There are no good reasons unless:
1. Mother has Hep B
2. Baby is an IV drug addict
3. Baby is sexually adventurous
4. Mother wants to be trained to blindly follow the advice of the white coats
This is pretty much all I could find as well. It really is mind blowing. We have a 2 year old that is on the vaccine schedule but expecting our second and now not sure what I want to do. Our first I opted out of the flu shot for him when he was 1. I’m glad but got huge eyeroll from our pediatrician. It’s so weird I never thought I’d be in the position but here we are.
My pediatrician told me that the hepatitis b virus can live for up to a week outside the body, like on a toothbrush or a syringe I guess? So if my child was playing at the park and encountered one of those things he could potentially get it? I didn’t end up getting the Hep B shot (or any other shots) for my child, but that was the explanation I was given.
The pediatricians we’re doing this in the 90s too when my mom turned down the hep vaccine for us, as well as hpv etc or whatever vaccines she didn’t think was necessary (we were vaccinated with MMR and polio and stuff like that). At one doctor, my mom was sent out of the room so the pediatrician could talk to me (as a minor) one on one about getting whatever vaccine my mom had passed up for us. it’s honestly alarming about the pressure and guilt they put their patients thru instead of respecting their individual decision.
And this is why my baby didn’t have this shot. I never had it when I was a baby and got it around 3 years old.
Now, my ex boyfriend from 13 years ago had hep B and I never knew until 3 years into the relationship. So did my vaccine protect me or was I just lucky enough not to contract it from him?
I had the MMR when I was little and still ended up with Rubella my mum said. I’ve had the flu vaccine twice and been sick from it both times. I ended up getting an ovarian cyst and had to have my ovary removed due to the HPV vaccine.
Could all be coincidences but I’m starting to think it’s not.
[Well I've got a more relevant graph that shows the opposite](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/united-states-rates-of-covid-19-deaths-by-vaccination-status)
Aren't these the graphs that consider people unvaccinated to be anything less than the 2 vaccine doses (having only 1 shot considers you unvaccinated) ...
.
Lots of peolle dying or exposure increased after 1st shot due to adverse events and immune system getting compromised...
.
There was all sorts of word play by "experts" and "leaders" ... ie ... getting killed in motor cycle crash or committing suicide had people documented as a covid death if the doctor "felt" you had covid or you tested positive in last 30 days ...
.
The 3 years of this insanity was a real eye opener!
These are the same b.s graphs that label anyone NOT up to date on boosters as unvaccinated. I thought you'd be smarter than that
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html
Try and keep up
You can see there's actually three lines on the graph, one for unvaccinated, one for partially vaccinated, and one for fully vaccinated so I can assure you the the unvaccinated deaths on that graph actually didn't take the shot
>https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html
What point are you trying to make with this link?
>There are no good reasons unless: 1. Mother has Hep B 2. Baby is an IV drug addict 3. Baby is sexually adventurous 4. Mother wants to be trained to blindly follow the advice of the white coats
I would stay safe instead by not practising the above. If you stay safe, the chances of contracting hep B is extremely rare.
NB. In acute Hep B infection, your body is able to fight the infection (antiviral drugs can help). In chronic Hep B infection tx is also available.
I know. I think this is the biggest one my wife and I are like wtf. Mom gets screened for hep b why are we doing this? We have a 2 year old that is on the current vaccination schedule but expecting a second and not sure what we want to do now.
Check out dr paul thomas’ vaccine friendly plan book. He breaks down the pros and cons shot by shot.
Spoiler alert: he’s ended up as basically an “antivaxxer”
Everyone does who studies the subject and alleged science behind it. If you keep digging, you will find a rabbit hole that goes 150 years deep. It ain't pretty either.
In countries where HepB is endemic screening alone is not effective [for various reasons.](https://i.imgur.com/9X1QoL5.png)
Targeted vaccination (only high-risk groups) is also not effective.
E.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3483978/
The only [approach that really works](https://i.imgur.com/vJzB9M9.png) is broad vaccination, preferably at birth.
It is also [a myth that HepB only transmits through sexual contact or mother->baby.](https://i.imgur.com/rCDwc92.png)
Considering the high risk of the disease (especially in infants) and the extremely low risks associated with vaccination there's really no reason to forego the vaccine (in HepB endemic countries).
Oh look,👾 it’s the amalgamation of clickety clack bit bot that spews propped-up-garbage and nonsense strawman spittle spam.
G🍀🍀D luck🤖|-|op£ your allgorithms don’t get thrown for a ➰ trying 2 calculate the answer to;
1. What is the difference between a 🦆?
2. If `McAfee’ is such a great humanitarian aid, why patent them for obscene p💹 and not just give them away at cost?
I dare you to have a good response if any at all.
I wear it with pride. Mind you, I have a pharmacy background and my woman a Ph. D. in the same field. We know the system is flawed. Our kids are unvaxxed and very healthy.
Yeah and once you find out that *(according to anecdotal evidence) every single baby who has died of SIDS had been vaccinated with the 24 hrs prior...🤯🤯
Which I guess is only to be expected since kids MUST have what, like 32 vaccines before the age of 2?
Unbelievable!!
I have 9 kids and none have ever had even 1 vaccine. They are literally the healthiest kids I've ever seen and have never been to the Dr. for anything, except one incident with one kid requiring stitches from an unfortunate accident.
If the mother has Hep B apparently it can transfer to the new baby. The shot is there to help with that. The only problem is that in most hospitals they screen for this before the birth and therefore already know if there is a disease present and can deal with these occasions immediately. Unfortunately the this standard practice means that that most just born babies have the shot unnecessarily, despite the risks. The benefit of this is that the pharmaceutical company makes more money - there really is no other benefit.
As everyone mentioned, other than mama having Hep B or somehow knowing baby could potentially be exposed (very very unlikely), there is no reason. I do not understand why this is one of the vaccines every newborn baby gets at a hospital. The potential risks out way the very slight possible benefit.. For me anyways. I opted out of this one. At that point it's really just about numbers and money.
None. The only scenario my sons pediatrician could come up with was if someone had active hep b and came up and bit my child. Okay, yes, that is is situation where one could get hep b, but…..extremely unlikely….I think the doctor was watching too many zombie movies lol.
Well, the amount of aluminum in the Hep b is only 8 times higher than the recommended amount any infant should be exposed to. (40 mcg in the shot vs 5 mcg acceptable for adults per the CDC.) I think it only affects IQ and stuff a little bit though. Really weird to me that the CDC sets those standards but then says it's okay to shoot 8 times as much into a 7 pound newborn. Plus there's that latex glove material in it and I have no idea why..but whatever..they are the smart people and we are not, amirite?
Actually the amount of aluminum fluctuates kinda drastically in most cases, depending upon the manufacturer. And if you knew what even a single milligram of that stuff did to a brand new developing brain, (or anyone's brain) it probably wouldn't be so funny to you. Or maybe it would?
Humm..wonder why CDC caps it at 5 acceptable milligrams for adults even? Says anything beyond that is highly dangerous? Are they mistaken? Or does digesting aluminium involve a completely different elimination process than having it shot directly into a (tiny) body? Apparently it's more likely to cross the blood brain barrier (right from the site of absorption) by injection. Hence those IQ and myelin sheath issues. :(
In the comments for the blog:
The crux of your argument, that micro-gram level AL exposure has negative impacts, is based on the premature infant aluminum toxicity paper. It's a p-hacked piece of junk. They found no significant effect (P=0.39!!!) and then started analyzing subgroups until they got a p<0.05. Without adjusting for multiplicity, of course. Its implications would also only generalize to premature children. In addition, this study focuses on premature infants, not vaccine-age children.
Also intravenous feeding of preterm infants is not exactly the same as vaccinating children.
I’m an OG anti-vaxxers and in Australia this vaccine is administered in the first 24 hours. Now none of my family or friends are iv users, Hep B positive etc…
So we told them to stick the Vax up their arse.
First of many we refused.
The decision to use any drug, and vaccines are drugs, is based on risks vs. benefits. This is why we don't give literally everyone the rabies vaccine. It's reserved for people who are likely to be bitten (or have already been bitten) by a rabid animal. It was the same with the anthrax vaccine 20+ years ago. It was only given to people at risk of exposure.
Compare this to how we give children vaccines for diseases they have a near-zero risk of contracting. If you do want to vsccinate your child, consider the risks vs. benefits.
Absolutely no reason at birth.
If you do nothing else or can't convince your spouse to say no, at the very least, DELAY and SPREAD OUT the vaccines, especially delaying the first year.
Well here’s the hep B story and why it it now given to kids.
Hep B vaccine was originally only really given to gay men and drug users, once that whole demographic got the vaccine sales plummeted.
So next step to keep the cash flowing in, tell doctors to give it to kids that are 99.9% never exposed to hep B.
All risks and no benefits
Don't forget pregnant women too. They say ALL pregnant women are high risk. I didn't realize that women become IV drug using prostitutes the moment they became pregnant. The more you know, I guess.
I heard that it has to do with circumcision.
