Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any medical concerns we suggest you consult your GP.

ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.

vaccine yes or no??????

(256 Posts)
123mon Thu 28-Feb-13 12:53:28

Hi, i would like to know your opinions about vaccine please. I decide to dont let my 3 years old daughter have the vaccine and i was wondering if there are other mums that think the same as me

luanmahi Sat 02-Mar-13 10:56:48

I watched a documentary (Panorama or something similar) last year about three families who lived next door to one another. The house in the middle had a newborn baby, the houses on either side had older children whose parents had decided not to vaccinate at the height of the media-created hysteria about MMR. Both sets of older children caught measles and recovered; the baby, who was too young to have had the MMR jab and was entirely reliant on herd immunity, died aged 10 weeks.

In almost all things, I would say, do what's best for you: breast feeding v formula feeding, early weaning v later weaning, purees v blw, co-sleeping v cots, etc., etc. but when it comes to health, unless you are a fully trained medical professional who has subscriptions to medical journals and has read all the scientific data available, you need to trust that your doctor knows better than you.

My little girl is 9 months old. By not vaccinating, OP, you are putting her at risk and, I'm sorry for being so aggressive, but you are extremely irresponsible.

bruffin Sat 02-Mar-13 11:00:08

You said aluminium is a neurotoxin but don't seem to understand the only way that you get a big enough dose to cause problems is through chronic exposure.This is either through a long term drip or in some one who has kidney failure or through industrial exposure at work.
The tiny amount in a vaccine will not do any harm. Also the body deals with it very quickly and the majority excreted from the body within a day or so.

Trazzletoes Sat 02-Mar-13 11:00:42

Yes, it is "nice" to respect other people's decisions.

However, my decision to vaccinate my DD has NO adverse effect on your family life. In fact, if you don't vaccinate, I'm helping to protect your child.

Your decision not to vaccinate your child leaves my DS more vulnerable to these diseases because he can't be vaccinated due to having no immune system and all that...

So excuse me if I don't "respect" your decision for which you have not given ANY reason beyond that vaccines have ingredients and you've spoken to some people.

If you refuse to read information that people are giving you, and you refuse to point us towards the basis of your research, how can we come to any other conclusion than that your decision is ill thought out and based on ignorance.

You have still not said what side effects you are anxious about.

123mon Sat 02-Mar-13 11:07:39

i think that your daughter is more likely to catch the desise from other kids who had the vax... i don't consider myself irresponsible, but a loving ,caring mum who thinks that there is somethink dougy about vaccine and i try to make what i think is the best decision for my child

Trazzletoes Sat 02-Mar-13 11:18:22

As I asked earlier, where are your figures for the number of children who HAVE been vaccinated who still catch the disease?

<feeling extremely ignored>

luanmahi Sat 02-Mar-13 11:24:15

Ditto Trazzletoes. And also where is the evidence that my daughter is more likely to catch a disease from a child that has been vaccinated than one who hasn't?

bruffin Sat 02-Mar-13 11:44:45

Of the 196 us citizens that cought measles in the 2011 outbreak 166 were completely unvaccinated
So why do you think you are more likely to get measles from someone who is vaccinated.

bruffin Sat 02-Mar-13 11:50:05

More figure

"In the year ending April 30, 2012, a total of 17, 448 measles cases were repoted in the European Union and Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway, according to the European Surveillance System, a service of the ECDC. Vaccination status was known for 84 percent of the cases, of which 82 percent had never received the vaccine, 13 percent had received one dose, and 4 percent had received two or more doses. According to the report, the proportion of unvaccinated individuals was significant in all age groups, including 89 percent in those younger than age one, and around 50 percent in 25- to 29-year-olds."

123mon Sat 02-Mar-13 11:52:26

in the leaflet that the doc gave me mentions that the mmr vax may not completely protect all persons who are vaccinate and other evidence are out there so go and find them.... i repete again we are all free to do what we think is best for our kids... and yes i beleve that who receve the vax can catch the disease especially from who hasn't been

123mon Sat 02-Mar-13 11:56:08

we beleve differen thinks there are lots of thinks that they dont tell you out there.... but im glad that we are not all the same

bruffin Sat 02-Mar-13 11:57:31

Its not perfect but to pretend that is a bad thing is ridiculous. Those that get disease after vaccination do tend to get it mildly and less likely to pass it on.
The vaccines have done a very efficient job of reducing the risk.

lljkk Sat 02-Mar-13 12:09:14

Child currently with mumps, doesn't sound like a mild illness to me.

