Measles: What Else is There to Say?

I have been trying not to get into the vaccine debate, mainly because I have friends who choose not to vaccinate their children, and whether I agree with them or not, I do respect and love them.

This used to be the only protection against measles.

I'm still hesitant to post this: I mean, there's already enough blogs on the subject, aren't there? Why should I post this and risk further alienating those who disagree with me? (I say further, because for the first time tonight I did speak up on a friend's post, and I was torn about whether to do that or not, too.) What more can I possibly add to the ever-mounting din of measles and vaccination debate?

Not much, I suppose. Except this.

I suspect most parents my age or younger have no real concept of measles. The first measles vaccines were around in the 1960s. In 2000, the year before my oldest child was born, measles was essentially eradicated in North America. Most of us have never seen a person with measles. Up until the glut of news coverage lately, I would imagine that most of us thought of measles as similar to chicken pox: a fever, some spots... just another childhood disease to check off the list in the baby book.

But it's not. Yes, it was once a common childhood disease that almost everyone got. But it was also the most lethal one. In the years leading up to the 1963 introduction of the measles vaccine nearly everyone got measles at one time in their life. According to the CDC, 3,000,000 to 4,000,000 people were infected each year, and approximately 400-500 of those would die. Another 4,000 were affected by encephalitis (swelling of the brain that could lead to permanent mental impairment.)

And it nearly killed me.

I was 11 months old, according to my mom (I obviously don't remember the details) and too young to be vaccinated. Mom says she's put a lot of the details out of her mind, which is understandable, I think, but basically she just remembers giving me alcohol baths, and praying that my fever would come down, because there really wasn't anything else she could do.

I can't imagine going through that with one of my children. I went through a life-threatening illness with my husband last year, and that was one of the most traumatic things I've been through in my entire life. If it had been one of my children, I don't know how I would have coped.

Roald Dahl dedicated his book, "The BFG" to his daughter, Olivia,
who died at the age of 7, after complications from measles.

The mistrust I see in my generation - of the political system, of capitalism (or socialism, in some cases), of "Big Pharma" - it's a systemic problem that isn't going to be cured overnight. There's no vaccine for it. This measles outbreak may convince a few anti-vax parents to vaccinate, but most of them, like my friends, will just dig their heels in even further. They will be even more convinced of the conspiracy behind vaccination. It won't matter to them that their children are more likely to be killed in a shark attack than they are to be injured by a vaccine. They are more likely to be struck by lightning.

It's true: you don't know that your child won't be the 1 in 10,000,000 to die from a vaccine complication. You also don't know that they won't have a reaction to peanuts, or eggs, or Tylenol, or any other number of things.

No matter how much we want to, we can't protect our children from everything.

You know what we can protect them from?

Measles.

Stephen Harper Can Bite Me

Okay, not my most eloquent title, but in this case, fitting.

Harper is making Canada a laughingstock amongst the G8 right now. We are the ONLY country that is putting a caveat on what our money can be used for in terms of maternal health in the Third World. Now he's actually got the gall to say that the majority of Canadians don't support allowing abortion funding.

Bite me. Abortion is legal in this country. Abortion is federally funded. Women in this country have access to safe, legal abortions. What gives us the right to deny women in situations that are MUCH worse the same right? The fact is that in most of these countries, pregnancy is a life-threatening condition. If a woman even survives a pregnancy, there may not be enough food to support another mouth in the family. Rape is a common occurrence in many of these places.

Do you know what is considered an abortion in sub-Saharan Africa? Try drinking turpentine or bleach. Impaling themselves. Jumping off roofs.

A woman desperate not to continue a pregnancy will do anything to achieve this goal. It's just pathetic that Harper is crowing about saving women's lives while he's allowing so many to remain at risk. Bev Oda should be ashamed of herself. I'm just disgusted.

Copy of an Email Sent to Colin Carrie, MP for Oshawa

Dear Dr. Carrie,

I have recently become aware of changes that the province of Quebec is making to its healthcare system. As an Ontario resident this usually wouldn't be an issue to me, however in this particular case I am outraged that these changes are being allowed by the Federal government, and worried that the silent approval being given to them will be taken as a sign by the other provinces that going against the Canada Health Act is acceptable.

