8 days until our trip...and I think we have chicken pox

[BNM]

How about this??

http://vaers.hhs.gov/data/index- Here you go.

When reviewing data from VAERS, please keep in mind the following limitations:

VAERS is a passive reporting system, meaning that reports about adverse events are not automatically collected, but require a report to be filed to VAERS. VAERS reports can be submitted voluntarily by anyone, including healthcare providers, patients, or family members. Reports vary in quality and completeness. They often lack details and sometimes can have information that contains errors.

"Underreporting" is one of the main limitations of passive surveillance systems, including VAERS. The term, underreporting refers to the fact that VAERS receives reports for only a small fraction of actual adverse events. The degree of underreporting varies widely. As an example, a great many of the millions of vaccinations administered each year by injection cause soreness, but relatively few of these episodes lead to a VAERS report. Physicians and patients understand that minor side effects of vaccinations often include this kind of discomfort, as well as low fevers. On the other hand, more serious and unexpected medical events are probably more likely to be reported than minor ones, especially when they occur soon after vaccination, even if they may be coincidental and related to other causes.

What have we learned from this post?
1. Vaccine reactions may not be reported, especially if mild.
So what? Just because more people than I know about had sore arms, I'm not going to decline a vaccine.

2. Vaccine reactions may be reported, when in fact the vaccine had nothing to do with it.
Exactly.

3. Serious reactions are more likely to be reported.
Only makes sense.


Nothing in this post states that only 10% of vaccine reactions are reported. Or that 10% are UNreported, both of which have been claimed above, by the same person, with no evidence that even sort of supports that. Either one. Those two claims are very different, by the way. Clearly she heard 10% somewhere, and the details have been lost.

 

[MommyBell08]

What have we learned from this post?
1. Vaccine reactions may not be reported, especially if mild.
So what? Just because more people than I know about had sore arms, I'm not going to decline a vaccine.

2. Vaccine reactions may be reported, when in fact the vaccine had nothing to do with it.
Exactly.

3. Serious reactions are more likely to be reported.
Only makes sense.


Nothing in this post states that only 10% of vaccine reactions are reported. Or that 10% are UNreported, both of which have been claimed above, by the same person, with no evidence that even sort of supports that. Either one. Those two claims are very different, by the way. Clearly she heard 10% somewhere, and the details have been lost.

Really, wow. This information does not say 10 percent. Very true. I said I had read it was estimated. I did read that somewhere but said from the beginning it was not a fact I could prove. My point is she acted like I pulled the whole idea out of my bu**. Since I found this information in a place I know she trusts, I posted it.

We have learned that when we read the stats of your risk of a reaction, they are not accurate. The statistic is based only on what is reported. You can bet your pretty penny they are going to say the ones not reported are the minor ones.

And for the red part, I was calming that it is ESTIMATED that 10% of reactions are reported, leaving 90% not reported. I did not write the other post... it is taken directly form the government website. You are combining the ideas, and have no idea what your are talking about. Sorry.

The point is you can not get an accurate statistic on the reaction risk because a large majority of injury incidence are not reported.

PS.

The FDA estimates that only about 10% of adverse reactions are reported (Reported by KM Severyn, R.Ph.D. in the Dayton Daily News, May 28, 1993. Ohio Parents for Vaccine Safety, 251 Ridgeway Dr., Dayton, OH 45459), a figure supported by two NVIC investigations (NVIC, "Investigative Report on the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System"). In fact, the NVIC reported that in New York, only one out of about 40 doctor's offices(2.5%) confirmed that they did report a death or injury following vaccination.

Go ahead. Copy and paste this entire thing and put it in your google search. See how many websites come up, supporting this claim. I WAS NOT confused.

PSS.

"The Medicines Control Agency has contradicted itself on this issue, stating in correspondence on 21st August 1998 that many serious reactions do get reported, but also stating in Adverse Drug Reaction Information Service Guidance On Interpretation Of Yellow Card Data, Drug Analysis Prints, 1997 edition, that only 10-15% of even serious reactions are reported."

 

[princessmom29]

What have we learned from this post?
1. Vaccine reactions may not be reported, especially if mild.
So what? Just because more people than I know about had sore arms, I'm not going to decline a vaccine.

2. Vaccine reactions may be reported, when in fact the vaccine had nothing to do with it.
Exactly.

3. Serious reactions are more likely to be reported.
Only makes sense.


Nothing in this post states that only 10% of vaccine reactions are reported. Or that 10% are UNreported, both of which have been claimed above, by the same person, with no evidence that even sort of supports that. Either one. Those two claims are very different, by the way. Clearly she heard 10% somewhere, and the details have been lost.