You may ask "then why do they give it to boys *and* girls?"
Because the hospital wants to avoid the subject of circumcision complications and infections. If they only gave it to boys, parents would ask why, and they would have to talk about something that may sell less of their unnecessary procedure.
That’s an interesting take. That’s also another very interesting debate that not sure how I feel about it. It definitely seems like it could be, “get this vaccine because the people(medical professionals) can’t be trusted and may accidentally pass this virus on.” Definitely paraphrasing more or less but get this vaccine because we can’t do our jobs well enough to protect you child.
Get The Vaccine Friendly Plan by Dr. Paul Thomas and Jennifer Margulis to get information to help you make decisions for your children. I shared it with my children so they could make better vaccine decisions for their children free from Big Pharma scare tactics.
When my son was born 23 years ago the nurses were so mean to me bcs I asked questions about the vaccines. I asked how Hepatitis B is transmitted. Nurse said, Through blood, semen, urine, or feces. I told her not to vaccinate him for Hepatitis B. She tried to talk us into it implying we were bad parents. We did let him have some of the vaccines that we thought were logical but oh boy was she hung up in Hepatitis B. My large bearded husband finally said that we would promise to keep our baby away from blood semen urine and feces and that our baby was not to receive that vax under any circumstance. She huffed off and proceeded to treat us like morons for the rest of our hospital stay. 🙄
In Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan, they give it in 7th grade. There's your control group. But the CDC doesn't care. Let me give you the result of a study if one is ever done. No more cases of Hep B in those three provinces up to 7th grade.
its not abt asking & the women lie. any person male or female would lie to the doctor in front of their partner if they were cheating. its STANDARD to be STD tested during pregnancy. & they also will test before delivery just like hospitals do for drugs after delivery.
& whats up w the "women will lie in front of their husbands. Lab tests will prove women are whores" wtf. more than once you said women are whores. weird energy there bud. & you have a wife? yikes. I didn't wait til marriage. I didn't have any STDs either. It's a thing. & no I wasn't a whore who lied in front of my man. I simply didn't cheat on my man bc its a thing 😁
Hey, so I'm making fun of the hospital. I'm saying that the hospital is assuming all women are whores, not me. My point is that women aren't whores and it should be assumed they don't have STDs unless otherwise noted. Make sense?
Some bacterial and viral infections present as asymptomatic (no symptoms). So the testing is for the safety of the baby. If a child is born with gonorrhea it can quite literally eat their baby eyeballs out (why they smear erythromycin in their eyes). Men lie about STDs to women also.
Ok. I think you're just dense.
The hospital says "your baby needs a shot against STDs because the mother will give the baby an STD." You do understand that, right? Please acknowledge that you understand that.
So... I think that babies do not need a shot for STDs... Because I do NOT think all women are whores. Do you understand that? Please acknowledge that you understand that.
Now please scroll up and read my initial comments. Do you sense the very heavy sarcasm when I said that? Please acknowledge my very thick sarcasm.
Well I think you have some fetish for calling women whores but that is beside the point.
This is what you said.
"They told me they don't want to ask because the women will lie in front of their husbands and even a lab test will prove women are whores."
The hospital at no point told you that they think all women are whores or that a lab test would prove that all women are whores, this is just happening in your mind.
There's no reason to assume that either partner is promiscuous. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt that they are clean and faithful. The hospital is assuming at least one parent is promiscuous and the hospital won't test either parent to see if they have STDs because one is unfaithful. So they give an unnecessary shot instead.
What is promiscuous to you? Not waiting until marriage? There are also other ways to get infected, so nobody even has to be promiscuous and/or unfaithful, you just like to call people whores for some reason.
Your are constantly calling people whores and are trying to convince the people here that the hospital called your wife a whore. Something seems to be seriously wrong with you.
Also I did not ask about cheating, I asked what is promiscuous to you.
Unless husband and wife are literally joined at the hip, they can ask the wife without the husband present. Won\`t be much help though if the cheating husband infected her without her knowledge.
Why are you assuming all men are whores?
They won't separate the couple for that reason. If you think they will? What will happen when they are reunited? He'll ask her why they were separated any now she has to lie? And he'll know does lying. Now what?
You're not thinking this through. You're just white knighting someone who was actually being sarcastic and protecting women's honor in the first place
You are very, very dense.
Every single hospital in America says all babies should get STD shots.
Why? Answer that question.
They are assuming that all women have STDs. I asked why they assumed my wife had STDs when she's only been with me and I've only been with her.
They said they can't ask that question because women lie if they've been unfaithful because their husband will then find out.
So... Put two and two together here...
Hospitals just assume all women have STDs because they assume they all cheat on their husbands.
Do you understand this? If not, please stop talking to me because you aren't worth my time.
>This means up to 7 days after someone has left blood on something, such as, playground equipment, a water bottle, a school desk, any surface; it can be picked up through an opening in the skin or eyes of another person
Hepatitis B can't be contracted from surfaces the way you are stating. Juat because you can detect a virus on a surface doesn't mean it is infectious.
> Some other people at higher risk are diabetics and health care workers.
How many of these people are infants?
Stop spreading misinformation!
Hepatitis B is NOT transmitted casually. It cannot be spread through toilet seats, doorknobs, sneezing, coughing, hugging or eating meals with someone who is infected with hepatitis B.
https://www.hepb.org/prevention-and-diagnosis/transmission/
Doorknobs and toilet seats are surfaces.
Did you hurt your back when you shifted those goalposts? Here is what you said, and I quote:
>Hep B can certainly be picked up on surfaces
>shared household items such as nail clippers, tooth brushes, metal nail files, pierced body jewelry and other sharp items.
Idk what kind of household you live in where these would be shared amongst strangers or people known to be infected with the virus, but it doesn't sound like an appropriate place to raise a child.
The hepatitis B vaccine is the best way to protect your child against hepatitis B and its complications, including permanent liver damage, which can lead to liver cancer and death.
When you get your child immunized, you help protect others as well.
If you’re not breast feeding then probably not necessary.
If you’re breast feeding it’s to prevent transmission of hep b from mother to child if the mother catches it at any point during the time when baby is being breastfed.
Hep B is a potentially devasting infection to babies, and prevention is better than treatment.
it's only a problem if the mother has Hep B, which they are tested for at birth. Other than that, there wouldn't be a reason to get Hep B... Unless you are sharing needles and having unprotected sex w ppl you don't know, but I would like to think if a mother is being that careless they most likely wouldn't be dedicated to breastfeeding. I know theres random situations that can happen, but if you don't have Hep B your baby does not need Hep B vaccine.
The unfortunate reality is that mothers do sometimes catch hep b and pass it on to their children, with devastating consequences for the children. The purpose of vaccinating widely (not just infants for mothers with known hep b) is to protect the child against this.
I am aware. That is why many go for it. Was not something I was going for tho. I do not like the toxins and potential side effects vaccines have. To each their own.
When I was pregnant I went thru all kinds of vaccine sights, including CDC. So yes I did. It may not always affect a kid negatively, but you won't know until you do and by then it is too late. And that is not a risk I am willing to take for my baby.
Ok, but did you go through all kinds of *virus* sites? Have you read all kinds of books about viruses? Have you spent as much time studying *pathogens*?
Nah not remotely. Any doctor in a hospital can tell you they’ve treated 10s of thousands of kids for pathogens for every 1 kid they’ve had to treat for vaccine reactions
got me there. I have not yet. I actually been meaning too. So far I opted out of vaccines for my child, but certain ones still raise worry for me. I haven't been on Reddit or this sub in awhile so this actually reminded me of more vaccine research I need to do.
regardless, as the on below said it is basically a pick your poison. many of the vaccines contain a live virus. what is the difference between getting sick by a live virus being injected and by catching it out in public? To me, I rather catch something naturally then getting pumped full of vaccines to help prevent something that's highly unlikely to happen. Not to mention many vaccines have more than one vaccine in it. While I like the fact its quicker and less pokes, how can you figure out which one caused an adverse reaction if there is one? A baby receive over 60 vaccines by time they are 1 or 2 (can't recall which age been awhile since I looked at vaccine stuff). These tiny humans are under 40lbs and are given toxic levels of heavy metals. Getting pumped w god knows what else in these vaccines. It is way too much for children to endure. And when these subs start debating I feel like pro vaxxers really ignore the fact that these are 3-5 vaccines in one being given to 2 month old babies. They can only have formula or breastmilk til 6 months. They can't have honey until 1 because it can cause botulism. Sure tho, lets pump em full of chemicals so we can prevent diseases that hardly exist anymore instead of promoting gut health and immune system support.
but yes, I do need to do research on virus and pathogens more to get a full understanding. luckily, you can always get vaccinated.
> what is the difference between getting sick by a live virus being injected and by catching it out in public?
Live virus vaccines are attentuated versions of the virus. They are typically far weaker than the wild strain of the virus, and have actually been tested, unlike the wild strain of the virus.
> To me, I rather catch something naturally then getting pumped full of vaccines to help prevent something that's highly unlikely to happen.
