Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
permaculture forums growies critters building homesteading energy monies kitchen purity ungarbage community wilderness fiber arts art permaculture artisans regional education experiences global resources the cider press projects digital market permies.com private forums all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
master stewards:
  • Nicole Alderman
  • r ranson
  • Anne Miller
  • paul wheaton
stewards:
  • Jocelyn Campbell
  • Mike Jay Haasl
  • Burra Maluca
garden masters:
  • James Freyr
  • Joylynn Hardesty
  • Steve Thorn
  • Greg Martin
gardeners:
  • Carla Burke
  • Dave Burton
  • Pearl Sutton

A Conversation About Vaccination

 
pollinator
Posts: 702
Location: Southern Oregon
120
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
My understanding is that vaccination requirements are for attending public school in the US. One does not have to attend public school, that is a choice. Many attend private schools or homeschool.
 
master steward & author
Posts: 16281
Location: Left Coast Canada
3833
books chicken cooking fiber arts sheep writing
  • Likes 6
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator

paul wheaton wrote:Just a heads up ...     the staff are watching this thread carefully.   If any of 40 different (untrained volunteer) staff find any post on here violates our publishing standards (by the iterpretation of even one staff member), the post will be removed.   And it is possible that apple cores will be doled out for good or errant (depending on your views) reasons.  

I think this is a good time to remind people to state your position and not "the truth."

We have staff on both sides of the fence on this issue - and most of the staff are choosing to not post here because they have been down the road of controversy in the cider press before.



In addition: Please remember that we have readers from all walks of life.  Insulting a demographic or making blanket stereotype comments are very easy ways to lose apples.

It is called the cider press because making cider chews up a lot of apples.  
 
Posts: 57
Location: Portugal
20
transportation gear earthworks solar rocket stoves
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator

Tyler Ludens wrote:Disclosure:  I have superstitious fear of the Flu Vaccine, so I have avoided getting it for years.  Because I used to rarely go around other people, I thought I could get away with it.  Now I am beginning to believe I should get the Flu Vaccine to do my part for herd immunity since I spend each weekend in the city.



The flu vaccine is a little different because flu is different.  Flu is probably the single biggest challenge to vaccine creators because it constantly changes and evolves and you can have a vaccine that deals with 6 common flu strains yet a 7th comes along and infects everyone.  One thing I do know is that you can't get flu from the vaccine, which is something people often believe.  In fact, they probably had the vaccine and shortly after were exposed to a strain that the vaccine didn't cover, maybe even at the doctor's surgery while getting vaccinated...
 
master steward
Posts: 10065
Location: Pacific Northwest
3958
hugelkultur kids cat duck forest garden foraging fiber arts sheep wood heat homestead
  • Likes 14
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
I'm going to quote myself from this thread (https://permies.com/t/111237):

My husband has Crohn's, and has had flare-ups from vaccinations. There's data  showing that autoimmune diseases can be set off by a multitude of things, from antibiotics to poor food choices, to extreme stress and even vaccines (study on auto immune diseases and vaccines "Although the vaccines are generally safe, with a low incidence of serious systemic adverse events, numerous reports highlighted the occurrence of neurological (Guillain Barre syndrome, multiple sclerosis, autism), articular (arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis), and autoimmune untoward effects (systemic lupus erythematosus, diabetes mellitus) after single or combined multivaccine procedures")

My children both show signs of IBS, with loose stools, undigested food, gut pain when they eat the wrong food, horribly stinky farts...pretty much everything that my husband had before he developed Crohn's. I think we can all agree that Crohn's is horrible stuff. People lose large sections of their digestive systems, are malnourished, in extreme pain, and some even die. Is it worse that chicken pox or mumps? Probably. Is it worse than polio or small pox or tetanus? Probably not. But, my children do not have Crohn's yet, and so do not qualify for a medical exemption, so I have to weigh the risks and benefits  and figure out how to keep my kids at the lowest risk of developing debilitating/life-threatening diseases like Crohn's, polio, tetanus, etc. Is the risk of my kids getting Hepatitis B fresh out of the womb higher or lower than them developing complications from that vaccine?



