Vaccines question

pwurple

gar32 wrote: »

Just a question for all reading. How up to date a you with your vaccines ?

Do you have a record of them?

Yes i have a record of them. Including batch numbers, i keep the box,and my gp records them on their patient system as well.

I agree vaccines have changed the world for the better but something must happen to the body that normally would not. Is it full understood?

No, it's a really natural process. Have a read of the history of vaccines. I thought it was covered in junior cert science as well.

Why do vaccines last for 1 year. Would you buy veg that last a year? I stay clear of E numbers as much as possible. Injecting something that last a year seems to be preserved unnaturally.

Any thoughts?

Vaccines last a very short time in the body, about a day. You immune system's memory of the disease lasts a lifetime. Unless a new version of the virus appears... Like with the flu. There are loads of flu versions and they constantly change. Your body remembers all the other flu's but not this one.

Jerrica

gar32 wrote: »

I agree vaccines have changed the world for the better but something must happen to the body that normally would not. Is it full understood?

mulbot wrote: »

I've never had a vaccine. for me,i think bypassing the bodies normal process of gaining immunity has to have some effect in the body-so i'm thankful i never got any..

That's the beauty of vaccines, they cause an entirely normal reaction to an antigen (something that provokes an antibody/ immune response) in a controlled and safe way.

Every time you are exposed to an antigen your body responds by (1) fighting the disease and (2) creating a population of memory cells to that antigen so that when you're exposed to it a second time you have a whole army of cells ready and waiting in the wings to fight it super quick. This happens naturally when you're exposed to the antigen in your everyday life; for example when you get chicken pox as a child you become immune to it for the rest of your life thanks to the bank of memory cells made that recognise the cp virus (this is natural active immunity) OR it can be done through vaccines (artificial active immunity), you get exposed to a benign, safe, killed form of the antigen and it creates the very same population of memory cells that will keep you safe for the rest of your life but without the horrible sickness and potential side effects the disease causes.

In other words the memory cells are the same no matter whether you get exposed naturally or artificially.

For the scienticians among us I'm aware I'm ad-libbing here a little bit but the oeverall take home message is the same

mulbot

pwurple wrote: »

Vaccines are the normal way of gaining immunity. That's how they were discovered and invented. You are exposed to a version of the virus, your body learns a defense.

That's what happens normally, all the time, every day of our lives. But with vaccines you get a weakened version that doesn't cause symptoms. (Just like how cowpox worked for smallpox when vaccines were discovered... Dairymaids didn't get smallpox because they had been exposed to the weaker cowpox in their work).

That's the best bit about vaccines! How it works with our natural immunity mechanisms, and the natural way viruses work in the world.

How they are introduced to the body is not normal-that's my point(well not just mine) They by-pass a number of(critical?) stages, and injecting a virus,in fact multiple viruses, into an underdeveloped immune system has to have some negative effect

shruikan2553

mulbot wrote: »

How they are introduced to the body is not normal-that's my point(well not just mine) They by-pass a number of(critical?) stages, and injecting a virus,in fact multiple viruses, into an underdeveloped immune system has to have some negative effect

There can be side effects which is why testing is done and any side effects are recorded. Then depending on what kind of side effects they are they can release it or have to go back to the drawing board.

pwurple

mulbot wrote: »

How they are introduced to the body is not normal-that's my point(well not just mine) They by-pass a number of(critical?) stages, and injecting a virus,in fact multiple viruses, into an underdeveloped immune system has to have some negative effect

I'm not sure what you mean by an underdeveloped immune system. Babies start producing their own antibodies in response to viruses at about 2 months, as their mother's ones are depleting. This is what a developed immune system does, same as you and me. How is it underdeveloped?

Their system hasn't learned as many viruses as ours alright, because they have not been exposed. The vaccines help catch them up... without, ya know, dying from the diseases in the process, like they used to.

