i would like support as i do want the mmr vaccination for my daughter!!!!!!(51 Posts)
I have a 3 yr old dd who had the mmr done seperately the first time. But is now due for her booster. Me and my family all feel the same on this. I realise that there are alot of parents who feel very strongly that you should the mmr as it is. But for me if there is the smallest doubt that this could be linked to autisim then that for me is enough!!! The reason i am posting on here is because i can get the signular jabs for measles and rubella through a private clinic in Birmingham, but unable to get the mumps, and i have seen people saying that they are getting this done and i am wondering if they have found somewhere they can get the mumps from??? If not are parents just having the two done and leaving the mumps?? Also i suppose i am wanting to see how many parents feel the same as me and what they are doing about the singular vaccinations, also any words of support/advice as to what to say to the doctors when i tell them i am not having the mmr with them. I really do not think it is fair that they will not licence the mumps into the country, surely this is our choice to make, plus we are paying alot of money to this done. I am really very grateful for your responses.
If anyone is the slightest bit worried about vaccines given to their children and the side effects then you must obtain the vaccine batch numbers. I say this because some BCG vaccines were withdrawn during the 90's due to fear that they were infected with bse, people who have died from vCJD may have been exposed to this disease via the vaccine route but relatives are now finding it impossible to obtain the vaccine batch numbers. lessons to be learned.
Thank you for those links bruffin, I will definitely take a look!
Vaccine safety web sites WHO consider meeting credibility and content good information practices criteria
IOM review Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality Its quite easy to dip into as there is a chapter for each vaccine and information about the disease they protect against.
Thank you to everyone who took the time to reply to my post!!!! It does give me a lot to think about and i will definitely do some more research. Thanks again !!
I would like to point out that mumps is not a primarily male-risk disease as is often quoted. The reason for this us that the testes are, obviously on the outside of the body and so the swelling is observable, whereas the ovaries are tucked away inside the body. Both can become inflamed during a mumps illness and cause infertility.
I had mumps menigoencephalitis as a child (viral meningitis and swelling of the brain). It nearly killed me. These viruses are very dangerous. There is no link between the vaccine and Autism. If you can't get the single mumps vaccine please please please give her the MMR.
This is a serious topic but I can't help but laugh at the idea of an immune system sitting around getting bored, then going a bit bananas and causing all the diseases which , apparently, are so prevalent now! And this coming from someone who, apparently, has done hours of research. It would be nice if this research was based in biological fact.
If LMCG had really done research, she'd know that childhood infectious diseases are actually a relatively recent phenomenon in human history. There is no need for these diseases to 'build up' an immune system. In fact, evidence from South America prior to the Spanish and Portuguese invasion shows a vigorous and healthy population - far healthier than the 'epidemiologically hardened' population of Europe and Asia. But I guess this kind of stuff isn't discussed on the crankosphere (I note LMCG did not link to ONE authoritative website)
I completely agree with pagwatch that the OP should discuss with her GP before making any decisions.
And I also agree that it's not a question of criticizing individual decisions, whatever they may be, but the information (or misinformation) on which those decisions may be based.
I openly admit there are cons - I'd be stupid to say otherwise - but having a knowledge of the diseases these vaccines help stop, to me the cons of vaccines are a better risk to take than the cons that would occur should my child get the diseases in question. However I can also see the point that a friend of mine who hasnt given her child all the vaccinations which is 'My DC is so unlikely to get the propper disease that I don't want them to get ill from a vaccine unessicarily." But again it's a risk I'm not prepared to take. Most (not all) failed vaccines, or outbreaks of diseases in vaccinated communities occur because of different or mutated strains of a disease (sort of like the different strains of flu, or MRSA) a vaccine can only protect against certain strains of disease if a new one comes along they may work or may not.
Anyway..... Prior to my links tomorrow I hope this post has made my view a little more balanced as I do realise I was ranting a bit earlier (PMT!).
:Offers handshake to LMGC and hopes no offence has been taken. Was not intended.:
Well said Pagwatch!
Reading my early posts back (LMCG makes me angry etc.) I feel I prob came across as shouting my point! What I meant was the 'DON'T DO IT' etc. not the decisions she has made for her own children. Yes it upsets me because of the knowledge in my family about vaccines and the pro's and cons etc but I agree that ultimately every parent should do what they feel is right for their kids bacause they are the parent no one else.
Hence why tomorrow I am going to search out some websites of pros and cons to link to. IMHO the pros far outweigh the cons but..... Its an individual opinion.
You are allowed to profer advice and opinion.
You can do as you wish.
I was just saying that in my opinion people who just say 'do this because I am right' tend to possess a horrible level of arrogance which does not tend to bode well for measured good sense.
People who are keen to force their opinions on others probably have their determination to be right more to the forefront of their mind than the health and well being of the person they are posting to.
I think you should read Pagwatch's post again LMCG. She said people like you are generally shouty and thick. Just in case you think the comment doesn't refer to you, here's a reminder of your first three words on this thread: 'DON'T DO IT!'