It's very difficult. I've had people tell me that my children and husband are the kind of people that mandatory vaccines are meant to protect via herd  immunity. But, honestly, I have a hard time saying to someone else "You must get this vaccine and risk the consequences to save my child."

I think that the amount of toxins in vaccines are usually able to be dealt with by the body of a healthy person. But, many of us--and our children--are already overwhelmed with toxins in the air, microplastics in our salt and water and food, hormones and medications in city water, etc. I see so many people developing "rare" conditions and cancers these days.

When discussing vaccine schedules with my children's doctor, she mentioned how many people would complain about the toxins in vaccines, while giving their children McDonald's for dinner. She said something along the lines of "There's more toxins in those burgers than in one little shot." There might be a bit of exaggeration in that, but I think it holds a lot of truth.

The person who started this thread, asked nicely for research. I understand very much that desire. When looking at vaccines and their safety, I was saddened to see there was little middle ground. It was either ALL the vaccines or NONE of the vaccines. There was a lot of people pontificating, but little actual studies--just rumors of studies.

-----------------------------

I thought I would talk a bit about the HPV vaccine. I've heard things about it not preventing all forms of cervical cancer. I never did actually find studies for that. But, I can give my own experiences with the vaccine, as a rather unknowing guinea pig.

I got married in 2007. The year before (2006), I went to my doctor to get a physical. My doctor highly suggested that I get the HPV vaccine, in case my future husband carried it, as they can't test for HPV. I took home the medical pamphlet and it said the only side effects were arm soreness or headache. I searched online, and found no negative side effects. So I got the three course set of HPV shots, and developed inverse psoriasis. For years I wondered WHY I developed it then, as nothing in my life had changed...other than that vaccine. Psoriasis is an autoimmune condition, and those can be triggered by vaccines.

Fast forward a few years, and everyone is reporting all these horrible side effects from that vaccine. And I go and look, and the vaccine had been released in 2006, and had only been studied for 4 years. FOUR YEARS. (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa020586 --finding that four years number is now hard. It used to be easy to find out how long the vaccine was in development. That info used to be on the gardracil site, as well as wikipedia. It isn't any more.) The women were injected "between October 1998 and November 1999"

At enrollment, the women underwent a gynecologic examination that included the collection of cervical samples for thin-layer Papanicolaou testing (ThinPrep, Cytyc) and cervical swabs, external genital swabs, and cervicovaginal-lavage specimens for HPV-16 DNA testing. Serum was obtained for the measurement of HPV-16 antibody. Follow-up visits were scheduled one month after the third vaccination (month 7), six months after the third vaccination (month 12), and every six months thereafter until month 48. During these visits, specimens were collected for Papanicolaou tests, HPV-16 DNA testing, and measurement of HPV-16 antibodies. The results of HPV-16 tests were not used for clinical care.



After only four years of testing, they did another small study, and then put the vaccine on the market in 2006. The vaccine clinical studies didn't test or screen for side effects other than acute ones that women reported. I got the shot the year after it was released. There were no long term studies done. Those of us that got it, are the long term studies, and there's no control factor. I miscarried my first child and found out I have PCOS--did the HPV vaccine cause that? Who knows, because there's no ultrasounds of women who got the vaccine before they got it and after, vs women who didn't get the vaccine. There's no control studies. The only side effects they look for are acute ones, not the potential long term effects.

I am still very sad that I got that vaccine. The chanced of me getting HPV from my husband were very slim.

------------------------------------------------

Personally, I think there's a big difference between vaccines for things like polio and tetanus and whooping cough, and Hep-B. Hep-B is a blood born pathogen. You get it from sharing blood or having sex. Why does a newborn baby need that unless their mother has Hep-B. Why is it required--to the exact same degree as polio and measles--for kids to attend school?

Chicken pox vaccine is also required here in the US, to the same degree as polio, measles, whooping cough, etc. It is not recommened in England because (https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/childrens-health/why-are-children-in-the-uk-not-vaccinated-against-chickenpox/):

The chickenpox vaccine is not part of the routine UK childhood vaccination programme because chickenpox is usually a mild illness in children.

