Measles: To Disneyland and Beyond

[annahanna]

If there is anyone reading here who is actually concerned about what these companies are putting into these vaccines. Heck, even if you are an ultra "pro vaxxer". The next time you bring your child in for a vaccine shot, ask your doctor this question:

If my child gets sick or injured from this vaccine, who is responsible?

Ask that question, and see if you are OK with the answer you get.

JMO

If it is truly a vaccine related injury, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Board is financially responsible. If the vaccine is defective, contaminated or otherwise tainted, the vaccine manufacturer (and possibly the doctor) is liable.

You seem to believe that the existence of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Board is somehow and admission that vaccines are dangerous and/or that vaccine manufacturers are completely protected from all lawsuits. Neither is true. The VICB was set up to handle vaccine injury claims in part as an inducement for pharmaceutical companies to make barely profitable vaccines in the US. Manufacturers are still liable if they make an error in the manufacturing process, deliver a contaminated product, or are otherwise negligent.

 

[MyBelle]

The link you posted actually disproved your point that the MMR causes arthritis. It is also a citation from December of 1993. A great deal has been learned about both the MMR vaccine and the triggers for juvenile arthritis in the 21 years since that was written.
"....The virus used in current vaccines is Wistar RA 27/3 rubella virus. In a Canadian trial,of this vaccine arthralgia occurred in 41% of women, transient arthritis in 9% and persistent arthritis (>18 months) in 5%. Joint symptoms rarely occur in men but arthralgia occurs in 4% of children and arthritis in 0.3%."

"In both women and children the risk of frank arthritis following rubella immunization is less then that after natural rubella infection."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1005209/?page=2

"About 1 child in every 1,000 develops some type of juvenile arthritis. These disorders can affect children at any age, although rarely in the first six months of life. It is estimated that around 300,000 children in the United States have been diagnosed with JIA."
http://www.rheumatology.org/practice/clinical/patients/diseases_and_conditions/juvenilearthritis.asp

I could not find current figures on measles/rubella arthritis - probably because the vaccination rate in the US and other developed countries has been high enough to make this complication of natural measles infection rare. However, your link (and other citations) states that the rate is HIGHER in natural infection then in vaccinated cases. The links you have provided are also very old. Much medical research has been done in the past 20 years. Also, the strain of virus used in manufacturing the vaccine has changed in the past 20 years.

The rate of encephalitis following MMR vaccine is approximately 1 in 3,000,000. (And it has not been conclusively linked to a vaccine virus infection.). The rate of measles encephalitis is approximately 1 in 1,000. Those are not remotely comparable odds. Since the rate of infection is approximately 90% for susceptible people exposed to the virus, it seems that you would have better odds getting the vaccine.

"In the section Post-Marketing Reports, encephalitis (infection of the brain) was added to reflect the receipt of reports following ProQuad vaccination. Previously, this adverse reaction was listed under adverse events seen after MMR or varicella vaccination. Encephalitis has been reported approximately once for every 3 million doses of MMR vaccine. Post-marketing surveillance of more than 400 million doses distributed worldwide (1978 to 2003) indicates that encephalitis is rarely reported after MMR vaccination. In no case has it been shown conclusively that encephalitis was caused by a vaccine virus infection of the central nervous system. There was no proven causal relationship between ProQuad and any of the reported cases that prompted the change in the label.
http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/QuestionsaboutVaccines/ucm070425.htm

About one child out of every 1,000 who get measles will develop encephalitis (swelling of the brain) that can lead to convulsions and can leave the child deaf or mentally retarded.
http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html

You stated that when you were a kid, you went to a GP. Pediatric Rheumatologists are a rare sub-specialty (approximately 100 board certified pedis rheumatologist's in the US) today. They were even more rare 20 or 30 years ago since it was not even a recognized sub-specialty until the early 1970's. If a GP told you (when you were 9 years old) that your arthritis was triggered by vaccination, s/he was incorrect or your case is extraordinarily rare. As you know, research in rheumatology in general and pediatric rheumatology specifically has made great strides in the last 20 years or so.

Anyone choosing to not vaccinate their children due to fear of JRA/JIA or encephalitis is actually taking a bigger risk that their children will develop one of these conditions through natural infection then they would have had through vaccination.

Thank you. There is no excuse for intentional parental ignorance.

