I read a few articles recently about chicken pox. In the US there is vaccination provided, yet in the UK there isn't, just the exposure method, which isn't good, my son suffered badly from it, and my brother in law has had it 3 times I'd be happy to see this introduced into the UK Congratulations
Why aren't children in the UK vaccinated against chickenpox? They're are reasons why it's not routinely available, although it's currently up for review, IIRC they were going to see how it worked in America, as it could potentially increase adult cases. It is available privately, I had it last year as I've never had CP as a child.
They didn't have a vaccine for Chicken Pox when I was a kid. I got it as an adult. They gave me the vaccine when I was diagnosed, because they said it would make it more mild. It was very mild, so I think it worked. Pretty sure I was exposed at work, although I have no evidence.
I'd love to see a school opened up, specifically for the children of the antivax crowd. Consider it a scientific/medical demonstration of the importance of vaccination, whilst simultaneously keeping the rest safe. I wonder how many of these parents would enrol their offspring into such a school?
Joe Rogan just had a vaccine specialist very calmly explain why the anti-vaxxers are completely wrong. He also has a daughter with autism, which must help his case. Hopefully a few people who were on the fence have had their minds changed by him.
I'm all for vaccines, but I have to admit even I'm lax about tetanus vaccine. What's that one, every 10 years? I'm overdue.
I think about half the US states now allow "religious exemption". I have yet to find a religious commandment not to vaccinate kids, but then again if the loophole exists, people will abuse it. I read somewhere that has led to measles resurgences..
Came here to say this. While I'm quite used to being told my opinion will change if I have kids, for now, I think this idea that you can't tell people how to raise their kids is utter trash. Maybe if a lot more people were told how to raise them, we'd have much less of an issue with crappy kids. (Yes, I am now old and moaning about the next generation) But yeah, I find it weird that there's an idea that its fine for parents to take choices that put another human's health, and potentially life, at risk. I understand kids don't have legal autonomy or whatever you want to call it and that parents are considered their guardians, but its so weird to me that this is a thing that's allowed. How come the rights of being a parent, which requires nothing other than getting laid, outweighs any right to a healthy life that the child has?
Wierdly in the UK if parents are actively denying treatment, then the hospitals can apply to the courts so that they can be forced to have the treatment. But its quite a big step, so it's not really done for routine vaccinations. It also comes with a lot of media attention, Alfie Evans case - Wikipedia
IMHO it's an ongoing process. We're still working stuff out. Back in the day kids were pretty much the "property" of the parent and sent out to work etc etc. We're still negotiating the relative rights of kids v parents in much the same way we are negotiating female rights, trans rights, gay rights, what it means to me male/masculine, etc etc. One reason is that in some cases there is no "right" answer. There are maybe a series of right answers. Raising a kid catholic or muslim (despite my own personal misgivings about that) are no different from each other for example really. In the case of vaccination however the science and benefit is clear-cut.
That case, and another like it but I can't remember the name, feed into my point though. All the outrage over those cases was that the parents wishes were being ignored by the hospital and I remember talking to so many people and having to point out that doctors are there to look after their patient, not their patient's parents. The focus was on the parents and the "as a parent you would..." rather than any interest in what harm it would do the child itself.
It wasn't, but thanks for looking. I honestly can't remember. Maybe it was just the Alfie one and it resurged again.
I respond to being told the same with these three points: 1) if having children is a catalyst for my perspective changing, and since my current viewpoint is based on robust scientific evidence, then it follows that the opinions of parents suffer from emotional bias and therefore should be trusted even less; 2) my partner has a daughter from a previous relationship to whom I am effectively a step-father and yet my opinion remains unchanged, so you are wrong; and 3) I will not bear children of my own, so the argument is moot (and you are still wrong).
Parents are just people with a heavy emotional connection to their offspring, so they want to do the right thing but: A) generally arnt Drs B) have all the normall cignative biases C) are generally over protective from what they Think are dangers. I'm now a parent, and I think I'm pretty evidence based in my thinking, my partner is a Dr, but not a paediatrician, and we generally follow all the national guidence. BUT the Internet is awash with spurious information, the national guidence is sometimes hard to find, midwifes and health visitors sometimes arnt upto date with it, and generally people don't like being told their wrong, so really it's amazing the vacination rates are as high as they are, social media is definatly to blame for much of the misinformation, I report dangerous things on Facebook all the time, and they hardly ever get removed.
Matters of public health don't require perspective, only evidence and robust scientific models that fit that evidence.
But effective health policy also includes convincing parents to take part, and that requires knowing and understanding the parents perspective, no matter how wrong it is... A good example is the amount of parents refusing the Vit K dose for their kids after birth. Because of misinformation put out by "alternative health sites"