At the risk of being criticized...

Post Reply New Topic

***I am not asking for a debate or any type of proof on either side, only personal advice and stories that relate to my question - e.g. if you had similar concerns and decided XXX would be best, etc...***

My 10-year-old son has been recently diagnosed PDD-NOS. He has obviously had issues since he was a toddler, but since they didn't cause any major problems until he was around 7 years old, I didn't seek help. He was different, had some struggles, but overall was fine by me until he got older, demands got higher and his deficiencies were more pronounced and creating obstacles.

I have a 19-month old son now. He is on the normal vaccine schedule except that I have been 1 - 3 months late on each vaccine visit (chaotic life, forgetting appointments, has to wait X no. of weeks for the next one and this one is already late, etc...). It is time for his 18-month shots (I am one month late). I don't want him to get them but I don't know what to do.

I consider my baby higher-risk for develping an ASD because his brother has one, we have one other child in my family that has Aspergers. Plus he is male, which puts him at higher risk.

I know this is a controversial topic - the vaccine-ASD link. I am not saying I do not want to have my baby EVER vaccinated, just saying I'd like to wait until he is older.

It's weighing heavy on my mind. I just have a really bad feeling about it...

Of course, the problem is that he is in daycare and they require the immunizaitions. I could put them off for a few months, but that's about it.

I know the response by many will be to mention the risk/benefit analysis of vaccinations - and I agree regarding deadly or debilitating diseases such as tetnus, polio, and pertussis. Those should be given early.

Does anyone else have these concerns? Any advice? (I mean other than shut up and get over it, you are crazy, etc...)

Vaccines don't cause autism. That's all I have to say.

I've done much research into a lot of the diet and miracle cure studies, and the mercury / heavy metals ones are some with the least amount of valid (unsubstantiated, trick-presented) data backing them up. I'd be more likely to direct you towards the 4:1 omega 3:omega 6 studies than any others. To be honest, from what I've read on the vaccine controversy, I'd say get the vaccines. Besides the fact that ASD disorders are present at birth - often noted before the barrage of vaccinations done to children - and thus even more unlikely to be related to post-birth injections, there is a big danger with not having protection against those evil contagions that lurk just below the surface of our global neighborhood.

PS - I'm not advocating the omega diets, I'm just saying that if you want something to latch onto, they certainly won't hurt.. Dodging vaccines might.

I have read all of the actual major studies (26 of them total - on both sides of the coin) and every single one is inconclusive.

Vaccines start on the day you give birth to your child in the hospital.

If you're interested in a more balanced view of the vaccine debate, this is my take on it: http://www.welcome-to-normal.com/2010/0 ... h-who.html

I personally believe the current label of "autism" is actually not one single condition. I believe it is a number of different conditions all with similar or identical presentations, but caused by different things. For example, I have one friend who's son is autistic because he was born at 1.5 pounds and his brain was not fully developed when he was born and he had 'failure to thrive' in the womb due to placenta previa. I have another friend who's son developed normally until age 2 then regressed profoundly and lost all language and social connectivity - immediately following a vaccine. Then there's my son who has just been different all along, speaking at 6 months, profusely verbal by 18 months, Aspergers diagnosis at age 6. I think some kids are born to be autistic and others are made that way by some outside factor.

It doesn't make logical sense that all 3 types of "autism" are the same when the underlying medical histories are completely unrelated. For that reason, I personally believe no scientific study on autism will find any conclusive evidence on vaccines because the samples start out as skewed. The samples start with a mixed bag of kids all given the same label of "autism" but without the same cause.

What I believe is that vaccines are safe for the vast majority of people. Beyond that, I believe that when a large group of parents insist that a vaccine did something to their children - that they saw immediate regression - well, as a mother I just can't look them in the eye and say they're all full of it, or delusional, or ignorant. Because I know that if something happened to my son, and I was 100% certain that X was the cause, and no one would believe me just because no study had been able to prove it, I would want other parents on my side.

My younger son is dairy, soy and wheat intolerant, and as a precaution I had his pediatrician put him on a delayed vaccination schedule.

No one should feel afraid to speak out about their personal views on the vaccine situation. No one wins when we change what we say out of fear, rather than out of education and awareness.

They don't get the mercury-possible vaccines until 6 months, from what I understood. I may be wrong. In addition, most of the damage that is done by heavy metals is from long term exposure - not a spike dose as you might see from a one-time shot. So eating two cans of tuna every week would actually do more damage than the shots.

