To expect mums to get their children vaccinated?(272 Posts)
Met two mums at play group today who said they didn't/weren't. Their reasons were autism, all that stuff on the Internet, drugs companies making money and keeping their children 'clean'. WTF?? Am I right in thinking their kids are safe though because 'the herd' is immunised? I just think there's a certain mother type who thinks anything 'non-natural' or scientific is wrong. Rant over
Well, MMR aside, and it's a long time ago, but my best friends cousin was damaged so badly with the whooping cough vaccine back in the 60's. He died at at, with the body ofa 4 year old and the mind of a 6 month old.
And Im sure you are aware of thalidomide too. Not one the market now as a cure for morning sickness.
So, OP, how do YOU know for sure, that there isn't a link to autism from the MMR? Nothing is 100%. Research is paid for by governements to pharmaceutical companies. Migh there be a chance in 50 years that new discoveries change what you now think is wrong?
YANBU. Their kids are not safe. They are ignorant & don't understand that measles & chicken pox could threaten the lives of their children.
It shows how uneducated they are about austism.
YABU. Anyone who thinks others are unreasonable if they don't 'do as they do' is unreasonable IMO. I agree with you that vaccinations are a good thing - and had my own kids done. But having protected my own DCs in this way I don't expect other mums should have to do the same. I think people should be free to make up their own minds rather than being forced into doing something that they have concerns about.
YANBU to think all PARENTS should have their children vaccinated (unless there is a genuine reason why they shouldnt).
YABU to just lay the blame with mothers though. Really winds me up. The onus is on both mum and dad to make the decision together, yet you are holding mum's solely responisble
BTW I'm aware that not all families have the same mum/dad set up and some are lone parents but you get my point.
you could listen to facts
vaccine damage occurs and is opening documented - not a secret - damage from illness occurs - more frequently - you as a parent make a choice
I chose to vaccinate - I am not a big fan of the arguments against except for medical reasons
YANBU, especially as it doesn't sound like they has done any actually research to back up their cavalier decision.
My anecdotal evidence to support a pro vaccination stance is based on my aunt who had polio as a small child. She has learning difficulties & has spent her entire life being cared for by her older sisiter. She is also physically disabled. Apparently, the only surprise in her local community at the time was how only 1 child in the family caught polio as typically if 1 child caught it, the others would too and were likely to die from it.
To those who choose not to vaccinate at all, I'd like to understand the evidence they are referencing when linking autism to the individual vaccines.
the mmr affected my first ds so badly I didn't get the others done. couldn't take the risk. The other 5 had measles last year. I don't regret my decision at all.
Some parents have carefully researched and considered and decided against vaccination. Which I think is fine. But I think you are right that there are also parents who haven't really considered the actual risks and issues, and are just going on a few headline stories.
The thing is, few people now have first-hand experience of children dying of the "common" childhood diseases, or being terribly damaged by them. So tey hear scare stories about vaccinations, and far fewer scare stories about what measles or chicken pox could do to their child.
The MMR research was very badly flawed. But many people think "no smoke without fire" and don't understand what was wrong with the way he did his research. "Oh but he found a link even if he didn't study it quite right" - no he didn't, but unless you have a little bit of understanding of statistics and scientific method, then it can be hard to explain.
There's 80 recently confirmed cases of measles in the Northeast. I've known 3 people irl who have had measles and all 3 had lasting effects - 2 with complete hearing loss in one ear. The daughter of someone I know online recently died after almost a decade of severe degenerative illness cased by measles.
Herd immunity only works if everyone who can possibly be immune is immune.
Both of my boys have autism. The signs were there since they were tiny babies. I had them immunised.
My son is up to date with all his vaccines and has had flu jabs to.
I may not agree with peoples decisions not to vaccinate but I do respect their decision as long as they have made an educated decision not to do so rather than just "some man said it would make them autistic" style responses.
I think it would help if parents were given much clearer information about the vaccines including possible side effects. Like any drug there is going to be side effects yet when it comes to vaccines its almost seen as wrong to discuss them.
They are safe because/if most children are vaccinated.
People like them put vulnerable people at risk - though who can't be immunised.
Utter selfishness and normally from ignorance/arrogance.
I would normally agree with the 'your kids your choice' however, children who are under 12 months & have not had their booster yet are at increased risk of contracting measles etc when others in their community choose not to vaccinate & therefore increase the likelihood of passing it on.
My 11 month old had a severe case of chicken pox, he was literally covered in spots...they weren't even spots as there was no white skin beween them all over his head & upper body as they merged into 1.
I would expect anyone who chose not to vaccinate to do research and then make thier mind up.
What shocked me was a program on it on the BBC last year ( part of the news or something) when two ladies had chosen not to vaccinate then said they were astonished by the severity of the diesese thier child caught - measles or something.
I was astounded.
Always - as Chicken pox isn't routinely vaccinated against in this country children not having vaccines won't make any difference to that!
DS3 has autism. He was diagnosed well before his 2nd MMR. I asked the HV and she said 'the damage has been done, it wont make any further difference' and she was right. He's high functioning
With DS3 it wasnt the MMR that caused the autism but with DS1 - well there's a wole different ball game., Maybe coincidental, maybe not.
We could look at Tb. I presume most of us here are of an age to have been innoculated as a matter of course. We don;'t now, and lo! it's on the increase by virtue of immigration. It's time there was a nationwide campaign again.
HPV another unproven vaccine - that'll have repercussions in years to come.
I think the thing that most bugs me is when someone saying they have done their research and decided x.
I am a scientist and the more I know, the more I realise the level of my ignorance. I have spent the last 20 years increasing my knowledge, but it is focused on a limited area. I would never pretend to be an expert on any other field. Takes years to really understand a topic, to be able to interpret literature and appreciate its context.
I also find it odd that some people seem to think there is a conspiracy to hide negative impacts. The vast majority of scientists have integrity and apart from this wouldn't risk their reputation by publishing misleading or false data.
There are some exceptions though. I guess they are publicly exposed, struck off, go abroad to work and publish in select journals. Can't imagine any examples of that recently.
Maybe there is a risk of autism/ nasty side affects with vacinnes, but it is far smaller than the risk of catching any of these diseases.
Its easy to forget the risk of measles causing brain damage that mimics autism.
I feel that a full vaccination record should be a condition of attending a state school unless there is a properly documented medical reason.
No child is 'safe' from measles etc whether they have been vaccinated or not, it amazes me the number of people who think that just because there child has been vacinated they won't get measles etc. YABU Every parent I know who has chosen not to vacinate has done so after much thought, discussion and research. In comparsion many parents who do vaccinate do so just because they are told it is the right thing to do, few (obviously some) in my experience do their own independant research. Theres no right or wrong answer.
Am counting down the days til DD gets her MMR. I would be very upset if she caught any of those illnesses. I really couldn't give a monkeys who I offend, I think it's irresponsible not to vaccinate unless medical conditions indicate against doing so.
Yabu for many reasons including not putting this in the vaccination topic.
We have a vaccination
Sadly we don't have a [odfo]
They are being U for not understanding that any risk from imms is far outweighed by the risks of not immunising.
Does it matter how much research a parent has done? It isn't just their own child who is at risk, they are risking other people's health.
YABU to think only mothers should be responsible.
I read somewhere (The Economist?) that you need 90%+ vaccination rate to get herd immunity but that this varies from disease to disease. The article pointed out that we are possibly the first generation of parents not to witness the effects of measles, diptheria, TB etc.
My dd2 is too young for the MMR, and the primary school closest to our house (luckily not the one dd1 attends) has had 10 cases of measles in the last few weeks. Out of 400 children that attend the school, 60 are not fully vaccinated . I'm terrified for my baby, and there's nothing I can do to protect her for another 6 months, and all because other people have chosen not to vaccinate their children, because of a totally debunked piece of "research".
YABU for starting a topic again that inflames people so much. But I'm guessing you're new and you probably didn't realise that!
YAalsoBU for condemning a parent without an attempt at understanding their opinion. Sounds like they had varied reasons, and they are entitled to their own perspective.
Finally, YABridiculouslyU for thinking/stating that mothers should be the ones to get the jabs. When did it become only one parents responsibility?
Posted too soon. Some of these diseases are becoming resistant to anti-biotics (I'm thinking specifically of TB) and so are much,much harder to treat.
YABU in that everyone is entitled to free choice. If your kids are vaccinated anyway why is there a problem?!
You know the MMR actually contains foetal cells? Foetal cells taken from two foetus's abortions back in the 60's/70's and their cells are stripped and used to host the vaccines.
Some people would have problems with that alone, injecting their children with cells taken from foetus's.
I think the evidence for immunisations is pretty strong. Research is pretty clear that children who don't get vacinated die. In the third world people queue up for hours becuase they have experienced measles deaths first hand.
The MMR has a 90% sucess rate in achieving immunity. It is why children get given an MMR booster so that they have 99% chance of being protected. If all healthy children were vacinated then the 1% who weren't protected by the MMR would be protected by herd immunity.
Even if an immunised child does get measles its likely to be far milder than if they had not been vacinated.
The evidence that autism is genetic is pretty strong. I am sure that one day there will be a genetic test that will diagnose autism spectrum disorders.
something it means 'oh do fuck off'.
Sorry I didn't know there was a different place for vaccination debates. I used the phrase mums because I only met the mums and I wasn't about to ask if their husbands agreed with them (surely v patronising). When looking into MMR for my DS (now 6) I found nothing convincing or scientific behind the scary headlines ... and I'm just surprised that even now, way on from Wakefield, people don't vaccinate.
Yabu. I would not want to see anyone physically forced to be injected by whatever gorern
Governing body is in charge that year.
(Thanks for enlightening me.)
You know the MMR actually contains foetal cells? Foetal cells taken from two foetus's abortions back in the 60's/70's and their cells are stripped and used to host the vaccines.
can you link to that please? a bone fide source.
I'd rather my child had the jab and developed autism than didn't have the jab and died of whatever disease.
I also don't have a problem with aborted foetal cells being used in vaccines. It makes sense to use them to help fight disease than just discard them (or whatever happens to the aborted foetus)
do any of you actually understand what autism is and how severely and profoundly it can affect people?
it may well be a small percentage have problems post vaccination but if you have hereditary factors etc I think you should be given a choice
Lots of countries make vacination a condition of state education. People can decide not to vacinate their children but they have no access to state funded schooling or childcare.
In my area most unvacinated children have lazy parents rather than parents who actively object to vacinations. Prehaps it would make sense for a health visitor/ school nurse to vacinate children in a nursery setting. Children who are behind with their vacines in reception/nursery could have their vacinations in school.
I had mumps, measles twice and rubella and I am fine
The link to autism was actually total bollox. I'm amazed people still think it's relevant.
AmandinePoulain raises a really big issue for me. I would find it very difficult to forgive the parents of a child that carried measles to my baby (who was too young to be immunised) on the basis of very poor science. There will always be a small number of children/adults who can't be immunised for good reason and they, and those too young for immunisations, need the herd immunity for protection. I was relieved when DD was immunised and the risks diminished.
While chicken pox is not a routine immunisation here, it is available privately.
