45223wc@mtuxo.UUCP (w.cambre) (09/13/85)
<eat em up Gators, eat em up> I tried to mail directly to machine MOT but could not get through so I am posting this in the hope that fred@mot will respond. I would be very grateful if you would let me know what immunization caused your daughter's hearing problem. We have been avoiding immunizations for our child who is now 20 months old, but feel some i.e. tetanus may be needed. Thank you very much. - Bill Cambre ATTISL mtuxo!45223wc Undergrad - Florida , Grad - Rutgers (I've seen them both and there's no-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o contest!)
pking@uiucuxc.Uiuc.ARPA (09/16/85)
I would be interested in the orginal article that prompted this. From what I understand very few public schools or daycares will take a child that has not had the "routine immunizations" and according to all programs, articles, and doctors I've ever heard, read or spoken to, diseases like polio, diptheria(sp?) whooping cough, measles, mumps, rubella, are still around, and a non-immunized child can get them, all of these childhood diseases can serious damage if not kill a child. More so than the immunizations. I have three normal healthy childern, and all have had their shots. I would never have considered NOT giving them. In Illinois it is a state law that any child entering public school or a state licensed day care must have had routine immunizations for polio, DPT, (diptheria, pertussis(whooping cough), tetnus(sp?)), plus the shots for mumps, measles, rubella. I have heard that in some extreme cases immunizations can cause problems but a doctor could give you advice in that area. The only vaccine not required, to my knowledge, in our part of the country, is the one for small pox.
eproj@burl.UUCP (eproj) (09/16/85)
> We have been avoiding > immunizations for our child who is now 20 months old, but feel some > i.e. tetanus may be needed. Thank you very much. > > I was under the impression that immunizations were required by law. We are scheduled to have our 9 week old given her first DPT shot this week. The doctor gave us a pamphlet on all the different immunizations required and some possible side effects that might occur after the shots. It seems to me that the risks of not having the shots are far greater than having them. Any comments? so long, Dave Schumacher
todd@scirtp.UUCP (Todd Jones) (09/18/85)
> We have been avoiding > immunizations for our child who is now 20 months old, but feel some > i.e. tetanus may be needed. Thank you very much. I was born in the fifties and immunized against the childhood killers of the early 20th century. Many of my peers who are now parents think, "Diptheria?, Pertussin?, (Whooping Cough) Tetanus? Gee, I've never heard of those diseases lately! If there could be complications, I'd better think twice about immunizing my child." It is a medical fact that immunizations can produce harmful side- effects, but there are very few cases statistically. Opting out of innoculations is a very bad gamble compared to the horrors of the diseases these innoculations are to prevent. Sensationalist, one- sided bogus journalism like 20/20 provide a disservice when they warn of possible dangers of adverse reactions to DPT immunizations without giving much time to the consequences of not getting the shots. Many medical professionals are alarmed at the growing trend of non-immunization and fear that these diseases will find a suitable population for resurgence. I'm not in love with the AMA, but I think their point is well founded. ||||||| ||||||| || || [ O-O ] Todd Jones \ ^ / {decvax,akgua}!mcnc!rti-sel!scirtp!todd | ? | |___| SCI Systems Inc. doesn't necessarily agree with Todd.
rick@iddic.UUCP (Rick Coates) (09/18/85)
The very best situation is for everyone _else's_ children to be vaccinated, but not yours. Then you avoid both the possibility of getting the disease, and having any side effects from the vaccination. > We have been avoiding > immunizations for our child who is now 20 months old, but feel some > i.e. tetanus may be needed. Thank you very much. Immunizations are required before a student can enter school (at least in many states - anyone know of exceptions?). The whooping cough vaccine can cause side effects - something like the disease, I gather. This is posing an interesting public health issue: apparently in England this issue came up some years ago with the result being that a significant population of children were not immunized. There have been subsequent outbreaks of childhood diseases - which can be very serious, even in children.
