Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

proverbialwisdom

(4,959 posts)
45. Nonsense.
Mon Aug 29, 2016, 10:20 PM
Aug 2016
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2016/03/17/peds.2015-4230

Pediatrics
March 2016, VOLUME 137 / ISSUE 3

Childhood Vaccine Exemption Policy: The Case for a Less Restrictive Alternative
Douglas J. Opel, Matthew P. Kronman, Douglas S. Diekema, Edgar K. Marcuse, Jeffrey S. Duchin, Eric Kodish


Abbreviations: MV — measles vaccine, NME — nonmedical exemption, VPD — vaccine-preventable disease

Efforts to restrict parents’ ability to exempt children from receiving vaccinations required for school entry have recently reached a pinnacle. The American Medical Association voiced support for eliminating nonmedical exemptions (NMEs) from school vaccine requirements,1 and California enacted legislation doing so.2 Although laudable in their objective, policies eliminating NMEs from all vaccines are scientifically and ethically problematic. In the present article, we argue for an exemption policy that eliminates NMEs just for the measles vaccine (MV) and is pursued only after other less restrictive approaches have been implemented and deemed unsuccessful.

Published By American Academy of Pediatrics
Copyright © 2016 by the American Academy of Pediatrics

Author Information: Douglas J. Opel, MD, MPHa,b, Matthew P. Kronman, MD, MSCEb, Douglas S. Diekema, MD, MPHa,b,c, Edgar K. Marcuse, MD, MPHb, Jeffrey S. Duchin, MDd,e,f, and Eric Kodish, MDg

aTreuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics, Seattle Children’s Research Institute, and
bDepartments of Pediatrics and
dMedicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington;
cDepartments of Health Services and
eEpidemiology, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington;
fCommunicable Disease Epidemiology and Immunization Section, Public Health–Seattle and King County, Seattle, Washington; and
gDepartment of Bioethics, Center for Ethics, Humanities and Spiritual Care, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio

Dr Opel conceptualized and designed the study and drafted the initial manuscript; and Drs Kronman, Diekema, Marcuse, Duchin, and Kodish reviewed and revised the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

http://www.acog.org/Resources-And-Publications/Committee-Opinions/Committee-on-Ethics/Refusal-of-Medically-Recommended-Treatment-During-Pregnancy

OB/GYN Group Says Pregnant Women Have Right to Informed Consent and Refusal of Doctor Recommendations

1. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Refusal of Medically Recommended Treatment During Pregnancy.
ACOG.org No. 664, June 2016.

2. McClain L. New ACOG Statement Says Forcing Treatment on Pregnant Women is Unethical.
Mothering June 10, 2016.

http://file.scirp.org/html/22932.html

Open Journal of Pediatrics, 2012, 2, 228-235

OJPed http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojped.2012.23036
Published Online September 2012 http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ojped/

Vaccination practices among physicians and their children

Michael Martin1, Vahe Badalyan2

1Department of Pediatrics, Inova Fairfax Hospital for Children, Falls Church, USA
2Department of Gastroenterology, Children’s National Medical Center, Washington DC, USA


Received 1 May 2012; revised 3 July 2012; accepted 30 July 2012

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to identify vaccination patterns of both general pediatricians and subspecialists with regards to their own children and projected progeny. A 14 question survey was sent randomly to 1000 members of the Academy of Pediatrics in 2009. Two categories of questions included 1) how physicians with children vaccinated them in the past, and 2) how all respondents would vaccinate a child in 2009. A comparison was made between the answers of general and specialty pediatricians. 582 valid questionnaires were received (58.2% response rate) of which 431 were general pediatricians and 151 sub-specialists. No statistical difference was found between general and specialty pediatricians on how they vaccinated their children up until 2009 (95% vs 93%). When asked about vaccinating a future child, a significant proportion of respondents would deviate from CDC guidelines, specialists more than general pediatricians (21% vs 9%). Generalists were more likely to give a future child Hepatitis A (OR: 3.6; 95% CI 1.3 - 10.4), Rotavirus (OR: 2.2; 95% CI 1.1 - 4.4), Meningococcal (OR: 9.9; 95% CI 3.3 - 29.9), and influenza (OR: 5.4; 95% CI 1.1 - 26.7) vaccines. Specialists were more likely to postpone MMR vaccination (OR: 4.4 95% CI 2.3 - 8.6). Safety was listed by both groups as the most common reason for altering the recommended immunization schedule. Until 2009, general pediatricians and pediatric specialists have largely adhered to ACIP recommendations, but due to vaccine safety and other concerns, both groups, albeit a higher percentage of specialists, reported greater numbers willing to diverge from these recommendations.