The human fetal cells are listed in the inserts as human diploid cells. There are cells from animals too - bovine.
YABU but I understand.
I have 3 dc, 2 were immunised fine had boosters, pre school etc. However ds2 was allergic not to egg but something else. As an asthmatic we were advised against having further immunisations until he was well into school.
I will say that if a parent for any reason has not had dc immunised they should HAVE to tell all professionals dealing with their dc. Nurseries, childcare workers should be told so when an out break is found the dc can be monitored. I felt it was the least I could do to protect other peoples dc.
To be fair when I started university in 2009, we had to fill out vaccination records - and all foreign students were routinely asked to have a BCG jab. Afaik anyone missing their other jabs - MMR, MenC, DTP etc were offered/asked to have those too... It just makes things a lot simpler really to get it done and out the way when they're young I guess. Afaik as well some universities will require you to have certain jabs before they let you in halls.
That said - I do wonder if in the future they will discover things about vaccines, in particular the HPV, and we'll end up regretting having them.
holly I am using my iPhone and can't figure out how to put direct links but go to Wikipedia list of vaccine ingredients, if that's bona fide enough for you. It's listed as human diploid cells.
Bovine cells are used in chicken pox - I knew that.
but I want to see concrete published research that aborted cells from 2 particular foetus back in the 60's (^*Foetal cells taken from two foetus's abortions back in the 60's/70'*^) are the hosts today for the vaccinations.
'Am I right in thinking their kids are safe though because 'the herd' is immunised?'
Also autism is not simply genetic. If one identical female twin has autism there is only 50% chance that the other one will too. Environment is also a factor.
If this works also a link to the direct manufacturer Merck.
Personally I couldn't live with myself if my child died from a terrible disease that I had chosen not to protect her against. I would be beyond furious if she were to catch something before we can fully vaccinate her against it, purely because other mothers choose not to vaccinate. I think that the memory of these diseases is weakening and people have forgotten the impact they have had on families and communities.
Because it wasn't true?
The orginally 'study' was a farce and the department of health has debunked it all.
MMR and autism have nothing to do with each other.
this is why it's 'bollocks' owl
The autism link has been discredited so many times; why would anyone even consider it?
We're so fortunate to have access to vaccinations. There are people who would walk a thousand miles to allow their kids the same protection, if it made any difference. My mother in law's sister had polio as a child; we just spent Christmas with her. She has spent her entire life unable to walk. WTF? Why is this even an issue?
"do any of you actually understand what autism is and how severely and profoundly it can affect people? "
Autism is not a death sentence. Measles can be a death sentence.
Many people with autism lead happy and productive lives. Certainly there is a massive spectrum of how autism affects people. I think a lot of people are very scared of autism because they don't understand it. Profound autism is severely disabling, but life is still worth living.
Sadly there are lots of other ways that children can aquire brain damage/ learning difficulties. Complications of measles, mengentis caused by mumps, rubella in utro etc.
I believe that the risks of vacination out way the benefits.
holly go to google scholar and type in 'human diploid cells MMR'.
Autism is a truly profound condition.
However, suggesting that the MMR causes it, is as crackers as suggesting that MMR causes HIV.
They are BU . 500 million+ MMRs given is proof enough.Wakefield has been thoroughly discredited.There are lots of theories on the rise in autism diagnosis
autism is not a death sentence? really?
have you ever lived with a child with severe or profound autism?
without anyone there to care it is a death sentence
and mmr does not cause all autism
you are all completely brainwashed
owl the MMR does not cause any autism. See the links posted earlier.
It is humbling to watch, on a Comic Relief segment, women in Africa queuing up for hours and hours to get their babies vaccinated and to listen to Bill Gates talk about his quest to eradicate polio, as smallpox was eradicated. Vaccines work and are a marvel of modern medicine. It is because they work that certain western parents have the luxury of reading scaremongering shite on the Internet and thinking 'no, that's not for my kids' because they haven't actually experienced the real horror of these awful diseases that vaccination protects us from. If they had, they might think again.
What makes you think that the MMR causes autism?
Stating that the MMR does not cause it, is not making light of the condition.
holly two references for you if they can be found online ...
1. Plotkin, S.A.; Cornfeld, D.; Ingalls, T.H.: Studies of immunization with living rubella virus: Trials in children with a strain cultured from an aborted fetus, Am. J. Dis. Child. 110: 381-389, 1965.
2. Plotkin, S.A.; Farquhar, J.; Katz, M.; Ingalls, T.H.: A new attenuated rubella virus grown in human fibroblasts: Evidence for reduced nasopharyngeal excretion, Am. J. Epidemiol. 86: 468-477, 1967.
I'd choose a few aborted fetus cells over serious disease myself.
YANBU. My DC has had 3 MMRs as we live in SE London and there was an outbreak when she was 12 months so she had her booster at 13 months and another before school. It is the least I could do for society.
I don't think kids should be allowed to register and attend regular schools unless they are immunised.
Flame me now, but I won't be giving my baby the MMR.
I will, however, pay out to have the vaccines done separately. I'm hoping by then that the govt will have removed their ridiculous policy of making the mumps vaccine unavailable.
I don't believe at all that anyone can say categorically that there is no link between the MMR and autism. Too many people who have a story to tell, sorry.
My brother is autistic. My mother is adament his measles jab changed him overnight from a happy, go-lucky, confident little boy with great coordination into the way he is now. Certainly, I've seen video footage, and the difference is startling.
Regardless. I'm not pumping the MMR into such a tiny little body. I'm unsure as to whether I will even give her the measles, given that that's the one I'm most concerned about. I was never immunised against it after my poor brother's experience. Yes, I was a little poorly, but I got over it.
I'm awaiting the flaming but I do believe some of you who are so pro-MMR are brainwashed!
You are advised not to take a puppy to the park without their jabs.
Why would you send your children to school without their jabs? It is irresponsible and effing stupid not to protect your children from nasty life threatening and very unpleasant diseases.
There is NO link between autism and MMR.
And smallpox has been completely eradicated through vaccination.
And now polio is extremely rare.
But what if the child has a contraindication against the jab? Are you going to ban them from going to school?!
I think talking about whether it is better to have an autistic child or a dead child was a particular low on a thread that has few high points and what prompted the post asking if people actually realised how significant a condition autism is.
Although I particularly enjoy the idea that a bunch of mothers think denying a child schooling because of a decision their parent made is a good way to go.
Some people are arses. Some people have incredibly difficult circumstances and genuine concerns around vaccination.
It's a bit grim that so few want to see the difference.
The idea that a parent who has genuine, sincerely felt concerns about vaccination should be harangued and their child denied schooling is pretty shocking to me and that people cheerfully compete to be more aggresive about that is shocking to me too.
It's almost as if actually getting the vaccination rate up, isn't nearly as important as throwing shit at other parents.
Still a good dose of sanctemonious hectoring is probably making a few on here feel bloody marvellous.
hideous judgy shit thread>>
It's never been clear to me why people who decide against the MMR because it 'causes autism' go for the single jabs, when they are exactly the same thing. If the MMR causes autism, then why wouldn't M, M and R cause it? The whole 'overloading the body with too many vaccines' argument doesn't wash because other vaccines in the schedule contain more vaccines than the MMR. (I know there are some hardcore antivaxxers who don't give any, but many only seem to take against the MMR).
Bill Gates could do far far more for people living in certain parts of Africa. Running water and decent sanitation would dramatically reduce diarrhea which causes more deaths than polio and measles.
Please don't condemn the parents of non vaccinated children as lazy or ignorant. Ds was born at the height of the MMR scare.he was not a healthy baby, prone to allergies and eczema and then behavioural problems as he got older, leading to tests and suggestions that he was " on the spectrum" We agonised long and hard over whether to inject him with a substance that was raising concerns in the media. I have a friend whose mother took the supposedly safe drug thalidomide in the early 60s....
So DS is still not vaccinated and now we are discussing it again as puberty and secondary school approaches. It is a hard and horrible decision and not one we will take lightly either way.
no flaming from me havingastress My brother reacted very badly to the single measles jab, immediately after recieving it. Another friends son had the MMR and a minute later had a massive fit which has left him permently brain damaged. Don't get me wrong I'm sure 99.9 % of children who recieve the MMR are and will be fine, but all vaccinations carry a risk. You can hardy blame parents who have witnessed the negative side effects of vaccinations first hand overly cautious. The arguement that unvaccinated children shouldn't be in school is shocking, we have the freedom to chose in this country.
Pag, I think you're marvellous, and I am yet again astounded by how calm and civilised you can be on these threads.
<hides thread before I get tempted to say anything else>
I haven't given my children the MMR. I'll attempt to explain why but I would appreciate not being flamed. I have a nephew with severe autism, I see the quality of life my sister in law has looking after her son who we all love dearly, I see the way he seems quite literally terrified by life at times, and the very difficult times they have ahead if them as he grows older, larger and stronger. I have the utmost respect for my sister in law but she is ground down by life and the way having an autistic son makes even the simplest task exhausting. It frightens me. My nephew has seizures, he had his first seizure the day of the MMR, it could quite possibly be coincidental, I don't rule that out, or maybe, just maybe there is something in his genetic makeup that reacted to that vaccine and started him on this path, until this point he had met his milestones and appeared neurologically typical.
I'm convinced the MMR is safe for the vast majority of the population and I appreciate that measles can have a devastating effect but that fear of something happening to my child because I gave them a vaccine is almost paralysing, in the way that something happening to my child because I didn't vaccinate isn't. I can't explain it any other way than that. It's not totally beyond the reaches of possibility that although the MMR may be safe for most, there may be a few genetic 'mutations' for want of a better word that it might interact poorly with and given my family history I think my reticence is understandable.
DD is almost 10 now and I have talked the MMR over with her and she knows that now she is older I would like her to have it as I feel that her body would be more able to cope with it now as opposed to when she was just one, however she faints at the sight of a needle so it's a work in progress. But that fear still cripples me.
I think the reason people are more concerned about the mmr is that they are live vaccines, which is why it cannot be given before age 1.
I do wonder if by 'research' everyone just means 'google'. Or have these non vaccinating parents read full scientific research papers and journals and compared the evidence for an against? I appreciate if people vaccinate one dc who then reacts badly so u don't future dc, but op I totally get the 'type' of parent ur talking about!
Well, like I said, I'm not saying I'm not going to vaccinate. Just not 100% sure I will give the measles one. Yes to Rubella, and if mumps were available, yes.
I agree with you fairy, i'm sure most kids are fine. But having seen first hand what the measles jab can do, really don't want to risk it. I'd like to weigh up the pros and cons for myself.
It's not a decision I will take lightly. Especially not after how badly poor DD reacted to her 12 weeks jabs. It's taken her 3 weeks to get over them, and she's just the next lot just next week. Such a large amount of toxics going into such a small body.
I might consider the MMR when she is much older. Hmm.
pagwatch A voice of reason thank you.
