MMR, do you or don't you?

[Saffron]

QueenMab Wrote:

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

> Even if there ARE risks linked to the MMR jabs

> (although, as others have pointed out, there is NO

> peer-reviewed research for this), the risks to

> your children (and to others such as pregnant

> women who have to rely on group immunity) of not

> vaccinating is far higher.

>

> Anyone whose thinking is that they "wouldn't trust

> a system that uses scare tactics instead of

> educating and being honest" is not even being

> rational, which goes to show how much hysteria and

> irrational thinking end up informing some of the

> most crucial decisions for our children. Very sad.

Despite the fact that there is no link between MMR and autism, it is incorrect to say that there are no risks to immunisation. There are peer-reviewed and other medical publications listing the known risks, disclosed as side effects, to all currently available vaccines.

Furthermore, pregnant women need not rely on group immunity. They themselves should have immunity from past immunisations. If there is a reason to believe your immunity has waned or that you did not seroconvert from your original MMR, you should be re-vaccinated prior to becoming pregnant. A very few individuals do not respond immunologically to vaccination. These women can be given antibody-type treatment in the event of coming in direct contact with someone who has measles/etc.

I'm hugely FOR the MMR, but I don't believe that only ever offering a single vaccination schedule is correct.

It is also my opinion that science must never support scare-tactics. Science should only provide information. Eventually, the use of scare-tactics only ever undermines the information it delivers. xx

[neilly1973]

was your friend's teenager daughter ok after getting mumps?

I think there is a lot of unnecessary fear around the jabs and the illnesses - and part of it, like with the being on time is to do with 'hitting the numbers' as all GP surgeries are bonused on hitting immunisation targets. The government is very dependant on the funding they get from the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture them.

With medicine so advanced these days i think the risk of complications is very rare - so it's all a bit of a toss up for me. there's a risk either way. I'd say to anyone, do the research and make your own mind up.

Later and more spaced out is always a good thing through as it's less of an onslaught on the immune system.

just another opinion tho' i accept.

[TE44]

Italian court holds MMR causes autism.

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2012/05/28/italy-court-holds-mmr-vaccine-causes-autism-iv-but-so-has-the-usa-some-autism-history/

[Ruth_Baldock]

In my unprofessional opinion:

The MMR/ Autism link is utter, utter bollocks.

Hope this helps.

[Saffron]

neilly1973 Wrote:

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

> was your friend's teenager daughter ok after

> getting mumps?

Yes, thankfully she had an uncomplicated case of mumps, and after being profoundly ill for some time she has recovered completed. My mother had measels in ~1947, and she was not so lucky. The infection damaged her eyesight to such an extent that were her vision any worse, she would be registered blind. She was around 6 years old at the time.

>

> I think there is a lot of unnecessary fear around

> the jabs and the illnesses - and part of it, like

> with the being on time is to do with 'hitting the

> numbers' as all GP surgeries are bonused on

> hitting immunisation targets. The government is

> very dependant on the funding they get from the

> pharmaceutical companies that manufacture them.

>

If you are saying pharmaceutical companies fund the government for their compliance, I don't believe this is correct. Perhaps I have misunderstood the statement?

[TE44]

The BMJ are polling and debating whether vaccination should be mandatory, at the moment. Whatever you decide,I believe

parents should have the choice.

[Saffron]

I found this an interesting summary:

http://www.jabs.org.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5599

Note, that in the US case(s), they're talking about thimerosal (mercury) in immunisations, which are no longer in use in the UK.

[susyp]

but perhaps children who are not vaccinated should not be enrolled in schools , as it affects everyone when the herd immunity decreases.

susypx

[TE44]

susyp Wrote:

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

> but perhaps children who are not vaccinated should

> not be enrolled in schools , as it affects

> everyone when the herd immunity decreases.

> susypx

What about parks, playgronds, swimming, or would it just be school.

[hellosailor]

susyp Wrote:

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

> but perhaps children who are not vaccinated should

> not be enrolled in schools , as it affects

> everyone when the herd immunity decreases.

> susypx

So if you exercise your right to choose whether or not your child should have certain vaccinations, they should not have the right to be educated? Supposing you have been advised by your doctor not to take up one or more of the immunisations because of family history etc? Does that child also get excluded from school?