Jerrica

mulbot wrote: »

How they are introduced to the body is not normal-that's my point(well not just mine) They by-pass a number of(critical?) stages, and injecting a virus,in fact multiple viruses, into an underdeveloped immune system has to have some negative effect

This is a good example of bad science. Vaccines are not by passing any critical stages, it doesn't matter if the antigen is delivered by accidentally swallowing a virus laden droplet in the air after someone coughs or via sterile syringe, it all causes the same reaction.

mulbot

shruikan2553 wrote: »

There can be side effects which is why testing is done and any side effects are recorded. Then depending on what kind of side effects they are they can release it or have to go back to the drawing board.

Vaccines that have side effects are not taken out of the system,even with serious effects-in fact the FDA scripts for all vaccines carry information regarding the known side effects,and note that anyone taking using the vaccine(doctors etc) be aware of the side effects and warrant those into their decision before administering

gar32

When I said vaccines last a year I meet USE BY DATE. Do you have any food in your fridge that last a year? Not even frozen food last a year. When they 1st made vaccines they had a 1 month use by date.

I am far from expert but the more I read and learn the more complex vaccines and mixed effects are. In the USA kids had 36 different samples injected into them.

I think I will always have 2nd thoughts about these things.

I just want healthy kids with no fear of side effects.

mulbot

pwurple wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean by an underdeveloped immune system. Babies start producing their own antibodies in response to viruses at about 2 months, as their mother's ones are depleting. This is what a developed immune system does, same as you and me. How is it underdeveloped?

Their system hasn't learned as many viruses as ours alright, because they have not been exposed. The vaccines help catch them up... without, ya know, dying from the diseases in the process, like they used to.

Underdeveloped or still developing maybe then-if that wording suits you better. A two month old baby does not have a fully developed immune system (e.g, key responses to encapsulated bacteria, such as the Pneumococcus primarily occur through a specific type of antibody that isn't fully developed until about 2 years of age!!)

"The vaccines help them catch up", so, do you think there are no possible side effects from flooding the immune system with numerous viruses at the same time?

mulbot

Jerrica wrote: »

This is a good example of bad science. Vaccines are not by passing any critical stages, it doesn't matter if the antigen is delivered by accidentally swallowing a virus laden droplet in the air after someone coughs or via sterile syringe, it all causes the same reaction.

Out of interest,how do you know?

pwurple

mulbot wrote: »

"The vaccines help them catch up", so, do you think there are no possible side effects from flooding the immune system with numerous viruses at the same time?

How many viruses do you think we are exposed to every day? Floating around in the air we breathe... On our skin, in through our mouths, ears, up our noses?

Do you think it's zero?

It's closer to thousands. Every day. All of us.

1, 3, or even 6 extra is a drop in the ocean of what we are normally exposed to. There is no "flooding".

pwurple

gar32 wrote: »

When I said vaccines last a year I meet USE BY DATE. Do you have any food in your fridge that last a year?

Wow, you don't cook much either!

I ate a cheese at the weekend that was older than my 4 year old daughter.

I have wine/whiskey that is decades old. I've got chutney and jam that lasts years, dried fish, canned goods, dried pasta. An aged basmati rice is years old.

Preserving things is easy and awesome and we have myriad ways of doing it.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

mulbot wrote: »

Underdeveloped or still developing maybe then-if that wording suits you better. A two month old baby does not have a fully developed immune system (e.g, key responses to encapsulated bacteria, such as the Pneumococcus primarily occur through a specific type of antibody that isn't fully developed until about 2 years of age!!)

"The vaccines help them catch up", so, do you think there are no possible side effects from flooding the immune system with numerous viruses at the same time?

And how do you think they develop those antibodies? Through exposure to the disease. Same way vaccines work.

Jerrica

mulbot wrote: »

Underdeveloped or still developing maybe then-if that wording suits you better. A two month old baby does not have a fully developed immune system (e.g, key responses to encapsulated bacteria, such as the Pneumococcus primarily occur through a specific type of antibody that isn't fully developed until about 2 years of age!!)

