Phin woke up yesterday with his rash worlds better and his outlook on life much improved. We went crazy and spent a couple hours at Target buying some miscellaneous supplies for Gid's schooling this year (perhaps more about our home schooling later?). It was so nice to be out. I'll post a copy of an email I sent to Chloe.
Our pediatrician's office called us back Tuesday evening and said basically they didn't need to see him and that what he has isn't the measles, but a "reaction" to the measles. What the Physician's Assistant told me was this: He gets the fever, diarrhea, runny nose, cough & rash exactly like those who have the "real" measles. But it's not the measles. Apparently the difference is the level of something in his blood (it's so hard to get all the details and carry on a real conversation while juggling three boys and making dinner) such that he is (supposedly) not contagious nor do we need to worry about the complications that make the measles so scary (blindness, death. . .). The difference is obviously academic to poor Phin but allows me to now leave the house w/out worrying about starting the Boise Measles Outbreak of 2007 and causing birth defects in my neighbor's unborn baby. I still have my doubts and remain skeptical as to what kind of research has been honestly conducted regarding the difference b/twn "real" measles and the "reaction". I wonder if anyone out there has an opinion on why Phin's case is called a "reaction". Re: It seems to play better to the public and allay fears to call something like this a "reaction" rather than the "real" measles.
My initial reaction would be that the vaccination mimics the disease in such a way as to trigger symptoms, but the virus is not live in his system. Does that make sense?
Posted by: willa Ibach at September 6, 2007 05:31 PMNo.
Posted by: lynnp at September 6, 2007 07:00 PMFrom the CDC's website:
Approximately 5-15% of susceptible persons who receive MMR vaccine will develop a low-grade fever and/or mild rash 7-12 days after vaccination. However, the person is not infectious, and no special precautions (e.g., exclusion from work) need to be taken.
Seems like an adverse reaction to the vaccine. I remember my ped. mentioning something of the like to me at Mad's 4 year-old shots.
Good Luck! Sorry that happened, it would have freaked me out too!
Posted by: carriebc at September 6, 2007 11:34 PMYeah, if the rash had been mild and the fever low-grade I might be okay with calling it a reaction. The thing is he had all the symptoms exactly as described as what happens when you get the measles - fever (102 for a couple days then off and on low-grade for a few more), cough, runny nose, diarrhea, mouth sores, complete body rash starting from head down torso then across arms & legs. Phin's fine now. I'm okay with that. What I'm not okay with is the medical community acting like they know exactly what's going on with these things and not being honest in their assessments and descriptions.
Posted by: lynnp at September 7, 2007 03:40 PMwith a couple notable exceptions (our friend Jonathan, Michelle's OB, our pediatrician), I've found that the humble medical professionals are few and far between, unfortunately.
but I'm glad that little Phin wont experience blindness or death any time soon.
oh, and I was SO tempted to buy up the bunny Fynn today (Michelle loves it especially), but I thought stealing yet another KWK from you wouldnt be very nice. so we were content to take home a little Pettit, Wilkes and Cooley...
Posted by: bobw at September 7, 2007 11:20 PM