I can’t actually believe that anyone would allow their kid to lick, chew, ingest something called the Chicken Pox lollipop in lieu of getting a shot.
It’s being hailed by some as a more “natural immunity.” I really hope this is just a scam and nobody’s getting taken in by this.
ABC News is reporting:
Authorities and doctors are warning parents who want to avoid chicken pox vaccines for their children that a new mail-order scheme to share lollipops licked by children infected with the disease as a way to create immunity in their kids is not only unsafe but illegal.
“Can you imagine getting a package in the mail from this complete stranger that you know from Facebook because you joined a group, and say here, drink this purported spit from some other kid?” U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee Jerry Martin told The Associated Press.
There are even Facebook groups such as “Find a Pox Party in Your Area” offering ways for people to connect and share the virus through infected items, according to news reports.
What?!
Now, this could be popping up online as a way to get people to do this but it’s possible that my faith in humanity will be restored when I learn upon later reports that everyone simply said “ick” or some derivative of “ick” and clicked away from it. But on the other hand I wouldn’t be surprised to hear of “Pox parties” being all the rage. I wouldn’t doubt they’ll be one in my neighborhood. I’ve got some pretty weird neighbors.
November 8, 2011 at 1:43 pm
It was standard procedure in the 50's and 60's to expose kids deliberately to their sibs and cousins with the normal childhood diseases. One of my male cousins apparently had not had mumps and got sent to visit all of us when we each had our case. He never contracted it to his knowledge (perhaps he had a "silent case") but he sure had lots of family visits!
November 8, 2011 at 2:13 pm
I used to visit cloth diapering boards a couple years ago and these pox parties via mail were quite common. Even though they were told it was illegal to send suckers that their infected kid had licked, they didn't care.
Elaine, some of us don't care that the abortion happened before we were born. What I personally am opposed to is injecting that child's DNA into my child. I don't support abortion for any reason regardless of when it occurred, however in this case, I just don't want the DNA injected.
I questioned the efficacy of the varicella vax as well because my oldest had the vax before I learned of the ingredients. But when she was 5, nothing happened. However, my second child also had the vax (right when I was learning of them) but when she turned 5, they said she needed a booster. Why? What was the change? (I learned that the period of time when my oldest was five, the varicella vax booster was pulled from the shelves, it has since been put back on the shelves for usage).
November 8, 2011 at 3:51 pm
@Elaine: So a child murdered 50 years ago is some how not as bad as a child murdered yesterday? Forgive me, I'm not with you on that idea.
Also, its not just one child from the 1960's. There are many different lines being used in medical reseach, not just the one you cited. You don't really think they quit using aborted fetal cell lines years ago do you? These are just a few I could find that are being used today in medical research and/or drugs, vaccines: WI-38(12 weeks gestation), MRC-5 (14 week gestation), HEK-293 (293 representing the number of aborted fetal experiments used to est), PERC6 (18 weeks gestation), IMR-90 (16 week gestation, female), IMR-91 (12 weeks, male). Sickened? Me too. Let's not even get in to embryonic stem cell research b/c by definition we know what that is.
Now can you see why I feel that by not refusing the vaccine I am telling big pharma its okay to continue its use of unethical means to develop vaccines and perform other medical research? By not refusing, I am condoning the practice. Did you know that Merck used to make an ethical Rubella (packaged as MMR) vaccine, but quit distributing it to the US in 2009? There was no outcry from parents and they still don't make one in the US.
Maybe my sole refusal doesn't make a difference, but it has to start somewhere. Additionally, on judgment day I don't want to look into the eyes of those aborted children and tell them I didn't do my part to stop this. Imagine the irony: praying for an end to abortion and turning around to take part in its "reward"–i.e. a vaccine? I am not some crazy parent passing contaminated suckers to my kids, but I am a parent who cares about the right to life for all of God's children.
November 8, 2011 at 6:03 pm
It's depressing to read comments on boards like this, where deadly ignorance is put forth as common sense.
Yes, people used to try to get Chicken pox as children, before there was a vaccine. It's not as dangerous for children. But even they can catch encephalitis from the disease. It's not that rare – something like one out of a thousand. But out of millions of kids, that's a lot of cases. The risks form the vaccine, by contrast, are negligible.
But what's not being taken into account in that calculation is that children with (relatively benign) chick pox don't have the disease on some deserted island. Quarantine in the home is pretty hard to arrange. So adults and babies are often exposed to it.
And chicken pox can be absolutely devastating to them. Infants and the aged, with their weak immune systems, are particularly vulnerable to pneumonia complications. Something like ten percent of pregnant women who get chicken pox also catch pneumonia. Adults can suffer from shingles from the same virus.
I live in a small liberal town, with a lot of vaccine skeptics. Some of them prefer 'natural' therapy (hey, the Black Death was natural!), others rant about Big Pharma (Bogeymen are always a sure sign of intelligent engagement of an issue). Well, now there's an uproar because diseases that haven't been a problem for decades… suddenly are.. Whooping cough, measles, etc. Their poor kids have to suffer. It's depressing to see Catholics jump on this Bonehead Bandwagon
November 8, 2011 at 7:15 pm
wow matthew! i hope i grow up to be as smart and condescending as you someday. you should run the cdc. if only you really knew what you were talking about that is…
funny you should bring up weak immune systems in infants. they are actually NOT weak but are not fully formed and injecting them with KNOWN carcinogens is no way to boost their immune system.
the varicella vaccine is a LIVE attenuated vaccine with a LIVE virus that can give the recipient chicken pox AND it can give them shingles. it also has a transfer rate which means that those who get the vaccine ARE CONTAGIOUS for up to 10 days. why aren't these people quarantined?
if you want some facts, but i think that you aren't really interested in truth, visit:
http://www.nvic.org/ or http://www.kansansforvaccinerights.com/
November 8, 2011 at 10:32 pm
To follow up with what Melissa just stated, one of the reasons infants should be breastfed is because it imparts some of the mother's immunity on the baby. A baby's immune system is not well developed AND they have a very porous gut which allows the transfer of the immune factors. I'm immune to both varicella and rubella from childhood infections, and part of that immunity is shared with my nursling via the milk. A nursing mother can attest: If baby gets the cold first, they are sicker way, way longer (and tend to be way, way sicker) than if mom gets it first.
