I read an article on CTV News last night and wanted to post a link on my Facebook page to celebrate my glee at a study backing one of my parenting choices but then realized that, like any other study, there’s probably one out there contradicting this one. I’m sure someone I offended by posting it would then post her link, which would only incite one of those Facebook wall wars between women who may or may not even know each other. Great for afternoon entertainment but not so great for positive discussion.
So I decided to post it on my blog (because random people on the internet are so much kinder, right?!)
Here is the link to the Quebec study that brought about some interesting results when researchers compared children who received their first dose of the measles vaccine at 12 months with those who received the first dose at 15 months. Why the need to compare? The researches were trying to determine why a puzzling number of Quebec teenagers, who were assumed to have been protected in infancy, were contracting measles. More than 700 measles cases were reported in the 2011 outbreak.
3 months may not make a huge difference when you’re an adult, but we’ve all seen the astounding rate at which infants develop (especially in their first two years) so three months is a large amount of time when thinking about it from a development perspective.
The children who received their first dose of the measles vaccine at 12 months were six times more likely to go on to contract the disease than those who got their first dose at 15 months.
With my first child, I followed all the “rules” and had his immunizations right on schedule, until we got closer to his first birthday and I started reading about the controversy over the MMR vaccine. It gave me some considerable food for thought, but I followed my doctor’s recommendation and forged ahead. When I had my second child, I was a little more seasoned as a mommy and decided that perhaps delaying her immunizations by a few months each time wasn’t such a bad idea. With my third, secure in my choices and research we decided to delay even longer, about 4 months or so for each.
I’ve long felt that immunizations are a lot for a wee baby to handle but it’s necessary in order to keep them and other children protected. A baby is still a little boo at 6 months, but she’s just a little bit bigger, a little bit stronger than she was at 4 months.
I’m very curious to see what reaction this study gets from the medical community and parents as well. Why did those 3 months make such a difference in immunity to measles? What does that mean for all immunizations?
I certainly am pro-immunization, I understand the risk involved in not vaccinating children, but this gives parents some pause and food for thought when considering whether to delay.
What do you think?