flu vaccination offered by school

[sweetgirl]

my child has been offered a flu vaccination by the school.

its in the form of a nasal spray.

personally i'm not keen on consenting to it.

i'd like to put it out to the forum to hear your views as to whether you think its a good idea or not.

thanks in advance

[Mrs TP]

My youngest falls into the age group for this and has had it in school the last 3 yrs and has been offered it again this year. I was apprehensive the first year as it seemed to be yet another new thing but we went with it and all was well and will be going for it this year too.

[mybaby178]

Hi my daughter had it for the first time last year and I have just signed the consent form for this year.

No side effects at all for her.

[edanna]

Vaccinating younger children against flu is a good idea because they are 'super spreaders' that can infect vulnerable people for whom flu could be extremely serious. My daughter has had the nasal spray for the past couple of years and it's been fine - much easier than a jab. So my conclusion is that it's good for her, good for us as a family and good for the wider community.

[Saffron]

I read about the spray, how it's administered and side effects. We decided to accept it for our daughter. There haven't been any problems. xx

[TE44]

http://www.drcarolynfrost.co.uk/what-every-parent-should-know-before-giving-consent-for-the-flu-nasal-spray-vaccine/

[nixlo]

TE44 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> http://www.drcarolynfrost.co.uk/what-every-parent-

> should-know-before-giving-consent-for-the-flu-nasa

> l-spray-vaccine/

I don't want to get into the pros and cons of the can of worms that is vaccination but would just like to point out that Dr Frost is not a trained medical doctor but a homeopath who offers an alternative treatment plan to vaccinations and so may not be offering a completely unbiased view on her website.

[yeknomyeknom]

We have not consented. I don't want to get into a debate on this either as it's so contentious and important. Just wanted make sure people know that you can go either way.

[Saffron]

http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/nasal-flu-vaccine

[TE44]

Yes nixlo I am aware she is a homeopath doc, it was more the info she had put up I was linking to. As

you can tell I also don't want to get into a debate

on here. People need to look at the information and make there own mind up.

[yeknomyeknom]

That's very interesting, thank you.

TE44 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> http://www.drcarolynfrost.co.uk/what-every-parent-

> should-know-before-giving-consent-for-the-flu-nasa

> l-spray-vaccine/

[yeknomyeknom]

Also very interesting. Chicken eggs and Pigs gelatine!? Who'd have thought!

Saffron Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/nasal-flu-vaccine

[Saffron]

Lots of people, actually.

yekanomyeknom Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Also very interesting. Chicken eggs and Pigs

> gelatine!? Who'd have thought!

>

> Saffron Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/nasal-flu-vaccine

[yeknomyeknom]

Oh ok. Silly me.

Saffron Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lots of people, actually.

>

> yekanomyeknom Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Also very interesting. Chicken eggs and Pigs

> > gelatine!? Who'd have thought!

> >

> > Saffron Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/nasal-flu-vaccine

[Jules-and-Boo]

That would be a No from us.

[TE44]

I think it's easy to forget, when this has been

something you have looked at and continued to look

at for many years, that many people are looking at this for the first time as parents. Unfortunately I have found it impossible on this forum to reach a level of communication where there is respect

for different decisions and views, which has led in the past to a right or wrong scenario. Making

it impossible to discuss the complexity of everything attached to reaching a decision. We

can only do what we feel is right for our children.

[hammerman]

A nasal spray flu vaccination wasn't around when my son and two daughters were at school and it doesn't sound invasive so I would go with it. They all had their other jabs e.g. polio/tb/meningitis/tetanus that seemed the general thing.

I was a bit worried when the HPV (cervical cancer) jab was offered to girls in school around 2010 as there were lots of pros and cons but I went with both my girls having it at school as in that past year (2009) Jade Goody had passed away with cervical cancer.

My youngest daughter (18) has just this week had the new Meningitis W vaccine at our local GPs as she is going off to university tomorrow. She actually reminded me a few weeks about where to get it done.

