3 ms·

Agreed. But I think part if this is necessity based. When going overseas you are often given shots for things that are less likely found in the US. It's not im

by fecak 13y ago

Agreed. But I think part if this is necessity based. When going overseas you are often given shots for things that are less likely found in the US. It's not impossible to catch those diseases in the US, but the costs or risks of vaccinating the entire US population prevents us from doing that. The vaccine court has paid out individuals for vaccine injury. The results of the court are generally not widely publicized, but defining safe is somewhat key to these points.

mikeash 13y ago
Well, nothing is going to be 100% safe. If vaccines do more good than harm, then they should be used. A court that awards damages to those who got unlucky is a good way to try to even it out a bit. I really would like to know what, if any, reasons there are to delay vaccines and why one might consider any given schedule to be "rushed". But so far I only get handwaving.
- fecak 13y ago
  On the day you are born, we know the least about you. Maybe you have a pre-existing condition that will be revealed in weeks to come. One of the few known vaccine court payouts went to a young girl named Hannah Poling, who had a mitochondrial disorder, and there are likely others with the same condition. Now that we know that a certain mitochondrial disorder may make a child more apt to vaccine injury, testing could prevent future injury. This is only one specific case, but the point is that the more we know about a person, the more likely we are to make informed decisions about their safety and health. Only some kids are allergic to peanuts, but we don't give kids peanuts until they are two or so. We know more about them at two, and they are less vulnerable.
  - mikeash 13y ago
    That makes sense. Is that what's actually driving the vaccine schedule?
    - fecak 13y ago
      In my opinion, what is driving the vaccine schedule is a combination of things based on various motives. One motive is to help children. Another motive is profit, and yet another is politically driven. The connection between the vaccine makers, politicians, and the CDC is easy to find ( former CDC employees tend to go pharma), and you don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to at least understand where there could be some possibility of priorities being crossed.

by fecak 13y ago

mikeash 13y ago

Well, nothing is going to be 100% safe. If vaccines do more good than harm, then they should be used. A court that awards damages to those who got unlucky is a good way to try to even it out a bit. I really would like to know what, if any, reasons there are to delay vaccines and why one might consider any given schedule to be "rushed". But so far I only get handwaving.

fecak 13y ago
On the day you are born, we know the least about you. Maybe you have a pre-existing condition that will be revealed in weeks to come. One of the few known vaccine court payouts went to a young girl named Hannah Poling, who had a mitochondrial disorder, and there are likely others with the same condition. Now that we know that a certain mitochondrial disorder may make a child more apt to vaccine injury, testing could prevent future injury. This is only one specific case, but the point is that the more we know about a person, the more likely we are to make informed decisions about their safety and health. Only some kids are allergic to peanuts, but we don't give kids peanuts until they are two or so. We know more about them at two, and they are less vulnerable.
- mikeash 13y ago
  That makes sense. Is that what's actually driving the vaccine schedule?
  - fecak 13y ago
    In my opinion, what is driving the vaccine schedule is a combination of things based on various motives. One motive is to help children. Another motive is profit, and yet another is politically driven. The connection between the vaccine makers, politicians, and the CDC is easy to find ( former CDC employees tend to go pharma), and you don't need to be a conspiracy theorist to at least understand where there could be some possibility of priorities being crossed.