Strikes Against the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella)

For those who question the wisdom or evidence in support of the schedule currently recommended by our CDC, there are generally many layers of questions.  Many question the schedule itself; with yet another dose of flu shot being recommended this year and the HPV (human papilloma virus) vaccine recommendations being expanded again-- our vaccine schedule seems quite full to many, especially in the first two years of a child's life (at least 25 shots by age 2, a total of 36 doses).  It certainly is more aggressive than most of the rest of the world.  (google a few and notice just how widely they vary from nation to nation, both in schedule, frequency, and diseases vaccinated against.  For example, Japan's schedule- which recommends 22 doses by age 2, or the Swedish schedule- which recommends 21 doses by age 2 as opposed to ours)

Then there are many who question the one-size-fits-all approach instead of considering each child's environment, personal health history, current health, family history (genetic predisposition) and even weight/body type (there is no dosing difference between a shot given a 5 lb or 10 lb newborn, for ex).

Then we come to questions and concerns about individual vaccines.  Many families feel more comfortable with certain shots than others, and their concerns may vary from shot to shot.  Their concerns may be ethical, practical, or medical in nature.  This is why so many feel insulted and frustrated when all vaccine questions are answered with a pat "oh, don't worry about autism!  That's been disproved so many times."  Whether or not it has, that generally is not the sum and total of a parent's concern on this issue.

Lately one vaccine seems to keep popping up in my life, whether it's reading yet another online story about the "horrible measles outbreaks", or an article in a magazine in which parents are encouraged to speed up their child's doses in preparation for travel, or in an admission form for kindergarden... that vaccine is the MMR.  The issues with the MMR are myriad, and I would like to list them one at a time.  My purpose is simple: to explain clearly why parents may desire to delay or omit this vaccine.  I am not a medically degreed individual, just a parent who enjoys research, can stomach reading medical studies until her eyes start crossing, and desires to empower other parents to make their own decisions, in discussion with their own trusted care providers.  Perhaps this list will be a good starting point for a conversation with your own medical care provider.  I certainly hope so!  As always, please follow the links in order to read primary sources on your own.

1. The MMR is a live vaccine-- that's how it is classified according to its Merck packaging.  According to the CDC's Pink Book, "Live attenuated vaccines are produced by modifying a disease-producing (“wild”) virus or bacterium in a laboratory. The resulting vaccine organism retains the ability to replicate (grow) and produce immunity, but usually does not cause illness."   A few of the main concerns regarding live-virus vaccines:
- Live vaccines seem to be better at provoking more immunity (because they are more like the original disease), and they unfortunately have more side effects for the same reason. The US has therefore traded the live oral polio vaccine (OPV) for the inactivated polio vaccine (IPV).  Again quoting from the Pink Book:

"The more similar a vaccine is to the disease-causing form of the organism, the better the immune response to the vaccine.")  "When a live attenuated vaccine does cause “disease,” it is usually much milder than the natural disease and is referred to as an adverse reaction. [...] Live attenuated vaccines may cause severe or fatal reactions as a result of uncontrolled replication (growth) of the vaccine virus. [...] A live attenuated vaccine virus could theoretically revert to its original pathogenic (disease-causing) form. This is known to happen only with live (oral) polio vaccine." 

The CDC states that live-virus vaccines are only a danger to those with certain immunocompromisation (HIV etc), however many parents wonder if those listed sources of  are the only potential sources-- could family (or personal) history of autoimmune disorders indicate susceptibility?
- encephalitis (brain swelling)-- Travel of a virus into the brain is a rare complication of several viral illnesses, including measles, and is a topic of ongoing research.  Unfortunately, it seems live virus vaccines also carry this risk, as this case study illustrates and as the vaccine inserts themselves state (see all three types of encephalitis listed under "Adverse Reactions").  According to the Mayo Clinic, "Secondary encephalitis often occurs two to three weeks after the initial infection. Rarely, secondary encephalitis occurs as a complication of a live virus vaccination." this in turn can be a factor in developing autism or other learning disabilities.  Encephalitis/encephalopathy is listed as a "Table Injury," meaning it is recognized as a possible vaccine reaction that will be compensated by the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.  Two children were compensated for it this earlier this year.
- live virus vaccines "shed," meaning they are able to be passed on from a recently vaccinated person.  The NVIC's report is here.

2. The MMR is a combination vaccine- by that I mean that it is not a shot for a single illness, but rather for three:  measles, mumps and rubella.  The technical name is "polyvalant." It stands to reason that giving the body three separate pathogens to identify and mount antibodies against would be more taxing than giving one at a time. One recent study (published in Human & Experimental Toxicology) analyzed reported adverse vaccine effects by number of vaccine doses given at one time, and found

"Our findings show a positive correlation between the number of vaccine doses administered and the percentage of hospitalizations and deaths reported to VAERS. In addition, younger infants were significantly more likely than older infants to be hospitalized or die after receiving vaccines."

(Interestingly this is also being discussed among vets and dog-owners, as multiple vaccines at once is linked with higher adverse reactions, especially in small dogs. Example here.)  Many parents (myself included!!) would like the option of monovalent (single dose) vaccines, but separate shots for each MMR component are no longer available in the US though they can be found in parts of Europe and in Japan.

3.  The MMR is a viral vaccine- viruses are very very very tiny, so small they can only be seen under an electron microscope.  So, when they are cultured, there is no way to isolate just the viruses.  Rather, infected tissue (of whatever animal the virus is being cultured in) is used.  While many efforts are made to purify and test the tissue for harmful substances, there is no way to test for every possible contaminant:  you can only test for what you know might be there. Viral vaccines therefore are most at risk for being contaminated.  Several examples include the contamination of several batches of past polio virus vaccines with simian virus-40, now implicated in numerous human cancers (I explored this topic more thoroughly here.), or pig virus contamination (PCV1) of the rotavirus oral vaccine in 2010.  The FDA suspended the use of the vaccine during investigation and determined that the viral contaminants would not harm humans.  However, the very fact that it was unexpectedly present in a vaccine is a bit alarming.  (Was 4 weeks really long enough to evaluate long-term effect on children?)  There have also been findings of contaminants in measles virus cultures and a monkey virus contaminant in RotaTeq.

4.  Measles is not a dangerous disease in healthy children- contrary to what our media would have us believe, measles is neither deadly nor risky in healthy children.  Sure, the typical symptoms are not exactly pleasant:  high fever, cough, runny nose, watery eyes, and a rash (according to CDC), but even when measles infection in childhood was nearly universal, with 3-4 million cases per year, the number of deaths was approximately 500/year (source: Pink Book).  That works out to a 0.017%- 0.0125% death rate, or between 1 in 6000-8000. (If you got the measles, you had about a 1 in 7000 chance of dying of it, and if you survived, you were immune for life.  No more chance of dying of measles ever again in your life.)  Just for perspective, in 2015 in the US our odds of dying in a cataclysmic storm or from heat stroke are around 1 in 6, 700.  Our odds of dying from choking on food are double that (1 in 3000), and our odds of dying in a car accident or poisoning is about 1 in 110. (All numbers from the National Safety Council.) The odds of dying of measles are about the same as dying in a tornado or hurricane... way less likely than dying of choking, and even less likely than dying from poisoning.

