Measles: To Disneyland and Beyond

[MsFacetious]

As a Californian, I'm very glad to hear my state is being proactive about it. And my daughter didn't go to Disneyland for the first time until she was 3 (and fully vaccinated). Anything younger is just too young to appreciate it.

I agree any younger is too young to appreciate it.
However, a Disney trip is something you plan quite a while in advance.
If I had it planned and ended up with a 6 month old child at the time of the trip?
There is no way I would disappoint my OLDER children by not taking the trip.
(Just as I am not cancelling our September road trip, despite being due 2 months before.) :twocents:

I wear baby when in public. So contact with the public is rather minimal.
I would take precautions and keep baby away from most people.
However, I am not someone who puts my life on hold when I have a baby.
My life continues on basically as normal... with baby in a carrier instead of my stomach. :twocents:

I had several cousins at Disney WORLD when this out break occurred.
One is 8 months pregnant. The trip was planned for 2 years and truly a once in a lifetime for this particular family.
So they went. I may not have gone at 8 months pregnant, but she was fine.

Babies and small children go to Disneyland because of older siblings all the time.
There is NO WAY I would leave a child under 3 for an entire week to go there. Wouldn't happen. :twocents:

 

[MyBelle]

Seriously. With how often the religious/personal objection clause is used, you'd think the God of the Old Testament had sent an eighth plague of explosive diarrhea down on the Egyptians for vaccinating their children.

This nonsense started years ago when religious, right-wing politicians like Michelle Bachman weighed in with her rhetoric about big-pharma making money off of vaccines and that they weren't safe. Sure, parents should have the choice about some things but if they want their children to go to public school, pre-school or day care, they need to vaccinate their kids.

But perhaps more disturbing are comments Bachmann made Tuesday morning about the safety of the HPV vaccine itself — and what they revealed about her utter misunderstanding of the science.

http://healthland.time.com/2011/09/...dation-fact-checking-michele-bachmanns-claim/

 

[PrairieWind]

So how many Americans get exemptions each year? And what do the exemptions cover?

 

[SophieRose]

Here's an interesting article on Sacramento County's vaccination rate. Did not know they had a large Russian population.
http://www.sacbee.com/site-services/databases/article8203365.html

Schools with a high number of Russian-speaking students in the North Highlands and Antelope areas led the region in the proportion of unvaccinated students with personal belief exemptions. At Community Outreach Academy, where 98 percent of students are native Slavic speakers, 87 of 160 students filed personal belief exemptions.

Many of the region's Russian speakers came to Sacramento as refugees to escape religious persecution; a large proportion of them are devout Pentacostals. The only way to file a valid personal belief exemption without a doctor's signature this school year was to state that a student is "a member of a religion which prohibits me from seeking medical advice or treatment." About one-fifth of exemptions filed statewide cited religious beliefs, though most students at Slavic schools filed exemptions with a doctor's signature.

 

[Migmuu]

This nonsense started years ago when religious, right-wing politicians like Michelle Bachman weighed in with her rhetoric about big-pharma making money off of vaccines and that they weren't safe. Sure, parents should have the choice about some things but if they want their children to go to public school, pre-school or day care, they need to vaccinate their kids.

But perhaps more disturbing are comments Bachmann made Tuesday morning about the safety of the HPV vaccine itself — and what they revealed about her utter misunderstanding of the science.

http://healthland.time.com/2011/09/...dation-fact-checking-michele-bachmanns-claim/

This is far bigger than vaccines. The main issue is that there is a significant portion of the country that inherently distrusts science, and that's an issue that transcends political parties, although some denialism is usually specific to a certain party. For example, you usually see anti-evolution and global warming denialism on the right.

The anti-vaccination movement obviously isn't restricted to one side of the political spectrum, but it's actually more of a problem with the left - especially the young adults. You see a lot of it among the holistic/alternative medicine crowd, which tends to be fairly young and left-leaning. Note that many of the areas with low vaccination rates tend to be fairly left-leaning, like Oregon.

