Vaccines

Link to the Douglas Report

2009-04-23T20:40:00.000-07:00

Below is the link to The Douglas Report, which urges Americans about five vaccines they should "never get." This link is posted on the top of the gmail toolbar!

I thought this was a great example of some of the extremism regarding vaccines.

http://www.douglassreport.com/reports/vaccines.html?gclid=CKChxYP70pkCFSbxDAodXDaotQ

From Larry King Live: Autism is Preventable and Reversible

2009-04-22T05:19:00.000-07:00

LKL Blog Exclusive by J.B. Handley, founder of Generation Rescue. J.B. will be our guest tonight on LKL, in addition to Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey.

Jenny McCarthy’s son Evan no longer has autism. This is a very hard concept for most people to grasp, because the popular understanding of autism is that it’s lifelong. Quietly, a revolution of tens of thousands of parents around the world are standing firmly behind Jenny and using the same treatments to heal their children that she used to heal Evan. Not a day goes by where I don’t hear a story from a parent of their child’s dramatic improvement or complete recovery from autism using what we call “biomedical intervention.”

In the 1940s, Autism was supposed to be a placeholder diagnosis, used until we had a better understanding of the actual physical issues that would define autism as a disease. Yet even today, a child is diagnosed based entirely on behavioral observation - there is no blood test or other way to test for it. Unfortunately, this has led to a level of inertia and acceptance amongst the mainstream medical community that many parents find unhelpful, if not unacceptable. “Autism is something you can’t really change, just learn to accept it” - that’s the message so many of us hear from our medical authorities.

Imagine for a second being that parent of a child with autism and told that your child may never speak and that a lifetime of care is likely. You start to do your own research, and you happen upon our community, filled with hope, examples of recovery, and specific actions you can take to heal your child. What would you do?

The vaccine issue has made autism one of the most polarizing topics on earth, which is too bad, because it keeps different communities within the autism world from working for the benefit of the only group that matters: our kids.

The number of children diagnosed with autism today is deeply alarming. The 1 in 150 number often used here in the U.S. is actually from 7 years ago, and we’re hearing more recent numbers well below 1 in 100 in states like Minnesota, New Jersey, and Oregon, to name just a few. Published studies in the 1970s showed an autism rate of 1 in 10,000, so autism has grown 100-fold, or 10,000%, numbers that are nearly impossible to imagine.

With autism cases growing this quickly, something in the environment has to be causing the rise. A “spontaneous genetic epidemic” is a scientific impossibility. It’s also likely that something relatively straightforward has to be behind the epidemic - it’s very unlikely that 100 different things all showed up sometime in the early 1990s and triggered the autism epidemic.

That’s where vaccines come in, and I think the case for them as a primary trigger is, unfortunately, very compelling. Firstly, the number of vaccines given to U.S. kids has expanded dramatically. Up until 1989, our kids received 10 total shots by their 5th birthday. Today, they receive 36. At their 2 month old appointment alone, most American children receive 6 separate vaccines in less than 15 minutes. Few other things on the planet that nearly all children receive have grown so dramatically during the exact time period when autism cases have exploded.

Secondly, and this is something most parents don’t realize, vaccines are known to cause brain injury in some kids. In fact, the US government has paid out over $1.8 billion in compensation for vaccine injury, most of it to children and much of that for brain injury. How exactly do vaccines cause brain injury? No one knows for sure, but if you check out the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program on the website of the Department of Health and Human Services, you can see for yourself that brain injury is a primary side effect (sometimes called “encephalopathy”) of many of our vaccines.

Finally, we have tens of thousands of case reports of parents reporting that their child developmentally regressed, stopped talking, and was later diagnosed with autism after a vaccine appointment. The number of vaccines have risen along with autism rates, vaccines are known to cause brain damage, and parents report regression and later autism after getting them. Is it really so hard to believe we think vaccines are a trigger?

Few parents appreciate that American kids are the most vaccinated on the planet. Generation Rescue just released a study called “Autism and Vaccines Around the World” which will surprise many. We looked at the vaccine schedules of 30 other first world countries to compare how many doses of vaccines children receive. What did we find? Compared to our 36, the average for the rest of the first world is 18, or half of the U.S. schedule. Perhaps more shocking, we looked at countries with the lowest rates of mortality for children under 5 (the U.S. ranks a disappointing 34th, behind Cuba and Slovenia). How many vaccines do the 5 countries with the lowest under 5 mortality rates give? Well, Iceland, Sweden, Singapore, Japan, and Norway give 11, 11, 13, 11, and 13 vaccines respectively - all less than 1/3 the number of vaccines the U.S. mandates!

How do autism rates compare in some of these other countries? Iceland’s rate is 1 in 1,000, Finland’s 1 in 700, and Sweden’s 1 in 800. These countries give 1/3 the vaccines we do and have autism rates that are as little as one-tenth of ours? Something isn’t right.

Parents just want a simple answer: “What do I do for my child? I want to give vaccines, but I don’t want autism.” There is no perfect answer as our kids are so different. But, perhaps you could start by considering the US vaccine schedule in 1989, which is a schedule many countries still use today. In 1989, we gave the following vaccines (and doses): DTP (5), Polio (4), MMR (1). For reference, today we give the following vaccines and doses: DTP (5), Polio (4), MMR (2), Hepatitis B (3), Hib (4), Varicella (2), Rotavirus (3), PCV (4), Flu (7), Hepatitis A (2).

Prevent deadly disease while preventing autism, why can’t the two co-exist?

To date, our health authorities have been unwilling to meet us halfway on vaccines. There appears to be no room for moderation, and we hear the American Academy of Pediatrics state that American children should simply get all their shots. Yet, looking at 30 other first world countries, we found that only 3 others had added Varicella to their schedules, and only 2 others had added Rotavirus to their schedules, as two examples of low rates of adoption by other countries, despite the fact that both of these vaccines have now been on the market for over a decade. What do these other countries know that we don’t? Would it surprise you to learn that the patent holder for Rotavirus sat on the government panel that adds vaccines to our schedule?

Our health authorities are also quick to assert that “the science shows vaccines don’t cause autism.” It’s disappointing to hear false statements like this from people many of us inherently trust. Having read every study these experts put forward, I can tell you with conviction that any doctor making this claim is either lying or has never read the studies for themselves. In fact, we were so frustrated by this mantra about “the science” that we created a website to analyze all the studies, which you can now find at FourteenStudies.org and see for yourself. In a nutshell, if you never look at unvaccinated kids and if you only ever study one vaccine (the MMR) which accounts for 2 of the 36 vaccines our kids get, its easy to craft studies to get the answers you want.

The debate over the causes of autism will not end anytime soon. Parents trying to do the right thing for their children are being put in the middle. I’m grateful for people like Jenny McCarthy who are willing to share their own stories and help as many parents as possible prevent and reverse autism. Through her courage alone, thousands of kids today are facing a far brighter future.

