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

Lame excuses for not vaccinating

(133 Posts)
JoTheHo Fri 27-Jul-12 08:03:59

Imagine you go to the quack, because of a slight dizzy feeling? 'I'm afraid medicine can't help you, but you've got it for the rest of your days. Be careful because this will mean you are more likely than average to have a car accident'. 'How much more likely?' you ask. I have no idea he replies. Would you stop driving your DC about?

Imagine your friend works for the govt stats office. She tells you that car manufacturers and govt have been conspiring to under-report car accidents. 'Cor' you say, 'how much are they fiddling the numbers'. 'That's just the problem no-one knows because it's all hush hush'. Would you stop driving your DC about?

I'm guessing most people would carry on driving. In which case, why do people use the exact same reasons for not vaccinating?

The anti-vaxer reasons that uncle Bert gets hay fever, hay fever is hereditary and something to do with immune system, vaccine damage is also something to do with the immune system, DC are related to uncle Bert, and are thus more likely than average to suffer vaccine damage. They thus don't vaccinate them.

The anti-vaxer believes that the evil quartet of doctors, scientists, govt and pharma conspire to under-report vaccine damage. All part of their thirst to play god, and make lots of money by making people ill, not forgetting generous measures of incompetence and stupidity. They reason that vaccine damage is under-reported so they don't vaccinate their children.

I have never seen any attempt to quantify whether either 'the more susceptible than average' or the conspiracy theory could plausibly be sufficient to justify not vaccinating. It's incredible lame. Many anti-vaxer start from a position of prejudice against vaccination. They then compile a long list of selective quotes, mis-quotes, anecdotes, quasi-scientific speculations, and conspiracy theories. They say this list is evidence, and that their prejudice has become a rational analysis. It isn?t. It?s an uncritical list of unquantified elements which are superficially consistent with their position.

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 08:06:27

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

ovenchips Fri 27-Jul-12 08:09:21

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

JoTheHo Fri 27-Jul-12 08:17:44

So that's 2 balanced, rational and proportionate responses

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 08:27:11

I will happily give a balanced and rational response if someone posts an intelligent and reasonably worded op. I tend to respond to like with like. And your op is judgemental, il thought out, crass, sneering and goading garbage.

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 08:27:42

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

peanutMD Fri 27-Jul-12 08:33:02

In all honest I don't know of anyone personally who chose not to vaccinate their children but I have spoken to a fair few people about the subject on here.

based on the people I have spoken to the non-vax group have done far more research into health risks, protection rates, ingredients and lasting effects of each vaccine than the vax group who trust and take their child along because they feel they should (me included).

I'm not sure who you are basing your rather short sighted and rude 'theory' in but I'd suggest you delve into their reasoning a bit more before judging!

Perhaps some do just believe vaccines are evil but in my experience there are valid reasons behind the decisions which ultimately leads to the point that vaccination is am individual choice not a compulsory action.

ArthurPewty Fri 27-Jul-12 08:37:16

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LynetteScavo Fri 27-Jul-12 08:41:49

"Imagine you go to the quack, because of a slight dizzy feeling? 'I'm afraid medicine can't help you, but you've got it for the rest of your days. Be careful because this will mean you are more likely than average to have a car accident'. 'How much more likely?' you ask. I have no idea he replies. Would you stop driving your DC about?"

Erm, I think I would, yes.

"The anti-vaxer reasons that uncle Bert gets hay fever, hay fever is hereditary and something to do with immune system, vaccine damage is also something to do with the immune system, DC are related to uncle Bert, and are thus more likely than average to suffer vaccine damage. They thus don't vaccinate them."

Really? Really? hmm On what planet do you live? hmm

OP, your only point seems to be to say people who don't vaccinate their children make lame excuses for not doing so.

In my experience, you are so far from the truth it's just laughable.

Probably one of the most twatish OP's I have ever read on MN.

MainlyMaynie Fri 27-Jul-12 08:44:33

I clicked on this as it was in active convos. I'm not really interested in vaccine debates. But that OP needs to be deleted for crimes against metaphors.

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 08:45:44

grin

Chictactoe Fri 27-Jul-12 08:50:45

OP you really are very ill informed and hellava rude!

ovenchips Fri 27-Jul-12 09:15:01

No OP I think you'll find you miscounted. That was 3 balanced, rational and proportionate responses.

Don't leave yourself out, there's a dear.

FarelyKnutsAboutTheIrishTeam Fri 27-Jul-12 09:31:28

Oh yes OP. My great aunt Bertha twice removed and long dead used to get eye twitches... You are so right.. THAT is exactly why I don't vax my child hmm

LeBFG Fri 27-Jul-12 09:33:33

OP seems to have caused a reaction in the anti-vaxer camp. Rather than responding to the claims (apparently put in a rude way?), everyone seems happy to diss the OP by being rude.

OP is right in the sense that people in MN world and ime in RL have refused to vaccinate DCs because they themselves have allergies. The logic follows that their DC will inevitably inherit their allergenic natures and thus have much more chance of developing a vaccine reaction...

ethelb Fri 27-Jul-12 09:34:43

I am really shocked ther are so many anti-vaxers on MN.

And the fact you think she is thick and not you.

But I would put all anti-vaxers on an island so their choices don't impact me.

TheOriginalSteamingNit Fri 27-Jul-12 09:35:53

Good grief, I got both mine vaccinated but that really is an abysmal excuse for an argument!

And actually if a GP told me I was more likely to have a crash because of a permanent feeling of diziness, I think I probably would stop driving my children about!

peanutMD Fri 27-Jul-12 09:38:35

And here was me thinking I put out a logical response! grin

I think the shit slinging is probably the point of the OP tbh so don't be sucked in.

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 09:59:30

I am not sure who the anti-vac people are to be honest so I am not sure if I am being included in the thick anti-vaccers who need to be put on an island.

I vaccinated my dc. They had every jab right up until the time that I and my dcs doctors and consultants agreed it was a bad idea.

The op is thick because it suggests that there is only one reason not to vaccinate, that people do so in spite of medical advice to the contrary and that they do so for thoughtless whimsical reasons.

All of which is indeed bollocks. And the manner in which it was posted was combative,argumentative and way more suited to 'aibu' than a vaccinations section.

The op got the response it deserved. Those who immediately join in 'anti-vac' snide-fest are choosing to leap on a bandwagon rather than admit that actually there is no insight, debate or question within the op.

