Are Vaccine Preventable Diseases Really That Serious?

Nothing lights up the argument channel than a difference of view on the vaccination issue! I’ve actually lost friends because they couldn’t give me enough solid information to make me even consider not providing my children with all the available help in the world. Unfortunately, few people will bother to read the article or take into serious consideration the documented facts included.

There is a complacency in the anti-vaxx people of that world that childhood diseases are not really that bad and certainly don’t need the ‘dangers’ involved with vaccinations to stop them from happening. The article:

https://www.verywell.com/anti-vaccine-myths-and-misinformation-2633730
should put a lot of these fears and misconceptions to rest . . . but it probably won’t until one of the seriously anti-vaxx people have a child who is seriously impacted by catching one of these ‘minor’ diseases. The following excerpt from the article shows exactly how much impact the pre-vaccination years were in the world.

Vaccine-Preventable Diseases Aren’t Really That Serious

This is one of the more dangerous ideas of the anti-vaccine movement.

The only reason that they get away with it is because vaccines have done such a good job! Since vaccines have eliminated and reduced most vaccine-preventable diseases, few people actually remember just how devastating these life-threatening diseases can be.

It is important to remember that in the pre-vaccine era:

there were regular outbreaks of polio in the United States causing 13,000 to 20,000 cases of paralytic poliomyelitis each year and about 1,000 deaths. In even larger polio epidemics in the 1940s and 1950s, there were up to 3,145 deaths.

there were about 500,000 cases of measles in the United States, with at least 500 to 1,000 deaths and 500 cases of measles encephalitis. As late as 1989-1991, there were 55,622 cases and 123 deaths in the US.

there were up to 200,000 cases of diphtheria and 15,000 deaths each year.
the Haemophilus influenzae type b bacteria caused life-threatening infections, including meningitis, epiglottitis, and pneumonia, in up to 20,000 young children each year. Many were infants, and up to 5 percent died. Among those who survived their Hib infection, up to 30 percent had hearing impairment or neurologic complications.

there were about 270,000 cases of pertussis and 10,000 deaths each year in the United States.
20,000 babies were born with congenital rubella syndrome during a severe epidemic of rubella in 1964 (12.5 million cases). An additional 2,100 newborns died and there were at least 11,250 surgical and spontaneous abortions in women with rubella while pregnant. The 1964 rubella epidemic is thought to have affected at least 1 percent of all pregnancies. These severe rubella epidemics were thought to have occurred every six to nine years, with smaller epidemics in two to four-year cycles.

Even today, about 200,000 children die each year from pertussis, and at least 122,000 die from measles around the world.

Vaccine-preventable diseases are clearly serious. We should also not overlook the fact that they would be just as deadly today if we stopped vaccinating our children and allowed them to come back in the United States.

 

The Untimely Death of Charlie Gard

A baby died in England this week. This baby’s death shouldn’t go unsung because a tiny infant showed the world what becomes of the humans of the world when the ways of the world have come to a pass that full-term, living babies can be deprived of necessary treatment and not allowed a chance at life.

Although little Charlie Gard seemed in perfect health his first couple of months of life, he suddenly started failing and ended up in a hospital with a diagnosis that could be considered a definite death sentence if left untreated. Although it was a chance, at best, Charlie’s parents researched options, begged for financial help, and got in touch with an American doctor who said he would examine the baby. Seems like a ray of home in what was being touted as a no-win situation.

Even with money in hand and a place to take their baby, the United Kingdom’s courts and doctors refused to allow the parents this option. There would have not been a single charge to the hospital for taking the baby to that one chance of help but the doctors said an adamant, unexplained ‘NO!’ and the courts backed them up on their say so. The time line for saving Charlie began in January when first diagnosed. At that point in time, the treatment just might have been beneficial giving the parents a feeling of hope in doing all they could for their first child. The doctors dragged on the process and the court trials didn’t get the immediate hearings you would think the situation merited so we end up seven months later with a baby slowly deteriorating in health.

Even in the condition he was in this month, the American doctor made the trip over to examine the baby and met with the UK doctors. A doctor in Rome offered his help on this as the Pope was also anxiously watching this turn of events. Everything was rejected and the courts sided with the doctors.

It got worse even after the parents realized that time had run out on treating their baby due to the doctors’ lack of action. They allowed that their son’s little life was fast running it’s course and only asked that they could take him home to die. This was refused. From what I read, they took the baby to an undisclosed place where the doctors removed him from his life support and Charlie died.

I only wonder how much celebration was enjoyed by those grown men who fought so hard for the death of this baby. I wonder if the judges breathed a sign of relief to have this pesky situation finally put to rest being glad little Charlie was finally being put to rest.

To basically recap: The parents of a sick baby had the wherewithal to transport him to the United States for experimental treatment. There would be no further cost to the UK hospital. The doctors refused to give the baby this once chance and regulated the time the parents could spend with the baby. When the parents persisted, the courts stepped in and took away their parental rights to do the best they could for their son.

