Jump to content
Gil Bang

are there any anti-vaxxers here?

Recommended Posts

I have a friend whose son is autistic and blames it on the vaccines. To hear her tell it, he was a normal baby, got some shots, got sick, then was different. There are a few holes in her story - it sounds like some things were showing up before the shot - but it's a losing battle trying to have a rational discussion with someone living through it. In person, she's an extremely kind and generous person. For years her family has taken in various junkies, homeless, ex-cons, helped them clean up their lives and made them part of her family. It's a really powerful and honorable thing. She also somehow turned from an apolitical Christian into a full-blown Trumper. I blame the vaccines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brian Fantana said:

Some things are more important than personal relationships but we can agree to disagree.

The reality is that many of the vaccines can be delayed with no real harm manifest. I would take a strategic approach. Agree to delay Hep B (low hanging fruit). Don't delay DTaP, pneumococcal, or Hib. Depending on circumstances, MMR could be delayed without much risk of harm. If in a granola day care, calculus might change. Varicella, meh. Hep A, meh. HPV for boys, lulz. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

My kids are fully vaccinated but we did delay a couple of them, such as Hep B. There's no way a newborn in my family is at risk for Hep B so we just waited a little longer on those.

 They also didn't get the chicken pox vaccine. Wasn't available for the oldest and the other two just got chicken pox the old-fashioned way. Doubt that qualifies me as an anti-vaxxer for this discussion.

My primary issue with the schedule is that it is not individualized for risk/benefit. I understand very well why it exists from a public health perspective, but the reality is that there are some aspects of the schedule that make zero sense when individualized circumstances are accounted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

Is Numbers here?   If he isn't this thread is the bat signal to him

He posts here as Hank Scorpio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Zepol87 said:

Vic is an anti vaxxer

Based on how he throws caution to the wind in the field of woman and food this may be the least surprising revelation ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

The reality is that many of the vaccines can be delayed with no real harm manifest. I would take a strategic approach. Agree to delay Hep B (low hanging fruit). Don't delay DTaP, pneumococcal, or Hib. Depending on circumstances, MMR could be delayed without much risk of harm. If in a granola day care, calculus might change. Varicella, meh. Hep A, meh. HPV for boys, lulz. 

This is where I am at, kind of.  We can afford to take my son (11 months) to the pediatrician once every two weeks so I get through my wife’s unfounded vax fears by agreeing he get one shot every couple of weeks, which keeps him on schedule.  The APA schedule is necessary and should be followed because herd immunity.  The Sears schedule is bullshit.  But if my wife wants to go down the street and take 6 weeks to do 3 shots that would otherwise be on the same day for peace of mind, I am not going to argue if kiddo is getting them.  MMR might cause a fight because I want it immediately when due and she wants to wait past 2 yrs because anecdotal autism. I love her, but the fucking internet, man 

Edited by A-Tex Devil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Incredulity said:

Way to go full cocksucker.   Congratulations.

It’s ok. I get it. My wife and I would’ve probably been the ones to chastise anyone who deviated from the vaccine schedule. Life has a way of humbling you though. 

31 minutes ago, A-Tex Devil said:

This is where I am at, kind of.  We can afford to take my son (11 months) to the pediatrician once every two weeks so I get through my wife’s unfounded vax fears by agreeing he get one shot every couple of weeks, which keeps him on schedule.  The APA schedule is necessary and should be followed because herd immunity.  The Sears schedule is bullshit.  But if my wife wants to go down the street and take 6 weeks to do 3 shots that would otherwise be on the same day for peace of mind, I am not going to argue if kiddo is getting them.  MMR might cause a fight because I want it immediately when due and she wants to wait past 2 yrs because anecdotal autism. I love her, but the fucking internet, man 

You are gonna see more and more of this. The internet is powerful, autism is some scary ass shit, and it’s only becoming more prevalent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, GRHorn said:

It’s ok. I get it. My wife and I would’ve probably been the ones to chastise anyone who deviated from the vaccine schedule. Life has a way of humbling you though.

I wasn't chastising you. I think what you're doing is fine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let lay out a hypothetical (read: not presently real, but plausible) scenario for those of you who seem to think that delaying or not getting your children vaccinated on schedule will do zero harm.