[TE44]

Hammerman, I can understand why you find the nasal sprat less invasive, the problem for me is not the

method it's the ingredients. It may have been made

more child friendly for children but it is still a live vaccine. I feel this whole topic is more complicated for many of us because it is linked

with a system that is corrupt, uncaring have broken

many laws that would bring upon prison sentences for the likes of you or me. I have not vaccinated and my children (all grown up now) are also well.

My grandchild has not been vaccinated either and she is flourishing. My worry, which I have repeated over the years on this forum, is the choice will be taken away and it becomes mandatory to vaccinate.

[sweetgirl]

I don't wish to get into or join any sort of debate but its good to hear your views.

thank you very much.

[devsdev]

Thanks for starting this thread as I'm trying to decide too. Our younger child was in NICU for 9 weeks and was pumped full of medication which kept her alive so I am grateful to modern medicine including vaccines. I was very happy for the kids to be vaccinated fully, including getting Men B and chickenpox privately. I let them have the flu vaccine previously (with no adverse reaction) but for some reason am hesitant about doing it now, possibly because I got quite unwell after taking the flu vaccine a couple of years ago. But it seems to be a sensible program - I just need to look into it some more again. Thanks for the link Saffron - going to have a read of the page.

[DulwichLondoner]

Reading some of the replies here, it seems not everyone appreciates how utterly irrelevant single cases are. ?My little Johnny was totally fine with it? or ?My little Rosie was not? are both equally meaningless statements. Pros and cons of a given treatment are not studied by asking a few random people what their experience has been, but by conducting thorough epidemiological studies, i.e. by analysing statistically a sample large enough to be representative.

Whatever your opinion, it cannot be based on one or two unrepresentative cases.

@TE44, that?s why I don?t know whether to feel angry or disheartened when I hear statements like yours , about how your non-vaccinated kids are doing fine. There are children who were brought up in households where everyone smoked in front of them. There were times when car seats were not used because they didn?t exist or were not mandatory. There are countries where parents take 1 or 2 very young children on motorbikes with no helmet and no protective gear. For each of this example, and many more, one could come up with cases of children who did those things and survived. Yet this doesn?t make these behaviours acceptable nor safe.

Also, how is the system corrupt?

On Dr Carolyne Frost, the mere fact that she lists things like newspaper articles and generic comments by random people on the internet as her sources is very worrying. Contrast this with the American study of over 2 million people quoted by the Oxford website mentioned above. Not to mention that homeopathy is not science ? there is no proof whatsoever for it!

@Te44, you worry it becomes mandatory to vaccinate. I very much hope it does, and worry it is not mandatory at the moment. I am usually quite libertarian in my approach, and am a big fan of Darwinian selection. If an adult refuses ordinary medical treatment in favour of homeopathy or other voodoo science, well, it?s his choice, and his choice does not affect the rest of the population much. With vaccines it?s different, though, because the choice of not vaccinating does affect the rest of the population big time. Ever heard about herd immunity? It means that having a large % of the population immune to infection (as with vaccines) protects those who are not immune, e.g. the very few people who cannot be vaccinated because of rare medical conditions. Plus, of course, an adult?s right to make stupid choices which endanger himself should not apply to helpless children.

[yeknomyeknom]

I think everyone should be entitled to make their comments on here without being berated because someone disagrees with them. You can get your point across without pulling another person down. We are all parents struggling along and trying to do the best for our kids. We all reach out on this forum for support and advice. We can each give our wildly varying views without criticising others so I think we should choose to be kind rather than clever.

DulwichLondoner Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Reading some of the replies here, it seems not

> everyone appreciates how utterly irrelevant single

> cases are. ?My little Johnny was totally fine with

> it? or ?My little Rosie was not? are both equally

> meaningless statements. Pros and cons of a given

> treatment are not studied by asking a few random

> people what their experience has been, but by

> conducting thorough epidemiological studies, i.e.