[Saffron]

This currently is the case in some US school districts. Exeptions are only given under special circumstances. I'm not saying whether this is right or wrong, just noting that the practice does already exist.

http://www.babycenter.com/404_can-a-daycare-center-or-school-require-me-to-have-my-child-v_70735.bc

[Saffron]

From the link above:

More than 20 states permit exemptions for personal or philosophical reasons, according to the Institute for Vaccine Safety at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. (Not coincidentally, these states have higher rates of measles, chicken pox, and pertussis.)

One might wonder whether if these diseases reached a national epidemic proportion, if exemptions would be revoked on all but the most extreme grounds?

[hellosailor]

Saffron Wrote:

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

> From the link above:

> More than 20 states permit exemptions for personal

> or philosophical reasons, according to the

> Institute for Vaccine Safety at the Johns Hopkins

> Bloomberg School of Public Health. (Not

> coincidentally, these states have higher rates of

> measles, chicken pox, and pertussis.)

>

> One might wonder whether if these diseases reached

> a national epidemic proportion, if exemptions

> would be revoked on all but the most extreme

> grounds?

But how would they enforce it if they did go that route? Police? arresting parents who haven't had children vaccinated?

I may be choosing to have my own child vaccinated but I would fight for the right of those who choose not to, to make that choice, about their own child...

[TE44]

Saffron, this was something that worried me, a couple of years ago, when the tamiflu was stockpiled for seemingly epidemic, (sorry cant quite remember, bird flu ?) Our goverment also have power to make vaccines mandatory, although they said they had no intemtions of implementing it at that time. I believe this was because there statistics had many flaws and also there was much resistance. The majority of states in America made flu jab compulsary then.

[TE44]

Hellosailor, I have not had my children vaccinated, but have many friends who have, and who, like you, would support nther peoples rights to choose. When people cannot support others with different views, it often leads to segragration eg susyps post.

[hellosailor]

I have found the decisions around which jabs and when to vaccinate very thorny, especially as we have a family history of adverse reactions to some jabs and my own daughter had an extreme reaction to one of the infant jabs which was very frightening.

In the end we decided to continue with vaccinations but are following a slightly delayed schedule with longer spaces between jabs, on the advice of our GP, and also following our own instincts.

I feel very uncomfortable having her vaccinated after the extreme reaction she had, and dread going to the surgery whenever it's a jabs appointment, but would also be anxious about not vaccinating, so have felt very much between a rock and a hard place with the whole thing, wondering what I should do for the best for my daughter.

Speaking candidly, when you have witnessed a very scary reaction to a vaccination, your first thoughts are not about herd immunity and the politics of that, but are about the safety and well being of your own child.

Other than the GP I mentioned who advised us to have a different schedule, I sought the advice of two other GPs in the period when we were trying to make up our mind what to do, the first said that although obviously they're not supposed to promote the idea, it is in fact fine to vaccinate on a schedule different to the national programme - pointing out that the ages at which different jabs happen has regularly changed over the years, and that I, for instance, would not have been vaccinated against rubella until my teens, so it is, in his words 'fairly arbitrary' when they happen, but his advice would be that they do happen.

The second one said, off the record, that they would not be vaccinating their children.

This did little to lessen my conflicted feelings!

We all have to make our own choice at the end of the day..

[TE44]

That must have been very difficult hellosailor, I hope your daughter recovered without any lasting effects. As you said we can only choose what we believe to be best, When my daughter was little and had whooping cough, i found the doctor very unhelpful, he seemed more interested in blaming me than caring for her. I have also found this with some parents, especially when kids were at school. I think it is a difficult decision, but one that should b down to us.

[taper]

I cannot believe some people continue to push the mmr scare stories. The Italian court case is an aberration and meaningless in the face of overwhelming evidence there is no autism link. Nutters like JABs leap on it to resurrect their conspiracy theories.

Can't we put this one to bed and not worry parents unnecessarily.

[hellosailor]

taper if you take the time to read the thread properly, it has segued into something slightly more complex than MMR and Andrew Wakefield, perhaps respond to some of the actual comments that have been posted in the resurrected portion of the thread, and then you will be able to contribute more to the actual conversation that is being held?

