UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (148) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 42361  
Subject: The POX! Date: 12/3/2001 8:24 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Ok...this morning there were two spots, we're now at 25 (12 hours later).

Have Children's Tylenol, Children's Antihistamine, Calamine lotion.

Don't have a bathtub, but am seriously considering converting a suitcase to a tub if the itching gets bad.

Kidlet went to bed with socks on his hands to prevent any nighttime scratching.

So far so good, he's not itchy at all yet.

Have I forgotten something? Any advice?

Ess
...had the pox once already, but he was only two and it was very mild, just 5-6 spots.
Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7557 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/3/2001 8:34 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Have I forgotten something? Any advice?
---------

My kids both handled chicken pox very well. I hope you're as lucky.

In addition to socks on his hands, now might be a good time to clip his nails, just in case. It's probably a good idea to keep your house cool enough that he wants to keep clothes on... Does he have any blanket sleepers with feet? They leave very little skin exposed for scratching. That's really all I can think of.

I don't remember how old your kid is, sorry. When my two had it they were pre-k and kindergarten. I spent a lot of time playing board games with them to take their minds off of the itch. For my oldest, that was when we began teaching him how to play Chess.

Rebecca


Print the post Back To Top
Author: GEEKSTEVE2000 Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7558 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/3/2001 10:26 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
don't they have a chicken pox vaccine out now?

i remember when i had chicken pox, i was a scratcher. i still have a couple scars from where i scratched the little suckers off.

good luck.
GS2

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7559 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/3/2001 10:45 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
don't they have a chicken pox vaccine out now?



Yes, yes they do.


http://www.chickenpoxinfo.com

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/article/1824-3181.html

- T.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7560 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/3/2001 7:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
don't they have a chicken pox vaccine out now?


They do, but I disagree with it in healthy children. To never get sick, I believe, compromises immunity by far more than a round of the pox.

For other illness - particularly fatal or long lasting ones, I'm all for shots. But the pox is neither in most people.

Rebecca, thanks for the advice, he's 4, almost 5, and entertains himself pretty well. Checked the nails yesterday and they were short so we're good to go on that front. I just think I'm going to go nuts with him in the house for 5 days and no visits to the park or anywhere with children.

Oh, and the all in one sleepers were a great idea, but it's still awfull hot here for them - not to mention that at 4 feet tall, I doubt I could find then here for the kidlet.

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: shirah33 Three stars, 500 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7561 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/3/2001 8:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
don't they have a chicken pox vaccine out now?


Yes, i got it. I was over 30 years old, and me and my kids were one of the first to get it the second my youngest turned 2 years old. the reason...if i got the shot, they said i was at risk for giving it to all the kids, and none of my kids have gotten chicken pox. my kids were 12, 9 and 2.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: laibach One star, 50 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7562 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 10:54 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
"They do, but I disagree with it in healthy children. To never get sick, I believe, compromises immunity by far more than a round of the pox."

Well, when they get the vaccine, they do in fact get sick, they just don't have symptoms. The vaccine strengthens the immune system exactly they same way as getting the pox does, they just don't have bumps, itching, etc.

Laibach
Father of a fantastic three-year-old

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7563 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 11:00 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"They do, but I disagree with it in healthy children. To never get sick, I believe, compromises immunity by far more than a round of the pox."

Well, when they get the vaccine, they do in fact get sick, they just don't have symptoms. The vaccine strengthens the immune system exactly they same way as getting the pox does, they just don't have bumps, itching, etc.
-----------

I chose not to immunize my kids for the chicken pox as well. I've read a lot about the vaccine, and some sources say that it's really too soon to tell how long the immunization lasts. Getting a light case doesn't always mean you won't get it again, and it's possible that the vaccine would work the same way.

There are definitely people who would be better off immunized, but for the vast majority of kids, chicken pox is just uncomfortable and NOT life threatening. I'd prefer my kids get it and get it completely over with for sure. Getting it as an adult is much worse, and if that vaccine wears off, that could happen.

Rebecca


Print the post Back To Top
Author: DisplacedTexan Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7564 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 11:27 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Actually, there is a fairly long history (in vaccine terms) with the varicella vaccine.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11354700&dopt=Abstract

And, just to put the mortality risk from varicella into perspective relative to other diseases, from a 1988 study:
At present in England and Wales more deaths are attributed to chickenpox than to whooping cough and mumps.
Obviously, pertussis and mumps are diseases against which children are routinely vaccinated.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: amatlaga Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7565 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 6:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I agree with the previous post:

my girls received the vaccine at 1 years old.

I have never had it and did not want the girls to bring it home and give it to me.

I figured anyway I can help them stay healthy, then it is worth the risk.

Angie

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7566 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 6:24 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
my girls received the vaccine at 1 years old.

I have never had it and did not want the girls to bring it home and give it to me.
----------

To me, that is a very good reason to vaccinate them... It would be much worse for you to get it now than it would be for them to get it. But if they got it, you would surely be next.

Rebecca


Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7567 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 6:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I have never had it and did not want the girls to bring it home and give it to me.

This sounds like a good reason to vaccinate *you*.

I still think that getting really sick is an important lesson in childhood. For our bodies and for our minds. So many people, if you ask them, remember clearly having chicken pox. They *remember* being told not to scratch and can point to the scar where they didn't pay attention.

If you're never sick, how will you learn to cope with being uncomfortable? If you're vaccinated and your body therefore has an asymptomatic version of it, where's the learning how to identify and manage a fever and blisters going to come from?

Anyone at risk for death should *of course* be vaccinated, but I do think that resources going into Chicken Pox vaccination would be better spent on something like HIV, which is the *real* pox of the future if we don't figure out a way to vaccinate.

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: bawitham Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7568 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 7:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I still think that getting really sick is an important lesson in childhood. For our bodies and for our minds. So many people, if you ask them, remember clearly having chicken pox. They *remember* being told not to scratch and can point to the scar where they didn't pay attention.

My 2¢, I don't remember being sick with it.

Beth



Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7569 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 8:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
So many people, if you ask them, remember clearly having chicken pox. They *remember* being told not to scratch and can point to the scar where they didn't pay attention.
-------------

LOL

Having the chicken pox was the most popular I ever was in elementary school. My brother and sister brought it home from day care and I broke out on Thanksgiving Day in third grade. Of course, the rest of my class, starting with the kids in my neighborhood got it next. Every day for literally months while everyone was coming down with it there was a roll call in the morning. I still remember. First Rebecca, then Kevin, then Scott, etc. (OK, so I don't remember past the third person.) It was such a status symbol.

Rebecca



Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7570 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 8:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
It was such a status symbol.


Heh, Kids.

Mine was pretty bummed when all his classmates got it and he didn't. Now, of course, I think he feels a little differently, but it has to be said that he quite enjoys that he's part of the gang.

Not to say that children should be sick because it's "cool".

I just worry, sometimes, that our children's lives are so coddled and protected that we don't end up giving them the skills to manage in life. Life is a messy, disappointing and at times painful experience. I'd like to know that my son has safe opportunities to learn to manage these circumstances before he has to go out and tackle them on his own.

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7571 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 8:48 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Ess,

You mentioned in a previous post that you didn't know what you were going to do for a week stuck in the house and unable to go out, etc, or something to that effect. If your son's friends have already had chicken pox, why don't you invite his best buddy over, if he wants. That was another advantage of being first... I was lonely for a week, but as all of my friends got sick I could visit as much as I wanted. If a friend can come over, that will give your son something fun to do for a couple of hours.

Rebecca


Print the post Back To Top
Author: ishtarastarte Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7572 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 9:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
My 2¢, I don't remember being sick with it.

Me, neither

Ishtar


Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7573 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 9:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If a friend can come over, that will give your son something fun to do for a couple of hours.


Unfortunately, they're all back at school now! But thanks for the thought. So far it's going ok. He's up to about 120 spots (keeping count so I know when it's on its way out) but still not itchy, so he's quite content to catch up on movies. Thankfully Shrek and Final Fantasy are out on VCD now, so he's happy to be a vidiot for now. The Legos are getting quite a workout as well, not to mention his computer. Oh, and the "experiments". He's obsessed with mixing "chemicals" (toothpaste, salt, marbles) and making who knows what.

The hardest part is that he's a terrible patient. Not because of whingeing, quite the opposite. He has SO much energy and no outlet. If it weren't for the spots, you'd never know he was sick! He was the same way last April when he had pneumonia severe enough to put him in the hosptial for 4 days. He was bouncing off the walls and yet his xrays showed lungs so nasty he should have been bedridden. The nurses had no idea what to make of him.

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7574 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 9:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
My 2¢, I don't remember being sick with it.

Me, neither


Sounds like both of you may be up for a vaccination! I've heard so many pox stories this week - and everyone I talk to has pulled up a sleeve or untucked a shirt to show me a pox scar.

Reminds me of when I was pregnant and I heard every horror story in the book. Speaking of pregnant, Rebecca, aren't you due any minute?

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ishtarastarte Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7575 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 10:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Me, neither

Sounds like both of you may be up for a vaccination! I've heard so many pox stories this week - and everyone I talk to has pulled up a sleeve or untucked a shirt to show me a pox scar.

Nope, I had it, mom has a story, I was 4, no scars.

Ishtar



Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7576 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/4/2001 10:53 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Nope, I had it, mom has a story, I was 4, no scars.

Interesting. I wonder if getting it younger makes it itch less. I'm convinced that 4 year olds don't have as many nerve receptors for pain/itching as older kids and that 2 years have even fewer.

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7580 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:16 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Reminds me of when I was pregnant and I heard every horror story in the book. Speaking of pregnant, Rebecca, aren't you due any minute?
--------------

I have about 7 weeks to go. But I am so ready to be done with being pregnant and have a baby already!!! Not that I am actually ready, though... Jeff is still scraping paint and will then have to seal the walls with paint. THEN we can FINALLY set up the nursery. He says he'll get it finished this weekend. That's also what he said last weekend!!! But I do have almost everything I need here. There are still a few things left to buy, but if I had the baby tomorrow I would be able to care for him without the missing items.

Rebecca

Print the post Back To Top
Author: medgoddess Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7581 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 8:58 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Interesting. I wonder if getting it younger makes it itch less
******************************************************************

I doubt it. I had chicken pox when I was 5. I was MISERABLE for a month (yes, July - August of 1978. I came down with the first set of pox the day before we were scheduled to go on a family vacation.) I have more scars than you can shake a stick at and I very distinctly remember being miserable. I had pox in places where pox just should not be.

Wouldn't want to put anyone through that.
Kristi

Print the post Back To Top
Author: bawitham Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7582 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 9:11 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Sounds like both of you may be up for a vaccination! I've heard so many pox stories this week - and everyone I talk to has pulled up a sleeve or untucked a shirt to show me a pox scar.

I know where my pox scars are, just don't remember being sick.

B

Print the post Back To Top
Author: bstroh Three stars, 500 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7583 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 9:24 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
If you're never sick, how will you learn to cope with being uncomfortable? If you're vaccinated and your body therefore has an asymptomatic version of it, where's the learning how to identify and manage a fever and blisters going to come from?

I've seen the argument for/against vaccination many times, in many different venues. This is the first time I've ever seen this particular supporting claim.

On it's face, it doesn't really matter. If you're never sick, you'lll never have a fever or blisters to manage.