Thanks for trying, but I am coming to realize that apparently some are more interesed in stubbornly clinging to thier beliefs than they are in facts and numbers. There is no reasoning with them becuase they don't choose to use reason to fom an opinion in the first place. Emotion rules, and there is no reasoning with that. I guess mabye I need to quit trying, andthe responses continue to make less and less sense.

 

[princessmom29]

We have learned that when we read the stats of your risk of a reaction, they are not accurate. The statistic is based only on what is reported. You can bet your pretty penny they are going to say the ones not reported are the minor ones.

And for the red part, I was calming that it is ESTIMATED that 10% of reactions are reported, leaving 90% not reported. I did not write the other post... it is taken directly form the government website. You are combining the ideas, and have no idea what your are talking about. Sorry.

The point is you can not get an accurate statistic on the reaction risk because a large majority of injury incidence are not reported.

PS.

The FDA estimates that only about 10% of adverse reactions are reported (Reported by KM Severyn, R.Ph.D. in the Dayton Daily News, May 28, 1993. Ohio Parents for Vaccine Safety, 251 Ridgeway Dr., Dayton, OH 45459), a figure supported by two NVIC investigations (NVIC, "Investigative Report on the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System"). In fact, the NVIC reported that in New York, only one out of about 40 doctor's offices(2.5%) confirmed that they did report a death or injury following vaccination.

Go ahead. Copy and paste this entire thing and put it in your google search. See how many websites come up, supporting this claim. I WAS NOT confused.

PSS.

"The Medicines Control Agency has contradicted itself on this issue, stating in correspondence on 21st August 1998 that many serious reactions do get reported, but also stating in Adverse Drug Reaction Information Service Guidance On Interpretation Of Yellow Card Data, Drug Analysis Prints, 1997 edition, that only 10-15% of even serious reactions are reported."

Do you HONESTLY think that scores of children are having reactiosd serious enough to be hospitalized or die, and NO ONE, thier parents, thier doctors, NO ONE is reporting it?

If you read the CDC/s statement IN FULL you find that the vast majority of those "unreported adverse reacations" incluse things like soreness at the injection site, mild fever, swelling, all of which are to be expected when you get a shot of any kind, not just a vaccination. They go on to say that life threatening reactions are almost always reported. What you have quoted is a third party anti-vax site that is slectively snipping the full statement to suit thier agenda. Just as you seem to be doing with facts shared here. There is really simply no reasoning with this type of emotional argument, not based on fact.

 

[Leajess99]

This is simply not a live and let live issue. One parent's actions directly effect the health and safety of other people's children.

Can you not give it a rest?? Seriously, it is getting old quite fast. Everyone has the right to make the decisions best for their family. Beating a deadhorse is just that. Let it go already.

 

[jodifla]

I just saw your post today and while I could not bear the ugly banter (whatever happened to live & let live?) to see if all of your kids came down with the chicken pox, I did see that your 6 YO did. I hope she is feeling better by now & your family is healthy and able to reschedule soon.

All of her children ended up getting chicken pox. It's an incredibly virulent disease.

 

[jodifla]

Thank you. I have alllll the CDC information already. I know how to find the website, its pretty simple.

1. No I wouldnt go to Africa where diseases are rampant with out vaccinating my kids. I wouldnt go to Africa with my kids at all. If I had to go, I would consider vaccines, they currently have real disease and risk, other than flu and chicken pox.

2. If everyone had the same living conditions as I do, and made healthy choices raising their kids, as far as nutrition and water, nursing, and supplements, I would be fine with them choosing not to vaccinate. Yes some people would still die of disease. Just like some kids that are vaccinated still die. Its life. We are not indestructible. I realise not everyone has this option, in this case vaccines may be the best option.

3. No I dont not think ALL vaccines should be pulled. I do think some should.

4. I do not send my kids to daycare. We choose to live a moderate lifestyle on one income so that I can stay home. This has also been another factor that has contributed in my decision. I realize not everyone has this option, so they will have to make their own decision. I realise this does not remove the risk but does lower it. See answer #2.

I am not sure what conclusion my answers bring you to. If it is that I rely on herd immunity, then that is your conclusion. I can respect you have your own opinion of me and my choices and I have my opinion of you and yours. Vaccines are out of control in the US. Like I said before, I dont think Vaccines are bad or unnecessary all the time. I do believe they CAN be a tool to keep our children healthy, but not a tool without real risks, that are often swept under the rug. They are abused and overused, and its clear to some ppl, when they consider the death rates of children in the US compared to other countries, and the rising number of vaccines we approve, and recommend for our children. No, you will not find this information on the CDC website, or any other site or place you will approve of so dont bother asking me to show you.

In conclusion, I believe the US has a ONE SIZE FITS ALL vaccine schedual, and it should be reassessed for each child as an individual with individual needs for the best health we can possibly have within our control. The rest is up to the man upstairs vaxed or not.