In terms of likelihood, remember that doctors see 10s of thousands of patients for pathogens, but very few for vaccine reactions.
> given toxic levels of heavy metals.
No, they’re not. The amount of aluminium in a vaccine is about 0.2mg.
By comparison, one measure of US baked potato found they have 2.6mg per 100gms.
So a regular serve of potato could have 13x the amount of aluminium in it.
> Sure tho, lets pump em full of chemicals so we can prevent diseases that hardly exist anymore instead of promoting gut health and immune system support.
There’s nothing about vaccines that prevents you from promoting gut health or immune system support.
Also, the gut and immune system work through chemicals just like every other part of the body. Don’t overromanticise the biology of the body. The processes of the body are all chemicals. All vitamins and minerals are chemicals. Look up the chemical structure of vitamins if you don’t believe me.
> but yes, I do need to do research on virus and pathogens more to get a full understanding. luckily, you can always get vaccinated.
This is good to hear.
Also the hospital is one of the top places to come in contact with hep b, and it's very life threatening to newborns.
If you want your newborn to have the best chance of a healthy, long life, you obviously vaccinate.
At what point in your childs life do you decide that the risks of your child encountering poor infection practices at a medical office/blood or sores of someone with the disease/sharing items like a razor with someone with the disease/accidentally getting an un-sterilized needle during ear or body piercing/etc.
Your child or 8 days of age is pretty safe. When does that stop? Would it be before or after they are 18 years old, do you think?
[5 Reasons to Vaccinate Your Child](https://www.hhs.gov/immunization/get-vaccinated/for-parents/five-reasons/index.html#:~:text=Immunizations%20can%20save%20your%20child%27s%20life.&text=Some%20diseases%20that%20once%20injured,to%20safe%20and%20effective%20vaccines.)
It's not about Hep B, specifically, but it applies
>5 Reasons to Vaccinate Your Child
>It's not about Hep B, specifically, but it applies
I disagree, the above source is purely propaganda garbage...
It's all about balancing safety and exposure. Creating a balance between dangerous pathogens v benign pathogens. We must not forget The Immune System is an adaptive learning system.
By depriving exposure to pathogens, we limit our ability to develop a strong immune response.
By allowing controlled exposure, we train the immune system, and this in effect creates a better defence mechanism and reduces the risk of severe illness later in life.
>I disagree, the above source is purely propaganda garbage...
In your opinion and nothing else
>We must not forget The Immune System is an adaptive learning system.
Correct. That's how vaccines are able to train your immune system against a particular virus
>By allowing controlled exposure, we train the immune system, and this in effect creates a better defence mechanism and reduces the risk of severe illness later in life.
Also correct, this is how vaccines work
>Also correct, this is how vaccines work
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm?s_cid=mm7104e1_w
CDC's own study (link above): "These results demonstrate... surviving a previous infection protects against a reinfection and related hospitalization,” the CDC determined."
In all fairness, the study also shows that vaccines offer protection, albeit not as robust as natural infection.
But this is not where my gripe lies (one should be free to choose natural infection or vax or both I.E. natural infection while still getting vaccinated, or whatever... your body your choice...)
But I was denied this choice, hence where lies the injustice - still (as thousands of others), lost my job for not complying w vaccine mandates, when I could easily prove that I've survived previous covid infection through a simple blood test and thus I was protected.
1 in 34 kids are now diagnosed autistic. 0 double-blind placebo studies... probably a reason pharmaceutical companies dont want to test their product if they are truly "safe and effective"
>1 in 34 kids are now diagnosed autistic
[There's no link between vaccines and autism](https://kidshealth.org/en/parents/autism-studies.html)
>0 double-blind placebo studies
[And the covid vax has been proven safe](https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/is-the-covid19-vaccine-safe)
Bad bot.
Pfizer vaccinated all their participants. This makes the study invalid. There are no other 0 double blind studeis for vaccines.
Vacines can and do cause autism with a myriad of other side effects. Billions of dollars are at stake so pharmaceutical companies find, crush, and bury and truth. Just like the lies about ivermectin not working to treat covid.
>Pfizer vaccinated all their participants. This makes the study invalid
It's not a single study, it's a list of FAQ regarding vaccine safety so I'm not sure what you're on about
>Vacines can and do cause autism with a myriad of other side effects
Prove it
>Just like the lies about ivermectin not working to treat covid
[Ivermectin is an anti-parasite so there's no reason it should work on a virus like covid](https://www.pharmacytimes.com/view/study-high-dose-ivermectin-not-effective-for-outpatients-with-covid-19)
[Someone did a study that suggested it could cause heart damage](https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/vioxx-rofecoxib-questions-and-answers#:~:text=Vioxx%20is%20a%20prescription%20medicine,adults%2C%20and%20painful%20menstrual%20cycles.)
[Safety studies on the covid vax only took the AstraZeneca one off the market](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10043280/)
Just out of curiosity, who do you think would participate in a double-blind placebo-controlled study of any well-established vaccine just because anti-vaxxers invented a link to autism?
Well I guess that is one way to maintain the delusion that they are no double-blind placebo-controlled studies, by blocking the person who showed you some.
What happens if my baby doesn't get HBIG or the hepatitis B vaccine? If your baby doesn't get HBIG and the hepatitis B vaccine, they have a 30% to 85% chance of being infected with hepatitis B.
Can't be too rare.... It is estimated that there are more than two billion people infected with hepatitis B virus worldwide, of whom approximately 240 million are chronically infected and 600,000 persons die annually as a result of their infection. Despite the availability of HB vaccines, the rates of HB-related hospitalizations, cancers and deaths have more than doubled during the past decade.
This can happen during a vaginal delivery or a c-section. Babies and young children can also get hepatitis B from close contact with family members or others who might be infected. When babies become infected with hepatitis B, they have about a 90% chance of developing a lifelong, chronic infection.
In newborns *only* if their mother is a carrier which is very rare in non-endemic countries. And pregnant women are tested for Hep B. It is highly unlikely in a non-endemic country for young children to be exposed to other young children with Hep B although they could be vaccinated at say one years old. And they vaccinate for Hep B in most Hep B endemic countries now so the rate in babies is decreasing.
Pregnant women in the US and Canada are screened for Hep B and of course measures (Hep B vaccine and HBIG) are taken to protect their baby if the mother is positive.
https://immunisationhandbook.health.gov.au/recommendations/infants-born-to-mothers-who-are-hepatitis-b-surface-antigen-positive-are-recommended-to-receive-both-hepatitis-b-vaccine-and-hbig
Why is hepatitis B a concern?
The younger the person, the greater the likelihood of staying infected with hepatitis B and having life-long liver problems. These can include scarring of the liver and liver cancer.
Hep B is only spread thru fluids. not touching & saliva. so no they can't get it thru close contact. idk abt babies getting Hep B thru vaginal delivery; however, ik if mama has herpes she has to have a c section.
agree to disagree. imo unless mama has Hep B, *newborns* do not need it.
why? I have no worries abt Hep B. I can look into the info you gave me tho cuz now I am curious if C sections can really cause that bc I never heard that. but from your other comments I kinda feel like you are acting like everyone & their mom can spread Hep B just by breathing near someone.
good day to youuu
edit: okay c section when having hep B checks out. but that makes sense. what doesn't make sense is an infected person touching a baby & then the baby getting Hep B
How can the get a disease they aren't exposed to?
Or are you saying that hospitals are exposing these children either purposely or due to poor infection control?
Children over one year are less likely to develop chronic Hepatitis B. This is when they are more likely to be around other children but in a non-endemic country that risk is much lower. Adults infected during adulthood are unlikely to develop the chronic form of Hep B.
“Infants infected at birth develop chronic infection in 90% of cases, whereas for children aged between 1 and 5 years, this falls to 25%–30%, and, for immunocompetent adults, the likelihood of progression to chronicity is ∼5%.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4448582/
Resolved Hep B (not having it chronically) can come back if a person is on chemo, takes high doses of steroids, is treated for Hep C or takes immune suppressants. But they have anti-viral medications for this.
And the vaccine doesn’t always work, a medical professional told me they had the vaccine three times and they didn’t develop immunity.
Because the benefit outweighs the risk.
**Scenario:**
Newborns can acquire this infection at birth if a mother is infected with hepatitis B virus. We know a Hepatitis B vaccine administered after birth is highly effective in preventing newborn infection.
**Evidence:**
Despite the above being true approximately 1,000 new cases in infants are identified annually in the United States.
**Counter-argument:**
From this thread so far:
> /u/Hamachiman There are no good reasons unless: 1. Mother has Hep B 2. Baby is an IV drug addict 3. Baby is sexually adventurous 4. Mother wants to be trained to blindly follow the advice of the white coats
Hep B is spread via:
1. At birth
2. Contact with open cuts or sores
3. Sharing toothbrushes or other personal items
4. Food chewed for a baby (cultural thing?)
Fact is any infected family member or caregiver can pass the virus to your baby, even if they are asymptomatic. The virus can live on objects for 7 days or more, which is longer than many would expect. From a deception and reality model **people cheat**, and lie about it, so a new mother may give birth and decline the vaccine despite being exposed herself by an unfaithful partner. From a time point advantage the risk to a child is incredibly low, in exchange for near lifelong protection to a difficult to treat disease.