 

[Charlie09]

The link you posted actually disproved your point that the MMR causes arthritis. It is also a citation from December of 1993. A great deal has been learned about both the MMR vaccine and the triggers for juvenile arthritis in the 21 years since that was written.
"....The virus used in current vaccines is Wistar RA 27/3 rubella virus. In a Canadian trial,of this vaccine arthralgia occurred in 41% of women, transient arthritis in 9% and persistent arthritis (>18 months) in 5%. Joint symptoms rarely occur in men but arthralgia occurs in 4% of children and arthritis in 0.3%."

"In both women and children the risk of frank arthritis following rubella immunization is less then that after natural rubella infection."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1005209/?page=2

"About 1 child in every 1,000 develops some type of juvenile arthritis. These disorders can affect children at any age, although rarely in the first six months of life. It is estimated that around 300,000 children in the United States have been diagnosed with JIA."
http://www.rheumatology.org/practice/clinical/patients/diseases_and_conditions/juvenilearthritis.asp

I could not find current figures on measles/rubella arthritis - probably because the vaccination rate in the US and other developed countries has been high enough to make this complication of natural measles infection rare. However, your link (and other citations) states that the rate is HIGHER in natural infection then in vaccinated cases. The links you have provided are also very old. Much medical research has been done in the past 20 years. Also, the strain of virus used in manufacturing the vaccine has changed in the past 20 years.

The rate of encephalitis following MMR vaccine is approximately 1 in 3,000,000. (And it has not been conclusively linked to a vaccine virus infection.). The rate of measles encephalitis is approximately 1 in 1,000. Those are not remotely comparable odds. Since the rate of infection is approximately 90% for susceptible people exposed to the virus, it seems that you would have better odds getting the vaccine.

"In the section Post-Marketing Reports, encephalitis (infection of the brain) was added to reflect the receipt of reports following ProQuad vaccination. Previously, this adverse reaction was listed under adverse events seen after MMR or varicella vaccination. Encephalitis has been reported approximately once for every 3 million doses of MMR vaccine. Post-marketing surveillance of more than 400 million doses distributed worldwide (1978 to 2003) indicates that encephalitis is rarely reported after MMR vaccination. In no case has it been shown conclusively that encephalitis was caused by a vaccine virus infection of the central nervous system. There was no proven causal relationship between ProQuad and any of the reported cases that prompted the change in the label.
http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/QuestionsaboutVaccines/ucm070425.htm

About one child out of every 1,000 who get measles will develop encephalitis (swelling of the brain) that can lead to convulsions and can leave the child deaf or mentally retarded.
http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html

You stated that when you were a kid, you went to a GP. Pediatric Rheumatologists are a rare sub-specialty (approximately 100 board certified pedis rheumatologist's in the US) today. They were even more rare 20 or 30 years ago since it was not even a recognized sub-specialty until the early 1970's. If a GP told you (when you were 9 years old) that your arthritis was triggered by vaccination, s/he was incorrect or your case is extraordinarily rare. As you know, research in rheumatology in general and pediatric rheumatology specifically has made great strides in the last 20 years or so.

Anyone choosing to not vaccinate their children due to fear of JRA/JIA or encephalitis is actually taking a bigger risk that their children will develop one of these conditions through natural infection then they would have had through vaccination.

Interesting that findings from 1993 are discounted, but not the vaccination from 30 years prior and that perhaps there are better ways of doing things.
You know, with the "modern" medical science that you are relying upon.

You can nitpick apart anything you'd like to, you can mock and disbelieve anything you want to - it doesn't change that vaccinations have side effects, more than just the measles vaccination cause arthritis as side effects -

And measles is seldom a deadly disease (in the US) regardless of this current media push to scare people into thinking it is.

 

[annahanna]

Interesting that findings from 1993 are discounted, but not the vaccination from 30 years prior and that perhaps there are better ways of doing things.
You know, with the "modern" medical science that you are relying upon.

You can nitpick apart anything you'd like to, you can mock and disbelieve anything you want to - it doesn't change that vaccinations have side effects, more than just the measles vaccination cause arthritis as side effects -

And measles is seldom a deadly disease (in the US) regardless of this current media push to scare people into thinking it is.

I am sorry that you view it as nitpicking or mocking to read the information that you linked and point out that those documents do not support the point that you are trying to make. My intent was not to ridicule but to respond honestly to your contentions that the vaccine causes arthritis and encephalitis. That belief is not supported by the documents that you provided.