And since there are no vaccines that are 100% effective against every childhood disease, I'm pretty sure everyone will be sick at some point in their first few years of life. Colds, ear infections, whatever.

Honestly, how many 18 month olds are going to use the chicken pox as a learning experience?

Personally, I'm thrilled that my daughter may never have the learning experiences of polio, whooping cough, etc.

Anyone at risk for death should *of course* be vaccinated, but I do think that resources going into Chicken Pox vaccination would be better spent on something like HIV, which is the *real* pox of the future if we don't figure out a way to vaccinate.

I'm trying not to make this a tangent discussion, but there is currently a vaccine for HIV that's pretty effective. Unfortunately, it's a behavioral vaccine, not a medical one.

I also think it's a bad idea to ignore smaller problems just because they're small. If they can be effectively addressed, they should be.





Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: bstroh Three stars, 500 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7584 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 9:29 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I just worry, sometimes, that our children's lives are so coddled and protected that we don't end up giving them the skills to manage in life. Life is a messy, disappointing and at times painful experience. I'd like to know that my son has safe opportunities to learn to manage these circumstances before he has to go out and tackle them on his own.

This is a valid concern, especially in a generation of kids who get whatever they want due to working parent guilt. (No, that's not a blanket comment; please don't start that argument. I think, although we all know it has nothing to do with OUR kids, we can all identify relatives, neighbors, classmates, whatever, in that category.)

I just think there are enough disappointments and pain in life that our kids are going to have this experience with or without chicken pox.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7585 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 1:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I just think there are enough disappointments and pain in life that our kids are going to have this experience with or without chicken pox.


Amen.

There's something that many of these "don't need this vaccine" crowd are forgetting.

One word: Shingles.

My mom gets this from time to time. It can be horribly painful. I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

- T.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Selphiras Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7586 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 1:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
There are also other opportunites that don't involve days of agnoy and the possiblility of making others sick (or getting sicker oneself) that a child can go through to learn about pain and suffering. For example, how about having cavities filled/drilled without anesthetic?

Or wouldn't you put your child through that?

Just for the record, I didn't have anesthetic for cavities when I was a child, and I refuse it as an adult. The pain of the minute or so is much more easily overcome than the pain of having half your face numb for hours on end. And since I was unaware such things existed and were an option as a child, I didn't know that this was such a bad experience and never minded going to the dentist. I'd never want the chicken pox again.

The thing I think is worst about chicken pox is that you don't know how bad it will be. One person might have only a few pox, and another might get them inside her mouth, a horrendous agony I'm told.

Selphiras

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GEEKSTEVE2000 Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7587 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 3:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
If you're never sick, how will you learn to cope with being uncomfortable?

the pox vaccine doesn't inoculate you against colds or toothaches or scraped knees. IMO kids have enough opportunity to suffer without getting chickenpox.


Anyone at risk for death should *of course* be vaccinated,

the problem with this line of thinking is that it is not only "unhealthy" kids that can get really sick or even die from chickenpox. sometimes perfectly healthy people suffer worse than most from "safe" illnesses like chickenpox.

GS2

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7588 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 5:55 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
They *remember* being told not to scratch and can point to the scar where they didn't pay attention.

And I'm betting that if you ask any of them, they'll say getting to scratch that itch was definitely worth the little scar. So I'm not sure what lesson that teaches.

If you're never sick, how will you learn to cope with being uncomfortable? If you're vaccinated and your body therefore has an asymptomatic version of it, where's the learning how to identify and manage a fever and blisters going to come from?

Well, identifying and managing the particular type of blisters in question wouldn't come up again, so it's not a very useful lesson. And there are all kinds of other illnesses where they can learn to identify and deal with a fever. But I do agree that learning how to cope with being that uncomfortable and sick is not a bad lesson to learn.

I also agree that all the resources that went into a chicken pox vaccine, and the subsequent resources involved in educating doctors and the public, the media attention, etc. could be better spent on something a lot more serious and a lot more life threatening.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7589 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 5:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I just worry, sometimes, that our children's lives are so coddled and protected that we don't end up giving them the skills to manage in life. Life is a messy, disappointing and at times painful experience. I'd like to know that my son has safe opportunities to learn to manage these circumstances before he has to go out and tackle them on his own.

Here here!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: amatlaga Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7590 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 6:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Ess

Knowing what you know now- would you get your son the chicken pox shot?

Even though people have a problem with it- my lack of pox aside- I got it for the girls. And not because of my lack of the illness but to save them the problem and hopefully any problems associated with the pox.

If it was offered again, I would probably allow them to be vaccinated again.

Angie

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7591 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 6:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Some Pox comedy:

http://www.babyblues.com/archive/1997/970501w.htm#anchor970505

http://www.babyblues.com/archive/1997/970502w.htm#anchor970512

My favorite is Friday's from the second link.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ishtarastarte Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7592 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 6:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"connect the chicken pox" *giggle* *snort*

Ishtar

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7593 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Knowing what you know now- would you get your son the chicken pox shot?
---------

You didn't ask me, but I'll answer anyway.

No. I wouldn't. My kids really didn't take it too bad, although they both had a pretty heavy case of it. Honestly, the worst part of it all was that Corey broke out in Jackson, TN on our way back to PA from visiting my dad in AR. I felt bad that he had the worst of it (fever and breaking out) on the road. And of course I was barely back to work when Drew broke out. But it wasn't a horrible or bad experience for any of us. I have no intentions of vacinating the new baby, either, unless there is some circumstance that would suggest it is necessary.

Rebecca



Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7594 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I also think it's a bad idea to ignore smaller problems just because they're small. If they can be effectively addressed, they should be.

At any cost? Or does "effectively" include cost-effectiveness?

None of us probably knows what kind of money and research effort developing a chicken-pox vaccine cost. It may have been easy, considering how common the disease is, and taken little effort- but I'm thinking if that was the case, it would have been done long ago. Or, it took lots of effort to develop one, and therefore, cost money. The argument is, couldn't both the time and money have been better spent on a bigger problem?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7595 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Shingles

I'll have to do a lot more research before I decide whether to vaccinate my kids or not for chicken pox, but if for some reason I decide I want them to catch it "naturally", I am sure of this: if they haven't caught it naturally by the time they are out of elementry school, it's not likely they will before they get old enough for it to be much more dangerous and uncomfortable. Therefore, at that point, they WILL be vaccinated.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7596 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:13 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Knowing what you know now- would you get your son the chicken pox shot?

I don't know.

The fact is that I'm not one to shy from vaccines and preventative medicine. It makes sense to me to avoid illness when you can. Before my son had the pox, my only experience with it was my own pox, which was *very* mild, maybe 20-30 pox. All other info came from sites and doctors, all saying it's a *mild* childhood illness, so getting the shot seemed to me like overkill.

Malarky. 300 oozing blisters (300 is average, aparently someone once counted 1500) is repulsinve (at last count he was at 150, but he has a lot more now). My son may not be techincally dangerously ill, but at the same time he's impossible to comfort without hurting and in complete, pants-wetting discomfort. We're now 4 days into the bumps and still getting new ones, so he's going to feel worse before he feels better.

So knowing what I know now, yeah, I'd suggest getting the shot. Not for the kid's sake, mind you, but because it's awful to have to watch your kid go through it(heh, kidding. For the kid, for the kid).

BUTBUTBUTBUTBUTBUTBUT if getting the shot is only going to give partial immunity, then NO WAY. I'm sure what my son has it better than what it would be if he were a grownup (and god forbid, shingles). Of course, if he were a grownup, he'd just get 2 weeks worth of valium and sleep it off!

I just think that the POX needs to be reclassified. It may not be a technically (aside from complications) dangerous illness for the body, but anything that fully puts you out for 2 weeks in complete misery counts as something we should avoid.

I still think our kids need to face tough experiences (and my point with that was not that learning how to manage blisters was a learning experience, but instead learning to manage being UNBEARABLY uncomfortable was. Most kids today are never even SLIGHTLY uncomfortable!) but I've now decided that travelling hard seat on a train from Hong Kong to Beijing might be a better way to toughen up than chicken pox.

Ess

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: ishtarastarte Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7597 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:22 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I had my daughter immunized at 1 year. The military dr's offered it with her normal round of shots. I figured that as a single parent, there was no way I would ever be able to take 5-10 days off of work to treat her.

2 Days after the shots, we went to Florida (from WA) to visit my family. My uncle got the shingles. He hadn't been exposed to any other children, so we think he got it from Chandra. Took him 6 very painful months to get rid of it. Didn't know THAT was gonna happen, but I'm glad she got the shot.

Only thing is that they said she MIGHT need a booster around age 10. Anyone know anything about that?

Ishtar

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7598 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:29 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The argument is, couldn't both the time and money have been better spent on a bigger problem?

Exactly. Although I do suspect that *all* research has some cross-benefits. What they know about the POX tells them more about viruses in general and therefore more about how to fight diseases like AIDS. Also worth noting is that getting chicken pox over and over again is in fact something that happens to people with AIDS, so this reasearch has a least done something to alleviate misery in people who need a little relief. (Have I just killed my own argument? I hate when I do that!)

Someone pointed out that there was already a "vaccine" and I'm assuming they meant not having sex.

While that sounds all fine and good, what about blood transfusions or rape? There is a HUGE uproar in China at the moment because private (I'm not sure if they were *actually* private, but they were not FORMAL gov't orgs) companies were POOLING BLOOD DONATIONS and REUSING NEEDLES and through this have infected ENTIRE VILLAGES with HIV. Or what's WORSE, an insurance company in South Africa has now started offering Rape Insurance. Apparently <some> men in SA think that sleeping with a virgin prevents AIDS (I can just hear the well-meaning healthcare volunteer saying this, never knowing how such innocent words would be bastardized) and so men are raping children thinking it's some kind of vaccine. The medical costs of getting AZT and counselling for the children are so exorbitant that buying this insurance is one way to manage. Now, that's insurance company spin, I'd argue there are better ways to protect your children.

I think it's probably just the hype increacing over AIDS awareness day, but I swear, the more I hear about ridiculous stories like this, the more I wonder if WHO has their numbers completely wrong and I want to walk around in a rubber suit under lock and key and keep a stockpile of my own blood.

So, yeah, there are some pretty scary things out there that are indeed worse than the chicken pox.

Ess


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: precious1965 Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7599 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:35 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Please keep in mind that some, if not most, schools will bar entry to children not vaccinated. A website of interest:

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/publications/Parents-Guide/default.htm
National Immunization Program: Parents Guide to Childhood Immunization

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/publications/Parents-Guide/PGVaricella.pdf (note that a death rate is present, as well as possible hospitalization; I read nothing about a booster being required)

"Chickenpox is usually a mild disease, uncomfortable but not dangerous. Still, serious problems do occur. The blisters can become infected, and some children get encephalitis (infection of the brain). Of every 100,000 infants under one year old who get chickenpox, about 4 die. For older children, 1 to 14 years old, about 1 in 100,000 dies. If a woman gets chickenpox just before or after giving birth, her baby can get very sick, and about 1 in 3 of these children die if they are not treated quickly.