There have been no measles deaths in the US for the past 10 years.  In other countries, where malnutrition and poor sanitation are concerns, measles complications can be fatal (which isn't surprising, given that anything is life-threatening for a malnourished person)-- however even then, the WHO says:

All children in developing countries diagnosed with measles should receive two doses of vitamin A supplements, given 24 hours apart. This treatment restores low vitamin A levels during measles that occur even in well-nourished children and can help prevent eye damage and blindness. Vitamin A supplements have been shown to reduce the number of deaths from measles by 50%.

The virus is quite contagious due to coughing but is fairly easy to eliminate from surfaces, "rapidly inactivated by heat, sunlight, acidic pH, ether, and trypsin. It has a short survival time (less than 2 hours) in the air or on objects and surfaces." (Pink Book)

5. Mumps is not a dangerous disease in healthy children- similarly to measles, mumps was once viewed as a childhood rite of passage (my mom remembers getting it as a child).  Like measles, mumps infection confers life-long immunity.  The options for supporting the immune system through the infection with vitamins, nourishing foods, rest and herbs are myriad when the patient is a healthy child. Mumps symptoms typically are swollen glands under the throat, headache, fever, tummy ache and malaise.  Even the CDC FAQ on the disease states:

Almost all people with mumps fully recover after a few weeks. During the illness, many people feel tired and achy, have fever, and may have parotitis. Some may feel extremely ill and be unable to eat because of pain around the jaw, and some may develop serious complications. Men and adolescent boys can develop orchitis, which rarely results in sterility. Women and adolescents girls may develop oophoritis. Meningitis and loss of hearing can also occur, and in rare cases this hearing loss can be permanent. The most serious complication is encephalitis, which can lead to death or permanent disability, although rarely.

As with many "childhood" diseases, disease complications tend to increase with age; in this case, only males that have gone through puberty are at risk for potentially developing sterility.  It is worth noting that with vaccination, formerly childhood diseases such as mumps have shifted to diseases which adults or babies are more at risk for (due to moms not being able to pass on natural immunity via breast milk, and vaccine protection wearing off in some individuals).  This is concerning to many.  As far as the encephalitis risk, see point #1 which points out that this is also a danger with vaccination-- arguably more of a danger than it was with the natural disease itself.

6. Rubella is a danger to unborn babies of moms who've never had rubella- it is not a danger to healthy children, nor even to unborn babies of moms who have had rubella.  So the question is whether or not routine vaccination of children is the most effective, most risk-free way of avoiding infection of moms during pregnancy in order to avoid CRS (congenital rubella syndrome).  Would it be advantageous to allow children to contract it naturally, allowing girls to then convey that rubella protection to their own infants later on via breast milk? Vaccine immunity can wear off in many individuals, and doesn't transmit as well via breast milk. Perhaps a vaccination for girls who show no immunity to rubella by age 12 would be a better option?  (This study on CRS in women in Saudi Arabia discusses just this, mentioning that immunizing children seems to limit CRS in younger mothers while increasing risk of it in older mothers as immunity wanes, while selective vaccination does better at allowing for life-long natural immunity but doesn't lessen the incidence of rubella itself.  However this is not necessarily a bad thing, as the study describes rubella as a "mild, self-limiting viral infection.")

7. Concerns with the measles component include many indications that it compromises gut health- Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride (MD) has written extensively about this in her book Gut and Psychology Syndrome, where she describes the findings of live measles infections-- of the same strain in the vaccine-- in the guts of certain patients, causing extensive gastrointestinal problems, and surprisingly, a host of chronic and neurological conditions, among them Autism Spectrum Disorder. Read one study finding association between measles virus in the gut and developmental disorders here.  The gut dysbiosis-autism link has begun to be studied from several angles, among them the use of probiotics to reduce symptoms of autism (especially after this study in mice- here summarized by Autism Speaks).

8. Concerns with the mumps component include indications that the vaccine is ineffective and falsified data was used to obtain FDA approval- this article summarizes the current 3 court cases well.  Essentially, the concern is that Merck used one form of the attenuated mumps virus in testing in order to show 95% efficacy, when in practice that efficacy has not been true since at least 1999.

"Merck fraudulently represented and continues to falsely represent in its labeling and elsewhere that its Mumps Vaccine has an efficacy rate of 95 percent or higher. In reality, Merck knows and has taken affirmative steps to conceal -- by using improper testing techniques and falsifying test data -- that its Mumps Vaccine is, and has been since at least 1999, far less than 95 percent effective." (Read more in the court documents for Chatom v Merck. )

There is evidence supporting the idea that the mumps component is not efficacious from India as well.

9. Concerns with the rubella component include its origin in tissue taken from aborted babies, which raises ethical concerns for many, and health concerns due to the presence of foreign human DNA. - From the MMR insert:  the rubella component contains the "Wistar RA 27/3 strain of live attenuated rubella virus propagated in WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts." As this 1964 paper entitled ""The Limited in vitro lifetime of human diploid cells" explains, "WI-38 and WI-44 [came] from female human fetal lung. All embryos were obtained from surgical abortions and were of approximately three months’ gestation."  (And as I understand it, the numbers refer to the number of cell lines that were "tried" before this cell line worked... so many many more than two babies' bodies were used to develop just those cell lines.)  The cell lines used to culture the current rubella vaccine came from a healthy human child whose life was ended by her mother at 3 month gestation for no medical reason-- many parents who believe abortion to be murder find any connection to aborted fetal tissue abhorrent-- even those who believe in the efficacy of vaccines.  Until a new medium is found for the rubella vaccine line (as the pope has urged Christians and pro-life individuals to clamor for), many parents find it reprehensible to use the current rubella vaccine (as well as other vaccines using human tissue obtained through abortion), and as such would object to the MMR.
- Those who may find no ethical dilemma in the use of cell lines originating in aborted human babies still may have concerns about the medical consequences of the injection of any tissue containing foreign human DNA-- recently, researcher Helen Ratajczak implicated the use of human (fetal) DNA in vaccines in the rise of autoimmune diseases, among other factors (published in the Journal of Toxicology).  Here is part of her explanation of why this may be:

"Because it's human DNA and recipients are humans, [...] That DNA is incorporated into the host DNA. Now it's changed, altered [... and the] body kills it. Where is this most expressed? The neurons of the brain. Now you have [the] body killing the brain cells and it's an ongoing inflammation. It doesn't stop, it continues through the life of that individual"  (source)

Another analysis of vaccine safety data has implicated the human tissue in the varicella, Hep A and second dose of the MMR in rises in autism disorder.  (Article from the Journal of Public Health here). Levels of human tissue in vaccine samples were found to be far above the current "safe" level.  The human tissue is implicated in a rise in childhood leukemia and lymphoma as well. (quote from study author Dr. Deisher here.)