Everyone is entitled to their choice but there are wide ranging issues. I teach in a secondary school where annually we get outbreaks of mumps due to pupils not having jabs when younger. Instantly notices are put up in the staff room warning any pregnant women. This occurred when I was seven weeks pregnant and as I was already at risk of suffering a miscarriage was practically told by the school nurse to leave the premises instantly
is this section of mumsnet watched by a certain sector of society or something? because it seems sooo different to other areas
etc is all left at the door of AIBU
<it wafts hopefully via mnhq>
holiday Can i ask? Did you get a lot of pressure from the GP's to get your children vaccinated with the MMR? How did you deal with that?
charliesmumma there's google, and there's google scholar which will link you only to evidence based research.
OK. Owllady, when your doctor says that your child has an ear infection - do you do your own independent research?
I am that someone has decided to criticise Bill Gates for attempting to eradicate polio.
I am pretty impressed with Bill Gates.
Babies are exposed to thousands or bacteria and germs the second they are born. Their immune systems are not 'overloaded' by a vaccine of one or two or three viruses. The link to MMR and autism was disproved years and years ago and the dr totally discredited. The affect of singular vaccines had never been tested and the side effects are unknown. MMR has been tested and is approved. I just don't get it.
having we got a lot of pressure from hvs. We were told we were irresponsible, didn't understand and were given a propaganda leaflet listing all the pros but none of the cons. It just pissed us off and made us more determined not to do it.
Yeah true - but how many people actually use google scholar? The 'research' also needs to be unbiased and I'm sure a lot of people look for what's going to back up their preferred ideology, so they can then site it to other people. Maybe some people do research both sides equally and still come up with 'autism caused by MMR, vaccines will over load the immune system' etc etc but I really wonder what they are reading or when/where its been published.
"But what if the child has a contraindication against the jab? Are you going to ban them from going to school?! "
No. However I want such children protected by the herd immunity. A child with a suppressed immune system (prehaps recovering from cancer) can't have vaccines and is more likely to die if they catch measles.
There is a difference between someone with serious medical reason backed up by consultants and some who has read some "woo" on the internet by Andrew Wakefield.
"have you ever lived with a child with severe or profound autism?
without anyone there to care it is a death sentence"
There are degrees of autism. I worked in a special school for 4 years and certainly there were some very violent and challenging children. While I was there a girl with profound autism who died of something completely unrelated to her autism. Everyone who knew her was deeply affected by her death. I cannot imagine the pain that the poor mother must still be feeling. I am sure she wishes her little girl was still alive.
There are lots of ways that children can develop profound special needs. Vacinations have cut the number of children with severe disablities.
flump I see your point, but even having the mmr doesn't 100% guarantee a child won't catch it and put you at risk.
You can be at risk sitting on the bus or out in the shopping centre.
Plus I work in a hospital and potentially could be exposed to all sorts of infectious diseases so the fact your school advertises an outbreak and advises anyone pregnant not to be there is sensible.
charliesmumma yes who knows! I suppose even with evidence based research people can cherry pick which info they want.
Also, it could be biased research as quite often it the major drug companies who are promoting a certain drug or vaccine are the ones financing the research.
vacinations have cut the number of children with severe disablities (sic)
have you got any actual proof to back that up? and what kind of disabilities we are talking about? It also does not disregard the link between disabilities occurring after vaccinations anyway
While I usually steer clear of this kind of mn argument in this instance I have to say this.
I was not intending to vaccinate my dc, I looked into it so I could defend my stance.
It's utter fucking bollocks. Wakefield ( the man who first shat out this nonsense) never did any kind of actual study at all.
I could rant at length on the subject but won't waste my breath, this link will walk you through all the evidence provided by both sides.
I think the BBC is a fairly repruatable source that child mortality has been drastically reduced.
Alternatively go for a walk in your local grave yard and think of the poor mothers who lost their chidlren to childhood diseases.
Vacnination prevents disablity
" In Africa, one the foremost causes of disability is infectious and communicable disease; the incidence of these diseases have been greatly reduced or eliminated in higher income countries. "
To me not vacinating is a no brainer for the majority of chidlren. There is no evidence that autism is caused by the MMR.
harridan the link is to either a piece from an "uninformed reporter" or the piece "bashed out" for the newsdesk. Which one am I supposed to be reading as neither title tempts me
noble I wasn't criticising Bill Gates for what he is doing; more wondering why he chose to do that, rather than something else which would reduce deaths from diarrheah and mean that people are stronger and more able to fight diseases that we vaccination against.
Um why isn't it parents who don't immunise?
In the absence of medical contraindication, my opinion is that nonvaxers are selfish and stupid free-riders, who only have the luxury not to immunise because the majority of people are responsible and get their kids vaxed.
Too right they should not be in state schools.
havingastress actually no, we didn't get any hassle, the surgery sent out repeat appointments for a few months following the primary cancellation but when I informed them I intended not to vaccinate they removed me from the list without quibble.
Tilder hit the nail on the head for me. I'm a scientist too, although in a somewhat different field, and find it frankly insulting that lay people would claim to have "properly" researched anything in my field without specialist knowledge and absolute heaps of time. So, people doing their own "independent" and "unbiased" research on the evidence for and against vaccinations in their spare time by doing a bit of googling (and quite possibly ending up on antivaxx websites - that obvs have their own agendas) or reading a couple of random (sometimes seemingly) scientific papers that come up high in a web search, are deluded fools.
Without in-depth knowledge of backgrounds and issues in immunology I would not dream of declaring that I know better than immunologists that work in this field for decades (and I'm sure the entrance criteria for medical schools, chemistry depts., etc. nclude "evilness" and "bribeability" (if there is such a word)). In fact my aunt and uncle both work for a drug company (fairly high ranking chemist and a biologist), and are definitely what you would call decent, normal people. Sure every field has its rotten apples, but science has a way of weeding them out (Wakefield, to give a well-known example)- eventually. The routine vaccines have been found to be safe enough (scientific research results are never absolutely black or white - but you they can find an acceptable shade of grey), and the alternatives are unthinkable (especially, because they are so easily avoidable), so I'll give my DS whatever's on the schedule. In fact he has his MMR booster next week
I know some people have a genuine reason (allergy, illness, etc.) for not immunizing their DC, but most really do not. We are all together in this society (like it or not), and parts of it - working together. If we have democratically agreed that we would like to get rid of some, possibly severe, diseases and that we should take care of the weak, e.g. cancer patients who cannot be protected, anyone without good reason really should immunize their DC. But you can't force some "free-thinking" individualists to think about anyone else. And I wouldn't even try, TBH. They already think they are cleverer than anyone else to have unveiled all these conspiracies.
Also, anyone who will want to come back with an argument about being a "sheep" blindly following current scientific advice, well, I guess I am, but so is everyone else. E.g. do you check whether the maintenance is up to date on a lift and really get stuck in learning about lift-building and maintenance literature before giving it a thorough once-over yourself before you (or your children) get in one? I didn't think so. But some people die in broken lifts. You have to have a degree of trust in others or move to a desert island somewhere.
Questions for those afraid of the effects of the vaccine:
Are you not similarly afraid of the possible outcomes of not vaccinating?
What do you believe to be the balance of risks?
"I know some people have a genuine reason (allergy, illness, etc.) for not immunizing their DC, but most really do not."
The problem is that all too often you only discover that your child isn't suited to a particular vaccination until after they've been given it.
My ds stopped breathing after being given his first DTP immunisations. Doctors refused to accept that the DTP might have been to blame, and came up with various suggestions including a latex allergy or an allergy to the swab they used on his leg.
Now according to some people on here, ds shouldn't have been allowed to attend school as he wasn't fully vaccinated. The get-out clause of "unless there was a good reason" wouldn't have applied because officially he had not reacted to the DTP at all.
We were encouraged to let ds have the second DTP injection under observation at the hospital. Again he stopped breathing, and by sheer chance there was a doctor on duty that day who had seen this reaction in another child. The cause was found to be the pertussis element.
How many parents on here can honestly say that they would have put their own baby through that second DTP without hesitation? And for those of you who wouldn't, well you would have effectively signed away your child's right to attend school.
Still think it's such a great policy?
SomethingOnce completely agree.
Every medication has its risks. I would rather take a 12 in million chance of my child developing autism from the MMR than substantially higher chance of them dying from a childhood disease.
*In the West, mortality is <0.05% of cases.
*Worldwide, measles is the leading cause of vaccine-preventable death.
*Complication and mortality rates are highest in infancy and lowest in 1-9 year-olds, before rising again into adulthood.
Somethingonce, I delayed giving my kids the MMR as they both have multiple severe allergies including egg. I was very worried about them getting measles, but also loathe to inject them with something there was so much fuss about when they were allergic to one of the components while they were still very young.
What swung it for me was DS developing asthma and seeing how poorly he was with something that the rest of the family had shaken off fairly easily. The balance of risks swung for me then. They ended up having the MMR in hospital.
Fuck off with the 'children shouldn't be in schools. Just fuck right off. In this country any medical procedure outside of some aspects mental health requires consent, why? because any medical treatment, any vaccination carries risk. Informed consent at that. In America where most states require vaccination to attend public schools, there are exemption forms, so in actual fact in all but two you can refuse vaccination and still attend school.
My dc are un-vaccinated, and should not be denied an education due to our family history. My sister is the collateral damage no-one wants to speak of. Its so easy to sit there and preach at other parents who make the choice not to vaccinate when your child is one of the majority who don't suffer a reaction. A reaction that leaves them profoundly disabled, paraplegic, incontinent, brain damaged and forgotten about. Your there helping my mum wipe my sisters bum, change her nappy (she is 34 btw) clean her peg site, set up her feeds. You're not there to help turn her to prevent pressure sores, give her meds, watch her spasm and scream in pain due to the chronic nerve damage her immune system and vaccine reaction caused.
You aren't in my shoes, my mums shoes, you aren't one of the unlucky few. Not everyone chooses to not vaccinate because of MMR and Wakefield. Her life was ruined the day she collapsed in the surgery after her jab, ruined.
In my opinion, in a modern society, every child has a right to go to school, regardless of parents's choices and ideology. That is fundamental. Not saying that it could not become more problematic in the future, though, if vaccination rates fall further.
Coppertop: Clearly you have an acceptable reason. It just isn't the scientific way to jump the gun and announce things before they are absolutely clear (can be annoying, or even sometimes, like with your son, dangerous, but ultimately necessary on the whole to make the world a more rational, safer place). I would, probably not have given the second vaccine either, seeing as your DS's reaction (whether it was something else linked to the situation or the vaccine itself, or even coincidental) was so very severe. People should immunize their DC so that boys like your DS can be kept safe(r).
The way I made the decision was this:-
Either the vaccine is safe or it is not safe. If it is safe then obviously the correct decision is to immunise. Sorted.
So let us now assume it is not safe. If that is true then in the next few years there is going to be a big scandal about it. As soon as there is even a whisper of the scandal then parents will stop immunising. At this point herd immunity will almost certainly break down.
So the question is:- Do I want my child to have the unsafe vaccine or do I want her to be at significant risk of catching one of the illnesses.
Answer:- I think that the vaccine - even if it is unsafe - gives a lower risk.
Therefore - either way I will vaccinate.
