Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications, experience, or professional qualifications of anyone posting on Mumsnet Talk and cannot be held responsible for any advice given on the site. If you have any serious medical concerns, we would urge you to consult your GP.

Delayed vaccinations- how best to proceed from now?

(96 Posts)
lou4791 Fri 02-Nov-12 12:49:40

My DD had her 2 month vaccinations at 4 months of age, and her 3 month vaccinations 8 weeks later at the age of 6 months. Due in part to me wishing to space them out a bit, and to surgery cancellations she still has not had the third lot of vaccinations. An appointment has come through for them and I am not sure how to proceed.
She is now over 10 months old so is overdue her third lot of newborn vaccinations, and due her menC and Hib, and her MMR and pneumococcal very soon. Surely having all of these so close together is now unnecessary, especially as the Pneumococcal, Hib and MenC will effectively be doubled up now.
Will my most sensible option be to decline the third lot of newborn vaccinations and continue with the 12 month vaccinations as usual?

I hope someone with a deeper understanding of vaccines will be able to offer some advise.

lou4791 Fri 02-Nov-12 12:50:16

advice

OneMoreChap Fri 02-Nov-12 12:54:55

At the risk of being blunt, why on earth aren't you asking your GP?

Why did she have her 2 month vaccinations at 4 months and her 3 month vaccinations at 6 months?

Do you believe that you know best when vaccinations should be given and that they are spaced as they are for a whim?

Your most sensible option for your child - and those of others whom you appear to be putting at risk for some reason - is to go to the doctors, take their advice and follow it.

This sort of behaviour is beyond me, and in many countries you would lose access to public services because of it...

ISingSoprano Fri 02-Nov-12 13:00:20

You need to complete all courses, even if they are late. I suggest you make an appointment as soon as possible for the 3rd lot and then carry on as per the schedule.

stillsmilingafteralltheseyears Tue 06-Nov-12 16:21:50

onemore I think it is not necessary to be quite so hostile before the OP explains why the child's vaccines were delayed. My own DS' were delayed on consultant's advice following a spell in ICU for example.

I agree that the GP would be best to advise but it is entirely possible the OP is behind schedule following medical advice.

You need to write it all out on paper. It may be that you bring forward the 12 month vaccinations, rather than 'doubling up'. The reason that your baby needs the boosters is because the "memory cells" of the immune system, don't start working until after 12 months of age, so the previous vaccines only last a limited time. Write out what vaccinations she has had and when, in a table, and then write down when the boosters for those are due. That way you will get a clearer idea of what is necessary. You can also spread out the vaccines if you want, for instance just giving one booster per visit - if you do this the pneumococcal (Prevenar) should probably be your first vaccine as that one is quite a high risk disease compared to the others.

I'm not so sure your GP will be able to advise you, unless by some miracle you have one who actually has some understanding of vaccines and vaccination. My own GP, who is great for everything else, knows very little about them or the risk of diseases that they help to prevent.

OneMoreChap Tue 06-Nov-12 16:40:30

stillsmilingafteralltheseyears

Hmm. Hostile?

OP said she chose to space some out, and thought about declining vaccinations.
I think the OP needs to consider the impact of declining vaccinations.

I'm very pleased that worldgonecrazy is a paediatric immunologist, but for others, I'd recommend chatting to their - hopefully less ignorant - GP.

onemorechap I'm not a paediatric immunologist, nor have I ever claimed to be, but I do have the benefit of having a leading paediatric immunologist advise me on vaccinations, and I am sharing what he told me. Pneumoccocal meningitis is a much bigger risk to children than measles and that's why he recommended the Prevenar vaccination be done first.

My GP told me that if I didn't vaccinate my child according to the NHS schedule, she would die. That's the level of ignorance that some GPs have.

OneMoreChap Tue 06-Nov-12 17:01:07

Thanks, worldgonecrazy.

If he's saying that, no doubt he ascribes to evidence based medicine which would suggest he has evidence that we should be rolling out Prevenar first?

Has he let NICE know, as yet?

OneMoreChap Tue 06-Nov-12 17:12:30

and see vaccination schedule which shows:

2 months
DTaP/IPV(polio)/Hib (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough), polio, and Haemophilus influenzae type b) - all-in-one injection: Pediacel®; plus:
PCV (pneumococcal conjugate vaccine) - in a separate injection: Prevenar 13®.

12 months, MMR.

So, not only was your mate right.... that's the schedule.

Tabitha8 Tue 06-Nov-12 17:16:58

Onemorechap If the OP wishes to space vaccinations or avoid some, is that not her decision to make?

