COUNTING ON THE KINDNESS OF STRANGERS
The Norwich Bulletin has a couple of pieces on vaccinations. The sidebar is a short profile of a home educating mom who has refused vaccinations for her kids. She doesn’t come off looking very bright:
“Doctors will ridicule us, and we know that,” Hussey said. “But I’m not some hysterical mother, we’re not stupid. God made my kids’ immune systems, and I can give my kids the things God gave me to make them well.”
One standard vaccine babies receive protects against Pertussis or whooping cough.
Children can be vaccinated for pertussis as young as 6 weeks old. Hussey said she doesn’t think the vaccine would have prevented three of her children from contracting whooping cough as adolescents.
“At the pediatrician, they tested the kids for that, and it came back culture negative. They still had it — you could hear it. The culture only detects the original virus that they made the vaccine for, and that’s not what they had. It’s a new strain,” Hussey said. “They think it’s gone, but it’s not. Lots of kids still get it, but now they call it bronchitis.”
Hussey said she will stick to homeopathic treatment for her children, and will continue home schooling them.
Yeah, that homeschooling reference was gratuitous.
For the record, I’m ambivalent about the vaccinations. Folks who don’t are counting on the combined immunity of those who do to prevent a serious outbreak. It’s kind of a “tragedy of the commons” in reverse. OTOH, folks should be free to vaccinate or not. There are a lot who are convinced that there’s some tie to autism (I’m not one of them.) And some people, like the woman profiled here, are just against modern medicine, period.
17 Responses to “COUNTING ON THE KINDNESS OF STRANGERS”
![]() Comment by Ulrike January 28th, 2006 at 10:44 am |
Folks who don’t are counting on the combined immunity of those who do to prevent a serious outbreak. Actually, many folks who don’t vaccinate don’t give a damn about serious outbreaks. We’re only concerned about making the best choice for our own children, and the rest of the state is on their own. Herd immunity isn’t a good reason to vaccinate an individual any more than herd education is a good reason to send an individual child to g-school. 😉 |
![]() Comment by Henry Cate January 28th, 2006 at 11:00 am |
We had a big issue with how aggressive some doctors are to give all the shots in the first couple months of a child’s life. The baby’s body is still undergoing great changes, and being hammered with a great variety of diseases seems like a bad idea. Our children have had all their vaccination shots, but at a much slower rate than normal. My wife is diabetic, juvenile onset. We know there are immune issues in our family. So we choose to do the vaccinations very slowly, one at a time. Many doctors want do three shots at one time, and many of the shots, like DPT, have more than one immunization. In fact one doctor refused to deal with us when we told her we would be going at a slower rate. We didn’t see any urgency to have all the shots in the first couple months. |
![]() Comment by Andrea R. in Missouri January 28th, 2006 at 12:09 pm |
Something has got to be causing the increase in things like autism. Why not vaccines? My kids have had all their shots but I admit that I’m one of those that are leary of them. Since you know more about scientific stuff than I do, I’d like to hear your ideas. Not to start an argument — genuinely curious. |
![]() Comment by Daryl January 28th, 2006 at 1:41 pm |
Ulrike– If there were an epidemic of some deadly childhood disease in your town, would you then vaccinate? Or would you continue to take your chances? |
![]() Comment by Daryl January 28th, 2006 at 1:45 pm |
The studies I’ve read have not shown a correlation with vaccines. I find it hard to believe that the FDA is involved in a massive scientific fraud to cover up any causal relationship. That may be naive, but that’s where I’m at. As a scientist, I am open to changing my mind based on further studies. |
![]() Comment by Andrea R. in Missouri January 28th, 2006 at 5:25 pm |
Nah, the guvmint would never cover anything up. Wanna buy a bridge? Actually, isn’t it just as likely that it is something in all the processed foods or all the hormones, etc. in our meat and dairy products these days? Maybe it’s evolution gone wrong. |
![]() Comment by Ulrike January 28th, 2006 at 6:32 pm |
Straw man, Daryl? 😉 I was not debating whether vaccines are right, wrong or sometimes both. I was just saying that your comment on people who don’t vaccinate are “counting on the combined immunity of those who do” is incorrect. I’ve been around the vaccine debate quite a bit over the past 8 years, and the main argument I hear is “the risks outweigh the benefits” either for the individual or on the whole (insert conspiracy theory here). My personal opinion is that the truth lies somewhere in between what the folks who are making a profit from the products tell us and what the folks who are 100% anti-product under an circumstances would have us believe. The problem is, there isn’t a truly unbiased source for information, so each of us must make the best decision we can with the information we do have, within the confines of our personal system of beliefs (religious, political or otherwise). |
![]() Comment by Daryl January 28th, 2006 at 6:59 pm |
No strawman. My point was that if in the event of an outbreak, you (or the anti-vaccine folks) would indeed vaccinate, you (or they) are relying on the fact that most other folks DO vaccinate to protect your kids. It all depends on how you define the risk. If you consider only the risk to your kids, perhaps. If everyone only consders the risk to their kids and decides not to vaccinate, then the risks for everyone are increased dramatically. |
![]() Comment by Rikki January 28th, 2006 at 7:43 pm |
I would think that the rise in certain types of autism is probably caused by a plethora of factors not to mention being better at noticing behaviors and identifying them as something other than oddities. |
![]() Comment by Jill January 28th, 2006 at 8:04 pm |
Rikki I don’t know how old you are, but I know many of us in our mid 30’s were given ‘dud’ batches of the MMR vaccine. That may have been the problem. As far as the ‘rise’ in autism – I don’t really think it is a real rise. I know at least three adults in my life who I would consider (knowing what I know NOW) autistic. Back then they lived on a farm and were considered either ‘slow’ or ‘odd’ or both! I do think the scientific community could do better with their research regarding vaccines. It is very hard to find unbiased information on the topic. |