Courts Rule: MMR Vaccine Does Not Cause Autism

2009-04-22T05:01:00.000-07:00

As of February 12, 2009, the Federal courts have ruled that there is no link between the MMR vaccination and Autism. While many would find this and sigh with relief that the never ending debate had finally come to an end, but unfortunately,

Some autism advocacy groups say that despite a ruling that appears to exonerate MMR vaccines as the cause of autism in children, they will continue to push to raise awareness that such a link may exist.

-ABC NEWS

Autism is "Curable," McCarthy Claims

2009-04-21T22:54:00.000-07:00

It is no secret that when opting to receive vaccinations, or any medication for that matter, that you indirectly acknowledge and accept any and all potential health risks and side effects. The chance of experiencing any mild problems, let alone ending up with a life-altering condition, is a chance so miniscule, that the long lists of "cautions" are rarely given more then a quick glance before going ahead with the treatment. Many are led to believe that for one reason or another, they are required to have certain vaccines, whether it be as an infant up until 5 years old, or when they are "all-grown-up" and going off to college. For whatever reason for getting vaccinated, in Michigan, they are (although each state is different) strictly a recommendation, NOT a requirement. This is an important fact that NOT many are aware of, and given all of the possible effects and life changing outcomes, the most controversial of those to be Autism.

For a list of different vaccinations, the ingredients contained in each, and the possible side effects of each, click: http://www.generationrescue.org/vaccine_information/

With a child that had been diagnosed with Autism, mother and author, Jenny McCarthy, is convinced that the MMR vaccination actually CAUSED his Autism. Wanting to raise awareness, and educate the public on information regarding the dangers and risks that are associated with vaccinations, but more specifically, autism. Taking on the role of the activist, she is getting people to start asking the government and doctors important questions, and to challenge treatments that may not have been thoroughly tested for their safety. She does this along side the well known comedian/actor, Jim Carry. Together they have created an Autism Organization: Generation Rescue.

The organization is aimed at educating other parents that may be experiencing the same traumatizing diagnose that she received of her son, and also to let others know that Autism, she believes, is curable, and on top of that, she also claims that her son is fully recovered! While her beliefs may be 100 percent false, either way she continues to exercise her personal rights autonomy, and with that she and all others are entitled to.

For a parents guide/ information on the MMR vaccine, go here:

"AUTISM YESTERDAY" Autism is Reversible from JB Handley on Vimeo.

Prevention of Cocaine Addiction through Vaccination

2009-04-21T17:48:00.000-07:00

Article from TIME Magazine

The Ethics of Vaccinations

by Tom Murray

Scientists at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston have developed a vaccine that may protect against cocaine addiction. The drug is still years away from FDA approval, but as with many new medical technologies, it raises some profound ethical questions about how, when and in whom it should be used. TIME asked Tom Murray, president and CEO of the Hastings Center, a bioethics research institute, to answer the most pertinent and thought-provoking questions.

Should we be concerned about giving the vaccine to children?

In general, parents will want to use any tools at their disposal to help their children, and a vaccine that prevents cocaine addiction could well fall into this category. There are a couple of problems, however: The vaccine as currently designed is not for prevention of addiction, but for use by current or former addicts who want to guard against relapsing. The drug is not likely to be tested in children, but if trials in cocaine-addicted adults lead to FDA approval, the vaccine will be available for "off-label" use — meaning that doctors will be free to prescribe it for anything they want.

Plenty of drugs that are not specifically approved for use by children are nevertheless given to them off-label, but medically speaking, children are not merely tiny adults, and scientists cannot predict how children will respond to a drug that has been tested only in adults. Without solid research confirming that the vaccine works in children as a preventive against addiction — without damaging side effects — parents who decide to give it to their children will be exposing them to unknown and possibly serious risks. At a minimum, if children are given the vaccine, doctors should follow them carefully in order to pick up any evidence of side effects.

Since drug addiction is a costly societal problem, should there be mass vaccination? If so, who should pay for it?

If the cocaine vaccine proves to be safe and effective, why not offer it to every adult who is a current or former user? If the vaccine is not outrageously priced and if it safeguards people against relapsing into addiction, it's hard to imagine that it would not yield enormous savings in the long run. The wisdom of mass vaccination, however, is not so clear. Even the safest vaccine has side effects. Complications may be rare, but the more people you vaccinate, the more adverse effects we'll see.

When we balance the risk of side effects against an addict's freedom from the grip of cocaine, uncommon risks are easily justifiable. But when we vaccinate tens of millions of people, most of whom will never get nearer to cocaine than the traces on the $20 bill in their pocket, even a one-in-million risk may be too high.

Will the vaccine exacerbate health care and social disparities, with the rich having more access to it than the less advantaged?

That, of course, depends upon who pays for it. Many of the newer vaccines listed by the Centers for Disease Control run from $75 to $125 a dose at your doctor's office, so it's reasonable to anticipate that a cocaine vaccine could cost upwards of $100 a pop. That's real money for most of us. If common sense prevails, addicts and recovering addicts will get the vaccine at no or nominal cost. It's in everyone's interest — including the health insurer's — to immunize addicts against cocaine intoxication. As for vaccinating children or people who have never used cocaine, until we can be sure that it will be an overall benefit to them, we should hold off. We have plenty of other real injustices in health care to remedy first.

Would people being offered the vaccine be able to give informed consent? Many people with drug addiction suffer from other problems, such as mental illness, and addiction itself might impair consent.

Making certain that someone gives fully informed and voluntary consent is fundamental to good ethics in both treatment and research — especially research. The days of testing new drugs on hapless victims are, we hope, long past. Researchers will have to be sensitive to the challenges of assuring that people enrolled in clinical trials for the cocaine vaccine understand what they're agreeing to and have the clarity of mind to give meaningful consent. The bare fact that a person is or was addicted to cocaine or may suffer from a mental illness does not render them incompetent to consent. But it does require researchers to be especially vigilant to ensure that the person has the mental capacity to consent — and that the vaccine is not being forced on them.

Will biomarkers remaining in the blood after patients receive the vaccine be a "stain" that can be used to discriminate against them for employment, travel, insurance, or legal purposes — even though use of the vaccine does not mean that cocaine was ever taken?

Sometimes wisdom is knowing when to ask someone else. So I asked my dear friend Mark Rothstein to answer this question. He is one of the world's experts on medical information and privacy and the director of the Institute for Bioethics, Health Policy and Law at the University of Louisville School of Medicine. He says: "It's safe to assume that any information that can be used will be used. Obtaining test results will become increasingly easier, as testing technology gets cheaper and electronic health-record networks more efficiently transfer large data files. As a legal matter, to take the example of employment, the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination against individuals who have engaged in the illegal use of drugs but who have successfully completed or are participating in a supervised rehabilitation program and are no longer using drugs. Therefore, if the vaccine biomarker were used to identify former cocaine users who are no longer using drugs, then discrimination based on a positive test would be unlawful. There are many other contexts besides employment in which the test might be used, however, and it will be necessary to examine (and perhaps amend) various laws to protect against discriminatory use of this information."