Sleepyfergus Tue 06-Nov-12 17:25:45

I agree with OneMoreChap, this is a question for the GP/HV to advise how to proceed.

I know we don't have the full story, but this isn't something to be taken lightly and should be sorted ASAP for the benefit of your child's health. I'm afraid your OP makes it sound as if you're a bit lazy and can't be bothered making the appts when they are due. Hope that isn't the case.

OneMoreChap Wed 07-Nov-12 09:18:17

Tabitha8
Onemorechap If the OP wishes to space vaccinations or avoid some, is that not her decision to make?

Sadly, yes.
In the US if you haven't vaccinated your kids, forget school... or so I'm told.

If there's a reason why children can't be vaccinated, fine. If it's about woo "science" like the MMR/autism stuff, then no, it's not.

Every child that isn't vaccinated contributes to our risk of childhood epidemics.

Clumsasaurus Mon 12-Nov-12 18:13:41

This might help Lou:
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/a/age-interval-table.pdf

ElaineBenes Mon 12-Nov-12 18:45:28

Worldgonecrazy

I that your GP probably told you that if you don't vaccinate then your child is at a 'higher risk of death' rather than your child will die (really?), in which case your GP is quite right, although he or she probably should have added serious disability.

Elainebenes please don't put words in mine, or my GP's mouth. She quite clearly stated, with a teary eye, that my child would die if she wasn't vaccinated. (And this was a long time before the current whooping cough outbreak.) My GP was dreadfully misinformed about vaccine risks and wasn't even aware of the information printed on the vaccine manufacturers' leaflets.

lou4791 Tue 13-Nov-12 14:09:27

Thank you all for your replies.

Clumsasaurus- Thank you for the link...just the kind of thing I was wanting.

Thank goodness we don't live in a country in which services are withheld for parental choice.

ElaineBenes Tue 13-Nov-12 18:33:13

If she really said that, worldgonecrazy, then I sincerely hope you changed GPs. I certainly wouldn't stay with one who couldn't differentiate between risk and certainty whatever his or her thoughts on vaccinations.

OneMoreChap Wed 14-Nov-12 10:15:33

lou4791

I note your comment re: parental choice.

On what basis did you make your choice?
Certainly not medical opinion by the sound of it.

Your choice risks other children - if you're happy with that - don't expect others to be, and expect to be condemned for it. Correctly.

Tabitha8 Wed 14-Nov-12 19:27:01

How about all the adults in the country who have never bothered to update their vaccinations / check their immunity? Like me, for example.

OneMoreChap Wed 14-Nov-12 22:40:55

Tabitha8
How about all the adults in the country who have never bothered to update their vaccinations / check their immunity? Like me, for example.

Irresponsible sods, but then you don't mix so closely with young children.

Err, you wouldn't be suggesting that as an excuse for the OP's apparently shiftless behaviour, would you?

Brycie Wed 14-Nov-12 22:47:15

"Your choice risks other children"

I'm a vaccinator and I'm irritated by this lazy scare-mongering. I'm guessing vaccines must be riskier for your child OP if she's in poor health and had them delayed on medical advice.l I don't know what you should do as I'm not family with vaccine schedule but I wouldn't be harangued into any decision by statements like that. The people who make them won't be around to pick up the pieces if anything goes round. The decision needs to be yours.

Ok having said that I know not much, I would be more concerned to do the late infant vaccine first and put off the measles for a bit.

Brycie Wed 14-Nov-12 22:48:03

Family? familiar!
Round? Wrong!

steppemum Wed 14-Nov-12 22:56:32

op, my kids vaccinations were all a bit out of synch and in the wrong order as we were overseas and had some here and some there. Each time the gp nurse worked out what they needed and then spaced them out.

With the early vaccinations they are getting DTP, and that requires 3 boosters to get up to full immunity. But at least one of the others thye said don't bother with both as long as thye had one. So you need to go and talk to your gP practice nurse

canyou Wed 14-Nov-12 23:08:47

Lou My DD was delayed a lot longer for all her vaccinations and we spaced them as you would a baby ie waited the length of time that a baby would wait. The nurse/ Dr will know the spacing needed. My DD had all single vacs as well so was even more complicated to a degree but the Dr was happy to follow guidelines that are normal for a baby and give the vacs tbh he seemed happy we were actively vaccinating her in spite for her complicated medical history and a history of bad reactions in the family.

OneMoreChap Wed 14-Nov-12 23:33:27

Brycie
I said "Your choice risks other children"

You said:
I'm a vaccinator and I'm irritated by this lazy scare-mongering.

As a health worker, I am surprised by your view. What does your professional body think of that? Unless you mean you are a parent who has had their child appropriately vaccinated...

