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.
Whoa.
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?
I’m with you. I delayed both DD’s vaccines by up to 6 months with a minimum 2 month delay for the first few vaccines. I exclusively breast fed both DDs for 6 months and with many exposures to different childhood ailments, they escaped all of them. I think children’s immunes systems should have a bit more time to develop before we start inundating them with vaccines. That doesn’t mean I’m against them at all. I completely agree that they help to protect everyone – just think their little bodies have enough going on already.
I also delayed most of my boys’ vaccinations. I had them done one at a time (not in clusters) and my doctor and I just kept track and made sure to get back to the boosters in the appropriate amount of time. We had reactions to vaccines (my kids have many allergies) so it while we stared #1 on schedule with part of his vaccines we went slowly after that. I, too, think it’s important to get them (for my child and for the protection of others), but I had concerns about all of that at one go – especially when you consider how many more they got than I did at that age. If that study’s results hold, then I’ll be doubly glad I did.
We are kindred spirits you and I. With my first child, I delayed her MMR to 15 months, because I just felt that she was only in 50th percentile for weight at 1 yr old and felt she needed some extra time before the MMR. We followed suit with her younger brother 2 1/2 yrs later, he was heavier but we felt there was no downfall to waiting to 15 months to get the MMR (both children were at home with us until 18 mths = no daycare). I’m happy that studies are coming out about the aggressiveness of today’s immunization schedules. I am also pro-immunization..but parents, trust your gut instincts about your children’s health and read, read and read more, before allowing any doctor to dictate what is the best way to proceed with YOUR children. Love the blog!
Thank you! Always love when my readers agree with me! HA!