There's also a worry that introducing chickenpox vaccination for all children could increase the risk of chickenpox and shingles in adults.



I think there could be a lot of room for middle ground on vaccines, and I am sad that I don't see it often.
 
Posts: 83
Location: British Columbia
62
chicken homestead ungarbage
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
Here are some of the thoughts bouncing around in my brain. I'd love some feedback on them:

1) Measles

I'd like to share some information I've passed by:

Cases of measles outbreaks in 100% vaccinated populations: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00000359.htm

I think this goes back to the heard immunity question. My understanding is vaccines are not effective for all persons. For whatever reason some people do not develop an immune response and therefore don't gain immunity.
So what I'm trying to wrap my head around is what the statistical analysis that is use to determine what percentage of the population requires immunization to acquire herd immunity. It seems that even with 100% vaccination rates this can still break down as there will be individuals that still act as a point of mutation.

... but does herd immunization reduce the chances of epidemics? I'm guessing it depends of the virulency of the strain and the overall socio-economic state of the population.

2) The WHO document : https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/detection/immunization_misconceptions/en/index4.html

Cool. I like this. I would like it a lot more if it cited the articles used to draw these conclusions.

I guess this is something I struggle with. Often, large organization put out informational material for the general population (Great!). I'm guessing, on average, that most people don't have the education in advanced statistics, quantitative research, and scientific method to even want to read the scientific literature... or have the time! I know exactly how long it takes to produce a literature review...  but then how do you fact check them?

Turns out I actually do have an issue with the document from WHO:

This logic is faulty however; you might as well say that eating bread causes car crashes, since most drivers who crash their cars could probably be shown to have eaten bread within the past 24 hours.



Statements like this make me feel uncomfortable. I understand that they are trying to articulate a point to a large population but I think they are throwing out the baby with the bath water. I've read scientific literature exploring the subject of inflammation and vaccination and their recommendations usually state "requires more research".

Here is how my brain is working right now:

Vaccines are designed to create an immune response --> immune responses often involve inflammation -- >there are documented cases of people dying from an immune response to vaccines --> is it really illogical to think that an immune response to a vaccine could not cause inflammation in the brain when there are compounds in vaccines that interact with the blood brain barrier?

I think it is a possibility. I'd really love some 3rd party research into this concept.

Okay so from other posts

3) Isolating non-vaccinated portions of the population

.... ouchie ouchie ouchie

I have a serious issue with isolating any population. I'm not fond of the justification of "it's their choice".

It goes back to the whole herd immunity and virus vectors. Are you isolating children because they are immune suppressed? I hope not! Are you testing everyone to see if they successfully developed resistance? What if you developed resistance but you're still a carrier?

That and it's not much of a choice; isolating yourself from society seems practically impossible these days. Are you not allowed in grocery stores? Hospitals? You have to find, build, and maintain you own little colony because you have questions about the safety of your child? I guess that is a choice ... but if that was my options I would vaccinate for sure because it seems like it's more of a choice between vaccination and death (physical or social). But I guess that's how the other side of the argument looks at it too: if you don't have herd immunity you don't have protection therefore you put everyone at risk.

I'm struggling to create an informed opinion and I have the time, resources, and education. How is the "average" person, on either side or the argument, expected to be an expert in the area or at least informed enough to be confident in their decisions based on sound reasoning. I think it boils down to research and education. I feel like the general population has lost trust in the medical organizations, regulating government bodies, and educational institutions.

Another note on Amy's comment:

The Wakefield study is an early report; yes, the sample size is small; therefore, I don't believe the information was intended to be applied on a population level. It specifically states " We did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described."  Again, it is my understanding from my reading, that they primarily set out to show evidence for gastrointestinal disorders being associated with neurological dysfunction.

 
master pollinator
Posts: 4004
916
transportation cat duck trees rabbit books chicken woodworking
  • Likes 10
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
I understand both sides. I have distrust of the medical profession because they have been unable to help me in the three years I have been sick, and on one surgery, the Doctor nicked some cords in my throat, and I will forever have to be on medications to fix his slip of the scalpel.

But despite some distrust, I can still do math.

2018: There is 300,000,000 people in this country, and 22 cases of polio.