Do you aver that that declining vaccinations as the OP intended does not compromise immunity?

Tabitha8 Thu 15-Nov-12 18:45:19

Onemore
What is the OP's apparently shiftless behaviour?

Incidentally, I frequently attend mother and toddler groups with my young child and I play with the other children there. I must ask their mothers if they ever have their own immunity to vaccine preventable diseases checked. I suspect that I'll find that I hang out with a whole bunch of irresponsible sods.

Brycie Thu 15-Nov-12 21:38:27

I mean I vaccinate my own children, sorry for the misunderstanding.

Yes, I think it's lazy, you haven't thought about the fact that there's an increased risk for her own children.

No, it doesn't really, in terms of other people, as most other people are vaccinated.

Brycie Thu 15-Nov-12 21:40:09

Oh I thougthg surgery cancellations meant she'd had surgery. Still, her baby her choice. Unless you're planning to go round to her house and pick up the pieces if things go wrong.

wearymum200 Thu 15-Nov-12 21:56:23

Advice on what to do if vaccines delayed here:
http://www.patient.co.uk/health/Childhood-Immunisation.htm
Note Hib/ MenC are included in the 3rd lot of newborn vaccinations, as is pneumococcal
MMR obv is not, but is only delayed till after 12 months, because children don't have a good antibody response to it before that.

OneMoreChap Thu 15-Nov-12 23:08:08

Brycie I despair, I really do.

Why have we had a recent spike in measles? Because stupid people didn't vaccinate their children.

Yes, stupid people.
www.travelclinic.ltd.uk/blog/post/2012/05/10/Measles-Outbreak!-UK-and-overseas.aspx

OneMoreChap Thu 15-Nov-12 23:10:48

Tabitha8
What is the OP's apparently shiftless behaviour?

"Due in part to me wishing to space them out a bit"
"Surely having all of these so close together is now unnecessary, especially as the Pneumococcal, Hib and MenC will effectively be doubled up now.
Will my most sensible option be to decline the third lot of newborn vaccinations"

asking a forum rather than a health professional.

Incidentally, I frequently attend mother and toddler groups with my young child and I play with the other children there. I must ask their mothers if they ever have their own immunity to vaccine preventable diseases checked. I suspect that I'll find that I hang out with a whole bunch of irresponsible sods.

Does that mean you approve of people who are too stupid to vaccinate their kids, then?

itsnotmymainmainpresent Thu 15-Nov-12 23:19:27

Where I live, we have to wait for our doctor to send out an appointment for us to take our children for their vaccinations.

DD2 is 14 months old and hasn't had her letter through yet for her MMR/12 month vaccinations.
Tricky for me to storm in there and demand she be vaccinated at the exact right age, when everyone else living in this Healthcare Trust area has to wait.
Not deliberately delaying vaccinating my child, but I will bet I am not the only one in the country in a similar situation.

OP: Just call your GP surgery and talk to the nurse. They will get your DD booked in, and she can have her vaccinations.

itsnotmymainmainpresent Thu 15-Nov-12 23:21:20

Oh, and apart from if I were travelling overseas to a high risk area, or in the case of tetanus should I step on a rusty nail (or similar) hmm What vaccinations should I be having myself? I'm not asthmatic. I'm 33 years old - if that makes a difference? hmm

Never heard of adult vaccinations.

ElaineBenes Fri 16-Nov-12 01:53:00

You've never heard of adult vaccinations???

Flu vaccine? Pertussis booster? You've never heard of these vaccines? Wow!

ElaineBenes Fri 16-Nov-12 01:55:32

And, yes, I most certainly would be following up to see why there is a delay in my child being protected against measles.

claraschu Fri 16-Nov-12 03:48:30

In the US you don't have to vaccinate if God has told you not to.

Brycie Fri 16-Nov-12 07:09:22

wow you're so amazingly clever onemorechap, and so selfless and rational. I really love you, you're amazing.

OneMoreChap Fri 16-Nov-12 16:05:00

brycie clever, selfless and rational? Thanks.

Although turning up so the vaccinations my kids are meant to have could be administered wasn't that hard, nor mentally taxing.

itsnotmymainmainpresent Fri 16-Nov-12 18:57:00

I've heard of flu vaccine, yes. Not the pertussis booster. Will look it up.

Flu vaccine is recommended for very young, elderly and those with respiratory problems, as far as I know. I don't fit into any of those categories. I have no problem with the fact I have never had a flu vaccine. I do realise flu can be fatal.