Cocaine is an illegal substance. Might use of the vaccine lead to trouble with the law? Or might it be a condition of parole, and is this ethical?

We'd like ethics and law to be good friends or, at least, not complete strangers. But they have different purposes and different ways of reasoning. The biological footprints left in the blood by the cocaine vaccine are not proof that the person ever used the drug. The cocaine molecule itself will leave traces in the body for a while, but it's too tiny to trigger our immune system; that's why the vaccine hooks it up to a larger one. Unless the law goes completely berserk, it won't confuse the antibodies created in response to the vaccine with the drug itself.

What's more likely is that judges and parole boards will look favorably upon addicts willing to take the vaccine, and suspiciously at those who refuse. Rehabilitation is a primary goal of the justice system. There's a good argument to be made that someone whose addiction led to crimes and thence to prison, but who is no longer an addict thanks to the vaccine, has to a significant degree been rehabilitated and deserves to be released. Ethically, however, that looks like a coercive offer: Take the vaccine or go back to the slammer. It's not an unreasonable judgment by the law. But I anticipate a pretty vigorous argument about whether it's ethical.

Is have the right to decide always the best choice?

2009-04-21T17:47:00.000-07:00

Autonomy is freedom from external constraint and the presence of critical mental capacities such as understanding, intending, and voluntary decision-making capacity.

The negative side to individual autonomy with immunizations:

Physicians have the training and greater knowledge of the fundamentals of vaccinations and relevant diseases to justify health benefits and risk of an individuals case to be immunized, as opposed to the knowledge held by the general public.
Someone who chooses to be exempt is 35 times more likely to develop a disease that could be prevented through vaccination.
Overall protection to the public and individuals is decreased, if there is no outside intervention to implement vaccinations.
Herd immunity is decreased if many people decide not to get vaccinations.
Transmission is increased. If less people are protected, there is greater risk of spreading the disease.
Total eradication of the disease is less likely to occur and more resistant strains will develop.
An individual’s choice to refuse preventative measures through vaccinations is choosing to risk the chances of dealing with treatment of diseases.
May decide not to get immunized because they believe it is not natural, but a vaccination can help with naturally strengthening the immune system.

Smallpox Eradicated Through Actions of Compulsory Vaccinations

A dramatic example of the benefit to not having individual autonomy is the smallpox epidemic. The World Health Organization required mass vaccinations. All cases discovered enforced vaccinations to those in the household of those infected and vaccinations of those in contact with the household members. In West Africa, it was reported that about 90% of the population received the smallpox vaccine. On May 8th, 1980, the actions of compulsory vaccinations led to the eradication of naturally occurring smallpox, which previously was the cause of over 2 million deaths.

Cost-effectiveness of Immunizations

2009-04-21T16:46:00.000-07:00

Vaccinations save more than $52 billion in total health care costs
Meningitis Vaccine – saves $ 2 billion in health care costs
Hepatitis B Vaccine – saves $14 health care costs in children and adolescents for every dollar spent
Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR) Vaccine – saves $9 billion each year
Diptheria, Tetanus, Polio (DTP) Vaccine – saves $6 in health care costs for every dollar spent
Pneumonia Vaccine – saves $194 million annually

Vaccination as a Choice: Right to Refuse Vaccination

2009-04-21T14:47:00.000-07:00

Vaccinations have no doubt been one of the most influential and invaluable tools created in modern medicine. Since it’s discovery and creation, this medical marvel has nearly eradicated smallpox, decreased epidemics, and largely protected against common colds and even chickenpox. However with its success has also come great controversy. One component of the larger debate is whether certain vaccinations should be state mandated or whether it should be a choice left to the parents. Keeping ones autonomy is a central issue in many bioethical debates and is no different with this one. Many parents and non-parents alike feel that personal autonomy is more important than obligation to the public and government and should be taken into consideration and respected.
In a public survey that was posted on the website NaturalNews.com, 98% of the participants stated parents should have the right to refuse vaccinations for their children. Though even with considerable statistics like this, an increasing number of states in our country have been fighting to make a number of childhood vaccinations mandatory to enter school. One of the arguments for supporters of mandating child vaccinations is that you are doing your child a disservice. Some even go as far as calling it abuse or neglect if a parent chooses not to get their child vaccinated. Although this view is expressed by a larger number of people, it has weaknesses. A parent is responsible for their child’s well-being and have an obligation and right to raise them how they see fit. For some, not vaccinating their children is the right way to go about this. A parent is considered the primary decision maker for the child until that child is legally an adult, which opponents of this are not taking into consideration. Mandating child vaccinations goes against parental rights and lets an outside source make medical decisions that directly affect the child. It can never be considered neglect or abuse when parents are making a conscious, informed, and well thought out decision to, in their eyes, protect their child and also protect their rights. For example, if a patient refuses treatment in a hospital even though it might greatly help them later in life, it would be against the law to continue treating them. This is no different from a parent refusing to immunize their child even though it might help them later in life.
This leads into a main argument in favor of vaccination as a choice: parents should be able to choose what is put inside of their child’s body and what kind of medical treatment is performed on them. An article I found online at the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), provides an example of this argument. L.R. Huntoon, M.D., Ph.D, spoke to a group at the YWCA and titled this Vaccinations: Public good vs. Individual Rights. Huntoon stated that he wanted to address one question, which was “who should decide what to put in your body?” Huntoon began the discussion with telling a fictional story: “The story begins with the FDA which has a little known advisory committee known as the ACNF - Advisory Committee for Nutritional Food. And their mission is to promote the most nutritional diet in the interest of the public good. After a period of study and deliberations, they came up with Recommended Daily Amounts of each type of food to include at least 3 servings of meat per day, preferably Big Macs, Whoppers and Chicken Dinners. They've called this optimal diet FAD which stands for Federally Approved Diet. They have published their FAD diet and other recommendations in a special government report. Before long, your state legislators took note of this official government report and acting in what they felt was the public's best interest, they passed a law, which made the FAD diet mandatory. And, just to make sure that all citizens follow this government approved diet, the law mandates that neither you nor your children can attend school (including college) unless you eat the government's FAD diet…. So, one day during a class discussion on nutrition your daughter or granddaughter happens to mention that she and her family are.....VEGETARIANS. Well, within a few days her parents receive a very threatening letter from school officials, which makes it clear that the little girl will be expelled from school unless her parents start feeding her the FAD diet. School officials also make it clear that if her parents are particularly stubborn in refusing to comply with the government-mandated FAD diet, that Child Protective Services will be called and they will likely take the little girl away from her parents based on "NUTRITIONAL NEGLECT" of a child. Well, being vegetarians, a very bright and independent thinking group of people, the parents said "Hey, wait a minute.... this is the United States of America, not communist China. Government has no right to tell me what I put into my body or into my child's body." Although this story is completely fictional, it does however represent the very real position we are at today with government-mandated vaccinations. And even though no one could ever compare the effectiveness and health benefits of vaccines to fast food, the point is made and supported. The government can not intervene in any other part of parenting a child so why this? Especially because it is a medical procedure that is pervasive and directly affects the child.
Most parents who decide against vaccination are not doing it solely to do it, but because of legitimate reasons and concerns they have learned about. Religion is a central theme in debates surrounding not only personal, educational and public issues but bioethical issues as well. A person’s religion needs to be taken into account in this particular situation of vaccination as a choice as it has been in other areas of medical practice. For example, Christian Science is one religion where members refuse medical treatment of any kind, which would include vaccination. They choose the practice of faith healing to treat members of the religion. However some states do not take this into account or consider it a good enough reason. A factor of not vaccinating that is actually supported by states and the CDC is not vaccinating based on medical grounds. The CDC website gives a list of common child vaccinations and when not to get children vaccinated. For example, they state “people should not get hepatitis B vaccine if they have ever had a life-threatening allergic reaction to baker's yeast.” For the MMR vaccine “Some people should check with their doctor about whether they should get MMR vaccine, including anyone who:
* Has HIV/AIDS, or another disease that affects the immune system
* Is being treated with drugs that affect the immune system, such as steroids,
for 2 weeks or longer.
* Has any kind of cancer
* Is taking cancer treatment with x-rays or drugs
* Has ever had a low platelet count (a blood disorder)”