10.  Childhood infectious diseases involving fevers (such as measles, mumps and rubella) may actually be beneficial in healthy children.  
- There is evidence that infectious diseases in childhood are protective against chronic or autoimmune diseases later in life, reducing the risk of cancer, asthma & allergies.  Fevers have even been used as part of cancer treatments and infectious diseases (including measles!) were found to cure disorders of the kidney in the past.
- Other research has collaborated the "old wives tale" that fevers always come before growth spurts, perhaps because the stimulation of the immune system by disease provides a "push" that allows the child to then grow.
- The protective/positive effects seem to be due partially to the effect fever/infection-suppressants has on the gut flora of children, and partially due to the need for all aspects of the immune system to be balanced and properly developed (Th1- cell-mediated immunity which includes the use of fevers, Th2 - antibody immunity).  The same mechanism that will kill tumor cells gets trained to "clean up" by killing viruses using fevers.  Hippocrates, the father of modern medicine, was reported to say:  “Give me a medicine to produce a fever and I can cure any disease.” Maybe he was on to something.

My point in summarizing these 10 "strikes" against the MMR is not to suggest that anyone who uses the MMR is stupid, uneducated, or irresponsible-- no, my goal is to explain that the reasons why SOME parents choose not to use this particular shot are varied, not one-size-fits-all.  If you hear that a friend or patient, client or family member has chosen to skip this vaccine, remember that they may not be worried about "that guy who said the mercury in the MMR causes autism."  They likely have multiple reasons for their choice, based in ethical, medical, or personal reasons!

Potential Vaccine Schedule (Selective & Delayed)

EDIT:  April 16, 2014
I continue to get a fair bit of traffic on this post, and several folks have asked me for an update. I leave this original post with all its edits as a testatment to my own "journey." It really has been a journey, one of growth & movement, not of stasis.

I've gone from "vaccines are awesome and make us so much healthier" to "wow... 40 vaccines in two years really seems intense, and giving more than one at a time kind of seems a bad idea" to "I think we'll wait until after their brain and immune systems are more developed (so after age 2)" to "vaccines are less important to health than gut health, proper nutrition- especially fat-soluble vitamins-and a strong immune system, and don't work as well as they claim to, so let's focus on the latter" (where I was as I wrote the above posts) to "vaccines have really dangerous side-effects that are far more common than ever thought- including ADD, ASD, asthma, allergies & other auto-immune failures, and wow, are they adequately safety-tested?" to "vaccines actually assault gut health and immune systems and are pushed by biased people who stand to gain from vaccine adoption, and why aren't they truly safety tested at all." As it standsI veiw vaccination is a last resort, even then it would be with MUCH precaution (vitamin loading, detoxing, and PRAYER). Most probable are the mumps & varicella vaccines before puberty if we can't find the natural diseases somewhere. (Interestingly there was a recent outbreak of mumps at Rutgers University... all of the young adults who got it were fully vaccinated.)

In your own journey, you may want to think through the role of hygiene & nutrition in the decline of "vaccine-preventable illness" as WELL AS the decline of diseases that aren't vaxed against (if vaccines are so essential, why did cholera & typhoid also decline at the same time as diptheria?); to read the vaccine failure rates (80% of kids with whooping cough are fully vaxed- the flu shot has a dismal 1% improvement rate-- vitaming D has 8%); also to read the vaccine clinical trials and assess whether you find their "control" group acceptable (never is the "control" group of children given a saline injection or a sugar pill; they are ALWAYS given another vaccine, making it very difficult to assess true effects, and the trials are seldom blind. Double-blind controlled studies are "the gold standard" in science.). You may want to research conflicts of interest in our own CDC... honestly, do we really trust our government in the health field at all? they've had fat & sugar all wrong for the past 50 years and sure look down on nutrition & herbalism! Lastly, two more books to read are Gut & Psychology Syndrome (Dr Natasha Campbell-McBride) and Healing the New Childhood Epidemics (Dr. Kenneth Bock) which come at vaccine risks from oblique angles. Both doctors are still pro-vaccine by the end of it, but they say they should only be administered to healthy kids, and by their own standards, we really don't have very many healthy kids in the US!!

Vaccines are the "sacred ow" of the medical field right now. I don't think most doctors are actually taught about vaccines-- more along the lines of "vaccines are awesome; moving on." (I have yet to meet a pediatrician who understood any of the many reasons why parents might object to our current schedule; no, it's not just about "that one crazy Wakefield guy whose autism research was totally disproved." Sigh.)

The more I read about vaccines, the more I find them to be the absolute opposite of everything we know about caring for our bodies: they are the complete antithesis of natural. We NEVER get diseases injected directly into our bloodstream; much less falsely weakened diseases paired with heavy metals, antibiotics & known poisons. Our bodies are primed to screen pathogens through several "barrier levels:" skin w its protective bacteria & acid mantle; mucous membranes with their legions of white blood cells; stomach with its HCl; gut with its probiotics galore. And then we are programmed to fight disease quite effectively, if properly supported; and once we get one disease, it's usually the last time we ever will. By contrast to vaccines, the more I study herbs, the more impressed I am that this is the route we SHOULD be pursuing; using natural elements that our bodies recognize, taken in ways that our body can use-- aroma, contact, ingestion-- NOT injection. I keep seeing studies pop up along these lines-- curcurmin in turmeric being more effective than the Pc at preventing lung disease; vitamin D from food & sun being more effective than the flu shot... Why aren't we pouring our efforts into studying THOSE! Seems like the classic egg v. egg-substitute or butter v. margarine mistake. We keep thinking we can out-do God instead of figuring out how to better use what He's already given us.  

As a final resource, I highly recommend Rachel Weaver's books "Be Your own 'Doctor'" and "Be Your Child's Pediatrician"-- she's a master herbalist/midwife. We've seen simple herbs cleanse our son of parasites we didn't even know he had (and suddenly end his constant congestion) and heal the eczema our daughter been fighting for years in a matter of 2 weeks. I've seen a friend's baby come back from the brink of death (intubated in the hospital) with the application of herbal extracts (essential oils) -- he coughed up the mucus that was choking him to death within seconds of application, and was extubated & heading home the next day. It's just amazing. God is so much smarter than us; the best we can hope to do is figure out how to use what He's made-- the glory of God to conceal a matter; the glory of man is to seek them out, as Proverbs puts it!


-----------------------------------------
Today (originally 11/16/10), I'm putting up an acceptable (to me) vaccine schedule.  As a bonus, you get to see my reading list.

Tomorrow, I'll put up an explanation for why we are thinking this way, with questions for you to consider as you make your own family vaccine schedule.

