Question about vaccine shedding

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-22-2005
Question about vaccine shedding
10
Sat, 10-24-2009 - 11:03pm
What's unsafe about shedding a virus that is safe enough to inject? What am I missing?














iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2009
Sat, 10-24-2009 - 11:54pm

For a normal healthy person, imo, a shedded virus poses little risk.

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2007
Sun, 10-25-2009 - 11:29am

Baby-wearing is very good for developing immunity. Mom tends to pass on protection, in various forms, to whatever she comes into contact with...

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sun, 10-25-2009 - 1:30pm
If you shed a disease then you can infect others who come in contact with you. But again, we are all different, so the shedding is different, just like the catching of disease is gonna be different in different individuals.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sun, 10-25-2009 - 1:31pm
Is the same true for a baby on formula, not breastfeeding?
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2009
Sun, 10-25-2009 - 1:39pm
I doubt it. I do not see how antibodies can be transferred without access to them through bm.

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2005
Sun, 10-25-2009 - 2:10pm
I never used a sling but later wished I had. It looks so convenient to have hands free! I did hold my kids constantly and I was constantly belittled for doing so but I didn't care what anyone in my family thought or said. I still don't, obviously. I get it all the time, we homeschool and my own Mom has just recently come around. My MIL has been happy with that decision all along. But she was the worst to talk about how I "hold the baby too much". Oh well, live and learn!
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2009
Sun, 10-25-2009 - 3:05pm
I have never understood that line of reasoning at all.

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2007
Sun, 10-25-2009 - 3:27pm
I haven't ever said it's unsafe. I've said it happens. A lot. It keeps the disease we're trying to eradicate circulating, if for nothing else. And if there's an unvaccinated person close by, they'll be epidemiologically pinpointed as the index - while vaccinated people and their mild symptoms are praised for doing their part to contribute to herd immunity.
Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-22-2005
Sun, 10-25-2009 - 3:29pm

<>

How would the result be different if nobody was vaccinated? Wouldn't that also keep the disease circulating?















iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2007
Sun, 10-25-2009 - 3:44pm

I can't really say what the outcome would be, but there will always be cycles of disease. Herd immunity is also accomplished by dealing with and overcoming disease. That's how it was first witnessed and detailed in the 30s. It has since taken on several forms, no doubt a result of manipulation with disease cycles and trying to remove pathogens deemed invasive from the environment.

You hear people talk about the generations that had many children because they lost so many to disease, without ever really discussing what was occurring sociologically, agriculturally, or environmentally. I feel similarly about the autism issue. Little study on those that suffered incalculable loss during epidemics of disease... nor are we studying children that have been reported to have regressed and are now on the spectrum.

I understand the concepts behind vaccination as a tool to promote community immunity, I just don't think they've been demonstrated fairly and I feel like vaccinated populations (I'm vaccinated by the way) are overlooked as contributors to the spread of disease for which vaccines exist. It's a bit of a double standard, and this is coming from someone with two, completely and totally over-vaccinated children.

Photobucket