In relation to this parents may also decide against vaccination because of negative side effects and previous cases they have seen. The CDC warns that the DPT vaccine may cause negative side effects because of the Pertussis component in it. Which is exactly what happened to Amy Roehl. After receiving this vaccine she had convulsions and a high fever. After this experience her mother decided not to continue with any other vaccinations except for her Hepatitis B shot. Another case supporting this particular argument is presented in a documentary titled Vaccine Nation. It includes the story of Alan Yurko who in February of 1999, was sentenced to life plus ten years with no chance of parole for child abuse and aggravated murder in the death of this ten-week old son. The medical diagnosis of the baby’s death was shaken baby syndrome. The doctor making the documentary as well as other medical professionals believe a majority of SBS cases to be attributed to a delayed vaccine reaction. Cases like this have affected the views of the public and now want to be more informed before vaccinating children. A last argument is the choice not to get vaccinated for personal reasons. Many people don’t realize how some vaccines are made. For example the influenza vaccine is made with animal products and eggs. Other vaccines are make with monkey and chick kidney cells. And others are made with calf serum and protein. Because of the use of animals as means PETA is a large opponent against vaccination. The Institute for Vaccine Safety has a map of which states accept religious, medical, and personal belief exemptions for child vaccinations:

If parents are choosing not to get their children vaccinated for various reasons based on medical, religious, or philosophical grounds, denying the parents this right would be very ethically unsound and morally wrong. Parents have been threatened with fines and even jail time in states such as New York and Maryland. Children who haven’t been vaccinated have been expelled from schools across the nation. And it has even gone so far that Child Protective Services was called and threatened to take children away if the parents did not comply with state mandations.

Is this a case of keeping ones autonomy and not letting the government or institutions rule what is being put in their own bodies? Or are objectors to the practice neglecting their children’s well being and denying them the best heath possible? Parents not vaccinating their child cannot be considered neglect. They are taking every aspect of their lives into account and consideration and then making an educated and informed choice they feel is best for their child. The government should not be able to take this important parental right away and to do so would be ethically wrong for many reasons.

Sources:
http://www.infowars.com/survey-98-say-parents-should-have-right-to-refuse-vaccination-of-children/

http://www.aapsonline.org/brochures/veghunt.htm

Influenza Vaccine Shortage of 2004

2009-04-21T14:36:00.000-07:00

U.S. Faces Flu Vaccine Shortage by Melissa Block of NPR

One of the main vaccine suppliers to the U.S., The Chiron Corp., lost their license due to manufacturing problems right before flu season started.
The CDC urged people NOT to get flu vaccines in order to save supplies for those who truly needed it; babies, the sick, health care works, pregnant women and the elderly.
The CDC held 8 million vaccines for use once flu season began and those at highest risk of dying from it became apparent.
The federal government only has control over vaccine contracts in government owed hospitals.
State laws determine local distribution of vaccines.
The U.S. was not able to get their shipment of 48 million vaccines.

HEALTH; The Sick, in a Flu Shot Scramble by Barbara Whitaker of The New York Times

A mother with a daughter who is severely asthmatic had a really difficult time trying to find a flu shot for her.
She finally got one because a doctor was able to persuade another patient not to get one.
This doctor only had 30 shots to give out.
The shortage came after years of health officials encouraging people to get vaccinated.

Advice on Vaccine Shortage Is Lacking, Local Officials Say by Gardiner Harris of The New York Times

State health departments and officials do not have enough vaccines for their regions and have no idea how to ration them.
The U.S. was reliant on only two vaccine manufacturers at the time, one of them being Chiron.
Some say this issue was foreseeable and the U.S. should have relied on more than two manufacturers.

Inequalilty in Vaccination

2009-04-21T13:49:00.000-07:00

There has been some dispute to whether or not there is inequality in the distribution of vaccination. This inequality exists between social class, racial/ethnic groups, and between age groups. It seems that the greater the gap in income is between the rich and the poor within a country, the lower the life expectancy and higher death rate. This is due health care coverage and the unresponsiveness of the governments in these countries to the needs of the lower class. By modestly increasing national income could support disease prevention, including vaccination, therefore increasing in areas where life expectancy is low.

One case study on the flu vaccine was found that showed the inequality between multiple groups. It focused on vaccination coverage in racial/ethnic inequalities within high risk adults. In the United States, influenza and pneumonia combined were the sixth leading cause of death in 1997 and also lead in the causes for hospitalization. The influenza vaccination is an extremely cost-effective way of decreasing these statistics. Some groups within the population are at more of a risk to having flu related complications. These groups include the elderly and immune deficient. There are also some disparities in the quality of health in certain ethnic and racial groups. It shows that Black Americans are less likely to get the flu vaccine than White Americans. When the researchers looked at patients with two or more high risk conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, and asthma, they found that White Americans were more likely to be vaccinated than Black Americans. They also found that in spite of race and ethnicity, people over the age of 65 were more likely to be vaccinated then people 64 years or under. Racial/ethnic disparities were also found to be interdependent of gender, socioeconomic status, and access to health care. It seems that there is some reasoning behind the differentiation of vaccination rates, one being that there are fewer opportunities for people of certain racial/ethnic groups to be vaccinated. If effective strategies were implemented to increase vaccination rates, such as health care providers being sure to offer the flu vaccine to all patients during flu season, then there would be less differentiation in vaccination rates between racial/ethnic groups as well as other subpopulations.

Sources:

http://ucatlas.ucsc.edu/sen.php

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1448155

HPV Vaccine: Personal Choice or School Mandated?

2009-04-20T22:09:00.000-07:00

Katie Couric HPV Vaccine Video:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=2423068n

What is the HPV vaccine and how is it effective?