The anti-vacc crowd likes this as a talking point. But I bet OP has a clean house with lots of good nutrition and the like. Didn't stop her kids from getting chicken pox.

Lots of those kids dying of childhood diseases died in the 1920s on, and they had plenty of clean water, good food, sanitation and the like. What they didn't have was vaccines.

 

[Leajess99]

The anti-vacc crowd likes this as a talking point. But I bet OP has a clean house with lots of good nutrition and the like. Didn't stop her kids from getting chicken pox.

Lots of those kids dying of childhood diseases died in the 1920s on, and they had plenty of clean water, good food, sanitation and the like. What they didn't have was vaccines.

They also didn't have the medicines or the technology we had. The life expectancy was a lot less as well.

 

[MommyBell08]

The anti-vacc crowd likes this as a talking point. But I bet OP has a clean house with lots of good nutrition and the like. Didn't stop her kids from getting chicken pox.

Lots of those kids dying of childhood diseases died in the 1920s on, and they had plenty of clean water, good food, sanitation and the like. What they didn't have was vaccines.

Chicken Pox do not scare me. That is why I dont vaccinate my kids for it. The most common side effects to the vaccine are fever and rash. Really? Having the things I mentioned DO help for a speedy recovery. If my children had a compromised immune system, I may reconsider.

 

[princessmom29]

They also didn't have the medicines or the technology we had. The life expectancy was a lot less as well.

And we still have little to no "medicine and technology" that effectively targets the viruses these vaccines are intended to prevent. There is very little that can be done to actually inhibit the progression of most viral illnesses. All we can do is treat the symptoms. Viruses are unique in the world of biochemistry. They cling to the fringe of the living thing vs. non- living debate an VERY hard to pin down adn treat. Thier DNA is simple and changes quickly. They are hard to pin donw, and once you do, what you thought you knew is no longer true.

The two primaray causes for the increase in life expectancy over the last century have been antibiotics and vaccines. Antibiotics treat bacterial diseases and vaccines prevent viral ones. We have yet to find an effective treatment for viral disease.

 

[North of Mouse]

MommyBell08, if they don't scare you, they should. My 3 children had it terrible with breakouts all over, couldn't eat, sleep, just cry and itch like crazy, even though the Dr. had me give them soda baths, meds, etc. I felt so helpless with their misery, I held them and cried with them (no vaccines then). If you truly love your children you will not want to see them in that condition when it can be prevented. The Dr. told me then (as still the case) that there was not much to do but treat the symptoms, and that they could become very serious. You never know which child will have a "mild" case, and which ones will have it very bad (mine did). AND, I was a SAHM and my children were healthy - scary to think now if I we had had sickly ones.

 

[princessmom29]

MommyBell08, if they don't scare you, they should. My 3 children had it terrible with breakouts all over, couldn't eat, sleep, just cry and itch like crazy, even though the Dr. had me give them soda baths, meds, etc. I felt so helpless with their misery, I held them and cried with them (no vaccines then). If you truly love your children you will not want to see them in that condition when it can be prevented. The Dr. told me then (as still the case) that there was not much to do but treat the symptoms, and that they could become very serious. You never know which child will have a "mild" case, and which ones will have it very bad (mine did). AND, I was a SAHM and my children were healthy - scary to think now if I we had had sickly ones.

ITA, chicken ox can be horrible, and no amount of "good nutrition" or "supplements" can stop that. It can also be fatal or leave a child permanently disabled. I cannot imagine not protecting my kids from something like that just to prove a point. It just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[BNM]

We vaccinate every child without there being a serious risk factor, putting babies at risk for reaction before we know how effective there immune system is.

Also I said that it is estimated that %10 of adverse vaccine reactions go undocumented. I'm not sure how there would be a study to prove this estimation, so you can disregard my statement if you choose to. (I know you do) Hopefully it sparks a thought in someone to read as much as they can before they blindly make the choice to put there child into a "one size fits all" vaccine schedule, just because the CDC recommend it. They have been wrong in the past, have they not?

I am not saying vaccines are bad, I just believe that the schedule in the US has gotten out of control and children are put at risk for life changing vaccine injuries, that could have been avoided.

And from post #248:
Its because the vax schedule is covering all the bases with the ppl as a whole in mind. Not my child, or yours. (general yours) The government pays millions out to people effected by vaccines, and it is estimated only 10% of vaccine related incidents are reported.
__________________

This is what I'm referring to above.

But honestly, the fact that there are unreported vaccine reactions doesn't change the conclusion I draw. The risk associated with the vaccine is much less than the risk associated with the disease itself. (we are still talking about chicken pox vaccine, right?) I think it's good that parents investigate what's given to their children. All vaccines are NOT the same, I think we can agree on that. The diseases they prevent, their efficacy, and the risks vary. I have friends who have declined the CP vaccine. I don't agree with that decision, and it would be utterly wrong for my family. I couldn't live with myself, watching my child suffer with a disease that I could have prevented. There's also the fact that I don't have the ability to stay home with sick kids for weeks without losing significant income, or my job.