I blame a lot of it on the media. The media is overly concerned with presenting both sides and so it plays a big role in science denialism of all kinds, even if it's unintentional. Like when they have a debate between a scientist who knows climate change is happening, and a scientist who believes it isn't. Holding a debate gives people the impression that the denier's views are just as legitimate as the scientist's and that the science is "up in the air" when, in fact, the science isn't even close to "up in the air". Studies show that the Earth is unquestionably becoming hotter and that there's a 95% probability that humans are major contributors to it. But viewers don't know that, and so they walk away thinking "Two scientists were debating about it and both sounded reasonable, that must mean scientists are still not sure if global warming is happening/manmade".

There desperately needs to be a talk show where actual scientists talk about, well, science in a way that most Americans can understand, and dispels myths like "Vaccines cause autism" and "Climate change isn't happening". I think most science denialism comes from simply not understanding it, and if there were a popular show that laid things out in an easily understandable and non-condescending way, it would help ease the distrust so many Americans have for science.

 

[LinasK]

The measles in this thread was transmitted at Disneyland. If parents want to take the risk of having their children exposed to a virus at an amusement park, that's up to the parents. Kinda dumb to do so but hey, it's their kid.

But see, that's just it. You got to Disneyland/Disney World or any amusement park to have fun, not expecting to pick up a deadly disease. You're not thinking about it, even though zillions of people frequent the park. I'm sure Disneyland has some sort of cleaning protocol, or they will now with this bad publicity. DD was just there last Spring and there was an earthquake while she was in the park. Disney was prepared for that, had protocol, shut down the rides, ushered everyone out, closed the park, inspected all the rides, and reopened the next morning.

 

[LinasK]

This is far bigger than vaccines. The main issue is that there is a significant portion of the country that inherently distrusts science, and that's an issue that transcends political parties, although some denialism is usually specific to a certain party. For example, you usually see anti-evolution and global warming denialism on the right.

The anti-vaccination movement obviously isn't restricted to one side of the political spectrum, but it's actually more of a problem with the left - especially the young adults. You see a lot of it among the holistic/alternative medicine crowd, which tends to be fairly young and left-leaning. Note that many of the areas with low vaccination rates tend to be fairly left-leaning, like Oregon.

I blame a lot of it on the media. The media is overly concerned with presenting both sides and so it plays a big role in science denialism of all kinds, even if it's unintentional. Like when they have a debate between a scientist who knows climate change is happening, and a scientist who believes it isn't. Holding a debate gives people the impression that the denier's views are just as legitimate as the scientist's and that the science is "up in the air" when, in fact, the science isn't even close to "up in the air". Studies show that the Earth is unquestionably becoming hotter and that there's a 95% probability that humans are major contributors to it. But viewers don't know that, and so they walk away thinking "Two scientists were debating about it and both sounded reasonable, that must mean scientists are still not sure if global warming is happening/manmade".

There desperately needs to be a talk show where actual scientists talk about, well, science in a way that most Americans can understand, and dispels myths like "Vaccines cause autism" and "Climate change isn't happening". I think most science denialism comes from simply not understanding it, and if there were a popular show that laid things out in an easily understandable and non-condescending way, it would help ease the distrust so many Americans have for science.

Yup! See my post about niece who is an anti-vaxxer, home-schooler, vegan, anti-GMO. She's liberal, her father started as a Liberal, old hippy, but he's a conspiracy theorist who supports Ron Paul now. He also drinks Colloidal Silver and thinks it's a cure-all. She's in California. There are many areas here like that- Santa Cruz, Santa Rosa, Auburn, it's not just Oregon.

 

[MyBelle]

This is far bigger than vaccines. The main issue is that there is a significant portion of the country that inherently distrusts science, and that's an issue that transcends political parties, although some denialism is usually specific to a certain party. For example, you usually see anti-evolution and global warming denialism on the right.