HPV is the most commonly transmitted sexual disease in the world. The virus is spread through sexual and genital contact. It is most commonly transmitted in the teenage and young adult years, when individuals are most sexually active, and because many people are unaware they have HPV or their partner does due to its symptomless appearance. Also, condoms do not necessarily protect from HPV –HPV can infect areas that are not covered by a condom. Some forms of HPV may cause cervical cancer for women and different types genital cancers (mouth, neck, anal, penal). Other types of HPV can cause genital warts. Each year, there are about 12,000 women diagnosed with cervical cancer and about 4,000 die from this disease in the U.S The vaccine targets the types of HPV strains which do cause cervical cancer. It is still important for women to get regular pap exams and to lower their risk with possible infected persons by using protection. The vaccine’s protection is projected to last a long time and is most effective in preventing HPV in women who have not previously been exposed to any forms of the disease, which is why testing at a young age is suggested. The vaccine does not treat current HPV infections or the diseases they may cause; it can only prevent HPV before a person gets it.

"Clinical trials have shown the vaccine to be highly immunogenic, safe, and well tolerated in females 9 through 26 years of age. Antibody responses are highest in girls 9 to 15 years old. In sexually active females 16 to 26 years of age, protection has been demonstrated against persistent infection, precancerous lesions, and genital warts caused by HPV types within the vaccine." -CDC

Some Statistics:

---Among teen girls in California aged 13 to 17, about 378,000 out of 1,468,000 (26 percent) reported receiving at least one dose of the vaccine. Among California females aged 18 to 26, about 262,000 out of 2,273,000 (12 percent) reported receiving at least one dose of the vaccine in 2007.

---76 percent of teen girls aged 13 to 17 and 60 percent of young adult women aged 18 to 26 reported an interest in getting the HPV vaccine themselves, while 57 percent of parents of age-eligible girls reported an interest in getting the HPV vaccine for their daughters.

(Source: Science Daily Online)

How Safe & Affordable Is It?

The vaccine had been licensed by the FDA and approved by the CDC as safe and effective. It has been studied in thousands of females around the world, ages 9 through 26, and it continues to be monitored by the FDA and CDC. Studies have not found any serious or adverse reactions or side effects to the vaccine and the most commonly reported symptom is pain at the injection site. For more information, please visit this site:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/human_papillomavirus_vaccine.htm

A common problem with the HPV vaccine is that many insurance companies do not offer full coverage of the pricey, $360 some estimate for all three shots. This is usually because a patient is over the age of 18 and because the vaccine has not been in practice long enough to foresee the long-term benefits and outcomes. However, there are also public health clinics that will offer the shots for very reduced costs (even Ingham Health Center in the Lansing area offers them for $24 if you are uninsured).

Should the vaccine be MANDATORY for school?

School mandates on vaccines are considered a huge public health success, credited with compliance rates near 100% for 5-year-olds. Schools and health departments are responsible for enforcement and school mandates in the adolescent population have been particularly successful given the poor compliance with routine vaccination in this age range.

On September 12, 2006, Michigan State Senator Beverly Hammerstrom introduced the first bill requiring vaccination of girls aged 11-12 prior to entry into the sixth grade. Since this time, school mandates have been considered or are being considered in 24 states, including:

Governor Rick Perry of Texas issued an executive order requiring vaccination for sixth-grade girls in Texas
in February 2007
Virginia is the only state to have signed a bill into law requiring HPV vaccination of girls prior to entry into the sixth grade. This bill initially required a parent's signature but was altered such that a verbal opt-out is sufficient. All of the HPV vaccine mandate bills introduced thus far have a clause regarding parental opt-out separate from the states' current vaccination exemption laws.

“The HPV vaccine has sparked ethical debate along many lines, including the utility of compulsory vaccination. Currently, the vaccine is approved only for use in females and, therefore, herd immunity in the truest sense is unable to be achieved at the moment. Further, given the prevalence of HPV in the general population, the greatest benefit to each person receiving the vaccine is to the individual in protection against the 4 viral types in the current quadrivalent vaccine. Therefore, given the individual benefit and the assumed individual risk, autonomy of the person or parents of the child receiving the vaccine becomes the larger consideration.” - California Health Interview Survey

Additionally, many parents feel that their rights are being violated when the vaccine is mandatory and that it only encourages an immoral lifestyle, and sexual activity. Further, HPV could be prevented by a monogamous lifestyle or through abstinence. Religious and cultural values come into play here and public schools should not be allowed to force families and parents to have to vaccinate for something can be seen as a personal choice protection vaccine. Parents could instead become more aware and educated by the school system about the prevalence of HPV and the risks it poses, so that they may best decide as to how to inform their daughters (and sons) and whether or when to go to the vaccine. While Virginia schools took a public health approach to try and mitigate the prevalence of HPV in society, it should be remembered that this is not a disease in which the transmission of infection is like that of traditional communicable diseases for which we have childhood vaccinations (measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox). Since research has already discerned that the age group most at risk for HPV is the teens and early twenties, perhaps the shot, if it is to be mandated, should be for adolescents entering high school or college. Parent opinion has actually favored this:

“In a survey of nearly 10,000 parents, only 49 percent said they intended to vaccinate their daughter if she were 9 to 12 years old. Meanwhile, 68 percent and 86 percent intended to vaccinate their 13-15-year-old and 16-18-year-old daughters, respectively.” (Source: Jennifer Young, MD, MPH)

Ethical Principles Involved

Utilitarianism: Getting vaccinated requires an individual to accept the risk of an immunization for the good of the society in the form of "herd immunity." It is unlikely that the individual will suffer from the disease itself because the particular diseases vaccines target are rare in the general population. Immunizations are more of a benefit to the "greater good" of society. Certain vaccinations are important for people of all ages, and it is important that children are immunized so as to not harm pregnant mothers.

Compulsory Vaccination: Currently, the vaccine is only approved for use in females, which hinders the concept of "herd immunity." Given its prevalence of HPV in the population, the greatest benefit each person receives is protection against the 4 strains most likely to cause cervical cancer and genital warts. Because the individual benefits, and is also at risk for a drug with few long-term studies, the autonomy of the girl (and her parents involvement in) receiving the shot is a much greater consideration.

Argument in favor of Vaccination: A Utilitarian Approach

2009-04-19T18:47:00.000-07:00

Utilitarianism is the theory that an action or practice is right when it leads to the greatest possible balance of good consequences or to the least possible balance of bad consequences and thereby minimizes harms and maximizes benefits. Utilitarian’s see moral rules as fulfilling individual needs as well as achieving wide-ranging, social goals. Vaccinations are a means of eliminating and preventing infectious diseases that once killed or harmed many infants, children, adolescents, and adults. Vaccines are intended to help bolster our immunity against certain viruses such as the flu, which is constantly changing in form and severity. The viruses and bacteria that cause vaccine-preventable disease still exist and can be passed on to those who are not protected by a shot. Vaccine-preventable disease can have many social and economic costs to society. These include sick children missing school, parents missing work to take care of the child, increased family stress and responsibility, lowered quality of life for the afflicted individual, and increased doctor’s visits, hospitalizations, costs, and premature death. Overall, vaccine policies and guidelines adhere to maximize the good (our society’s overall health and a lower disease and death rate), maintain the standard of goodness (the happiness, health and freedom to a better life), minimize consequentialism (the good of the action outweighs the very low percentage who have adverse reactions to vaccines), and to be impartial /universal without regard to people’s race, sex, nationality or economic circumstances.

