Parents coordinate trading of chicken pox-laced goods via Facebook

http://blog.sfgate.com/sfmoms/2011/11/04/parents-ordering-chicken-pox-lollipops-through-facebook/

by dpritchett • 15 years ago

16 33 15 years ago

blog.sfgate.com

rdtsc4• 15 years ago

The stupider the people get, the more regulations and laws need to be passed to regulate them.

These individuals need to be punished, and if they don't stop, children taken away from them. I don't see this any different than harsh physical abuse.

All those participating in it, should be guilty of child endangerment as well.

In general those refusing to vaccinate their child should be forced to sign a waver form that would make it very easy to fast-track their prosecution for abuse and child endangerment if it can be shown the child has been infected and their life is in danger or has infected others.

davidhansen• 15 years ago

This may not be a case of stupidity. It could very well be simple ignorance that a chicken pox vaccine exists. Until I saw this article, I was previously unaware that a vaccine for chicken pox was ever developed.

umarmung2• 15 years ago

Same here.

After researching it, in most of Europe, children do not get vaccinated from chicken pox. We have no special higher rate of incidence of the disease either in totality or as adults.

The only time the vaccine is ever given out here is for those at special risk, e.g. adult healthcare workers who are not already immune or those who live around people with compromised immune systems.

Also, ironically, where the chicken pox vaccine is widely used, e.g. in the US (unlike most places in the world), there is no natural external boosting of immunity from being exposed to others with chicken pox, so therefore MORE injections may be needed later.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varicella_vaccine

rdtsc4• 15 years ago

I was addressing those referenced in the article who specifically refuse a vaccine after it is suggested to them because "it gives the immune system a workout".

dogfu6• 15 years ago

What do you say the relative of someone who had a vaccine and immediately became crippled and couldn't walk because the reaction damaged their inner-ear? Just co-incidence? No p-value with a sample of one? Would you make them take that vaccine? Or let 'em slide on this one? I'm not sure your government regulations would deal with this case.

The immune system is an organ like the muscles, brain and heart. Putting a little stress on these organs is actually good. Just because the autism/vaccine fiasco was fraud doesn't invalidate all concerns. For instance the school system forcing girls to get "anti-cancer" vaccines when there is an effect alternative (i.e. "dont' be a promiscuous"). The parents can make that choice ... or the kid when she becomes a teenager. If polio or small-pox are threats, certainly the good out weighs the bad. But chicken-pox? Not so clear cut. AIDS? Again, don't sleep around and dont jab things in your body and you won't get AIDS.

scythe4• 15 years ago

>What do you say the relative of someone who had a vaccine and immediately became crippled and couldn't walk because the reaction damaged their inner-ear?

The same thing you say to the person who got struck by lightning five times. On a societal level, you work with the 99.99999%.

>The immune system is an organ like the muscles, brain and heart. Putting a little stress on these organs is actually good.

Just to verify: you took one bio course as a college underclassman and you think that makes you an immunologist.

tresta2• 15 years ago

re no need for a hypothetical aids vaccine (or the cervical cancer one) if you don't "sleep around" or take drugs:

I assume that you've never heard about rape? Or for that matter coming into contact with HIV positive blood in an accident, or any other infection vector?

rdtsc4• 15 years ago

> The immune system is an organ like the muscles, brain and heart. Putting a little stress on these organs is actually good.

That kind of armchair immunology and microbiology would exactly be prevented by harsher regulations. This analogy and hunch might not just hurt your child, but if your child gets infected, they could infect infants at a doctors office who have not yet gotten their immunizations.

> For instance the school system forcing girls to get "anti-cancer" vaccines when there is an effect alternative (i.e. "dont' be a promiscuous").

OK agree with you there, however there is no easy way to prevent many of these infectious diseases.

wildjim2• 15 years ago

In the UK and NZ, the vaccine is only given to those at-risk from Chickenpox. Children don't receive it as a matter of policy, and I don't believe adults who've never caught the disease are normally offered it, either.

One of the reasons/theories I've heard for this, is that if you've had Chickenpox, you are at-risk for Shingles -- which is often extremely painful and difficult to overcome. However, if you are regularly exposed to Chickenpox, your immune-system gets "reawakened" to the virus, therefore can more-quickly recognise and fight-off a recurrance, before it becomes Shingles.

One of the easiest ways to aid this exposure is to keep the virus active, but under-control, in the community. This has a useful side-effect of the community also being aware and more-knowledgeable about the disease, too.

