It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

We can’t just blame anti-vaxxers...Parents skip vaccines for many reasons.

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 09:07 AM
Okay, so the title is C&P'd from the article.

In response to the terribly-scripted NLBS #35 video and other threads on here that denounce "anti-vaxxers" as the cause for measles in the U.S., I found an article on WaPo that gives a nice rundown on the history of how the MMR vaccination became so prevalent, and also reminds you finger pointers that there are many more reasons as to why someone might not vaccinate themselves or their children.

The gist of the point, from the article:

In the panic over measles’ spread in California and beyond, the public has been quick to blame vaccine refusers concentrated in wealthy, educated communities for being too ignorant to realize that measles can be a serious disease.

This charge, however, ignores the history of measles. It’s an intractable disease that, despite decades of vaccination, rebuffs our best efforts at elimination. And each time it flares up, its resurgence points out unresolved tensions between this country’s “haves” and “have-nots.”


In 2000, the CDC declared the disease "eliminated”: measles still occurred, but only when brought into the United States from abroad. In recent years, however, the size of measles outbreaks has grown, as has the number of cases coming in from outside the country.

As in the past, today’s vitriolic rhetoric around the causes of measles’ return tells us something about class relations in our own time. Blaming purportedly selfish upper-middle class families reflects a collective cultural discomfort with the wealthy’s increasing ability to opt out of shared responsibility for community welfare.

But as we focus on the alleged selfishness of wealthy, overeducated vaccine skeptics, other factors at the root of the outbreak are, as in the past, getting lost in the conversation. Parents avoid or delay children’s vaccines for an array of reasons: poverty, other challenges accessing health care, medical reasons, religious beliefs and an ever-expanding list of required vaccines. Parental acceptance of some immunizations has eroded in recent decades precisely because the overall number of vaccines and vaccine doses required for children has grown to historically unprecedented levels.

We need to acknowledge these factors — just as we need to recognize that our vaccination debates continue to thinly veil class anxieties deeply rooted in our history.

I'm not quite convinced that the vaccination debates are fueled by class anxieties as much as they're fueled by propoganda by drug companies, politicians and the media reports that are alarmist in nature nearly all the time, but the overall point of the article is sound: You have no way of knowing why unvaccinated people are unvaccinated.

We can't go around in societies making accusations based on ignorance. I wholeheartedly defend the parents right to decide what's best for their child in this instance--we vaccinated our first child (11yo now) on the normal schedule because we basically had to (he was in daycare from a very early age). He was constantly plagued with infections like strep throat, common colds, pink eye, and even a nearly drug-resistant staph infection.

Our daughter, 10 years later (at 13 months old), is on the delayed-vaccination schedule and is not in a daycare system (which, I'm highly convinced, is just a petrie dish for perpetuating illnesses and infections). She has been sick once, within the last month, and it was just a short-lived common cold. We have refused a few vaccinations up to this point, and with her having just turned the corner of the 1-year-old age, she's up for her MMR shot, and I'm not convinced we're going to give it to her.

Say what you will, but scientific data and stats prove that a natural immunity, at least to measles, is a life-long, high-level immunity, whereas the vaccine's level of immunity drops off over time. Also, with current death rates from measles being at less than 0.00% (per simple math applied to CDC numbers) in the U.S., and severe complications being well under 1% as well (in children), there is a good argument against the vaccine's life-long effectiveness and the reality concerning major complications and death from measles.

I know you all are probably dead tired of hearing about MMR vaccines and anti-vaxxers, but I just thought that this was a good article to bring to light to remind us that the "sides" to this debate aren't as simple as pro- and anit-vaccine.

Don't forget to workout and eat clean today! Nothing is a replacement for a healthy body.
edit on 5-2-2015 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 09:13 AM
I.E low I.Q, and a disconnect with reality.

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 09:25 AM
There are probably many reasons that people do not vaccinate. But to get anywhere you are forced to join a group so you aren't ignored. Even if your own personal reason is different.

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 09:40 AM
I've noticed a disturbing trend in the media. It seems like lately, just about every topic one can imagine is presented but with the addition of a slant discussing race/class disparities. It's makes me think of the phrase "stirring the pot".

In my opinion, the idea of poverty preventing people from getting their kid vaccinated is BS. In the US, people have access to healthcare (such as medicaid, medi-cal, etc) that insure that children have access to the healthcare they need.

I believe that unless your child has a history of dangerous adverse reactions to vaccines, you have a duty to give him or her the best possible protection you can from disease.

Yes, natural immunity is often much more successful. For example, my child has never had a flu shot and most likely never will unless she decides to as an adult. I've never had one either. And we never get the full blown flu.

Kids aren't typically exposed to things like measles (although that seems to be changing), so how would they receive their natural immunity without having been exposed? I'd rather my kid start out with some immunity for a more serious illness than no immunity at all.

