Hope this makes parents feel better about vaccinating their kids.
Doesn't work that way - vaccines stimulate the immune system to produce anti-bodies just like the illness without the risk. And the saying that, "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" is a myth.That lines up with over cleanliness leading to asthma, the immune doesn't get enough stimulation.
I guess making these sorts of things mandatory puts too much power in the hands of the pharmaceutical companies though
This vaccination business is a hot subject in our household right now. Our youngest son (6) has cancer and the chemotherapy he has faced over the last 9 months has removed the benefit of all of his childhood immunisations. If everything goes to plan, in 3 years time, he will once again have to go through these vaccinations.
He is about to return to school and naturally we are very concerned. We kept his vaccinations up and are hoping that parents of children in his year also made the effort.
When places are too clean the immune systems isn't stimulated to develop correctly so overreacts at times leading to asthma attacks.
You have my sympathies and I can't begin to imagine what you've been through or the worries you must have!
Have you considered home schooling him until he's in less danger from stupid parents?
1. Big Pharma companies are immune from prosecution if your child dies from a vaccine allergic reaction.
2. UK Gov gives you £120k compensation if "problems" arise after vaccination.
Vaccine Damage Payment - GOV.UK
Food for thought, don't you think? Vaccines are safe but there is a compensation scheme from the Government????...sounds legit!
There are always risks - some (extremely few) children will have an adverse reaction and that is not hidden or covered up. However, those risks are infinitesimally small compared to the huge risks of not getting vaccinated - and we aren't just talking about the risk to the individual but to those others who are too young to be vaccinated or are immunocompromised.
Yes.Or am I blowing this out of proportion?
Or you could flip this thinking on its head. The government spends a fair amount of money on vaccination each year and if the compensation they had to pay was high as well then they would soon stop. They obviously believe that the cost of vaccination + the cost of the occasional time it goes wrong is still less than the cost of not doing it. Obviously this does not make the impact of when it does go wrong any less.The risk is infinitesimal but vaccine damage is occurring enough for The Goverment to warrant a compensation scheme? Accepted losses doesn't sound right to me at all. I wouldn't be able to justify a child's death or serious health damage by saying well you knew the risks, we told you. !?! Or am I blowing this out of proportion?
I would be interested to know how the vaccine damaged is proved or what damage by vaccines is caused.