"Even when chickenpox is not serious, it can create problems for the family because the parents may have to miss work to care for the sick child. About 1 child out of 500 who get chickenpox must be hospitalized. For adults who get chickenpox, 1 in 50 must be hospitalized.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7600 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Only thing is that they said she MIGHT need a booster around age 10. Anyone know anything about that?

The CDC says:

How long does the vaccine protect someone against chickenpox? Will a booster vaccination be needed?
The length of protection/immunity from any new vaccine is never known when it is first introduced. However, available information collected from persons vaccinated in Japan in the United States show that protection has lasted for as long as the vaccinated persons have been followed (25 years in Japan and more than 10 years in the U.S.). Follow up studies to determine how long protection will last and to evaluate the need and timing for booster vaccination, are ongoing. If it is determined in the future that a booster dose is necessary, your health care provider will inform you. Currently, no booster dose is recommended.
from http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vaccine/varicella/faqs-gen-vaccine.htm#20-lengthprotect

FYI, the CDC is a great resource for info about disease/shots.

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7601 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Heh, precious, if only you'd posted 2 minutes earlier, you'd have saved me from rooting around at the CDC!

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: mapletree3 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7602 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 7:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Apparently <some> men in SA think that sleeping with a virgin prevents AIDS (I can just hear the well-meaning healthcare volunteer saying this, never knowing how such innocent words would be bastardized) and so men are raping children thinking it's some kind of vaccine. The

Actually this has been a myth in Western society as well for hundreds of years. That having sex with a virgin would not prevent, but cure an STD.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7603 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 8:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
An update...

I just had a call from one of the mothers at my son's school. It turns out that out of the kids who have come down with the chicken pox, 4 of them were vaccinated. FOUR. That's FOUR OUT OF (ABOUT) TEN.

They were vaccinated all over the world, so it can't be a bad batch in one location. I'm thinking that either this vaccine isn't working that well, it *does* need a booster, or, and frankly scariest, the chicken pox has already mutated to render the vaccine ineffective.

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7604 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 10:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
(and god forbid, shingles).

You don't understand.

If you've had chickenpox, there is a chance you'll get shingles. Shingles is a "secondary form" of the disease. After you've had chickenpox, the virus can go dormant in your system. In some folks that dormancy occurs in nerve cells. Later in life, they rear their ugly little virus heads again. Since they've been protected in the nerve cells (where the immune system has a hard time eradicating them) that is where they reappear.

And it hurts. A localized rash sometime occurs. It can happen more than once. And, there's some indication that if you have the rash you may be contagious.

- T.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7605 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 10:14 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
My uncle got the shingles. He hadn't been exposed to any other children, so we think he got it from Chandra.

No, he didn't.

He got the shingles from his own case of chickenpox when he was a kid.

- T.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7606 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 10:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
You don't understand.

Actually, I do. What I wrote was about getting chicken pox or shingles later in life, as in getting the virus in either iteration for the first time, the shingles being a worse iteration than the simple pox. I was *not* commenting on the virus once already in the system or how long it will last in the system.

And yeah, the shingles sound like a nightmare, thus my god forbid comment. I know a boy who never had the chicken pox as a kid who ended up skipping the pox altogether and going right to shingles at 25. He was absolutely miserable.

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7607 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 10:34 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Interesting - http://www.cdc.gov/nip/diseases/varicella/faqs-gen-shingles.htm

The case that *I* know of, the guy NEVER had an active case of the chicken pox. I understand that the pox was dormant in his system according to the CDC, but I grew up with this kid and we all thought it was odd that he never got it when we all did. In fact, we thought he might be magic.

Weird.

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ishtarastarte Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7608 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 10:35 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Please keep in mind that some, if not most, schools will bar entry to children not vaccinated. A website of interest:

1. The chicken pox vaccine is not yet a requirement that I'm aware of.

2. You can fill out a forms stating that you have religious objections to vaccination.

Ishtar


Print the post Back To Top
Author: ishtarastarte Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7609 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 10:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
. It turns out that out of the kids who have come down with the chicken pox, 4 of them were vaccinated.

That is scary. How old are the kids?

Ishtar

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AlisonWonderland Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7610 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 10:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I am sure of this: if they haven't caught it naturally by the time they are out of elementary school, it's not likely they will before they get old enough for it to be much more dangerous and uncomfortable.

Just trying to remember my kids' experiences with chicken pox.

Older son had it when he was 4 1/2, and a very mild case. I figured the one year old and the 8 year old would get it and we'd be done with it. But noooooooooooo......

Instead, the oldest and youngest got it at ages 14 and 7. Then a few days later, both of them had pox that got infected and they developed strep as well. They were NOT happy campers.

~~ Alison

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7611 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 10:57 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
That is scary. How old are the kids?


4-5

My son has already had them, as well, so the current (among the parents) conclusion is that this is a particularly virulent strain. It occurs to me that using anti-viral drugs like alclovir may be causing the virus to change drastically enough to render the vaccinations useless.

Ess
...they say it's the micorscopic stuff that will get us in the end, and I'm starting to see why...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7612 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 10:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
...they say it's the micorscopic stuff that will get us in the end, and I'm starting to see why...

Of course it's the not checking spelling carefully that will get me!

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7613 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/5/2001 11:31 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The case that *I* know of, the guy NEVER had an active case of the chicken pox.

You actually don't know that. The fact that he had shingles strongly suggests he did, indeed, contract chickenpox. It just may have been extremely mild, or masked by another illness.

- T.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7614 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 6:55 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I just had a call from one of the mothers at my son's school. It turns out that out of the kids who have come down with the chicken pox, 4 of them were vaccinated. FOUR. That's FOUR OUT OF (ABOUT) TEN.
----------

This is exactly why I didn't vaccinate my kids. It wouldn't be so bad if the vaccine wore off while they are still kids, but I do not want to risk them getting it as adults. It's *much* better to get it while you're young if you're going to get it.

Rebecca



Print the post Back To Top
Author: GEEKSTEVE2000 Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7615 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 8:49 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
The argument is, couldn't both the time and money have been better spent on a bigger problem?

even if it could have been, i dont see why that is a reason for not taking advantage of the vaccine, now that it has been created.

GS2

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GEEKSTEVE2000 Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7616 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 9:00 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The case that *I* know of, the guy NEVER had an active case of the chicken pox. I understand that the pox was dormant in his system according to the CDC, but I grew up with this kid and we all thought it was odd that he never got it when we all did. In fact, we thought he might be magic.

maybe he just had a very mild case as a child, a couple of pox on his butt or something, and never even knew he had them.

or maybe his magic just wore of at a very inopportune time ;)

GS2

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7617 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 9:03 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The case that *I* know of, the guy NEVER had an active case of the chicken pox. I understand that the pox was dormant in his system according to the CDC, but I grew up with this kid and we all thought it was odd that he never got it when we all did. In fact, we thought he might be magic.

maybe he just had a very mild case as a child, a couple of pox on his butt or something, and never even knew he had them.

or maybe his magic just wore of at a very inopportune time ;)
-------------

Vaccines basically just give a light case, so light that it usually doesn't even register with symptoms. So, why couldn't an adult get shingles if they've been vaccinated against chicken pox?

My little sister had chicken pox around age 3 and had shingles when she was in jr high.

Rebecca

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GEEKSTEVE2000 Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7618 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 9:12 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Vaccines basically just give a light case, so light that it usually doesn't even register with symptoms. So, why couldn't an adult get shingles if they've been vaccinated against chicken pox?

i would suppose someone who got vaccinated still could get shingles.
However, Esster was saying that her magical friend had never gotten pox as a child but then still got shingles, no vaccines involved.

GS2

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7619 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 9:20 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
i would suppose someone who got vaccinated still could get shingles.
However, Esster was saying that her magical friend had never gotten pox as a child but then still got shingles, no vaccines involved.
--------

I know. Sorry. I should have gone back in the thread and replied directly to Teragram's post. It was something that kept occuring to me, and it was when I got to that last thread that the idea had formulated enough to post my thoughts.

I'm also wondering if maybe a lighter case of chicken pox is normal for getting shingles. The very few people I know who have had shingles (and examples from this thread) all had very few chicken pox. Does anyone know of anyone who had a really bad case of chicken pox and then got shingles? If there is a corelation, to me that is one more reason to get chicken pox naturally. (Vaccine would equal light case.) I have no idea if the corelation exists, however. It's just speculation from my own experience and the examples others have mentioned.

Rebecca


Print the post Back To Top
Author: GEEKSTEVE2000 Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7620 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 9:28 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It was something that kept occuring to me, and it was when I got to that last thread that the idea had formulated enough to post my thoughts.

Yup, I know how that happens.

I'm also wondering if maybe a lighter case of chicken pox is normal for getting shingles...

It's a good question. Maybe by getting and fighting off a more severe case of the pox you build up a better immunity to the virus. It would certainly add weight to the case against the vaccine.

GS2

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7621 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 10:55 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The case that *I* know of, the guy NEVER had an active case of the chicken pox.
...
You actually don't know that. The fact that he had shingles strongly suggests he did, indeed, contract chickenpox. It just may have been extremely mild, or masked by another illness.


Isn't it just possible that he contracted the *virus*, whether then or later, and that it just went dormant instead of causing an immediate reaction?

It's well known that people can carry viruses (virusi?) without ever having symptoms of the illness themselves. What makes chicken pox different? And so, on that note, this quote from the CDC website doesn't make sense to me:

"However, you can not catch shingles itself from someone else. Shingles is caused by the chickenpox virus which has been dormant (staying quiet) in your body ever since you had chickenpox. So, you get shingles from your own chickenpox virus, not from someone else."

Shingles and chickenpox are the same virus, no matter who they come from or when you got them. If you can contract chickenpox from someone else, you can contract shingles from someone else. The symptoms of the virus just take a different form.

This quote would indicate that someone who never had chickenpox can never have shingles. I don't think I believe that. I think it's entirely possible to never have "caught" the virus before, to catch the virus from someone who has either shingles or chickenpox, doesn't matter, and to have a good enough immune system that your own antibodies would fight off most of the virus before it ever caused chicken pox symptoms, except the stuff in the nervous system. Therefore, it would manifest itself directly as shingles instead of chickenpox, either right away or later.

It would make sense to say that if you had chickenpox, you won't contract shingles from anyone else- if you got it it would be your own. But I think it makes just as much sense to say that if you didn't have chickenpox, you can contract either chickenpox or shingles from someone else that has either. I don't see why it couldn't work this way, anyway.



Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7622 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 10:57 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The argument is, couldn't both the time and money have been better spent on a bigger problem?
...
even if it could have been, i dont see why that is a reason for not taking advantage of the vaccine, now that it has been created.


It's not, I agree. But it does somehow seem like overkill that they put all the work into it, nevertheless.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7623 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 11:01 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Vaccines basically just give a light case, so light that it usually doesn't even register with symptoms. So, why couldn't an adult get shingles if they've been vaccinated against chicken pox?

Well, the point of the vaccine is to "train" your antibodies against the virus- to build up enough antibodies against the virus that you couldn't catch it naturally, while giving you a light enough dose to not cause symptoms.

So, even if you have the virus from the vaccine go dormant and try to come back as shingles, you already have the antibodies to fight it and so you wouldn't actually get the disease.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7624 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 11:05 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
So, even if you have the virus from the vaccine go dormant and try to come back as shingles, you already have the antibodies to fight it and so you wouldn't actually get the disease.

got to remember to finish the post before hitting submit...