You have to ponder what was going through these people’s minds to constantly refuse to move an inch on possibly saving this innocent child. Do these doctors have children? Would they appreciate a stranger telling them they couldn’t decide what was good for their own children? Yet, the doctors involved and the courts thought nothing of depriving this little family of their God-given free will and rather than have their word contradicted and take an ego bruising, felt it was better to get rid of the evidence . . . little Charlie Gard.

I’m thinking there are a great many people in the world today shedding tears for this family and not thinking well of how the helpless are treated under the medical guidelines of the medical health care system of the United Kingdom. A doctor vows to do no harm. I didn’t see any evidence of compassion in the events of the last few months.

Over the years, so many atrocities have been committed under the guise of medical treatment, especially in what unborn get to live and who are thrown away. It seems to follow, in a way, that if you get used to dumping aborted babies into the trash that helping a live baby to their demise would just be another day’s work. AND, if you have the backing of the court, it looks like one takes a huge chance in trusting their health and eventual outcome to the powers that be who want to run our lives.

Unfortunately, this is not isolated to the UK. People might remember Terri Schiavo who was deliberately starved to death because that was her husband’s wish with the backing of doctors in spite of her having a family who wanted to save her. Another case was the teenager, Justina Pelletier, who held by the Boston Children’s Hospital based on a doctor’s view that she wasn’t being properly treated medically. She went in a healthy young lady and finally left in need of much health care and rehabilitation from her time in that hospital.

Many prayers needed, today, for Charlie Gard’s family as well as other people/children who might be in similar situations and not allowed their freedom of choice.

Charlie Gard – Medical Treatment Gone Array?

When a government is in charge of healthcare, they can also be in charge of whether you live or die. Case in the point, the medical conflict over the 11-month old, Charlie Gard in Britain. Initially, the powers that be felt that keeping him on life support was futile and the baby should be allowed to die with dignity. His parents feel he should have more of a chance and garnered every cent they could to pay for travel and treatment to America. The British medical services ‘would not allow’ that and put a date of death tag on the little boy. Thankfully, this has been extended and some good has come about on behalf of the little child.

A doctor going for cutting-edge medical treatment on the ailment of the boy and an expert in that particular field came to the UK on his own dime and spent five hours evaluating the little boy. He determined that with the help he could provide in the States, Charlie Gard could have an 11% to 56% chance of improvement. He didn’t feel he was mentally impaired. To sweeten the deal, the US Congress voted to give the parents and Charlie immediate citizenship and residence in the United States. The parents had the financial means to bring the baby over without a single penny required of the British health system. They were refused this by the British doctors and the courts. They are adamant that Charlie stays in Britain and that Charlie should die.

Recently, the doctors showed up at a hearing with brain scans purported to be from Charlie and showing low brain function. Before even talking to the parents about this, they sprung it on everyone to validate their vote for allowing Charlie to die.

You have to wonder about the mind set and callousness of a system that basically kidnaps someone’s child and takes away the parents’ right to make decisions for the child. What is wrong with doctors who refuse to consider an alternative that won’t cost them any money. Why is it so important for them to watch a baby boy die? It does make one think that pride is playing a major part in this because these British doctors have failed to help the baby and are afraid that he just might have more of a life with medical treatment in the United States. Don’t doctors take a pledge about ‘do no harm’? It is tragic, sickening, and evil to follow the news on this where doctors fight for the right to end this little boy’s life.

What Happens When The Government is in Charge . . .

http://citizengo.org/en/lf/71800-petition-save-charlie-gard-10-month-old-sentenced-death-london-hospital?tc=fb&tcid=36881477

You may not have heard about this but there is a 10-month old baby in a London Hospital on life support. In spite of the parents objections, the hospital plans to remove the baby from life support within days. The parents have gone to court on this and been denied a ‘stay of execution’ of their child. Are they asking for more and more ‘free’ medical care for the baby? Nope! They have raised more than enough money to have the child transported to the United States for an experimental trial that might extend or save his life. England and the doctors are not permitting this. A lesson to those who feel that the one-payer, everything is for ‘free’ medical system would be ideal. Ideal until someone other than yourself gets to decide your date of death.

Polio is Still Around

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/09/02/outbreak-of-rare-mutated-poliovirus-in-ukraine-leaves-two-children-paralyzed/

This was an interesting article but I had to wonder why anyone is still disbursing the oral vaccine anymore especially with the growing reduction in parents allowing their children to be vaccinated. When a person receives the live polio virus, it makes any immune-deficient person or unvaccinated child/infant  susceptible. I was known as the ‘mean’ mother at the doctor’s office as, back in my day, I always insisted on the injected, dead virus vaccine rather then the oral because of my elderly in-laws and mother.

With the influx of refugees, many of which come from countries that still have outbreaks of polio, we will have to figure out ways to protect ourselves and our children because the government certainly isn’t thinking about this right now.