Then, on Friday, you'll be able to read (if you want) a detailed "paper" of sorts going in more technical/ medical detail.

That's the plan- short & sweet, then a "Questions to Ask" guide, then finally the full shebang which you are under NO obligation to read. :)  It's written mainly for my own peace of mind (I actually like writing papers), but our family doctor will be getting a copy, and I *might* try to do more with it if I think it's good enough.  EDIT:  this became my 3-part series on Keeper of the Home.  I have uploaded the full Q & As on chicken-pox & polio, and abbreviated ones for all the possible shots.

So, without further ado, here is it is: (DTaP 4 doses, Pc 2 doses, Hib 1 dose):

12 mos--DTaP Dose 1 (can provide partial immunity against diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough/pertussis)
15 mos--  Pc Dose 1 (can provide partial immunity against meningitis)
18 mos-- Hib sole dose (can provide partial immunity against meningitis)- no further doses needed if given after/at age 15 mos.
2 yrs- Pc Dose 2- no further doses needed if first dose given at/after age 12 mos.
3 yrs- DTaP Dose 3
4 years- DTaP Dose 4 (no further doses needed if given at/after age 4)

10 years- MMR & varicella vaccines, separated by at least 6 mos, only IF our kids don't get chicken pox (varicella), and rubella (German measles) naturally.  We're hoping to catch the live versions, so if you have a kid down with any of those, invite us over!! :)

(We do not plan on getting flu, Hep B or A, rotavirus, HPV or IPV vaccines.)

**Edit September 2011- because of sickness, we have held off on several vaccines and will be even more delayed; I'd rather not further tax my daughter's immune system when it is already fighting off a virus, even if it's "just a little cold."  I am also seriously considering completely skipping the DTaP completely with our next child(ren), due to the danger & relative uselessness (if the current epidemic is any indication) of the pertussis components  (don't really care so much either way about the diptheria elements).  However, because tetanus is a real danger and there are no vaccines available before age 2, I am making myself aware of which hospitals/treatment centers have TIG (tetanus immune globulin) on hand in the event of an accident before my children are old enough to get the single tetanus vax.  Proper wound cleaning & care is the best defense against tetanus... and keeping an eye on my baby while at the park.

Reading list:
The Vaccine Book: Making the Right Decision for Your Child (Sears Parenting Library)-by Bob Sears (though he has an alternative schedule, he is fundamentally FOR vaccines)
Vaccinated: One Man's Quest to Defeat the World's Deadliest Diseases- by Paul Offit (essentially a biography of the man who made many of the vaccines still used today- gives a lot of insights into his world view, motives & motivations)
Vaccines: What Every Parent Should Know-Paul Offit & Louis M. Bell (try not to let its oversimplified tone insult your intelligence so much that you throw it away after one chapter)
CDC Vaccine Guide

Cautionary:
The Vaccine Guide: Risks and Benefits for Children and Adults- by Randall Neustaedter
The Virus and the Vaccine: Contaminated Vaccine, Deadly Cancers, and Government Neglect- by Debbie Bookchin & Jim Schumacher
Make an Informed Vaccine Decision for the Health of Your Child: A Parent's Guide to Childhood Shots- by Mayer Eisenstein
"A User-Friendly Vaccination Schedule" by Donald W. Miller, Jr.
"The Danger of Excessive Vaccination During Brain Development" by Russel L. Blaylock
"The Challenge to Mass Vaccination" by Barbara Loe Fisher
"How We Are Making our Children Sick," by Sean Manning, in Pathways, issue 20
"A Personal Perspective on Vaccination,"by Jean McAulay in August/Sept 2008 of Today's Chiropractic Lifestyle

Thoughts on the "Parents, You've Been Lied To" Articles.

My thoughts on the back-and-forth

A pro-vaccine article has been circulating lately; you may have seen it, entitled "Dear Parents, You Are Being Lied To."  Hosted on the Illustrious "I F-ing Love Science" page, authored by "Anonymous," you can tell it's a real winner... a friend asked for my thoughts on it, so here are a few thoughts as well as some links you can check out to do your own research.  [An excellent, well-supported (full of links!!) rebuttal can be found here:  "Dear Parents, you are being lied to."]

- The article title begs the question-- who, exactly, is doing the lying?  The article never says... because makes no sense. There is no organized "they" who is financially or otherwise served by sending out lies... People who are cautious about vaccines or doubtful that they are worth their inherent risk (all drugs have risk & side effects) have either seen negative effects of vaccines first-hand or they've been researchers who changed their minds as they read for themselves. People who don't view vaccines as the modern savior are generally challenged at every turn & very much in the minority. On the flipside, there is a very strong bias-pressure to love vaccines, with our own CDC almost completely composed of men & women employed by vaccine manufacturing companies. There is a definite group of people who stand to gain by encouraging vaccines. Parents who choose not to face many obstacles, and health professionals who speak out face even more.  Here is a great article comparing the vaccine-SIDS question to the x-ray-cancer question a generation ago.

- The "measles outbreak" that caused such a hubbub was at the time of the outbreak, 8 kids... none of whom died. The totals for measles the entire year for the entire US last year was under 200... hardly the panic-worthy epidemic the media implies. Measles IS very mild in healthy kids; comparing it to measles in malnourished kids is totally unfair. It's documented that a Vitamin A deficiency (a fat-soluble vitamin, so one lacking in any starvation, carb-heavy, diet) makes measles far more serious. In normal kids it's usually about as "serious" as a cold...

"Several recent investigations have indicated that vitamin A treatment of children with measles in developing countries has been associated with reductions in morbidity and mortality. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) issued a joint statement recommending that vitamin A be administered to all children diagnosed with measles in communities where vitamin A deficiency is a recognized problem and where mortality related to measles is ≥1%. [...] Vitamin A is a necessary substrate for preserving epithelial cell integrity and in addition plays a role in immune modulation." (Study: "Vitamin A Treatment of Measles")

"Vitamin A deficiency is a recognized risk factor for severe measles infections." (Study: "Vitamin A for Treating Measles in Children") 

- As far as safety tests go, there are NO-- literally zero-- vaccine studies where there is a vaccine-free control group. All required shots are tested against another shot, never against a placebo (with the exception of the flu shot). So these tests can only say that a shot is more or less safe or effective than another shot... a true double-blind study with a control group is the "gold standard" of science. Also, vaccines have never been tested in conjunction with one another; they are tested one at a time, though they are administered 5 at a time (or more), and in quick succession (within a few short months of each other-- we'd expect someone who had a cold and then got the flu and then got strep to react to each differently than a person who just got strep). There is no safety data at all on the type of administration that is the recommended norm here in the US.  Two recent studies have found correlations in infant death and vaccine numbers:

"The US childhood immunization schedule requires 26 vaccine doses for infants aged less than 1 year, the most in the world, yet 33 nations have better infant mortality rates (IMRs). Using linear regression, the immunization schedules of these 34 nations were examined and a correlation coefficient of 0.70 (p < 0.0001) was found between IMRs and the number of vaccine doses routinely given to infants. [...] These findings demonstrate a counter-intuitive relationship: nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates." (Source-- this study examined infant deaths relative to number of total vaccines recommended) 

"Our findings show a positive correlation between the number of vaccine doses administered and the percentage of hospitalizations and deaths reported to VAERS. In addition, younger infants were significantly more likely than older infants to be hospitalized or die after receiving vaccines. Since vaccines are administered to millions of infants every year, it is imperative that health authorities have scientific data from synergistic toxicity studies on all combinations of vaccines that infants are likely to receive; universal vaccine recommendations must be supported by such studies."  (Source-- this study examined infant hospitalizations & death relative to number of simultaneous vaccines received)

- As to WHY there are no studies comparing vaccinated & unvaccinated kids,vaccines are considered so essential to safety that to withhold them -- even on tests intended to ascertain whether they are indeed essential to safety-- is seen as "unethical." Talk about the cart before the horse! However, many parental groups have offered up their members as volunteers, because they already intend to not vaccinate.  Populations who refuse to vaccinate for religious reasons, such as the Amish, would be valid control groups, or for a new vaccine, even children otherwise vaccinated but receiving a placebo for that new shot (which is clearly not proven to be effective or safe!) would be acceptable. Or, start with a retrospective survey of matched groups of children, controlled for other variables, with the variable being full vaccination or no vaccination... so long as the study participation was in no way tied to the government (due to fear of punitive action over differing medical opinion being viewed as "parental neglect"-- Justina Pelletier, anyone?), most parents who have foregone vaccines would jump at the chance to participate!!  If I can imagine three scenarios for true placebo-controlled studies, why can't professional researchers who make scientific investigation their full-time jobs come up with even one?

-  Funding for studies coming from a vaccine manufacturer tends to bias results.  As an example, a recent Cochrane review of all the data on flu shots found that studies sponsored by vaccine companies tended to be more favorable than those done by independent parties. Third-party-researchers do exist-- or teams made up of both "special interest" (vaccine-cautionary) and pharmaceutical (pro-vaccine) representatives could do it. There are a hundred feasible ways that fair testing could be done.  While all researchers SHOULD be trying to disprove their hypothesis, in reality most are likely to attempt to affirm their own beliefs. However anything that comes up with a vaccine-cautionary bent will face much more scrutiny than anything done in "support" of the majority opinion.

"This review includes trials funded by industry. An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry-funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size. Studies funded from public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favourable to the vaccines. The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in the light of this finding." (Source-- Cochrane Review on Vaccines for Preventing the Flu in Healthy Children")

- Speaking of funding... does it not strike you as odd that drug companies only agreed to make vaccines (drugs) if they were financially shielded from any safety-related lawsuits?  If an automobile maker would only sell a type of car under the condition that they didn't have to pay any damages if it malfunctioned, we'd probably assume there was something wrong with the car!  This piece makes the excellent case that, in the words of pharmaceutical companies themselves, vaccines are "unavoidably unsafe."

- A final word regarding specifically the investigation of a link between autism and vaccines.  It is lunacy to say there is "no found link."  Just read a few of the studies amassed here (a fairly exhaustive list of research done on vaccines & their long-term effects, specifically ASD).  There is research on many aspects of this issue, and none show "no link."

Why I Ask What I Ask

I just re-read an excellent book, and this quote jumped out at me as capturing so well why I take the time to research rather than take for granted, and then go further by encouraging those around me to research, too.

"Priya never recieved her MMR due to her egg allergies, but otherwise was fully immunized.  After putting her on an elimination diet, she improved greatly.  She started to grow, and to sleep better.  She was happier and more alert. The dietary changes helped her, but her immune system remained hyperactive and hypersensitive, and never fully recovered. Priya died of an anaphylactic reaction to a trace amount of peanut in an egg roll.  I wish I could turn back time.  I wish I knew then what I know now, about the effects of vaccines and heavy metals on a developing immune system.  I sought out the people I thought would help, but I was sent down a path that led to tragedy."
~ Dr. Anju Usman, MD speaking of her daughter in a presentation on nutrient therapy & a biomedical view of ASD.  Quoted in Healing the New Childhood Epidemics, by Dr. Kenneth Bock (MD)

I never want a friend of mine to have to say those words.  If even one family is spared that kind of "I wish I'd known" burden because they looked into something rather than just going with the flow, then all the effort of blogging, posting, reading, talking and writing will be worth it.  In this world we all will suffer; there's no way around it.  But I would far rather have suffering come from something I could not prevent or foresee than through something I brought into my own life, even unknowingly!  Let's always try to go ahead with eyes wide open!!

This is why it's worth it to me to bring up issues like vaccines, water purity, breast-feeding, responsible farming and cheap manufacturing from child slavery.  Yes, it risks offending some because they think I'm judging them (I'm not, I promise.  I'm just asking you to ask some questions for a minute.).  But if the price tag might be higher than you're willing to pay, wouldn't you want to know that up front?  Again, I'm not saying I KNOW the final price tag on any of these or other issues-- my goal isn't to put my own answer out there for everyone to agree with.  My goal is to get the questions, the prayers, the asking started, so that God can guide you, whomever you are reading this, in areas where you might not have thought to even ask for guidance.  In each of these areas (and many more besides), someone else did so for me.

(Dr. Usman, quoted above, had her first 3 children fully vaccinated (minus the MMR for Priya) on schedule and all three of them suffer from many allergies and auto-immune conditions.  She chose to not vaccinate her youngest, and he is free from any such disease.  While this isn't a controlled matched study, it is startling.  I highly recommend the book! And no, Dr. Bock isn't anti-vaccine; he's just leery of the current CDC schedule and certain ingredients in today's vaccines.  He has a suggested vaccination schedule in an appendix of his book.)

Mishmosh Parenting Post

She's kind of a big deal

I've had the privilege of reading a half-dozen really helpful articles that all loosely relate to the topic "parenting."  And, lest you think I spend all my time trolling the net in search of a good article, I must thank my Facebook Friends for linking to most of these.  :)  Regard this as a preparation for Mother's Day, if you will.  I know I am printing each of these out and adding them to my "parenting" binder (yes, I have one of those =D).

Two reminders on just how precious motherhood and care of little ones is:
- "You're a Mom; You're Kind of a Big Deal" (Kat)
- "Your Children want YOU!" (April Perry)
Both of these could also be applied to dads, or even to teachers or others who invest heavily in little people whose needs are so great and whose ability to articulate praise is so small.  Anyone who doesn't believe the impact of a good mom can just ask someone who didn't have one.  Such an absence is so keenly felt.  And God sees the effort, the struggle to do what is right, the hours of service, even when no one else (definitely not the tiny person whose clothes I am again laundering) does... His is the "well done, good and faithful servant" I'm going for!
** EDIT: HOW COULD I FORGET THIS ONE!???
 -" Desperate, Breathless, Dependent Parenting"- such a great perspective.  Why we can't be "do-it-by-our-own-bootstraps" parents.

Chowing down on Pad Thai at 2

-"A No-Nonsense Strategy for Picky Eaters" (Renee at FIMBY)- I'm fully expecting to get a "picky eater" somewhere along the line, especially since E is soooooooo easy when it comes to food (Ethiopian, sushi, Thai, French, British, Guatemalan, you name it, she eats it and likes it and eats plenty of it)... we did have a few "food battles" early on (one around 15 months, another brief period after age 2), and may again, but this article very well summarizes our family strategy! It makes eating out so easy as well as eating in other people's homes (especially the parts about watching Mommy & Daddy eating anything and everything wonky).

Taking time to smell the flowers

-"Parenting is Never an Interruption" (Paul Tripp)- once again, God's sovereignty crashes into own sinful desires to "get done what I want to get done."

- "Women, Stop Submitting to Men" (Russell Moore)- helpful in thinking about how I want to raise my daughter to view men!

My mom with my baby

- "Vaccination" (Suzanne Humpheries), particularly the idea that vaccines aren't effective before age 1 (at the earliest) due to a baby's different immune system.  I'd read doctors who recommended waiting until age 2 to vaccinate due to concerns over neurological development, as well as immune system fragility, but hadn't considered whether the vaccines would even work on infants.  If it's true that they don't work, that will certainly change what we do in our own family vaccine plan! I'm trying to dig deeper and find studies, etc., that substantiate this claim.  So far what I've waded through does seem to back it up.  (Study on measles vaccine being more effective at 12 mos. than at 9 mos.; a study of Hib vaccine failures that seems to imply that the vaccine fails more often in younger babies; and a discussion of vaccine immunology that discusses the difference in immune responses based on age)

Made Your Flu Shot Lately?

Ok, so I find this both hilarious and profoundly gross. Twice I dry-heaved while watching it, even as I was laughing my head off. But that might be because I'm pregnant. Ryan kept telling me "it's not even real, it's just water in the blender..." Anyway, here's a humorous reminder of what you might be about to shoot directly into your bloodstream or up your child's nose.

Vaccination Summary

Because I still frequently receive emails or Facebook messages regarding vaccinations, I thought I'd post a summary (full of links) on how I go about sifting through all the vaccine information and mis-information out there:

First off, I am SO, so glad you're thinking through all of this-- so many folks don't even, well, THINK of that! :)  Considering how much time most of us put into researching the homes we buy, the cars we drive, and the places we vacation, it makes sense that we should research something that could affect our children for their entire lives!

I've done a series of blog posts that might be a good starting point for you:
1. Overview- http://www.keeperofthehome.org/2011/02/the-thoughtful-parents-guide-to-thinking-through-vaccinations.html
2. 10 Questions to Ask- http://www.keeperofthehome.org/2011/03/the-thoughtful-parents-guide-to-thinking-through-vaccinations-10-questions-to-ask.html
3. Resources both Pro & Con- http://www.keeperofthehome.org/2011/03/the-thoughtful-parents-guide-to-thinking-through-vaccinations-pro-vaccine-and-cautionary-resources.html

Here is our own family's schedule (which I am often re-thinking & editing): http://eowyns-heir.blogspot.com/2010/11/vaccine-schedule-long-awaited.html 

There are more of my own posts about vaccines if you want to read them: http://eowyns-heir.blogspot.com/search/label/Vaccines

We are super selective & slow about vaccines, aiming to build a good foundation with breast-feeding, lots of whole foods (including plenty of fermented/cultured foods/drinks & healthy fats like fish oil and organic butter), and an exposure to plenty of environmental factors like animals, dirt & grass. We employ regular hand-washing & use natural hand-sanitizer when out & about to minimize coughs & colds, but I'm not a germophobe by any definition.  I'm also prepared to use as many natural resources to fight disease naturally if my children do contract potentially serious diseases (but usually temporary and straightforward in healthy kids) like chicken pox, polio, or measles-- like supplementing with vitamins, employing essential oils, boosting their immune system with herbs, and using drug-free pain management techniques like warm compresses, etc. I know it won't be fun if & when my daughter gets the mumps, but I know it's a part of parenting the Lord will give me the strength to persevere through!!

5 Things Every Pregnant Mom Should Know...

I love lists. I've had several "5 Things..." lists in my head.  They are quite random, but hopefully they'll help someone out there!  
 
1. What you eat matters just as much as how much you eat.   It's easy to think "any calories are good calories," but that's just not true.  I know this goes against what a lot of people say & think, but think about it:  the baby is made of what you eat... or needed nutrients are pulled from your storehouses, including teeth, muscles, organs and bones.  Not a good situation for you there!  Seek to eat nutrient-dense foods in whatever quantities you need to stay full-- for me that was an insane amount (I thought) of meat, eggs, cottage cheese, cheeses, fruits, veggies, nuts/nut butters, and the occasional gluten-free baked good (a treat).  Not to say that you can't enjoy sweets in moderation (especially homemade ice-cream from full-fat milk!), but your baby honestly doesn't need it and neither do you.  (As a comfort for those who think that nothing sounds good at the moment:  at the beginning of my pregnancy- almost the first five full months- I was dependent on real ginger ale (I mean the kind that actually has pieces of ginger root in it) sipped throughout the day, and 4 oz of Coca-Cola (had to be actual coke, not a knock-off) in the morning to keep ANYTHING down at all... )  I've found Nina Planck's book Real Food for Mother & Baby to be the best new-mom-dietary book out there... both readable and nutritionally sound.  It's SO much better than What to Expect, which suggests the low-fat, low-meat approach so prevalent in our unhealthy culture today.  Developing babies NEED fat, and how are they going to get it unless you eat it?

2. If your water breaks before your labor starts, going to the hospital is NOT a good idea.  I wish I could yell this from the tallest roof downtown.  I don't know how many of my personal friends (healthy, not Group-B Strep positive) have been frightened with "you have to have that baby in 24 hours or else we're doing a c-section."  Even more have been told that their labor had to have started in 24 hours or else they'd do an induction (which is usually way more painful than natural labor, technology-ridden- you're strapped to an IV and must be monitored round-the-clock) and prone to complications and further interventions.  Why?  The main concern is that infection is nearly inevitable once the bag of waters ruptures.  My friends, this is simply not true.  Let me make it very clear:  the only way a healthy (non-GBS+) mom could possibly get an internal infection while leaking fluid is if bacteria traveled "upstream" into the uterus. The main way that happens is if it is pushed in via an internal exam. 

Despite a lack of evidence, there is a widespread impression among providers that when duration of rupture of membranes exceeds 24 hours, there is increased danger to mother and baby. Birth within 24 hours is a common management goal when the membranes are ruptured. This may lead to use of oxytocin and associated practices such as internal monitors and more frequent vaginal examinations, which are in themselves independent risk factors for infection.