![]() Comment by Laura January 28th, 2006 at 9:53 pm |
For us it didn’t have anything to do with relying on herd immunity. After having the smallpox vaccine as a kid, I had a fever over 106 for several days, and the doctors told my parents that there was nothing they could do, and that they should go home and pray that I survived. A couple of years later, I was given a tetanus booster, which put me in a coma for a day and a half. As a college student, I was hospitalized for a week after reacting to immunizations recommended for travel to central america. Still not having learned my lesson, I proceeded to have my firstborn vaccinated at 6 months (we delayed immunizing for several months). He spiked a fever that couldn’t be controlled with tylenol or advil, screamed a horrifying high-pitched wail for 6-7 hours, and contracted his one and only ear infection within a few days. Before he was immunized, his reflexes were normal and he was a calm, coordinated baby. After being immunized, he became a twitchy, uncomfortable little guy, who has never since been able to be still. We never had another vaccination given to him, and we chose not to vaccinate his sister, either. We decided that for our family, the risks are just too high. I have educated myself as best I can about disease prevention and treatment, including alternatives to conventional medicine, because I want to be as aware and prepared as I can be in case my kids are exposed or become ill. So far, at ages 12 and 14, they’ve avoided all the diseases kids are normally immunized for. My youngest, who was never vaccinated, seems to have the healthiest immune system of us all. She rarely gets sick, and recovers quickly when she does. |
![]() Comment by Ulrike January 28th, 2006 at 10:51 pm |
Many non-vacc’ers would *consider* vaccinating if the circumstances changed (whether that was because of an outbreak or new data from a less biased source). They might still decide not to vaccinate, but they *do* consider all the options, risks and benefits. That doesn’t make them hypocrites; it makes them reasonable people who want to do what’s best for their children. Consider: if you were unvaccinated for Small Pox or Anthrax, would you go out and get vaccinated, simply because an “outbreak” *could* occur, or would you feel that the risks outweighed the benenfits? Would your decision change if an outbreak *did* occur? |
![]() Comment by Daryl Cobranchi January 29th, 2006 at 4:26 am |
And that was my point exactly. The reason that the risks of vaccinating might outweigh the benefits is because other folks chose to immunize. If enough people come to the same conclusion, the risk/reward curve shifts. Since you stated that they would consider vaccinating if that equation changed, they are indeed relying on the herd to keep the risk (of contracting the disease) acceptably low. I didn’t accuse anyone of hypocrisy. I’m merely pointing out that if everyone makes the same decision, then the “commons” is vulnerable. And, speaking of vaccines, this BBC piece just crossed my virtual desk. Thanks, Jason. |
![]() Comment by Rikki January 29th, 2006 at 9:45 am |
Jill, |
![]() Comment by Ulrike January 29th, 2006 at 10:57 am |
Daryl, I suspect that during most outbreaks, most non-vacc’ers would stick with their decision, which would not prove your point. Many of us would actually be happy if our children did catch many of those diseases naturally. I admit, I was very pleased when my daughters and I caught Rubella (which, unless you’re a fetus, is milder than the common cold!), because the vaccines I was given as a child had not left me immune, even though I was given an extra booster as a teen. So far, only my son has gotten chicken pox, but I hope my daughters catch it before they get too old. I was a bit disappointed that none of them caught measles while we were in Germany, where outbreaks are an annual event. The one of the problems with asking a hypothetical about a “deadly outbreak” is that most of the diseases we vaccinate against either aren’t that deadly (chicken pox), or the vaccine isn’t that effective (influenza), or the disease isn’t highly communicable (Hep b). But, I tried to answer the question, as you asked it: *if* a “deadly outbreak” did occur, many parents who have chosen not to vaccinate so far would at least reconsider their option. |
![]() Comment by Daryl Cobranchi January 30th, 2006 at 8:39 am |
And for the record, we didn’t vaccinate against chicken pox until years after it was available. We also had expected our kids to innoculate themselves the old-fashioned way. When they didn’t, we chose the vaccine before they got older and getting the disease became more serious. |
![]() Comment by deputyheadmistress January 31st, 2006 at 1:16 am |
Daryl, what you said originally was a flat, unqualified claim that the “Folks who don’t are counting on the combined immunity of those who do to prevent a serious outbreak.” Well, no. They are not. You later qualified it by adding ‘If there were an epidemic of some deadly childhood disease in your town, would you then vaccinate?’ But the conditional ‘if’ was not part of your first statement, and there is no evidence that your ‘if’ is accurate. How do you know that those who do not vaccinate would choose to vaccinate if a deadly outbreak swept through their town? I don’t think that’s true of most of those I know who do not vaccinate. Some of them don’t even think vaccinations really work- and they would point to that ‘deadly outbreak’ as proof, since the majority of the population have been vaccinated. I was vaccinated against measles and got the measles shortly thereafter, and my younger brothers had the mumps vaccination and got the mumps anyway. Other nonvaccinators think that the vaccines might work, but the diseases they protect against are not, most of them, ‘deadly,’ and they believe the vaccines to be more dangerous than the disease itself. Polio, they would agree, is more serious than most of the others- but for years the best way to get it in this country was to come into contact with the vaccine. There are just all kinds of reasons people don’t vaccinate and it’s just not accurate or fair to sweep the entire community with this wide brush, particularly when you apparently base it on nothing but some unpleasant assumptions about how these people might react in a hypothetical situation. |