suze@terak.UUCP (Suzanne Barnett) (09/19/85)
> I was under the impression that immunizations were required by law. I have never heard of a LAW that required immunizations. I believe it would be held unconstitutional on the basis of freedom of religion. There are a lot of religions that have beliefs about medical procedures that vary from standard MD practice. There are, however, immunization requirements for such things as entering school. One can usually obtain a waver for these on any number of reasons. However, when an epidemic occurs, those children without the proper immunization are not allowed to attend. This happened here in the entire Phoenix area last spring with a measles epidemic, most prevalent in the high schools. Naturally, some parents took it to court for depriving their children of the right to education. The judge threw it out. Interestingly enough, the issue the parents took on not getting their children immunized was not religious. > We are scheduled to have our 9 week old given her first DPT shot this > week. The doctor gave us a pamphlet on all the different immunizations > required and some possible side effects that might occur after the > shots. It seems to me that the risks of not having the shots are far > greater than having them. Any comments? Agreed. My comments above are not based on my opinion of whether or not immumizations should be given. I feel they usually should, with direction from an MD, close supervision to recognise side effects, and based upon the child's health. -- Suzanne Barnett uucp: ...{decvax,ihnp4,noao,savax,seismo}!terak!suze phone: (602) 998-4800 us mail: CalComp/Sanders Display Products Division (Formerly Terak Corporation) 14151 N 76th street, Scottsdale, AZ 85260
charli@cylixd.UUCP (Charli Phillips) (09/20/85)
In article <468@scirtp.UUCP> todd@scirtp.UUCP (Todd Jones) writes: >> We have been avoiding >> immunizations for our child who is now 20 months old, but feel some >> i.e. tetanus may be needed. Thank you very much. > >I was born in the fifties and immunized against the childhood >killers of the early 20th century. Many of my peers who are now >parents think, "Diptheria?, Pertussin?, (Whooping Cough) Tetanus? >Gee, I've never heard of those diseases lately! If there could >be complications, I'd better think twice about immunizing my >child." > >It is a medical fact that immunizations can produce harmful side- >effects, but there are very few cases statistically. Opting out of >innoculations is a very bad gamble compared to the horrors of the >diseases these innoculations are to prevent. > Todd Jones Our pediatrician gives parents a pamphlet (which I have misplaced) before their child is due for his first innoculations. It explains the chance of possible side-effects (they are really *very* rare), explains which children should *not* receive certain immunizations (some of them may be contra-indicated in rare instances), and what happens when a large number of parents don't get their kids immunized. (Yes, there have been modern day local epidemics of the "outdated" killer diseases.) Needless to say, my son is getting his innoculations right on schedule! charli
susan@vaxwaller.UUCP (Susan Finkelman) (09/20/85)
> > We have been avoiding > > immunizations for our child who is now 20 months old, but feel some > > i.e. tetanus may be needed. Thank you very much. > > > I was under the impression that immunizations were required by law. > We are scheduled to have our 9 week old given her first DPT shot this > week. The doctor gave us a pamphlet on all the different immunizations > required and some possible side effects that might occur after the > shots. It seems to me that the risks of not having the shots are far > greater than having them. Any comments? Around here pediatricians will skip the 'P' part of the DPT if parents request. (I chose to have my child vacinated). If a baby shows a mild reaction to the 1st of the series, the pertussis component can be skipped in subsequent shots. I am fortunate to have a very healthy, hardy kid, so I'll have her immunized against everything, especially since the non-immunized kids will probably increase Beth's danger of being exposed to these diseases. Susan Finkelman {zehntel,amd,fortune,resonex,rtech}!varian!susan