The problem with parents who don't vaccinate is that I think some of them do so believing that herd immunity will never fall apart so the risk of catching the illness is fairly low. But that is relying on other people to do something to their children that you have decided is unsafe for your own child. And I don't think that is a good thing to hang your hat on.
Incidentally I found out a few months ago that I have a horse in this race. Despite having rubella aged about 8, having the jab at 11, being immune before getting pregnant with dd age 29 and still being immune when pg with dd at 30 it seems that I am now 33 and not immune to rubella. And pregnant. It's a scary place to be. I am very glad dd has been immunised as she has had loads of colds etc the last few months and it would have been terrifying to wonder each time if they were the start of rubella....
redspottydress he chose to do that, and diarrhoea, and HIV, TB, malaria and so on. Eradicating polio is just a headline: imagine completely wiping out a horrendous disease through vaccination.
Info on the work against diarrhoea:
Demented so you think nobody should vaccinate their children ,and we should bring back, polio , dioptheria, measles and the like, or just your children should be exempt from vaccination?
(I know you won't answer that)
We vaccinated DS because we were more worried about the possible consequences of him catching one of the illnesses than we were about the theoretical risk of autism.
The illnesses that are vaccinated against can kill, or permanently disable a child. Or an unborn child, in the case of rubella. So we were more concerned about that than the risk of the vaccine.
Although if we had a family history of people reacting badly to vaccines, or known allergies to components of the vaccine, it would have been a much harder decision to make, and I can understand parents being reluctant to vaccinate under those circumstances.
Noble I stand corrected, I should have done my research!
People have the right to choose if they want their children to be injected with things they don't fully trust. It's that simple. If we don't have parental choice over what goes into our children's bodies, then there is something seriously wrong.
I, myself, I find that I have an inherent distrust towards potentially fatal diseases (someone's really botched up their PR, haven't they!).
As a result of measles I have very little hearing in one ear and partial hearing loss in the other. This happened when I was 6 years old.
I listened to an interesting article on the radio the other day talking about immunisation programmes in developing countries.
The healthcare professional interviewed described the immunisation programme in developed countries as being a victim of its own success. We have gone through years of not seeing the impact of the diseases which are routinely immunised against.
my oldest dd is fully vacinated and I fully intended dd2 to be vacinated
when she was due her MMR booster, she was undergoing diagnostics for an auto immune disorder
under medical advice she didn't recieve her booster
I rely on herd immunity to keep her safe and well and the number of people not immunising their children scares me
So sorry to read about your sister, Demented.
I am interested in what you have to say, but feel it would be insensitive (this is perhaps not the place or the time) to ask questions.
If you have two children with autism don't you think it's more likely to be genetic than 'caused'?
Some people have to walk miles and queue for hours to get their children a vaccine. They tend to be in countries where parents have seen the devastation of childhood diseases.
My child has been immunised, and will go on to be so.
This thread is actually fucking horrible. Some of the attitudes on here are just
Spotty MMR isn't given to babies under 1 because it doesn't work effectively not because it's live. I looked into it a few months ago because I'm so close to an outbreak and I wondered if we could give it early but we can't. All of the immunity I passed on to dd2 during pregnancy will have waned by now and breastfeeding provides very little protection so I'm understandably worried
YANBU. Parents who choose not to vaccinate are putting their own, and everybody else's, child at risk.
To those who feel that MMR causes Autism. Please explain the incidences of Autism before the MMR.
As for this, Also autism is not simply genetic. If one identical female twin has autism there is only 50% chance that the other one will too. Environment is also a factor.
I sincerely hope you are not blaming parents or the home environment. The refrigerator mother crap was discredited many, many years ago.
If you have two children with autism don't you think it's more likely to be genetic than 'caused'?
I don't have two with autism, I have one - the other has LDs including DAP, which was coincidental in manifesting at the time of the MMR. May be as a result, maybe not. I'll never know and it's not worth over thinking because it can't be changed can it?
We chose to vaccinate and I do admit to feeling uneasy about it, even after reading and digesting all the evidence. We decided that the pros outweighed the risks. I don't know of any parents who chose not to vaccinate, but I'm sure my children are in close proximity to some children who aren't. I do think these parents should be able to choose not to vaccinate, but also believe that they are taking a risk by not doing so.
I've made this point on other threads and I'll say it again. I always wonder if the children who did have vaccine reactions, would have had those reactions triggered anyway but by something else.
Anyway, YABU to expect people to do anything. There are always reasons why people do not vaccinate, as some people have said upthread.
They are ignorant & don't understand that measles & chicken pox could threaten the lives of their children. Hands up how many of the smug bunch on this thread have their kids vaccinated against chickenpox. :waits for the extra smug to appear:
I see the usual tasteless comments about dead versus autistic children have appeared. Which misses the point so utterly spectacularly it's really quite astounding.
Amongst all this hysteria about banning children from school please can I point you in the direction of the JCVI minutes. Always an interesting read. Anyway vaccination rates are currently the highest they've ever been. The areas with the outbreaks have very high rates (95% ish - although of course will depend on the cohort you measure) so I don't think we need to worry too much about mass outbreaks in schools destroying the innocent. (Albeit you might see outbreaks in schools such as Steiner school where a lot of parents choose not to vaccinate - this is to be expected). Babies aren't usually at high risk of catching measles (although of course they will be at higher risk if they do) because they usually have passive immunity from their mother - this is why they are not vaccinated earlier - if the average baby was at risk of catching measles MMR would be given along with the other 6 at 2 months.
Some of my children are vaccinated, some aren't. My mother is deaf in one ear from measles, I have a science PhD, I have a severely disabled child, I've read more than probably everyone on this thread. No senior doctor has ever criticised our decision to not vaccinate our younger children - in fact they have gone so far as to agree with it.
But do carry on with the hysteria.
As for don't you think it's more likely to be genetic
This totally misunderstands genetics. Genes often interact with environmental factors - there's a whole lot of research going into that.
Also autism is NOT one thing - it is many conditions. It is known for example that autism where the condition runs through families is inherited very differently to simplex autism. Autism where it runs through families may be inherited in the way that people tend to mean when they say 'it's genetic' - in other words the autism traits are inherited. This is not the case for simplex autism. That much is known.
simplex autism being single case in the family (with unaffected boys in the family) and no increased autism traits in parents.
tilder wrote way up thread that as a scientist they are still learning - and that is exactly what always worries me - we have no bloody idea of the long term consequences of our medical activities, and is the reason why I chose for my DD to have single vaccines.
<joins Pag on the ODFO bench>
Bit surprised to see my name mentioned especially given how badly I worded my post. Was very after rereading.
Have to say, I am pro vaccine and I think I failed miserably in getting my point across. My point is basically to query how someone with lay knowledge can interpret the spread of info available on vaccination and come up with x, whereas the consensus of experts is y. I do appreciate that for some people there are unusual circumstances that may mean a different approach might be helpful, but when it comes to vaccination these cases are rare. This is not meant to be offensive.
I was very interested to see papers from the 1960s used to support a view on the current content of a vaccine. That did raise an eyebrow.
Enough of being a geek, I do try and steer away from vacc threads normally.
I have issues with non-vaxers who use it as some kind of element in their repertoire to lord over other parents... you want to put your child at risk - fine... but don't use the comfort zone of all those people who DO vaccinate to lord it over them as you being the enlightened caring parent versus all the sheep out there. THAT annoys me. DD1 is vaccinated, DD2 will be - I'm toying with delaying the 1 year boosters a couple of months to give them at actual age vs adjusted age but that's about it - and thank God I DID vaccinate after a relative decided to bring whooping cough riddled kids to get their presents on Xmas Day.
As a somewhat entertaining side-note (and I'm amazed I can actually remember doing this but I can) I was vaccinated against most things as a kid - to the extent I remember chucking a strop aged about 10 years old when I wanted a day or two off school, and stropping off up the stairs kicking each one as I went to the sounds of the tortured yell of "but you've blooming well vaccinated me against everything INTERESTING I COULD CATCH!"
tilder - you got your point across just fine, and I realise that you are pro vaccination, it is just that your point that we are all still learning struck a chord with me
Exit, if you are concerned that we don't know the long term effects of our medical activities and you were worried about the MMR, what made you decide that having the vaccines separately made any difference to the potential risk?
Very good points tilder and toys. Completely agree.
exit not knowing things doesn't mean they're bad. In fact, the point about science learning and evolving should, according to your logic, lead you to reject any medicine, including paracetamol. There are some studies beginning to show a link between asthma/allergies and paracetamol use.
In which case, it is therefore conceivable that the benefits of vaccination are even greater since by reducing the exposure to illness (eg measles), the potential use of paracetamol is reduced, on average. So learning more has shown that vaccination is even more beneficial to child health.
In fact, the more research which is done, the more confident I am in the safety of the current recommended childhood vaccinations. For example, concerns were raised about the MMR and autism based on a pretty flimsy theoretical link and not on any observed evidence. So a number of large studies were carried out to see if there was anyhting to the idea. None of them found any link. Of course, it's still theoretically possible that there is a link but the numbers of children affected would be tiny if there were since the studies were so large. So here's an example of learning more showing that vaccination is safe and (hopefully) increasing confidence.
Personally, I would make vaccination compulsory for school attendance if no medical exemption is provided. Those with genuine medical reasons could obtain exemptions and, in fact, their children would be the ones who would stand to gain the most. Of course people sholdn't be forced to vaccinate but if you wish to partake of a social good then you should be willing to accept that by you not vaccinating you are, de facto, increasing the risk to others who are equally entitled to an education. Those for whom there are concerns over vaccinating would be able to be exempted and those, like the ones the OP described, would not be allowed to willy nilly expose others to risk.
The only thing, OP, is that YABVU to just refer to mums. It's dads as well!
If we waited for 100% certainty we would still be living in caves.
On something as important to me as my children's health, I take the advice of the overwhelming majority of people and vaccinate. I am really not sure what possible reason there could be for countless doctors, scientists etc who understand the science far better than me to mislead me on this. The mmr has been extensively studied and I really do think any possible link to autism is vanishingly small.
'Personally, I would make vaccination compulsory for school attendance if no medical exemption is provided.'
Am I right that you are a "liberal" who reads the Guardian?
They won't make it mandatory in a hurry because they know that many parents would remove kids from schools and they would mainly be educated and middle class. The numbers could be surprisingly large. They prefer an education campaign to making it mandatory.
I do agree with you re the superior parenting attitudes MiaowTheCat.
Who is 'they'?
Mandatory vaccination for state school entrance seems to work fine in other countries.
And what is being a "liberal" got to do with things in your opinion (and why the quotation marks??)? Very strange!
They is the authorities. Homeschooling would increase dramatically like in the United States and they don't want that.
A "liberal" in quotes is someone who thinks parental choice and rights should be ignored in order to make vaccination mandatory because they think that they are right and know best about the benefits and risks.
Remember the Blair case
There are a lot of educated people who are not as sure as you are when it comes to potential risks and many are influential and would not easily accept mandatory regulations.
'Ms Booth, journalist and mother of a 12-month-old daughter, said: "Where my daughter's health is concerned I'm more inclined to believe information I find on the Internet than to swallow advice from a Government leaflet.