Can immunisation trigger rheumatoid arthritis?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1005209/?page=2

Information Sheet Observed Rate of Vaccine Reactions
http://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/tools/MMR_vaccine_rates_information_sheet.pdf

I drew attention to the age of the study you are relying on because, even if it proved your point about the vaccine in use 20+ years ago, (it did not) there is a wealth of more recent information about the versions of the vaccines in use today as well as about the causes of JRA/JIA. You are absolutely correct in saying that measles is seldom a deadly disease in the US. Most people who contract the disease recover with no lasting side effects. However the fact remains that the risk of death and side effects is lower in vaccinated individuals then it is in people who have contracted the disease. Choosing not to vaccinate carries a higher risk then choosing to protect children from this unpleasant disease.

 

[MyBelle]

I am sorry that you view it as nitpicking or mocking to read the information that you linked and point out that those documents do not support the point that you are trying to make. My intent was not to ridicule but to respond honestly to your contentions that the vaccine causes arthritis and encephalitis. That belief is not supported by the documents that you provided.


I drew attention to the age of the study you are relying on because, even if it proved your point about the vaccine in use 20+ years ago, (it did not) there is a wealth of more recent information about the versions of the vaccines in use today as well as about the causes of JRA/JIA. You are absolutely correct in saying that measles is seldom a deadly disease in the US. Most people who contract the disease recover with no lasting side effects. However the fact remains that the risk of death and side effects is lower in vaccinated individuals then it is in people who have contracted the disease. Choosing not to vaccinate carries a higher risk then choosing to protect children from this unpleasant disease.

BBM. Very well said.

 

[Charlie09]

I am sorry that you view it as nitpicking or mocking to read the information that you linked and point out that those documents do not support the point that you are trying to make. My intent was not to ridicule but to respond honestly to your contentions that the vaccine causes arthritis and encephalitis. That belief is not supported by the documents that you provided.


I drew attention to the age of the study you are relying on because, even if it proved your point about the vaccine in use 20+ years ago, (it did not) there is a wealth of more recent information about the versions of the vaccines in use today as well as about the causes of JRA/JIA. You are absolutely correct in saying that measles is seldom a deadly disease in the US. Most people who contract the disease recover with no lasting side effects. However the fact remains that the risk of death and side effects is lower in vaccinated individuals then it is in people who have contracted the disease. Choosing not to vaccinate carries a higher risk then choosing to protect children from this unpleasant disease.

See, here's the thing. I don't have to prove anything. Unpleasantness is part of life -

My job as a parent, and as a customer to the medical world is to insist on being provided with the full documentation. I've had three doctors for my now 11 year old. One was hateful about vaccinations. The second one and I had a very long discussion about it - we left the discussion agreeing to disagree, noting where we agreed, and he talked about a few for the future. Our current doctor just says "by law, I'm supposed to tell you where the recommended vaccination schedule is at this point. (Tetanus is one of those we may end up doing down the line. I just am not sure about preventative or only if needed. I'm open to it.) For the rest - I see the links, I see the cautions, I can read the ingredient list, I see the potential for side effects, I see what is allowed in the Vaccination Compensation Fund, I see children that are vaccine damaged - it's enough for me to say "no thank you."

It's enough for me to support any parent who doesn't want to inject their children with chemicals and additives.

If after doing the research and not being bullied into submission - parents support the vaccination and want their children vaccinated - then have at it! Be comfortable with that decision -

 

[MyBelle]

See, here's the thing. I don't have to prove anything. Unpleasantness is part of life -

My job as a parent, and as a customer to the medical world is to insist on being provided with the full documentation. I've had three doctors for my now 11 year old. One was hateful about vaccinations. The second one and I had a very long discussion about it - we left the discussion agreeing to disagree, noting where we agreed, and he talked about a few for the future. Our current doctor just says "by law, I'm supposed to tell you where the recommended vaccination schedule is at this point. (Tetanus is one of those we may end up doing down the line. I just am not sure about preventative or only if needed. I'm open to it.) For the rest - I see the links, I see the cautions, I can read the ingredient list, I see the potential for side effects, I see what is allowed in the Vaccination Compensation Fund, I see children that are vaccine damaged - it's enough for me to say "no thank you."

It's enough for me to support any parent who doesn't want to inject their children with chemicals and additives.

