, researchers took these mothers seriously and did investigate the cluster of illness.

This is interesting, read under Whole cell pertussis vaccine controversy on this wikipedia link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pertussis

!Anecdotal evidence warning!

I have a friend who has a disabled son. She told me about another family whose two children attend his school. One got MMR vaccine, took a bad reaction and was brain damaged. The family took the decision not to MMR the second child. The second child caught measles, took a bad reaction and got brain damaged. So this poor family have something in their genes that means that with measles, brain damage is likely and vaccination does not help them. But is this not a good example of why we need vaccination for that herd immunity? The MMR/autism scare meant that there wasn’t a herd immunity for measles in our community meaning that second child – who should have been able to not have the MMR and be safe from measles – was brain damaged.

I’m a guilty party in this – my nephew is autistic and I have not given my two kids MMR. Even though they are both over the age where autism would be evident and seem unaffected. I am now thinking that I will give them it but have yet to persuade my scientist husband. Emotions do get in the way of rational thinking.

@Stinley You can probably still get a measles only vaccine. I know you can get a German measles only vaccine, unless something has changed in recent years. Measles, unfortunately is very very contagious, so it sweeps through communities like wildfire. If your daughter, if you have a daughter ever needs fertility help later on, some doctors will want her to be tested for German measles immunity. There are much fewer adverse actions in children than in adult women who receive the vaccine. Not trying to convince you, I understand why you might feel reluctant. Just thinking you might feel better if you space out the vaccines. Even if your children wind up getting them a few months to a few years later over time. Did you give them all the other vaccines?

My sister gave her son MMR at 18 months but when it was time to get a booster at age 4 she didn’t give him it. This was because his autism was more apparent then. Although it was, with hindsight, apparent from birth. She’s a midwife so is used to dealing in evidence based practice and even said she didn’t think that MMR caused his autism but didn’t want to take the risk of making it worse.

I have looked in to the MMR thing and according to all the criteria that we use for all medicines the evidence is overwhelmingly that there is no link between MMR and autism. I have no idea if any of the other vaccines I gave to them have problems – never thought twice about it. They both just got the lot.

Actually it is the story of the family so badly affected by measles that will make me take them to get the jab. In essence i have let my actions put other children at risk for reasons that are not based on any evidence.

I will just give them MMR because to get separate vaccines I would have to go private but the MMR is free on NHS

@Stinley You are still talking MMR, I am suggesting give them the measles only vaccine. Later you can give the Rubella. I assume there is a mumps only not sure. I’ll look it up.

Are you in America?

I’m having trouble finding it right away, I’ll ask my mom where to look, she used to work in vaccinations at FDA. She never gets a flu sot if that makes you feel better, and she is the one who thinks too much risk with adults taking the rubella shot. She told me to skip it even if my immunity had been low when I was trying to have a baby.

I’m in UK. So free healthcare but you gets what you is given. That is MMR or nothing. I could pay for separate vaccine but there is no evidence that MMR causes any harm so my rational brain says no need to bother when it’s free. it’s my unrational brain that’s the problem – what if my child gets autism from MMR? I’m winning the fight with the unrational brain but just not quite there yet…

@Stinley Oh, UK might have different vaccines available. I would research if you think you might be more comfortable with the separate vaccines. Your doctor may or may not be aware it is available.

I understand your fear. You might also want to know that some vaccines have mercury some don’t. Personally, I am not convinced the mercury is the culprit if indeed the vaccines are causing problems, might be some other part of the vaccine?

Here is the thimerosal table for America. MMR no longer has any in our vaccine.

@Stinley @JLeslie Good way to find out whether these things are actual concerns or not: see if non english speaking europe knows anything about it. I only found out about this “controversy” well after i started reading sites full of consipracy nutters. I was vaccinated against pretty much anything you can get a vaccine for (Flu excluded because that’s just silly) and i’m perfectly fine.

Joking aside though, since the italian health system gives all vaccinations for free, it’s incredibly common for people to get all of them for their kids as soon as possible, and the MMR vaccine is even mandatory for every recruit in the italian army (which is pretty small, so you wouldn’t want to endanger the few fuckheads who actually want to be part of it).

Make of this data what you will.

@Thammuz Pretty much vaccinations are free in most of America also. It is typically covered by insurance and in many states even if the parents don’t have private insurance children are covered by the state, so they get their vaccination. In America there are about 30 now by the child is done, not sure about Italy.

I think @Stinley mentioned he knows it is not logical, even said it was anecdotal why he is afraid to vaccinate his children.

The majority of America is completely clueless about any concerns about vaccines. It is just select groups of people, and there are some loud voices out there. Most just do whatever their doctor tells them they are supposed to do.

@JLeslie most Americans are pretty clueless about how their GPS satelight system works, if the building they’re standing in is structurally sound, or if the flight path their pilot is following is correct. Vaccines work very well, are studied constantly by experts and people that are much more knowledgable than the critics. If more people listened to these fear-mongers we would be having even more outbreaks of whooping cough and other diseases that we’ve nearly eradicated.

@Stinley Your example is an excellent depiction of why herd immunity is the moral imperative of all healthy people.

@gorillapaws I agree.

@gorillapaws it’s “satellite” ;)

@Thammuz That’s one of those words I always fuck up when I’m not paying attention. Thanks for the correction (It’s a shame that Fluther won’t let me correct my typos).

@gorillapaws I just blame the auto-complete on my phones bruiser… browser :D

@gorillapaws Don’t worry, i just thought it was funny in the context of you pointing out that some people don’t know lots of stuff. Plus it kinda proved your point too.