"How can a Government, which in one breath advises us to check the labels on food for additives and E numbers, then so breezily recommend vaccinations containing mercury and formaldehyde for babies less than nine-weeks-old?"
Ms Booth, who said she had refused to allow her daughter Alexandra to have the MMR jab, said doctors receive generous bonuses if they meet Government targets on vaccinations.'
There are many people like Lauren Booth, Cherioe Blair's half-sister, who would probably campaign against it. The fuss that that would make would increase fears of the public and probably lead to a lower vaccination rate. That is why they won't make it mandatory in a hurry.
YANBU... I was about to start a similar thread . They are putting OUR children at risk because vaccinations rely on herd immunity, when we get below a certain percentage of children vaccinated (85-90%) the vaccines don't work as well because there is too much disease out there for them to overcome! So they are selfishly increasing the risk of everyone elses children becoming sick!
There is a risk of an adverse reaction to ANYTHING whether it be getting vaccinated or eating a new food and having an allergic reaction, but most reactions are very mild, so the risk of a severe reaction is FAR LESS than the risk of dying due to the disease the vaccine is protecting. The one study linking MMR vaccines to autism was fraudulent, in that the Dr who ran it made up the figures and case studies to prove what he wanted the outcome to be.
Well, you'll be pleased to know then that I am not a "liberal". It's not a question of knowing best but one of protecting others' rights to an education which you seem keen to trample on. Children who are immuno-supressed are just as entitled to an education - unfortuantely they have no choice in the matter.
Unfortunately, there are indeed people out there like Lauren Booth, although I personally tend not to rely on the Daily Mail for my information (is the Guardian preferable ). It is a rather
Do you have any statistics to back up your claim that homeschooling in the US is dramatically more than in the UK (and that this is due to vaccination)? Sounds pretty outlandish to me.
'They' probably won't introduce compulsory vaccination in the UK, it's not a very British thing to do. I think it's a shame.
Actually I think the Lauren Booth example is quite enlightening. She hears 'formaldehyde' and 'mercury' and decides that they sound too scary. I think that reprsents quite well a large number of parents who do not vaccinate. In fact, the amount of formaldehyde used is very small and quite harmless and there is no mercury in pediatric vaccines (and what was there previously was in a form that is harmless and the body can excrete). Stupid woman.
It always surprises me how much rage there is against parents who feel they have very good reasons for not vaccinating their babies, all this how dare you put my
vaccinated so presumably safe child at risk!, yet the same people completely ignore the thousands of people who are here illegally from God-knows-where, carrying God-knows-what diseases.
But it's easier to pick on concerned parents, much more PC.
I'm certainly not 'lording it' over people who have vaccinated. I don't want my child to be ill any more than they do theirs. I say lucky them that their child hasn't had a bad reaction to a jab that makes them nervous of giving them any more. Lucky them that they don't have cause to regret the ones that they have already given.
' It's not a question of knowing best but one of protecting others' rights to an education which you seem keen to trample on.'
If you are happy to take the vaccinations then go ahead, but don't try to scare or blackmail others by scaremongering to do so if they disagree with you.
If you want schools where every child is vaccinated, then create segregated schools with vaccinated and unvaccinated children, but don't force all children to be vaccinated against their parents' wishes. Then we will see in which schools children end up catching mumps etc.
''They' probably won't introduce compulsory vaccination in the UK, it's not a very British thing to do.'
I bet a lot of the 'liberals' would love to try it, but they know that there wil be opposition from the people, so they won't do it. Instead they will use education programmes and leaflets etc.
Sorry, your use of 'they' and "liberal" is quite amusing Claig and I think it reveals a lot about your thought processes and world view.
It's not scaring or blackmailing. If you are allowing unvaccinated children to go to school, then you are putting children who cannot be vaccinated at risk (as well as a small number of vaccinated children for whom the vaccine did not work).
It's really not that hard to work out and I think it's very unfair on those children who are equally entitled to an education.
That was quite a xenophobic post, pixel.
It's not about being PC or not. It's about protecting those children who are unable to have the vaccines. They are usually the ones who would be worst affected if they caught any of these diseases anyway.
Maybe so, but when dd was small (17 yrs ago) I was chatting to the HV about vaccinations and she told me they no longer did TB. I asked if that was wise what with all the immigration and she was shocked that I dared to say it and said that no it wasn't a risk.
Then I read this on this very thread:-
We could look at Tb. I presume most of us here are of an age to have been innoculated as a matter of course. We don;'t now, and lo! it's on the increase by virtue of immigration.
Not immigration. On the increase because they stopped immunising against it and because they is more international travel.
Stuff I read at the time seemed to voice concerns over giving the three vaccines in one injection, hence my choice to go for single vaccines.
And of course science is all about learning, but mistakes are made. If there are concerns, and there is an alternative (ie single vaccines) that is the choice I made.
YANBU at all. Vaccinations are the greatest public health advancement in centuries and the benefits to herd immunity should never be under estimated.
Actually pixel is right. Immigration has impacted on TB levels in the UK.
I'm a health care worker and have seen it quite often.
So not because we don't routinely vaccinate against anymore then? That wouldn't have anything to do with it?
We've always had large amounts of people from other countries here.
It's probably a number of factors.
The vaccination was not very effective and also the chance of people in the general population being exposed to TB was very small so it wasn't really worth it to vaccinate the whole population.
My guess would be that the increase in TB is caused by:
b) increased international travel
c) increased drug resistance so if you get it, you may find it harder to get rid of it
d) immigration (it could be if more people are coming for countries where it's prevalent or they are mixing more with general pop)
e) no more routine vaccination of children
My mums cousin caught measles at the age of 3 in the 40's before vaccination were available. Prior to this she was described as ridiculously bright and the most beautiful child many people had ever seen. It left her so badly brain damaged that it was impossible to care for her at home and she lived in a hospital for the rest of her life... over 40 years.
My children are vaccinated, every child in our extended family is vaccinated, My eldest got a ridiculously high temperature after one but I still took him back for the rest and had my daughter vaccinated.
Other parents are entitled to their point of view... but I don't think they truely know the gamble they are taking with there children's lives.
I'm not saying immigration is the only factor, but it is a factor. No need to call people xenophobic for saying so when it is fact.
In the 1980's TB in the UK was just about irradicated. Since the 90's it's been on the increase.
I'm sure stopping vaccinating children is partly to do with it but in my experience 95% of people I see with TB are not UK nationals. The other 5% are but had TB at a young age before vaccinations came out.
It also is partly due to overcrowded living. Now I don't know about where you guys live but where I live there are so many houses of multiple occupancy and they are almost alway migrant workers living there.
I can understand people's reticence but really - statistically there is more likely to be harm to your child from not vaccinating than from vaccinating. This is enough for me. Nothing is without risk - it's weighing up the risks. And that's without mentioning herd immunity/protecting babies, children who are immuno-suppressed, pregnant women and the like.
It's a no brainer for me. But parents who don't vaccinate often have very real concerns and they need to be addressed, not dismissed.
going back to the beginning, the reasons these women gave were:
- causes autism: long disproved
- all that stuff on the internet; yes, well, monkeys with keyboards are bound to be more informed than people who spend years at medical school and many more years researching
- drug companies making money: too stupid an excuse to bother with
- keeping their children clean; by letting them suffer with preventable diseases?
if only there was a competence test before breeding. And I do like the idea of separate schools for vaccinated and non-vaccinated children, although I think the children who cannot be vaccinated for health reasons should be allowed to go to the former.
no smallpox now. How did that happen?
I've said this before but I have a bit of a bugbear about people talking about "researching" vaccinations.
Unless you have a PhD in Immunology you haven't done any research into vaccines. You've spent a few hours reading stuff (probably dumbed down for laypeople) on the Internet.
Make the decision but don't pretend like you're doing so from anything but ignorance. People who have devoted distinguished careers to the field are unanimously in favour of vaccines.
After doing some research I decided my daughter should have her vaccines but it wasn't a decision I came across lightly. Mercury was my biggest worry so I don't think parents are stupid when they won't get their kids vaccinated. I do personally think the pro's heavily outweigh the con's though and I don't like the pressure medical professionals are willing to apply to parents without explaining ALL the risks involved.
By "research" I mean homework Hold.
What kind of qualifications do you have in medicine, immunology, or public health, to make any "homework" meaningful?
How were you able to inform yourself better than the medical councils of basically every first world nation?
But Chelsea, there isn't any mercury in childhood vaccinations
hold your opinion on people not knowing anything about vaccinations unless you have a degree in immunology is exactly why the general population are worried about it. People feel they are not fully informed about vaccinations, and so do what they can to get to unbiased evidence.
And just because they don't hold relevant qualifications, doesn't mean to say they can't get what information they can and make their own judgement.
People distinguished in their careers who brainless people should go along with, according to you, have their salaries paid for by who??!
You probably don't have a degree in car manufacturing, but you still look at all the reviews, for yourself to chose a car. You wouldn't just have a car because that's the one the salesman wants you to have would you.
And for the record, I personally know a consultant microbiologist, who during the swine flu scare said he would not be happy to have the swine flu vaccine but he kept quiet about his professional opinions at work because he was supposed to be promoting it.
As for the MMR I'm on the fence. I think I will have my children vaccinated but reluctantly.
People distinguished in their careers who brainless people should go along with, according to you, have their salaries paid for by who??!
This is conspiracy theory nonsense.
There is nothing "brainless" about following standard medical advice (the way you do if you were diagnosed with cancer or diabetes) and recognising that the qualifications needed to decide optimum medical treatment are beyond most people (for reasons of time moreso than intelligence).
Also I would like to add back in the 60's/70's these same experts who had degrees and many years experience also said it was safe for pregnant mums to take thalidomide for morning sickness. People believed that information was truthful. Now we know they were WRONG!
The swine flu vaccine wasn't even necessary for most healthy people though.
So who ARE they paid by?
Just an honest question since you know so much about them.
Obviously paid for by some secret government cell, set up to mislead parents into making their children zombies by immunising them.
YANBU. People who don't vaccinate their DC are being utterly irresponsible. The ones I know are full of conspiracy theories about governments and pharmaceutical companies and full of 'but we can't know for sure' statements. Well I know for sure that if my child catches measles or diphtheria or polio he could die. Vaccinating him is much less likely to do him harm than not doing so.
you not for all but for children under 5, pregnant women, the elderly, people with diabetes, asthma etc as well as all front line workers in the NHS. I was using it as an example that an expert in the field, personally and quietly was opposed against it but due to his job had to promote it.
"Obviously paid for by some secret government cell, set up to mislead parents into making their children zombies by immunising them."
you now you are being ridiculous. :-)
How can you call yourself informed on the issue if you don't even know who the NHS and the GMC are funded by?
Might as well be though, for all the sense that is coming from those who say they wouldn't vaccinate their children (not meaning those who cannot be vaccinated).
I've always been exasperated by parents who "research" vaccinations on google and opt out, HoldMeCloserTonyDanza has managed to express this much better than I ever have been able to.