My post, for example, hasn't got anything to do with the MMR autism scare, it is do do with my daughter, and indeed several members of my family, having had extreme reactions to jabs, and the route I have decided to take in terms of the spacing of her jabs as a result. Am I 'worrying unnecessarily' or is this something that as any responsible parent, I should be thinking about in our particular set of circumstances?

It's tedious when people add to interesting topics and debates on here with the conversational equivalent of ' naaah, everyrone shhhhudddup!'

[taper]

My response is to TE44 who is clearly trying to resurrect the MMR/Autism scare on this forum by linking through to a scare site. Saffron too (JABs).

[sillywoman]

Ruth_Baldock Wrote:

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

> In my unprofessional opinion:

> The MMR/ Autism link is utter, utter bollocks.

>

> Hope this helps.

>:D<

[prickle]

Ruth_Baldock Wrote:

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

> In my unprofessional opinion:

> The MMR/ Autism link is utter, utter bollocks.

:))

Not sure if any of you are qualified not internet experts, but we are talking from a position of relative ignorance. It is arrogant to go against the prevailing professional advice for something that not only affects the health of your child but also others. You are gambling with your child health for the sake of what you see as your right to choose. Also being under-vaccinated puts your child in danger when you go abroad as you may not know if herd immunity exists in that country. That is what brought us to our senses several years ago, post-Wakefied.

[hellosailor]

prickle Wrote:

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

> It is arrogant to go against

> the prevailing professional advice for something

> that not only affects the health of your child but

> also others. You are gambling with your child

> health for the sake of what you see as your right

> to choose.

Prickle, I think it's grossly unfair to suggest that parents like TE44 are 'gambling' with their children's health 'just for the sake' of exercising their right to choose, rather than because they feel they are doing the best for their child, whether we have come to the same decision or not. You surely can't really think that their motivation is such as you suggest?

[neilly1973]

I think the general point on here is a general one about vaccination and it's a good debate to have.

A very good friend of mine is a teacher with special training in autism - he has made it his total focus for the last 10 years to help children (and parents of) live with autism. His view is that, despite it not being scientifically proven, that there is definitely an (albeit) anecdotal link from what he has seen and heard from the parents he works with.

I was really interested by the doctor who off the record said they would not be vaccinating their children, I was also interested to find out that a friend of mine who is a health visitor who has not vaccinated any of her 3 children as she had seen too much vaccine damage in her work (i was very surprised by this).

I am not trying to scare monger and i absolutely accept that the risk of serious complications from vaccination is very rare, however, my belief is that the risk of serious complications from the childhood diseases is also now in this day and age rare.

For me, my biggest concern is the effect that combination vaccines can have on an underdeveloped immune system - how does an 8 week old immune system stand up to that - intuitively to me that feel wrong. I had measles and mumps as a child, survived and now also have fully immumity not partial (as the jabs are not 100% effective).

I think every parent has the right to choose and do what they feel comfortable with for their child. Neither is wrong or right and people should not be judged for the decision they make. I chose not to vaccinate my child for my own reasons - I really agonised about it so read up on lots of literature to help me get informed and decide. For anyone who is not sure what they want to do, i'd say do the same so you are making an informed choice. I read a few things:

1. i went to the website: The informed parent

2. Comparing natural immunity with vaccination (trevor Gunn)

3. MMR, understand your choices by Will and Lara Sussman.

I found them all balanced and fair. Neither option is without risk. we live in a democratic society - so do the research and make a decision based on being personally informed = not because we are pushed by the NHS or other parents. It's a personal choice. how lucky we are to have that choice.

I think if you choose to vaccinate, waiting until they are a bit older, spacing them out more or looking into privately getting single vaccines is an excellent compromise.

but as i said, it's just an opinion.

[TE44]

taper Wrote:

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

> My response is to TE44 who is clearly trying to

> resurrect the MMR/Autism scare on this forum by

> linking through to a scare site. Saffron too

> (JABs).

Taper, you cannot be more wrong, I did not ressurect this thread and would not have even considered it when another mother has put her concerns about her child after vaccination, on a very recent post.