123mon do you think you could possibly find the courtesy to answer the questions you are being asked
You claim to want to have a reasonable conversation yet ignore various posters who ask which side effects you are concerned about.
What thinks (sic) are we not told about? I, for one, would love to hear your conspiracy theories...

bruffin Sat 02-Mar-13 12:12:43

Its not perfect but to pretend that is a bad thing and we shouldn't vaccinate is ridiculous. Those that get disease after vaccination do tend to get it mildly and less likely to pass it on.
The vaccines have done a very efficient job of reducing the risk.

Tallgiraffe Sat 02-Mar-13 12:13:48

Ok, just because something isn't perfect doesn't mean you shouldn't use it. If you follow this argument then no-one should use condoms because there is a tiny chance that you'll get pregnant while on them. The fact that if you don't use them your chances are much much higher you would be happy to ignore.

On a different note, your child has already had the MMR vaccination. So therefore can't have reacted to the ingredients or you'd have said so. So what can be the harm in giving the next one?

bruffin Sat 02-Mar-13 12:18:26

Only reason for even to bother answering op is hopefully others that may have been sucked in by the numerous quack websites out there, may realise that most of the scaremmongering on there is nonsense.

INeverSaidThat Sat 02-Mar-13 12:19:56

I am very glad all my children have had all the recommended vaccines.

Trazzletoes Sat 02-Mar-13 12:22:04

and yes i beleve that who receve the vax can catch the disease especially from who hasn't been

Your own words.

You are completely contradicting yourself.

You have just said here that those who haven't been vaccinated are more likely to contract the disease!

None of us are saying that vaccinations are 100% perfect but I am stunned by your reasoning.

If I understand correctly, you are choosing not to vaccinate your child because if she IS vaccinated there's a small risk she may catch the disease, compared to a huge risk of catching it if you don't vaccinate?

(I can't comment on other reasons because you are still ignoring every single one of the questions I have asked on this thread)

Good to know everyone else can see me though <waves>

bruffin Sat 02-Mar-13 12:23:10

Op has two children one who is a lot older so presumably she didn't have any reactions either.

123mon Sat 02-Mar-13 12:28:49

im only quoting from ufficial governement statistics and documents.... and to answer to REMEMBERINGMYPFES its not up to me to tell you what the thinks that not telling you are... my question was if there were other mums in this website thinking the same as me... im not here to tell people what to do, or explaing thinks to them i beleve in one way, you beleve the opposite fine by me.

Trazzletoes Sat 02-Mar-13 12:32:01

Hello? Hello?

<bangs head against brick wall>

<ouch>

Tallgiraffe Sat 02-Mar-13 12:32:56

What official statistics? Please link them. I think you'll find Bruffin's data are the official ones.

Trazzletoes Sat 02-Mar-13 12:43:58

and to answer to REMEMBERINGMYPFES its not up to me to tell you what the thinks that not telling you are...

So there is nothing and you're just making it up on the spot to try and justify your ill thought out decision.

Well, that's, er, responsible of you.

#borednow. Why won't you answer the questions?!?
Thanks to
Others for the sensible info btw. I'm 18+4 with DC1 and fairly convinced we would vaccinate. This has helped solidify that decision - 123 feel free to say thanks, I'll also be helping to keep your DCs safe!

123mon Sat 02-Mar-13 13:10:17

yes i sayd that i beleve that the ones not vacs are more likely to catch the diseas,and what im concerne about the vaxs is whats inside,and the side effects are joint pain and/or swelling (which could be transient or chronic), autism, allergic reactions, seizures (fits), inflammation of the brain (encephalitis) death. the docs has more complete list of side effects
www.ema.europa.eu.
I also beleve that my older daughter has been left with side effects of the vax (squint and eye side problems and learning difficulties) which i didn't know by then

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now