That a theory, anyway. Of course, based on that, you should never get shingles if you had chickenpox, because you ought to have the antibodies for the virus already. And we know that's not the case.

I think the "lighter case o' pox = shingles" idea has a lot of merit.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7625 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 11:07 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
That a theory, anyway. Of course, based on that, you should never get shingles if you had chickenpox, because you ought to have the antibodies for the virus already. And we know that's not the case.
---------

Jennie,

LOL When I read the post you didn't finish this is *exactly* what I was thinking!

Rebecca



Print the post Back To Top
Author: AlisonWonderland Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7626 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 11:18 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
None of us probably knows what kind of money and research effort developing a chicken-pox vaccine cost. It may have been easy, considering how common the disease is, and taken little effort- but I'm thinking if that was the case, it would have been done long ago. Or, it took lots of effort to develop one, and therefore, cost money. The argument is, couldn't both the time and money have been better spent on a bigger problem?

I just remembered something from when two of my kids had their very bad cases of chicken pox. We were going to visit family since it was spring break from school. The doctors and nurses told us we really shouldn't travel since the kids were affected. The problem with our travel was the fact that the trip would have been 6-8 hours, involving taking breaks at highway rest stops. The med-folk said that even though our kids were okay for travel (if we could make the trip nonstop), it was very possible that their "germs" could possibly affect others very seriously -- people whose immune systems were fragile or impaired, like those with AIDS or undergoing cancer treatments.

~~ Alison

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7627 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 11:29 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
-- people whose immune systems were fragile or impaired, like those with AIDS or undergoing cancer treatments.



Or those with lupus.

Or those with diabetes.

Or pregnant women near term.

Or the elderly.

You've touched on one of my biggest gripes.

When you are sick, or when you are responsible for someone who is sick such as a small child, you have a duty to protect the rest of society. This means staying home. It means following your doctor's advice and taking all the medicine prescribed to the last grain or drop (particularly antibiotics).

Getting sick is not good. Staying healthy is good. The sheer arrogance of people who foist their snot-nosed, coughing, hacking, booger-smeared-grabby-hands kids off on the public shows that all they care about is themselves. It shows they really don't even care all that much for their kids.

It makes me sick.

- T.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7628 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 11:40 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
When you are sick, or when you are responsible for someone who is sick such as a small child, you have a duty to protect the rest of society. This means staying home. It means following your doctor's advice and taking all the medicine prescribed to the last grain or drop (particularly antibiotics).
---------------

My kid's school district has a policy that if a child misses 10 days of school or more in a year that the child will automatically repeat their grade. If kids were kept home for every sniffle, no one would advance to the next grade. When I was working, I did take off work if I was very sick, but again, if I called off for every sniffle, I would have been out of a job. And I *needed* that job.

That's not to say precautions shouldn't be taken. When you are sick you should definitely wash your hands, and you should teach your kids to do the same. And if you or your children are very sick of course you should stay home/keep them at home.

Unfortunately, when Corey broke out with Chicken Pox we were about 8 hours into a 20 hour drive and there wasn't a whole lot we could do except get home as soon as was possible. Otherwise we would not have taken him out of the house because chicken pox is very contageous and dangerous to certain groups in the population.

Rebecca

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7629 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 11:45 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
My kid's school district has a policy that if a child misses 10 days of school or more in a year that the child will automatically repeat their grade.

That's absolute bovine feces.

I never would have gotten out of grade school. How do they handle kids with chronic illness? Keep failing them?



This kind of thinking drives me crazy and I see that it is a handy excuse for having someone else take care of your sick kid and all the while your sick kid is getting everyone else's kids sick.

Lovely. Simply lovely.

- T, glad she's not in your district.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 2gifts Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7630 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 11:47 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
My kid's school district has a policy that if a child misses 10 days of school or more in a year that the child will automatically repeat their grade. If kids were kept home for every sniffle, no one would advance to the next grade.

Now there's a ridiculous policy. Whatever happened to the rule that says you attend school, you learn what is taught, you demonstrate that you have learned it to the appropriate level and you move on to the next grade? What do they do with children that have a serious illness and have to miss a lot of school but perhaps make up the work or are tutored so they learn everything? It seems very unfair to say that you can do all that was expected, but unless you have enough face-time, you won't progress.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7631 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 11:48 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
This kind of thinking drives me crazy and I see that it is a handy excuse for having someone else take care of your sick kid and all the while your sick kid is getting everyone else's kids sick.
----------

T,

I do take care of my children and when they are sick I have no desire to pass them off on someone else.

But I do not see any reason to keep a kid who feels ok except for a stuffy nose home from school. I really don't. If they feel bad, have a fever, etc that's different.

Rebecca


Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7632 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 11:52 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Now there's a ridiculous policy. Whatever happened to the rule that says you attend school, you learn what is taught, you demonstrate that you have learned it to the appropriate level and you move on to the next grade? What do they do with children that have a serious illness and have to miss a lot of school but perhaps make up the work or are tutored so they learn everything? It seems very unfair to say that you can do all that was expected, but unless you have enough face-time, you won't progress.
------------

I agree that it is a ridiculous policy. It was actually the first thing I was told when I registered the kids for school. Since I don't expect it to effect me (my kids are healthy) I don't really worry too much about it. Not counting chicken pox, my kids haven't missed 10 days of school combined from pre-k through now.

I have no idea if exceptions are made or not. I would think that with good grades and a medical excuse you'd have a pretty good case for an exception to be made.

Rebecca


Print the post Back To Top
Author: AlisonWonderland Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7633 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 12:03 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
My kid's school district has a policy that if a child misses 10 days of school or more in a year that the child will automatically repeat their grade.

When I was 11 and in fifth grade, I developed mononucleosis. I missed the last 6 weeks of school and all the finals except the first half of the spelling final. I probably had to do some schoolwork while I was home, but I don't remember doing any. I guess I must have been doing well enough for them to pass me along to sixth grade. I remember seeing my report card from fifth grade where my teacher said he'd misjudged me throughout the year. Since I'd been so quiet, he didn't realize what a good student I was. (it's that old invisible look that I've perfected, I guess.)

What I DO remember is watching the Twilight Zone in my parents' air-conditioned bedroom (the only room with A/C). Shows what made an impression on my, eh?

~~ Alison

Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7634 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 12:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
When I was 11 and in fifth grade, I developed mononucleosis. I missed the last 6 weeks of school and all the finals except the first half of the spelling final. I probably had to do some schoolwork while I was home, but I don't remember doing any. I guess I must have been doing well enough for them to pass me along to sixth grade. I remember seeing my report card from fifth grade where my teacher said he'd misjudged me throughout the year. Since I'd been so quiet, he didn't realize what a good student I was. (it's that old invisible look that I've perfected, I guess.)
---------

I had mono, too. I even had strep throat on top of it for a week. I don't recall how much school I missed, but it wasn't more than a couple of weeks. When I was in highschool I cut school about as often as I went. I also had straight A's so I didn't have any problems progressing to the next grade and graduating.

Rebecca


Print the post Back To Top
Author: mapletree3 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7635 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 12:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
When you are sick, or when you are responsible for someone who is sick such as a small child, you have a duty to protect the rest of society. This means staying home. It means following your doctor's advice and taking all the medicine prescribed to the last grain or drop (particularly antibiotics).

In some cases the doctor is just as much to blame. I had a co-worker who got the chicken-pox as an adult. His doctor told him he could go back to work if he felt like it! There were at least two pregnant women in our company at the time. As soon as we saw him, we told him what was what and made him go home.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7636 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 12:16 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
LOL When I read the post you didn't finish this is *exactly* what I was thinking!

:)

I'm awfully good at typing a post half-way, getting distracted by something else, and then coming back and hitting submit before I finish what I'm doing.

jenniebez
chanting the new mantra "Must finish before submitting. Must finish before submitting."

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7637 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 12:21 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It seems very unfair to say that you can do all that was expected, but unless you have enough face-time, you won't progress.

Maybe they're just trying to prepare the kids for "real-world" jobs?

jenniebez
HATES corporate politics

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cmonkey Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7638 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 1:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
the chicken pox has already mutated to render the vaccine ineffective.


There's nothing surprising in this, if it's the case. Any organism is going to change in response to the environment, in order to insure its survival. Look at HIV. It's a really remarkable little thing. It mutates so quickly that any vaccines they are able to come up with will probably be rendered pretty much ineffective because of the rate and level of mutation.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: ishtarastarte Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7639 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 1:24 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
That's absolute bovine feces.

I never would have gotten out of grade school. How do they handle kids with chronic illness? Keep failing them?


My daughter's school is the same way. I would guess that they would say to homeschool if the kid is chronically ill.

Ishtar





Print the post Back To Top
Author: ishtarastarte Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7640 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 1:28 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Now there's a ridiculous policy. Whatever happened to the rule that says you attend school, you learn what is taught, you demonstrate that you have learned it to the appropriate level and you move on to the next grade? What do they do with children that have a serious illness and have to miss a lot of school but perhaps make up the work or are tutored so they learn everything? It seems very unfair to say that you can do all that was expected, but unless you have enough face-time, you won't progress.

The attendance rules here have to do with money. I can't remember all the details, but it has to do with money. They told us at the beginning of the year, at parent's night. Something about getting state funds based on how many kids are present. A class in 1-3 grades has a maximum of 20 students, but if there are less than 15 for the day, some kind of funds get cut, and somehow they waste time figuring this out on a day by day basis. So the school district sets a limit of how much time a kid can miss and still pass the grade. It sucks, but it's the way it is.

Ishtar



Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7641 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 2:12 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Any organism is going to change in response to the environment, in order to insure its survival.

Well, that's not quite right. Any organism will mutate. Period. Whether or not it's mutation happens to help it survive in it's environment is purely chance. It's just that we only happen to see the surviving mutations because, well, the rest didn't make it.

There's always the chance that someday we'd come up with a vaccine that no mutation of the virus can get around, and then we'd have it licked... assuming the virus couldn't find any other hosts, wouldn't then continue to mutate, and evenutally come up with a form that the vaccine doesn't cover. But viruses mutate SO QUICKLY, like the HIV you mentioned, that that chance is mighty small. Microscopic, even. (sorry, I'll save the puns for Aruba.)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7642 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 2:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
My daughter's school is the same way. I would guess that they would say to homeschool if the kid is chronically ill.


They'd be saying it to my attorney.

I'm willing to bet that in yours and Becca's districts, there have been many challenges to these policies.

That a bunch of parents didn't immediately rise up and tell the school district that they're a bunch of anacephalic paper-pushers looking to squeeze the taxpayers any way possible is amazing to me.

All I can think is "what a bunch of sheep".


- T.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: ishtarastarte Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7643 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 3:20 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
They'd be saying it to my attorney.

I'm willing to bet that in yours and Becca's districts, there have been many challenges to these policies.

That a bunch of parents didn't immediately rise up and tell the school district that they're a bunch of anacephalic paper-pushers looking to squeeze the taxpayers any way possible is amazing to me.

All I can think is "what a bunch of sheep".


Well, I am in Cali!! *grin*

I do know that California isn't the only place doing things like this, though. In 1988, when my sister started high school, they started a new attendance policy. I don't remember exactly, but something like 4 or more missed days in a semester could result in disciplinary action (with or without dr's notes).