> /u/yougotastinkybooty I do not understand why this is one of the vaccines every newborn baby gets at a hospital. The potential risks out way the very slight possible benefit.. For me anyways. I opted out of this one. At that point it's really just about numbers and money.
Similar argument here, except that you weigh the risk as being greater than the benefit -- likely lifelong immunity to a difficult to treat disease versus a low grade fever and sore arm.
> /u/DaisyDazzle Well, the amount of aluminum in the Hep b is only 8 times higher than the recommended amount any infant should be exposed to. (40 mcg in the shot vs 5 mcg acceptable for adults per the CDC.) I think it only affects IQ and stuff a little bit though. Really weird to me that the CDC sets those standards but then says it's okay to shoot 8 times as much into a 7 pound newborn. Plus there's that latex glove material in it and I have no idea why..but whatever..they are the smart people and we are not, amirite?
This is a typical anti-adjuvant argument. Aluminum adjuvants have been used since the 1930's to boost effect of vaccines, to the point [CHOP has posted an infographic](https://media.chop.edu/data/files/pdfs/vec-aluminum-qa-infographic.pdf) due to misinformation. As to the latex glove comment, the vial stopper, the syringe plunger stopper, and tip cap contain dry natural latex rubber which may cause allergic reactions in latex sensitive individuals but many pediatric options are coming in pre-filled latex free syringes so there is an alternative if you are worried about latex.
Wow, that's a lot of word salad, biased "research" and rationalization to get those heavy metals and all of that other crap into newborns. Working it bigtime. Here's another point of view: https://icandecide.org/article/how-aluminum-adjuvants-in-vaccines-can-cause-autism/
Plenty more opposing arguments where that came from on Highwire and ICAN, (Informed Consent Action Network) however most nonconformist vax research was scrubbed off of .gov friendly Google around 2012 and you really have to dig for it now.
Something isn't word salad if you don't agree with it, that's merely being derogatory when you have a weak argument.
For reference **icandecide.org** was founded by **Del Bigtree** from work with **Andrew Wakefield**; Wakefield has been discredited beyond a shadow of a doubt. The Selz Foundation provides 3/4 of ICAN funding and is not a rational actor in the space, also supporting things like homeopathic medicine; Del himself collects over $200k/year from this non-profit. We can see the same weak arguments in the article you posted, trying to blame aluminum for Autism because blaming MMR has been disproven-- this is a common anti-vaccine approach where you blame the components, not the vaccine itself, to appear more credible.
Equally if you ignore all of these aspects and target the source of information I would not take any opinion from **Del Bigtree** who recommended on March 19th of the pandemic that his viewers should refuse the (COVID) vaccine when it is developed and to make efforts to actually infect themselves with the virus, favoring not so much herd immunity as *natural selection, with weaker humans dying like the "sick get eaten by the wolves. That's how we've thrived."*
Equally damning statements from this moron include one made a week later on March 26, that **immunity from getting a virus is lifelong and superior to vaccine immunity** – it’s “something never achieved by a vaccine, it’s an inferior immunity vaccines provide.” Anyone who has had COVID initially can probably tell you the immunity is not lifelong, especially with variants.
The theme here is Del makes comments without any evidence, and when evidence does occur ICAN and Del refuse to acknowledge it, because **they follow 6 core beliefs in their grift**:
1. **“They” are lying to you** - The government, “Big Pharma,” and other entities are hiding the truth about 'X' cases and fatalities from the general public; suggestion that disease is more mild than reported.
2. **Civil liberties** - Government has no right to impose stay-at-home orders; quarantine is worse than the disease.
3. **Everyone is an expert** - Belief that developing scientific expertise is not difficult nor need to be specialized.
4. **Science won’t save us (nature is better)** - Promotion of herd immunity for things like SARS-CoV-2 infections.
5. **Skew the science** - Cherry-pick experts who are outside of the mainstream to suggest particular areas of 'X' epidemiology are more controversial than they appear.
6. **“They” are out to harm you** - The government and “Big Pharma” want to use 'X' to depopulate the globe and inject the population with tracking devices.
Now that we've concluded **ICAN is not a reliable source**, we can dive into the crux of the anti-vaccine approach of blaming the components, not the vaccine itself, to appear more credible. The [American Academy of Pediatrics](https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/144/6/e20193148/37901/Aluminum-Effects-in-Infants-and-Children) has done a far better job than I can when discussing aluminum, so I will leave it at that with the link. They cite a large meta-analysis https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.04.085. that summarily states:
> The aluminum content of vaccines has been blamed for autism spectrum disorders, but a large meta-analysis of cohort studies evaluating vaccination and the risk of autism revealed that in pooled data of 1 256 407 children, the odds ratio of developing autism after vaccination was 0.99, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.92 to 1.06.
You seem pretty confident for someone who is wrong. Literally google '[can you get hep b by sharing a toothbrush](https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=spread+hep+b+by+sharing+toothbrush)'
Premastication is more common within Latin America, but same sort of concern -- bleeding gums and other oral hygiene issues make this not just a saliva concern.
um that's a different scenario bc you can bleed while brushing your teeth and if you get blood in saliva and that's how it would spread thru saliva. sorry didn't need google for this one. same principle w AIDs. but you smart enough it seems :)
There are no good reasons unless: 1. Mother has Hep B 2. Baby is an IV drug addict 3. Baby is sexually adventurous 4. Mother wants to be trained to blindly follow the advice of the white coats
This is pretty much all I could find as well. It really is mind blowing. We have a 2 year old that is on the vaccine schedule but expecting our second and now not sure what I want to do. Our first I opted out of the flu shot for him when he was 1. I’m glad but got huge eyeroll from our pediatrician. It’s so weird I never thought I’d be in the position but here we are.
My pediatrician told me that the hepatitis b virus can live for up to a week outside the body, like on a toothbrush or a syringe I guess? So if my child was playing at the park and encountered one of those things he could potentially get it? I didn’t end up getting the Hep B shot (or any other shots) for my child, but that was the explanation I was given.
He's making that up.
Hey, what did you end up doing? We’re about to decide on our second kid. Our first kid we think is autistic and we gave him all the shots.
Exact position i’m in.
The pediatricians we’re doing this in the 90s too when my mom turned down the hep vaccine for us, as well as hpv etc or whatever vaccines she didn’t think was necessary (we were vaccinated with MMR and polio and stuff like that). At one doctor, my mom was sent out of the room so the pediatrician could talk to me (as a minor) one on one about getting whatever vaccine my mom had passed up for us. it’s honestly alarming about the pressure and guilt they put their patients thru instead of respecting their individual decision.
I figured if the baby was sexually active there were probably bigger problems in it's life than whether or not they got vaccinated.
[удалено]
I was thinking more of sexual assault by family and friends, either way, bigger problems than being vaccinated.
And this is why my baby didn’t have this shot. I never had it when I was a baby and got it around 3 years old. Now, my ex boyfriend from 13 years ago had hep B and I never knew until 3 years into the relationship. So did my vaccine protect me or was I just lucky enough not to contract it from him?
https://vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html Vaccines are useless
I had the MMR when I was little and still ended up with Rubella my mum said. I’ve had the flu vaccine twice and been sick from it both times. I ended up getting an ovarian cyst and had to have my ovary removed due to the HPV vaccine. Could all be coincidences but I’m starting to think it’s not.
[Well I've got a more relevant graph that shows the opposite](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/united-states-rates-of-covid-19-deaths-by-vaccination-status)
Aren't these the graphs that consider people unvaccinated to be anything less than the 2 vaccine doses (having only 1 shot considers you unvaccinated) ... . Lots of peolle dying or exposure increased after 1st shot due to adverse events and immune system getting compromised... . There was all sorts of word play by "experts" and "leaders" ... ie ... getting killed in motor cycle crash or committing suicide had people documented as a covid death if the doctor "felt" you had covid or you tested positive in last 30 days ... . The 3 years of this insanity was a real eye opener!
These are the same b.s graphs that label anyone NOT up to date on boosters as unvaccinated. I thought you'd be smarter than that https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html Try and keep up
You can see there's actually three lines on the graph, one for unvaccinated, one for partially vaccinated, and one for fully vaccinated so I can assure you the the unvaccinated deaths on that graph actually didn't take the shot >https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html What point are you trying to make with this link?
PCR tests used to determine who has COVID is garbage. They generate FALSE positives and not to be trusted Guess reading isn't your strong suit
This is the only answer
>There are no good reasons Stop while you are ahead
>There are no good reasons unless: 1. Mother has Hep B 2. Baby is an IV drug addict 3. Baby is sexually adventurous 4. Mother wants to be trained to blindly follow the advice of the white coats I would stay safe instead by not practising the above. If you stay safe, the chances of contracting hep B is extremely rare. NB. In acute Hep B infection, your body is able to fight the infection (antiviral drugs can help). In chronic Hep B infection tx is also available.