The anti-vaccination movement obviously isn't restricted to one side of the political spectrum, but it's actually more of a problem with the left - especially the young adults. You see a lot of it among the holistic/alternative medicine crowd, which tends to be fairly young and left-leaning. Note that many of the areas with low vaccination rates tend to be fairly left-leaning, like Oregon.

I blame a lot of it on the media. The media is overly concerned with presenting both sides and so it plays a big role in science denialism of all kinds, even if it's unintentional. Like when they have a debate between a scientist who knows climate change is happening, and a scientist who believes it isn't. Holding a debate gives people the impression that the denier's views are just as legitimate as the scientist's and that the science is "up in the air" when, in fact, the science isn't even close to "up in the air". Studies show that the Earth is unquestionably becoming hotter and that there's a 95% probability that humans are major contributors to it. But viewers don't know that, and so they walk away thinking "Two scientists were debating about it and both sounded reasonable, that must mean scientists are still not sure if global warming is happening/manmade".

There desperately needs to be a talk show where actual scientists talk about, well, science in a way that most Americans can understand, and dispels myths like "Vaccines cause autism" and "Climate change isn't happening". I think most science denialism comes from simply not understanding it, and if there were a popular show that laid things out in an easily understandable and non-condescending way, it would help ease the distrust so many Americans have for science.

Sorry, but I don't blame any of this on the media. I also don't need a "talk show" with actual scientists. I can read and interpret for myself without the need for a "popular show" to do it for me. I have my own set of measure that includes personal experience with measles and chicken pox. If parents want to make their own decisions, I'm okay with that. But I'm not okay if they want to take advantage of taxpayer programs such as school, pre-school or daycare yet they expect a different rule applies to them.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

But see, that's just it. You got to Disneyland/Disney World or any amusement park to have fun, not expecting to pick up a deadly disease. You're not thinking about it, even though zillions of people frequent the park. I'm sure Disneyland has some sort of cleaning protocol, or they will now with this bad publicity. DD was just there last Spring and there was an earthquake while she was in the park. Disney was prepared for that, had protocol, shut down the rides, ushered everyone out, closed the park, inspected all the rides, and reopened the next morning.

Being a parent involves a tad bit more than having fun. Of course you don't expect a deadly disease but you also do not anticipate a deadly car accident on your way to the amusement park but it could happen so it is wise to engage all safety measures including wearing seat belts. Disney's cleaning protocol had nothing to do with the measles outbreak.

JMO

 

[newone]

My mother's life was sheer hell for a couple of years while all three of her school aged kids came home with everything ranging from chicken pox, measles (German and red) through to Mumps....one of us would get it and it would cycle through the three of us for about 28 days and then voila something else would pop up.

I am fairly confident in saying that if anyone had offered a vaccine to prevent any one of the above or all three as an option my parents would have frog marched us to the clinic to get the shots.

MOO

Oh yeah and that was the era of tonsillitis too.....and tonsillectomies ((rare these days))

 

[Sonya610]

California is considering banning unvaccinated kids from public schools:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/02/...nate-opt-out-option-for-anti-vaccine-parents/

As far as people not expecting to be exposed to nasty germs at Disney Land that is silly, any place that attracts a lot of small kids is going to be a disease risk.

Years ago I worked in a very small office and we decided to have a "bring your dog to work day", one of the women working there (a woman with a 2 year old in daycare, who had brought the 2 year old into the office on a few occasions including when he was sniffling) actually had the nerve to say "Dogs are unsanitary, they shouldn't be allowed in an office". Needless to say I immediately blurted out the fact that small kids in daycare are a MUCH MUCH bigger disease risk to everyone in the office, kids in daycare often spread the flu, colds, pink eye, etc.... The woman did not take too kindly to my attempt to "educate" her, on the otherhand she didn't dare argue the point.