Also, in many community colleges, if you miss more than 2 or 3 classes, they will knock your grade down a level.

It's definately not unique to this school district.

Ishtar




Print the post Back To Top
Author: cmonkey Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7644 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 3:34 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Well, that's not quite right. Any organism will mutate. Period. Whether or not it's mutation happens to help it survive in it's environment is purely chance.

But the reason for mutating in the first place (goes the theory) is in order to widen the gene pool, as it were. Without mutation, one disease, one vaccine, one bad batch of mayo, and that organism is history.

But viruses mutate SO QUICKLY, like the HIV you mentioned, that that chance is mighty small.

And that's what's so cool about them.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Selphiras Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7645 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 3:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
JennieBex theorized

Shingles and chickenpox are the same virus, no matter who they come from or when you got them. If you can contract chickenpox from someone else, you can contract shingles from someone else. The symptoms of the virus just take a different form.

According to the CDC shingles and chickenpox aren't exactly the same thing. Shingles cannot be contracted from some else, although chickenpox can be caught from someone with shingles. Shingles can only develop from the dormant chickenpox virus sticking around at the end of your nerve cells. Therefore, it can only happen to someone who previously had chicken pox. (see: http://www.cdc.gov/nip/diseases/varicella/faqs-gen-shingles.htm, point 2)

Farther down that page, it says that yes, you can get shingles after having had the vaccine, but it is much less likely than if you have natural chickenpox.

Selphiras

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Selphiras Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7646 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 3:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Some more relevant data from the CDc, http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vaccine/varicella/faqs-gen-vaccine.htm

more than 20 states require chicken pox vaccination or evidence the child had the disease for school or day care. Other states having requirements in the works.

one reason to get vaccinated is to prevent someone who can't be vaccinated from contracting the disease. (And no saying, but I keep my kids away from everyone else. Usually, people are contagious before they know it.) Your kids vaccine might save someone else, as those who can't get vaccinated have a higher risk of complications.

No vaccine is 100% effective. This one is 80-90%. Even for those few who do get the disease, it is much more mild than if they hadn't been vaccinated.

Getting the vaccine *after* having been exposed to chicken pox can resist or lessen the severity of having it.

Selphiras

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GEEKSTEVE2000 Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7647 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 4:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Getting the vaccine *after* having been exposed to chicken pox can resist or lessen the severity of having it.

is this from the CDC too? it seems strange that adding more virus on top of the virus you already have would lessen the severity of the disease.

GS2 - i guess thats why I'm not a doctor

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Selphiras Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7648 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/6/2001 4:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Yes, this is from the CDC. I would hazard that is is because the vaccine is not quite the same as getting the virus. It's job is to promote antibodies, and apparently it does so even if you are already in the process of catching the disease. (I'm not a doctor nor do I play one on TV. Just my educated guess.)

Selphiras

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 2gifts Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7652 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 10:04 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
It seems very unfair to say that you can do all that was expected, but unless you have enough face-time, you won't progress.

Maybe they're just trying to prepare the kids for "real-world" jobs?


It's probably just the particular career path I have chosen, but I have specifically shied away from any job that does require a lot of face time, and I have not found this to be any sort of career hindrance. In fact, I'm in an upper management position. Heck, today I'm even working at home because the kids have no school.

So no, I don't think the particular policy is like a real-world job.



Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7653 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 11:24 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Well, that's not quite right. Any organism will mutate. Period. Whether or not it's mutation happens to help it survive in it's environment is purely chance.
....
But the reason for mutating in the first place (goes the theory) is in order to widen the gene pool, as it were. Without mutation, one disease, one vaccine, one bad batch of mayo, and that organism is history.


No, sorry, that's incorrect. The reason for mutation is simply that in the complex process of duplicating DNA, mutations happen. There is no bigger reason than that. It is not for a goal. There is no purpose. It just happens. Organisms do not choose to mutate.

You are correct that without a mutation that happens to help them against a certain environmental factor, organisms might not survive. And they don't. Check out the dinosaurs, and millions of other species that have gone extinct over the years. Most of the mutations that happen have no impact at all, because they don't result in any real change in the organism involved, or because there is no environmental factor that happens to select for or against the new mutation. Of the others, some are good for the organism, and some actually make it worse for the organism and they are selected against and die out.

But viruses mutate SO QUICKLY, like the HIV you mentioned, that that chance is mighty small.
...
And that's what's so cool about them.


I'll agree with you there. They are interesting little things. But still, they don't mutate because they are trying to survive- they survive (or don't) because they mutate.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7654 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 11:26 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
According to the CDC shingles and chickenpox aren't exactly the same thing. Shingles cannot be contracted from some else, although chickenpox can be caught from someone with shingles. Shingles can only develop from the dormant chickenpox virus sticking around at the end of your nerve cells. Therefore, it can only happen to someone who previously had chicken pox.

And that's the point I was contending with. Who says you have to have actual chickenpox symptoms for the virus to go dormant in your nerve cells. The only requirement to get shingles is that you've contracted the virus and it's gone dormant in your nerve cells, NOT that you've actually had a case of the chickenpox. While it's unlikely you'd get A without having B, it's possible.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7655 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 11:36 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
is this from the CDC too? it seems strange that adding more virus on top of the virus you already have would lessen the severity of the disease.

GS2 - i guess thats why I'm not a doctor


No, it doesn't make sense to me, either, GS2. Unless they mean that having been exposed, but not actually having caught the virus... then the vaccine would help. But then I wouldn't think it would help any more than if you'd had it before being exposed.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7656 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 11:40 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Yes, this is from the CDC. I would hazard that is is because the vaccine is not quite the same as getting the virus. It's job is to promote antibodies, and apparently it does so even if you are already in the process of catching the disease. (I'm not a doctor nor do I play one on TV. Just my educated guess.)

I always thought that vaccines were just "dead" versions of the virus. Yes, injected to promote antibody production- but if you've already got the virus in your system, you are already producing antibodies.

Perhaps, it's if you have a light case of the virus? Or if you are in the VERY beginning stages of having just caught it and it hasn't reproduced enough to have a large presense in your body yet? THEN it might make sense- because by getting the vaccine, you're adding enough of the virus to trigger antibody production before the naturally caught virus would. So the antibody production gets a head start, and can fight off the real virus easier.

Yeah, that would make sense, then...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7657 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 11:47 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It's probably just the particular career path I have chosen, but I have specifically shied away from any job that does require a lot of face time, and I have not found this to be any sort of career hindrance. In fact, I'm in an upper management position. Heck, today I'm even working at home because the kids have no school.

So no, I don't think the particular policy is like a real-world job.


Maybe you've just had good luck? Or maybe your definition of "a lot" of face time is different from mine. I'm lucky in my job right now because my manager doesn't usually feel the need to have us be somewhere "just to have a face there"- he's happy to actually let us just get the job done- but in my last job, it was all about politics,not about what kind of a job you actually did. Which is one of the reasons I left.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cmonkey Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7658 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 12:48 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I always thought that vaccines were just "dead" versions of the virus.

Not always. It's the proteins on the virus that the body reacts to, so you can be exposed to live or dead ones and obtain the desired immunity. Ok, you won't probably be exposed to enough dead ones by any natural route to ensure immunity, but by vaccine... well!

There are LOTS of attenuated (live) vaccines out there: the Sabin is probably the most famous, scientists are working on one for HVA, and Varicella --yes-- chickenpox.

Inactivated vaccines are exposed to some kind of agent that makes them ineffective as pathogens but still produce immunity. They're probably the safest route, but your immunity might not last for a long time (tetanus booster, anyone?), and this particular kind of vaccine isn't as effective in preventing disease. Also, you can't do it for all diseases. Measles is one example.

Attenuated vaccines have been in use for hundreds of years. Jenner's cowpox vaccination was made with attenuated virus.

The vaccine should be life-long, but the virus can revert to virulence, is unstable biochemically (the process used to attenuate the virus may fail), contamination is a problem (witness the smallpox lab that has yet to produce a batch FDA will approve), and if you vaccinate the wrong people, they can get very sick.

Guess I should get that pox shot.





Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7659 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 12:52 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Guess I should get that pox shot.





Yes, yes you should. The "1 in 50 adults get hospitalized" stat for chickenpox is MORE than enough reason.

- T.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cmonkey Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7660 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 12:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Yes, yes you should. The "1 in 50 adults get hospitalized" stat for chickenpox is MORE than enough reason.

Not to mention effects of disease during pregnancy. Women, if you ain't had the pox and you're planning on getting pregnant, get the shot. Or think about it really hard.












'monk,
NOT an announcement!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: GEEKSTEVE2000 Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7661 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 1:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I always thought that vaccines were just "dead" versions of the virus.

sometimes they are. some vaccines though, are live versions that have been altered so they cant reproduce. still others are live viruses of a fairly harmless type that are closely enough related to another disease that the antibodies you build up can fight off either one.

GS2

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NaggingFool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7664 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 3:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Ok, so my post is more about vaccinations than chicken pox.

I'm just speculating, but how do you feel about waiting until adolescence to vaccinate a child for chickenpox? It seems to me like that's one of those diseases you really want to have immunity to during the college years.

Aside from the chicken pox vaccine (and I had chicken pox at age 18, so I'm good on that front) what other vaccines do you think I should consider before getting pregnant?

Lastly, I had no idea there was a tetanus vaccine shortage. I had my physical on Tuesday, told the doctor I needed a booster, and she gave me one. In retrospect I remember the RN telling her that was the last one, but I assumed it was a local ordering problem. Oops?

-Megan


Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7666 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 3:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Aside from the chicken pox vaccine (and I had chicken pox at age 18, so I'm good on that front) what other vaccines do you think I should consider before getting pregnant?
-----------

I would assume you've had all of the other shots. MMR is the big one that comes to mind that you should have before getting pregnant, but you probably had that as a kid. They can also do a test for Toxoplasmosis (Cat Scratch Fever) so that you know if you can get it or not. Apparently most people have been exposed but it is very rarely symptomatic. However, if you have NOT been exposed you need to be careful not to expose yourself while pregnant.

Rebecca


Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7668 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 3:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
cmonkey, thanks for all that info! I learned a lot from that.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cmonkey Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7669 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 4:00 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Aside from the chicken pox vaccine (and I had chicken pox at age 18, so I'm good on that front) what other vaccines do you think I should consider before getting pregnant?

Have you had the MMR? Probably, but that's a good one. They'll probably tell you to hold off on pregnancy for two to three months after you get the shot, because of the rubella, but there's no evidence that they're are dangerous during pregnancy

You probably got diptheria with the tetanus, so that's done. Pertussis. Have you had a pertussis vaccination?

Hepatitis B vaccines can be given before or during pregnancy, if you're in a risk group.

And if you're Rh-, you'll want to have some treatments during the pregnancy if the father is Rh+.




Print the post Back To Top
Author: cmonkey Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7671 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 4:07 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
cmonkey, thanks for all that info! I learned a lot from that.

No problem. I love this stuff. If I ever go back to school again (after I finish this latest round), I'll probably finish my public health and history and ethics of medicine degree. I have no idea what I'd do with it, but the classes would be so much fun.