If after doing the research and not being bullied into submission - parents support the vaccination and want their children vaccinated - then have at it! Be comfortable with that decision -

I live in a state that does not have a personal belief exception in our statutes. I expect states that do have such an exception will be eliminating it and parents who refuse to vaccinate will be reported to CPS by pediatricians. My grandchild's pediatrician told her father this when he balked last spring. Physicians do have a duty to protect children from bad choices made by their parents.

JMO

 

[LinasK]

If after doing the research and not being bullied into submission - parents support the vaccination and want their children vaccinated - then have at it! Be comfortable with that decision -

I was not bullied at all. I am comfortable knowing that my child's vaccines did not contain thimoserol in them. I am proud to be considered a "pro vaxxer plus". My daughter, now 13, has had every vaccine possible, and then some including Gardasil. She used to be one Immunoglobin low, so her resistance to disease was lower. She has never had any reaction to a vaccine and she will be visiting Disneyland again.
And it's all the more important for her to be vaccinated, since her cousins and a couple of friends are anti-vaxxers!!!

 

[bluesneakers]

I think you are welcome to your opinion, as am I.
I don't think the state has the right to put a concoction that had side effects into my child without taking on the full responsibility of such medical experimentation.

This is a serious question - I'm not looking to argue - I'm just genuinely curious. If you had two children and didn't vaccinate either one, what would you do if one of them got lymphoma or leukemia or another illness that compromises one's immune system? Would you then vaccinate your other child (and yourself if you hadn't been vaccinated)?

 

[Charlie09]

I live in a state that does not have a personal belief exception in our statutes. I expect states that do have such an exception will be eliminating it and parents who refuse to vaccinate will be reported to CPS by pediatricians. My grandchild's pediatrician told her father this when he balked last spring. Physicians do have a duty to protect children from bad choices made by their parents.

JMO

Informed consent of what goes into our children is not a bad choice.

 

[Charlie09]

This is a serious question - I'm not looking to argue - I'm just genuinely curious. If you had two children and didn't vaccinate either one, what would you do if one of them got lymphoma or leukemia or another illness that compromises one's immune system? Would you then vaccinate your other child (and yourself if you hadn't been vaccinated)?

Measles vaccinations don't guarantee life long immunity- so at what point do you say enough to vaccinations? And the what ifs?

 

[Charlie09]

I live in a state that does not have a personal belief exception in our statutes. I expect states that do have such an exception will be eliminating it and parents who refuse to vaccinate will be reported to CPS by pediatricians. My grandchild's pediatrician told her father this when he balked last spring. Physicians do have a duty to protect children from bad choices made by their parents.

JMO

I guess the AMA will have to change it's position

s professionals committed to promoting the welfare of individual patients and the health of the public and to safeguarding their own and their colleagues’ well-being, physicians have an ethical responsibility to take appropriate measures to prevent the spread of infectious disease in health care settings. Conscientious participation in routine infection control practices, such as hand washing and respiratory precautions is a basic expectation of the profession. In some situations, however, routine infection control is not sufficient to protect the interests of patients, the public, and fellow health care workers.

In the context of a highly transmissible disease that poses significant medical risk for vulnerable patients or colleagues, or threatens the availability of the health care workforce, particularly a disease that has potential to become epidemic or pandemic, and for which there is an available, safe, and effective vaccine, physicians have an obligation to:

(a) Accept immunization absent a recognized medical, religious, or philosophic reason to not be immunized.

(b) Accept a decision of the medical staff leadership or health care institution, or other appropriate authority to adjust practice activities if not immunized (e.g., wear masks or refrain from direct patient care). It may be appropriate in some circumstances to inform patients about immunization status. (I, II)

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/phy...l-ethics/code-medical-ethics/opinion9133.page

 

[bluesneakers]

That's not what I was asking. I understand they don't guarantee immunity and I know people need boosters shots in adulthood (if they choose, of course). What I was asking is if you and your family were unvaccinated, what would you do if a member of your family became sick with an illness (or had to undergo chemotherapy) that suppresses one's immune system?

 

[Charlie09]

That's not what I was asking. I understand they don't guarantee immunity and I know people need boosters shots in adulthood (if they choose, of course). What I was asking is if you and your family were unvaccinated, what would you do if a member of your family became sick with an illness (or had to undergo chemotherapy) that suppresses one's immune system?