 

[wendybtn]

Don't let your parental rights endanger my kid! JMO

 

[newone]

Yup! I was working in a nursing home examining a patient whom I was not told had TB when he coughed on me. I didn't know it until I took the Tyne wrist test and it showed positive the size of a quarter. I wasn't given the chance to preventatively protect myself from this patient who arrived from the Philippines with TB. I had to take a drug called INH every single day for one year, if I traveled I had to take it with me, camping trip or not. It was a royal pain, but it kept me from getting TB. Now, I can't take the Tyne test ever again to check for exposure, I must get chest x-rays, another inconvenience.

In some countries the BCG inoculation is common place for prevention of TB -- a lifetime of positive skin tests and mandatory chest xrays are the result for those of us so inoculated against TB

grateful for the inoculation ...... IME

 

[CoolJ]

This is far bigger than vaccines. The main issue is that there is a significant portion of the country that inherently distrusts science, and that's an issue that transcends political parties, although some denialism is usually specific to a certain party. For example, you usually see anti-evolution and global warming denialism on the right.

The anti-vaccination movement obviously isn't restricted to one side of the political spectrum, but it's actually more of a problem with the left - especially the young adults. You see a lot of it among the holistic/alternative medicine crowd, which tends to be fairly young and left-leaning. Note that many of the areas with low vaccination rates tend to be fairly left-leaning, like Oregon.

I blame a lot of it on the media. The media is overly concerned with presenting both sides and so it plays a big role in science denialism of all kinds, even if it's unintentional. Like when they have a debate between a scientist who knows climate change is happening, and a scientist who believes it isn't. Holding a debate gives people the impression that the denier's views are just as legitimate as the scientist's and that the science is "up in the air" when, in fact, the science isn't even close to "up in the air". Studies show that the Earth is unquestionably becoming hotter and that there's a 95% probability that humans are major contributors to it. But viewers don't know that, and so they walk away thinking "Two scientists were debating about it and both sounded reasonable, that must mean scientists are still not sure if global warming is happening/manmade".

There desperately needs to be a talk show where actual scientists talk about, well, science in a way that most Americans can understand, and dispels myths like "Vaccines cause autism" and "Climate change isn't happening". I think most science denialism comes from simply not understanding it, and if there were a popular show that laid things out in an easily understandable and non-condescending way, it would help ease the distrust so many Americans have for science.

It is not a distrust of science whatsoever. For me, my whole life is pretty much studying science.

It is a distrust of corruption and manipulation within science that I am speaking of.
Please folks, ponder the idea that there may be more to all of this than you are being shown. The truth will come out, it is just a matter of how long is it going to take. 10yrs? 50yrs? 100yrs? 500yrs?

ETA
Here is just one example of the corruption and manipulation that is taking place. This one within the CDC itself:
http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/03/o...istleblower-plans-to-testify-before-congress/

Here is another that is related to the one above but includes 2 Merck SCIENTIST whistleblowers:
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/lawrence-solomon/merck-whistleblowers_b_5881914.html

These are related specifically to the MMR vaccine. I would need a few weeks to dig up all the proven examples of corruption and manipulation within the entire pharmaceutical industry.

 

[CoolJ]

Earlier I mentioned about a whistleblower who is the former long time chief editor of "The New England Journal of Medicine". Ask your Physician how respected this publication is within the medical community.

Here is a short clip of her speaking:
http://youtu.be/ytbXDgU7pfM

If you really want to do some digging and learn more about what she saw over her 21 years on the editorial staff of this publication her name is Dr. Marcia Angell. There is hour long+ lecture available on you tube if you wish to learn more about the companies you are allowing to inject whatever they want into your bloodstream.

 

[CoolJ]

Double post

 

[chlban]

This nonsense started years ago when religious, right-wing politicians like Michelle Bachman weighed in with her rhetoric about big-pharma making money off of vaccines and that they weren't safe. Sure, parents should have the choice about some things but if they want their children to go to public school, pre-school or day care, they need to vaccinate their kids.