Correct, which is why it is so important for the under 2's to receive a vaccine against pneumococcus so that they are protected from it. The PCV (pneumoccocus conjugated vaccine) contains attenuated or killed parts of a number of different strains of pneumonoccus. Infants cannot make enough of the specific antibody IgG2 that would be needed to adequately fight a 'natural' pneumococcal infection (becuase of that capsule that covers the bacteria like a protective coat), so the vaccine safely uses parts of the bacteria that the body can respond to.

Note that in 2000, about 14·5 million episodes of serious pneumococcal disease were estimated to occur. Pneumococcal disease caused about 826 000 deaths (link) i.e. Pneumococcal disease is one of the world's leading preventable (by vaccination) fatal diseases. Unsurprisingly the highest death rates are found in countries where vaccines are unaffordable to the general populus.

Again you in danger of taking snippets of science without clearly understanding them and using them inaccurately in your argument.

I'm sure your mind won't be swayed by any of this, but for anyone on the fence there's a very good pdf available from the New Zealand Immunisation Advisory Centre which addresses some understandable concerns about whether vaccines "overload" and infant's immune system (they don't), details how an infant's immune system is different to an adults and discusses the role that vaccines play in helping to strengthen the immune system in a safe, controlled way.

mulbot wrote: »

Out of interest,how do you know?

It's my job to know.

witchgirl26

I've been reading this thread with interest. My mam was wary of vaccines ever since her cousin had developmental delays as a result of the polio vaccine. Now this was the vaccine that was given out about 50-odd years ago and it has changed since. Anyway we all got our vaccines as kids but my mam made sure she was very informed. She was still wary about the MMR with me so I just had them as separates. In fact that came in handy as I did get both measles and rubella (thankfully mild doses) so when getting the booster at 11, I just got the mumps one.

I'm now looking at getting the chicken pox one as there is no record of me having chicken pox as a child. Do I like getting needles stuck in me? No. But will I do it so that I protect not only myself but others, yes I will.

I do get people's fears over vaccines, I really do but if you have concerns, you should discuss them with a medical professional and not rely on the internet.

I did also read this blog post this morning from a mother who was an anti-vax parent & who has now changed her stance. I thought it was interesting and worth sharing:
http://thescientificparent.org/learning-the-hard-way-my-journey-from-antivaxx-to-science/

CelticRambler

tinkerbell wrote: »

It's expensive - around €150-€160 for each vaccine plus the cost to administer it by a medical professional.

For information, the Bexsero MenB vaccine is available from French pharmacies for 88€ per dose (down from 93€ since the start of this year). Under EU rules, you are allowed acquire vaccines for "personal" use from any EU-recognised, qualified professional, which extends to buying it for your children.

As it needs to be stored in a fridge, you wouldn't be able to buy it in France and bring it back to Ireland, but if you're planning to vaccinate several children/teens at the same time it might be worth planning your holidays carefully. A doctor's visit costs 25€ in France.

Before this thread went off the rails, the OP was getting a lot of stick for saying that she'd keep her children away from others if her own were ill. As the image above shows, that's not the problem with unvaccinated children, as the "herd" is protected by all those who are vaccinated.

The danger is almost entirely on the OPs side. It only takes one infected individual to start an outbreak, e.g. the recent Disneyland measles epidemic in the US. The OP can never take her children to any place where children gather from all over the country/world without them being at risk.

So it comes back to balancing one risk against another. As far as early-years vaccines are concerned, it's a question of accepting the very slight risk of vaccine-related illness for the sake of a normal childhood versus the risk and cost of a severe illness by coming in contact with an infected child.