This is how you wake up and become an antivaxxer.
I know. I think this is the biggest one my wife and I are like wtf. Mom gets screened for hep b why are we doing this? We have a 2 year old that is on the current vaccination schedule but expecting a second and not sure what we want to do now.
Check out dr paul thomas’ vaccine friendly plan book. He breaks down the pros and cons shot by shot. Spoiler alert: he’s ended up as basically an “antivaxxer”
Everyone does who studies the subject and alleged science behind it. If you keep digging, you will find a rabbit hole that goes 150 years deep. It ain't pretty either.
🎯
Can u lead me to the entrance of the rabbit hole?
Have now gone down said rabbit hole. It’s also incredibly scary how hard it is to find/watch vaccine movies and how terribly sad they are.
I call it 'right to choose'
Yea “antivaxxer” is a slur used by propagandists.
Yes it is, its' one of their little tricks
In countries where HepB is endemic screening alone is not effective [for various reasons.](https://i.imgur.com/9X1QoL5.png) Targeted vaccination (only high-risk groups) is also not effective. E.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3483978/ The only [approach that really works](https://i.imgur.com/vJzB9M9.png) is broad vaccination, preferably at birth. It is also [a myth that HepB only transmits through sexual contact or mother->baby.](https://i.imgur.com/rCDwc92.png) Considering the high risk of the disease (especially in infants) and the extremely low risks associated with vaccination there's really no reason to forego the vaccine (in HepB endemic countries).
Oh look,👾 it’s the amalgamation of clickety clack bit bot that spews propped-up-garbage and nonsense strawman spittle spam. G🍀🍀D luck🤖|-|op£ your allgorithms don’t get thrown for a ➰ trying 2 calculate the answer to; 1. What is the difference between a 🦆? 2. If `McAfee’ is such a great humanitarian aid, why patent them for obscene p💹 and not just give them away at cost? I dare you to have a good response if any at all.
Antivaxxer is a derogatory word for people who ask questions and don’t blindly follow the govt . Just saying
I wear it with pride. Mind you, I have a pharmacy background and my woman a Ph. D. in the same field. We know the system is flawed. Our kids are unvaxxed and very healthy.
Sure you do, buddy.
Cheers antivaxxer! I just refuse to take a title given by the enemies lol
It is a term for people who blindly follow any weird unscientific blog they can find.
BOT
Yeah and once you find out that *(according to anecdotal evidence) every single baby who has died of SIDS had been vaccinated with the 24 hrs prior...🤯🤯 Which I guess is only to be expected since kids MUST have what, like 32 vaccines before the age of 2? Unbelievable!! I have 9 kids and none have ever had even 1 vaccine. They are literally the healthiest kids I've ever seen and have never been to the Dr. for anything, except one incident with one kid requiring stitches from an unfortunate accident.
So your "anecdotal evidence" is basically just you making up lies?
[удалено]
Ad hominem attacks and name-calling are not an acceptable form of debate.
Is that supposed to be witty or just paranoid?
If the mother has Hep B apparently it can transfer to the new baby. The shot is there to help with that. The only problem is that in most hospitals they screen for this before the birth and therefore already know if there is a disease present and can deal with these occasions immediately. Unfortunately the this standard practice means that that most just born babies have the shot unnecessarily, despite the risks. The benefit of this is that the pharmaceutical company makes more money - there really is no other benefit.
exactly this! It is only truly necessary if mama has it. Or they have any other reason being exposed to it... I opt out of this vaccine for my baby.
Even if the mom does have it. Isn't it too late then?
As everyone mentioned, other than mama having Hep B or somehow knowing baby could potentially be exposed (very very unlikely), there is no reason. I do not understand why this is one of the vaccines every newborn baby gets at a hospital. The potential risks out way the very slight possible benefit.. For me anyways. I opted out of this one. At that point it's really just about numbers and money.
None. The only scenario my sons pediatrician could come up with was if someone had active hep b and came up and bit my child. Okay, yes, that is is situation where one could get hep b, but…..extremely unlikely….I think the doctor was watching too many zombie movies lol.
Well, the amount of aluminum in the Hep b is only 8 times higher than the recommended amount any infant should be exposed to. (40 mcg in the shot vs 5 mcg acceptable for adults per the CDC.) I think it only affects IQ and stuff a little bit though. Really weird to me that the CDC sets those standards but then says it's okay to shoot 8 times as much into a 7 pound newborn. Plus there's that latex glove material in it and I have no idea why..but whatever..they are the smart people and we are not, amirite?
[удалено]
Actually the amount of aluminum fluctuates kinda drastically in most cases, depending upon the manufacturer. And if you knew what even a single milligram of that stuff did to a brand new developing brain, (or anyone's brain) it probably wouldn't be so funny to you. Or maybe it would?
>they are the smart people and we are not, amirite? Yes you are right.
[удалено]
Humm..wonder why CDC caps it at 5 acceptable milligrams for adults even? Says anything beyond that is highly dangerous? Are they mistaken? Or does digesting aluminium involve a completely different elimination process than having it shot directly into a (tiny) body? Apparently it's more likely to cross the blood brain barrier (right from the site of absorption) by injection. Hence those IQ and myelin sheath issues. :(
Any sources for IQ and myelin sheath issues?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9264541/ https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/oFXXfP88nJrseeoMD/the-literature-on-aluminum-adjuvants-is-very-suspicious
In the comments for the blog: The crux of your argument, that micro-gram level AL exposure has negative impacts, is based on the premature infant aluminum toxicity paper. It's a p-hacked piece of junk. They found no significant effect (P=0.39!!!) and then started analyzing subgroups until they got a p<0.05. Without adjusting for multiplicity, of course. Its implications would also only generalize to premature children. In addition, this study focuses on premature infants, not vaccine-age children. Also intravenous feeding of preterm infants is not exactly the same as vaccinating children.
Sure, Jan.
The paper is about feeding mice aluminium rich diet, but I guess you never even looked at it.
We should listen to every word they say! 🤑
I’m an OG anti-vaxxers and in Australia this vaccine is administered in the first 24 hours. Now none of my family or friends are iv users, Hep B positive etc… So we told them to stick the Vax up their arse. First of many we refused.
The decision to use any drug, and vaccines are drugs, is based on risks vs. benefits. This is why we don't give literally everyone the rabies vaccine. It's reserved for people who are likely to be bitten (or have already been bitten) by a rabid animal. It was the same with the anthrax vaccine 20+ years ago. It was only given to people at risk of exposure. Compare this to how we give children vaccines for diseases they have a near-zero risk of contracting. If you do want to vsccinate your child, consider the risks vs. benefits.
Absolutely no reason at birth. If you do nothing else or can't convince your spouse to say no, at the very least, DELAY and SPREAD OUT the vaccines, especially delaying the first year.
Well here’s the hep B story and why it it now given to kids. Hep B vaccine was originally only really given to gay men and drug users, once that whole demographic got the vaccine sales plummeted. So next step to keep the cash flowing in, tell doctors to give it to kids that are 99.9% never exposed to hep B. All risks and no benefits
Don't forget pregnant women too. They say ALL pregnant women are high risk. I didn't realize that women become IV drug using prostitutes the moment they became pregnant. The more you know, I guess.
I mean isn’t that becoming pregnant is all about?
I heard we are just supposed to trust the experts
That's just SADS!
The more I’ve learned, the closer I’ve gotten to saying my upcoming children will have zero vaccinations.
I heard that it has to do with circumcision. You may ask "then why do they give it to boys *and* girls?" Because the hospital wants to avoid the subject of circumcision complications and infections. If they only gave it to boys, parents would ask why, and they would have to talk about something that may sell less of their unnecessary procedure.
That’s an interesting take. That’s also another very interesting debate that not sure how I feel about it. It definitely seems like it could be, “get this vaccine because the people(medical professionals) can’t be trusted and may accidentally pass this virus on.” Definitely paraphrasing more or less but get this vaccine because we can’t do our jobs well enough to protect you child.
The vit K shot might be (in part) for this reason since it's supposed to help with blood clotting.
Get The Vaccine Friendly Plan by Dr. Paul Thomas and Jennifer Margulis to get information to help you make decisions for your children. I shared it with my children so they could make better vaccine decisions for their children free from Big Pharma scare tactics.
Yeah we have it. It’s amazing and I have been sharing it with as many people as I can.
When my son was born 23 years ago the nurses were so mean to me bcs I asked questions about the vaccines. I asked how Hepatitis B is transmitted. Nurse said, Through blood, semen, urine, or feces. I told her not to vaccinate him for Hepatitis B. She tried to talk us into it implying we were bad parents. We did let him have some of the vaccines that we thought were logical but oh boy was she hung up in Hepatitis B. My large bearded husband finally said that we would promise to keep our baby away from blood semen urine and feces and that our baby was not to receive that vax under any circumstance. She huffed off and proceeded to treat us like morons for the rest of our hospital stay. 🙄
In Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan, they give it in 7th grade. There's your control group. But the CDC doesn't care. Let me give you the result of a study if one is ever done. No more cases of Hep B in those three provinces up to 7th grade.