Quebec is planning to charge a $25 user fee for each doctor's visit, as I'm sure that you're aware. To my knowledge, not a single Federal politician has spoken out against this, despite it being contrary to the Canada Health Act. The Act says quite straightforwardly:

User charges
19. (1) In order that a province may qualify for a full cash contribution referred to in section 5 for a fiscal year, user charges must not be permitted by the province for that fiscal year under the health care insurance plan of the province. 

So how is this now acceptable? As you are a medical professional I'm especially bothered by your apparent lack of concern. I understand that the health system in Canada is under great stress, but user fees are simply not the answer. $25 may not seem like very much to some people, but there are so many people in Canada for whom this would be completely out of reach. Even for families such as mine, with four children, if all four children were sick at the same time we would be looking at a $100 bill for a few minutes in urgent care.

Our family lived in the United States for a year, and we have experienced their healthcare system. It is one of the reasons that we returned to Canada, and why I would hesitate to live there again. Even with employer-provided insurance and a relatively healthy family we found healthcare costs to be difficult.

In my experience, user fees do tend to make you think before you go to the doctor, which may be a good thing at first glance, however, if a user fee presents a financial difficulty you may end up avoiding an office visit when one is warranted, possibly leading to a worse medical problem down the road. To me this doesn't make sense: isn't it better to deal with problems at the start and avoid a larger bill to medicare later on? As a wellness practitioner, I would think that you would see the value in regular office visits for preventative care, as well, which might be avoided if they present a financial problem.

I hope that the Conservative Party will speak out against Quebec's planned user fees, and enforce the Canada Health Act. The vast majority of Canadians treasure our national healthcare system and do not want to see it destroyed.

Sincerely,
Cynthia Hill


NOTE: This letter was also cc's to Prime Minister Harper and Minister of Health Leona Aqlukkaq. To find an email address for your own MP, you can look here. I urge you to write a similar letter if you don't want to see Quebec allowed to go against the Canada Health Act.

Quebec Adds User Pay Charge for Health Care

I am furious.

The Canada Health Act says:

User charges
19. (1) In order that a province may qualify for a full cash contribution referred to in section 5 for a fiscal year, user charges must not be permitted by the province for that fiscal year under the health care insurance plan of the province. 

Apparently Quebec didn't read that part of the act. In that province's latest budget they introduced a $25 user fee for each doctor's appointment. Are you freaking kidding me? This terrifies me. It's one of the things that I hated about living in the US. $25 might not sound like a lot to some people, but to someone living below the poverty line it might be the difference between going to the doctor or having food for a week. Even for some middle class families it's more than they can manage. Think about my family: I have four kids. If all of the members of my family were sick at the same time, including my husband and I, that's $150 to go to the doctor! And to possibly be told "It's just a virus. Drink lots of fluids and get some sleep."

I will say that having lived with co-pays in the States I do think twice before running to the doctor, but I don't like it, truthfully. My son was showing signs of an ear infection. Since the thinking now is that most ear infections are viral, I decided to wait it out. His eardrum ruptured.

The Canada Health Act is one of the most fundamental parts of this country. It's one of those things that we trumpet as making us better than *ahem* other countries without universal health care. The fact that NO ONE at the federal level has said anything about Quebec's decision is troubling. Not even the NDP! Seriously??? Jack Layton, who is currently undergoing cancer therapy using Canada's universal health care system and paying NOTHING, thinks it's okay to start down this slippery slope?

I realize that the healthcare system is hurting. I'm not naive. There are changes that need to be made. This is NOT one of them. There will be those who can't afford to go to the doctor for troubling symptoms. They will wait until they simply cannot wait anymore. Isn't this going to cost more in the long run? I know a woman in the US who had ovarian cancer. She is supposed to follow up every six months. She never has, because she can't afford the cost of the ultrasound. Is this the route we want to take?