If you were in a car accident and the car was under water, and you could only save one child, which one would you save?
It's a distraction -

 

[Charlie09]

I was not bullied at all. I am comfortable knowing that my child's vaccines did not contain thimoserol in them. I am proud to be considered a "pro vaxxer plus". My daughter, now 13, has had every vaccine possible, and then some including Gardasil. She used to be one Immunoglobin low, so her resistance to disease was lower. She has never had any reaction to a vaccine and she will be visiting Disneyland again.
And it's all the more important for her to be vaccinated, since her cousins and a couple of friends are anti-vaxxers!!!

Cool, we're going to Disneyland tomorrow - un-vaccinated and all

 

[MyBelle]

Informed consent of what goes into our children is not a bad choice.

Parent's don't give informed consent, they give permission to treat. And if a parent refuses to take a pediatrician's advice as to what is best for the child, they shouldn't be surprised that CPS will be notified by the physician. It would be no different than if the parent was insisting on an immunization that the doctor felt was ill-advised for health reasons. Refusing immunizations not only endangers the non-vaccinated child, it also endangers other non-vaccinated children.

How does informed consent apply to children?

Children do not have the decision-making capacity to provide informed consent. Since consent, by definition, is given for an intervention for oneself, parents cannot provide informed consent on behalf of their children.....The primary responsibility of the physician is the well-being of the child. Therefore, if the parental decision places the child at risk of harm then further action may be indicated.

https://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/consent.html

 

[bluesneakers]

If you were in a car accident and the car was under water, and you could only save one child, which one would you save?
It's a distraction -

No, that's not it either. Maybe I'm just not wording it correctly because I don't mean anything so drastic, and I'm not suggesting you need to choose between the two. It's just something I've been curious about. To simplify it though makes it sound worse and I don't want to come off like that either, but basically would you consider that a situation where you would vaccinate? I just assumed it's something you've considered because you've put so much thought and research into your opinion. I don't want to make you defend your choice; I'm pro-choice on vaccines.

If this is too much of a distraction or you don't want to or can't answer I understand and apologize.

 

[Charlie09]

Parent's don't give informed consent, they give permission to treat. And if a parent refuses to take a pediatrician's advice as to what is best for the child, they shouldn't be surprised that CPS will be notified by the physician. It would be no different than if the parent was insisting on an immunization that the doctor felt was ill-advised for health reasons. Refusing immunizations not only endangers the non-vaccinated child, it also endangers other non-vaccinated children.

How does informed consent apply to children?

Children do not have the decision-making capacity to provide informed consent. Since consent, by definition, is given for an intervention for oneself, parents cannot provide informed consent on behalf of their children.....The primary responsibility of the physician is the well-being of the child. Therefore, if the parental decision places the child at risk of harm then further action may be indicated.

https://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/consent.html

I'm sure it comes as a surprise to you that not all pediatricians are pro-vaccination -
Dr. Bob Sears is a big one here in South Orange County -
And Dr. Jay Gordon of UCLA -

SO I guess, I would stay with a parent friendly doctor - not one who wants to violate medical ethics in their practice.

 

[K_Z]

That's not what I was asking. I understand they don't guarantee immunity and I know people need boosters shots in adulthood (if they choose, of course). What I was asking is if you and your family were unvaccinated, what would you do if a member of your family became sick with an illness (or had to undergo chemotherapy) that suppresses one's immune system?

Great question, bluesneakers. A lot of families that refuse vaccines also refuse lifesaving medications and therapies like chemotherapy for highly curable cancers (like Hodgkins Lymphoma-- several of those lately).

I'm guessing that the recommendation for chemotherapy for the sick child would be met with some serious resistance, not that the other children would be vaccinated to protect the sick child while undergoing chemo. There are a number of these "chemo refusal" stories about in the news in the past few years, and typically the courts must step in and take custody of the child to ensure lifesaving treatment is provided. There is just no amount of science or reasoning that will persuade some of the frightened, stubborn, and ignorant parents from making disastrous decisions for their kids. It's sad and pretty frustrating.

 

[Charlie09]

No, that's not it either. Maybe I'm just not wording it correctly because I don't mean anything so drastic, and I'm not suggesting you need to choose between the two. It's just something I've been curious about. To simplify it though makes it sound worse and I don't want to come off like that either, but basically would you consider that a situation where you would vaccinate? I just assumed it's something you've considered because you've put so much thought and research into your opinion. I don't want to make you defend your choice; I'm pro-choice on vaccines.

If this is too much of a distraction or you don't want to or can't answer I understand and apologize.

I can't see a reason I would vaccinate for anything outside of Tetanus - we'd work on immunity issues on a different level than more chemicals.