So pertussis booster is whooping cough. Never seen it offered to adults.
According to the NHS website it's offered during pregnancy. There are a lot of vaccinations / tests during pregnancy - they do not fall into the normal sphere of vaccinations as far as I am concerned. You don't get a letter saying "hey, you'r 30, come for your jabs" hmm

itsnotmymainmainpresent Fri 16-Nov-12 18:57:14

"you're"

ElaineBenes Fri 16-Nov-12 19:08:44

You might not be offered it on the NHS but that doesn't mean you can't get it (although I live in the US so no NHS anyhow, you make your own decisions and pay for them).

I don't want to get the flu, I have no time to take 2 weeks off work regardless of the health complications, I get the vaccine and pay for it and do the same for my kids. Just because I don't get a letter doesn't mean that I won't do it!

Tabitha8 Fri 16-Nov-12 19:25:27

I haven't yet made up my mind whether vaccines for adults, given primarily to protect children (eg. whooping cough, MMR) ought to be available for free on the NHS or if adults should have to pay for them. I'm leaning towards a freebie. If they are considered necessary, then ought they not to be free?
Presumably each one now would be the cost of a precription charge? About £8 each.

Onemore
Not sure what you meant when you said:

Does that mean you approve of people who are too stupid to vaccinate their kids, then?

I was talking about the parents having their own immunity checked, not the immunity of their children.

Anyway, I've yet to meet anyone who has avoided vaccinating a child out of stupidity.

Tabitha8 Fri 16-Nov-12 19:32:20

itsnotmy
Perhaps the reason you didn't know about adult vaccinations (I think that we are really talking about boosters of the childhood vaccines, aren't we?) is because, when children are vaccinated, we tend to believe that immunity will be lifelong.
I had no idea, even only three years ago, that I could catch measles, for example. I had the jab as a child and grew up believing that would be that forever.

ElaineBenes Fri 16-Nov-12 19:43:32

Tabitha8

I've seen lots of people on here who don't vaccinate their children out of stupidity. Unfortunately, they also think that they are very clever.

Welovecouscous Fri 16-Nov-12 19:45:35

Elaine, can't you just respect other people's choices?

ElaineBenes Fri 16-Nov-12 19:47:28

I can respect other people's choices.

I can also say that they are based on stupidity and not on scientific evidence if that is the case.

Can you not respect my opinion?

Welovecouscous Fri 16-Nov-12 19:52:12

Elaine I respect your right to the view that it is always sensible to vaccinate. I wouldn't describe you as stupid.

I don't feel the need to denigrate other people for their healthcare choices, unlike you.

I am sure many would have said there was no need to remove mercury from vaccines until the government said mercury use should be avoided. Sceptics are not always wrong.

I vaccinate btw.

Tabitha8 Fri 16-Nov-12 19:52:19

I must have missed some vaccination threads (I try to read them all) as I can't think of anyone who hasn't vaccinated their child out of stupidity.

ElaineBenes Fri 16-Nov-12 19:59:35

No, it might not always be the right choice or sensible to vaccinate. I don't know people's medical histories.

But if someone is basing their decisions on woo, then I do think that's stupidity.

Tabitha, there was a recent thread where someone insisted how knowledgable they are about vaccines. One piece of 'evidence' to show that vaccines increase allergies was an internet survey asking if a child was vaccinated and if they had allergies. I mean, seriously? That's stupidity IMO.

ElaineBenes Fri 16-Nov-12 20:01:36

Welovecouscous

There was NO need to remove mercury from vaccines. It was done solely as a precautionary measure to placate the anti-vaccine movement and the hypothesised link between autism and mercury exposure. There was no evidence then so the precautionary principle was applied - and there has since been solid evidence showing no link.

downindorset Fri 16-Nov-12 20:18:27

Hmm, glad there's no mercury in vaccines. I always remember it from school as the stuff that peeled the Elizabethan's faces off when they used it in make-up. Would rather not have it injected into me or my children, thank you very much!

ElaineBenes Fri 16-Nov-12 20:24:48

You need to learn about the difference between ethylmercury and methylmercury.

You're thinking about methylmercury.

What was in vaccines (still in some, mainly flu i think) is ethylmercury which has a proven track record of being very safe.

This is exactly what I was talking about welovecouscous and tabitha.

stinkymice Fri 16-Nov-12 20:57:29

But on the NHS website they say there is no mercury (thiomersal) in Dtap/IPV.
Why do they say thiomersal, not ethymercury OR methylmercury??

ElaineBenes Fri 16-Nov-12 21:20:02

Thimerosal = ethylmercury.

itsnotmymainmainpresent Fri 16-Nov-12 21:58:13

Maybe, elaine.