'monk,
übergeek

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7673 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/7/2001 6:22 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
They can also do a test for Toxoplasmosis (Cat Scratch Fever) so that you know if you can get it or not.

Cat Scratch Fever is NOT Toxoplasmosis.

Toxoplasmosis is NOT Cat Scratch Fever.

Didn't we have a discussion about Toxo a few months ago?!?

{banging head on desk}

Cat Scratch Fever is caused by a bacteria: Bartonella henselae. (ref: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol1no1/regnery.htm) While I haven't spent a great amount of time on it, I can find no documentation linking birth defects or increased fetal mortality with B. henselae.

Toxoplasmosis is caused by a parasite: toxoplasma gondii.

- T.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cmonkey Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7676 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/8/2001 12:47 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Cat Scratch Fever is NOT Toxoplasmosis.

Toxoplasmosis is NOT Cat Scratch Fever.


Nugent's next big hit: Cat Poop Fever


'monk,
that was Nugent, right?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7677 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/8/2001 7:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
My kid's school district has a policy that if a child misses 10 days of school or more in a year that the child will automatically repeat their grade.

That's absolute bovine feces.

Speaking as someone that was kept back for too many absentees, I can tell you it is not "bovine feces". That was true of our school district. I got straight A's on tests, but didn't hang around for the rest of the stuff, so they flunked me.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7678 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/8/2001 7:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
What do they do with children that have a serious illness and have to miss a lot of school but perhaps make up the work or are tutored so they learn everything?

In our district, we had to provide a note from the doctor, a parent's note was not sufficient if we went over the "limit".

Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7680 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/8/2001 8:14 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
is this from the CDC too? it seems strange that adding more virus on top of the virus you already have would lessen the severity of the disease.

The vaccine is a "dead" form of the disease as someone pointed out. If the "dead" form is injected after the person has been exposed to, and probably caught, the virus, the immune system would likely make anti-bodies to cover both the actual virus and the "dead" virus. Consequently, the reactions should be much lower because the body is using more immunities for less actual symptoms.
Just a thought.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: bstroh Three stars, 500 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7689 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/11/2001 10:37 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 8
At any cost? Or does "effectively" include cost-effectiveness?

None of us probably knows what kind of money and research effort developing a chicken-pox vaccine cost. It may have been easy, considering how common the disease is, and taken little effort- but I'm thinking if that was the case, it would have been done long ago. Or, it took lots of effort to develop one, and therefore, cost money. The argument is, couldn't both the time and money have been better spent on a bigger problem?


Well, it was obviously cost-effective to develop, or the vaccine wouldn't be on the market. It's not like pharmaceutical companies are in business to lose money on every dose.

Could the time and money be spent on a bigger problem? Sure. We could pour every dollar in the United States into research on treatments/cures/vaccines for HIV. Research could continue for decades. In the interim, we can have hundreds or thousands of people die from chicken pox.

Do you stop buying gas for your lawn mower when your roof leaks? It's a bigger problem.

Healthcare is not a single issue. It's dozens of different cancers; it's HIV; it's Parkinson's. It's general quality of life issues for many people - arthritis, depression, anxiety.

Research dollars should go where they can do the most good. Currently, that means a lot of research on a lot of diseases and problems.

Trying to focus an entire industry on a single issue wrecks the idea of the market economy, and it eliminates a lot of potential relief for folks who don't have HIV.



Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7690 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/11/2001 7:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Trying to focus an entire industry on a single issue wrecks the idea of the market economy, and it eliminates a lot of potential relief for folks who don't have HIV.

Yes, and everyone here was indeed suggesting the entire industry should focused on a single issue!

A great many people (tho it wasn't my impression that this was going on in this thread) focus on a handful of diseases without realising that there's lots out there that needs research, and in fact it's possible (and I think I said this in an earlier post) that research on some seemingly non-serious illness may in fact teach us a lot about something very serious. Take Zovirax - works for herpes, but it turns out that it works against the chicken pox too. Obviously both are herpes-type viruses, but there's a lot we can learn from one virus and extrapolate to another.

But at the same time, it is *also* possible that the research machine (all components) decided to *make* a disease dangerous because it's politically advantageous (ie too many parents can't stay home for a week while their kids are quarantined) when in fact for the vast majority of the population, it was like a cold. What about people with low immunity? Well those same people could be more at risk from a virulent flu or cold, given that they are both potentially more serious than the chicken pox. (NOW I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS THE WAY IT IS, I'M MERELY SUGGESTING THAT IT'S A POSSIBILITY AND THAT'S WHY WHERE and WHY WE SPEND MONEY ON RESEARCH SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.)

Ess




Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: bstroh Three stars, 500 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7691 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/12/2001 9:51 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Yes, and everyone here was indeed suggesting the entire industry should focused on a single issue!

Considering the number of times the idea of 'wasting research dollars that should have been spent on a more serious issue' was mentioned, I didn't see it as much of a stretch from there to 'all the money for the most serious issue.'

But at the same time, it is *also* possible that the research machine (all components) decided to *make* a disease dangerous because it's politically advantageous (ie too many parents can't stay home for a week while their kids are quarantined) when in fact for the vast majority of the population, it was like a cold.

Okay, I'm done here. I know you aren't saying this is factually true, but it amazes me you can even suggest it as a possibility.

Is it 'politically advantageous' for folks with jobs to be able to work? What do you suggest as an alternative? Many companies don't have infinite sick leave. Eventually, you get fired. Plus, a lot of folks have become accustomed to the little luxuries a paycheck can provide - you know, food, shelter, that sort of thing.

Is it 'politically advantageous' for kids to be alive? Yeah, this is not normally a fatal disease, but it can happen.

How did prevention of disease suddenly become a big conspiracy? And if that's the case, what about the evil conspirators who make antibiotics - they actually CURE disease. Think of the political implications there...



Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: DisplacedTexan Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7692 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/12/2001 10:43 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
bstroh:Healthcare is not a single issue.
Amen!

For a bit of a global perspective on those diseases/phenomena that cause the most deaths, you might want to take a look at this study:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9142060&dopt=Abstract

Just a tidbit from the above:
The leading causes of death in 1990 were ischaemic heart disease (6.3 million deaths), cerebrovascular accidents (4.4 million deaths), lower respiratory infections (4.3 million), diarrhoeal diseases (2.9 million), perinatal disorders (2.4 million), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (2.2 million), tuberculosis (2.0 million), measles (1.1 million), road-traffic accidents (1.0 million), and lung cancer (0.9 million).



Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7693 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/12/2001 1:26 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Well, it was obviously cost-effective to develop, or the vaccine wouldn't be on the market. It's not like pharmaceutical companies are in business to lose money on every dose.

Could the time and money be spent on a bigger problem? Sure. We could pour every dollar in the United States into research on treatments/cures/vaccines for HIV. Research could continue for decades. In the interim, we can have hundreds or thousands of people die from chicken pox.

Do you stop buying gas for your lawn mower when your roof leaks? It's a bigger problem.

Healthcare is not a single issue. It's dozens of different cancers; it's HIV; it's Parkinson's. It's general quality of life issues for many people - arthritis, depression, anxiety.

Research dollars should go where they can do the most good. Currently, that means a lot of research on a lot of diseases and problems.

Trying to focus an entire industry on a single issue wrecks the idea of the market economy, and it eliminates a lot of potential relief for folks who don't have HIV.


No one was suggesting that ALL research dollars be used for HIV, or any other single issue. The question was only about those used for chicken pox, and the point was that they may have been more beneficial if put towards a bigger problem like HIV.

All of the different diseases that you mention- cancer, HIV, depression, etc.- all of them I see as being a much bigger problem both for most individuals and for society as a whole than I see chicken pox being. And, as you say, research dollars should go to where they can do the most good. But, as you also pointed out, the pharmaceutical companies are in it for the money, not the greater good. Basic economics- research dollars are not going to go to where they can do the most good, they're going to go to where the most profit can be made from the investment.

Perhaps the question was a rhetorical one- we all know that the money and time could have been used for better causes. But, those causes won't make the companies money right now, and money makes the world go round.

In the decades that it may take for an HIV cure, hundreds may die from chicken pox. But, if those decades aren't spent on an HIV cure, hundres of thousands will die because of the wasted time. And my point isn't about HIV- I could have said cancer, I could have said any number of other lethal diseases. In answer to your question- yes, I'd quit mowing my grass if I needed the money to fix a roof leak instead. The roof leak is a much bigger problem, that can do MUCH more damage, and with limited resources, I'll route them to where they are needed most. The lawn can be mown later.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: cmonkey Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7694 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/12/2001 4:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
All of the different diseases that you mention- cancer, HIV, depression, etc.- all of them I see as being a much bigger problem both for most individuals and for society as a whole than I see chicken pox being. And, as you say, research dollars should go to where they can do the most good. But, as you also pointed out, the pharmaceutical companies are in it for the money, not the greater good. Basic economics- research dollars are not going to go to where they can do the most good, they're going to go to where the most profit can be made from the investment.

I think there's a missing component to this argument (the whole thread, not this quote specifically). Research in one field can be applied to another. IOTW, chicken pox research may yield something helpful in the fight against HIV. They are not mutually exclusive. Virologists share information (there are limits, of course; there _is_ a money factor here) and it may well be that someone researching hepatitis or chicken pox will notice something that can be applied to HIV. I also have to argue the point that there is lots of money to be made in chicken pox versus HIV. Anyone out there have a friend who takes a drug cocktail? There is an @$$load of money to be made there, far, far, FAR more than in chicken pox vaccines.

One other point: chicken pox is wildly contagious, at least compared to HIV, so researching and producing a vaccine is a viable and important project. As rampant as HIV is, you're not going to get it if you are in the same room with someone who is infected. You're not going to get it if you try to comfort someone who is infected. Diseases that are very contagious *should* be researched and vaccines *should* be produced.



Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7695 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/12/2001 6:40 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Research in one field can be applied to another. IOTW, chicken pox research may yield something helpful in the fight against HIV. They are not mutually exclusive. Virologists share information (there are limits, of course; there _is_ a money factor here) and it may well be that someone researching hepatitis or chicken pox will notice something that can be applied to HIV.

I think it's rare that Bob the Virologist researching disease A is going to just hop on the phone to Joe the Virologist researching disease B and say "Hey, found something you may want to know about." Most research is done independently of other research, and then published in papers. If the info found doesn't directly apply to the goal at hand, it's not going to be followed through on by the researchers that found it- at least, not until they can get more funding, and that is hard and could take years, and then only if they feel like it. It will simply be put in the paper- maybe. Then, if someone researching some other disease HAPPENS to come across the right paper in their research, and HAPPENS to make the possible connection, they may choose to include that in their own research. Or they may not, depending on how much it would cost and how well it fits into the research they're already doing.

In other words, you are right- research on chicken pox may aid the research into HIV. But most likely it won't be as efficient as directly researching HIV itself.

Diseases that are very contagious *should* be researched and vaccines *should* be produced.

Why? I currently have a cold. Colds are very contagious. I honestly don't feel like my life or the world would be made much better if a cure was found and I would never catch a cold again. To me, it's simply a nusiance, and one that I can live with. It would be a waste of money, in my opinion, to bother trying to find a cure for a simple nusiance until we have nothing better to do with the money.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7696 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/12/2001 6:50 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
. I also have to argue the point that there is lots of money to be made in chicken pox versus HIV. Anyone out there have a friend who takes a drug cocktail? There is an @$$load of money to be made there, far, far, FAR more than in chicken pox vaccines.