It is, on the other hand, quite possible that a short term duration poisoning reaction will occur in the children after an injection. Maybe due to the mercury, maybe due to the fact that these vaccines are putting small doses of ACTUAL (though denatured) INFECTION into the child. It's possible the strange responses are due to the way some bodies respond to the production of these sppecific antiboodies.

I have a sibling who was the regressive type. Although a difficult baby from the start, she acquired skills and then lost them later. I was also an unusual baby, but I never lost skills like language. To me this points to genetics, especially considering we both have different types of autism in the same family. For the record, my sibling does not even have all of her vaccinations.

To be honest, delaying the vaccines by a few months should be ok; if all the other children in the playgroup have been vaccinated, then there will be a bit of herd immunity (i.e. because they were vaccinated, they are less likely to catch the disease and pass it on to yours). Morally, it's a bit iffy (relying on other people to vaccinate their kids whilst reaping the benefits) and herd immunity requires a lot (something like 90%) of children to be vaccinated though, so if other people have also delayed the vaccine, then your child is still at risk (and that's not including the risk of picking up the disease outside playgroup).

I would recommend getting your child vaccinated. The risks of irreversible brain damage from the diseases are a lot higher than any risk from the vaccines. Also, just because your child has a risk factor (male) does not make him a whole lot more susceptible than a female child (even a 50% increased risk would just make the odds something like 2/10000 rather than 1/10000 (not the actual statistics, but I remember it being a similarily low number).

What about spacing the vaccines out? There's no proven benefit of doing so, but some parents prefer to do it this way because of the 'overloading the immunse system' school of thought.

The only vaccine with anything but a ridiculously small trace amount of mercury to children under 6 is the flu shot. This has been studied extensively, most countries have removed thimerosal from their vaccines and there's been no reduction in autism rates - if mercury in vaccines was causing it, it would make sense that there would be at least a reduction. Most reputable scientists do not believe there is a connection and the ones that are pushing it the hardest have little credibility or seek to profit off of mercury "cures." Herd immunity is already starting to become compromised in states like California, since the greatest risk of vaccines isn't damage but a failure to develop immunity, by not vaccinating your child, you're putting those that have been vaccinated and haven't developed immunity at risk as well. Yes, there's a chance of (non-autism) vaccine damage - that risk is very small compared to the devastating results of some of the diseases that a child may get.

The general concern with vaccines and autism is not a mercury issue, as I understand it, but one of toxic overload. Toxic overload has essentially been proven - and compensated for - in cases with underlying medical conditions. This complicates the issue for those of us who do believe that vaccines are generally safe, because it becomes a numbers game of 'how few are at risk?' and 'is my child in those few'?

I don't discount parents' concerns on this issue, and I think if we had more confidence in pharmaceuticals not essentially being evil cults that run the world, we would be able to make a more informed decision.

I think its a matter of wieghing risks. For example, young children can die from pertusis, tuberculosis, measles, mumps, rubella etc. whereas noone I've ever heard of died from having an ASD. That seemed like a pretty good reason for me to get my children vaccinated on schedule, especially since I had them in daycare which is a hotbed of germs and germ transmission. Not criticising, sharing.

If I'm remembering correctly, the 18 month is the 3 in 1.

So, in the interest of hedging the most bets possible, and understanding that I don't think there is link but who knows what else can happen, here is what I would do if it was my child:

1) Request 3 separate vaccinations at 3 separate dates.
2) Verify that none have thimerisol.
3) If whopping cough is one of the 3, do that one FIRST, because it is the real and immediate health concern in many areas of the US right now.

Good luck in making that decision. I know that when it comes time to actually take the step, it doesn't always matter what the science says; emotion comes into play, and all the "what if's" that have not been tested because doing so just isn't practical. We know what the generalization is, and the big picture, but we don't know the picture for this one little innocent who is depending on us to make the right decision. So, you have to shut out all the noise, split up the science best you can, and do something.

Despite all my faith that there is no connection between autism and vaccines, and all my anger at the selfish parents not doing the whopping cough shots that have allowed this horrible disease to take solid root in my area and kill a few infants in the process, I have heard enough and felt enough emotion in all the debate to split a few hairs and want things done just a little differently. What I posted would be my solution, if I was making that decision today. And I'd pay any extra cost for splitting the shots out of pocket, because I can afford to do that sort of thing. Now if the doctor were to say those separated shots won't be available for 6 months and thus it would turn my childcare upside down to stick to that plan ... I'd probably just go with the 3 in 1. There are only so many rocks in my roads I can deal with.