Here in the UK, it tends to be the case (you may know this) that few people have access to private medicine, including vaccinations. The majority just rely on the provisions made by the nhs. There is no kind of movement publicising the requirement to renew childhood vaccinations.

I'm not in one of the "high risk" categories, so no vaccines have ever been offered to me. I don't think I know of anyone else who has had adult boosters (excluding those given as a matter of course during pregnancy, or those in the high risk categories).

The note from our GP arrived today, so DD2 will be having her 12 month jabs next week. You can't just jump the queue, unless you go private, and that's not an option - especially as I have already paid for the nhs jabs out of my taxes.

OneMoreChap Fri 16-Nov-12 22:38:02

Tabitha8
Anyway, I've yet to meet anyone who has avoided vaccinating a child out of stupidity.

Splendid.

of the "not stupid" people who avoided vaccinating their child, what reasons did they give?

ElaineBenes Sat 17-Nov-12 01:56:20

Boots offers flu vaccines cheaply, it's where I had mine done when I lived in the uk (now my workplace offers them for free - cheaper than having staff off sick)

Brycie Sat 17-Nov-12 02:41:15

Hi welovecoucous, I think you are me!, my children, my choice, your children, your choice. I've never really understood this need to be rude about other people's choices.

OneMoreChap Sat 17-Nov-12 13:38:08

ElaineBenes

I can respect other people's choices.
I can also say that they are based on stupidity and not on scientific evidence if that is the case.

This.
+1

See this paper for some interesting views on herd immunity and vaccine exemptions.

Tabitha8 Sat 17-Nov-12 14:22:25

So, who is meant to pursue an action in tort and against whom?

OneMoreChap Sat 17-Nov-12 14:30:15

The paper suggests that those who suffered the tort might have a class action against those who caused the loss of herd immunity. Note, it's a US paper, not UK.

Brycie Sat 17-Nov-12 14:43:48

But onemorechap (and Elaine, I guess) you know that there are doctors, barristers, all sorts of clever people who don't get vaccinated. You can say at a push that they are making a stupid decision, but it doesn't mean it's based on their stupidity, as they aren't stupid, or even that it's based on stupid reasons, as they may not be stupid reasons. In fact one reason for not vaccinating a child would be that most other children are vaccinated so why risk your own. That might be selfish but it's not stupid.

Brycie Sat 17-Nov-12 14:46:16

In fact the idea of vaccinating solely for herd immunity is quite stupid, as it involves self sacrifice. Unless there is a benefit to your own child which exceeds that cost then vaccinating for herd immunity would be a stupid thing to do.

OneMoreChap Sat 17-Nov-12 16:01:32

Read tragedy of the commons for why relying on herd immunity is stupid....

Brycie Sat 17-Nov-12 16:24:13

Why is it stupid to rely on herd immunity - I thought some children had to.

OneMoreChap Sat 17-Nov-12 21:14:22

Some.

Who have to.

Not doctors, barristers, all sorts of clever people who don't get vaccinated and those who think reason for not vaccinating a child would be that most other children are vaccinated so why risk your own

Brycie Sat 17-Nov-12 21:17:46

But it's stupid to rely on herd immunity. You said so. Why is it stupid for one lot of children and not stupid for another? Either it works, to rely on herd immunity, or it doesn't. Herd immunity doesn't differentiate between children who haven't been vaccinated for different reasons, ignoble or otherwise. So why is it stupid to rely on herd immunity? I mean you did say it was.

Brycie Sun 18-Nov-12 01:12:39

Well I've just got back from ferrying children around and while I'm happy you've had a more interesting evening than me I am disappointed not to have the explanation.

OneMoreChap Sun 18-Nov-12 12:48:55

If you are allergic to the constituents of a vaccine, or you are severely immuno-compromised, your GP would recommend against vaccination.

Newborns are also not vaccinated.

They have little choice but to rely upon herd immunity.

I'm sure you really aren't as idiosyncratic as you represent your views to be...

Do you genuinely believe it is a generally sensible policy for parents to voluntarily not vaccinate their children?

Do you also believe that having a shower and eating fruit combats HIV?

In both cases, you are misguided at best and more likely wilfuly ignorant.

Brycie Sun 18-Nov-12 15:10:19

Seriously you said it's stupid to rely on herd immunity. What do you mean by that? Explain. Otherwise I won't believe you. Why would I?

Brycie Sun 18-Nov-12 15:13:18

And why are you talking about showers and eating fruit? Why is it so hard to explain your comment about herd immunity?

You're pretty definitive in your views there, calling people stupid, ignorant, whatever. Ok at flinging around the insults - now's the time to back yourself up with something that is a little more cogent.

Otherwise it just looks like stupid posturing.

Brycie Sun 18-Nov-12 15:58:32

<tumbleweed>

I can't stand it when people on mumsnet just throw around these insults and generalisations about all sorts of things. I have never felt more pushed in the opposite direction than in these conversations about vaccinations. I've had this particular conversation before - I think it's counterproductive to be so insulting and I think it will never change anyone's mind.

bruffin Sun 18-Nov-12 16:33:26

"Seriously you said it's stupid to rely on herd immunity"

Very very simple, if everyone relied on herd immunity then there would be no herd immunity.

Brycie Sun 18-Nov-12 16:42:25

Is that it? Everybody knows that. But it's got nothing to do with relying on herd immunity as an individual. All you have to do is make sure uptake levels are good in your area and keep your ear open for outbreaks, and then go and get a vaccine if you're worried. What's stupid about that? We live in the real world, and not everybody's going to not vaccinate their children. You can pretty much rely on that.

Onemorechap's comment implied herd immunity doesn't work. I don't think he quite understood himself or he might have explained it. But now I can see why - he obviously meant something completely different. Perhaps that's why he struggled.

ElaineBenes Sun 18-Nov-12 17:38:47

It works, brycie, but it's imperfect. For the vast majority, even with herd immunity, vaccination is less risky. But there is also the component that by not vaccinating you're reducing herd immunity for everyone (impacting upon the few who genuinely shouldn't be vaccinated and the few for whom the vaccine doesn't work) so it's not just stupid but also selfish (fair enough though, I'm also selfish with resoect to my kids but people prefer to deny it rather than recognize it for what it is).

I agree with you that doing a risk analysis isn't stupid in itself, we all do it, but the skewing of risks of vaccination up and risks of disease down is stupid (which is what I see happening). Just my opinion though.

OneMoreChap Sun 18-Nov-12 18:03:43

Brycie

I have a life elsewhere, as well... so I apologise if I'm not at your immediate beck and call.

If you are a sociopath, and don't care about the society in which you live, perhaps you might choose to rely on herd immunity, despite having the opportunity to take vaccine.

As I suggested in the tragedy of the commons, the approach you appear to be espousing mean that fewer and fewer "clever" people will vaccinate. Herd immunity isn't nationwide, and appears in pockets cf. measles outbreaks in Liverpool, Los Angeles and so on.

keep your ear open for outbreaks, and then go and get a vaccine if you're worried. What's stupid about that? because that shows a fair lack of understanding as to how disease incubate, outbreaks occur?

Why was I talking about showers? A stupid man, linked to in the article, alleged that a good shower would prevent HIV. "I'll be fine relying on herd immunity" is in the same sort of order, when stupid, selfish people are deliberately reducing herd immunity.

I take it back. Your suggested course of action is not stupid. It's ignorant, uncaring and sociopathic.

I hadn't called you stupid. I believe you are vexatious and aruing a point you know to be false. If not, I'll reconsider my view; of you.

Brycie Sun 18-Nov-12 18:26:08

Hi Elaine smile yes definitely to call it selfish but it's the accusation that its stupid I'm challenging. It's really not. (As regards the selfish thing, people will just say they have the right to put their children first, which everyone does anyway - and I completely agree - usually without admitting it.)

I think the only way to convince people is to say it's the best thing for their child. It doesn't make sense at all to ask people to risk their child for other people's children. People vaccinate to protect their children, and the herd immunity thing is just an extra reassurance when they get nervous about the risk. If the risk is greater than the benefit they wouldn't do it and nor should they, so vaccination is just as, maybe not selfish, but self-driven, self-centred, if you see what I mean.

Calling people sociopaths is just grin NEVER going to be taken seriously.

Onemorechap - I really don't mind what your view of me is smile as you are so randomly insulting people it doesn't matter.

Yes, I think people who don't vaccinate look out for early symptoms and keep their ears to the ground about uptake and outbreaks. Except for the (few) people I know who just don't vaccinate anyway and wouldn't mind if nobody vaccinated at all. I mean, they even went to "dangerous" countries and didn't vaccinate, so they don't really count in terms of the herd immunity thing.

Brycie Sun 18-Nov-12 18:28:14

Can I just say, hi Bruffin, I remember you from another thread and didn't mean to be rude just now - you caught some of my snarkiness which may or may not have been aimed elsewhere and people who may or may not have been dishing it out and may or may not be able to take it. grin

JoTheHot Sun 18-Nov-12 19:11:24

Keeping your ear to the ground for outbreaks might work if you're not one of the ones that gets infected first. Relying on herd immunity, when you don't have to, is stupid in the same way as living in a block of flats and relying on your neighbours' smoke alarms.

Brycie Sun 18-Nov-12 19:30:44

Not really - you can add up all the various risks, the risk of getting it, the risk of suffering permanent damage from it, the risk of being the first one to get it, the risk of being the first one to get it with no outbreak anywhere nearby or in known contacts etc, and definitely come to the conclusion that herd immunity confers a worthwhile benefit. I mean let's not forget Jo - herd immunity is worth something. It's supposed to work.

JoTheHot Sun 18-Nov-12 20:00:52

Herd immunity isn't supposed to work. It does work.

Your analysis is incomplete. Concluding that herd immunity confers a benefit is but one part of one side of the risk analysis. To rationally not vaccinate, you need to conclude that the residual risk, after taking into account herd immunity, is less than the risk of vaccinating. At current levels of vaccination, this is not the case.

Brycie Sun 18-Nov-12 20:41:04

So if it works, why is relying on it as stupid as relying on your next door neighbour's smoke alarm?

Brycie Sun 18-Nov-12 20:45:46

I think this is the problem, saying herd immunity works, and then saying it's stupid to rely on it, is going to convince no one. To convince people you have to really focus on the fact that it's a benefit for their own chld because the herd immunity argument sort of goes a bit nowhere.

JoTheHot Mon 19-Nov-12 07:45:00

Why have you drifted into benefits to the individual vs society (*in bold*)? This is irrelevant to what you and I are discussing: the role of herd immunity in a selfish individual-focused risk analysis.

I think it's quite a simple concept that herd immunity provides an imperfect level of protection, and as such it does not mean that vaccination is automatically not beneficial to the individual. I think that you and most non-vaccinators understand this, despite your faux-pleas to the contrary. I think someone is stupid if they can't understand that protection is not all or nothing, that their neighbour's smoke alarm gives some protection, but not enough, and that herd immunity gives some protection, but sometimes not enough.

Brycie Mon 19-Nov-12 07:59:42

I'm saying it's irrelevant if you want to convince people to vaccinate. If you say herd immunity works, but it's stupid to rely on it, you're contradicting yourself,k and people won't take you seriously.

Read my posts: I'm not a non vaccinator. In fact due to travel my children have had more than they otherwise would.

Brycie Mon 19-Nov-12 08:14:15

smile you also assume that people can't work out that when authorities sy you need x level of immunisation in a population to acheive herd immunity, then when x level is occurring, herd immunity is either achieved or not. In which case it offers very good protection, or someone's not telling the truth. The fault comes with assuming people are stupid, which is a very bad idea in this kind of conversation. You're also assuming that people don't realise that all parents behave in a self/self-centred/self-driven way when it comes to vaccination. As Elaine said, it's true that people don't always admit it, even to themselves. But it doesn't stop it being true.

Brycie Mon 19-Nov-12 08:16:27

"I think it's quite a simple concept that herd immunity provides an imperfect level of protection, and as such it does not mean that vaccination is automatically not beneficial to the individual. I think that you and most non-vaccinators understand this, despite your faux-pleas to the contrary. I think someone is stupid if they can't understand that protection is not all or nothing, that their neighbour's smoke alarm gives some protection, but not enough, and that herd immunity gives some protection, but sometimes not enough. "

In other words this type of explanation is a much better way of approaching the situation, except for calling people stupid (not necessary) and also of course the assuming things about people which are wrong and the personal remarks.

Brycie Mon 19-Nov-12 08:16:29

"I think it's quite a simple concept that herd immunity provides an imperfect level of protection, and as such it does not mean that vaccination is automatically not beneficial to the individual. I think that you and most non-vaccinators understand this, despite your faux-pleas to the contrary. I think someone is stupid if they can't understand that protection is not all or nothing, that their neighbour's smoke alarm gives some protection, but not enough, and that herd immunity gives some protection, but sometimes not enough. "

In other words this type of explanation is a much better way of approaching the situation, except for calling people stupid (not necessary) and also of course the assuming things about people which are wrong and the personal remarks.

bruffin Mon 19-Nov-12 08:31:51

If you say herd immunity works, but it's stupid to rely on it, you're contradicting yourself,k and people won't take you seriously.