Ok, so you've decided to not go with the schedule your child's pediatric has recommended. So does the rest of your neighborhood. So does the rest of your city. What will happen here is that because your children weren't vaccinated and neither were the children around them, they are now susceptible to every goddamn thing they should've been safe from thanks to the wonderous things brought by science. So your kids get hit with shit like measles, rubella, whooping cough, and polio. AT THE SAME TIME. Now your child(ren), should they survive all that, will have horrible disabilities for the rest of their lives because you didn't have the fucking fortitude to man the fuck up and get them the preventive care that could've saved them from all of that. Most likely though, they will die because their bodies are too frail to fight off everything at once and there just isn't enough medicine in the world to treat everything once they are infected with it all.

If you think you can't do it because you are hurting them because of the needle, I promise you you are hurting them more if you don't. If they don't get the vaccinations they need and get sick and/or die from any ailment, that shit is squarely the fuck on your shoulders and YOU have to try and sleep with that for the rest of your life. Frankly, I hope if this happens to you and your child dies, I hope you never sleep again. You don't deserve to rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t understand the idea that spreading out the vaccinations has any impact in preventing autism since there has been zero proof that autism is caused by vaccines.    But even if autism might be caused with vaccine A and B being administered together, who to sat spreading the schedule by 6 months won’t still cause it?  

Not to mention that there isn’t zero harm if you take 1 vaccine visit and change it to 4 pediatrician visits:  the doctors office will be slammed.     Remember that the next time you want a walk-in appt and you’re told it’s a 4 hour wait.   The delayed vaccine schedule is preventing other kids from being treated when they’re ill.

finally I understand the human nature to push guilt into someone else.  If you give your kid all the vaccines and they end up autistic, you spend the next 40 years wondering or fearing it was your fault with the vaccines.  If you hold off on the vaccines, and your kid infects other with the measles, it’s unfortunate but a random event.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the "spread 'em out" theory is expected to reduce the risk of autism, I think it's mostly just an attempt to reduce the assault on a small child's body with multiple vaccinations administered at once.

That said, I haven't the foggiest if such a plan is in any way grounded in science.  Certainly it opens up some risk because of delayed vaccinations, but whether or not there's any real benefit, I don't know.  All our kids did the standard schedule.  Outside of our 14 YO boy being kind of an immature dumbass (because he's a 14 YO boy), I can't point to any developmental issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, HOOK'EMHOOAH said:

So your kids get hit with shit like measles, rubella, whooping cough, and polio. AT THE SAME TIME. 

1

You left out the sharknado.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most dangerous logic I see out there is "Yeah, so people are getting the measles occasionally now.  So what.  No one dies from it.  So why do I need to risk my kid getting sick from the vaccine?"    It's terrifying that people think this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't think the "spread 'em out" theory is expected to reduce the risk of autism, I think it's mostly just an attempt to reduce the assault on a small child's body with multiple vaccinations administered at once.

That said, I haven't the foggiest if such a plan is in any way grounded in science.  Certainly it opens up some risk because of delayed vaccinations, but whether or not there's any real benefit, I don't know.  All our kids did the standard schedule.  Outside of our 14 YO boy being kind of an immature dumbass (because he's a 14 YO boy), I can't point to any developmental issues.

It’s not grounded in anything as far as I know other than suspicion.  

One thing that has caught my attention in years of living with this and reading what I can is there is a strong positive correlation between autism spectrum and atopic dermatitis, food allergies, and asthma.  Those are all mediated by inflammatory/immune responses.  It seems possible to me that autism could be a manifestation of some inflammatory process that goes out of whack.  Wouldn’t have to be from immunization.  Could be from an environmental exposure.  This is just my own speculation.  

So many unanswered questions.  It leaves room for all kinds of wild theories that youll find online  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Against my better judgment I’ll share here. My oldest son is on the spectrum. His development was seemingly normal until around 2 years old. I don’t remember the exact date, in a lot of ways I have blocked that part out. I still refuse to watch videos of him from before that time.  Anyway, he drastically changed.  It’s a similar story to what people have heard before. To this day my wife attributes it to vaccinations. 

Years have passed and countless hours of therapy and many tens of thousands of dollars have been spent. My son is now 9 and in school doing well, without assistance due mainly to my wife’s tireless efforts to help him.  But he is going to have a tougher adolescence and life than the average person because of this. 

I say all this because since my son’s issues my wife has insisted our kids be on a delayed schedule.  I’ve pointed out multiple times that vaccines aren’t blamed for autism, but you cannot convince against her experience. There’s some things not worth fighting over with your spouse especially when she has sacrificed so much to help one of your children. 

I’m posting this merely to share another experience.  I wouldn’t wish autism on my worst enemy’s children. 

For reference or a timeline our 7 year old is caught up finally. 