Misc: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141392809#post38
Good. LeftyMom Aug 2016 #1
Another victory over woo. HERVEPA Aug 2016 #2
I don't think this thread is going how the OP hoped. LeftyMom Aug 2016 #9
You think? N/t Godhumor Aug 2016 #14
hahhaha me either! obamanut2012 Aug 2016 #35
This is a very good ruling. procon Aug 2016 #3
Bill and signing statement here. proverbialwisdom Aug 2016 #20
Besides Home schools, HockeyMom Aug 2016 #23
Good. This will save lives. nt SunSeeker Aug 2016 #4
Good. Recursion Aug 2016 #5
We have lost our memory of how it used to be central scrutinizer Aug 2016 #6
True this. lindysalsagal Aug 2016 #7
True. People ignorant of history treestar Aug 2016 #15
Yes, ignorance of history can cut both ways. proverbialwisdom Aug 2016 #25
A friend of mine had Hepatitis B. Hassin Bin Sober Aug 2016 #28
Did this go through? treestar Aug 2016 #42
Only a handful of the 31 nations in the EU follow the US CDC Hep B infant schedule. Wonder why? (nt) proverbialwisdom Aug 2016 #44
Mumps got me bad. hunter Aug 2016 #16
Off topic, but FYI. proverbialwisdom Aug 2016 #22
You have it exacly right Danmel Aug 2016 #43
Nonsense. proverbialwisdom Aug 2016 #45
Good. nt msanthrope Aug 2016 #8
Good. Starry Messenger Aug 2016 #10
Excellent! MicaelS Aug 2016 #11
Good tammywammy Aug 2016 #12
Common sense prevails over bullshit Godhumor Aug 2016 #13
Not an idiocracy yet, at least in this U.S. judicial district. Unit 001 Aug 2016 #17
If we all had more confidence in the FDA. Delmette Aug 2016 #18
Ridiculous. stopbush Aug 2016 #26
anti vaxx nonsense obamanut2012 Aug 2016 #37
Check it out. proverbialwisdom Aug 2016 #19
Jay Gordon diagnosed a child with an AIDS associated pneumonia with an ear infection LeftyMom Aug 2016 #21
Yikes. Hassin Bin Sober Aug 2016 #29
He's a crackpot joeybee12 Aug 2016 #24
Nope! nt longship Aug 2016 #32
Likely a life-saving decision. nt Ilsa Aug 2016 #27
So very excellent. tymorial Aug 2016 #30
Good! If you can't vaccinate your kid, keep them away from endangering others. onecaliberal Aug 2016 #31
Here's one way that CA SB277 is illogical in a cartoon. proverbialwisdom Aug 2016 #33
You embrace the logic of cartoons, yet are currently denying the logic of science, medicine LanternWaste Aug 2016 #40
That's ridiculous. The cartoon is factual and succinctly demonstrates the absurdity of SB277. proverbialwisdom Aug 2016 #41
I'm sure OP is devastated by this sensible ruling. Odin2005 Aug 2016 #34
GOOD obamanut2012 Aug 2016 #36
Doctors can issue waivers if need be. KittyWampus Aug 2016 #38
Yes but NOT because parents want them to, it has to be a legit reason. onecaliberal Aug 2016 #39
8/29/16: American Academy of Pediatrics Publishes New Policies to Boost Child Immunization Rates proverbialwisdom Aug 2016 #46
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Federal judge denies inju...»Reply #45