I found an old journal article from 1995, it shows a different look at the outbreaks mentioned in your Washington Post article. It simply discusses the numbers and vaccination rates, without delving very heavily into class/race issues.It's pretty compelling support in favor of vaccination (my humble opinion). measles stats

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 09:42 AM
If you can't afford insurance and live in poverty you can get them for free for children.
edit on 5-2-2015 by anton74 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:02 AM
I'm in Australia & my 6 year old son has had severe reactions to the MMR vaccine so I no rrefuse to put him through it again,which bought me phone calls from my local medical centre which I stopped taking after I was called a bad mother for not getting him every vaccination. I had to sign a form stating that I'm a "conscientious objector" to vaccination even though he is covered for polio,whooping cough etc & my questions about the homeopathic alternative was shot down ( pharmaceutical companies don't benefit from those)I had the support of one nurse who explained how they get incentives for vaccinated children & my decision cost them money!!incidentally he was transferred after supporting me & telling his boss I had valid concerns & harassing me was just putting me under unfair pressure. Its crap when as a parent I can't make that decision without having to go through BS .

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:09 AM
a reply to: SlapMonkey

A theme of Pharma marketing is to polarize the narrative into a binary framework.

On one side, the caring technocrats and the unfortunate parents of kids with impaired immune systems.

On the other side, the "anti-vaxxers" a totally fabricated "movement" of "the outsiders" which is classic propaganda.

If you've done your research, you can easily recognize the massive wall of propaganda and shills being unleashed on the world by Pharma and their State cronies. But more importantly, you'll realize each vaccine has it's own scientific and political story and it's own cost/benefit ratio. For example the MMR has a very different cost benefit ratio than the standalone Measles vaccine. The Flu vaccine and HPV vaccines have a different cost/benefit ratio than the polio vaccine.

The biggest problem is that the Pharma PR, Marketing and outright propaganda obscure the information required, by you the target, to determine the cost/benefit ratio. Again, they are pushing a binary world where you have smart people and wild eye'd people that irrationally hate all vaccines.

With this much disinformation and corruption in government and the Pharma industry There is simply no way for me to trust them to make medical decisions for me. They tell me my child needs 26 shots to be a normal human. Why not 56? They tell me bundling 5 vaccinations together in the same shot and injecting my infant is A-OK. When I do the research, I find that the bundling is a profit generator. It is less safe and the risks are higher for the target. It benefits no one but the shareholders and automatons. It's another corrupt form of corporate predation.

I don't trust profit machines and neither should you. Especially ones with secret research and 100% legal immunity. Think about it.

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:14 AM
a reply to: MojaveBurning

I've seen the opposite of what you describe.

The propaganda I've seen is "privileged liberals" are the leading group not to get the "full slate" of vaccinations.

Maybe they are the ones that had the time and know how to understand the vaccine package inserts and citations?

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:19 AM
Lets just say vaccinations such as the MMR do cause negative health effects in SOME people, the way i see it the people who dont vaccinate there children would rather them die from a horrific disease, than have a disability that can be helped and is not life threatening.

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:28 AM
a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

I do think about it, and like you, I'm lacking trust in gov't/Big Pharma, and all the research paid for by them. But sometimes the effects of certain diseases, like polio, outweigh my concern possibly associated with the vaccine.

I treat each vaccine individually and make my choice accordingly.

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:14 AM

originally posted by: alexkelsey92
Lets just say vaccinations such as the MMR do cause negative health effects in SOME people, the way i see it the people who dont vaccinate there children would rather them die from a horrific disease, than have a disability that can be helped and is not life threatening.

I may sound shallow, disgusting or selfish but I don't really know what I would choose between a dead or a disabled child. I want my children to be better than me. I would feel like I've failed somewhere in my life...

I'm sorry about what I said to parents that have child with disabilities. You parents are much braver than I could ever be.
edit on 5-2-2015 by theMediator because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:36 AM
a reply to: alexkelsey92

How many people have died from Measles in the past 10 years? Just curious.

No I think I would rather take the ridiculously tiny risk of being a part of an outbreak that covers less than a fraction of the smallest percent of a population, with no fatalities, than to knowingly inject something that could be harmful into my child.

Risks happen in everyday life 24/7. I'll take my chances with a dead disease.
edit on 5-2-2015 by TheNewRevolution because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 08:28 AM

originally posted by: alexkelsey92
Lets just say vaccinations such as the MMR do cause negative health effects in SOME people, the way i see it the people who dont vaccinate there children would rather them die from a horrific disease, than have a disability that can be helped and is not life threatening.

Even though I'm trying hard to avoid telling people that they're speaking out of ignorance, I can't just let this slide.

Here in America and most other countries with modern medicine and health care, your chances of contracting and dying from measles is less than 0.00%. Seriously, the percentage of Americans who have both contracted measels and died from it since 2000 is 0.00%.

Measles is far from a "horrific disease," and I'd ask you to do some research not just into the possible severe side effects, but also into the numbers associated with these side effects compared to the population who have contracted measles. Odds are, if you get measles, you'll be sick for some weeks, and then go on with life with a naturally created, full immunity that lasts for a lifetime. That's much better than putting crap into your arm that has a protective ability that degrades over time and necessitates additional injections.

But, we all have our ways of doing things--I'm just one of those who prefers to go through some short-lived pain or discomfort in order to get a better result than taking the easy way out.

new topics

top topics


log in