> by analysing statistically a sample large enough

> to be representative.

>

> Whatever your opinion, it cannot be based on one

> or two unrepresentative cases.

>

> @TE44, that?s why I don?t know whether to feel

> angry or disheartened when I hear statements like

> yours , about how your non-vaccinated kids are

> doing fine. There are children who were brought up

> in households where everyone smoked in front of

> them. There were times when car seats were not

> used because they didn?t exist or were not

> mandatory. There are countries where parents take

> 1 or 2 very young children on motorbikes with no

> helmet and no protective gear. For each of this

> example, and many more, one could come up with

> cases of children who did those things and

> survived. Yet this doesn?t make these behaviours

> acceptable nor safe.

> Also, how is the system corrupt?

>

> On Dr Carolyne Frost, the mere fact that she lists

> things like newspaper articles and generic

> comments by random people on the internet as her

> sources is very worrying. Contrast this with the

> American study of over 2 million people quoted by

> the Oxford website mentioned above. Not to mention

> that homeopathy is not science ? there is no proof

> whatsoever for it!

>

> @Te44, you worry it becomes mandatory to

> vaccinate. I very much hope it does, and worry it

> is not mandatory at the moment. I am usually quite

> libertarian in my approach, and am a big fan of

> Darwinian selection. If an adult refuses ordinary

> medical treatment in favour of homeopathy or other

> voodoo science, well, it?s his choice, and his

> choice does not affect the rest of the population

> much. With vaccines it?s different, though,

> because the choice of not vaccinating does affect

> the rest of the population big time. Ever heard

> about herd immunity? It means that having a large

> % of the population immune to infection (as with

> vaccines) protects those who are not immune, e.g.

> the very few people who cannot be vaccinated

> because of rare medical conditions. Plus, of

> course, an adult?s right to make stupid choices

> which endanger himself should not apply to

> helpless children.

[DulwichLondoner]

This is not about disagreeing, it?s about stating banal facts. One can think the Earth is flat ? his thinking it doesn?t make it true.

There exists such a thing as a scientific truth. If someone wants to challenge and dispute it, he should do so applying the scientific method, not saying ?I think?? or reporting one or two isolated and totally unrepresentative cases.

[yeknomyeknom]

This is a forum. The definition of a forum being "A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged."

People are entitled to exchange their views. Whether you value homeopathic views or scientific ones, you don't know what the next person on here values. All points should be made welcome. It's for the reader to then discern what is of value to them. You are entitled to your views but so is everyone else.

DulwichLondoner Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This is not about disagreeing, it?s about stating

> banal facts. One can think the Earth is flat ? his

> thinking it doesn?t make it true.

>

> There exists such a thing as a scientific truth.

> If someone wants to challenge and dispute it, he

> should do so applying the scientific method, not

> saying ?I think?? or reporting one or two isolated

> and totally unrepresentative cases.

[DulwichLondoner]

? Anyone is entitled to say and think the Earth is flat. This doesn?t make it true.

Just like someone is entitled to write here that the Earth is flat, I am entitled to write that it is unsubstantiated nonsense, and that there has been irrefutable evidence for ages that it?s not flat. This is not about debating, say, whether X or Y would be a better Prime Minister. This is about scientific truths.

When someone draws inference from a handful of isolated an unrepresentative incidents (my unvaccinated kids are doing just fine) I am entitled to point out how and why this approach is wrong. Beg to differ? Great. Then explain why.

Vaccines are more complex because individual choices affect the rest of society (herd immunity), and because a parent?s anti-scientific approach causes direct harm to helpless children. Individual rights are not absolute. You have the right to think that 70mph would be a better speed limit for urban areas, and are entitled to point out the merits of your case. You are not entitled to drive at 70mph in the city centre, not because you might get hurt (Darwinian selection) but because you might hurt other people. It?s the same with vaccines.