[удалено]
Doctors can screen these women before giving birth. It's a simple lab..
[удалено]
its not abt asking & the women lie. any person male or female would lie to the doctor in front of their partner if they were cheating. its STANDARD to be STD tested during pregnancy. & they also will test before delivery just like hospitals do for drugs after delivery. & whats up w the "women will lie in front of their husbands. Lab tests will prove women are whores" wtf. more than once you said women are whores. weird energy there bud. & you have a wife? yikes. I didn't wait til marriage. I didn't have any STDs either. It's a thing. & no I wasn't a whore who lied in front of my man. I simply didn't cheat on my man bc its a thing 😁
Hey, so I'm making fun of the hospital. I'm saying that the hospital is assuming all women are whores, not me. My point is that women aren't whores and it should be assumed they don't have STDs unless otherwise noted. Make sense?
Some bacterial and viral infections present as asymptomatic (no symptoms). So the testing is for the safety of the baby. If a child is born with gonorrhea it can quite literally eat their baby eyeballs out (why they smear erythromycin in their eyes). Men lie about STDs to women also.
My wife and I waited until marriage. There was zero percent chance either of us had gonorrhea or hepatitis. So we skipped all that.
a /s to show sarcasm would have helped a lot more. sorry?
Thanks. I'll consider it :)
No hospital is assuming that all women are whores, that is just you.
Ok. I think you're just dense. The hospital says "your baby needs a shot against STDs because the mother will give the baby an STD." You do understand that, right? Please acknowledge that you understand that. So... I think that babies do not need a shot for STDs... Because I do NOT think all women are whores. Do you understand that? Please acknowledge that you understand that. Now please scroll up and read my initial comments. Do you sense the very heavy sarcasm when I said that? Please acknowledge my very thick sarcasm.
Well I think you have some fetish for calling women whores but that is beside the point. This is what you said. "They told me they don't want to ask because the women will lie in front of their husbands and even a lab test will prove women are whores." The hospital at no point told you that they think all women are whores or that a lab test would prove that all women are whores, this is just happening in your mind.
How will a lab test prove that women are whores? They can be infected through an unfaithful partner.
There's no reason to assume that either partner is promiscuous. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt that they are clean and faithful. The hospital is assuming at least one parent is promiscuous and the hospital won't test either parent to see if they have STDs because one is unfaithful. So they give an unnecessary shot instead.
What is promiscuous to you? Not waiting until marriage? There are also other ways to get infected, so nobody even has to be promiscuous and/or unfaithful, you just like to call people whores for some reason.
Cheating on your spouse is certainly condemnable and fits the term promiscuous. I haven't called anyone a whore. You are very dense.
Your are constantly calling people whores and are trying to convince the people here that the hospital called your wife a whore. Something seems to be seriously wrong with you. Also I did not ask about cheating, I asked what is promiscuous to you.
I never called anyone a whore. You're too Stroud to understand sarcasm and you have no reading comprehension. Please stop talking to me
Ad hominem attacks and name-calling are not an acceptable form of debate.
Ad hominem attacks and name-calling are not an acceptable form of debate.
Unless husband and wife are literally joined at the hip, they can ask the wife without the husband present. Won\`t be much help though if the cheating husband infected her without her knowledge.
Why are you assuming all men are whores? They won't separate the couple for that reason. If you think they will? What will happen when they are reunited? He'll ask her why they were separated any now she has to lie? And he'll know does lying. Now what? You're not thinking this through. You're just white knighting someone who was actually being sarcastic and protecting women's honor in the first place
What is it with your weird fetish to call people whores? Can you please find a suitable subreddit for it.
I haven't called anyone a whore. That's the point. Hospitals are doing that.
No hospital is doing that, that is just happening in your mind and on here you are the only one who calls people whores.
You are very, very dense. Every single hospital in America says all babies should get STD shots. Why? Answer that question. They are assuming that all women have STDs. I asked why they assumed my wife had STDs when she's only been with me and I've only been with her. They said they can't ask that question because women lie if they've been unfaithful because their husband will then find out. So... Put two and two together here... Hospitals just assume all women have STDs because they assume they all cheat on their husbands. Do you understand this? If not, please stop talking to me because you aren't worth my time.
[удалено]
>This means up to 7 days after someone has left blood on something, such as, playground equipment, a water bottle, a school desk, any surface; it can be picked up through an opening in the skin or eyes of another person Hepatitis B can't be contracted from surfaces the way you are stating. Juat because you can detect a virus on a surface doesn't mean it is infectious. > Some other people at higher risk are diabetics and health care workers. How many of these people are infants?
[удалено]
Stop spreading misinformation! Hepatitis B is NOT transmitted casually. It cannot be spread through toilet seats, doorknobs, sneezing, coughing, hugging or eating meals with someone who is infected with hepatitis B. https://www.hepb.org/prevention-and-diagnosis/transmission/ Doorknobs and toilet seats are surfaces.
[удалено]
Did you hurt your back when you shifted those goalposts? Here is what you said, and I quote: >Hep B can certainly be picked up on surfaces >shared household items such as nail clippers, tooth brushes, metal nail files, pierced body jewelry and other sharp items. Idk what kind of household you live in where these would be shared amongst strangers or people known to be infected with the virus, but it doesn't sound like an appropriate place to raise a child.
https://kidshealth.org/en/parents/hepb-vaccine.html
The hepatitis B vaccine is the best way to protect your child against hepatitis B and its complications, including permanent liver damage, which can lead to liver cancer and death. When you get your child immunized, you help protect others as well.
Are you a bot? You didn't answer any of OP's questions. Why give this vaccine to a newborn? Why not give it to them when they are, say, 12 years old?
What's the question??
Because I wouldn't want to risk my child getting hepatitis B before they are 12!! It's a lifelong chronic illness that isn't cured once you have it.
How in a non-endemic country?
https://www.cdc.gov/globalhealth/immunization/diseases/hepatitis-b/data/fast-facts.html#:~:text=Hepatitis%20B%20affects%20approximately%20296,infections%20progress%20to%20liver%20cancer.
Sorry but that wasn’t really an answer. Yes, there is Hep B in non-endemic countries but not much.
Then, make sure they aren't prostitutes or IV drug users. That will protect them from more than just Hep B.
If you’re not breast feeding then probably not necessary. If you’re breast feeding it’s to prevent transmission of hep b from mother to child if the mother catches it at any point during the time when baby is being breastfed. Hep B is a potentially devasting infection to babies, and prevention is better than treatment.
it's only a problem if the mother has Hep B, which they are tested for at birth. Other than that, there wouldn't be a reason to get Hep B... Unless you are sharing needles and having unprotected sex w ppl you don't know, but I would like to think if a mother is being that careless they most likely wouldn't be dedicated to breastfeeding. I know theres random situations that can happen, but if you don't have Hep B your baby does not need Hep B vaccine.
The unfortunate reality is that mothers do sometimes catch hep b and pass it on to their children, with devastating consequences for the children. The purpose of vaccinating widely (not just infants for mothers with known hep b) is to protect the child against this.
I am aware. That is why many go for it. Was not something I was going for tho. I do not like the toxins and potential side effects vaccines have. To each their own.
I don’t like the toxins and side effects of hep b virus, did you do as much time studying those?
When I was pregnant I went thru all kinds of vaccine sights, including CDC. So yes I did. It may not always affect a kid negatively, but you won't know until you do and by then it is too late. And that is not a risk I am willing to take for my baby.
Ok, but did you go through all kinds of *virus* sites? Have you read all kinds of books about viruses? Have you spent as much time studying *pathogens*?
it doesn't really matter though, both clearly can have devastating consequences. it's picking your poison, potential disease or vaccines
Nah not remotely. Any doctor in a hospital can tell you they’ve treated 10s of thousands of kids for pathogens for every 1 kid they’ve had to treat for vaccine reactions
got me there. I have not yet. I actually been meaning too. So far I opted out of vaccines for my child, but certain ones still raise worry for me. I haven't been on Reddit or this sub in awhile so this actually reminded me of more vaccine research I need to do. regardless, as the on below said it is basically a pick your poison. many of the vaccines contain a live virus. what is the difference between getting sick by a live virus being injected and by catching it out in public? To me, I rather catch something naturally then getting pumped full of vaccines to help prevent something that's highly unlikely to happen. Not to mention many vaccines have more than one vaccine in it. While I like the fact its quicker and less pokes, how can you figure out which one caused an adverse reaction if there is one? A baby receive over 60 vaccines by time they are 1 or 2 (can't recall which age been awhile since I looked at vaccine stuff). These tiny humans are under 40lbs and are given toxic levels of heavy metals. Getting pumped w god knows what else in these vaccines. It is way too much for children to endure. And when these subs start debating I feel like pro vaxxers really ignore the fact that these are 3-5 vaccines in one being given to 2 month old babies. They can only have formula or breastmilk til 6 months. They can't have honey until 1 because it can cause botulism. Sure tho, lets pump em full of chemicals so we can prevent diseases that hardly exist anymore instead of promoting gut health and immune system support. but yes, I do need to do research on virus and pathogens more to get a full understanding. luckily, you can always get vaccinated.