Like for example we have ChelseaKnows1 doing her research and determining that vaccinations are unsafe because they still have mercury - firstly, it's almost completely false that vaccinations contain mercury and secondly, it's irrelevant because people who actually are qualified to do research have ruled out any link between thermisol & autism.
Thirdly, and most infuriating, is that this thermisol nonsense has really jeopardized the health of the poorest people in the poorest countries because thermisol as preservative allows health care providers to provide the combined immunizations - not possible without thermisol.
So parents sit blithely in the first world at their laptops, doing their "research", work themselves into a hysteria that cannot be undone by actual research, and lots of poor people die as a result. Good work, anti-vaxers!
And, I'm always curious as to where the anti-vaxers draw the line on their skepticism of medical information. Would you be suspicious of cancer treatment, should god forbid you need it? If not, why not? What's the difference? Pharmaceuticals make huge amounts of money on cancer. There must be a conspiracy.
"Obviously paid for by some secret government cell, set up to mislead parents into making their children zombies by immunising them."
I think that comment is on a par with the taliban telling afgans that the polio vaccine is a western plot to make muslims infertile.
I am a Guardian-reading mad liberal. I do not support mandatory vaccination for state-school entrance.
I do not support this, because education is very important. Regardless of my personal feeling on vaccination, many parents would feel forced to home-educate their children. The results of home-education are extremely variable, from children who blossom educationally and as people, to children who massively under-attain. And this is with parents who fully choose to home-educate, as an end in itself. The human results of reluctant home-educators will doubtless be even more variable.
In short, I do not think the rights of children are served by making their loving parents feel forced to home-educate.
Thank you for reading.
Oh, and if you are the child of the stereotypical anti-vaccinator, then you need access to school science lessons more, not less than your vaccinated peers!
hold I never said I was informed on the subject.
I'm playing devils advocate.
Just because I'm questioning you, you don't have to get on the defensive about it :-)
ReallyTired, please be assured that my comment was with my tongue firmly in my cheek. Maybe sarcasm doesn't come across so well on here?
I'm not in the least defensive. I have nothing to defend. I think the word you're looking for is "scathing".
I'm glad you've dropped the conspiracy claptrap anyway. If you want to suggest the NHS is in thrall to mysterious paymasters, I'm afraid the onus is on you to provide proof.
"Oh, and if you are the child of the stereotypical anti-vaccinator, then you need access to school science lessons more, not less than your vaccinated peers! "
I don't think you can argue with this.
Prehaps teens who aren't vacinated should be offered the MMR/ DTP when they are thirteen and allowed to have the vacine without their parent's consent. It seems nuts that parental consent or knowlege is not needed for an abortion, but teens aren't allowed vacines without parental consent.
Maybe a nastier sting would be to deny nursery vouchers or a state nursery place to non vacinated children (without proper reason). The non vaxed children could start school in reception when education starts to matter. Childhood diseases are more of a danger in the three to five group than with older children because personal hygiene improves. Also older children are more resilent to illness.
Obviously children who have good reason not to be vacinated or delay vacination should get nursery vouchers.
Because the majority of our children are immunised it does luckily help protect the "clean" (stupid term) children. Unfortunately with them not being immunised also puts out new (too little to be immunised) babies at risk / as well as themselves.
I can't understand that we have these drugs to protect our children from dying, and yet they refuse to protect them- because they are "informed parents" from reading information found on google and the doctor who linked the MMR to autism without any evidence
Not sure why you'd want to be scathing either, if you want to educate people then adopting a friendlier approach would be beneficial to the cause.
I wonder what Japanese immunologists in the UK think. Given that Japan banned the MMR vaccine about 20 years ago in favour of single vaccines (which btw are no longer available in UK as they have stopped manufacturing single vaccines). The Japanese government banned it due to high risk of side effects. Notably a higher risk that the mumps part of the vaccine caused high rates of non viral meningitis. They did however not find and link whatsoever to autism.
During the time of vaccinating with the MMR, the Japanese government made it compulsory with a fine for non agreeing parents.
Single vaccines you see, that was always my argument. If there was the slightest doubt why not make single vaccines available to everyone? I read somewhere it was because it was thought that parents would get fed up of keep going back for jabs, and the cost of course ......
In Japan they bowed to public pressure. The question is did it do a blind bit of difference to autism rates? Nope. Same with mercury in vaccines. Removed due to unfounded concerns, no scientific basis. Did removing it make any difference to any outcome? Nope.
Yanbu, and i totally agree op.
All my dc have had their imms.
No wonder diseases are coming back.
ReallyTired I don't think you can argue with this.
This is MN! Someone will. Unfortunately for them, they will then fall victim to a highly directed steam of vitriol (from me) as I cathartically explain exactly how awful the science-education provided by the stereotypical non-vaccinator is. I was home-educated, y'see.
YABU,vaccine damage is a real risk. My generation had Mumps, measles and chicken pox and rubella and in the main took it in our stride. I had measles and chicken pox as an adult and they were not really that bad.
I weighed the whole thing up and looked at the various scientific views. We eventually had the first MMR vaccinations and the polio vaccine, but nothing else.
higgle has summarized the general view of anti-vaxers quite nicely, I think.
kungfu they did not now down to public pressure. And if you want to read post again properly, they did not find a link with autism but with other side effects from having the mixed jab. Most notably non viral meningitis.
I agree with the OP and have 2 autistic children (1 DS, 1 Dsd) It's genetic imho, not caused by vaccines and not cured by wacky diets or supplements. We have got so complacent now about diseases that were real killers only a generation ago, that some mums now think they are now being healthy and "natural" to leave their kids unvaccinated, even against diphtheria, polio, tetanus etc. v odd. Andrew Wakefield is treated as some sort of martyred hero now by many such mums, though I believe he is now living v happily in the US earning millions with a new "clinic" (he was struck off in the UK)
Higgle, Maybe they weren't that bad for you but the plural of anacdote is not evidence.
Statistically, more children would be harmed by these diseases than by a vaccine. Many many more. I don't see how people can argue with that.
(Though I did state in an earlier post I do sympathise with concerns)!
YANBU at all. Any parent who has a child who can be vaccinated has a moral obligation to have them vaccinated IMO. This protects all members of society including those who cannot be vaccinated. Anything else is selfish and self-indulgent.
And how is the NHS paying for my stupidity? I am perfectly capable of paying for it myself.
And to be honest Kungfu, you sound incredibly rude.
<stands behind glossy>
Enough with the personal attacks, people, please.
Rephrasing so not misconstrued as a personal attack as none were intended and I'm sorry if they were seen as such.
If people wish to purchase single vaccines and fund their own silliness, that is fine. I don't think anyone else should have to foot the bill.
yabu for not understanding that you have been brainwashed by the government and pharma companies.
none of mine are vaxed,never have never will.loads of reasons,some you mentioned,some you didnt,but if you are happy to let someone inject aborted fetal tissue and alluminium into your baby then fine.im not.
hiding thread now as i have said all i have to say :-)
I respect people's choices but I do not respect
ridiculous hysterical paranoid posts like the above one! Gives non-vaxers a bad name and ammunition to those who do judge...........
The problem with this topic is that so many people have intensely emotive and upsetting stories which, while purely anecdotal, have more impact on reading than any amount of sensible scientific evidence.
Already we have had somebody with a profoundly disabled relative as a result of the vaccine and somebody else with a profoundly disabled relative as a result of measles. Obviously both can happen (in very very rare circumstances) so it's not surprising that parents can feel so conflicted about how best to protect their child.
I vaccinated as I don't believe any of the scare stories and think the tiny risk of a problem occuring due to catching one of the diseases is higher than the miniscule risk of a problem occuring due to vaccination. But, if I had a harrowing story to tell, maybe I would think differently.
Unfortunately I think it is actutally important that people try to look past such horror stories and vaccinate anyway because, by not doing, they are essentially saying that it is necessary for others to expose their children to risk as long as they don't have to do it themselves. If nobody vaccinated we would have a big problem.
It also doesn't help that people keep sharing their stories then hiding the thread, thus missing out on the calm, scientific reassurance that others are posting that might help them change their minds.
crash what part specifically about the post by amber was ridiculous?
Isn't it astonishing that this foetus that was aborted in the 60s has enough tissue to apparently be injected into thousands of babies 50 years down the line. Or maybe not.
Even the catholic church says that using vaccines that were created using aborted foetuses is ok, because vaccination is so important. They just say that new vaccines should be created without using aborted foetuses.
owl lady I'm with you speaking as a mum of a very severely autistic dd of 19 yrs whose autism was DEFINITELY NOT caused by MMR. HOwever, I did allow dd to have mmr at 13 months and she had an incredibly bad skin reaction and I overheard a very telling telephone conversation between my GP and the hospital consultant - obviously not meant for my ears - which was more than enough to suggest there was some suspicious issues with MMR.
I would not allow her to have the booster after what I heard. To all of those who say they would rather take the risk of their child developing autism I would suggest you have only ever encountered mild to moderate ASD. SEVERE AUTISM is a whole different ball game. My DD is incredibly violent and destructive at times and can be a very dangeous human being to be around at such times yet we absolutely adore her. She has been at residential boarding school since she was 8 yrs old which broke our hearts but wE had no choice as none of the autistic day schools could cope with her and she was a danger both to herself and others. Thankfully she has grown into a beautiful young woman but still has her violent meltdowns and manic obsessions but in 6 months time thank you God she finally moves into a 24 hr care bungalow back in our village after DH and I traveling 4-5 hour round trips EVERY SINGLE WEEKEND to spend just a few hours with our only child. I was a child of the late50's and early 60's where EVERYONE had measles and I never heard of anyone dying or being disabled by it and I thought medicine had moved on massively since then??? I wonder how many of you would have chosen my life for the past 11 years and worse still to take the risk to your child. I totally respect everyone's right to make their own decision but if you believe all the propaganda issued about vaccines being totally safe you are just being naive. By the way I do allow dd and myself to have the flu vaccine but no way would I trust the MMR after the conversation I overheard.
I would also add I totally understand there are odd occasions where chicken pox and measles can lead to severe problems and would in no way wish to insult anyone who has suffered accordingly. However I know that just about every child had these diseases when I was a child and in those days it was considered no more dangerous really than a cold or flu. I strongly believe MMR is a massively different issue altogether. I would much prefer measles vaccine and a mumps vaccine separately.
So what DID you hear raffles?
But Raffles, you have no idea if what you overheard came from a point of knowledge or just the scaremongering that was going on at the time (even health professionals believed some of the quite mad and now internationally discredited views about MMR and autism).
And yes, I do know about severe autism. My ds is 18 and severely autistic (with all the violence and obsessions that come with it). He is also in residential and has been for 4 years with 3:1 care. He was autistic from day one. He had his MMR and the booster with no side effects.
You You have my greatest admiration as a mum dealing with very similar difficulties but with the greatest respect I know EXACTLY what I heard and there was no misunderstanding. MY dd's godfather is a medical professor so we have several friends who are medics too and behind the scenes many of those are still "on the fence" in private. It would be too lengthy to try and relate a telephone conversation of around 10 mins here and as I say our dd's difficulties were obvious prior to the MMR and of course many children will have no reaction at all to having this vaccine. It is the families where children HAVE been affected and are told there is some other reason for it when blatantly there isn't similar to what demented housewife stated earlier.