But perhaps more disturbing are comments Bachmann made Tuesday morning about the safety of the HPV vaccine itself — and what they revealed about her utter misunderstanding of the science.

http://healthland.time.com/2011/09/...dation-fact-checking-michele-bachmanns-claim/

This is the simple solution to me. You have personal or religious beliefs against vaccinations? Fine, then either find a private school that will accept your child or home school, becuase to get into the public schools without being vaccinated a child must have a vald medical exemption.

Yes, there will still be children that won't be immunized but the numbers will diminish exponentially and the herd immunity theory will take effect.

My concern about just eliminating the personal objection to vaccines is that anyone that doesn't want their kid vaccinated just has to say it's a religious objection, whether it really is or not.

I honestly don't think PSA's will help with this. This is not a problem among uneducated people. Every statistic says most anti vac people are highly educated and the biggest problems are in the most affluent areas. This is one of those "celebrity causes" that idiots like Jenny McCarthy go on the daytime talk shows and spread as gospel. There is so much mistrust of medicine that it's an easy sell.

Also, mark my words, whatver legislation is passed it will be challenged on all kinds of constitutional grounds. I get that. I am usually a huge supporter of personal rights, but when those rights endanger others I draw the line.

Michelle Bachman is an even bigger idiot than Jenny McCarthy. In fact, I think she's nuts.

 

[K_Z]

So, here's what I'm hearing, with regard to ethics and corruption in the "big pharma" industry.

*There is some corruption within the pharmaceutical industry, and this is serious. (I agree.)
*There are manufacturing defects with some pharmaceuticals, and this is serious. (I agree.)
*Some batches of some vaccines are not as effective as represented. (I agree.)
*Some doctors, health professionals, and scientists have engaged in unethical conduct, and this is serious. (I agree.)
*All these corrupt people are intentionally conspiring to defraud the public and make a lot of money, and don't care at all about people's lives and health, and that's serious. (I don't agree; I think this is conspiracy paranoia, bordering on delusion.)

Therefore, some are convinced "it is logical and justified" to be suspicious and reject:

*All pharmaceutical agents from any manufacturer or country anywhere in the world.
*All vaccines of any type or usage
*All medical care and recommendations from mainstream health care providers

This is a logical fallacy, as well as a self-imposed false dilemma, and extreme paranoia, IMO. A false dilemma assumes there are no other options than to "reject" all of it in hand. That's like saying "a number of a certain brand of cars that are blue have crashed, therefore I will never drive or ride in any cars ever again."

Every single industry and profession has "some" corruption, and "some" unethical individuals. Our job collectively is to continue to root them out, expose corruption, and correct course. And hold them criminally and civilly accountable where possible and practical.

With regard to MMR vaccine (as this is the main topic at hand here), while there may be instances of corruption and unethical manufacturing and unethical research, there is NO QUESTION that millions upon millions of people all over the world have avoided being infected with measles over the past 50 years, and lives have been saved from permanent complications and death. We have very, very reliable data about infection rates world wide. And the "option" to avoid vaccination for measles on a widespread scale will unquestionably lead to larger and larger outbreaks, a re-established reservoir of disease in our country (a rich country), and more and more complications and death here, as well as in poor and vulnerable populations around the world.

Wholesale rejection of vaccines, and immersion in paranoid thinking is just not logical or reasonable. It's a really unhealthy and harmful mindset to be making decisions from for self and children, IMO.

 

[kimi_SFC]

Thank you for your latest post K_Z.

Your expertise on these threads is valued and appreciated.

Truly.

:loveyou:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nrdsb4]

If you're saying it is okay to take a healthy baby to recreational places crowded with children, I don't agree with you. They are vulnerable to a number of viruses, not just measles. That's what babysitters are for.

JMO

My post says "public places." People should not have to keep their babies at home with baby sitters for the first couple of years because the anti vaxxer movement has destroyed the herd immunity which had been achieved in this country at one time.