GR -- first, thank you for sharing this.  I know that it isn't easy.  I wish your family strength, and admire you for the love and patience you demonstrate just in this short post.

Anecdotal experience is a very strong and persuasive influence.  And when the topic is something  as emotionally wrenching as your child, it's even stronger.  Outside data, rigorous science, etc.?  That's no match for a protective parent's wounded heart.  That said, good on you for at least prevailing on having the vaccinations done, even if on a different schedule.

I do find it interesting that the solution many folks have reached is "spread out the schedule," even though -- as I understand it -- there's no science supporting the notion that a spread-out schedule is any better, reduces the risk of autism, etc.  It makes me think it's more about one of our most base human impulses (one with which I am quite familiar) -- the need to exercise control.  Having something "HAPPEN" to your kid is the ultimate in "no control."  So, you want to wrest back control.  And taking the spread them out path is an easy way to do that.

And your experience, particularly this, raises the ultimate question:

Quote

His development was seemingly normal until around 2 years old. .... Anyway, he drastically changed.  It’s a similar story to what people have heard before. To this day my wife attributes it to vaccinations. 

The common facts seem to be 1) normal development until about age 2, 2) group of vaccinations given, 3) sometime after, autism manifests.

The rub is on element 2).  Is it correlation, or causation?  Medical ethics prevents a good study (it would be unethical to do a double-blind study where kids are given fake vaccinations).  But I'm curious about historical charting and observation of autism.  First, I hypothesize that it was rarely or poorly diagnosed before the 1980s -- it's not something that was well understood, and because it manifests psychologically as opposed to physically, it was often misdiagnosed.  Second, I hypothesize that when it WAS diagnosed, the observation of symptoms likely correlates with the current timeline -- that is, evidence of autism generally manifests in the early toddler years, and includes a noticeable change in behavior.

So, my complete hypothesis (based on the studies I have read, and just broad attention to the subject) is that we are seeing some increase in the diagnoses of autism because medical science is better at diagnosing it.  And, vaccines are not a material cause/contributor of autism.  Rather, it is something that inherently manifests at around /within a reasonable period of time after he same age that many vaccines are given -- vaccinations are a correlation that is simply a coincidence based on timing, and are not a cause.

I don't envy you your situation, and it's near impossible to argue logic with respect to a matter so deeply entrenched in the heart and psyche.  Good luck to your family, and to your son.  It's clear that you're doing right by him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, GRHorn said:

My oldest son is on the spectrum.

i'm not going to express sorrow for you that your son is on the spectrum.  some of the most amazing and inventive people who have lived have been there.  i'll instead hope for your son and the rest of you that he has something of that in him.  that your wife has done such a fine job with him that he can attend school and is doing well suggests to me that he may be one of the ones who is extraordinarily helpful wherever his life takes him.  you may one day celebrate, in a sense, that he has had this hill to climb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

GR -- first, thank you for sharing this.  I know that it isn't easy.  I wish your family strength, and admire you for the love and patience you demonstrate just in this short post.

Anecdotal experience is a very strong and persuasive influence.  And when the topic is something  as emotionally wrenching as your child, it's even stronger.  Outside data, rigorous science, etc.?  That's no match for a protective parent's wounded heart.  That said, good on you for at least prevailing on having the vaccinations done, even if on a different schedule.

I do find it interesting that the solution many folks have reached is "spread out the schedule," even though -- as I understand it -- there's no science supporting the notion that a spread-out schedule is any better, reduces the risk of autism, etc.  It makes me think it's more about one of our most base human impulses (one with which I am quite familiar) -- the need to exercise control.  Having something "HAPPEN" to your kid is the ultimate in "no control."  So, you want to wrest back control.  And taking the spread them out path is an easy way to do that.

And your experience, particularly this, raises the ultimate question:

The common facts seem to be 1) normal development until about age 2, 2) group of vaccinations given, 3) sometime after, autism manifests.

The rub is on element 2).  Is it correlation, or causation?  Medical ethics prevents a good study (it would be unethical to do a double-blind study where kids are given fake vaccinations).  But I'm curious about historical charting and observation of autism.  First, I hypothesize that it was rarely or poorly diagnosed before the 1980s -- it's not something that was well understood, and because it manifests psychologically as opposed to physically, it was often misdiagnosed.  Second, I hypothesize that when it WAS diagnosed, the observation of symptoms likely correlates with the current timeline -- that is, evidence of autism generally manifests in the early toddler years, and includes a noticeable change in behavior.

