[Kelly]

We decided to get Davey vaccinated against CP at his 1 year.

I personally think non-vaxing is wrong, so my son will have all of his vaccines.

I was just curious about who is vaxing on this board and who isn't.

We decided to get Davey vaccinated against CP at his 1 year.

I personally think non-vaxing is wrong, so my son will have all of his vaccines.

I was just curious about who is vaxing on this board and who isn't.[/b]

Ditto to that. Joshua is also being completely vax'd.

[Isabellamom]

I think our family is considered "TP" in this area (although we have not gotten the Hep B, chicken pox or flu and we split the MMR). We did our research into our family history and family allergies and decided that with the amount of international travel we do and the risks in our home area, vaxing was right for us. However, we are delaying Hep B (the only reason teh CDC changed the protocal on hep B was because older kids weren't following through and getting the whole series- we will be getting the series, just later).

I don't think it's WRONG not to vax...some families have severe risks for neurological disease. If I had a strong history of neurological problems in my family or if my child displayed any signals of epilepsy or other seizure problems, I would probably delay or very selectively vax. In addition, if I had an older child that had vaccine reactions, I would be wary about vaxing my next child. So, I believe there are cases were families have the duty to not vax due to what they may do to their children.

I think our family is considered "TP" in this area (although we have not gotten the Hep B, chicken pox or flu and we split the MMR). We did our research into our family history and family allergies and decided that with the amount of international travel we do and the risks in our home area, vaxing was right for us. However, we are delaying Hep B (the only reason teh CDC changed the protocal on hep B was because older kids weren't following through and getting the whole series- we will be getting the series, just later).

I don't think it's WRONG not to vax...some families have severe risks for neurological disease. If I had a strong history of neurological problems in my family or if my child displayed any signals of epilepsy or other seizure problems, I would probably delay or very selectively vax. In addition, if I had an older child that had vaccine reactions, I would be wary about vaxing my next child. So, I believe there are cases were families have the duty to not vax due to what they may do to their children.[/b]

Very true... I'm not against that. I can totally understand that aspect! It just seems that a lot of people, who have had no history of vaccine reactions, are just becoming overly paranoid.

[Isabellamom]

I agree...did you see the article where the researcher who first claimed the MMR led to autism is being tried for multiple crimes including subjecting children to invasive tests without proper information and authorization?

EDIT: I would also think that paranoia may lead to less attention being given to those who have been truly vaccine damaged (there is a fund in the CDC- I think- that attempts to help these children- all of their leaflets on the vaccines talk about it at the very end)

[Kelly]

I do agree with the fact that if you have a history of problems and such, then not vaxing might be right for you, but IMHO, it's wrong to not vax just for the sake of it.

I think the benefits HEAVILY outweigh the "risks".

[Bakerybrat]

We fully vax here.

[debthemom]

listen to some, and theyll say breathing and drinking water will kill us all.

whatever.

[Kelly]

^ lol, true!

[~Casey~]

We fully vax. I wouldn't have it any other way. The only reason the risk is soooo low for un vaxed children getting whatever disease is in question is because most of the rest of us are vaxing. If we all stopped vaxing we'd be right back where we started a couple hundred years ago. IMHO.

[MommytoCS]

We will fully vax....silly not too imho!

We fully vax. I wouldn't have it any other way. The only reason the risk is soooo low for un vaxed children getting whatever disease is in question is because most of the rest of us are vaxing. If we all stopped vaxing we'd be right back where we started a couple hundred years ago. IMHO.[/b]

Yup... and a lot of people refuse to acknowledge that.

[Kelly]

We fully vax. I wouldn't have it any other way. The only reason the risk is soooo low for un vaxed children getting whatever disease is in question is because most of the rest of us are vaxing. If we all stopped vaxing we'd be right back where we started a couple hundred years ago. IMHO.[/b]

*nods* That is totally true!!!

[Tanya G]

the only thing I dont think we will vax for is chicken pox. I am not even sure if thats a part of routine vaxing where I am, something to look into. I dont think you will find very many traditional parents who dont vax, but at the same time, I am sure those that dont vax are extrememly well educated on the matter and not vaxing for good reason. I for one, do very much want to vax my son and have had to opportunity to read differnt articles on not vaxing but have not looked at them because I trust my doctor and dont want to read that stuff and get myself all stressed out. But I think that either side is doing what they are doing in the best interest of their children.

[Kelly]

I debated with myself about the chicken pox vaccine. In the end, we decided to get it. Even if it doesn't prevent it, but causes a milder case, that's fine witth us.

[Lilysmommy]

We fully vax here

[illinoismommy]

I used to feel not vaccinating was wrong until I read a few books that changed my view. I think the most friendly for those of you who think it is wrong would be What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Children's Vaccinations by Stephanie Cave, MD. You really must read THIS book to be informed on the issue, reading online simply doesn't cut it. I say this nicely, I swear, because it wasn't until the 4th time I researched this issue that I went out and read some books rather than the stupid crud online.

We delay vaccinations because we are concerned about the continually increasing number of times that tiny infants' immune systems are assaulted by the vaccinations. I no longer believe I protected my son by getting him vaccinated on schedule until his 18th month, but compromised his long term immune system and played Russian roulette with his well being. That makes me sad. We are going to skip the boosters until we get a titer when he is a little older.

There are some vaccinations I won't let my next baby have until they are much older-- like HepB. Unless I have HepB (I don't see how I could, but I will get tested) there is no reason for a baby who is hours old to get a vaccination for a disease that is spread the same way as HIV-- body fluids, sexual contact, and needle sharing. So each disease is being considered individually.

I am highly concerned by the ingredients of these vaccines and how they give them TONS all at once. I am not happy with their reasoning for doing it this way-- if they get the parents with young babies to give vaccinations they are more likely to getit but if they wait until they are older it will be more difficult to get them into the doctor's office. This doesn't sound like good reasoning to me.

My plan for chicken pox is to wait and if my children do not get it by age 5-7 then get the vaccination. I also want to wait to see more research on it as there are some indications that giving the chicken pox vaccination only delays when a person gets the chicken pox, it wears off and then you can get it as an adult which would be far worse than as a child.

Another thing that concerns me is the reason for these vaccinations. The chicken pox one was invented because employer's were getting annoyed about giving mother's time off of work. This way they didn't have to... but what if they made that decision not tihnking about the well being of the children themselves and their long term immune system? Another thing, this new HPV vaccine (another sexually transmitted disease) there has already been news stories talking about how they want to make it school mandated so that Merck can make their 3 billion dollars per year. It is a sexually transmitted disease, why does that need to be required for school children? Pretty soon they'll want to give it to 4 month olds too, that way we can assault their immature immune systems with close to 10 recommended vaccinations at once. The last sentence is just a musing, of course, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Well I hope this helps someone who is on the line with this issue. I just thought I would share some thoughts.

We are a "VAXED" family as well..

[Kelly]

Thanks for your input JRD. It was very informative.

[#5in2005]

we are "vaxers" too.

If vaccinating was truely more damaging than benificial, it would not be happening.

Also, my cousin goes to a church that forbids vaccinating (because you have to trust God, not a vaccine) and their schools closed for over 2 months a few years back, because all these illnesses started showing up again.