But also, there is sheer volume to consider. There is quite an urgent demand for anything and everything that might even slow HIV. But, how many people are making the demand? Lots of people have HIV, but of those, how many can afford to try every new drug on the market? And of those, how many actually choose to? (ok, I can't imagine anyone who wouldn't, but some may just have made the choice to die without fighting...) And of those, what percentage are actually trying the drug X that is actually in question? Many of the people that the drug is marketed towards cannot actually afford to purchase it, or cannot get access to it, or don't even know it's available.

With the pox vaccine, there is one "drug". No competitors. It applies to the majority of the general population- big market. The majority of health plans will cover it, meaning most everyone will be able to pay. And, it's not "experimental"- meaning they can talk doctors into recommending it to patients. Deep pockets, high demand, built in salespeople.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7697 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/12/2001 6:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Why? I currently have a cold. Colds are very contagious. I honestly don't feel like my life or the world would be made much better if a cure was found and I would never catch a cold again. To me, it's simply a nusiance, and one that I can live with. It would be a waste of money, in my opinion, to bother trying to find a cure for a simple nusiance until we have nothing better to do with the money.

That's all well and good for you. There are a great many people in this world who risk death by any infection. My last major bout with a cold left me hospitalized for four days at a cost of over $10K.

You're not seeing the larger picture, Jennie. You've made it quite clear with this post. You're strong and healthy. Fabulous. Lucky you! The rest of us will take any gain made in any field.

- T.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7698 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/12/2001 7:11 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I cannot believe y'all get this upset over a vaccine.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7699 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/12/2001 8:31 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
I cannot believe y'all get this upset over a vaccine.

When it comes to a vaccine, I really do appreciate the discussion. It's a question we all face and I'd hope as parents we've thought about it and don't just go along with whatever the doc says. This can be a great forum for getting more information and throwing around ideas. At the same time, I think that since we've all actually made these decisions one way or another, a criticism of doing things one way can *seem* like a personal attack since we've actually done things, possibly the way they were criticised.

I've noticed a lot of parents throw in a "different strokes" kind of comment from time to time, and I have to say, as much as I acknowledge that we're all going to parent differently and our children are different and thus require different methods, I suspect most of us, when it comes right down to it, think there *is* a right way and a wrong way to do things.

When I started this thread, I wanted to engage in a discussion about the chicken pox. What has emerged has lasted a week and gone on several tangents. But at the same time, it has been a really interesting conversation! I have to admit, I feel that all too often this board gets a lot of response on what's the best baby product and not enough discussion on issues parents face. I'm really glad that everyone who commented put their honest opinion out there, it's so much more interesting than a discussion where everyone is being too polite to have an opinion.

Ess

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7704 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/13/2001 1:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
When it comes to a vaccine, I really do appreciate the discussion.

Sorry to offend. I simply found it amazing that people had such heavy attitudes towards something I find so innocent.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7706 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 12/13/2001 6:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Sorry to offend. I simply found it amazing that people had such heavy attitudes towards something I find so innocent.

No offense here, Z! I think the point is that *parents* get pretty caught up in what they're doing, because it is personal.

Ess

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7929 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/4/2002 10:11 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Why? I currently have a cold. Colds are very contagious. I honestly don't feel like my life or the world would be made much better if a cure was found and I would never catch a cold again. To me, it's simply a nusiance, and one that I can live with. It would be a waste of money, in my opinion, to bother trying to find a cure for a simple nusiance until we have nothing better to do with the money.

...
That's all well and good for you. There are a great many people in this world who risk death by any infection. My last major bout with a cold left me hospitalized for four days at a cost of over $10K.

You're not seeing the larger picture, Jennie. You've made it quite clear with this post. You're strong and healthy. Fabulous. Lucky you! The rest of us will take any gain made in any field.


So you're saying it's better they put all those resources into ridding the entire population of a minor disease that may cause complications for a few already sick people (I'm assuming that the great many people you mention are those with immuno diseases, or other diseases that weaken their immune system), instead of putting the resources towards the more threatening disease that these people have that cause them to be overly susceptible to colds in the first place? That doesn't make sense to me.

I think I *am* seeing the big picture, and what I see is that we as a species cannot cure ourselves from every disease, and we shouldn't. We should concentrate on those that are true threats. Your cold may have been the immediate threat, but it wasn't the real problem. If you are not strong and healthy, it is not because of the cold, and the underlying problem is what needs to be solved. Curing a cold the entire world over will not leave you unsusceptible to other infections. Curing whatever causes you to be so threatened by all infections will.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: TeraGram Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7936 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/4/2002 1:10 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
So you're saying it's better they put all those resources into ridding the entire population of a minor disease that may cause complications for a few already sick people (I'm assuming that the great many people you mention are those with immuno diseases, or other diseases that weaken their immune system),

Show me where I said any such thing. What I said was "The rest of us will take any gain made in any field."


I think I *am* seeing the big picture, and what I see is that we as a species cannot cure ourselves from every disease, and we shouldn't. We should concentrate on those that are true threats.


No, you're not seeing the big picture. Mild infections can turn deadly in one generation. Epidemics can sweep a land faster than ever nowadays thanks to air-travel, enclosed-building HVAC systems and less-than-sanitary mass food-production. Read your history a bit; it was more than just "the weak" that were hit by the flu epidemics of the first quarter of the 1900's. Further, does it not impact even the healthiest members of society when "the weak" are injured or killed by a disease which may be cured or (gasp) prevented entirely?

HEY! I KNOW! Let's bring back POLIO! Yes, we shouldn't bother wiping out diseases. Only the WEAK get sick.

Great argument, Jennie. Nice to see your heart of gold.

- T.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7947 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/7/2002 3:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
TeraGram,

Frankly, I think you're overreacting. You need to take a deep breath, and step back for a second before lashing out at someone like that.

I never called ANYONE "weak," nor did I imply that only certain people get sick. I simply responded to your own comment that those people who are already sick might be the ones to benefit from a cold/pox/whatever vaccine. I REALLY don't appreciate you putting words in my mouth, ESPECIALLY not words like that.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on what the "big picture" is. In my opinion, it's you who is not seeing the big picture. Human beings will never be able to "wipe out" all diseases. We aren't going to make this a sterile world where everyone is safe from all disease. Star Trek universe ain't gonna happen. With that in mind, we need to concentrate our limited resources so as to make a substantial impact on the quality of life, or on saving lives. Fixing the common cold just won't make a big enough impact AT THIS TIME, relative to all of the more serious problems that could be worked on.

And next time, try to make your point WITHOUT personally attacking someone.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7949 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/7/2002 11:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Fixing the common cold just won't make a big enough impact AT THIS TIME, relative to all of the more serious problems that could be worked on.

That depends upon how you look at it. I'd be willing to bet that more money is lost due to the common cold than on any other disease - including the ever-mentioned aids. Probably the only close contender would be cancer.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7950 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/7/2002 11:10 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on what the "big picture" is.

BTW, something to keep in mind is that less people have died from Aids than from cancer, heart disease, and numerous other illnesses. There are numerous illnesses more deadly than Aids, yet Aids research gets more money than any of the other illnesses.
Who isn't seeing "the big picture"?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7951 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/8/2002 10:11 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Fixing the common cold just won't make a big enough impact AT THIS TIME, relative to all of the more serious problems that could be worked on.

That depends upon how you look at it. I'd be willing to bet that more money is lost due to the common cold than on any other disease - including the ever-mentioned aids. Probably the only close contender would be cancer.


I'll agree with you on that. My point was that it won't make a big enough impact in regards to "substantially improving the quality of lives, or number of lives saved", which is what I was talking about. But if we're talking money only, it's certainly the best place to focus. Not only would you be talking the money lost from people taking off from work, etc., but there also would be a huge money gain for whatever pharmaceutical company came up with that vaccine. Just like I said regarding the pox, for the pharmaceutical company, it's a sure bet, and why shouldn't they go for it?

Of course, there is a little money lost by the fact that people would no longer be buying as much kleenex, dayquil, triaminic, sudafed, etc., etc. I shudder to think how much I've spent on cold remedies in my life ;).

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7952 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/8/2002 10:22 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
BTW, something to keep in mind is that less people have died from Aids than from cancer, heart disease, and numerous other illnesses. There are numerous illnesses more deadly than Aids, yet Aids research gets more money than any of the other illnesses.
Who isn't seeing "the big picture"?


And as I've CONSISTENTLY stated throughout this discussion, I'm not saying that all research effort and money should go to Aids. I never said that. What I said was that the effort and money would be better spent (from a non-profit-making perspective) on specifically concentrating on the bigger, more deadly diseases LIKE Aids, and cancer, and ...

Read back through my posts on this subject, and you'll see that I never mentioned any one disease, Aids or otherwise, as "THE" disease we should be putting everything into. In fact, I believe it was someone else that brought up pumping everything into HIV, and I immediately responded saying that that was not my point and not what I was suggesting.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: lazyglen One star, 50 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7953 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/8/2002 12:31 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
<delurk>
I didn't reply to this thread 'cause I'll probably be missunderstood, but I'll give it a try since the disscusion is still going on.

Let me make it clear from the outset that I am replying to the THREAD not to any particular post.

Remember that the research is being done by people not the dollars, even the dollars come from people somewhere along the line. If I set up a trust fund with my huge fourtune that I'm going to have one of these days, to invest in research to erradicate say, hangnails, then that's my decision. It is, or was, my money and with it, I can do as I please.

Likewise with researchers, if I get probed by Aliens who give me the knowledge to do medical research (cause that's the only way it's gonna happen) and I decide to dedicate my life to developing a vaccine against flatulence - so be it.

I know that some (most?) of the moneies invested in reseacrch come from the guv'mint. Ideally, that money should be spent on the greatest good for the greatest number. How then, do you make that decision? If you spend ALL the money on researching one disease, research (publicly funded anyway) stops on all others until you find a cure. Anything less than all the cash and there is the possibility that you are underfunding the program.

What do you do with the side benefits of the research? If you are searching for a CURE and find a TREATMENT, do you ignore the treatment since developing it will siphon dollars from the search for the cure?

I am glad that there are lots of people researching lots of different diseases. I'm glad that someone spent the time and money to develope a vaccine against "the POX" so my daughter can have the momentary pain of a vaccine rather than the weeklong pain of having them. She will have plenty of times being sick with other things to learn to 'deal with the discomfort of being sick'.

And I'll teach her to wash her hands in an attempt to keep that from happening too.

LazyGlen

</delurk>

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7954 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/8/2002 4:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Lazyglen,

Excellent post! You make some very good points.


Remember that the research is being done by people not the dollars, even the dollars come from people somewhere along the line. If I set up a trust fund with my huge fourtune that I'm going to have one of these days, to invest in research to erradicate say, hangnails, then that's my decision. It is, or was, my money and with it, I can do as I please.

Likewise with researchers, if I get probed by Aliens who give me the knowledge to do medical research (cause that's the only way it's gonna happen) and I decide to dedicate my life to developing a vaccine against flatulence - so be it.

