Tag: peanut butter

Bad Vaccine Analogies

Analogies can help explain how vaccines work, especially good vaccine analogies.

Not having a cookie doesn’t make you immune to getting cookies…
Not having a cookie doesn’t make you immune to getting cookies from someone else…

They can also help explain how folks who do not support vaccines think.

Bad Vaccine Analogies

I wonder if all of their bad analogies will end up on tee shirts…

Would you use a parachute that was only 9% effective? Or would you just jump out of the plane and hope you can fly?
Would you use a parachute that was only 9% effective? Or would you just jump out of the plane and hope you can fly?

What do you think of Larry Cook’s analogy?

To be fair, the flu vaccine, in some years, can be as low as 9% effective.

Does that mean you can compare it to using a condom, parachute, or alarm clock that is only 9% effective?

How about this scenario:

You are on a plane that is about to crash and there is something wrong with the only parachute that is left on board. You inspect the stitching but estimate that you only have a 9% chance that it will deploy and get you to the ground safely. There is no backup parachute. Do you use it anyway, jump out without it and see if you can fly, or take your chances in a plane that is barreling towards the ground?

In most other situations, unless it is a life and death situation, you wouldn’t risk using a parachute that was only 9% effective. But what if that was your only option?

What if there is only a 9% chance that the parachute will get you to the ground without any injury, but a 80 to 90% chance that it will get you to the ground without dying? Would you use it then?

Would you use an alarm clock that was only 9% effective? No. I’ll set the timer on my phone to wake me up…

And that’s why we sometimes get a flu vaccine that is far less than 100% effective.

What’s the alternative?

Being unprotected and at a higher risk to get a severe case of the flu.

More Bad Vaccine Analogies

Larry Cook isn’t the only one to come up with bad vaccine analogies.

Why would you let your kid eat a poisoned cupcake?
Why would you let your kid eat a poisoned cupcake?

Of course, vaccinating and protecting your kids is not analogous to giving them a poisoned cupcake.

While vaccines are not risk free, serious reactions are extremely rare.

In fact, for this analogy to make even a little sense, you would have to have one million kids eating one million cupcakes.

Even then, the analogy falls apart.

Who would give their kid a cupcake if there was a chance that it was intentionally poisoned, even if the risk is just one in a million?

What’s the benefit of eating the cupcake?

Is this the last cupcake on earth? Is your child starving and is this cupcake the only thing he can eat? Is it a magic cupcake that can cure them of a life-threatening disease?

We vaccinate our kids, even if there is a one in a million chance of a severe, life-threatening reaction, because of all of the benefits they get from being vaccinated and protected.

Vaccines are not 100% safe, but they have few risks, and are safer than getting the diseases they protect us against.
Vaccines are not 100% safe, but they have few risks, and are safer than getting the diseases they protect us against.

How about all of the vaccine analogies about cars and seat belts?

Anti-vax folks like bad car and seat belt analogies.
Anti-vax folks like bad car and seat belt analogies.

Why don’t we call people who push for safer cars anti-car?

Jay Gordon doesn't think that that he is anti-vaccine.
Jay Gordon doesn’t think that that he is anti-vaccine.

Do these car safety advocates tell people to stop riding in cars or that a safe car can never be made?

Wanting safer vaccines doesn't make you anti-vaccine.
Wanting safer vaccines doesn’t make you anti-vaccine.

Do they say that kids will be hurt every time they ride in a car? Do they tell parents to just drive one day a week or one block a month?

Peanut butter or the plague??? Vaccine advocates aren't immune to bad vaccine analogies...
Peanut butter or the plague??? Vaccine advocates aren’t immune to bad vaccine analogies…

Unlike folks who are anti-vaccine, those who want safer cars generally still drive and ride in cars!

Making Sense of Vaccine Analogies

Have you heard the folks who say that they won’t set their kids on fire to keep someone else warm? They somehow think this is analogous to getting vaccinated and keeping herd immunity levels up to protect those who can’t be vaccinated.

No one wants to set your child on fire...
No one wants to set your child on fire…

You understand why that’s a bad analogy, right?

In addition to protecting others because your child doesn’t get sick and won’t expose them to a life-threatening disease, by vaccinating and protecting them, your own child doesn’t get sick!

Unlike setting your child on fire, it’s a win-win deal.

Well, it’s a win-win unless you believe classic arguments against vaccines, such as vaccines are poison or that vaccines don’t really work to prevent disease.

And maybe that’s why these bad analogies actually do work very well for some of these folks. They believe the misinformation and propaganda that help prop them up.

More on Bad Vaccine Analogies

Why Are We More Careful About Introducing Baby Food Than Giving Vaccines?

The rules about introducing baby food have changed a lot over the years.

Believe it or not, instead of rice cereal, when your baby is ready for solid foods, you can now give her fruits, veggies, meat, or even peanut butter. That’s right, infants can have peanut butter!

baby boy cake child
Let them eat cake, but don’t let that be your baby’s first food… Photo by Henley Design Studio on Pexels.com

In fact, if your baby has eczema, your pediatrician will likely encourage you to introduce peanut butter early, by four to six months, as a way to hopefully avoid peanut allergies later in life.

Why Are We More Careful About Introducing Baby Food Than Giving Vaccines?

Those are some big changes, aren’t they.

Still, a lot of other things stayed the same, including that parents should:

  • wait until at least four months, and often until six months, before they think about starting solid foods
  • only give one new food at a time

So while there are few restrictions on which foods to give now (still no honey before age 12 months and no choke foods), you still want to introduce one new food every three or four days to watch for a reaction.

Why is that different than for vaccines?

It’s because reactions to foods are more common, especially non-allergic type reactions (diarrhea, gas, and fussiness, etc), but also because there is basically no risk to delaying the introduction of new foods by this slow method.

There is also no real benefit to going much faster. Do you really want to introduce your baby to multiple new foods a day?

In addition to allergies and intolerances, there is another type of reaction you are watching for too – your baby simply not liking the food. For example, if one of your baby’s first foods is an apple, strawberry, beet combo puree and he spits it out at the first taste, how are you going to know which flavor he didn’t like? Isn’t it better to go through all of the single ingredient first foods before mixing them up?

Now if you did the same thing with vaccines, your baby would be getting a shot every four days! And it would leave them unprotected for a lot longer period of time.

Considering that serious vaccine reactions are rare, it is easy to understand that there is no benefit to only giving one vaccine at a time and we recommend that folks stick to the standard immunization schedule.

What to Know About Giving Vaccines and Introducing Baby Food

Although it is like comparing peas with peach mango and oatmeal cereal, stick to your pediatricians advice about vaccines and introducing baby food.

More on Giving Vaccines and Introducing Baby Food