canopus@amdahl.UUCP (Alpha Carinae) (09/20/85)
> The very best situation is for everyone _else's_ children to be vaccinated, > but not yours. Then you avoid both the possibility of getting the disease, and > having any side effects from the vaccination. Unfortunately, this statement is not true. The virus which causes Polio, for example, is still around. Back in the early fifties I remember my parents going into a panic each year during the "polio season". The fact that polio has been virtually wiped out due to the Salk vaccine does NOT mean the polio virus has been eradicated. An unvaccinated child is at risk. > The whooping cough vaccine can cause side effects - something like the > disease, I gather. Most, if not all vaccines, have a certain percentage of risk associated with them. The best of all worlds would be to know in advance if one was susceptible to reactions. Some reactions are quite severe, leaving victims permanently disabled. It is a difficult choice for parents to make for their kids, laws notwithstanding, whether to immunize or not. -- Frank Dibbell (408-746-6493) ...!{ihnp4,cbosgd,sun}!amdahl!canopus Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA [This is the obligatory disclaimer..] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "This is the biggest fool thing we have ever done. The bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert in explosives." [Adm Bill Leahy to President Truman in 1945 about the Manhattan Project]
45223wc@mtuxo.UUCP (w.cambre) (09/21/85)
Well, Rick Coates and Todd Jones have expressed their OPINIONS about
the subject matter, now maybe we can get them to post some real
statistics or article references, books, studies, etc. I am still
working on my references, (alas I must leave for a week, but I SHALL
return). My wife just received some manuals on immunizations and
the dangers of immunizations yesterday. Her Unix machine in not on
the net, so unfortunately you all have to get this info second hand
through me.
- Bill Cambre {ihnp4!}mtuxo!45223wc
** My views belong to me! But you can share them if you want **tmb@talcott.UUCP (Thomas M. Breuel) (09/22/85)
In article <2187@iddic.UUCP>, rick@iddic.UUCP (Rick Coates) writes: > The very best situation is for everyone _else's_ children to be vaccinated, > but not yours. Then you avoid both the possibility of getting the disease, and > having any side effects from the vaccination. This is not true as such. First of all, there are diseases which are not epidemic, but nevertheless can, and should, be vaccinated against (e.g. tetanus). Furthermore, if a significant fraction of the population is not vaccinated against a certain disease, the possibility of minor (or major) side effects of a vaccination may be judged to be of less importance than the possibility of catching that disease. Thomas.
lj@ewj01.UUCP (Leonard Jacobs) (09/22/85)
> I was under the impression that immunizations were required by law. > Any comments? > For a radical point of view, one which will stir your concern re immunizations, is the book by Robert Mendelsohn, M.D. entitled How_To_Raise_A_Healthy_Child_In_Spite_Of_Your_Doctor. 1984, Contemporary Books, Chicago. -- Len Jacobs East West Journal harvard!bbnccv!ewj01!lj
kenc@islenet.UUCP (Ken Cribbs) (09/22/85)
> The very best situation is for everyone _else's_ children to be vaccinated, > but not yours. Then you avoid both the possibility of getting the disease, and > having any side effects from the vaccination. > > > We have been avoiding > > immunizations for our child who is now 20 months old, but feel some > > i.e. tetanus may be needed. Thank you very much. > > Immunizations are required before a student can enter school (at least in > many states - anyone know of exceptions?). > > The whooping cough vaccine can cause side effects - something like the > disease, I gather. > > This is posing an interesting public health issue: apparently in England > this issue came up some years ago with the result being that a significant > population of children were not immunized. There have been subsequent > outbreaks of childhood diseases - which can be very serious, even in children. The emerging philosophy of "my kid is safe if she's the only un- immunized one in her group" is a fallacy. Adults and older children who have been immunized (or partially immunized) against pertussis (whooping cough) can be carriers of the organism, even though they themselves are not clinically infected with pertussis. I am a medical consultant to a law firm which recently handled a case against the manufacturer and distributor of a DTP vaccine; I learned the pros and cons of immunizations from the best authorities in the world, and arrived at two basic conclusions: first, although American pertussis vaccines are crude, outdated biologicals which could and should have been improved years ago, right now the statistical risk of a serious adverse reaction (i.e., seizure disorder/mental retardation) from the vaccine is less than the statistical risk of the disease itself, pertussis. Second, parents must realize that a safe, "acellular" vaccine is available in Japan, where it has been in general use since around 1981 with no reports of serious neurological complications after more than 15 million immunizations. The most conservative American statistics have shown that at least 1 in 310,000 children immunized with American DTP vaccine will suffer serious neurologic sequelae. (I personally believe the incidence of major adverse reactions is much higher.) Pertussis is a "killer" disease, and I agree that children should be immunized against it whenever possible. But the pertussis vaccines currently available in the U.S. are, to my thinking, unreasonably dangerous in light of current vaccine technologies (which have the ability to produce a relatively non-reactogenic vaccine). The children of my wealthy friends are going to Japan for their primary immunizations; those of my friends who can't afford that luxury are taking their chances on "vaccine roulette," and hoping their child isn't among the unlucky one-in-whatever that will be permanently damaged by an old, outdated vaccine that could be made safe, but isn't. Evaluation of the "acellular" vaccines must become a national priority. One victim of a less-than-best vaccine is inexcusable, especially if the victim is your child; epidemiological arguments don't hold up against the dichotomy of am immunized child who will never speak.
fred@mot.UUCP (Fred Christiansen) (09/22/85)
The DPT immunization is recognized as causing, with a certain unfortunate
frequency, a number of handicaps. Phil Donohue had one of his "exposes"
on it a few years back, and Senator (Representative? i forget) Paula
Hawkins has had an investigation. The Center for Diseases Control in
Atlanta also keeps a record. Mental retardation and convulsions are on record.
It is the Pertussis component which is unstable and causes the most
problems. It is possible to get only a DT shot. However, simply avoiding
a Pertussis (whooping cough) immunization is, in turn, somewhat risky.
The materials we have received indicate that England tried dropping the P
component for some time and observed an uncharacteristic upswell in the
incidence of whooping reports, including fatalities.
Our daughter's allergic reaction occurred after her second shot.
This is typical of allergic reactions, where the first exposure sets you
up and the second gets you (my doctor relatives explain this in much
fancier terminology/"medicalese").
As requirements go, you may have difficulty getting your children
into school with the required immunizations. One option is to wait until
that time. You are not required to do so earlier than that.
Due to our experience, many folk have expected us to be very anti-
immunization. This is not so. Diseases are rampant, and one must be armed
to do battle with them. Immunizations are some of the "weapons" to use.
I would recommend becoming informed of the risks of the diseases, weighed
against the risks of the immunizations, with timing aspects (early in
child's life or later) factored in. Think things over, give it your
best shot, and live with the consequences. More than likely, everything will
work out fine.
Given our daughter's reaction, there is certain evidence that had we
not had our daughter immunized, then exposure to the disease might well be
fatal.
Cheers! Life is fantastic!