That said, I don't agree with Pagwatch's point. If you have good reason to believe that someone is making a bad decision, I see no reason not to say so. Are we allowed to criticise if someone is about to sign a totally unsuitable mortagage, or if they are genuinely ill and will only go to a homeopath, or do we really just have to stand by and say here's a link to the pros and cons?
The verifiable evidence clearly says that in general people should accept the routine vaccines. In general means excepting those who have medical reasons to believe that they are unusally prone to be harmed by a vaccine.
To be honest you should start by ignoring any posts which tell you whether to vaccinate or not. People who tell others what to do over such an important issue are generally shouty and thick.
You need to be very clear why you chose to decline a vaccination which require you to take some responsibility and do your own research. This should include discussing things with your GP because, if you are really sure that you want to decline then you should be sure enough to discuss that rationally with your medical advisor.
My DD has not had any vaccinations. I discuss this regularly with my GP and he fully accepts my decision.
Do some research. Talk to your GP. Then do what you think is best. It's just parenting.
Have just poped back here to read during a break.
While I totally disagree with LMGC I don't think she is out of touch with reality or 'stupid' as some posters have implied. She has chosen not to immunise her children because of her research and is letting us know why. She is just as entitled to have that view as we ate to have the opposite. Yes it does make me angry but then again she has at least made the effort to show her sources etc. something that will do when I have the time. Let's just agree to disagree and stick to facts on either side without attacking people personally. (I realise I did just that myself in an earlier post for which I apologise.)
I'm sure it must have occurred to the pro-single-vaxxers that there is a healthy profit to be made by terrorising parents with fables about the damage that combined vaccinations do, then kindly providing (at a cost) single vaccines for these terrrorised parents to buy. It must also surely have occurred to the anti-vaxxers in general that a lot of the anti-vax stuff on the internet is put there by total idiots who have no understanding whatsoever of scientific method. Or perhaps not?
OP - give your child the vaccine. These diseases are dangerous, with potential complications including blindness and death. And even if your child does not suffer overly - any child they pass it on to might, which is why we need high levels of vaccination - for the herd immunity.
i do find it quite sad actually that where many in the world would do anything for a vaccine, many fortunate people here in the west are declining.
as for well 30% can have mumps and it be undetected. i can just imagine how uttery awful i would feel if my child had mumps and was fine/ undetected but shown from tests, and they passed it on to another child/person who becomes seriously ill from it. I could never forgive myself
It is virtually impossible to do impartial research on the internet if you are not scientifically trained because the methods used by scientists and the methods used by anti-vacs are opposite.
A scientist tests a theory, and then tries to disprove it. That's why gravity is still a theory, we have a lot of evidence but it has not been proved and you would not get a scientist to say it has been proved.
Anti-vacs find anecdotal evidence and then try to gather more to 'prove' their case.
Scientists use thousands of examples, studies numerous cases, tests, retests, etc.
You CANNOT give them both the same credence.
Just because your children are healthy doesn't mean vaccines don't work. As a child I was driven from Northern England to Spain in the tailgate of a car. It did me no harm. But I wouldn't recomend parents drive thousands of miles with a child not in a seat or seatbelt.
LMCG you are utterly deluded and out of touch with reality.
As in the CP vaccine is almost as likely to give you the disease itself as not.
I'm going out soon. But tomorrow I'll link some websites of my own finding that say both sides of the argument so people can make their own properly informed desicion based on fact and not hype!! (And that's hype on both sides of the argument!)
properformer please expand on your `the chicken pox vaccine is not much different from the actual disease` aren't all vaccines based on that theory? chicken pox is a cleansing disease necessary for immune function, thats why it's worse as we get older. and to what extent do you agree that children are damaged and why is that ok? it's a very small number of children that have had complications from childhood diseases. Reported complications are lower in vaccinated children for a reason- don't be so naive. Studies have shown that outbreaks of diseases have occured in fully vaccinated populations.
How does one go about getting DC's immunity checked? We're coming up to vaccination time for DS1
I also note LMGC's websites have no real accredited scientific basis. When I have more time I will find some propper scientific sites stating the pro's and cons of immunisation.
Oh Immunisations work by injecting your child with a weak, mutated or synthetic form of the disease so that your immune system can create antibodies to fight the disease should it come into contact with it in the future. Of course there are risks - you are exposing your child to a disease, but it is in a very mild form. All vaccines ate given decades of tests to ensure the utmost safety but nothing is 100% safe. On another note - that's why my uncle said no to the bird flu vaccine, because it hadn't been given the decades of research to prove it properly safe.
By all means do your own research but use sites that have a scientific basis and argue pro and con. Any site that just argues one side of the argument is biased and so not to be trusted IMHO.
(LMGC I do respect your post was stated as opinion and I do respect that. I'm not saying you should immunise your children if you do not feel it is right as that is your choice.)
Yes, silver, from what they have said. They don't live in the UK so their experience may well be different to yours.
Don't know any more details but he is an adult now so a good few years ago. There are definitely people out there with a financial interest in making the link.
Join the discussion
Please login first.