Factors other than duration of rupture are known to increase risk of infection when membranes are ruptured. One strongly predictive factor is the number of vaginal examinations. The authors of the term PROM study point out that the number of vaginal examinations was more predictive of maternal infection than duration of membrane rupture. (see source here)

The more internal exams you have (the more times someone "checks you to see how far along you are"), the more likely infection becomes.  The first thing they will do at the hospital is to do an exam!! If, however, you stay at home, i.e., you don't have an exam, you probably won't get an infection.   (For those of us with more worry-wart tendencies, I'd suggest taking your temperature every hour or so once your water breaks to keep yourself from wondering.  If you did get an infection you'll get a fever and will then have plenty of time to get antibiotics or anything else needed.  You can also head to the hospital if you feel weird or freak out at any time!) If you stay home until labor starts (in 90% of women this happens within 48 hours) you'll be far more comfortable, less prone to infection (since no one is examining you), and less likely to need any other intervention.  (Even if you have Group-B strep, you have the option of beginning antibiotic treatment along with efforts to naturally start labor, like stair-walking and using a breast pump, instead of immediate induction.)


3. The average length of a first pregnancy is 41 weeks and a day.  That's over week past your "due date" (which is a ball-park estimate anyway) and that's an average, meaning as many women go longer as go shorter!  I've often scratched my head at women who say in one breath "God is in control and I'm trusting Him" and in the next "I'm getting induced on my due date because I'm so tired of being pregnant!"  If He's in control, can't you hang on until your labor starts in His timing?  There's rarely cause to induce a "post-due-date" baby, though it's recommended to keep a close eye on mom & baby as the due date comes & goes.  Getting induced because pregnancy is uncomfortable isn't a good idea (I don't mean when pregnancy is life-threatening, as in preeclampsia or toxemia, etc.)-- labor is uncomfortable, parenting a newborn is uncomfortable, and healing from a labor is uncomfortable!!  All of the above are often made more difficult by an induction.  Some women "bake" their babies longer-- seems to be genetic.  Other times, the due date or date of conception has been miscalculated.  Here's a good antidote to the idea that babies start to lose weight and be sickly if they "stay in" for too long.

A major conceptual problem with routine induction at 41 weeks is that the median length of pregnancy in healthy first-time mothers is 41 weeks 1 day. The conventional 40 weeks is just that: a convention. It is based on nothing more than a German obstetrician's fiat two centuries ago that since women cycle according to the moon, pregnancy lasts 10 moon months, that is, 10 months of 4 weeks each. Practitioners may argue over how great a deviation from normal warrants intervention, but in the case of routine induction at 41 weeks, they are arguing for intervening when there is no deviation from normal.  (Henci Goer, author of The Thinking Woman's Guide to Better Birth)

4. When you're in labor, laying on your back is usually the most painful position.  Wow, I speak from personal experience on this one.  When I had to lay down to be "checked" in labor, if a contraction happened before I could get back up it was agony (well, lying on my side was even worse, due to Eowyn's position). Walking around, squatting, leaning on Ryan, swaying, even just sitting up made the pain far more manageable.  Nothing was exactly comfortable, but it was doable!  This is a really good reason to avoid induction (as long as you have Pitocin dripping into you, you need to be monitored constantly, and few hospitals have wireless monitoring systems), as well as to opt for intermittent external fetal monitoring instead of continuous or internal.  Even in bed, though, you can move a bit.

How do you picture yourself during labor? Perhaps you've imagined yourself getting into bed, pulling up the covers, and simply lying there awaiting your baby's birth. Your husband mops your face with a wet washcloth while doctors and nurses flutter around your bedside. This image bears little resemblance to reality. If you really want to have your baby more quickly and with less pain, plan to get up and keep moving around as long as you can through labor.  [...]

But lying down has no medical benefits for most mothers. In fact, it carries several proven risks. When you lie on your back for long periods of time, the weight of the uterus compresses the descending aorta and inferior vena cava, blood vessels that supply or drain the lower part of your body. This interference with your circulation reduces your blood pressure, compromising blood flow to your baby and causing his heart rate to drop. When you stay upright (or at least off your back), placental circulation improves and fetal heart rate abnormalities may be alleviated. [...] A British study comparing mothers who walked during labor to mothers who stayed in bed demonstrated that walking not only shortened labor but also reduced pain and the need for medication.

How does walking help your labor along? For one thing, your contractions become stronger, more regular, and more frequent when you stand up. Gravity helps your baby make his way through your pelvis. Furthermore, the upright position improves both the angle of your baby's body to your spine and the application of his head to your cervix. Because your uterus naturally tilts forward in your abdomen during contractions, it meets the least resistance when you are standing, leaning slightly forward.  (The source article is a good one to read!)

5. It's standard procedure to inject all newborn babies against Hepatitis B, but this is completely optional. Hep B is an STD, and if you don't have it, your baby isn't at risk... AT ALL.  Even if you choose to vaccinate for everything else, injecting an immune-stimulating drug immediately following the trauma of birth into a tiny person for a disease they aren't even able to contract is pretty pointless.  At the very least, hold off for a while! (You can read the risk factors for the disease here.)  Get your pediatrician & doctor (or midwife) to sign your birthplan for extra back-up.  Most practices test for Hep B during the 2nd trimester of pregnancy, and if you test negative and are in a monogamous relationship with another Hep-B-free person, most doctors will back you up no prob.

And a bonus...

6. Your milk usually doesn't come in until 3 days after your baby is born (sometimes it's delayed even more if you have a C-section).  A newborn's stomach is as big as an adult pinky (or picture a marble or thimble), which is why colostrum (first "milk") is super-dense and comes in very tiny quantities.  The newborn's stomach grows quickly, and as the baby nurses it tells the body to produce mature milk.  Most newborns also have quite a reserve of fat to get them through the first few days of learning how to nurse, etc.  I've had friends whose babies were given bottles in the hospital within hours of birth because "their milk hadn't come in."  The answer (unless the baby is tiny, malnourished and dehydrated) isn't a bottle in that situation; it's being put to the mother's breast as often as possible, and kept near her as often as possible!  Here's a good little article by a Lactation Consultant on the topic.  (Note:  this doesn't mean you will have to nurse on-demand for the baby's whole life; the first few days, even weeks, are pretty unique.)  (image credit)

So, what do you wish you could know or had known as an expectant parent? Any ideas for a "5 Things" list I could do?  Comment away!

Thoughtful Thoughts on Vaccines

OK, so the title is lame, but I am so very tired... Sorry for my blogging absence; amidst life and love and pursuing home-centered godliness, I've also been spending most of my spare minutes tweaking and sourcing my blog posts on a favorite topic (childhood vaccinations) on a bigger blog than this humble little site: Keeper of the Home. Please mosey on over and check them out! Part One posted Tuesday; and Parts Two & Three will show up in the following weeks!

