People forget that one of the reasons these vaccines were developed was because there was so much death and long term health consequences from having these “childhood” diseases that vaccines were developed to combat. My sister’s friend’s brother lost his hearing due to one of these conditions, for which there was no vaccine at the time to prevent.
My mother had trouble breathing most of her life due to whooping cough. And my aunt had one leg shorter than the other due to polio. Anyone remember reading the Mrs. Mike book about the diphtheria epidemic?
I know someone about my age, late 50s, who is completely deaf due because her mother had rubella during pregnancy.
Your timeline is a little off. What you say is true of my generation – but it was 62 years ago that I suffered through the measles. Vaccinations for measles, mumps & rubella were developed in 1963, 1967 and 1969 respectively — so that’s 50 years ago or more. I had the mumps in 1961 – too early for the vaccine, but did get the rubella vaccine. My kids are in their 30’s and born before a chicken pox vaccine was developed (in 1995) – so my son had chicken pox at age 6 and my daughter had a mild case at around age 2 — so that’s the only vaccine that wasn’t available until more recently (20+ years now).
Does anyone know if those of us who had the disease 40+ years ago are capable of getting and passing on the virus now due to diluted immunity over time? Should we get the shot as a public health help?
I’m willing to get the booster shot (though I was diagnosed with the virus and suffered mightily) if it would help with herd immunity.
So far, I haven’t heard or read anything about getting revaccinated or boosters for anything but Tetnus, pertussis.
Also my doctors have recommended that those of us with chronic lung disease need to get another pneumonia shot every 5 years, even tho that exceeds cdc recommendations. We are also supposed to get annual flu vaccines.
Not generally. However, if you had chicken pox, it may come back as shingles, in which case you could pass the virus to a non immune person who would get chicken pox.
But also, some early measles vaccines were less effective, so those who had measles vaccine in the early years may want to get revaccinated.
Agree that it is a good idea to get the Shingrex vaccine – both shots. My internist was pleased to note that I received the vaccine in Feb & April, before folks started clamoring for it and there was the shortage that there is currently. Definitely a good idea to lessen your chance of getting Shingles.
But the vaccines were recommended for little kids. Older kids didn’t necessarily get make-up shots.
I was born in 1955 but somehow never caught rubella. I was never immunized because no doctor ever told me or my parents that I should be. Giving rubella shots to a teenager, college student, or young adult just wasn’t on their radar screens.
Then, in 1985, when I wanted to start a family, one of the first questions my doctor asked at my preconception visit was whether I had ever had or been vaccinated against rubella. Because the answer was no, I had to get the shot and then delay throwing away the birth control for several months.
We’re the same age, Marian, and I too made it through childhood without rubella. We found out when we did a pre-marriage blood test (do they still do those?). At that point I was immunized. Prenatal exposure to rubella is devastating.
I had the pre-marriage blood tests done in NJ for a wedding in CT. I requested the rubella test–required by CT but not NJ at that time-- but they sent the results without it. I contacted them, and they re-sent the form with immunity indicated.
Fast-forward 4 years: I’m pregnant. Doctor orders various tests: I am NOT immune to rubella! (I had measles as a kid, but not rubella, and was never vaccinated. I was vaccinated in the hospital after giving birth.)
I was really angry, because I was sure that the lab actually failed to run the test and some clerk decided to just check off the box rather that tell me I had to come in for retesting. Putting my child at risk that way was unconscionable.
Holy JPMorgan!!!
Oh there is one rabid anti-vaxer commenting on that story, and folks are not letting him have the last word. Great comment (for those who can’t see comments on the Seattle Times story):
"We regularly force parents to take protective action for their children. For example, look at child safety seat and seat belt rules. If you refuse to properly buckle your child in, you will be prosecuted, in most states for child endangerment. This is done regardless of unjustified fears that somehow some oddball chance of the car running off a bridge and submerging might justify not buckling the child in.
Some parents believe in beating their children. We nonetheless punish them for that.
We should likewise punish Anti-Vaxxer parents who deny their children vaccinations."
My daughter and her husband didn’t have to get blood tests before they got married in Virginia in 2017. I’m not sure about other states.
@BunsenBurner I knew exactly who you were referring to. That person (?) has made the same nonsensical comment on every recent measles article.
Everyone in my Catholic elementary school lined up for the rubella vaccine when it first came out. IIRC, it was free and no exceptions that I know of. I guess we were a lot closer to people having polio etc, for anyone to say “no”.
Sometimes I think people are simply getting stupider…
Are they? Or has the internet just made them more obvious?
I live in WA State where there is an outbreak of measles in the Vancouver area. I received an email today from our school district but it originated from our county health department. It said that if anyone in our community gets measles then students who have not been vaccinated for MMR will not be allowed to attend school. This seems like a prudent policy.
I know VA didn’t require blood tests for marriage all the way back to '88, 'cause that’s when we got married there - no blood test required. I don’t think many states required it when we looked to see if it would be an issue.
What were the blood tests for anyway? What did they check for and what could “fail” someone for the marriage license? Too close of a blood relationship?
I think the main idea is to check for STD’s. Maybe so the virginal wife to be can changes her mind if her husband turns out to be a cad? :)) I think these days it’s just a public health backstop, a way to ensure people at least get tested at that one point.