Additionally, without immunizations, an individual is more likely to infect others in the community, creating more harm. People who are not vaccinated can pass diseases on to babies who are too young to be completely immunized, are a threat to children and adults who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons (those with Leukemia, Cancer, HIV/AIDS, or receiving chemotherapy, radiation therapy), and can affect the small proportion of children whose vaccinations "did not take."

Examples of How Important Vaccinations are to Longevity (U.S.):

~Before the Polio vaccine was available, 13,000-20,000 cases of paralytic polio were reported each year in the United States

~If vaccinations were halted for Measles, 2.7 million people could be estimated to die of measles each year worldwide (before the immunization was available, nearly everyone in the U.S. had measles and 450 died/year)

~The Hib Meningitis vaccine has reduced the incidence of Hib by 98%; this form of bacterial meningitis once killed 600 children/year & left many survivors with deafness, seizures, Mental Retardation

~Before the Pertussis vaccine (whooping cough), 150,000-200,000 cases were reported each year with up to 9,000 deaths; It has also been found that incidence rates surge 10-100 times in countries where immunization coverage is reduced

~Each year, Tetanus kills 300,000 newborns and 30,000 birth mothers who were not vaccinated

~Before the pneumococcal vaccine was available for children, there were 63,000 cases and 6,100 deaths per year from Pneumonia; since the vaccine, this incidence has been reduced by 75%

~Prior to the varicella (chickenpox) vaccine, the virus caused an est. 4 million cases, 11,000 hospitalizations, and 100 deaths per year; cases have decreased by over 90%

~Around 5,000 people will die each year from Hepatitis-B related liver infections resulting in over $700 million in medical and work loss costs

[Source: Centers for Disease Control & Prevention]

How Vaccines Are Made, What They Are Made of, and How They Work

2009-04-19T12:46:00.000-07:00

How They Work

Many people are vaccinated each day against various diseases and viruses, however the majority of these people may not know how these vaccinations actually work. The link posted below is a video that gives a description of how vaccinations work in the body.

How They Are Made

Depending on the particular vaccination, the actual product is made in several different ways using various ingredients. The Children's Hospital of Philedelphia provides a list of ways vaccines are made and the pros and cons to each approach.

“Weaken the virus

Using this strategy, viruses are weakened so that they reproduce themselves very poorly once inside the body. The measles, mumps, German measles (rubella) and chickenpox (varicella) vaccines are made this way. Viruses usually cause disease by reproducing themselves many times in the body. Whereas natural viruses reproduce themselves thousands of times, vaccine viruses usually reproduce themselves fewer than 20 times. Because vaccine viruses don't reproduce themselves very much, they don't cause disease, but
vaccine viruses replicate well enough to induce “memory B cells” that protect against infection in the future. The advantage of live, "weakened" vaccines is that one or two doses provide immunity that is life long. The limitation of this approach is that these vaccines usually cannot be given to people with weakened immune systems (like people with cancer or AIDS).

Inactivate the virus
Using this strategy, viruses are completely inactivated (or killed) with a chemical. By killing the virus, it cannot possibly reproduce itself or cause disease. The inactivated polio, hepatitis A, influenza, and rabies vaccines are made this way. Because the virus is still “seen” by the body, cells of the immune system that protect against disease are generated. The strength of this approach is that the vaccine cannot possibly cause even a mild form of the disease that it prevents and can be given to people with weakened immune systems. The limitation of this approach is that several doses must be given to achieve immunity.

Use part of the virus
Using this strategy, just one part of the virus is removed and used as a vaccine. The hepatitis B vaccine is the only vaccine that is made this way. The vaccine is composed of a protein that resides on the surface of the virus. This strategy can be used when an immune response to one part of the virus (or bacteria) is
responsible for protection against disease. The hepatitis B vaccine can be given even to people with weakened immunity and the vaccine appears to
induce long-lived immunity after three doses.

Use part of the bacteria
Some bacteria cause disease by making a harmful protein called a toxin. Several vaccines are made by taking toxins and inactivating them with a chemical (the toxin, once inactivated, is called a toxoid). By inactivating the toxin, it no longer causes harm. The diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccines are made this way. Another strategy to make a bacterial vaccine is to use part of the sugar coating (or polysaccharide) of the bacteria. Protection against infection by certain bacteria is based on immunity to this sugar coating (and not the whole bacteria). However, because young children don't make a very good immune response to the sugar coating alone, the coating is linked to a harmless protein (this is called a "conjugated polysaccharide" vaccine). The Haemophilus influenzae B (or Hib) and pneumococcal vaccines are made this way. A conjugate vaccine to prevent meningococcal infections should be available soon. Just like for inactivated viral vaccines, bacterial vaccines can be given to people with weakened immune systems, but often require several doses to induce adequate immunity.”

Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia
A Pediatric Healtcare Network
www.chop.edu

What They Are Made Of

The Center For Disease Control (CDC) has a significant amount of information on various topics of vaccination. They also have a list of ingredients of 49 common vaccinations and facts about these components available on their website. The following is the link to this information:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm

Smallpox Eradication: A Milestone in Modern Medicine

2009-04-19T12:33:00.000-07:00

http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/smallpox/smallpox-images/smallpox1.htm

Previous to the mass vaccination campaign, smallpox had been causing epidemics for over 3,000 years. Many well known historical figures have died from smallpox.
Kills 1 in 4, can cause blindness and scarring in survivors.
It has two fatal forms: hemorrhagic which causes hemorrhage in the skin, and malignant which causes lesions that do not develop into pustules and remain soft and flat.
Spreads by air droplets or contact with infected clothing or bedding.
In the 1950's, 50 million cases of smallpox existed. The figure fell to 10-15 million in 1967 after the introduction of the vaccine.
Vaccine administration:

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/smallpox/en/

There are some potential serious side effects including eczema and encephalitis which can result in death. However, a study was done using 14 million vaccinated people and only 9 deaths occured.
In 1967 WHO launched a global eradication campaign and the last natural case of smallpox was in 1977. The disease was declared eradicated in 1980.

This is an excellent example of how effective vaccines are and why we should continue to use them. I posted this in case anyone wanted to use it as evidence when making their ethical arguments. I think that because this happened over 30 years ago, people are starting to forget about the smallpox vaccine and its importance. It is now on the list as a potential biological warfare weapon because millions of people have never been vaccinated against it or may no longer be protected from it.