1949: There is 149,000,000 people in this country, and 42,179 cases of polio

What I love about math is, it is what it is, and people can draw their own conclusions from it.


polio.gif
[Thumbnail for polio.gif]
 
Stacy Witscher
pollinator
Posts: 702
Location: Southern Oregon
120
  • Likes 2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
I totally agree that not all vaccines are equally important. I don't think the chicken pox vaccine is particularly helpful. Shingles is much worse than chicken pox.

Immune comprised people often have to self-isolate to keep themselves healthy. My son couldn't go to school for a couple of years because they were so many sick people there, and the school wouldn't work with us, so we homeschooled him for a while.

I don't know what it's like in states other than California, but they wanted your kid in school everyday regardless of if they were sick, which is very much part of the problem.
 
Posts: 51
18
  • Likes 3
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
I am neither pro or con vaccination. If you look at the number of vaccinations that were given to a child under 6 years old in 1950 vs. 2013, there has been a 414% increase. Back in 1950, a child would receive 7 vaccines by the age of 6. In 2013, it was 36, including pre-natal and vaccines given at birth, when the child's immune system is not fully developed. I don't think we know all the ways that could go wrong in the long run.

I know people that have suffered from polio and it's horrible. Vaccinations for the really nasty, life threatening, or life changing bugs makes sense to me. And unless they've changed the formula, these vaccines have a track record of safety that can be studied. I think that new vaccines should be studied very carefully and for a long period of time before going public.

So I'm against over-vaccination or ill-timed vaccination or rushing to vaccinate without thorough testing for safety. Those details are important with something as complex as the immune system.
 
pollinator
Posts: 1086
Location: Victoria BC
127
  • Likes 5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator

Mart Hale wrote:What I don't like about the vaccine issue is that there are no debates.....


I would love to see both sides of the issue in public debate on TV.      


The line was crossed for me when they removed the exemption for taking vaccines in NY, and now being pushed in CA.


I believe people should have the right to choose the medical care they are given them, when you take that right away you are no longer function as a care giver but as  their God, you take this vaccine regardless of what you believe, and regardless of your research.


Just like I can choose strawberries or choose apples, I should have the right to choose what medical care I get,  I do not trust government to make that choice for me.


The problems I see with vaccines as they sit.


1)   You cannot sue the vaccine manufactures for damage the vaccines cause.     Instead it goes to a special court and our tax dollars pay for the damages.     How is this justice???

2)   The vaccines today are not tested before they are deployed we are the test subjects.

3)    Injecting me with mercury and baby / animal body parts does not set right with me.

4)    Those who ask questions are vilified for asking questions.        

5)     The CDC   has hidden reports from the public.        This does not bode well for my trust of them.






Other folks likely have better thoughts on the missing parts.

1) This seems fairly logical from my perspective. The government(presumably the US gov in your case?) has chosen to back vaccination. By the numbers, according to both studies and results, it would appear to benefit the populace as a whole.

As any initiative this broad is likely to have some degree of downside for some, they have further chosen this method of compensation. This protects the companies making vaccines, which the government is clearly considering a desirable outcome. And, 'the taxpayer' *is* pretty much the populace as a whole. Given that they are benefiting, it seems reasonable that they paying to help those who were harmed as a byproduct.

Kind of like compensating those people whose land is expropriated to create a hydroelectric generation reservoir. The benefit sure isn't likely to outweigh the downside for them..


2) I think I am underinformed on the nuances of this one. Pass.


3) I too, and likely most people who are fond of critical thought, could write a really long list of things about our current society that don't sit right with me.

Some of those things, as unpleasant as one may find them, are the best currently available option. In these cases, hopefully matters will improve with time.

In this specific example, matters *have* improved immensely with time, going by life expectancy.


4) There is an industry/lobby built around fearmongering on this issue. It feeds on panic, hysteria, and misinformation.

It is absolutely possible to have legitimate questions, concerns, and fears about vaccines. Unfortunately, seeking answers often leads into a distorted echo chamber. There are people who are not operating in good faith.

Attacks against those genuinely seeking factual discussion, seem to me a backlash against this phenomena.