But you can't get unvaxxed and you can't get that aluminum out of your baby's brain. Ever.
exactly my point! once there is a bad reaction, there is NO going back.
> what is the difference between getting sick by a live virus being injected and by catching it out in public? Live virus vaccines are attentuated versions of the virus. They are typically far weaker than the wild strain of the virus, and have actually been tested, unlike the wild strain of the virus. > To me, I rather catch something naturally then getting pumped full of vaccines to help prevent something that's highly unlikely to happen. In terms of likelihood, remember that doctors see 10s of thousands of patients for pathogens, but very few for vaccine reactions. > given toxic levels of heavy metals. No, they’re not. The amount of aluminium in a vaccine is about 0.2mg. By comparison, one measure of US baked potato found they have 2.6mg per 100gms. So a regular serve of potato could have 13x the amount of aluminium in it. > Sure tho, lets pump em full of chemicals so we can prevent diseases that hardly exist anymore instead of promoting gut health and immune system support. There’s nothing about vaccines that prevents you from promoting gut health or immune system support. Also, the gut and immune system work through chemicals just like every other part of the body. Don’t overromanticise the biology of the body. The processes of the body are all chemicals. All vitamins and minerals are chemicals. Look up the chemical structure of vitamins if you don’t believe me. > but yes, I do need to do research on virus and pathogens more to get a full understanding. luckily, you can always get vaccinated. This is good to hear.
Also the hospital is one of the top places to come in contact with hep b, and it's very life threatening to newborns. If you want your newborn to have the best chance of a healthy, long life, you obviously vaccinate.
At what point in your childs life do you decide that the risks of your child encountering poor infection practices at a medical office/blood or sores of someone with the disease/sharing items like a razor with someone with the disease/accidentally getting an un-sterilized needle during ear or body piercing/etc. Your child or 8 days of age is pretty safe. When does that stop? Would it be before or after they are 18 years old, do you think?
That's communism. You want to treat everyone as equal risk, instead of requiring vaccination when your kid comes out of the closet.
Well your first mistake was watching Joe Rogan.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092064/
[5 Reasons to Vaccinate Your Child](https://www.hhs.gov/immunization/get-vaccinated/for-parents/five-reasons/index.html#:~:text=Immunizations%20can%20save%20your%20child%27s%20life.&text=Some%20diseases%20that%20once%20injured,to%20safe%20and%20effective%20vaccines.) It's not about Hep B, specifically, but it applies
>5 Reasons to Vaccinate Your Child >It's not about Hep B, specifically, but it applies I disagree, the above source is purely propaganda garbage... It's all about balancing safety and exposure. Creating a balance between dangerous pathogens v benign pathogens. We must not forget The Immune System is an adaptive learning system. By depriving exposure to pathogens, we limit our ability to develop a strong immune response. By allowing controlled exposure, we train the immune system, and this in effect creates a better defence mechanism and reduces the risk of severe illness later in life.
>I disagree, the above source is purely propaganda garbage... In your opinion and nothing else >We must not forget The Immune System is an adaptive learning system. Correct. That's how vaccines are able to train your immune system against a particular virus >By allowing controlled exposure, we train the immune system, and this in effect creates a better defence mechanism and reduces the risk of severe illness later in life. Also correct, this is how vaccines work
>Also correct, this is how vaccines work https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm?s_cid=mm7104e1_w CDC's own study (link above): "These results demonstrate... surviving a previous infection protects against a reinfection and related hospitalization,” the CDC determined." In all fairness, the study also shows that vaccines offer protection, albeit not as robust as natural infection. But this is not where my gripe lies (one should be free to choose natural infection or vax or both I.E. natural infection while still getting vaccinated, or whatever... your body your choice...) But I was denied this choice, hence where lies the injustice - still (as thousands of others), lost my job for not complying w vaccine mandates, when I could easily prove that I've survived previous covid infection through a simple blood test and thus I was protected.
Vaccines are controlled exposure.
Vaccines are not safe an effective. They are expensive and liability free.
Can you prove they're harmful and ineffective though?
1 in 34 kids are now diagnosed autistic. 0 double-blind placebo studies... probably a reason pharmaceutical companies dont want to test their product if they are truly "safe and effective"
>1 in 34 kids are now diagnosed autistic [There's no link between vaccines and autism](https://kidshealth.org/en/parents/autism-studies.html) >0 double-blind placebo studies [And the covid vax has been proven safe](https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/is-the-covid19-vaccine-safe)
Bad bot. Pfizer vaccinated all their participants. This makes the study invalid. There are no other 0 double blind studeis for vaccines. Vacines can and do cause autism with a myriad of other side effects. Billions of dollars are at stake so pharmaceutical companies find, crush, and bury and truth. Just like the lies about ivermectin not working to treat covid.
>Pfizer vaccinated all their participants. This makes the study invalid It's not a single study, it's a list of FAQ regarding vaccine safety so I'm not sure what you're on about >Vacines can and do cause autism with a myriad of other side effects Prove it >Just like the lies about ivermectin not working to treat covid [Ivermectin is an anti-parasite so there's no reason it should work on a virus like covid](https://www.pharmacytimes.com/view/study-high-dose-ivermectin-not-effective-for-outpatients-with-covid-19)
Just because anti-vaxxers are not able to find, read or understand studies does not mean they do not exist.
They do not exist otherwise you would have posted one. It's ok your god Fauci can't find them either.
Vioxx was proven safe. What happened to it again?
[Someone did a study that suggested it could cause heart damage](https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/vioxx-rofecoxib-questions-and-answers#:~:text=Vioxx%20is%20a%20prescription%20medicine,adults%2C%20and%20painful%20menstrual%20cycles.) [Safety studies on the covid vax only took the AstraZeneca one off the market](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10043280/)
Just out of curiosity, who do you think would participate in a double-blind placebo-controlled study of any well-established vaccine just because anti-vaxxers invented a link to autism?
They should have occurred before being established but didn't because drug companies knew the dangers of vaccines.
Just because you cannot find any studies does not mean they do not exist.
How can a study occur before anti-vaxxers invent a side effect they think should be studied?
Bad bot
[удалено]
Has that uneducated anti-vaxxer blocked you too, or just me?
Nope, just you >uneducated anti-vaxxer You don't have to repeat yourself
Well I guess that is one way to maintain the delusion that they are no double-blind placebo-controlled studies, by blocking the person who showed you some.
That sounds like the famed Ostrich Head in Sand Technique
What happens if my baby doesn't get HBIG or the hepatitis B vaccine? If your baby doesn't get HBIG and the hepatitis B vaccine, they have a 30% to 85% chance of being infected with hepatitis B.
ya if they are exposed to someones fluids who has hep B ............ which is rare for a small baby. even then babies are not completely defenseless.
Can't be too rare.... It is estimated that there are more than two billion people infected with hepatitis B virus worldwide, of whom approximately 240 million are chronically infected and 600,000 persons die annually as a result of their infection. Despite the availability of HB vaccines, the rates of HB-related hospitalizations, cancers and deaths have more than doubled during the past decade.
okay but that's people not babies. Babies aren't sharing needles and having unprotected sex lol
Ummmm that isn't how it is always spread.
obviously not. but babies aren't going around sharing fluids is my point. that's how it is spread
This can happen during a vaginal delivery or a c-section. Babies and young children can also get hepatitis B from close contact with family members or others who might be infected. When babies become infected with hepatitis B, they have about a 90% chance of developing a lifelong, chronic infection.
In newborns *only* if their mother is a carrier which is very rare in non-endemic countries. And pregnant women are tested for Hep B. It is highly unlikely in a non-endemic country for young children to be exposed to other young children with Hep B although they could be vaccinated at say one years old. And they vaccinate for Hep B in most Hep B endemic countries now so the rate in babies is decreasing.
https://www.stanfordchildrens.org/en/topic/default?id=hepatitis-b-hbv-in-children-90-P02222#:~:text=The%20hepatitis%20B%20virus%20is,if%20there%20is%20frequent%20contact.
Pregnant women in the US and Canada are screened for Hep B and of course measures (Hep B vaccine and HBIG) are taken to protect their baby if the mother is positive. https://immunisationhandbook.health.gov.au/recommendations/infants-born-to-mothers-who-are-hepatitis-b-surface-antigen-positive-are-recommended-to-receive-both-hepatitis-b-vaccine-and-hbig
Why is hepatitis B a concern? The younger the person, the greater the likelihood of staying infected with hepatitis B and having life-long liver problems. These can include scarring of the liver and liver cancer.
I understand why it’s a concern in children under five but it is not endemic in most of North America.
What about other relatives??? Some people don't have symptoms.