Source: WHO
Pictures: CDC, WHO

Basic Vaccine History

2009-04-19T12:21:00.000-07:00

Vaccines were developed mainly in the 19th and 20th centuries as preventative medicine for bacterial and viral diseases. The first vaccine was developed by Edward Jenner for cattle. Smallpox was a fatal disease that was becoming an epidemic during this time. He noticed that milkmaids who did were exposed to cowpox in cattle did not acquire the disease. He then inoculated cattle with the smallpox vaccine from human subjects and they developed immunity to cowpox. The Latin root vacca or cow is responsible for the name- vaccination.

Immunity develops when a weak form of a disease is inoculated. Antibodies are produced by the immune systems as well as other factors that are said to develop the immune response and prevent the disease from invading the body in the future.

Louis Pasteur developed the rabies vaccine by injecting 15 day old spinal fluid of a rabies-infected rabbit into a patient, and continuing to inject the patient with fresher samples on a daily basis. Immunity was built stronger and stronger each day until the patient was completely immune to the rabies virus as the injections increased in virility.

As vaccinations became more advanced and widespread, the ethics of policies became controversial. Individual immunity originally was available to the rich, and then became more widespread throughout the population to include more people and produce herd immunity. Herd immunity for certain population or areas of the world led to the possibility of completely disease eradication. The immunity of the entire world population to certain diseases, for example smallpox and measles, mumps, and rubella became more accepted and expected.

The problem with widespread immunity is that the disease becomes so uncommon that people will overlook the risk The lower perceived risk can reduce the chances that people will become vaccinated and have their families vaccinated. Lower perceived risk of not getting vaccinated, medical safety concerns, political or religious reasons, and concern about excessive government or institutional power over the individual have contributed to resistance to vaccination. This is obviously a risk to all of society, because the virus could adapt and a new strain could be resistant.

As a result of this, some vaccines have become required by law. In 1853, the smallpox vaccination became required in England and Wales. In the 1905, the US Supreme Court ruled that certain vaccinations for individuals become required. Many policy issues arise by vaccination requirements because there is a compromise between the health of society and the freedom of the individual. Vaccinations are required for children enrolling in public school, for those enlisting in the military, and for citizens with green cards. Exemptions are allowed for school aged children who have compromised immune systems, have allergies to immunizations, and those whose parents hold religious or personal objections. Physicians are required discuss the decision and inform the parents of the potential harm of not getting their children vaccinated. They are required to respect the decision of their patients, but if the child is at risk for immediate or serious harm child protective services can be notified. A medical neglect form is filled out by the physician and it is possible that the child may be forced to be immunized.

Moral Obligation to the Public

2009-04-19T12:20:00.000-07:00

When deciding whether or not to vaccinate their children, parents must consider the possible impact their choice has on their community. Vaccination is not simply a personal choice in which only the individual will benefit or suffer from. Parents not only have an obligation to keep their children safe from deadly diseases, they have an obligation to protect other people from being harmed by these diseases.

If your child is not vaccinated they may pass the disease onto other members of the community who are not vaccinated.

Some people may not be able to receive vaccines because of medical reasons; these people are reliant on herd immunity. Herd immunity cannot be established if many members of a community are not vaccinated. For example, the influenza vaccine is not recommended for pregnant women and children under 6 months.

A couple of people deciding not to get vaccinated in a low risk community is not the present issue. The issue comes when too many people decide not to get vaccinated and the risk of disease in the community increases. Of course, it is not fair to force some into getting vaccinated while letting others decide for themselves. The only way to for this to be fair is for all healthy, able people to become vaccinated.

Is the moral obligation so strong that parents ought to be legally liable when their unvaccinated children spread disease?

Arguments justifying this:

Their children are a direct cause of injury in another person. The other person is harmed unfairly and of no fault of their own.
This would increase rates of vaccination because people would be motivated to avoid unnecessary legal trouble.
Follows with negligence claims-- harm, duty, breach of duty and causation.
We need to protect those that cannot be vaccinated.

Arguments against this:

Extremely difficult to trace a disease back to someone.
There are medical risks (even if they are very unlikely) to getting vaccinated.
Could create panic, especially those that truly do not believe in vaccinations.
Vaccine policies need to maintain the most amount of personal liberty possible.

Also, there is no way to draw definitive lines, there are simply too many holes that might allow for abuse of the law. For example, what about an unvaccinated child giving a disease to another unvaccinated child? I believe that both parents are at fault for this and one should not be legally responsible for making the same decision the other made.

I found the Michigan Law Review to be a really source for this, they had a lot of articles looking at the legal and ethical side of vaccine liability.

Case Study – Vaccination as a Choice

2009-04-19T11:48:00.000-07:00

Amy Roehl

Amy Roehl is a 22 year old senior at Michigan State University who will be graduating with a degree in communicative disorders and sciences this May. She grew up in Beverly Hills, Michigan with her Mother, Father, and brother Craig. Amy is also one of the many people who have not had childhood as well as adult vaccinations and who remains an objector to the practice along with her mother. However this has not always been the case. When Amy was born her mother saw no objection to the regular vaccinations and she received the first immunization in a series of shots for Hepatitis B. Her mother, like many parents saw little to no harm in vaccinating her children and knew she was only helping them. The minimum age for some other child vaccinations are around 2-6 months of age and it was around this time when Amy’s mother took her to get these recommended routine vaccinations, which included the DPT vaccination. DPT protects against Diptheria, Pertussis, and Tetanus. According to the CDC it is given at 2, 4, 6, and 15-18 months of age with a booster between ages 4-6. In childhood vaccines it is known as DTap and the adolescent and adult booster is known as Tdap. After Amy was given a dose of the DPT vaccine she had a very serious adverse reaction. Amy started to convulse and display seizure-like symptoms. The cause for the significant negative reaction was the pertussis part of the vaccine. According to the FDA, “the pertussis component of DTP causes more adverse reactions than any other vaccine. Most common are fever, soreness at the site of the shot, and irritability. In rare cases, the vaccine causes very high fever and convulsions.” After this experience Amy’s mother wasn’t taking any more chances and Amy never completed any other vaccinations with the exception of the Hepatitis B. This means Amy has never had a tetanus booster shot, a flu shot, or even the highly recommended meningitis vaccination when coming to college. As a child Amy’s mother said she had some difficulty with after school or day care places that wouldn’t let Amy enroll there because she had not had the recommended vaccinations. However her elementary school as well as high school just asked her mother sign a waiver saying she had not had them. Because of the negative side effects she experienced after the DPT shot, she decided against the recommended but not mandatory Meningococcal Meningitis vaccine. I asked Amy if the university gave her any trouble when she objected to the immunization and how she went about doing that. She said they just made her sign a waiver, as she had to do in previous schools, saying this was her choice not to get the vaccine. The university registrar and health center also kept sending her emails and contacting her about getting the shot but that was pretty much the extent of it. It has now been four years since she decided against the meningitis vaccination and she says if presented with the situation again, she would make the same choice.