Another argument I've heard against the vaccine is that it's simply not possible to get rid of Chickenpox totally -- it's _highly_ infectious, and the infectious stage is before symptoms appear, etc -- but the vaccine gives a false sense of security of protection, perhaps in the same way as everyone thinks they're safe from Smallpox, Hepatitis, Ebola, etc because we worked so hard to get rid of or control it.

jrockway2• 15 years ago

These individuals need to be punished, and if they don't stop, children taken away from them.

Is growing up without one's parents less harmful than getting a common childhood disease from a friend? Who is going to pay to punish the parents and relocate the children?

rdtsc4• 15 years ago

I don't see knowingly exposing ones child to an infectious disease, that could be life threatening (people die from complications from shingles), any different than leaving the child in a hot car in the summer or say beating them. If you read the article this is also happening with mumps, rubella and other infectious diseases.

> Is growing up without one's parents less harmful ...

After a certain point yes. Because being crippled or dead is better than growing up with abusive parents sometimes.

jrockway2• 15 years ago

I don't really see the hate for these people. You get the chicken pox once. The earlier in life you get it, the less troublesome it is.

I'm not going to argue against vaccinations, but the reality is that we have much more long-term data about having kids play together than the chicken pox vaccine. Both options are probably equally good at this point, and most people have personal experience with the first one and not the second one. Therefore it's not particularly odd to want your kid to get chicken pox naturally.

(I don't buy the argument about "giving the immune system a workout", though.)

alexholehouse3• 15 years ago

Because sending highly infectious biological material through the mail system can be exceptionally hazardous for anyone who may come into contact with it. Adult chickenpox can be lethal.

scythe4• 15 years ago

>You get the chicken pox once.

False.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shingles

wildjim2• 15 years ago

Strictly speaking, it's not the same as Chickenpox, especially in symptoms and effect.

jessriedel• 15 years ago

You can believe the unknowns associated with the new chicken pox vaccine aren't worth the well-known and manageable hassle of having the chicken pox, without also believing crazy things about vaccines causing autism or sending infections through the mail.

umarmung2• 15 years ago

Exactly.

Inviting around other local kids to interact with each other to overcome the much heavier risks of the adult version of this disease or to go on frequent field trips to farms and rural areas while young so that kids bodies are no strangers to naturally occurring organisms and strengthen their immune system is VERY different from sending around contagions in the mail!

Risking affecting others without them knowing is very much a red line most sensible people would never cross.

Mz4• 15 years ago

Mailing contagious items: Not cool.

Local "pox party": I have no problem with it.

My ex caught chicken pox from our children around the time he turned 32. Chicken pox in adults is much more serious than in children. I finally dragged him to a doctor against his will after watching his fever go up 0.8 degrees a day every single day until it was over 104F. Above 105 is dangerous. It was on track to hit that mark within the next 24 hours. Years later, he swore it was never really that bad (ie his life was never really in danger). I suspect he partly just didn't remember how bad it was. He wasn't lucid for much of the time. He was left with much worse scars than the kids. He had fantasies he would stay home from work and play computer games, like the kids. For at least a week, he laid on the couch, unable to sit up for long. I had to leave meds in a covered candy dish to get any sleep. His hands were swollen and his palms had spots on them, so he couldn't open his medication bottles.

pasbesoin2• 15 years ago

s/Not cool/Illegal/

IIRC

And, that would be violation of Federal law. Documented on FB?... No thanks.

My father caught chicken pox as an adult, while travelling. It nearly killed him.

P.S. Looked at the story (duh). Says the same thing. Anyway, I'll leave my personal anecdote FWIW.

Mz4• 15 years ago

I imagine it is illegal (someone else already said that here). Law and morality are not the same thing and are fairly often at odds. Historically in the US, slavery was legal at one time in some states. After it was abolished, racism was embodied in the legal code. Plenty of morally high minded people disagreed with those laws.

Whether legal or not, I don't find it acceptable. Similarly, on CF lists, people routinely post announcements that they have leftover medical supplies of some sort and are willing to give it away for free (sometimes on the condition that the recipient cover postage, sometimes not). This is generally viewed as socially acceptable on most CF lists because medical expenses for CF are extremely high and people coping with CF are typically financially devastated by that fact. On the only CF list I own, I announced that this was not an acceptable practice because I think the price of exposure to the germs of another person with CF outweighs the value of the supplies. So I think that's Not Cool either, even in cases where it happens to be legal (and legality of it varies by jurisdiction in this case and probably also depends on exactly what is being offered).

Parents coordinate trading of chicken pox-laced goods via Facebook

Related Stories