This is very unfortunate for a variety of reasons, as a civil, fact-based discussion might help identify problems and improvements. Genuine concerns and problems can be camoflauged by the white noise.

But, the issue is so charged, that even here we struggle to be polite and rational while discussing it! At the core, it is about not just individual rights vs herd safety, it has two viewpoints where each can see the other side as willfully endangering the lives of children. Yikes.


I have no doubt that there have been failures, mistakes, and probably some garden variety corruption on the other side of the line, but feel strongly that these are problems to be dealt with in pretty much all human endeavors, rather than proof that the whole vaccine system should be discarded.

5) Citation would help here. I can certainly understand mistrust of gov. bodies. It seems like there is incompetence, corruption, baffling ignorance, and immense inefficiency at every turn.

Pushing for better is important.

But, I cannot see fully privatizing improving matters. This is one of the very few things that seems to me best done by a central gov., broad consistency being so key..
 
pollinator
Posts: 363
63
food preservation cooking homestead
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator

Stacy Witscher wrote:My understanding is that vaccination requirements are for attending public school in the US. One does not have to attend public school, that is a choice. Many attend private schools or homeschool.




In NY they have expanded this to include public places.    


https://myfox8.com/2019/03/27/new-york-county-bans-unvaccinated-kids-from-public-places-declares-state-of-emergency/

So  at least in NY they are removing the option to be in public unless you take the vaccine.
 
pollinator
Posts: 1331
Location: RRV of da Nort
160
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator

Mart Hale wrote:

So  at least in NY they are removing the option to be in public unless you take the vaccine.



Mart, out of curiosity, how are they policing, or planning to police, this?  And I'm kinda vague on what constitutes 'public' place in this regard.  Thanks!
 
Dillon Nichols
pollinator
Posts: 1086
Location: Victoria BC
127
  • Likes 2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator

Mart Hale wrote:

Stacy Witscher wrote:My understanding is that vaccination requirements are for attending public school in the US. One does not have to attend public school, that is a choice. Many attend private schools or homeschool.




In NY they have expanded this to include public places.    


https://myfox8.com/2019/03/27/new-york-county-bans-unvaccinated-kids-from-public-places-declares-state-of-emergency/

So  at least in NY they are removing the option to be in public unless you take the vaccine.



For full context, per the link:
This ban applied to people under 18, in public spaces, in one specific county in New York, lacking one specific(triple target; measles/mumps/rubella) vaccine, in response to a measles outbreak.

It was to expire in 30 days, unless lifted sooner.

To me, given the context is a outbreak, this seems damned inconvenient, but manageable, if one believes the vaccine to be a grave risk..


BUT, if you are against it, you will be pleased to read that a judge stayed it within a few days, feeling a 7-month outbreak of ~200 cases was not a sufficient crisis to warrant the action.


This article discusses the stay on the ban, and what options the authorities do have. Mostly these are bans on public spaces and fines to enforce this, applicable to those who are infected/infectious.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/health/during-measles-outbreaks-fines-and-public-bans-are-legal-but-there-are-limits

It also discusses new york city trying a mandatory vaccination declaration for an area. It mentions a fine for non-compliance, but also talks about 'case by case', and 'legal counsel', which kind of smells like 'we're not quite sure what will happen if anyone is really strongly resistant to this officially non-optional thing...'

A later second declaration of emergency in late april did not attempt to reinstate the publi spaces ban. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/measles-outbreak-2nd-state-of-emergency-rockland-county-new-york-today-2019-04-25/



I think that striving for full context is a really important part of a fraught discussion like this. Deliberately causing something to appear more drastic than it is, often achieved by leaving out key details, is a powerful tool used by manipulators of all stripes. It is also something that seems to happen quite automatically when people are caught up in fear; the scariest, most extreme words have the longest legs, and travel farther than the surrounding context.


Since we don't have anyone like that here, it would seem to behoove us to work hard at avoiding having these sorts of effects by accident!
 
pollinator
Posts: 415
77
  • Likes 5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator


the most interesting thing about the graph to me is that you have a 90+% drop in polio deaths BEFORE the vaccine. So why is it that the vaccine is credited with erradicating the disease? What factors contributed to the precipitous decline in the danger from the disease prior to the vaccine and shouldn't we be looking at for a holistic solution rather than a chemical silver bullet?
 
Posts: 525
Location: Australia, New South Wales. Köppen: Cfa (Humid Subtropical), USDA: 10/11
143
transportation hugelkultur cat forest garden fish trees urban chicken cooking woodworking homestead
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator

Nicole Alderman wrote:I thought I would talk a bit about the HPV vaccine. I've heard things about it not preventing all forms of cervical cancer. I never did actually find studies for that.



Sorry to hear about your bad experiences.

Here are two links that may assist:

1. Current study findings
2. Factcheck of the site

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjg5ab_tInlAhXUZCsKHQPWDiwQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmediabiasfactcheck.com%2Fsciencealert%2F&psig=AOvVaw2zbBUIt_BEm0bbYpk4DRVJ&ust=1570512467736630


https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=0ahUKEwiWqYKOq4nlAhWXX30KHbr-CJIQzPwBCAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sciencealert.com%2Fbogus-paper-claims-the-hpv-vaccine-causes-fertility-problems&psig=AOvVaw3qu1eehCRdksKO6mFIk_hJ&ust=1570509814378184
 
F Agricola
Posts: 525
Location: Australia, New South Wales. Köppen: Cfa (Humid Subtropical), USDA: 10/11
143
transportation hugelkultur cat forest garden fish trees urban chicken cooking woodworking homestead
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator

stephen lowe wrote:

the most interesting thing about the graph to me is that you have a 90+% drop in polio deaths BEFORE the vaccine. So why is it that the vaccine is credited with erradicating the disease? What factors contributed to the precipitous decline in the danger from the disease prior to the vaccine and shouldn't we be looking at for a holistic solution rather than a chemical silver bullet?



Suggest you read the history of serum development, trials, errors, uptake, etc:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio_vaccine
 
pollinator
Posts: 1562
Location: Big Island, Hawaii (2300' elevation, 60" avg. annual rainfall, temp range 55-80 degrees F)
531
forest garden rabbit tiny house books solar woodworking
  • Likes 6
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
Stephan Lowe asked why the drop in polio before the vaccine. I don't know what the official reason is, but I was a kid back then and know that my life was restricted until the vaccine came about. Because of the big outbreak in the early 50s, kids in my neighborhood were no longer being sent to summer camps. No longer were permitted to swim at the neighborhood swimming hole. We were strongly reined in when it came to our summertime activities. Parents feared their children getting polio. So they stopped letting their kids do things that might lead to them getting exposed. We didn't complain in our family because we saw our aunt wearing bulky metal braces in order to walk. She was permanently disabled due to polio. So we feared having to grow up wearing braces ourselves.

When the vaccines became available, my mother made sure that we got them. As kids we rejoiced. It meant that we could go to summer camp, Girl Scout and Boy Scout camp, and swim in the local pond again.
 
Su Ba
pollinator
Posts: 1562
Location: Big Island, Hawaii (2300' elevation, 60" avg. annual rainfall, temp range 55-80 degrees F)
531
forest garden rabbit tiny house books solar woodworking
  • Likes 7
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
Having dedicated my life to veterinary medicine, I admit that I am strongly passionate about preventative medicine. Having had my heart torn into pieces watching dogs and cats suffer and die from preventable diseases made me unforgiving toward their anti-vaxx owners. I really don't know how nurses can deal with the emotional carnage when caring for children dying from various preventable diseases. It takes a brutal toll on the caregivers.

I can honestly report that in our veterinary practice we never, never, never saw a dog or cat who was properly vaccinated die from distemper, parvovirus, rabies, Lyme disease, leptospirosis, coronavirus, or leukemia. Yes, we saw plenty of cases where pets had not been vaccinated, and those animals suffered, many died. Not just to protect the animals, but to protect the mental wellbeing of myself and the hospital staff, I made vaccination mandatory. Clients who were anti-vaxx were told to find another veterinary hospital.

Put me into the pro-vaxx column, based on decades of firsthand experience.
 
Travis Johnson
master pollinator
Posts: 4004
916
transportation cat duck trees rabbit books chicken woodworking
  • Likes 5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator

stephen lowe wrote:

the most interesting thing about the graph to me is that you have a 90+% drop in polio deaths BEFORE the vaccine. So why is it that the vaccine is credited with erradicating the disease? What factors contributed to the precipitous decline in the danger from the disease prior to the vaccine and shouldn't we be looking at for a holistic solution rather than a chemical silver bullet?



Yes, but polio ebbs and flows because it is a an epidemic, so we must look at the results over a broad period of time. And if we go by pure math, we can see in this 14 year time chart, there was 85 deaths in the seven years prior to the vaccination being rolled out, and only 2 deaths in the seven years after it was widely given to the population.

Those are deaths though. In 1949 there was 43,000 cases of polio alone, and since the vacinations began, there has been only 132 reported cases...in 65 years!

But I do get it.

If you are a parent, and you give your kids the vaccines and they have anthrophiltraic shock, yeah that is going to be concerning. To be told...too bad...you MUST vaccinate would be troubling. I know full well what it is like to have to give an EpiPen to a child. But those are rather rare situations...to be TOLD you must put your child at risk is one thing, but to make a decision that goes against long standing scientific research, is yet another. For us, we vaccinate based on individual vaccinations, and not "we vacinate", or "No we do not."
 
pollinator
Posts: 3124
Location: Toronto, Ontario
383
hugelkultur dog forest garden fungi trees rabbit urban wofati cooking bee homestead
  • Likes 4
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
I think discussing such things in absolute terms is pretty self-defeating; the only reason I would do so was if I wanted a pretty clear-cut answer that came down on the side of fear.

Certainty dispels fear, and we can't be certain about an individual's reaction to vaccination. So people are rightly fearful of what they know might harm their child, though the likelihood is statistically low. We are fortunate enough to not see daily examples of the other things that also might harm their child, and vaccination has been so successful at lowering the number of cases of infected that the severity of that harm, lethal in some cases and merely disfiguring and debilitating in others, isn't available for comparison.

So we have a distorted view of the danger of the diseases against which these vaccines protect. They are more dangerous than anything we deal with in the West. Cancer isn't communicable (unless you count cancer caused by communicable disease like HPV), nor is heart disease, or any disease of affluence. It is the diseases of poverty, spread through not enough good food and hygiene and too much crowding, against which these vaccines guard.

So there is, as mentioned above, an amount of privilege that causes the blindspots that allow people to not see the dangers in not vaccinating, in my humble opinion. This doesn't include downright willful stubbornness of people who aren't interested in the science, but are being contrarian because, as mentioned above, they don't like to be told what to do.

I think people who question the necessity of vaccination would do well to volunteer at Missions that do outreach to those places in the world where they still stand in line all day, and travel for days, just to be vaccinated. They might want to get vaccinated first, though. Or not. Their choice, I suppose.

And as to the inclusion or separation of people who won't be vaccinated on personal grounds (speculative medical grounds count) in society, the leper colony model wouldn't be my first choice, but it would solve a lot of problems for those members of society who can't be vaccinated for legitimate medical reasons, immune-compromised individuals and such. But what is the alternative? Allow these legitimate vectors for the diseases against which they haven't been vaccinated to move around the general populace, infecting innocent, unsuspecting immune-compromised or otherwise at-risk individuals, who get to suffer and die because they wanted to live in society? They have no choice in the matter, whereas the vaccine objectors do.

I think therefore that it falls to those with a choice to either choose to vaccinate and remain a part of society, not causing death and debility to anyone, or to make their own, where nobody needs to vaccinate. I have detailed in the past how that will likely go, by the way. A generation or two down the road, there will be an outbreak against which nobody will have an immunity; virgin field epidemic, or a modern equivalent, as much as that is possible. Ninety percent could die, theoretically, based on what was seen in previous virgin field outbreaks.