I know that some (most?) of the moneies invested in reseacrch come from the guv'mint. Ideally, that money should be spent on the greatest good for the greatest number. How then, do you make that decision? If you spend ALL the money on researching one disease, research (publicly funded anyway) stops on all others until you find a cure. Anything less than all the cash and there is the possibility that you are underfunding the program.

You forgot one other source of research dollars- the pharm companies themselves will invest in research. Their goal, of course, is to find something that will make them big bucks. Also, not all private research funding is given with a specific cure in mind. A lot is given as grants for the purpose of funding research at universities, and it may be granted for many different types of research. The professors of those schools pick their research subjects based on their own interests, and what they think will be important enough to get them published (a big factor when it comes to getting tenure).

But your excellent point remains- the research dollars come from all different kinds of sources, with all different kinds of goals in mind. The point that I was trying to make, and that I think some others here were also, was that I don't personally believe that some of the goals are the best use of the time and money. But, it's not my time or money, and so I don't make the decision.

In regards to spending all the money on one disease, I don't think anyone here actually ever suggested that. However, I think some people may have gotten the mistaken idea that that was the point that some of us were trying to make.

I don't think we should stop funding on all disease research to dedicate everything to one at a time. Like you said, how would we make that choice? But I do think that (assuming everyone was working with the same goal of saving lives in mind, which we've already agreed isn't how it works) we'd be able to agree to a set of "urgent" diseases and "not so urgent" diseases, and that if we put the not so urgent ones on hold for a bit and concentrated on the urgent group, we wouldn't be spreading ourselves so thin.

What do you do with the side benefits of the research? If you are searching for a CURE and find a TREATMENT, do you ignore the treatment since developing it will siphon dollars from the search for the cure?

An outstanding question, for which I have not developed an answer in my own mind. I'd be interested to hear what others say.

I am glad that there are lots of people researching lots of different diseases. I'm glad that someone spent the time and money to develope a vaccine against "the POX" so my daughter can have the momentary pain of a vaccine rather than the weeklong pain of having them. She will have plenty of times being sick with other things to learn to 'deal with the discomfort of being sick'.


I take a different view on this. I would have rather they spent the time and money on something like childhood leukemia. I'd rather have my future child suffer a week of discomfort than have s(he) or another child suffer for years and then die. Or another disease, leukemia doesn't have to be it. But you get my point. But for what it's worth, since they've already spent the time and money, I certainly do not intend to "throw away" the option of the vaccine (I may decide against it, but that will be for other reasons than my belief that they could have done something better with the money.)

Lazyglen, I'm glad you decided to delurk for this discussion! You made some very well thought out arguments, and I appreciate a good intellectual discussion, which is why I've been so into this one. I know it's gotten way off topic by now, so I hope I won't get kicked off the board for being off topic ;).


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: beccapooka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7955 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/8/2002 4:50 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I take a different view on this. I would have rather they spent the time and money on something like childhood leukemia. I'd rather have my future child suffer a week of discomfort than have s(he) or another child suffer for years and then die. Or another disease, leukemia doesn't have to be it. But you get my point.
----------

Jennie,

When reading your posts, this is what I have understood your point to be throughout the discussion, and I wholeheartedly agree.

Rebecca


Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7956 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/8/2002 6:50 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I take a different view on this. I would have rather they spent the time and money on something like childhood leukemia. I'd rather have my future child suffer a week of discomfort than have s(he) or another child suffer for years and then die. Or another disease, leukemia doesn't have to be it. But you get my point.


Exactly. Or research on diabetes so my mother can live longer to see my child grow up. Or blindness so children could grow up seeing the world or or or or, there are just so many things that seem more important to me than the pox.

The other thing that *really* concerns me, and I don't think it has been adequately addressed in this oh-so-long thread, is the idea of super bugs. By "curing" minor illness, aren't we just making more problems for ourselves in the long run? Take the chicken pox - of all the kids at my son's school that got the chicken pox, *many* of them had been vaccinated. So the vaccine either didn't work (they were all immunized in diffrent places, all over the world), or the pox has *already* become more virulent than the vaccine (ie resulting antibodies) can handle. What happens when we get rid of all minor illness and turn them into major ones?

OK, ok, so to use another example, what about anti-bacterial soaps? What happens when bacteria start to survive (oh, wait, they already are)? Where are we then? Were our dishes/hands/houses so dirty in the first place that we needed to eradicate all possiblity of bacteria, or did we just buy into a huge marketing budget and fear mongering on the part of the soap companies when nothing to worry about actually existed?

I know, I know, everyone would like to have a clean house, but what happens when our very actions create bugs that *can't* be cleaned up with anti-bacterial soap?

Ess

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: lazyglen One star, 50 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7957 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/8/2002 8:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
But your excellent point remains- the research dollars come from all different kinds of sources, with all different kinds of goals in mind. The point that I was trying to make, and that I think some others here were also, was that I don't personally believe that some of the goals are the best use of the time and money. But, it's not my time or money, and so I don't make the decision.

I think that this is the point I too was trying to make but from a different perspective. Someone conciously made a decision to spend that bucket-o-bucks for a particular purpose. Perhaps to make money from selling the vaccine, or because their Mom died of the disease or their son suffers from it. They did not, I'm sure just take a piece of paper with a bunch of diseases written on it and throw a dart.

At the risk of putting words in peoples mouths, let me try it this way...

Here is a bucket of cash:
\$$$$$$$$$/
\$$$$$$$/
======= (End of bad ASCI art)

I think I remember TeraGram said her last 'common cold' put her in the hospital, perhaps she wants to spend the bucket researching a cure for that.

Jenniebez, you mentioned Childhood Lukeimia, maybe you have personal reasons to spend it there.

Ess has suggested research on Adult Diabetes so her Mom can better know her kids. Ess also mentioned blindness, and antibiotic resistant bacteria.

My Mom would perhaps be interested in spending it to lead her Mother out of a Alzheimer's induced fog in which she recognizes no one.

I might want to spend it on regenerating finger joints to regain the function that I lost in a stupid accident on a table saw.

But we only have one bucket. Even if we split it into 2 or more smaller buckets, once we made a decision to fund some research, some of the people listed above would still think that we funded the wrong thing.

As you said The professors of those schools pick their research subjects based on their own interests... I wouldn't want to force someone to do research on breast cancer when their interest was in flatulence. It could be a waste of money as their heart wasn't in it.

The POX does indeed kill children. How many is "enough" to make the vaccine worth it? A lot of PR money is spent on the 'back to sleep' program. How many children does this actually save? Is that worth it?

Unless the decision was made with that paper and a dart, I'm willing to give "them" the benefit of the doubt.

LazyGlen

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7958 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/8/2002 8:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Unless the decision was made with that paper and a dart, I'm willing to give "them" the benefit of the doubt.

Actually, we all have a way to make sure that areas of research we're really concerned about happen, and that's to put our omney where our moths are.

But the funny part about this entire discussion was that it all got going because it seemed to me that making the vaccine for the pox was a big waste of time, specially since it doesn't work (well). I *never* meant for the discussion to turn into funding issues on medical research! Egad!

Ess

..My son (the POXY KID) is now *fully* recovered from his round, in fact he has been for a couple of weeks...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7959 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/8/2002 8:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Oh, my... bad editing day, let me try that again:

Unless the decision was made with that paper and a dart, I'm willing to give "them" the benefit of the doubt.

Actually, we all have a way to make sure that areas of research we're really concerned about happen and that's to put our money where our mouths are.

But the funny part about this entire discussion was that it all got going because it seemed to me that making the vaccine for the pox was a big waste of time, specially since it doesn't work (well). I *never* meant for the discussion to turn into funding issues on medical research! Egad!

Ess

..My son (the POXY KID) is now *fully* recovered from his round, in fact he has been for a couple of weeks...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7964 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/9/2002 10:30 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Ess,

I have just a one word reply to your post:

"EXACTLY!"

Jen

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7965 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/9/2002 10:39 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Unless the decision was made with that paper and a dart, I'm willing to give "them" the benefit of the doubt.

You make a good point. Since it's not my money they're using, I really have no right to tell them where to spend it. I won't. But I *can* voice my opinion that I don't think much of their choice.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7966 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/9/2002 10:44 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
But I *can* voice my opinion that I don't think much of their choice.

I'm sorry, that came out sounding snotty, like I know better than they. That wasn't what I was trying to say. Perhaps a better way to phrase it would have been "But I can voice my opinion that I don't agree with their choice."

Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7971 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/9/2002 11:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I take a different view on this. I would have rather they spent the time and money on something like childhood leukemia.

Then maybe you should give your money to the Leukemia Society and stop complaining about where other people give their money. It's getting old.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: esster Two stars, 250 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7972 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/10/2002 12:57 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2


This thread has spurned more snarly language than any I've read here since the grand stay at home debate. I've seen more posters insult the intelligence and dignity of other posters than I ever would have thought possible on the PARENTS board.

Surely it's possible to have a discussion without such personally directed commentary -or do we have to restrict our topics to baby names, furniture selection, and how to get out banana stains?

Ess
(I'm not pointing fingers here, just asking that we either play nice or give the thread a rest. Time out, folks!)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7973 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/10/2002 1:53 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
(I'm not pointing fingers here, just asking that we either play nice or give the thread a rest. Time out, folks!)

Yes!!!!!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7974 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/10/2002 11:09 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Then maybe you should give your money to the Leukemia Society and stop complaining about where other people give their money. It's getting old.

I'm sorry, but I didn't realize that I was "complaining". I thought I was adding my viewpoint to an intellectual discussion on the issue.

If you think the discussion is getting old, why are you still reading the thread?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7978 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/10/2002 9:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I'm sorry, but I didn't realize that I was "complaining". I thought I was adding my viewpoint to an intellectual discussion on the issue.

We figured out your viewpoint the first three times you said it. I've found that when someone wants to tread on someone else's rights, they tend to repeat themselves. Much like the way you have done about people's rights to research whatever they feel like.

If you think the discussion is getting old, why are you still reading the thread?

Because it keeps popping up in my "replies" box.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jenniebez Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7981 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/11/2002 11:34 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
We figured out your viewpoint the first three times you said it. I've found that when someone wants to tread on someone else's rights, they tend to repeat themselves. Much like the way you have done about people's rights to research whatever they feel like.

Give me a break. I'm not "tredding on anyone's rights" by stating my opinion. If my first post about my view was all you wanted to hear, good for you! Quit reading the thread. Others, however, had valid points they wanted to make against my view, and therefore the discussion continued.

Because it keeps popping up in my "replies" box.

My response to Lazyglen's post popped up in *your* reply box? Wierd- maybe you should talk to TMF about that. I can certainly understand how that would FORCE you to participate in a discussion that you yourself have said isn't worth your time. Or maybe you don't really have anything to add to the discussion? Maybe you're just here to take jabs at other people when they talk about a subject you don't feel like listening to?



Print the post Back To Top
Author: zsimpson Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7987 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/11/2002 6:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If I say, "I give, you win" will you please give it a break?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ishtarastarte Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 7988 of 42361
Subject: Re: The POX! Date: 1/11/2002 7:10 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
If I say, "I give, you win" will you please give it a break?

You could just STOP responding. The thread would have died days ago if you had!

Ishtar

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (148) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement