ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
MMR back in the headlines - Italian Court rules it WAS cause of boys Autism(148 Posts)
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2160054/MMR-A-mothers-victory-The-vast-majority-doctors-say-link-triple-jab-autism-Italian-court-case-reignite-controversial-debate.html - sorry for DM link....
This is surely going to reignite the debate around the jab - fwiw my DCs were vaccinated with VMMR (with chicken pox too as we're not in the UK) - but I was concerned about the jab having heard / seen the reporting surrounding it.
So is the court right - and what does it mean for the UK and parents here who believe that MMR damaged their children?
Having reacted badly to vaccines myself I decided on singles for my kids. DS already showed signs of ASD before the jabs and so i know they ddnt cause it, but I wonder if if he would have been more affected than he is if he'd had MMR.
I will never know.
jaffa - good question about whether singles are safe. As I said, I had to accept that my choice to give ds singles wasn't necessarily better for him - there are risks with all medicines and I don't know of any studies comparing single vax to MMR. (I doubt you could get the funding to do one, and it may be logistically difficult anyway.)
Wasn't one of the things Wakefield posited that one group of autistic children have very sensitive guts? There was something about vaccine-strain measles being found in their tummies, and the mumps vaccine acting as some sort of pathway that allowed the measles vaccine to do X Y or Z - it's so long since I looked into this I've forgotten the details.
I know Wakefield has been demonised but I do wonder whether we we look back and think it's another case where someone who was demonised was actually onto something all along. Like Yudkin and sugar.
I wasn't vaccinated as a child because of epilepsy in both sides of the family, it was later proved that there was no link.
I think its important that children are vaccinated but a 3 in 1 vaccine is just too much for some children.
I dont think there will ever be a 'yes' or 'no' answer to the ASD MMR question.
"The Italian judgment has important implications for Britain for a number of reasons.
"First, the jab given to Valentino called MMR 11 contains the same active measles, mumps and rubella viruses in the same quantities as MMR VaxPro, one of only two approved MMR vaccines in the UK which is used on hundreds of thousands of children every year. (Prior to the introduction of MMR VaxPro in 2006, MMR II had been used in the UK since 1988).
"This match of ingredients is confirmed in the Department of Health Green Book a guide for doctors on inoculation against infectious disease and by detailed data on MMR vaccines released by the European Medicines Agency."
DS definitely was on the spectrum looking back to him as a baby even at a few days old he behaved differently than the other babies I knew. So for him his ASD is not linked to MMR.
I didn't have the whooping cough jab as a child due to the link with fits as my gm had epilepsy. Luckily I didn't catch whooping cough.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
Isn't one of the differences however that with vaccines, you don't get the product info leaflet? When you get medicines, you do get an insert, and the risks are all spelt out.
But with vaccines, you get a reassuring leaflet and thats it.
I rememebr reading on the JABS website about 10 years ago about cases of UK children where their problems had been deemed to be caused by MMR. So much so that the govt had paid out large sums of compensation. I gave dd single jabs.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
Oh thnaks for that Viva, on htat website there's the product info:
Friend of mine's teen dd got arthritis after MMR, which her mum (a nurse) said was listed as a known adverse reaction but I didn't know where to find that info.
I didn't know you had a legal right to the inserts. Who would give them to you?
you are supposed to get the inserts befoe you sign the consent form - and time to read them, digest, and ask any questions you may have.
it is only after all this that you are able to give 'informed consent', after all.
I was refused the insert when I askd for it with dd1 - the nurse got extremely shirty, would not let me read it, threw the form at me to sign, and snapped 'if you read it you'll onlyhave questions afterwards' (err, isn't that the point of being able to read the insert?)
she also went on to mutter lots about parents questioning 'since all that rubbish about autism' - very diplomatic since dd1 was in the system being assessed at that point
anyway, luckily for me I had done my reading before going - it is possible to find copies of the inserts and information - so I told her in no uncertain terms that I would be complaining about her attitude, that I had questions I wanted answered regardless, and that the form she was trying to pressurise me into signing would be worthless if she didn't let me read the insert, as it would not be informed consent.
she let me have the leaflet, but didn't know the answers to the questions I had
so I am not particularly surprised that more parents don't read the inserts, tbh. I doubt lots of them are given the inserts to read...
there are a few inaccuracies in that article, though - MMRII was intro'd in about 1992ish, iirc, after 2 or the original 3 vaccines used i nthe UK were withdrawn, due to unacceptably high side effect/complication rates (which were known about before those strains were intro'd into the UK - part of what the whole furore has been about, tbh)
I also thought (but have not had time to read up on this recently, so could easily be worng) that the boy in the article also received the Urabe strain (the withdrawn one), not the MMRII equivalent.
whichever he did receive, though, I am glad his family has had some sort of verdict on this (small comfort though tht may be).
I think there are probably some children for whom the MMR or any other vaccine is not safe.
I think parents should have access to all the risk information as a matter of course - it could be sent out with the appointment.
I think children who are damaged by vaccines should receive financial compensation - after all it happens very rarely, the state could bear the cost and meanwhile the children who do benefit from vaccination could continue to do so.
single vaxes for both my dds here. I have absolutely no regrets. I do believe one day Wakefield will be vindicated.
OMG here we go again.
There is NO proven link between MMR and autism
The Wakefield research paper was so flawed that even the doctors who put their names to it were struck off
There is NO evidence to suggest single vaccines are safe or safer
No vaccine can ever be 100% safe, you have to either protect your child and take a small risk, or dont protect them taking a bigger risk.
Did you read the link in the OP?
mosschop-people are always going to discuss the MMR and Autism, parents of autistic children are always going to question the MMR. Yes 'there is no proven link' (yet) but it also can't be ruled out.
No one is saying 'don't vaccinate your kids' but it should be a parent choice wether to opt for the single vaccines.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
We had the singles too as wasnt happy with all the speculation around the mmr, very happy we did even if only for our own peace of mind. Sadly the mumps vax is very hard to get now so not all parents get to choose.
I think it will get easier now.
BTW mine have both had the MMR and I agree that Wakefield's research violated every basic precept of scientific method.
But that doesn't mean vaccine damage is impossible - we need more research about vaccine interaction with certain genetic predispositions, immunocompromised children and probably a lot more besides.
Hopefully we will end up with a situation where parents can make a truly informed choice.
There is no proven link because the number of children the issue affects is very small.......and because the government is not going to let anyone suggest that everybody should not contunue to do as we are told without questions, let alone allow any funding for research which might show a result they don't want to get out.
Silverfrog - I am appalled at that nurses attitude!
It is hard for parents to make an informed choice in a situation where the waters are muddied by the fact pharma companies make so much money from vaccines and the government prioritises disease control over trying to find out which children are at risk from bad reactions to vaccines.
Collateral damage. Should be recognised and compensated for.
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.