--
<< Generic disclaimer >>
Fred Christiansen ("Canajun, eh?") @ Motorola Microsystems, Tempe, AZ
UUCP: {seismo!terak, trwrb!flkvax, utzoo!mnetor, ihnp4!btlunix}!mot!fred
ARPA: oakhill!mot!fred@ut-sally.ARPA AT&T: 602-438-3472kenc@islenet.UUCP (Ken Cribbs) (09/25/85)
> > I was under the impression that immunizations were required by law. > > I have never heard of a LAW that required immunizations. I > believe it would be held unconstitutional on the basis of > freedom of religion. There are a lot of religions that have > beliefs about medical procedures that vary from standard MD > practice. > > There are, however, immunization requirements for such > things as entering school. One can usually obtain a waver for > these on any number of reasons. However, when an epidemic > occurs, those children without the proper immunization are not > allowed to attend. This happened here in the entire Phoenix > area last spring with a measles epidemic, most prevalent in > the high schools. Naturally, some parents took it to court for > depriving their children of the right to education. The judge > threw it out. Interestingly enough, the issue the parents took > on not getting their children immunized was not religious. > > > We are scheduled to have our 9 week old given her first DPT shot this > > week. The doctor gave us a pamphlet on all the different immunizations > > required and some possible side effects that might occur after the > > shots. It seems to me that the risks of not having the shots are far > > greater than having them. Any comments? > > Agreed. My comments above are not based on my opinion of > whether or not immumizations should be given. I feel they > usually should, with direction from an MD, close supervision > to recognise side effects, and based upon the child's health. > -- > Suzanne Barnett > > uucp: ...{decvax,ihnp4,noao,savax,seismo}!terak!suze > phone: (602) 998-4800 > us mail: CalComp/Sanders Display Products Division > (Formerly Terak Corporation) > 14151 N 76th street, Scottsdale, AZ 85260 I would add the following recommendations: Pertussis vaccine (the "P" portion of DTP immunization) can cause serious neurologic damage in relatively rare instances; if the child has an underlying neurologic disease, a histiry of seizures, or serious problems with allergies, be sure to specifically ask your pediatrician whether it might be safer to give only the DT immunization (diptheria and tetanus toxoids only, without the pertussis vaccine). If the doctor becomes defensive or acts as though your concerns are ridiculous, get a second opinion from another pediatrician before consenting to the immunization. The same recommendation applies if there is a family history of a seizure disorder ("epilepsy"). -- Ken Cribbs {ihnp4, dual, vortex}!islenet!kenc
fred@mot.UUCP (Fred Christiansen) (09/27/85)
> [lots of other interesting info re DPT immunizations] > > epidemiological arguments don't hold up against the dichotomy of am immunized > child who will never speak. i appreciate your contribution, friend at islenet. just in passing, if you had in mind our daughter when you said "child who will never speak", you might be pleased to know that we are working with an excellent speech teacher who is shaping her sounds into "mama", "papa", "I love you", and a number of others. not bad for 100+dB loss. factors in a deaf person's ability to shape sounds into speech comprehended by most everyone are: age when hearing loss occured (sometimes hearing is lost after language/speech has been under development for awhile), degree of hearing loss through the sound spectrum (esp re speech sound band), type of loss (conductive loss weakens sound; sensori-neural loss distorts sound, sometimes even cutting out sound entirely), and maybe a few others that don't come to mind right off. -- << Generic disclaimer >> Fred Christiansen ("Canajun, eh?") @ Motorola Microsystems, Tempe, AZ UUCP: {seismo!terak, trwrb!flkvax, utzoo!mnetor, ihnp4!btlunix}!mot!fred ARPA: oakhill!mot!fred@ut-sally.ARPA AT&T: 602-438-3472
ems@amdahl.UUCP (ems) (09/30/85)
> > [lots of other interesting info re DPT immunizations] > > > > epidemiological arguments don't hold up against the dichotomy of am immunized > > child who will never speak. > > i appreciate your contribution, friend at islenet. > just in passing, if you had in mind our daughter when you said "child > who will never speak", you might be pleased to know that we are working with > an excellent speech teacher who is shaping her sounds into "mama", "papa", > "I love you", and a number of others. not bad for 100+dB loss. > ... description of possible hearing loss types and implications > for speech development ommited ... Please remember that speech is not equal to language. The deaf have a beautiful and complete language in sign language. A deaf child (profoundly deaf, >80db or so loss) would be best served by learning to sign. Develop language first, and oral skills will follow. Develop oral skills without language and you have nothing... (BTW, at one time I was about 80db deaf. I am now about 5-30 db deaf depending on which ear and what frequency. Western surgery fixed a problem with trashed eardrums...) -- E. Michael Smith ...!{hplabs,ihnp4,amd,nsc}!amdahl!ems This is the obligatory disclaimer of everything. (Including but not limited to: typos, spelling, diction, logic, and nuclear war)