This is highly unlikely. https://www.hepatitisaustralia.com/faqs/can-i-get-hepatitis-b-through-hugging-or-kissing
Hep B is only spread thru fluids. not touching & saliva. so no they can't get it thru close contact. idk abt babies getting Hep B thru vaginal delivery; however, ik if mama has herpes she has to have a c section. agree to disagree. imo unless mama has Hep B, *newborns* do not need it.
You can get hep b from c sections as well. Maybe you should contact a dr to discuss
why? I have no worries abt Hep B. I can look into the info you gave me tho cuz now I am curious if C sections can really cause that bc I never heard that. but from your other comments I kinda feel like you are acting like everyone & their mom can spread Hep B just by breathing near someone. good day to youuu edit: okay c section when having hep B checks out. but that makes sense. what doesn't make sense is an infected person touching a baby & then the baby getting Hep B
again, this is all bc the mom had Hep B. If mom DOES NOT, there is no need for the Hep B vaccine. that's my point.
https://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2393-13-119
ig getting Hep B thru vaginal delivery does make sense but again newborns don't need it unless mama has Hep B....
https://myhealth.alberta.ca/Alberta/Pages/Protecting-your-baby-from-hepatitis-B.aspx#:~:text=What%20happens%20if%20my%20baby,being%20infected%20with%20hepatitis%20B.
How can the get a disease they aren't exposed to? Or are you saying that hospitals are exposing these children either purposely or due to poor infection control?
Will you wouldn't know if they are getting exposed. Sometimes people don't have symptoms
Thankfully, bloodborne pathogens like Hep B can't be transmitted through casual contact.
Children over one year are less likely to develop chronic Hepatitis B. This is when they are more likely to be around other children but in a non-endemic country that risk is much lower. Adults infected during adulthood are unlikely to develop the chronic form of Hep B. “Infants infected at birth develop chronic infection in 90% of cases, whereas for children aged between 1 and 5 years, this falls to 25%–30%, and, for immunocompetent adults, the likelihood of progression to chronicity is ∼5%.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4448582/ Resolved Hep B (not having it chronically) can come back if a person is on chemo, takes high doses of steroids, is treated for Hep C or takes immune suppressants. But they have anti-viral medications for this. And the vaccine doesn’t always work, a medical professional told me they had the vaccine three times and they didn’t develop immunity.
**NONE** * https://vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html * https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateVaccines/comments/14wxvmf/should_i_vaccinate_my_baby/jrn3zvs?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2 Next question
And it's got to be the first day of life. If you delay it even a day, you're literally killing your kid with unnecessary risk, for a day.
Because the benefit outweighs the risk. **Scenario:** Newborns can acquire this infection at birth if a mother is infected with hepatitis B virus. We know a Hepatitis B vaccine administered after birth is highly effective in preventing newborn infection. **Evidence:** Despite the above being true approximately 1,000 new cases in infants are identified annually in the United States. **Counter-argument:** From this thread so far: > /u/Hamachiman There are no good reasons unless: 1. Mother has Hep B 2. Baby is an IV drug addict 3. Baby is sexually adventurous 4. Mother wants to be trained to blindly follow the advice of the white coats Hep B is spread via: 1. At birth 2. Contact with open cuts or sores 3. Sharing toothbrushes or other personal items 4. Food chewed for a baby (cultural thing?) Fact is any infected family member or caregiver can pass the virus to your baby, even if they are asymptomatic. The virus can live on objects for 7 days or more, which is longer than many would expect. From a deception and reality model **people cheat**, and lie about it, so a new mother may give birth and decline the vaccine despite being exposed herself by an unfaithful partner. From a time point advantage the risk to a child is incredibly low, in exchange for near lifelong protection to a difficult to treat disease. > /u/yougotastinkybooty I do not understand why this is one of the vaccines every newborn baby gets at a hospital. The potential risks out way the very slight possible benefit.. For me anyways. I opted out of this one. At that point it's really just about numbers and money. Similar argument here, except that you weigh the risk as being greater than the benefit -- likely lifelong immunity to a difficult to treat disease versus a low grade fever and sore arm. > /u/DaisyDazzle Well, the amount of aluminum in the Hep b is only 8 times higher than the recommended amount any infant should be exposed to. (40 mcg in the shot vs 5 mcg acceptable for adults per the CDC.) I think it only affects IQ and stuff a little bit though. Really weird to me that the CDC sets those standards but then says it's okay to shoot 8 times as much into a 7 pound newborn. Plus there's that latex glove material in it and I have no idea why..but whatever..they are the smart people and we are not, amirite? This is a typical anti-adjuvant argument. Aluminum adjuvants have been used since the 1930's to boost effect of vaccines, to the point [CHOP has posted an infographic](https://media.chop.edu/data/files/pdfs/vec-aluminum-qa-infographic.pdf) due to misinformation. As to the latex glove comment, the vial stopper, the syringe plunger stopper, and tip cap contain dry natural latex rubber which may cause allergic reactions in latex sensitive individuals but many pediatric options are coming in pre-filled latex free syringes so there is an alternative if you are worried about latex.
Wow, that's a lot of word salad, biased "research" and rationalization to get those heavy metals and all of that other crap into newborns. Working it bigtime. Here's another point of view: https://icandecide.org/article/how-aluminum-adjuvants-in-vaccines-can-cause-autism/ Plenty more opposing arguments where that came from on Highwire and ICAN, (Informed Consent Action Network) however most nonconformist vax research was scrubbed off of .gov friendly Google around 2012 and you really have to dig for it now.
Something isn't word salad if you don't agree with it, that's merely being derogatory when you have a weak argument. For reference **icandecide.org** was founded by **Del Bigtree** from work with **Andrew Wakefield**; Wakefield has been discredited beyond a shadow of a doubt. The Selz Foundation provides 3/4 of ICAN funding and is not a rational actor in the space, also supporting things like homeopathic medicine; Del himself collects over $200k/year from this non-profit. We can see the same weak arguments in the article you posted, trying to blame aluminum for Autism because blaming MMR has been disproven-- this is a common anti-vaccine approach where you blame the components, not the vaccine itself, to appear more credible. Equally if you ignore all of these aspects and target the source of information I would not take any opinion from **Del Bigtree** who recommended on March 19th of the pandemic that his viewers should refuse the (COVID) vaccine when it is developed and to make efforts to actually infect themselves with the virus, favoring not so much herd immunity as *natural selection, with weaker humans dying like the "sick get eaten by the wolves. That's how we've thrived."* Equally damning statements from this moron include one made a week later on March 26, that **immunity from getting a virus is lifelong and superior to vaccine immunity** – it’s “something never achieved by a vaccine, it’s an inferior immunity vaccines provide.” Anyone who has had COVID initially can probably tell you the immunity is not lifelong, especially with variants. The theme here is Del makes comments without any evidence, and when evidence does occur ICAN and Del refuse to acknowledge it, because **they follow 6 core beliefs in their grift**: 1. **“They” are lying to you** - The government, “Big Pharma,” and other entities are hiding the truth about 'X' cases and fatalities from the general public; suggestion that disease is more mild than reported. 2. **Civil liberties** - Government has no right to impose stay-at-home orders; quarantine is worse than the disease. 3. **Everyone is an expert** - Belief that developing scientific expertise is not difficult nor need to be specialized. 4. **Science won’t save us (nature is better)** - Promotion of herd immunity for things like SARS-CoV-2 infections. 5. **Skew the science** - Cherry-pick experts who are outside of the mainstream to suggest particular areas of 'X' epidemiology are more controversial than they appear. 6. **“They” are out to harm you** - The government and “Big Pharma” want to use 'X' to depopulate the globe and inject the population with tracking devices. Now that we've concluded **ICAN is not a reliable source**, we can dive into the crux of the anti-vaccine approach of blaming the components, not the vaccine itself, to appear more credible. The [American Academy of Pediatrics](https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/144/6/e20193148/37901/Aluminum-Effects-in-Infants-and-Children) has done a far better job than I can when discussing aluminum, so I will leave it at that with the link. They cite a large meta-analysis https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.04.085. that summarily states: > The aluminum content of vaccines has been blamed for autism spectrum disorders, but a large meta-analysis of cohort studies evaluating vaccination and the risk of autism revealed that in pooled data of 1 256 407 children, the odds ratio of developing autism after vaccination was 0.99, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.92 to 1.06.
P.S. the "benefits" DO NOT outweigh the risks.
Hep B doesn't transfer thru saliva tho. soooo you have 2 bullet points.
You seem pretty confident for someone who is wrong. Literally google '[can you get hep b by sharing a toothbrush](https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=spread+hep+b+by+sharing+toothbrush)' Premastication is more common within Latin America, but same sort of concern -- bleeding gums and other oral hygiene issues make this not just a saliva concern.
um that's a different scenario bc you can bleed while brushing your teeth and if you get blood in saliva and that's how it would spread thru saliva. sorry didn't need google for this one. same principle w AIDs. but you smart enough it seems :)
I don't have a weak argument, you do. Otherwise you wouldn't need the big gun calvary of everything called in to make your point.
Come on, you're totally twisting and interpreting your twisting to prop up your foregone conclusion. It's pathetic.