As to the idea that litigation is the best solution for any ill, I think that's a problem in thinking where you need to allow harm to befall people before that harm is addressed, and in the most punitive and retributive manner possible. I think it would be better to not have to do that. As a result, doctors, for instance, could focus on being the best doctors they could be, rather than focusing on making sure they can buy enough insurance for the malpractice or wrongful death suit that is bound to come the moment the relative of a patient feels hard done by, or thinks they can get away with it.

The freedom to choose includes the freedom to choose badly, or to choose to benefit at the expense of society. It is one freedom that is curtailed when we agree to give up some of our individual liberty to benefit from the security and stability of society. If you choose to exercise those freedoms anyways, in some contexts, that's cause for legal action that could result in life imprisonment.

I don't understand why causing the death of people who can't vaccinate by choosing not to and thereby compromising herd immunity isn't punished as harshly as deliberately taking another's life, say with a weapon. It's about the same thing. Those without the ability to prevent it are being exposed to conditions that have an excellent chance of killing them by those who could stop it, but instead choose not to.

Of course constant study needs to be done. We continuously need to make sure that not only are the vaccinations safe, but that they remain so, and that they are improved upon, as we improve our understanding of vaccines, their interactions, and the human body.

But let's be clear about the identity of the injured parties here. It's those who need herd immunity to protect them that aren't getting it because of the choice of individuals not to protect them, individuals acting out of their own self-interest, and making decisions based on, at best, small pieces of the available data.

-CK
 
Posts: 686
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada
61
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
Something that hasn't bee brought up and probably should is vaccine safety and the immune system. Vaccine safety trials are always performed on healthy adults because of medical ethics laws. They also have working mature immune systems.
An infant or young child does not have a mature immune system and the medical world knows through direct observation that their immune systems function differently from that of an adult. The immune system is also a learning system. It doesn't only remember the hallmarks of a specific pathogen, but also the route by which it entered the body.

So we have vaccines developed for and tested on healthy adults which come with paperwork explaining that they should not be used on children or adults who are pregnant or immunocompromised. And yet these are the very people we as a society focus our attention on.

Animal vaccines in my opinion are a different case. Animals mature far more quickly than humans do, they don't live not as long, and the consequences of adverse effects are much lower. It is an entirely different risk profile. Animal safety studies are also not particularly reliable analogs to human safety which is why human safety trials are conducted after animal ones.

Anyway, my point is that there is a time factor involved with immunizations. And the time at which these things are applied is not the time at which the application of these things are advised. Permaculturists know the importance of proper timing more than most folks.
 
pollinator
Posts: 2283
Location: Kent, UK - Zone 8
179
books composting toilet bee rocket stoves wood heat homestead
  • Likes 3
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator

Nick Kitchener wrote:Something that hasn't bee brought up and probably should is vaccine safety and the immune system. Vaccine safety trials are always performed on healthy adults because of medical ethics laws.



This is a true but incomplete statement. Trials are not the only form of evidence used my medical professionals when determining the safety of vaccines - or any medication for that matter. Trials of the form you outline above are a critical part of the assessment process, but once a medication has been deemed sufficiently safe to use in the field data collection does not simply stop.

During roll out phases of any medication the drugs are given to larger and larger cohorts of individuals of all ages. Their clinical outcomes are monitored and compared to control groups. Side effects are tracked and recorded. And at this stage the effectiveness of the drug is really tested out over the longer term.

So when considering the effectiveness and safety of any intervention it is perhaps rational to avoid taking drugs in the first 12 months of a roll out, but beyond that you can be confident that they are safe and effective when used within "normal" bounds. Even if the initial clinical trials were performed on adults.
 
Mother Tree
Posts: 11067
Location: Portugal
1703
dog duck forest garden tiny house books wofati bike bee solar rocket stoves greening the desert
  • Likes 12
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Report post to moderator
This thread has been taking up far too much staff time, and has been causing strife for far too many members here, staff included.

I'm bringing it a halt, and locking the thread, before any more feelings get hurt or friendships damaged.

It was a good idea to try to discuss this topic, but the cost seems to be too high at the moment.  
 
Uh oh, we're definitely being carded. Here, show him this tiny ad:
permaculture bootcamp - learn permaculture through a little hard work
https://permies.com/wiki/bootcamp
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
Boost this thread!