I'm not antivax, but I don't vax my kids for very good (personal) reasons. But to counter that, based on my doctor's advice, I practice extended breastfeeding.
I find the entire lollipop-my-mail quite gross, but have no problems with pox parties. I remember them as a child, and I'm in my 30s. Chicken pox is not risk-free, but neither is the vaccine. It's just a matter of knowing what the risks are, and deciding which ones are more acceptable to you and your family.
November 8, 2011 at 10:37 pm
And on another note, Matthew, I live in a small, very conservative city in rural Canada, and there's tons of skeptics here too. Our vax rate here hovers around only about 70%, which is actually quite low considering our vaccines here are mostly free and there's quite an aggressive campaign to encourage vaccination.
So no, most anti-vaxers I meet are not boneheads but are generally well-educated, well-informed, and deeply concerned.
November 9, 2011 at 12:30 am
It's really interesting to look at the differences in vaccines between countries. I'm from the US, but lived in the UK for a bit. In fact, my children were born there before we returned to the US. I was really amazed at the differences. They don't vaccinate for varicella in the UK, and the Health Visitor I had thought it was rather silly to vaccinate for it given that it's so often mild. I don't know what other medical professionals thought, because I didn't think to ask. It wasn't available and that was that. My son had a very mild case of chicken pox and my daughter hasn't had them, though she was unintentionally exposed to children with chicken pox. I personally won't get her the vax because of the aborted foetal cells. Yes, I know the cells are from one abortion years ago, but that's enough for me.
As for the chicken pox lollipops, I'd never heard of them until recently. I'd asked someone what they were, but didn't go that route for exposing my daughter. Yeah, just not happening. If she encounters someone with chicken pox in the normal course of things, that's fine. Giving her a pre-licked lollipop? No thanks.
November 9, 2011 at 1:52 am
I never said "a child murdered 50 years ago is not as bad as one murdered yesterday."
I simply said I don't see how one can be held morally responsible for "cooperating" with an action that happened long before they were born and over which THEY HAD NO CONTROL.
To argue that parents who vaccinate their children are guilty of cooperating in abortion is like arguing that all white Americans are morally complicit in stealing land from Native Americans, or that living in an antebellum house that may have been built by slaves makes you morally complicit in slavery.
Injustices that happened long ago are no less wrong for having happened long ago, but if you weren't there when it happened, and weren't even the proverbial glint in your daddy's eye at the time, how can YOU be held responsible?
Elaine
November 9, 2011 at 2:43 am
My children and I have all had adverse reactions to vaccines, so we're done with shots in our family. My son got pox from a party, but it's almost impossible to find wild chicken pox anymore, and my daughter still hasn't contracted it. They both nursed for a really long time, because I knew we had some family pre-dispositions to make up for. Here's hoping! Oh, and I would never do suckers by mail, because that's gross and who knows where the envelope has even been. The parties are actually quite fun for all concerned 🙂
November 9, 2011 at 3:10 pm
Pox Parties or Pox through the mail are equally GROSS!!! Elaine is right. The Catholic Institute of Bioethics has an article that addresses vaccines derived from cell lines of aborted fetuses. It basically says that it is a bigger moral issue to spread potentially harmful diseases to others. And while it is perfectly ok to make a heroic stand for yourself and not get a vaccine it is not the role of the parent to make that choice for their child. It is the duty of the parent to protect your child. So from there I guess one could argue that vaccines are harmful to their health in other ways but I have found no proof of that either. To actually see proof for me means reading the actually study that finds vaccines causing harm in higher numbers than the actual disease not just the article on a antivax site. The study should have been done by a research scientist too and not a lawyer, a group of angry parents, a homeopathic whatever, or a chiropractor. If someone can site one, please do so. I could go on but I have school to tend too. Here is the link to the article……
http://www.immunize.org/concerns/furton.pdf
Leslie
November 9, 2011 at 3:19 pm
Yes, if the disease is something serious enough and there is no alternative, it is OK to receive vaccines with aborted foetal cells. I personally do not put chicken pox in that category, but there are others who will make different decisions and that is OK. I prefer if all such decisions are made following appropriate research with reputable sources. As I mentioned earlier, part of my perspective comes from seeing that England, for example, doesn't vaccinate for it, and yet doesn't have a horrible problem with chicken pox complications. Same with some of the other jabs that are routinely given in the US but not in the UK (eg: Hep B). But there are those who do need these vaccines, especially those with weakened immune systems.
I will say that I wrote to the manufacturer for the MMR to express my concerns, and they brushed it off saying that the Church was OK with it, which isn't quite accurate. The Church is OK with it if there are no alternatives, but encourages them to come up with alternatives, which the drug company didn't seem inclined to do. I know, getting a letter from one parent isn't exactly enough to convince them, but perhaps if we all wrote, they would be more inclined to change that.
November 9, 2011 at 8:16 pm
These people are disgusting and years later when their kid is sterile like my husband or has painful attacks of shingles like my boss the kid can curse mom and dad.