Vaccine Policy

2009-04-15T19:02:00.000-07:00

Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)

Composed of 15 members—mostly doctors and/or people with public health degrees.
Provide advice and guidance to Secretary for Health and Human Services and to the CDC about vaccine selection.
Meets 3 times a year.
Makes vaccine recommendations for the number of doses, age for vaccination, dosing intervals and vaccine precautions.

Vaccines for Children (VFC)

Federally funded to provide vaccines for children who would not otherwise be able to pay for them.
Started in 1994.
Eligible children qualify for all vaccines recommended by the ACIP.
Costs around $3 billion to operate.
Vaccine administrators are allowed to charge an administration fee, but there is a cap on how much they can charge. In Michigan the maximum fee is $16.75.

Eligibility for VFC

Must be under 18 years old and one of the following:

Medicaid eligible—children whose health insurance is covered by the state
Uninsured
American Indian or Native Alaskan
Underinsured—if private health insurance coverage does not cover vaccination, covers only selected vaccines, or places a cap on vaccine coverage.

Which vaccines are recommended by the ACIP?
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/child-schedule.htm#printable

Diseases these vaccines prevent

Hepatitis B- Can cause infection of the liver which can lead to cirrhosis (hardening of the liver which leads it to stop functioning). Children and infants are much more likely to develop chronic hepatitis than adults.
Rotavirus- Easily transmitted GI disease that is the leading cause of diarrhea in children. Responsible for thousands of doctor visits, ER visits, hospitalizations and 527,000 deaths of children under 5 yearly.
Tetanus- Caused by a common soil bacterial toxin in deep wounds. Infection causes severe muscle spasms throughout the body which can result in death.
Pertussis- Highly contagious, chronic cough that may become serious in young children. Cases of the disease rose from 8,296 in 2002 to 25,827 in 2004 (perhaps because of decreasing vaccinations???)
Haemophilus influenzae type b- Before the vaccine, was one of the leading causes of meningitis among children under 5. Can result in brain damage and deafness.
Pneumococcal- Is the leading cause of meningitis in the United States. Difficult to treat after infection and spread from person to person through close contact.
Diphtheria- Sore throat, swollen glands, difficulty breathing. Before vaccination was a leading cause of death in children. It currently is very rare in the U.S.
Inactivated Poliovirus- Can cause paralysis which can lead to lifelong disability or death. Has not been in the U.S. for 20 years, but it still has not been eradicated from the world yet, which means we still need to be vaccinated.
Influenza- Respiratory disease that kills about 36,000 people a year, elderly people and children are at high risk for complications.
Measles- Running nose, cough, sore throat, sneezing, generally not very serious.
Mumps- Painful swelling of glands and flu-like symptoms.
Rubella- rash, swollen glands, fever—not a very serious illness.
Varicella (chickenpox)- Causes a rash and is not a serious illness in children. However, it is potentially dangerous in pregnant women, newborns and adults.
Hepatitis A- Transmitted by eating contaminated or undercooked food. Causes a variety of not very serious symptoms, usually goes away on its own but can last up 2 months.
Meningococcal- Causes meningitis, this is the type that is recommended for college students.

Sources: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/, http://www.webmd.com/, http://www.mayoclinic.com/

Michigan Vaccine Requirements:
http://www.immunizationinfo.org/vaccineInfo/disease_stateinfo.cfv
This is a list of all vaccinations required at the different school levels.

Michigan Exemption Law:

(1) A child is exempt from the requirements of this part as to a specific immunization for any period of time as to which a physician certifies that a specific immunization is or may be detrimental to the child's health or is not appropriate.

(2) A child is exempt from this part if a parent, guardian, or person in loco parentis of the child presents a written statement to the administrator of the child's school or operator of the group program to the effect that the requirements of this part cannot be met because of religious convictions or other objection to immunization.

Moral Obligations- Self and Family

2009-04-14T17:40:00.000-07:00

“Parents have the most grave obligation and the primary right to do all in their power to ensure their children's physical, social, cultural, moral and religious upbringing.” CCL 1136

Children depend on their parents to protect them from harm and parents are morally obligated to do what is best for their children. A vaccine is protection from a disease; therefore it is a parent’s moral obligation to vaccinate their children to protect them from any diseases they could otherwise possibly contract. It would be risky for a parent to send their child to school and possibly bring home any one of the illnesses children are vaccinated for because the parent denied the child the vaccine. This puts the parent and the rest of the family at risk for contracting the disease.
Usually parents should have autonomy to make decisions on raising their child. However, when a child is put at risk of contracting a potentially deadly disease, a parent’s autonomy may be infringed. The United States has made the decision that childhood vaccinations are compulsory, meaning the parents are obligated to vaccinate their children.
It has been argued that the risks of vaccines out way the benefits, however this has been proven to be not true. So in reality there is no real reason a parent or child should not want to be vaccinated. Vaccines are safe as long as they are given correctly at the right amount and at the right age.
Parents are morally obligated to vaccinate their child to prevent them from:
1) Getting ill
2) Passing the illness on to other children at school
3) Passing the illness on to family members at home

Why Vaccines Are Important For Children

2009-04-09T14:46:00.000-07:00

Why Vaccines are Important to your child:

1. Vaccines prevent deadly childhood disease. Polio, whooping cough, meningitis-these diseases once claimed the lives of thousands of children in the U.S. Thanks to the development of vaccines, death rates from these illnesses have dropped dramatically. But in order to keep these rates low, children need to be vaccinated.

2. Vaccines are safe. Vaccines are tested in thousands of people before they are added to the childhood immunization schedule and are continuously monitored for any safety risks. Valid scientific studies have shown no link between thimerosal and autism. This mercury-based preservative was once used in several vaccines (and is still used in some flu vaccine). However, since thimerosal was removed from childhood vaccines in 2001, autism rates have actually increased, supplying further evidence that thimerosal does not cause autism.

3. Deadly diseases are still a threat to children. Deaths due to Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) in Minnesota and Pennsylvania remind us that vaccine-preventable diseases are still a threat. In addition, the United States has seen increased cases of measles and whooping cough. Outbreaks in unvaccinated communities show that these diseases are still out there and thrive when children aren't fully immunized.

4. Multiple vaccines do not overwhelm a child's immune system. Antigens are the substances that create immunity to disease. Improved vaccine development has led to a decrease in the number of antigens in each vaccine. So while there may be more vaccines given than a decade ago, the number of antigens that a child's system must respond to is less than what a single vaccine contained 50 years ago.

5. Staying on schedule is important. Infants are susceptible to infectious diseases. While these diseases could make an older child very sick, they could be deadly for infants. The recommended immunization schedule is designed to work best with a child's immune system-at certain ages and at specific times. If a vaccine requires a second or third dose, they need to be given within a certain time frame or the vaccine will not fully protect your child.

Keeping your infant safe and healthy is an important part of caring for your baby. By giving your child needed vaccinations on a timely basis, you can help your baby get a head start on a healthy future. For more information visit the AAP Web site, www.aap.org