Feel free to leave comments here or there-- I may respond to them more quickly here; the volume of discussion on that blog is quite a bit more than I can handle. But then again the point is discussion amongst us all, not me policing and answering every question myself, right?

In the words of my South African friend,
Cheers.
'Night, y'all. :)

Thinking Through More Vaccines

Today we'll go through the other major vaccines, and I'll explain why we decided to get or avoid them.  Don't worry, I won't be so in-depth as I was with my example yesterday (pondering the chicken pox, or varicella, vaccine).  Of course, if a reader requests a similar analysis of a vaccine, I'll be happy to oblige!

Remember, these are the conclusions we came to for our family in our situation.  One of the biggest problems with the CDC schedule is that it forces a one-size-fits-all approach to children who are VASTLY different.  Your conclusions could be totally opposite because of where you live or what your genes are!!  That is OK!  Real quick, here are the 10 questions I use to evaluate each vaccine (or medical procedure) I'm given the option of having:

1. What disease(s) is this vaccine aiming to protect against?
2. What is the a) probable outcome of this disease, and b) worst-case scenario outcome?
3. Today, is this disease treatable and/or preventable by other/natural means?  
4. What are possible dangers in this type of vaccine (look up whole list of ingredients)?
5. What is the a) probable outcome of this vaccine, and b) worst-case scenario outcome?
6. How much has this vaccine been tested, and are those tests by objective testers?
7. How effective is the vaccine?
8. Are there any benefits to gaining immunity to this disease through actual infection, rather than through the vaccine?
9. What is the rationale behind getting the vaccine?  Is this valid/applicable to my situation?
10. Is the disease generally worse than the vaccine?
Now, each vaccine in turn briefly:
-Hepatitis A- No, because of #9.  This disease passes through feces-oral transmissions (diapers), or contaminated water/food.  Common in poor, crowded, unsanitary communities, which we do not inhabit.  If we travel internationally to an affected area, we would consider this vaccine.
-Hepatitis B- No, because of #9.  This is a sexually transmitted disease, which can only be passed to infants through an infected mother (which I am not).  There is absolutely no reason for a baby of a healthy mother to receive this shot.  If our child were to begin a career in health or public service, an adult vaccination would be appropriate.
-Polio (IPV)- No, mainly because of 2 & 5.  Even during epidemics, 95% of those exposed to polio will exhibit NO symptoms, and of those, 5% will have only mild flu-like symptoms.  Even among those 1 in 1000 who do exhibit muscular paralysis, the vast majority have a full recovery.  The real clincher, though, is the high percentage of contaminants which this vaccine has had over the years, and still can have now.  Monkey tissues are used to culture the disease, and diseases which monkeys carry harmlessly are deadly to humans. SV-40 infected at least 30 million (some estimate as high as 200 million worldwide) children in the 1960s vaccination campaigns, and is still being treated today in the form of numerous cancers.  Some evidence has shown that SV-40 has even been passed from vaccinated-infected-mothers to their children in the form of brain tumors!  While monkey tissues are now tested for SV-40 and various other diseases, the threat of viral contamination is still very high, and utterly probable.  Some postulate that HIV is the human version of SIV, which infects 50% of all African green monkeys (the kind most used to culture polio vaccines). Several doctors have warned that only about 2% of existing monkey viruses are known and are tested for, and since you can't test for something you don't know is there, who knows what might be in the vaccines. It just isn't worth the risk.(The definition of "polio" as counted by the CDC has become drastically more restrictive since the development of the vaccine, which further confounds the problem of judging its effectiveness; the numbers are falsely lowered.  Now a patient must exhibit the worst possible symptoms in order to be counted as having polio, as opposed to having mild symptoms and being counted.)  I've judged polio (which my child may well be immune to, like most of the population), to be less a risk than a cancer-causing virus.
-Rotavirus- no, mainly because of 2.  This vaccine is to prevent a disease which, while unpleasant (vomiting & diarhea) is treatable-- the main danger is dehydration.  The actual sickness only confers partial immunity (though repeat infections are usually less severe), so of course the vaccine-weakened form of the virus provides spotty protection at best.  
-Meningitis (both Hib & Pc)- Yes, mainly because of 10.  Meningitis begins with flu-like symptoms, yet can turn deadly in toddlers very quickly, though death is relatively rare. It was not uncommon, though breast-feeding and avoidance of day-care lowered risks considerably. While long-term effects of the vaccine are still undermined, and there are the usual cases of serious vaccine-associated reactions to the vaccine, the vaccines do seem to have been effective in drastically lowering meningitis cases among toddlers.  Even if the vaccine-granted immunity does wear off, meningitis in older children is far less serious than in very young children.  Pc also does effectively protect against pneumonia, to which our daughter is susceptible (thanks to her GB's genes).
-Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR)- no, because of 2, 4, 3, 8 & 10- none of these diseases tend to be serious in children, and naturally-obtained immunities are permanent, even passing on to their later infants as long as breast-feeding lasts.  That last advantage is not true for infants born to mothers who only have the vaccine-immunity.  Malnutrition is responsible for measles complications, which are nearly eradicated by supplementation of vitamin A (along with avoidance of fever-reducers during the illness). Combination vaccines and live vaccines are a deadly combination, assaulting the still-developing neurological system of little bodies ill-equipped to fight off 3 diseases at once.  Both combination shots and live-virus vaccines are especially linked to auto-immune disorders (diabetes Type I, Celiac's disease, ADD, autism spectrum disorders, asthma). It seems clear to me that this triple vaccine poses far more dangers than contracting any & all of the 3 diseases, especially if our children's diet is rich in vitamin A.
-DTaP (diptheria, tetanus & pertussis/whooping cough)- yes, only for the tetanus component (tetanus alone isn't available for children under the age of 2, at least not that I could find), because of #2 & 9.  Tetanus is severe & life-threatening, occuring due to injuries with contaminated objects (such as are plentiful in our inner-city neighborhood park and street).  The vaccine is 100% effective in providing tetanus immunity, as long as 10 year boosters are given.  If we did not live in this neighborhood, we might delay the shot until only the tetanus component could be given.  I wrestled most with this vaccine decision because pertussis is the most controversial and reactive of all the shots, linked to brain damage and seizures in an alarmingly high number of children (I know a woman whose daughter is suffering exactly that).  However, it seemed to us that the likely-hood of our children reacting so violently to the vaccine were less than them cutting themselves on a rusty iron nail if they tripped in the park.  It might be different for you!
-Human Papiloma Virus-no, because of #9 & 6.  This protects against a sexually transmitted disease, for which my child is not at risk.  If she chooses to become promiscuous in adulthood, it will be up to her to weigh the risks of the shot v. the disease. The shot is brand-new and is showing alarming side-effects after only 1 year on the market.  It may not even be around by the time our children are old enough to get it.


I welcome your thoughts and questions!