My concern really is where people have only seen autism on the tv where you and I both know they are showing youngsters with only mild to moderate autism. People need to see what severe autism is really like before making such throwaway comments as "I would rather take the risk of my child developing autism"
Then it's very fortunate that we now know that there is no scientific evidence of a relationship between autism and vaccines and that, in fact, vaccines can reduce the incidence of autism by reducing in utero exposure to diseases like rubella.
There was a Louis Theroux documentary on living with chikdren with severe autism. He came away with the deepest respect for parents, soldiering on in very challenging circumstances. It was very moving and certainly if vaccines could cause such a condition it would be very worrying, but they don't, they help protect against it.
What patronising drivel. 'Soldiering on' what a way to describe a life, but hey at least Louis Theroux has the greatest respect for us. (Read my blog for why I loathe being patronised just because we love our son).
Do any of you with such interest in autism actually know what research money is being spent on? There's quite an active research area on the immune system as it's known that in some autisms (autism is not one thing blah blah blah) the immune system shows abnormal responses. There's also quite a lot of money being invested in environmental factors.
Unfortunately too much research still treats autism as one thing (a bit like looking for triggers of lung cancer while examining melanomas) but that is slowly changing.
As Raffles said I have had senior medics agree that vaccinations may be a feature in some cases. Albeit a small number. And I know of children who have ended up in ICU post vaccination who have been told the same. Although the parents have also be warned that it would be very difficult to price.
Oh raffles there was some research published this week regarding a link between autism and allergy. I haven't actually read any more than the abstract yet but might be interesting ( thinking about the skin reaction - we should maybe swap notes on that - ds1 was dxed with, and treated quite aggressively for, eczema herpeticum immediately prior to regression & his paeds and neurologist have suggested it may well have been a factor).
Oh and I should add that in the (mainstream) autism conferences I have attended apparently same researchers have discussed seriously the potential roles of vaccinations in their models (often in a virus or more rarely live vaccination type way). So if you think the issue is dead and buried you are mistaken, although it is true you're unlikely to get a research grant to find direct investigation into autism & vaccinations these days. (Unless funded by a parent I guess - which is what happened with a lot of research into gut issues - now producing interesting results which ds1's neurologist shared with us and suggested we try - 8 years after his first paed ridiculed us for trying the gluten fee diet).
noble you need to look up on the MMR manufacturer, Merck's website, they have an information page on the MMR the link is posted a few pages back. Then educate yourself on human diploid cells.
There is a laboratory in the US that run lines of these cells taken from several, but two specific in regards to MMR, lung tissue from aborted foetuses.
As for the Catholic Church, they also still cannot advocate fully the use of contraception in the world so why should we care what they think?!
kungfu you are making quite a dangerous statement there. MMR vaccine protects against autism?!
Just on par that the vaccine causes autism.
Research shows there is NO link between the MMR and autism either way.
I would like to know where you have this information from.
The MMR does have ingredients that are allergenic. Neomycin is a major one.
Neomycin. Is an aminoglycoside antibiotic. Is a DNA binder. Causes skin reactions. Strips the intestinal tract of bacteria. You wouldn't know you were allergic to it until you had the MMR. You are very unlikely to have contact with it in normal medicine.
Fuck, I've never seen such rubbish. Neomycin would have to be given daily to have a significant effect. The same with Streptomycin. The amount received in a vaccine is almost nothing.
Oh, and before anyone starts on me, there are five people in this house with ASDs. The two older ones were around long, long before MMR.
But autism isn't one thing. And five people with autism in the house would very much suggest multiplex autism (where the autism traits have high heritability so you perhaps wouldn't expect an environmental factor to be involved).
Simplex autism inherited very differently.
I was simply stating FACTS so why is that BS?
Here are a few facts...
1 - vaccinations do not provide immunity, it is perfectly possible to catch a disease after being vaccinated. In Oman in 1989 they experienced a widespread polio outbreak six months after achieving complete vaccination. In the US in 1986, 90% of 1300 pertussis cases in Kansas were 'adequately vaccinated'. 72% of pertussis cases in the 1993 Chicago outbreak were fully up to date with their vaccinations. Japan experienced yearly increases in small pox following the introduction of compulsory vaccines in 1872, by 1892 there were 29, 979 deaths, and all had been vaccinated.
2 - it is a myth that vaccines are the main reason for the low disease rates we have today. According to the British association for the advancement of science, childhood diseases decreased 90% between 1850 and 1940, paralleling improved sanitation and hygienic practices, well before mandatory vaccination programs. Infectious disease deaths in the US and England declined steadily by an average of about 80% during this century (measles mortality declined over 97%) prior to vaccinations. In GB, the polio epidemics peaked in 1950 and had declined 82% by the time the vaccine was introduced in 1956.
European countries that refused immunisations for small pox and polio saw the epidemics end along with those countries that mandated it.
I could go on but have to run.
YABU for assuming people who don't vaccinate haven't done their research, in most cases I think it's the opposite, trusting a doctor does not constitute research.
At the end of the day each parent has to make their own decision, they are all doing what they believe is best for their child so should not be flamed for this.
moresnow if vaccinations don't provide immunity, how am I immune to measles, hepatitis B and rubella (confirmed by blood tests) despite never suffering any of these diseases? Whilst it is true that vaccines don't provide immunity in 100% of people that is exactly why herd immunity is so vital. And as far as I'm aware vaccination programmes have never been mandatory in this country.
glossy, I have looked it up. They took cells from an aborted foetus, that was aborted anyway and not for the purposes of research, cultured cell lines from it, and these cell lines reproduce themselves. Vaccines are then cultured in these cells. 50 years is pretty far removed from the original aborted foetus, no?
From the hysterical 'vaccines contain aborted foetus' suggestions, one might well think that scientists were dipping a syringe into the foetus itself and putting a little bit into every vaccine produced.
Whatever your views on abortion, I think it's positive that some good has come out of it. Especially in the case of the rubella vaccine, which has gone on to prevent abortions.
Vaccinations have been mandatory in this country in about the 1850s. A movement of aristocrats and working and middle classes rose to fight it and eventually the authorities had to allow for personal choice and liberty.
It is amazing how strong our ancestors were in their fight against authority and for freedom and choice. Nowadays it is mainly educated middle class people who are in some way anti vaccine and the opposition to vaccines is nowhere near as strong as it once was.
'A number of distinctive features of the anti-vaccination movement emerge from Durbach's fascinating account. She reveals the movement's cross-class character: though some of its leading figures were derived from the upper classes, its activists were largely drawn from the lower middle and respectable working classes (women as well as men). The anti-vaccinationists' rejection of government and medical coercion in relation to health reflected a wider suspicion of state intervention in personal and family affairs. Activists were often also religious dissenters, trade unionists and radicals; they were opponents of vivisection, and supporters of temperance, vegetarianism and alternative medicine. As well as being an effective parliamentary lobby, anti-vaccinationism was a militant mass movement, given to carnivalesque demonstrations and riotous protests.
Here the differences between the nineteenth century movement and contemporary anti-vaccination campaigns are more striking than the superficial parallels noted by Durbach. Though today's anti-vaccinationist campaigns get some support from quirky aristocrats, their base of support is almost exclusively middle class. Activists object to particular vaccines (in Britain mainly MMR, in the USA mainly those containing mercury). They have no objection to state intervention in any other area and, though some favour homeopathy or other alternative therapies, many seek to justify their concerns about vaccine safety with reference to mainstream medical science. Indeed some of the most prominent campaigns are careful to point out that they are not' anti-vaccine' but simply concerned to promote 'informed choice' by parents. However disingenuous this posture may be, it reflects the general defensiveness of current campaigns and the limited scope of their resistance to medical authority. In contrast with the collective campaigns of the past, today's have a strongly individualistic character. Rather than demanding the abandonment of the national immunization programme, they merely request the choice of mercury-free vaccines, or single agents rather than MMR. Campaignsin reality little more than websites run by a few individualsprovide information (often misleading) and contact details for solicitors pursuing compensation claims for alleged vaccine injuries.'
The Anti-Vaccination Movement in England 1853-1907
But occasionally there are still some calls for mandatory vaccinations from some quarters. However, the authorities are not in favour of those calls today. It is possible that their experience of the 1850s - 1890s is one reason why.
'But in the UK vaccination programmes have relied on persuading and educating parents that immunisation is not only beneficial to their children but to society as a whole.
The BBC has learned, however, through a freedom of information request that the strategic health authority in London asked the government if it could introduce compulsory vaccinations.
Specifically the SHA asked about the "feasibility of requiring an immunisation certificate for measles before children go to school."
In documents seen by the BBC, the Department of Health acknowledges that immunisation rates in London are consistently lower than the rest of the country.
But officials said: "Our strategy is to maintain a voluntary immunisation system and invest efforts in educating parents about the benefits of vaccination and dispelling 'myths' about vaccine safety."
'But, although he sympathises with Sir Sandy's concerns about the possibility of a measles epidemic, Professor Finn believes compulsory vaccination would be counter-productive.
"There is a real risk we would end up with less MMR immunisation not more," he said.
"I think this would be handing a gift to the anti-vaccine lobby, because they would say 'look they can't persuade you it is right, so they are going to have to force you'."
But as fears of a measles epidemic grow, serious questions are now being asked as to whether persuasion on its own is enough.'
Call to make MMR jab mandatory
'The anti-vaccinationists' rejection of government and medical coercion in relation to health reflected a wider suspicion of state intervention in personal and family affairs. Activists were often also religious dissenters, trade unionists and radicals; they were opponents of vivisection, and supporters of temperance, vegetarianism and alternative medicine.'
Amazing how times have changed and whereas then the left were suspicious of state intervention etc., nowadays they are mainly in favour of it.
Did you know that in utero exposure to rubella has been shown to be one of the risk factors for autism?
Therefore vaccinating against rubella will reduce the incidence of autism.
Why do you find that dangerous other than the admittedly unpleasant notion that if you are unvaccinated then you are possibly contributing to someone else's autism?
Ds1 caught rubella from a vaccinated child.
Actually flu caught early in pregnancy seems to be associated with autism (and schizophrenia) so it's a bit daft to harass those who don't vaccinate as being responsible for great numbers of autism cases (the numbers of cases of rubella autism even in the old days were small).
The child my son caught rubella from spread it to a few people as the mum didn't realise you could get rubella if you had been vaccinated.,
My point being that it isn't as simple as 'people who vaccinate=good, people who don't=bad'. That's as daft as assuming that mothers of severely autistic kids are saints (notice my nickname - it's a piss take) to be admired for bravely caring for their not wuite human child each day )(unless of course they happen to have an opinion on what happened to their child in which case they are no longer saints but classed indtead as stupid woo-blinded angry, bitter hags just looking for something to blame - mothers only being saints if they keep their mouths shut it seems).
In our case when we thought we had an average child we vaccinated. When we found we didn't my we spoke to medics, read original research (science PhD can cope with that), attended conferences and spoke to researchers about their thoughts, emailed a few others, organised a microarray (on the NHS), discussed ideas with paediatricians and a neurologist (on the NHS), and based out decision on that.
