i just wanted to post again that i dont' mean any of these comments in a rude or insulting way at all. so i'm sorry in advance if it comes out that way. i'm not trying to come across as saying you're wrong because you're not. i was just defending my previous comment i guess. ok, i'm gonna shut up now. lol

That's OK. It takes worse than that to offend me. ;)

I'm not jabbing at you, but being in a public school increases the risk of getting a disease? Because I, and everyone else I know, has been going to a public school all our lives, and have never contracted any diseases any more than a person who isn't.

The only vaccinated illness i've ever had is Rubella, which I caught from my own sister who was an adult, e.g not at school.

In fact if anything, I would say children who are exposed to other children (and the associated infections) the better their immune systems are likely to be! Keeping kids too clean is actually bad for them, as it doesn't allow them to be exposed to things and to build up their natural immunity.

Yeah, they say that kids who grow up with animals, particularly dogs and cats, have better immune systems.

When I was in uni, two of my boy friends were always 'ill'. My friend Pheebs just used to say, 'You should have eaten more dirt as a child!' ;D

If I had an unvaxed child, then yes I believe they would be less likely to contract illness and disease if they were not surrounded by hundreds of potentially ill children. Of course, this isn't a perfect theory, but it makes sense on a basic level.

So what are you going to do to them? Because where ever you go, there are children... who are potentially ill...

I don't understand your logic, lol

I'm not trying to make a case against all vaccinations, nor am I advocating keeping children in a plastic bubble. I am nothing more than a concerned consumer trying to educate herself in a minimally biased way. As I've said more than once on this thread, it's a matter of weighing the risks. There is no perfect decision which will eliminate the risks, period.

Any child that is not exposed to pathogens wont catch disease/illness vaxed or not, but to not be exposed to pathogens is physically impossible.

Not in the UK it isn't. In the UK Hep B vaccine is only given to high risk groups such as health care workers, or people travelling to countries with a high infection rates (e.g. African countries). It's a blood borne virus, so I really don't see the rationale for giving it to newborn babies. You need to be exposed to contaminated blood to catch it. I would probably refuse the hep B vaccine if it was offered to my newborn baby, because in that case, the benefit does not outweigh the risk of catching the disease.

In the UK vaccines start I think around 3 months, and include polio, diptheria, tetanus, and later the MMR.

And kids can catch measles even without attending day care. I assume you will be taking them to church? And breastfed kids can also catch measles or mumps.

I believe in making decisions based on evidence, and there is no evidence for these vaccines being dangerous (and I don't buy into conspiracy theories that children are dying from them and it's being covered up. Believe me it is NOT easy to cover up things which happen in medicine). There is plenty of evidence that they save lives by preventing children catching diseases which could (and still do) kill them or cause them serious permanent damage. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that NOT having your child vaccinated is putting them at far greater risk than having them vaccinated (not to mention, as I've said, the fact that it puts other children at risk, as it contributes to a lower herd immunity, which e.g. immunocompromised kids rely on).

In making my point about the daycare, I was not trying to say that it would prevent them from catching a disease. In fact, I totally agree with you that keeping children in a sterile environment is harmful (which is why I don't believe in all the "antibacterial" crap you can buy in stores these days). If I choose to delay the Hep-B vaccine - which I will likely do - my child's risk for contracting the disease are better because they will not constantly be around other (potentially ill) children. I understand the risk is still there, of course. There will be risks regardless of what my decision is. The question is - which risks are more significant?

And the answer (in my mind at least) is that the risk of dying or being permanently diasbled from measles or rubella IS the greater risk. I have absolutely no doubt about that. There is NO evidence of these vaccines being dangerous, but if you choose not to vaccinate, you are seriously risking your child's life.

No risk whatsoever for the MMR vaccine?

You know I can't possibly say there's NO RISK. However, any risks are minimal there is NO evidence of a link between the MMR and autism. What I CAN say with certainty is that is you DON'T vaccinate, your child is being put at risk of diseases which could kill or seriously damage her. Surely that outweighs some tiny (unproven) possible risk from the vaccine?

here they routinely immunise Hep B from birth, my daughter went on to have the vaccinations at 2 months as we lived in the uk when she was born, and then she had the other (two i think) at 4 and 6 months i think.
If i have another child in the future i'd like to miss out the Hep B because as far as i know its not necessery unless the mother as it, but should i check the levels of Hep B here? do you think there is any terms on which a newborn or baby of any age should have it?

Personally, I don't see the benefit of vaccinating a baby against hep B in the UK (although, I couldn't comment on Spain, which is where you live, right? Although STILL there would have to be bodily fluid contact for spread of the virus). I think your specific question is outwith my area of expertise though, so i think it would be wrong of me to try and answer it, especially as it would translate into me giving you medical advice, which I'm very wary of doing over the internet.

okay so i should checkout the hep B levels anyway before making a decision on that. and i totaly understand you not wanting to give medical advice, thanks anyway!!

we're delaying the mmr until two years, but shes had all the others, minus rotavirus. she wouldn't have had the hep B vaccination either, as its not a standard UK one but i didn't know about that at the time.

For anyone interested i've heard the Dr Sears has a vaccine book which also has an alternative vaccine schedule in it, so that you only give one live vaccine, or aluminuim containing vaccine at a time. i'm planning to get it before my next child.

Is MMR vaccine worse than the others?

to be honest i don't know. i can never find non bias information on vaccines and i end up frustrated.. its just a minefeild. They say the links to the MMR and autism have been disproven, and that autism shows itself around the same time as the vaccine, etc but there are so many people with autistic children who say otherwise.
i can't remember the tecnicalities but something in the brain changes at age 2 and the vaccination is less likely to bring the onset of autism.(would love for anyone to explain this/disprove it) and this is why we're delaying it until then, along with the fact i am still breastfeeding (if she weans i might think otherwise) I just feel at peace with this way of doing it.

I'd say Red Fraggle would probably have the best answer to that.

So (sorry completely uneducated here!) what is the link between breastfeeding and the vaccines?

Breastfeeding passes on antibodies, for example if a baby was to come into contact with an illness, my antibodies to it(as i've been vaccinated) will be passed onto her,they probably won't stop her from getting it, but it will help her to fight it off.
http://www.kellymom.com/health/meds/vaccine-protection.html
it works with alot of bugs that have gone around, shes missed getting illnesses that i have got, such as stomach bugs and colds etc. now obviously colds and stomach bugs are nothing compared to serious diseases, but i know that my breastmilk will help her fight off anything she does encounter.

Oh! Well there ya go, thats good to know then! Ta!

Which is similar to being immune to TB, but it only works if the mother is immune to the illness and her immune system detects the pathogen at the time of breast feeding, which as you said is why it protects against colds as he saliva contains pathogens so your body makes the antibodies and sends it to your milk.