Herd immunity is not supposed to be there for people who just want to take the risk. It's there for people who real medical reasons for not vaccinating. Herd immunity works in those situations as long as every one is on board, there is no contradiction. Look at whooping cough, before the vaccine was first bought in the deaths from WC in their first two months of life was 3500 a year (US) once the vaccine was bought in, those deaths in children too young to vaccinate went down to as low as under a hundred in 2 years.
That is herd immunity working, those that cant be vaccinated were being protected by those that can. But if everyone took the decision to rely on herd immunity, then the vaccine rate drops and there is no herd immunity for the those who need it.
The reason that you rely on herd immunity can be stupid, or sensible depending on your starting position.
If you have a legitimate medical reason for not vaccinating ie allergy to a componant then it is not stupid to have to rely on herd immunity because you have no choice.
To deliberately play games and assume that everyone else is vaccinating therefore you do not have to, is stupid because if everyone made that decision then there would be no herd immunity to rely on.

Brycie Mon 19-Nov-12 08:37:40

It doesn't matter what it's supposed to be there for. As I said earlier, herd immunity doesn't discriminate between people who aren't vaccinated for different reasons, ignoble or other wise. It just works anyway, as Jo pointed out.

"To deliberately play games and assume that everyone else is vaccinating therefore you do not have to, is stupid because if everyone made that decision then there would be no herd immunity to rely on. "

It's not stupid - first of all you wouldn't have to assume, and second, it would take a long time for all herd immunity protection to wane, so you can continue to recalculate the risk. So for example if you want to delay some vaccinations but aren't opposed to them, you could work out that you're 95 per cent safe to do that, and run to the doctor if you hear of an outbreak.

You can call it selfish, of course, but all parents have the interests of their children at heart (I certainly did and I took the opposite decision). You don't do it for other people's chidlren, you do it for yours. So you can say it's a selfish decision, but not stupid.

Personally I think that's why uptake is lower in better off areas. Some groups are more "obedient" to the greater authority of the doctor, HV etc and others have worked out that's the case so will rest on that.

Brycie Mon 19-Nov-12 08:40:25

Anyway tbh I'm in agreement about the most basic principle and only got involved in this conversation because of the insulting generalisation of a poster above. It's really pointless and counter-productive. In fact I've had this exact same conversation with Elainebenes before (although it wasn't her being sweeping, I can't remember) but I was quite shocked by the nature of it and just thought, whoever is going to listen to this? But then I suppose if you don't really want to convince people it doesn't matter, it's only an internet forum so it's not like the parliament of the nations smile

OneMoreChap Mon 19-Nov-12 10:30:20

Yep;

I believe you are vexatious and aruing a point you know to be false.

I don't have to convince anyone; my children were vaccinated, as was I.
As, I believe, were yours. So you're arguing on behalf of some purported non-vaccinators? Fine, argue their case by yourself. You have no skin in the game.

My kids didn't run the risk of illness, nor of infecting a pregnant woman with German Measles. Why would I care about that, anyway?

I don't have to coo nicely and say well, it's good for everyone and try and convince you to take a risk with your child's health. If you don't vaccinate, their risk is greater.

As you say, this isn't a parliament, and my views are as valuable as yours; though I suspect rather better informed.

JoTheHot Mon 19-Nov-12 17:31:09

Brycie I find your writing difficult to decipher. For instance, you quote my comment on herd immunity, then beneath it you write:

"In other words this type of explanation is a much better way of approaching the situation, except for calling people stupid (not necessary) and also of course the assuming things about people which are wrong and the personal remarks."

Yet, my explanation didn't say anyone was stupid, didn't assume people are other than they are, and didn't include any personal remarks. I know you are a self-appointed pagwatch-inspired politeness enforcer on vaccine threads, but beyond that I don't know what you are saying, and so can't reply to it.

You also seem to find my prose difficult. "you and most non-vaccinators" in no way implies you are a non-vaccinator.

Brycie Mon 19-Nov-12 21:06:56

That's quite lucky you don't want to convince anyone onemorechap smile a little less disappointment in the world grin

Jo I'm sorry it was when you said "I think someone is stupid.." obviously you weren't referring to a specific person. I thought you meant you believed people who rely on herd immunity are stupid, like onemorechap - apologies. Also I'm sorry I misunderstood "you and most non-vaccinators". Maybe I am finding your posts a bit difficult to decipher but it's not deliberate.

Except I've just seen! you made up for the lack of personal remarks with your "self-appointed pagwatch-inspired politeness enforcer"! If Pagwatch is a politeness enforcer too then hooray I'm a fan! However I am actually an actual person with an actual separate and independent mind. It might shock you that two people have independently come to the conclusion that it's better to be reasoned than insulting but in that case prepare to be shocked!

OneMoreChap Mon 19-Nov-12 22:37:19

Brycie Thanks for that; that has at least made me smile.

You have certainly convinced me.
Sadly, it's about comprehension and vexatiousness.

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