Our aim is not to maim or kill other children, merely to have our younger two grow up to not need 24 hour 1:1 care like their brother.
Of course the idea that we're thick freeloaders is simpler and perhaps more satisfying to those who have never had to consider their child might be at higher risk from a vaccination.
Sorry for typos (phone )
I was surprised that you thought 'soldiering on' was patronising.
My cousin has a severely autistic son. When I speak to her and ask how things are, the first thing she says (almost invariably) is 'oh, soldiering on'. I shall inform her she is being paronising to herself next time we speak!
Anyway, judging by the responses on this thread, for every parent who may have a valid concern and consider not vaccinating, there are at least 10 who just scream mercury! Formaldehyde! Aborted fetal cells! Brainwashing! Conspiracy! And they are the ones putting everyone's children at risk, especially those who cannot be vaccinated.
Although vaccination rates are higher than they've ever been so no need for hysteria. I know many people who haven't vaccinated - the vadt majority did vaccinate older siblings so presumably have experienced something to make them change their minds. Those who have never vaccinated have always given a coherent account to me rather than screaming 'aborted foetuses' ( although tbh while cell lines derived from foetuses don't particularly bother me I can see why they might offend some. I eat pork, I don't ridicule those who don't).
Yes I did find it patronising. Not the specific words, the tone. Of us toiling away with our dreadful children - selflessly handing over our lives to these beasts. Unless we happen think that our children might have ended up this way from vaccination - then we're just thick and dangerous in case other innocents believe us (please note my son did not regress following MMR so I haven't personally experienced the abuse - my son regressed following a strange reaction to a common virus). The narratives that people come up with re mothers to those with severe autism are rather tiresome. Saint versus angry nutter. How about normal with the ability to have an opinion on what happened to their child.
The risks of non vaccinating are far greater than the risks of immunising. In Gloucestershire as in the North West the numbers of measles cases is increasing dramatically and there will shortly be a media campaign to try and increase vaccination rates. Immunisation only works if the vast majority of people of immunised and the genuine reasons not to immunise are few and far between. Measles is a horrible disease that carries with it a significant risk of complications including death. Mumps can cause sterility in men at a rate of 40-70% if inflammation of both testes. Rubella if caught when pregnancy has a 50% chance of causing congenital ruballa syndrome with a multitude of lifelong and potentially life-limiting complications.
I believe those the vast majority of those who have "carefully researched" the issue really are unable to interpret the basic scientific data to the standard required and will often choose sources that put an inherent spin on the information which aligns with there own uninformed views.
Certain states in the USA children are not allowed to attend the public/state school system unless immunised unless there is a verifiable medical reason why this should not be done. Personally I agree with with stance and wish it would taken up in the UK (along with nurseries etc). In this day and age there is no reason why people should suffer the life long consequences due to the ignorance of their parents.
You must have read my post wrong, saintly, since that certainly wasn't my tone nor intention. Sorry if past experiences have made you jump to these conclusions.
I personally don't know anyone who hasn't vaccinated their kids in real life. Scratching my head to think of anyone and I can't, so all I see are the reasons people have given on this thread, and for the vast majority, they're not carefully thought out, scientifically substantiated reasons.
divegirl, where did you get your mumps sterility rates from? could you cite a source? thanks
Actually in US states you can get exemptions ( either philosophical or religious depending on the State).
MMR rates for 5 year olds in the area with current outbreaks are 95% - a media campaign may be a waste of money.
I was quite able to understand the data thanks. I presented my own paper at a conference where I discussed vaccination with researchers (& heard vaccination mentioned in various research groups models).
Do you have any evidence that any of the outbreaks are affecting the 'nice' general public. Measles outbreaks are largely confined to the unvaccinated (mainly teens & adults in the current one). Babies are not vaccinated as they usually have passive antibodies. With the MMR now given earlier everyone has the option to get a measles vaccination at an early age. The risk of non-vaccination in the case of measles is generally to the unvaccinated - so you have a choice.The pertussis outbreaks are occurring in those who have been vaccinated for whatever reason & the dept of health has said non-vaccination is not driving those outbreaks.
If we're going to get hysterical and ban the few people who choose not to vaccinate I hope we're going to introduce compulsory testing of parents to ensure they understand that their child can still catch and spread a disease despite vaccination. Or is not bothering to do the limited research needed to find that out not counted as being irresponsible? (Reminder my son caught rubella from a vaccinated child - which was fine, we stayed in during the infectious period and he presumably now has immunity, but there were quite a few cases associated with that child).
Fwiw I don't particularly think the mother was irresponsible - just pointing out where mass hysteria lands us. The absolute vast majority of people choose to take the protection vaccination offers (have a look at the current rates - they are very high indeed) - do we need to hound those who choose not to. Of the many people I know who have decided not to vaccinate all except two have seen their elder children regress (ie they used to vaccinate). Some have seen their elder children end up in HDU or ICU. In many cases those elder children are no teens who are still in nappies. In a number of cases their doctors have suggested MMR may be responsible at least in part for their children's conditions. Do we really need to hound these people & ban them from education? Really?
The mumps data might be correct given that it says 'if in both testes' which it very very rarely is. The sterility rate from mumps is very low because it so rarely causes problems in both testes. Although the rate of mumps in teens and adults is increasing so maybe it will become more common. The congenital rubella data sounds misleading as well as the damage depends very much at the stage or pregnancy it is caught. Very specific weeks being linked to problems - will google.
The vast majority of people we socialise with as a family kungfu have a mix of vaccinated and unvaccinated kids. As I said I only know 2 with no vaccinations at all - and they both have pretty good reasons IMO.
Highest risk for rubella is 10 weeks and under (more severe the earlier you get it - iirc rubella autism is very early on in preganacy - which ties in with the flu-autism research). Up to 16 weeks may get problems which become apparent when older. If you get rubella later than that there isn't a risk.
I grew up next to a rubella baby - which was partly why I had my rubella status checked before ttc. I would love to see some advertising money spent on that - granted there are always accidental pregnancies but I see a positive of vaccination being that they can protect specific groups. In fact I would go so far as to say I have no problem with vaccinations targeted towards specific at risk groups.
According to NHS Direct, if the mother catches rubella in the first 13 weeks of the pregnancy, there's a 90% risk that the baby will be affected.
If the mother has rubella after 16 weeks pregnant, the risk of the baby being affected is low.
Sorry I think it should be 'very low' risk after week 16 rather than no. But still 50% is misleading as your risk at week 8 is going to be very high versus negligible at week 38.
You may think this is pedantic but important I think if you're accusing people who don't vaccinate of being too stupid to understand their decision.
According to HPA - up to 25% post pubertal makes have orchitis (usually unilateral) 'sterility seldom occurs'
I genuinely have never understood why mumps vaccination is given - there's a better argument for chickenpox vaccination I think.
Was looking at the same site purple
Saintly, where is your data for the 95% figure? This article suggests it's much lower than that (obviously the first and the booster jabs are needed)
95% is the minimum level thought needed for herd immunity and we still fall short of that.
Can't link easily as I'm on phone - go to JCVI minutes - I think it was the June 2012 meeting - they discuss imms rates and say they are happy with them and give a link to data (probably on the HPA page?) it's broken down by regions but the MMR rate for the north (where I think there are current outbreaks) was 94/95% at age 5. Given that doesn't include monovalents the measles coverage must be very high -in that age group anyway. Some of the lower figures (in different age groups or areas) may reflect a higher % giving singles but of course that is unknown.
I googled and found one with slightly lower figures (but still 95% for first MMR). The one I was looking at the other day had a 98% rate for Northern Ireland. They fluctuate a bit from quarter to quarter but still very high.
I actually have a letter here from the HPA, written at the height of the MMR trouble ( in 2001) saying there was no problem with MMR vaccination rates and coverage was high (and it was a lot lower then than it is now).
It would be better I think, if the data included singles. It's hard to assess for example whether Brighton parents are rejecting all vaccinations or just have the cash to pay for singles (I suspect the latter as the only people I know who haven't given either MMR or singles haven't given other vaccination either - and the imms rates for pedicel is very high indeed).
But admittedly that's guessing.
Ha sorry autocorrect - but anyway if high numbers are giving the 5 in 1, then I suspect a similar number are giving a measles vaccine - but some will be choosing singles.
And even without that - in some areas the MMR rate is very high anyway.
But 95% for the first MMR isn't good enough for herd immunity, the pre-school booster is needed too. Rates for that are much lower.
Well it depends whether the first is working. And herd immunity depends on monovalents as well (figures not given) so no-one really knows whether it's reached the magic 95%
Actually some tables I saw did reach those rates at 5 years old - but I'll have to try and find them when I'm on my computer rather than phone.
It would be useful to know where the outbreaks are occurring. One report mentioned travellers families - well tbh you would expect measles outbreaks every so many years in pretty much fully unvaccinated populations and increasing the vaccination rate isn't going to affect those. Also teens and young adults mentioned - then we need to know whether they are a) fully immunised b) one dose only c) vaccinated with singles d) never vaccinated. Unfortunately that data isn't available as it is assumed that no MMR = no vaccination (I say it's important as waning immunity could be a factor if teens and young adults affected - in which case you would need a different strategy).
I DO know that the HPA told me the MMR rates in 2001 were not a concern and I was mistaken to think they were (and they were much lower then)
As an adult about to ttc, I have just had to get vaccinated against a lot of things. Because I moved around a lot as a child, not because my parents were against it. It has cost me A LOT of money, not to mention the time and hassle of trying to get vaccination records from lots of countries.
Why couldn't you get it on the NHS? (Genuine question - my rubella status was checked for free prior to ttc and they said they would give me rubella if needed).
These days they give MMR to adults if needed - I haven't heard if anyone having to pay for it though.
amandine the clinical evidence for vaccinations is their ability to stimulate antibody production, a fact which is not disputed and which is what your blood tests would have revealed as 'immunity' what is not clear is whether or not such antibody production constitutes immunity. For example, agamma globulin-anaemic children are capable of producing antibodies, yet they recover from infectious diseases almost as quickly as other children. Furthermore, a study published by the BMC in 1950 during a diptheria epidemic concluded that there was no relationship between antibody count and disease incidence. Researchers found resistant people with extremely low antibody count and sick people with high counts.
Natural immunisation is a complex phenomenon involving many organs and systems, it can't be fully replicated by the artificial stimulation of antibody production.
Think about the way the immune system works and the way that it is forced to work when given a vaccine. We are forcing it to go into overdrive in a way that it would not do if the disease was met naturally.
OP, yes it is unreasonable to assume other parents should make the same choices as you; that those who don't should be compelled to do so and to stereotype those who choose not to vaccinate their children. There is an assumption that those who don't vaccinate haven't considered the issues properly. Anybody who has looked at the issues in any depth will understand that there are strong arguments for and against.
I'm not in the UK anymore. That's great that adults can still get them on the NHS, good idea.
What are the strong arguments against fascicle? Apart from for children with known reactions to vaccines or illnesses?
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.