Advanced search


(94 Posts)
redkaybee Wed 12-Dec-12 03:09:20

Quick question on the controversial topic of vaccinations. I suggested to my gp I would like to consider a delayed vaccination schedule for my daughter. After the 5 in 1 she was inconsolable and now suffers reflux. I do want to vaccinate but not so many all at once. The Ho consulted with st thomases children's hospital and was apparently advised against a spread out schedule so I have been told follow the nhs schedule or I must go private for an alternative schedule. Is there anyone out there in london who has managed an alternative vacc schedule from an nhs gp?
Many thanks in advance

redkaybee Thu 13-Dec-12 09:29:33

Bruffin - encephalitis would be a major concern to me . This study seems to show this has been caused by many if the vaccines on the market

sh77 Thu 13-Dec-12 10:26:00

I understand your concerns. I too am not anti-vacc but was concerned with giving ds so many so early. He had none until he was 18 months but has almost caught up. The nurse did not question my decision. I am in w9 and would have suggested my surgery if you were closer. Have you asked on the vaccinations board? Good luck.

bruffin Thu 13-Dec-12 13:33:21

Encephalitis caused by vaccines is much rarer than caused by the disease.

redkaybee Thu 13-Dec-12 13:50:25

Bruffin which disease are you referring to? I would not choose for my daughter to get encephalitis through either disease or vaccine. Vaccines are not 100% effective yet I as a patent choose to put these antigens into my daughters system . If she caught a disease her body would produce its own antibodies to fight the disease - these antibodies are a far higher level of immunity than is provided by a synthetic version. As I said previously I am not looking at the pro/ anti vaccine debate but at where I can possibly get a spread out vaccination schedule. St thomases is also a highly reputable hospital with some very proficient staff. I was told by a consultant there when my pregnancy was overdue by their scans by 4 days( not overdue in the least by my cycle) that and I quote 'we don't want another dead baby on our hands' and ' I used to recommend a balti a bonk and a bottle of red' .

bruffin Thu 13-Dec-12 14:07:28


ZuleikaD Thu 13-Dec-12 14:28:05

Their scans would be a lot more accurate than your cycle. Though I wouldn't have phrased it quite like that, myself.

redkaybee Thu 13-Dec-12 16:02:10

I was consciously trying to get pregnant so I knew exactly the date I conceived. The scans dictated I conceived prior to my period - their scans go by size of the foetus, and are inaccurate. They are used because the majority of women do not know their conception date.

Welovecouscous Thu 13-Dec-12 16:19:26

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ArthurPewty Thu 13-Dec-12 16:46:24

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ZuleikaD Thu 13-Dec-12 16:58:13

You can know when you had sex, but unless it was IVF you can't know the exact date of conception - sperm lives in the vagina or fallopian tubes for up to four days and conception can occur at any point in those days.

bruffin Thu 13-Dec-12 17:28:20

Its not libellous, everything i have said us documented by the Asa ruling.

ZuleikaD Thu 13-Dec-12 17:36:54

The ASA ruled that the website "breached CAP Code rules on misleading advertising, substantiation, exaggeration, harm and offence, and medicines, medical devices, health-related products and beauty products." In essence Dr Halvorsen has been called a liar by far more authoritative people than bruffin.

Welovecouscous Thu 13-Dec-12 18:34:49

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

redkaybee Fri 14-Dec-12 00:24:25

yes couscous - it must happen a lot without women knowing and they are too quick to induce - all those undercooked babies being born before their time. As for the ASA - I would not class them as authoritative - they are a body that has to deal with public complaint. If someone were to lodge a complaint concerning dr halvorsens website - I wonder who would want to do a thing like that - then the ASA will explore the complaint and act accordingly. Because the record runs that there is no scientific evidence that mmr causes autism then any wording to that effect upon the website will be deemed inappropriate and removed. I am sure once upon a time the world was flat and smoking was good for you........

bruffin Fri 14-Dec-12 00:59:53

There is no evidence, there has been paper after paper looking for the connection and they can't find it. The papers used by Halvorsen to back his claims to the ASAP certainly didn't say what he claimed they did, just an example of the cherry picking he uses to scaremonger. Your obviously not interested in the real research, you just want a yes man who give you want you want regardless. Your gp is not going to refuse to vaccinate because you are late with the next appointment.

redkaybee Fri 14-Dec-12 03:58:08

Bruffin each to their own opinion. Again - a debate is not what I was looking for. I have done extensive research. The link to autism is in the vaccination causing a leaky gut. A leaky gut at infant age can cause a whole host of problems. An infant not ingesting the correct nutrients over a prolonged period is going to fall short developmentally. The outcome is a set of problems that when examined fall under the spectrum of autism. Wakefields research methodology was seen as unethical. The wording mmr causes autism was rejected. It is my understanding that vaccines are not 100% either safe or effective. I do not vaccinate myself. I would never choose to have a flu jab - I know someone who recently had the flu jab and has been ill for a month post jab. With the flu. My daughter is 4 months old - vaccines are an assault on an immature nervous system/ digestive system/ neurological system/ immune system . Why would I choose to put so many in at once? At such early stages? Certainly not because I am still going to baby weighing clinic and am therefore more likely to get the jabs which the gp is in turn paid for providing. Why do America and Australia have different schedules? Why were thimerosal jabs removed? Why has the 5 in 1 only been around for 8 years introduced in 2004 - is that long enough to know that it is safe? Why are the FDA now claiming there are still traces of thimerosal in vaccinations? Why is the house of commons currently discussing the provision of single vaccines. You are right. I am looking for a yes man - someone to say yes vaccination is your choice and if you choose to have it done you do not have to follow such an aggressive schedule as is provided by the nhs where babies are not treated as individuals, genetic history is not considered, neither is weight or the fact a baby is prem.Where a 6 lb baby can receive the same amount of antigens as a 16lb baby .

bruffin Fri 14-Dec-12 08:09:01

You may have "extensive research" but its not "good" research and you are perpetuating every dodgy myth surrounding vaccines going.

As I said previously use pubmed, google scholar, the IOM. All the answers are there but no wonder your doctor wont listen to you if you say you have done your research then start going on about thermisal and nonsense about leaky guts.

radicalsubstitution Fri 14-Dec-12 08:27:10

redkaybee your extensive research is thoroughly flawed.

For all those exercising their 'personal choice' not to vaccinate, please remember that you are mostly protected from the potential harm caused by childhood infectious diseases simply because most people follow the recommended vaccination schedule.

There are children with serious health issues who cannot be vaccinated on schedule. They deserve to be protected by the herd immunity offered by children who have no genuine reason not to be vaccinated.

Some people, however, have no interest in sound scientific evidence regarding vaccines if it does not fit in with their preconceived ideas.

If I released a bogus, crap 'scientific' study saying that extended breastfeeding psychologically damaged children then they would usually be the first to jump up and down and claim it was rubbish. Why, then, put so much faith in Wakefield's utter rubbish.

redkaybee Fri 14-Dec-12 08:31:08

Bruffin it's not nonsense . I came here hoping for intelligent advice on spreading vaccines. Yet I am faced with comments like your last which i would classify as ignorant. I would also go as far as to say the FDA and the house of commons may know a little about thimerosal and it's dangers. Yet this was in vaccines up until 12 years ago and deemed as safe. It was subsequently removed and deemed as dangerous. That's science for you!!

redkaybee Fri 14-Dec-12 08:35:53

And radical substitution thanks for your kind informative non emotional or aggressive words.

bruffin Fri 14-Dec-12 08:39:00

I am really not the one who is being ignorant here. Yes it is complete nonsense. Thermisal was removed because of scaremongering not because it was deemed unsafe, and it made not the slightest difference to the rates of autism and FWIW thermisal was never in MMR. As I said read proper research not the first thing that google throws up.

You were given safe advice about the spread of vaccines from your gp but you chose to ignore it.

redkaybee Fri 14-Dec-12 08:45:06

As stated in my initial post the topic of vaccination is controversial. I was looking for help about SPACING vaccines. I don't see anywhere in any of these posts where I am asking to NOT VACCINATE but if I did it would be MY CHOICE. Herd immunity is a CONCEPT. Leaky gut is real. Thimerosal is also real. Autism is on the increase. The topic of vaccinations is a controversial one. Wakefield provided an examination . There are mothers and fathers who deal with autism on a daily basis for life who claim the change happened after a vaccination. Please stop with the 'one size fits all' mentality and science is 2000% correct. I don't buy it and neither do thousands of other parents. I am looking to protect my child according to her genetic predisposition . And also to do this using nhs vaccines. But spaces out. Any advice on this topic would Be useful.

bruffin Fri 14-Dec-12 08:47:46

There is more thermisol in your breastmilk than there ever was in vaccines.

LeBFG Fri 14-Dec-12 08:55:04

Really odd we can't criticise a public figure on his published works - threads have been deleted about Halvorsen the GP (note not an immunologist).

Vaccines in the olden days had many more antigens in them so even though the 5:1 sounds like an 'assault', it isn't really.

We would all love that our DC were never ill - through vaccines or disease - but we don't have the luxury of choice.

MMR is not linked to autism. To date, given the extensive research out there, this is considered pretty much as fact.

For a thorough account of the Wakefield story I would recommend the wiki entry very highly.

ZuleikaD Fri 14-Dec-12 09:14:29

redkaybee your friend could not possibly have caught flu from her flu vaccine, so let's check our facts, shall we? Flu vaccine is a 'dead' vaccine - it has no live virus in it therefore it is impossible for it to give you flu. It takes 10 days to give you immunity, however, so the straightforward fact is that she caught it from somewhere else.

Also, you're wrong about babies who were premature being given the jabs at the same time as others who were full term. Certainly around here their jabs are given corrected for their adjusted birthdate.

I have no beef with someone wanting to work with their own schedule for their children's vaccinations (as long as they are given eventually) but that decision should be backed up by properly researched facts, not by some random googling.

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