It was just shit stirring and the fact that others join in is a bit sad really.

The issues do get discussed in a clam and reasonable way quite often on here. But it is a difficult subject and the subject affects our children and our fears for them. Goading people who are simply trying to protect their children in their own way is pathetic.

JoTheHo Fri 27-Jul-12 10:00:47

I agree that the anti's do give more thought to vaccinating, but stand by my view that they rarely make any effort to quantify whether the risks they find are sufficent to justify not vaccinating.

It was very much not my intent to write such that most of the comment was on the tone of my post. I'd much rather debate the substance. I was probably just releasing pent up frustration at the uncritical nature of some of the anti-vax comment on MN.

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 10:11:08

Could you possibly re-post with a new op?

It is pretty frustrating for me to read this kind of stuff when my DDs consultant thinks that she probably shouldn't be vaccinated and I have a profoundly disabled son.

A debate is fine. But posting that people who don't vaccinate are all acting blindly is not good.

Fwiw dds consultant is very nice. He should be excellent company on the island

ethelb Fri 27-Jul-12 10:17:22

Pag I relaise that your children's medical care is private but why does the face that you have a disabled son mean your DDs consultant is recommending that she is not vaccinated?

Plus, if you are in an unusual situation why are you backing anti-vaxxers who have, to pretty much the entire scientific establishment, no good reason for their choice. not that it should be a choice btw.

You have to have the mmr to get into the states now, what do you all propose to do about that?

LeBFG Fri 27-Jul-12 10:26:25

When OP was refering to 'the anti-vaxer' I'm sure she wasn't referring to ALL people who choose not to vaccinate, Pagwatch. It would take a brave person to vaccinate the rest of their DCs if they experienced similar to you.

BUT, there remains a majority of people who chose not to vaccinate because of other reasons like they:

1/ have various allergies, and I DO actually remember a poster who knew someone who had hayfever and wouldn't vaccinate.

2/ believe they have strong immune systems that mean their DCs wouldn't be too badly affected if they got the disease

3/ believe there is a conspiracy to hide vaccine reaction numbers.

They never quote the actual risks like: vaccine damage is 1:100 000, risk of damage through getting disease 1: 10 000, my DC is 1000 times more likely than average of developing a reaction, so odds are even either way so I won't vaccinate.

lammy4goldinsinglescull Fri 27-Jul-12 10:30:18

I did not vaccinate one of my DCs. On medical advice. Guess he just a quack then, that immunologist?

LeBFG Fri 27-Jul-12 10:30:30

* oops, missed a zero: vaccine damage is 1: 1000 000....hopefully, you'll get the point I'm making

Chictactoe Fri 27-Jul-12 10:31:11

My children are all vaxed so don't assume because I don't like the judgy, mean OP that I am of opposing views. I just dont have my head so far up my bum that I feel the need to judge and bash people with different views to mine.

ethelb Fri 27-Jul-12 10:32:36

I'm always quite shocked that people would rather risk a child's life through not vaccinating (mmr etc) rather than risk a few allergies or whatever they perceive to be a risk (which isn't a risk anyway).

And I do think that people hear certain scientific/biological words ie. genetic, immune system, histamine, allergy and don't really understand them or the processes they are involved in and make up some cod biology to justify their silly beliefs.

JoTheHo Fri 27-Jul-12 10:54:57

Some people have solid considered reasons for not vaccinating. These people are non-vaxers not anti-vaxers. Such people can be too quick to assume that criticism of anti-vaxer's is also aimed at them. PAGwatch, you are surely aware that some people don't vaccinate for some pretty weak reasons. You do yourself a dis-service by allowing them to align themselves with you.

I don't agree that my op lumps together all people who don't vaccinate. I think it's quite clearly aimed at people who make uncritical use of the my child is more at risk or the conspiracy arguments. I arguably should have said 'Some anti-vaxers', as opposed 'The anti-vaxer'.

Accuracyrequired Fri 27-Jul-12 12:46:10

Cripes what a panful of unreadable shite op.

ArthurPewty Fri 27-Jul-12 14:07:36

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Accuracyrequired Fri 27-Jul-12 14:29:10

es normale

Accuracyrequired Fri 27-Jul-12 14:33:14

Is it me or is there something rather distasteful about the backpedalling by these people once Pagwatch comes on? ie you're all so stupid and thick and haven't a clue and such a bunch of know-nothings about science ..and then along comes Pagwatch, who everybody knows and likes, and is most definitely one of the most popular populars, and then we get "oh of course we didn't mean you, Pag, you're different," smarm smarm back pedal back pedal.

ArthurPewty Fri 27-Jul-12 14:40:03

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Howmanyteachersistoomany Fri 27-Jul-12 14:40:38

Where's this back pedalling?

Accuracyrequired Fri 27-Jul-12 14:42:01

oh just read the thread hmm

Chictactoe Fri 27-Jul-12 14:42:27

I dont know Pag, have not noticed her posting and dont give a seconds thought to anyones nick but clearly Accura, YOU have a problem with Pag.

Accuracyrequired Fri 27-Jul-12 14:42:32

oh leonie you noticed it too!

Accuracyrequired Fri 27-Jul-12 14:43:31

"Clearly you have a problem with Pag"

smile

yeah I really don't

read the thread

ArthurPewty Fri 27-Jul-12 15:13:20

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

JoTheHo Fri 27-Jul-12 15:22:11

Accuracyrequired
<struggles valiantly but unsuccessfully to contain mirth at the least appropriate pseudo ever chosen>
you've accused be of back pedaling. Please back this up with 2 quotes, such that the latter pulls back from the former. When I say quotes, I mean quotes with quotation marks, not inferences, not summaries and not 'just read the thread'.

DementedHousewife Fri 27-Jul-12 15:32:33

I guess my sisters reaction that resulted in a lifetime of disability and the pitiful payout she recieved from the government run vaccine compensation scheme isn't a good enough reason to not want to take that chance with my Dc in some random internet nobody's opinion. Good thing my GP, their Pead, the Hv all agreed with me when I asked for advice, that with our family history (other sister had a severe seizure but thankfully wasn't left dependant on 24 care) all said that in my shoes they would be very wary too.

Ho hum, <shrugs> if you as in the random nobody doesn't agree with that and and my Dc should be banished to an island. Your entitled to think that just as I'm entitled to say fuck off, you're not the one wiping my sisters backside, you're not the one changing her nappy, you're not the one seeing her in pain, you're child was lucky, they didn't react.

My mum has had a lifetime of regret getting my sister vaccinated after my other sister had her severe (itu admission) seizure. I won't offer up my children for collaterol damage to protect yours, if that makes me selfish again <shrug> my concern first and foremost is my children, vaccinate your own children by all means, if you're so convinced of their efficacy and saftey then my children shouldn't need to be banished to an island should they.

No medical treatment outside of mental health should be made mandatory, ever. The mere suggestion is idiotic and ignorant.

Accuracyrequired Fri 27-Jul-12 15:34:15

"The anti-vaxer believes that the evil quartet of doctors, scientists, govt and pharma conspire to under-report vaccine damage. All part of their thirst to play god, and make lots of money by making people ill, not forgetting generous measures of incompetence and stupidity. They reason that vaccine damage is under-reported so they don't vaccinate their children. I have never seen any attempt to quantify whether either 'the more susceptible than average' or the conspiracy theory could plausibly be sufficient to justify not vaccinating. It's incredible lame. "

"I don't agree that my op lumps together all people who don't vaccinate. I think it's quite clearly aimed at people who make uncritical use of the my child is more at risk or the conspiracy arguments. I arguably should have said 'Some anti-vaxers', as opposed 'The anti-vaxer'."

Accuracyrequired Fri 27-Jul-12 15:35:04

Your op really is a panful of utter shite by the way.

MaryHansack Fri 27-Jul-12 15:41:20

bit sneery, that OP.
my children had all their vaccinations, but the pre school booster did make my daughter puke violently, or so it seemed to us, and it was horrible. So my son didn't get his.
Every family has the right to make their own difficult decisions without being mocked by smug superior types like the OP.

ExitPursuedByABronzeBear Fri 27-Jul-12 15:45:48

I want to know what Pag said in her deleted posts.

Anyone got directions to the island please?

And the last time I checked, this was still a free country.

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 15:51:00

Hello grin

Can we just have that everyone agrees with me. That would be great!

I can detail my dss background, I have done before but it gets a bit dull.

But tbh that is a side issue.
I could stand to one side and say 'i chose to not to vaccinate and I do so for these read on. Because those who are in favour of vaccination often accept these reasons as genuine I can stand aloof'

But in my experience (fwiw) people take vaccination very seriously, including those who decide not to. I have never met someone who doesn't vaccinate because the moon is not aligned or their chakra is damaged.

Most people I know are taking it incredibly seriously. Some (like me) woukd give anything to just go to the clinic and get it done without any doubt or concern. Our history and our experiences sometime colour our view and change our perception. As I said before, you could not imagine a person more prompt at the vaccination clinic until my experience forced me to rethink.

But if people judge differently and make a different decision from you I think heaping vitriol upon them, just because you feel you can, sucks.

These threads get raw because of the 'stick them all on an island' type comments. I have read stuff about 'you might as well have a gun' and all sort of sanctimonious clap trap.

So I won't try and draw a line between my choice and the choice that others make because, whilst I may not agree with them always, I try to respect the fact that they are actively seeking to do their best for their child. I try to do that throughout the site over things like breast feeding, school choice, religion etc.
This is another choice where beating up on each other just because we feel it's fine annoys me.

But to be honest I should stay off these threads. I am very aware that I don't handle them well and it is harder at times when DS2 is struggling or DD is poorly.

MaryHansack Fri 27-Jul-12 15:51:15

was it though bronzebear? not for long.

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 15:52:17

Exit. I was very rude.
I quite accept why they were deleted.

<<grudging>>

ChopstheDuck Fri 27-Jul-12 15:54:28

Exactly what pag said.

OP, you have no fucking idea what you are talking about!

It's a bloody agonising choice between leaving your child susceptible to disease or risking the possibility that they will end up disabled like their sibling.

JoTheHo Fri 27-Jul-12 15:56:18

Why didn't you just quote the entire op, and then the whole of any secondary posting. That way I'd be completely in the dark.

Are you suggesting The first quote does in fact lump all non-vaccinators together. If so you need to go and look up the prefix 'anti'.

Or are you suggesting my own proposal of 'some' for 'the' is back pedaling. 'The anti-vaxer' means a typical anti-vaxer, 'some anti vaxers' means a proportion of anti-vaxers. The distinction is moot. If that's the most substansive cricism you can muster, I must have done a pretty potent demolition with my original panful of utter shite.

ChopstheDuck Fri 27-Jul-12 16:01:02

Definition of anti
preposition
opposed to; against:

what other class of non-vaccinators would you suggest exist? Other than those poor paranoid souls fleeing the evil quartet?

SilkySmith Fri 27-Jul-12 16:02:31

argh thought this said "lame excuses for not VACCUMING" and I was all ready with my list! bah! as you were..

ChopstheDuck Fri 27-Jul-12 16:04:06

lol, now there's a better thread!

Mine -
Cos I decided to hoover up the whole masala tin of spices that I dropped and so now every time I hoover, the house reeks like an Indian takeaway! grin

SilkySmith Fri 27-Jul-12 16:07:25

my top one:

if you leave it till the carpet changes colour with the dust it becomes SOOO much more statisfying to see the hoover tracks where you've already done (like when everyone used to use shake n vac)

it messes up the hoover!

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 16:09:06

No one needs an excuse not to vacuum.

<<dogmatic and unreasonable>>

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 16:10:04

I keep the hoovering the basement and have the whole bad back thing at my disposal.

ExitPursuedByABronzeBear Fri 27-Jul-12 16:10:17

I really need to vacuum - but, just like nature, I abhor it.

JoTheHo Fri 27-Jul-12 16:13:02

'It's a bloody agonising choice between leaving your child susceptible to disease or risking the possibility that they will end up disabled like their sibling.'

I agree 100%. I can't see what this has to do with anything I've said.

In case it got lost above. I have every sympathy with non-vaccinators who choose not to vaccinate having critically weighed up the pros and cons. I have a large problem with people who compile ad hoc lists of the down-sides to vaccinating without assessing the credibility or the importance of the items in their list.

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 16:13:55

<<snort>>

That's fab Exit.
I am going to use that somehow.

ChopstheDuck Fri 27-Jul-12 16:14:51

I need to hoover right now, brought half of frensham pond home with us yesterday. Sand vs Spices though?!

SilkySmith Fri 27-Jul-12 16:17:55

"I really need to vacuum - but, just like nature, I abhor it"

eugh! nature MINGS!

JoTheHo Fri 27-Jul-12 16:20:06

In the case of a newly introduced vaccine, an anti-vaxer would be someone who automatically starts compiling reasons not to have it.

SilkySmith Fri 27-Jul-12 16:22:26

"I have a large problem with people who compile ad hoc lists of the down-sides to vaccinating without assessing the credibility or the importance of the items in their list."

yeah but, as a vaccinator I agree in a way but also think it is so important that all individuals have a choice so have to support all non vaccinators from that point of view, because otherwise, where's the cut off? where's the line between good enough reason and not? I do understand herd immunity, but still wouldn't ever want it to be enforced on anyone.

<I would also fight for my right to choose not to vaccum grin>

SilkySmith Fri 27-Jul-12 16:24:33

Well the fact that it's new can be a reason to not want to use it
(same for hoovers, don't want pretty new kit getting filled with dirt!)
I think that one is pretty understandable, its reasonable on a personal level and unreasonable in terms of wider society (someone has to go first)

saggarmakersbottomknocker Fri 27-Jul-12 16:28:42

I have a large problem with people who compile ad hoc lists of the down-sides to vaccinating without assessing the credibility or the importance of the items in their list

Do you know a lot of these people OP? I'm not overly concerned with other people's vaccination choices TBH.

peanutMD Fri 27-Jul-12 16:30:46

Jo I commented on the first page I'd this thread too and just want to state as someone who has always took my son to be vaccinated I did refuse to take him to be vaccinated against swine flu as I didn't believe that they had researched it enough to ensure that it was safe.

does this make me thick too?

ExitPursuedByABronzeBear Fri 27-Jul-12 16:30:49

My Dyson was beautiful the first day I got it. It has never been the same since.

MaryHansack Fri 27-Jul-12 16:34:19

In the case of a newly introduced vaccine, an anti-vaxer would be someone who automatically starts compiling reasons not to have it. or in other words, questions it?

MaryHansack Fri 27-Jul-12 16:35:02

ps I recommend the Miele hoover over the Henry

JoTheHo Fri 27-Jul-12 16:36:58

'I'm not overly concerned with other people's vaccination choices' - as is your prerogative. There are probably things which interest you which I'm ambivalent about.

Pagwatch Fri 27-Jul-12 16:49:39

JoTheHo

Then perhaps it would have been better to start again with your OP because it really does read as if you are objecting to everyone who decides not to vaccinate and that they only do so for the reasons you ridicule.

Saying 'some' rather than 'the' does clarify this somewhat subsequently. But the tone of your op is overwhelmingly contemptuous and negative. People will respond to your tone. It's human nature.
Saying 'oh but I didn't mean non vaccinators, I meant anti- vaccinators' is fine too. But why not articulate that you see the distinction in the OP rather than being arsy that people assume you are talking about everyone who doesn't vaccinate?

Maybe be quite clear next time rather than spending so much energy choosing unlikely scenarios designed to equate people declining vaccination as deeply stupid?

And yes, saggers may be interested in other things, lime why people don't breastfeed or why they watch soaps. But she hasn't started a thread saying 'lame excuses for not breastfeeding' or 'crap reasons for watching crap telly'.
Whereas you did.

maples Fri 27-Jul-12 16:57:00

Jo your post is both very unkind and silly.

Do you follow every piece of medical advice you've ever been given?

Don't you think patients and their parents have the right to choose?

I have a family history of auto immune illnesses and am not anti vax at all but will be staggering DS's jabs so he has them more spread out - eg no mmr but measles in 6 months then mmr at 3 just before he goes to preschool.

BeingFluffy Fri 27-Jul-12 16:58:32

JoTheHo, I am somebody whose immune system was very likely damaged by the Rubella vaccine I had when I was 16, leading to Adult Onset Stills Disease. As auto immune diseases run strongly in my family (mother and sibling) I felt I could not risk my daughters' health and decided not to give them the MMR, they have had the other childhood vaccines. This decision was supported by the GP I had at the time whose own children did not have the MMR. Most people I have discussed vaccination with, who chose not to vaccinate have good reasons. They are not as stupid or ignorant or misinformed as you believe.

RebeccaAdlingtonMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 27-Jul-12 17:06:37

Hi there,

Just to clarify, as we have had a few reports about this thread, we don't remove threads because they are offensive to some or in poor taste, we always ask others to post with their point of view and debate the issues raised.

We will remove any other posts that personally attack, are libellous or racist or otherwise break our Talk guidelines

I would be interested in some people responding about why they don't vaccinate.
I have a dd with ASD and have just been diagnosed with MS. Someone mentioned to me that there might be a link with hep b vaccine ( which I had as a nurse).

I have obviously looked at the autism links and research and in my world am happy that there is no link.

Is this what people are referring to? Or other vaccines?

Why would you not vaccinate your older children against rubella etc?

I am genuinely interested.

saggarmakersbottomknocker Fri 27-Jul-12 17:36:15

Exactly Pag.

Why are you bothered about other people's choices though Jo? You don't appear to be particularly concerned with gaining any insight rather you'd just dismiss 'the anti-vaxers/non-vaxers' (I'm not clear on the difference, presumably anti-vaxers are non-vaxers?) as a bit thick.

grammar Fri 27-Jul-12 17:52:13

Anti-vaxers, do you read 'What Doctors don't tell you'? It is a hugely subversive damaging to trust magazine. It FEEDS conspiracy theories. I thought OP'S post was fine, it generated debate...waht happens during the debate is entirely different.

ElaineBenes Sat 28-Jul-12 03:15:53

I don't have a problem with an individual choice not to vaccinate - people have their own experiences, their own medical histories.

I do have a HUGE problem with the ridiculous amount of misinformation that is spread about vaccines and I can understand where Jo is coming from. Just in the last couple of weeks, I've seen people write that

infections are good for your immune system (wrong),

people who go to India get sick because they've been vaccinated (wrong),

after you have a cold you've burnt out the poison (wrong),

there's no herd immunity below 95% coverage (wrong),

they're upset that their children have been denied the opportunity to have measles (WTF?),

they wouldn't vaccinate with the MMR whatever evidence was presented to them about safety (because it cannot be),

they wouldn't vaccinate no matter how dangerous measles is,
potassium posphate is blown into your brain with a flu vaccine (your brain ALREADY has potassium phosphate in it),

measles isn't dangerous because their great aunt joan had it and she's still here (nuff said)

all epidemiological studies showing that vaccines are safe are flawed (until the elusive one comes along that will show they're not - that one will be perfect!)

there's a big worldwide conspiracy to hide the fact that the MMR is actually dangerous (they're all involved - the GMC, WHO, CDC, NHS, all national governments - they probably are the ones who shot kennedy as well)

that an education campaign about vitamin A and its benefits should replace vaccination (there is NO need to supplement with vitamin A in developed countries, it work in low income countries where vitamin A deficiency is widespread)

homeopathy can 'cure' a vaccine reaction (uh huh)

if there is a inconsistency between anecdotal evidence and scientific evidence, the anecdotal must be correct

ArthurPewty Sat 28-Jul-12 06:47:50

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LaVolcan Sat 28-Jul-12 08:17:03

Elaine

As usual, you take things out of context with your xxxx(wrong)... yyyy (wrong)

One of those posts was mine, on another thread, and it was prefixed with to the effect, I find that for me....

Since you don't know me, or my health, or my family circumstances how is it that you can opine that my experience was wrong? How many others have you quoted out of context? Should we play you at your own game

measles is always fatal because my aunt died from measles it (wrong)

- or should we be more civilised and say that
measles may be fatal, but there is a vaccine (you need to weigh up the balance for yourself)

I said at the time that if you disagreed with me you were at perfect liberty to say so. I recall I got a cheap jibe about 'you don't like science' whereas you apparently do,but in my opinion, that could be qualified by the statement, when it suits you!

Badvoc Sat 28-Jul-12 08:29:44

Eh?
(totally mystified as to the point the op is trying to make?)
I vac both my kids.
There were no contraindications not to...neither were undergoing chemo or other treatment that is contraindicated, neither we're unwell on the day of their vacs, neither had any reaction after....but that does not apply to everyone.
I have a big issue with homeopathy, but that's another thread!

minceorotherwise Sat 28-Jul-12 08:34:12

Can I come to the island?
I'll bring my dyson?

LaVolcan Sat 28-Jul-12 08:47:08

Not if you bring your Dyson! How abhorrent!

minceorotherwise Sat 28-Jul-12 09:09:27

I have fruit shoots hidden in it, and vitamins
shock

3duracellbunnies Sat 28-Jul-12 09:24:19

So pleased for you OP that you haven't had a fit caused by an immunisation and your sis didn't have anaphalactic shock and almost died. When you are in my situation, then you can pull up your judgey pants.

And fwiw my children have finally had some of their vaccinations in hospital under proper medical supervision as the GPs finally admitted that they weren't as prepared as the hospital would be for what was a real risk. Only had the one dose because it was on the second dose that we reacted.

Tabitha8 Sat 28-Jul-12 13:12:32

Just to jump in here as I'm not interested in this thread one bit, but...
As I understand it, if a child catches measles in the UK, we should give vit A supplements. Something to do with measles eating up our stores of Vit A. I believe it takes it from the liver first (is that right) then the eyes. Can't remember all the details.

ElaineBenes Sat 28-Jul-12 16:36:31

Just wondered who produces these vitamin a supplements tabitha and if you have PROOF that they are 100% safe - because otherwise you won't give them, right? Even if your child has measles.

Tabitha8 Sat 28-Jul-12 17:24:20

That's a bit like saying I won't eat anything as I don't know it's safe. Which, of course, is true, but food has been quite good at keeping me alive for some decades now. And, I enjoy it.
Anyway, point is, I thought we should give vit A? Perhaps not so necessary in the UK?

ElaineBenes Sat 28-Jul-12 17:39:09

Food is most certainly not 100% safe. Choking, food poisoning, allergies - by your standard we should avoid all food apart from maybe very well cooked rice porridge to keep us alive. Or is is proof of 100% safe for vaccines irrational?

However, supplements are one of the least regulated and controlled part of the drugs market. It's not food.

Do you know that a study showed how variable the dose sizes are and there is a real risk of vitamin a poisoning if the dose is too high.

I actually don't know much about the therapeutic use of vitamin a in acute measles. I don't need to - my kids are immunized. Thankfully I won't be dabbling aorund guessing safe dosages of an unregulated vitamin supplement.

Tabitha8 Sat 28-Jul-12 17:42:29

But the MMR doesn't work for every child, does it? So a child who has had two doses of MMR could still catch measles.
Ah, but now you'll want to tell me to vaccinate my child to keep up the old herd immunity.
Anyway, enough of this thread. I prefer to post on ones that start more sensibly.

ElaineBenes Sat 28-Jul-12 17:48:31

Mmr is very effective against measles. And if, by chance, a fully immunized child does contract measles, they are far less likely to have complications. And, yes, there is further protection from herd immunity ( I'm in us, kids have to be immunized to go to school thankfully)

sashh Sun 29-Jul-12 10:22:08

OP have you been drinking?

There are lame excuses for not vaxing, my personal favorite lame excuse is/was "But he cries with needles" - that is a lame excuse.

"My friend has two autistic children" is another lame excuse. The children were both diagnosed pre vaccination. Your family has no history of adverse reactions, no known allergies, there is no logical reason to this as a reason not to vaccinate.

A child with an egg alergy cannot have vaccines grown on eggs - that is a sound medical reason not to vax.

I think everyone on here knows I am provaccination, but, I do know there are good solid reasons not to vaccinate.

I also know that some people are damaged by vaccines.

OP this is a really badly worded and not thought out post. It is insulting to people who have good reasons to not vaccinate, or to only partially vaccinate eg when I worked in healthcare all staff were offered hep B vaccine and anual flu shots. A colleague had the hepB, but not flu - because she had an egg alergy.

Sometimes vaccination is for the good of the individual being vaccinated, sometimes it is for the benefit of others eg if someone is having chemo then family members may be offered vaccines to stop them passing things on to the individual undergoing chemo, as they can't have the vaccine, and the disease would be dangerous.

veryberrymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 16:28:20

I am not going to rise to the goading comments, at best they are just immensely ignorant. I am not anti-vaccination. I am pro-vaccine education. Vaccination is a great idea, but the reality is that it is not risk free and the long term side effects are not known. As soon as a link is made between a vaccine and an auto immune disease or serious adverse effect, the research is stopped and redirected to disproving the link. This is because pharma funds research in academia and the govt give their friends in pharma money to develop new vaccines. It's called conflict of interest OP, not 'a conspiracy theory.' There's nothing fantastical about it, it's just the truth..you can read about it in reuters news! Vaccines are a continuing process of trial and error, even after the clinical trials are over . Eg..The DTP has been replaced by the DTAP because the former was causing too many cases of seizures and encephalitis. The oral polio is now only being used on poor children in the third world; it has been taken out of use in the west because it can cause polio. (I'd say that is pretty evil. It's not ok for our kids but it's ok to force it on little Indian kids --they don't care if a couple of hundred get paralysis.) So what is the guarantee today's vaccines are safe? None. Why are combination vaccines being promoted when it's been shown that individual ones pose fewer risks? Money. When pregnant, I read a book by an MD called Stephanie Cave. The book 'What your DR may not tell you about Vaccination.' was balanced and let you decide from the stats. I learnt alot about vaccine links to autism, auto-immune disorders, SIDS and more. I recommend every parent read it, and especially OP. Maybe then decide if she holds the same opinion about parents who don't vaccinate. Really, educate yourself for your children.

veryberrymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 16:33:15

http://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Your-Dr-Childrens-Vaccinations-Doctor/dp/0446555711/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1344699167&sr=8-1-spell

bruffin Sat 11-Aug-12 16:41:50

If you Google stephanie cave the first entry is whale, so extremely unlikely to be well researched or unbiased.

bumbleymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 16:50:29

Why do you assume that bruffin? Perhaps the reason that whale link to her is because they agree with her findings. I don't know anything about her but it seems a bit strange to discredit someone's book because a certain website mentions them.

Spink Sat 11-Aug-12 17:01:48

For dh and me, it was the unclear evidence re EFFECTIVENESS of vaccines both on individual and 'herd' that played a part in our decisions, not just risk.
And it is a case of vac DECISIONS rather than decision - each disease and vac has it's own stats so we have gone for some and not others.
(sorry bout shouty capitals - I'm on my phone so it is the only way to emphasise...)

bruffin Sat 11-Aug-12 17:04:16

Even you should have worked out by now that nothing on whale is credible.

bumbleymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 17:10:38

I just googled whale.to and GMC and they're mentioned on there too so does that mean they aren't credible either?

ElaineBenes Sat 11-Aug-12 17:47:45

Veryberry

I was in a pediatric cancer ward in an Indian hospital. Children were dying from cancer which would have been treatable in the uk because they didn't have the expensive chemotherapy drugs. Are you outraged by that?

Difficult decisions are made in low income countries all the time. Ideally, India would give both opv ( to prevent tranmsissiom) and ipv (for increased personal protection). Ipv is way more expensive but opv is still preferable to doing nothing at all. I'd like to see India move to ipv but it's certainly not evil to vaccinate children against polio since the risk of vaccine induced polio paralysis is very small compared to the risk of contracting wild polio paralysis.

And anyway, we may be able to eradicate polio so future generations wont even have to spend on a polio vaccine. This is a good thing.

Your outrage is both hypocritical and misplaced.

bruffin Sat 11-Aug-12 17:49:41

Don't be silly
I didn't Google whale I just Googled stephanie cove and all the top entries link straight to the whale site. It's a page devoted to her.

bumbleymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 18:27:31

I'm not being silly. You said ' nothing on whale is credible.' I take it you didn't really mean that.

I still don't see how being mentioned on a website (or even having a page that someone else has written about you on a website) completely discredits a book you've written. Tbh it just seems like you want to find any reason to discredit any book that may raise questions about vaccines without really looking into it too much. Why is that?

bruffin Sat 11-Aug-12 18:32:25

Something you don't need to look too far into if you have read enough in the first place, its the same old thing.
Also the book dates back to 2003 so fairly outdated.

bumbleymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 18:36:09

Something being 'outdated' is a valid point to make but I don't agree that you shouldn't look into things just because you've read something in the past. New information and new books are coming out all the time.

ElaineBenes Sat 11-Aug-12 19:13:18

Personally I find Paul Offits books very insightful. He is a pediatric immunologist and a vaccine specialist so my money is on him actually knowing what he is talking about.

bumbleymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 19:21:00

Paul Offit, co inventor of the rotavirus vaccine?

He's mentioned on whale.to too so bruffin may not approve of him either.

ElaineBenes Sat 11-Aug-12 19:30:09

I don't know if 'mentioned' is the right word bumbley. Maybe try 'villified', 'smeared', 'defamed', 'demonised' - I think those words describe better how Paul Offit is 'mentioned' on Whale.

But I think that is high praise indeed if the crankosphere recognise that he is indeed a threat to the nonsense they are spouting. I think Bruffin may actually approve.

bruffin Sat 11-Aug-12 19:34:20

Grow up bubblemummy,
Samantha Cove uses quack therapies to cure autism, it pretty obvious any book by her is not is not exactly going to anything other than a scaremongering book.

bumbleymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 19:35:19

Well apparently 'nothing on whale is credible' so I'm not sure about that smile

bumbleymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 19:38:08

Maybe, bruffin but I think Raeding it would be a better way to form an opinion rather than just basing it on the first site her name appears on when googled. You can't really blame Samantha Cove for whale.to's SEO.

ElaineBenes Sat 11-Aug-12 19:41:15

have you read paul offit's books bumbley?

bruffin Sat 11-Aug-12 19:45:07

I was right though, I dont need to read the book, to find that out.
And Whale hates Offit, so Offit is obviously a legitimate source of informationgrin

bumbleymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 19:51:45

Not yet EB, I'll put them on my 'to read' list though. smile which one in particular would you recommend?

ElaineBenes Sat 11-Aug-12 20:02:20

try "Deadly Choices: How the Anti-Vaccine Movement Threatens Us All"

bumbleymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 20:04:04

Will do. Off to amazon/abebooks. smile

veryberrymummy Sat 11-Aug-12 23:11:27

Elaine, I think that anyone suffering from a preventable illness or dying unnecessarily is awful. I think people living in a filthy slum and starving when others live in obscene luxury is outrageous. Excuse me for thinking every child matters and deserves the safest vaccination on the market and a choice. But oh yeah Bill and Melinda Gates can only afford to force the OPV on them because their throwing a party at Christmas to congratulate themselves on their philanthropy. Britain have just hosted the Olympics and USA just put a buggy on Mars for Christ’s sake.
If the likes of the global elite are so philanthropic, why don’t they use the money they dodge in tax (22 Trillion) to improve sanitation and diet in developing countries which would do a lot to prevent the spread of infectious disease and drop the debts owed to the imperialist World Bank, cousin of the WHO. I understand where you are coming from but I think you fail to understand the conflicts of interest with big pharma and government. It’s late and I have to get some sleep otherwise I would write a list of examples
As I said before, I’m not anti-vax, I’m pro vaccine education. Vaccines work on the principle that the benefits outweigh the risks but the risks are not truly represented because of the conflicts of interest so even if a Dr has your kid’s best interest at heart they will just be repeating the spiel told by the medical reps - and many medical reps are being told lies by their employers Big Pharma.. I think we’ll just have to accept that we live with very different perceptions of reality. You believe everything the government tells you is true and that bullets can change direction in mid-flight and I don’t. I used to be unquestioning about vax but some things made me start digging beyond the FDA/CDC/NHS/BMA spiel and I couldn’t ignore it. There are only so many incidences of vaccine/adverse reaction/auto-immune/SIDS you can call coincidence before you start wondering, ‘I think these people on the other side of the fence may have a point. The truth does not change according to your ability to stomach it.
I will read the Offit book. I hope you’ll give the Cave one a go. (The whole trouble with this world is that fools and fanatics are so sure of themselves and the wiser, so full of doubt.)

ElaineBenes Sun 12-Aug-12 02:03:43

I think every child matters too, it's why I do the work I do.

But you're not being realistic. The number of lives saved for India at this moment to move to IPV is minimal (because very few people actually become permanently paralysed and even fewer die, if at all, through vaccine induced paralytic polio) compared with the number of lives which could be saved by, say, ensuring there is sufficient amoxicillin or oral rehydration packets in each local clinic. That's the harsh reality of health care in a low income country. You want to save as much healthy life as possible with the resources available and it would be wrong to put money into moving to IPV in such a situation.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation does absolutely amazing work. It's a fabulous organization. Very results focused and interested in getting the most out of every dollar.

And, sorry, but what's this about the imperialist World Bank cousin of the WHO? I have friends in both, they're devoted professionals. committed to the cause of improving the well-being of others. It does make you sound like you've spent too long in the crankoshere when you speak like this.

And, no, the difference between us isn't that I believe everything the govt says. I've worked in public health, studied epi, public health policy, stats, research design (and also some medical anthropology and sociology which is why I find the anti-vax movement so fascinating) and come to the conclusion that there is nothing wrong at all with the vast majority of vaccines.

The difference between us is that you place a huge weight on anecdotal evidence and conspiracy theory. I like scientific evidence to inform my decisions.

ElaineBenes Sun 12-Aug-12 03:40:09

I should add veryberry that, like you, I'm also very pro vaccine education. It's absolutely vital to counter all the myth, distortions and outright lies out there in the crankosphere and among the anti-vax lobby (whcih thankfully doesn't include you since you're not anti-vax) which lead some very well-meaning parents to put their child's and other children's lives at risk by not vaccinating them against preventable diseases.

ElaineBenes Sun 12-Aug-12 04:06:57

here you go - evidence from India that the rate of vaccine acquired paralytic polio is even lower than in other countries - an estimated chance of one in four million doses! About four doses of OPV are given so it really is a one in a million chance.

This is the kind of risk factor we're talking about here. This is the level of vaccine damage which can be detected. Of course, given the size of India's population and the coverage of OPV, that's still quite a few children and ideally they'd move to IPV but, to quote the authors:

"The risk of paralytic disease from wild poliovirus infection still far outweighs the risk of VAPP in countries where polio is endemic, and experience has shown that OPV, particularly when distributed in mass campaigns, is an essential tool for rapidly raising herd immunity and interrupting wild poliovirus transmission. The results of this analysis and of analyses from other populations indicate that the risk of VAPP remains quite small even when OPV is administered to large numbers of children through mass immunization campaigns. Efforts should therefore be intensified with a view to achieving the goal of global polio eradication by the end of 2002 and the subsequent discontinuation of OPV vaccination to ensure that no child will ever again experience paralytic disease, disability and death associated with either wild poliovirus or vaccine-related poliovirus."

Unfortunately 2002 has been and gone but the target is still the same.

MrsGeranium Sun 12-Aug-12 21:41:22

I think you'll find in India that non-specific acute flaccid paralysis has risen to levels associated with polio paralysis in the 1990s. This suggests that either, a large amount of "polio" paralysis wasn't associated with polio at all; or that polio paralysis has been renamed, or rediagnosed, as acute myelitis, or simply non specific viral paralysis.

Elaine, your study is incredibly old. If you are going to take the mickey out of other people and use words like tosh and crankosphere and bizarro and try to belittle rather than argue points, then you need to do better than that.

ElaineBenes Sun 12-Aug-12 21:53:05

It's the same vaccine. Old doesn't mean wrong. One in a million chance of acquiring vaccine induced paralytic polio. That's the level of vaccine damage which can be detected.

MrsGeranium Sun 12-Aug-12 21:57:51

There are many other different factors than the vaccine. You simply don't have current numbers for vaccine induced polio paralysis. Do you know ANYTHING about reporting systems in India, about the difference between now and fifteen years ago, about health service supply, about oversight, about collation systems, census and so on?

A survey as old as the one you link has no relevance. If you claim that the quality of survey is no better now than it was then (and it really isn't that reliable now) then it just shows you really don't know a great deal about it.

That figure of one in a million is utter, utter nonsense. And if you are GENUINELY interested and knowledgeable about this you'll know about the figures for non-specific viral paralysis, and have a comment about those too.

MrsGeranium Mon 13-Aug-12 00:42:35

This is an interesting read.

It's not particularly new (though it's a lot newer than the one Elaine pasted - 2007). But it's a very good look at how the mainly pro-vaccine contributors (Dept of Paediatrics at a new Delhi hosp) can make an intelligent assemssment of the benefits and otherwise of a mas polio campaign, and the strategies needed to fight the disease.

Here's one extract:

Benefits claimed: WHO claims five million children
have been saved from polio paralysis18. It is
instructive to see how this figure is arrived at. In
1988, there were 32,419 cases of paralytic
poliomyelitis19. The WHO arbitarily raised this
number ten-fold to 350,000 claiming incomplete
reporting5. In 2004 with the changed definition, only
culture positive paralysis was considered polio and
there were 2000 such cases. Subtracting 2000 from
350,000, the WHO calculated that 348,000 children
were saved from paralysis that year.

Here's another:

Vaccine efficacy: In India many who have received
10 doses of OPV have contracted poliomyelitis
raising doubts about the efficacy of vaccine in some
populations2,3. Enteric infections, poor nutrition and
poor sanitation are being blamed3,7. This belated
acknowledgement that public health problems cannot
be solved by magic bullets alone (repeated doses of
OPV) may be one of the gains from this
misadventure. Now monovalent OPV (mOPV)8, birth
dose of vaccine8 and inactivated poliovirus vaccine
(IPV)9 are being suggested, without clear evidence
that any will work9. What is evident is that they will
escalate costs several fold. ‘As long as there are
things we haven’t tried, the polio team remains
optimistic’ says an article in Science2, as if there is
merit in using untested remedies.

veryberrymummy Sun 19-Aug-12 22:21:57

I suppose suggesting that pharmaceutical companies bribe doctors, fix trial results and pay health professionals to endorse articles written by sales reps promoting their products is way up there in the 'conspiracy theory crankosphere' ..that is until it they are found guilty of doing so in a court of law..http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/glaxosmithkline-pays-3bn-for-illegally-marketing-depression-drug-7904555.html

veryberrymummy Sun 19-Aug-12 23:01:24

Mostly a reply to Elaine..

Mrs Geramium has some very valid points about the methods of data collection in India. It's also possible and likely in my opinion that vaccine related paralysis has also been given the name Guillain Barre syndrome and therefore this will bring the figures down. I have already said that I think the studies funded by big pharma and biased and the results massaged, giving the above example so you can quote as many pharma sponsored papers as you want, it doesn't guarantee their credibility.

Executives for Merck sit on the board of the CDC which decides vaccine policy in the USA. It's not theory, it's fact.

The CDC say the OPV should not be given to anyone who is in poor heath. How many Indian children do you think that includes?

I know someone who works for the World Bank and they are a lovely individual who's heart is totally in the right place. But they fail to understand how the world bank gets a country into debt and then owns it, makes the divide between the rich and poor wider, usually a country which has previously been destroyed by the military and intelligence arm of the same global elite crowd. For more on the World Bank see the work of Award Winning 'crank' and 'conspiracy theorist', John Pilger.

As for Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, not very transparent are they?

I think you'll find Cave's book analyses scientific data from both sides carefully and in a balanced way.

On anecdotal evidence: If records say a vaccine has injured 1 in 1 million people and then you meet 300 people who have had the vaccine and 10 of them have been injured by it and 30 may have suffered side effects which a Harvard scientists said were linked but then oh, disproved any link, you are going to start questioning the accuracy of those records.

If it wasn't all the parents popping up with their 'anecdotal evidence' about the DTP, would we have the DTap now or would pharma and policy makers still be stubbornly insisting 'No, any adverse reaction' is very rare. Look we have this paper, it says so! The figure is 1 in 1 million!' ?

If you look at product literature it will list the occurence of a number of side effects as 'unknown' as these have occurred in the 'post marketing' period. these include anaphylactic shock and apnoea.

If you are or know well a parent of a child with SN you will have experience a considerable amount of bullshit and bullying linked to financial incentives for the bullshitters for sacrificing your child for their gain.

Once that has happened there is a massive reluctance to allow you anywhere near your chikd again or subsequent Children!

I don't drive.

ElaineBenes Sat 25-Aug-12 02:12:46

I know parents of an sn child very well and I dont have a clue what you are on about starlight and what it's got to do with vaccinations.

ElaineBenes Sat 25-Aug-12 02:23:28

Actually veryberry, polio diseas surveillance in India meets international standards. The Indians are quite good at censuses and disease surveillance. Their vital registration system is shameful in terms of human rights (ie getting people birth and death certificates) but their sample registration system (what they use to generate vital stats in the absence of sufficient coverage of births and deaths) is very good at generating statistics at the district level.

Sorry, don't buy into the big pharma conspiracy theory. Not that it can't happen - but that it's no more likely with vaccines than any other medication. I mean, how do you know that ibuprofen is 'safe'? And actually, anecdotally, I don't know one person in my life who is 'vaccine damaged'. I don't doubt it can happen but probability suggests that if it is as common as people here suggest, surely I should have come across ONE person? But, no. On the other hand, I do know of quite a few people who are either damaged or dead by vaccine preventable illness.

The reason they can't count the rare side effects is that they are so rare you can't quantify them. This is a good thing.

And the bmgf is transparent but they don't have to be. It's not a public organization but a private philanthropic one. I've worked with them before. I found them to be results focused with clear priorities. And they focus on vaccines because they do what they're supposed do - save lives and prevent disability.

ElaineBenes Sat 25-Aug-12 02:28:10

And I didnt want to engage with mrs g/accuracy but for the record, I thought that they had a point in the article she linked to. I'm not a huge fan of these vertical internationally imposed single disease programmes. I'd like to see polio vaccines rolled out with overall health systems strengthening with a focus on improving primary care, ensuring that all basic essential medications are available at the village level and that all childhood vaccines are available. It's not that vaccinating against polio is bad, it's not, but it should be done in a way that builds capacity throughout the health system.

againstbullies Mon 24-Sep-12 20:08:25

As a new member and looking through the topic I have never seen such blinkered, narrow minded arrogance that occurs if anyone dares to voice their opinion or challenges vaccination for their own good reasons. They are jumped by a pack of dogs. It's like watching bullies in a playground- shame on you! People have valid arguments and have evidence for their concerns but these pro vaxers are just not interested. FFS broaden your minds you fools it's embarrassing to read. Needless to say I'll find another site to have an adult reasonable discussion I wouldn't waste my time with unintelligent imbeciles. Stay in your little bubbles of delusion and carry on thinking you know it all. I feel very sorry for your childen. angry

CatherinaJTV Mon 24-Sep-12 21:17:27

Oh and your post is to teach us how to communicate respectfully and to exchange well supported information hmm

Catsu Mon 24-Sep-12 22:20:25

The only people I know in real life who haven't vaccinated have done so because they couldn't bear to inflict the pain of sn injection on their child or (more commonly) because it seems to be part of 'attachment parenting' to not vaccinate.

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