I have declined vaccines in the past as well, notably HepB: I am vaccinated myself, so I elected not to give my newborns the first in the series. They did receive the 2nd dose.

Discuss it with your doctor. That's all I'm saying. He or she will know what the risks and benefits of that vaccine are, for your specific case. If she recommends the vaccine, or it's required for school, there's a good reason for that! But there are vaccines that are given to high risk people, and that's where the research comes in. Rotavirus for infants comes to mind. One of my kids was vaccinated, one wasn't, because their risk factors were different. If your kids are immunosuppressed, that will change the recommendations.

If you go into your doctor's office, guns blazing, intent on proving your point that vaccines are evil, I think very few doctors are going to have the time or inclination to bother going over things with you. But if you ask about the risks of being hospitalized due to a disease, vs the risk of being hospitalized due to side effects of the vaccine, those are numbers they should be able to give you. Your doctor will know those risk factors, as that is what determines whether she recommends a vaccine or not. It's true that if you have a doctor who recommends every vaccine, and takes a one-size-fits-all approach to your child, you should look for another doctor.

Before I started looking into some of this, it never occurred to me that regular people, whose kids are out there bumping elbows with my kids, would decline what I consider to be core vaccines. Tetanus. MMR. To me, if there is only one case of tetanus in an unvaccinated child, that is a terrible tragedy and an unforgivable oversight on the part of the parent.

 

[BNM]

ITA, chicken ox can be horrible, and no amount of "good nutrition" or "supplements" can stop that. It can also be fatal or leave a child permanently disabled. I cannot imagine not protecting my kids from something like that just to prove a point. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Or it could leave your child permanently scarred. I'm sure any teenager isn't going to thank you when they have facial scars, especially when none of their friends do. In people my age, it's extremely common to have chicken pox scars. For my kids, not so much. And every time you look at your child you get to be reminded that the scars are your fault. No thanks.

 

[Bonnie151]

Chicken Pox do not scare me. That is why I dont vaccinate my kids for it. The most common side effects to the vaccine are fever and rash. Really? Having the things I mentioned DO help for a speedy recovery. If my children had a compromised immune system, I may reconsider.

It may not scare you while they are children but if they *don't* catch it when they are young you really really ought to strongly consider getting them vaccinated when they are a bit older. The older you get, the greater the risk of a bad case.

 

[jodifla]

Or it could leave your child permanently scarred. I'm sure any teenager isn't going to thank you when they have facial scars, especially when none of their friends do. In people my age, it's extremely common to have chicken pox scars. For my kids, not so much. And every time you look at your child you get to be reminded that the scars are your fault. No thanks.

I have to see mine everyday! If my mother had withheld the chickenpox vaccine from me, and let me suffer and have the scarring, I'm not sure I would have still been speaking to her once I found it it was HER CHOICE to let me be sick.

 

[Jey12]

They also didn't have the medicines or the technology we had.

Medicine + Technology = Vaccines

Just sayin....

 

[MommyBell08]

Let me just say this. My children are my everything. I strongly consider everything I do that effects them in any way. My decision to not vaccinate for chicken pox is not because I want to prove anything to anyone. I have read books, articles, and data on the issues since my before my first DS was conceived. Hours and Hours, days and days of research. (side note I do also read on the internet, as log as you are considering your source, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that) This decision did not come lightly. I am well aware of what chicken pox is, and can do. I am not trying to sound better than anyone, but I can safely say I have probably read more on this topic than most parents. I am terrified of my children having a LIFE LONG complication, or worse dying form a vaccination, that was not absolutly necessary for there lives to be saved. I worry more about there precious lives then a scar, but HATE to ever see them in any kind of pain, or discomfort. My kids are my world. End of story. I honestly try hard to make the best possible decisions I can for them, and always will.

 

[princessmom29]

I am terrified of my children having a LIFE LONG complication, or worse dying form a vaccination, that was not absolutly necessary for there lives to be saved. .

This is what I just don't get though. The chance of life long complication or death is exponentially geater from having Chicken Pox than it is from having the vaccine. If that is waht you are frgihtened of, you are taknig a far greater risk of it happening by allowing the child to contract the disease than by giving them the vaccine. They are much more likely to die or be permamaently damaged by contracting chicken pox than they are by having the chicken pox vaccine. The data has been collected and analyzed year after year and this is the continuous finding.

 

[Moira222]

All of her children ended up getting chicken pox. It's an incredibly virulent disease.

Thanks for telling me - I checked in to see. how sad.