Comments on: The vaccination does make the baby cry, so why do it?

By: GARY FORTMAN

GARY FORTMAN — Fri, 26 Apr 2019 01:40:24 +0000

In reply to Morbillivirus Rubeola. And if you don't get the vaccine you may be dead, which would not bother me at all.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 22:04:27 +0000

Kendra, please tell me you don’t have any children in you care.

By: Kendra

Kendra — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 20:43:37 +0000

You all are nuts! Vaccinations have been PROVEN to contain MERCURY, LEAD, PRESERVATIVES, DYES, and cause AUTISM! If you are still Pro Vaccines…you’re an idiot.

By: rumparooz diaper

rumparooz diaper — Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:05:48 +0000

Vaccinations are most important part of life for babies. its make them cry it is compulsory. so cant ignore that.

By: dr. becky

dr. becky — Fri, 13 May 2011 07:22:59 +0000

As a parent and public health scientist I can’t thank you enough for this eloquent, compelling post. There was also a small outbreak of measles in my (Canadian) city last year, originating from a family that were anti-vacc and where the children were infected by a visitor from another country. My son is also 18 months and it makes me terrified to send him to school in a few years if this trend continues.

What the anti-vacc protest also miss is that people likely DIED in the clincial trials (as happens, in very small numbers) for these drugs years ago when they were orginally introduced. Don’t let that be in vain and reverse years of progress…

I only wish as scientists AND as a concerned parents we could become more organized and speak out together as you do here.

By: Giliell

Giliell — Thu, 05 May 2011 08:53:54 +0000

@Calli
Thanx, that makes sense.
As I said, those things ARE a bigger issue here, partly due to history and culture, partly due to the way our healtcare is organized, partly due to bad information.

One problem is that “childhood diseases” are not taken seriously. The very word is a synonym for “minor problems” recently developed things have. So you might say “I’m not going to buy a 3D TV until they’ve gotten over their childhood diseases”
I don’t know, is that ever used in that way in English?
My BIL, who is a trained virologist, until recently, was of the opinion that you really don’t have to vaccinate against everything. Until he caught rubella…

The problem with the healthcare system is that the way it’s organized you just cannot have some sort of mass-vaccination. When I studied in Ireland, they started vaccinating against Meningitis C. It was done on campus and even I, an exchange student could just go there and get it. That’s avery low threshold model that makes it easy for people just going there, getting it, not much planning or commitment needed. In Germany you always have to make an appointment and so on.

The bad information is on the one hand about the dangers of those diseases, since they’re still considered a harmless nuissance, and also on how they’re transmitted. Hep B is portraied as a STD, which means that people see no reason to vaccinate a newborn.

By: gwen

gwen — Wed, 04 May 2011 23:30:39 +0000

There IS a standard recommended vaccine schedule put out by the CDC. All of our medical manuals have it in the index. It occasionally gets updated when new information becomes available, or new vaccines are added. I have a feeling that a lot of the variability has to do with doctor preference and vaccine availability.

By: Giliell

Giliell — Wed, 04 May 2011 15:37:25 +0000

A quick check says that they’re all made by GlaxoSmithCline
A lot of those decissions are made by the fact of who makes the best offer in a country, seems like GSK has a pretty monopoly on childhood-vaccination in Germany.

By: Calli Arcale

Calli Arcale — Wed, 04 May 2011 13:24:01 +0000

Giliell — it’s not a difference between what’s the state of the art but what’s the current epidemiological advice. And that does vary from country to country, for good reasons. It’s not that one country’s schedule is better than the other; it’s that one country’s schedule is better *for them*. Measles has historically been more of a problem in Europe than the US, so epidemiologically, it’s probably more urgent to get the vaccination series completed, whereas in the US, it’s historically been safe to spread it out more. Upshot of spreading it out more — the immunity lasts a smidge longer if the last shot is later, and with some vaccines, older patients may develop the desired immunity with fewer shots (because of their more mature immune system). One factor is the average age of patients with a particular vaccine-preventable disease in a given country; if 90% of the patients are, say, 2 years old, you want to make sure your vaccinating people completely as early as possible. If 90% of them are 15, however, you might want to aim a little older.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 04 May 2011 13:09:08 +0000

Or the third possibility: Multifinality. If there are guesses along the way, the results from the application of the same science in two different system will likely result in different outcomes from the same premises.

Most likely, though, there is some logic to all of this that we don’t understand because it has to do with production and marketing requirements where the juice is made. That translates into recommendations with medical verisimilitude fed to physicians.

I wonder how many vaccines, if any, are made by German and US based companies? I.e., Bayer AG vs not? All these different outcomes are probably being made in one small room by some guy with a cigar.