And to pick up on one other point from the early part of this discussion - it is very common in France to be required to show that your children are "fully" vaccinated before they're allowed take part in group activities. There's little point in using the phrase "I'm in [insert country of choice] ..." as an argument against vaccination, as one never knows if/when one wil end up somewhere else.

tinkerbell

Bexsero may be cheape in France but considering 3-4 doses are needed then it doesn't actually work out cheaper overall... You'd be returning to France every few months!!

mulbot

witchgirl26 wrote: »

I've been reading this thread with interest. My mam was wary of vaccines ever since her cousin had developmental delays as a result of the polio vaccine. Now this was the vaccine that was given out about 50-odd years ago and it has changed since. Anyway we all got our vaccines as kids but my mam made sure she was very informed. She was still wary about the MMR with me so I just had them as separates. In fact that came in handy as I did get both measles and rubella (thankfully mild doses) so when getting the booster at 11, I just got the mumps one.

I'm now looking at getting the chicken pox one as there is no record of me having chicken pox as a child. Do I like getting needles stuck in me? No. But will I do it so that I protect not only myself but others, yes I will.

I do get people's fears over vaccines, I really do but if you have concerns, you should discuss them with a medical professional and not rely on the internet.

I did also read this blog post this morning from a mother who was an anti-vax parent & who has now changed her stance. I thought it was interesting and worth sharing:
http://thescientificparent.org/learning-the-hard-way-my-journey-from-antivaxx-to-science/

In my case i read the information from related books, i.e medical journals/studies etc. The internet isn't the best source from whatever side you agree with(pro or anti vaccine). Also,i have obviously discussed with GP back home,he has no problem discussing vaccines or administering,yet none of his 3 children were vaccinated

SpaceSasqwatch

mulbot wrote: »

In my case i read the information from related books, i.e medical journals/studies etc. The internet isn't the best source from whatever side you agree with(pro or anti vaccine). Also,i have obviously discussed with GP back home,he has no problem discussing vaccines or administering,yet none of his 3 children were vaccinated

What you have posted on this thread would lead us to believe otherwiae.....

mulbot

SpaceSasqwatch wrote: »

What you have posted on this thread would lead us to believe otherwiae.....

Such as?

RentDayBlues

I see from the news today that Australia has introduced a "no jab, no pay" policy for state benefits, what a great idea.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

RentDayBlues wrote: »

I see from the news today that Australia has introduced a "no jab, no pay" policy for state benefits, what a great idea.

The daily rags would have a field day with that here, "Most vulnerable in our society forced to jab children to avoid starvation", the blood would pour down the steps of Leinster house.

Jerrica

I think this is a very bold and interesting move, and while for us parents as individuals it's often the unfairness of the risk to our children's health that's at the heart of our despair against anti-vaccination protagonists, it seems that the Australian government are looking at it from an economic point of view: From The Independent:

Social Services Minister Scott Morrison claims that it is not fair for those who do not receive benefits to pay towards Family Tax Benefit A – worth up to $4,600 per child aged under 12 a year – for parents who shun immunisation. .... [Morrison said] “We’re a free country, and we’re for free society, but that doesn’t mean you get to take taxpayers’ money if you don’t want to go along with the rules.”

Luke92

Rosy Posy wrote: »

Also if my kids are sick I take the responsibility of keeping them at home away from the very young, old or pregnant.

Your OH is a GP, yet you don't know that your Kids could be sick for days and spreading their sickness without having any symptoms.

Also, some people are carriers. They can have a virus but it may not affect them as bad as other people. Everyone is different.

Virus A might not affect child B but could kill child A. Virus B could kill child B, but child A will be fine. (I say kill just to make a point)

gar32

Luke92 wrote: »

Your OH is a GP, yet you don't know that your Kids could be sick for days and spreading their sickness without having any symptoms.

Also, some people are carriers. They can have a virus but it may not affect them as bad as other people. Everyone is different.

Virus A might not affect child B but could kill child A. Virus B could kill child B, but child A will be fine. (I say kill just to make a point)

Yes that is true but even Vaccinated people can carry sickness. Most of the vaccines need boosters to keep people from getting sick. I would bet like most people I know they have not had a booster in years.

On that point what are the costs for boosters and why are adults not tracked for them. Anyone can carry a sickness.