So, my complete hypothesis (based on the studies I have read, and just broad attention to the subject) is that we are seeing some increase in the diagnoses of autism because medical science is better at diagnosing it.  And, vaccines are not a material cause/contributor of autism.  Rather, it is something that inherently manifests at around /within a reasonable period of time after he same age that many vaccines are given -- vaccinations are a correlation that is simply a coincidence based on timing, and are not a cause.

I don't envy you your situation, and it's near impossible to argue logic with respect to a matter so deeply entrenched in the heart and psyche.  Good luck to your family, and to your son.  It's clear that you're doing right by him.

The biggest danger of anti-vax nonsense is that it'll make ordinary people believe it if their kid is on the spectrum.  Anecdotal experience wouldn't result in believing anti-vax nonsense if it wasn't so prevalent.  As far as "spreading out" I indulged my wife with our first kid, even though it ticked the doctor off.  I put my foot down with my second kid and she seems to have come around.  She's not anti-vax at all but for a while thought all at once was somehow bad.  There's no science behind it and I think she's cool with it now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

I divorced an anti-vaxxer. Sad thing is she is in nursing school now. Like most conspiracy people, anti-vaxxers are so susceptible to other BS they can become a scary group. 

 

How ironic, considering she must have a huge list of vaccinations in order to do her clinical rotations, which she has to do in order to get her degree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

How ironic, considering she must have a huge list of vaccinations in order to do her clinical rotations, which she has to do in order to get her degree.

For sure. I anticipate her being fired within a few months if she ever takes a nursing gig due to telling a patient the doctor is wrong and Tumeric or crystals can save the day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, 'stache said:

 She's not anti-vax at all but for a while thought all at once was somehow bad.  There's no science behind it and I think she's cool with it now.  

Is there science behind all at once being necessary? Anastasis (who is a pharmacist, I believe) has suggested it’s not, and I think there was a doctor on shaggy who said so as well, though I could be mistaken.

That’s not an “anti-vax” position, I’m legitimately curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think part of it is a wrong-headed appeal to purity.  Vaccinations aren't natural; therefore, are impure; therefore, must be bad.

I think this thinking also belies the anti-GMO people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't think the "spread 'em out" theory is expected to reduce the risk of autism, I think it's mostly just an attempt to reduce the assault on a small child's body with multiple vaccinations administered at once.

I really don't care if parents want to make 35 trips to the pediatrician, as long as everyone that can gets their shots.  But, the idea that the pathogen loading in four vaccinations (which I think is the most they get at one time) is some sort of assault on the immune system of a <2 yo must have come from someone that has not have spent much time watching the dietary habits or general hygiene of said child.  Those things are walking petri dishes.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

For sure. I anticipate her being fired within a few months if she ever takes a nursing gig due to telling a patient the doctor is wrong and Tumeric or crystals can save the day. 

Or fucking prayer. Show me a goddamn miracle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, GRHorn said:

You are gonna see more and more of this. The internet is powerful, autism is some scary ass shit, and it’s only becoming more prevalent.  

Not so sure about that.  I'm pretty sure more people are taking their kids to shrinks nowadays than they did in the 70s,80s and 90s.  Plus, there is such a broad spectrum for autism, I'm willing to bet the general population was under diagnosed for the most part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, JBJ said:

I think part of it is a wrong-headed appeal to purity.  Vaccinations aren't natural; therefore, are impure; therefore, must be bad.

I think this thinking also belies the anti-GMO people.

Quote

I talked to a public health official and asked him what's the best way to anticipate where there might be higher than normal rates of vaccine noncompliance, and he said take a map and put a pin wherever there's a Whole Foods. I sort of laughed, and he said, "No, really, I'm not joking." It's those communities with the Prius driving, composting, organic food-eating people.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2011/01/why-prius-driving-composting-set-fears-vaccines

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, JBJ said:

I think part of it is a wrong-headed appeal to purity.  Vaccinations aren't natural; therefore, are impure; therefore, must be bad.

I think this thinking also belies the anti-GMO people.

"People lived for thousands of years without vaccinations and we will too!"

Nah, bitch. You will live for a few years without them. You might even get lucky and get a couple decades. But dont think for a second that for those thousands of years that those people who didn't have vaccinations they weren't suffering the entire time. It wasn't some happy-go-lucky free for all where everyone was at peace and lived into their silver years and rode off into the sunset after completing all the stupid shit on their bucketlists. Old was fucking 30 because it meant you didn't die from some horrible disease when you were an infant or that your parents didn't just leave you somewhere to die because fuckin' nothing could be done for your ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, udaydanceparty said:

...I'm willing to bet the general population was under diagnosed for the most part.

No doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

Is there science behind all at once being necessary? Anastasis (who is a pharmacist, I believe) has suggested it’s not, and I think there was a doctor on shaggy who said so as well, though I could be mistaken.

That’s not an “anti-vax” position, I’m legitimately curious.

While I do believe there is plenty of science to it, one of the other major, and very important factors, is that parents won't otherwise bring their kids in, so get as many in while you can to maintain herd immunity.  

Edited by A-Tex Devil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, udaydanceparty said:

Not so sure about that.  I'm pretty sure more people are taking their kids to shrinks nowadays than they did in the 70s,80s and 90s.  Plus, there is such a broad spectrum for autism, I'm willing to bet the general population was under diagnosed for the most part.

I think that's true, and I have no data to back this up, but I have a sneaking suspicion that there are some unknown environmental factors at play, as well.  And I don't mean vaccines. 

Between the amount of estrogen in the water supply, the amount of plastics we use, industrial agriculture, etc., it's clear that our bodies are a cocktail of chemicals much different than they were 50 or 100 years ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

Is there science behind all at once being necessary? Anastasis (who is a pharmacist, I believe) has suggested it’s not, and I think there was a doctor on shaggy who said so as well, though I could be mistaken.

That’s not an “anti-vax” position, I’m legitimately curious.

The get them all at once logic is so people actually get them all period. People are more likely to drop the rest of the schedule, miss appointments, decide "we've made it this far", etc. the more they're spread out. I also have never seen anything that says that getting them all together at the recommended ages is medically necessary; I've only seen the completely logical argument that it's socially necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMPO, looking for it and diagnosing it.  30 years ago the autism kid was somewhere between "weird" and "retarded" and went to special classes.  Now most are mainstreamed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, udaydanceparty said:

Not so sure about that.  I'm pretty sure more people are taking their kids to shrinks nowadays than they did in the 70s,80s and 90s.  Plus, there is such a broad spectrum for autism, I'm willing to bet the general population was under diagnosed for the most part.

People probably do take their kids more to shrinks nowadays, but we aren’t talking about anxiety or ADD.  You take them in your pedi initially because they have continuous meltdowns, inappropriate behaviors, speech delays, motor delays, and/or a totally detached sense of being that is hard to describe unless you’ve been around it for a long time.   

I guess my experience is skewed, but I’ve spent a lot of time in waiting rooms and seen kids all over the range.  Most are more affected and in a different way than I remember any kids when I was growing up.    For those reasons I think it’s not just increased awareness.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

Might want to save a few pins for Kenneth Copeland, et al.

Those who are involved in the outbreak have connections to Waxahachie and Midlothian, and it's possible more cases will occur because of how contagious measles is, the Texas Department of State Health Services said. 

 

I have a strong suspicion that none of those people have ever set foot in a Whole Foods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HOOK'EMHOOAH said:

Or fucking prayer. Show me a goddamn miracle.

Yep. She believes in them as well way over science. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

People probably do take their kids more to shrinks nowadays, but we aren’t talking about anxiety or ADD.  You take them in your pedi initially because they have continuous meltdowns, inappropriate behaviors, speech delays, motor delays, and/or a totally detached sense of being that is hard to describe unless you’ve been around it for a long time.   

I guess my experience is skewed, but I’ve spent a lot of time in waiting rooms and seen kids all over the range.  Most are more affected and in a different way than I remember any kids when I was growing up.    For those reasons I think it’s not just increased awareness.  

Not sure your age, but 40 years ago+/- they wouldn't have been in a waiting room.  Doctors response would have been, "yeah, you got a handful".  Most of the kids got it beat out of them, neglected out, or institutionalized.(I am not saying those are better answers than current methods).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Yep. She believes in them as well way over science. 

Because OF COURSE she does.

And that's why we can't have nice things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Yes, beating the autism out of a kid is one of the preferred treatments.

I'm not an incredulity fan, but he notes that those weren't better answers than current methods.  He's just observing -- correctly, I think -- that our understanding of autism, and the response/treatement thereof was pretty shitty for a LONG time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'm not an incredulity fan, but he notes that those weren't better answers than current methods.  He's just observing -- correctly, I think -- that our understanding of autism, and the response/treatement thereof was pretty shitty for a LONG time.

Seems to me he thinks it could work:

Quote

Most of the kids got it beat out of them

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the best way to measure it, anecdotally but still, would be to get a pediatrician’s opinion from someone that has been in practice 30 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...