Satori Rae

gar32 wrote: »

Yes that is true but even Vaccinated people can carry sickness. Most of the vaccines need boosters to keep people from getting sick. I would bet like most people I know they have not had a booster in years.

On that point what are the costs for boosters and why are adults not tracked for them. Anyone can carry a sickness.

The vaccination timeline for adults roughly is


Around 13-18 years. 3-in-1 (Td/IPV) teenage booster, given as a single jab and contains vaccines against diphtheria, tetanus and polio


18/25 years. Men C vaccine for students

65 and over especially but really to be gotten unless you are allergic to eggs. Flu (every year) Pneumococcal (PPV) vaccine

70 years (and 78 and 79 year olds as a catch-up) Shingles vaccine

There would be some variations such as if you where working around bodily fluids you would need a Hep vaccination and also if considering to getting pregnant may need a rubella booster before hand.


And anyone can carry a sickness but the more people that are vaccinated against it the more chance of it not killing another child or person.
Usually in schools or there work people are notified about boosters it is up to the parents to get their kids sorted or risk there lives.

mulbot

Satori Rae wrote: »

The vaccination timeline for adults roughly is


Around 13-18 years. 3-in-1 (Td/IPV) teenage booster, given as a single jab and contains vaccines against diphtheria, tetanus and polio


18/25 years. Men C vaccine for students

65 and over especially but really to be gotten unless you are allergic to eggs. Flu (every year) Pneumococcal (PPV) vaccine

70 years (and 78 and 79 year olds as a catch-up) Shingles vaccine

There would be some variations such as if you where working around bodily fluids you would need a Hep vaccination and also if considering to getting pregnant may need a rubella booster before hand.


And anyone can carry a sickness but the more people that are vaccinated against it the more chance of it not killing another child or person.
Usually in schools or there work people are notified about boosters it is up to the parents to get their kids sorted or risk there lives.

Like OP said,the % of people in these groups getting follow up "boosters" must be very low,

Satori Rae

mulbot wrote: »

Like OP said,the % of people in these groups getting follow up "boosters" must be very low,

It depends if you work in the health industry you have to have them done also if you are a student like wise. Other wise then that I could not quote stats.

Usually these are free if you are on a medical system such as having a medi card or being on the Nhs or are in the health industry. Apart from the chicken pox vaccine I think)

Usually if you are an adult you have to sort out these things for yourself but reminders are give out.

witchgirl26

mulbot wrote: »

In my case i read the information from related books, i.e medical journals/studies etc. The internet isn't the best source from whatever side you agree with(pro or anti vaccine). Also,i have obviously discussed with GP back home,he has no problem discussing vaccines or administering,yet none of his 3 children were vaccinated

No I agree, on either side you will not get the best information from the internet. And fair play for reading medical journals etc if that's what you did because a lot of people wouldn't.

gar32 wrote: »

Yes that is true but even Vaccinated people can carry sickness. Most of the vaccines need boosters to keep people from getting sick. I would bet like most people I know they have not had a booster in years.

On that point what are the costs for boosters and why are adults not tracked for them. Anyone can carry a sickness.

Not all vaccinations need boosters. Some are a one shot deal thing. I know for a fact what all my vaccinations are & have obtained any boosters necessary. I do have to look into the chicken pox one but the need for that will be based on a blood test determining if I did ever have a mild case & therefore the vaccine is not required.

As for the cost - my GP has a list of costs of all vaccines and boosters that they refer to if you ask. They're not cheap in some cases but I believe they are definitely worth it.

You're right - anyone can carry sickness. The idea being that the majority of people are vaccinated then the potential spread of that sickness is limited and thus those who have stronger immune systems can protect those who, for medical reasons, cannot get vaccines.

witchgirl26

mulbot wrote: »

Like OP said,the % of people in these groups getting follow up "boosters" must be very low,

For those ones listed - I got the first set of them in school I think (bar the polio one which I got myself then a few years later before going travelling).

I get a flu vaccine every year without fail.

Haven't hit 70 yet so a little off the shingles one but I'm sure my then GP will remind me!