Mumsnet hasn't checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have medical concerns, please seek medical attention; if you think your problem could be acute, do so immediately. Even qualified doctors can't diagnose over the internet, so do bear that in mind when seeking or giving advice.
My DS is about due for his MMR and I'm still really concerned about it and at the moment don't want him to have it (until he's older at least). Things like the autism rates going up so much since it was introduced, allot of regressive autism cases happening about the time of the jab, Tony Blair not giving it to his kid etc that are the causing for concern for me. Also, have read things written by people who believe their babies have been damaged by it and that sticks in my head. I know that the people that started the scare had ulterior motives etc.
Would be really interested to know of other mums reasoning for having it/not having it and any advice if possible. Thanks.
I did with ds and will with dd. We had no family history of reactions or other complications. THe risks of measles, mumps and rubella were enough to convince me. Yet another measles outbreak at our local nursery though
I know but I've never heard this before. Is this the Sunday Times stuff Brian Deer or whatever he's called, because some potential intellectual property was protected (but never developed). I just can't understand the ulterior motives of a gastroenterologist reporting a new conditon that he's found. He was a prolific author before all this, especially for a clinician.
But you're right, I am on a vax thread although please note I have not said what I have done or why I have done it!
I did give it to all mine. I do worry about the scare stories, but TBH they have different scare stories in different countries - in Germany for example lots of people think that the MMR stops the child's immune system from developing properly (and the vax rates are dropping considerably) but nobody has ever heard of the autism scare, which makes it all seem like rubbish (to me anyway).
In the end I personally accepted that vaccinating carried a risk but was outweighed by the benefits.
yes, I did give it to dd1. I read the research (and lots of things posted on here) and came to the conclusion that for us the risks of catching the diseases far outweighed any risks inherent in vaccination.
Also, there are people with whom I come into contact for whom catching measles would be very very serious and possibly fatal. So I didn't feel I could take that risk.
DS1 had it at 20m because until then he was having massive temp spikes every couple of weeks (temps of 41) and I wasn't happy about him having the MMR until he was "cooler"!
DS2 will have it when I think he's ready for it - might be earlier than 20m, might be the same time, might be later. But he will have it.
They both had the earlier imms - DS1 was shaky and pasty after the first lot, so I delayed the second and third for a month or two, but DS2 has been fine with both lots he's had so will have the third lot at 17w.
(pulls up a chair and rubs hands together)
ahem....both my ds's reacted to their first immunisations-so all their vax were done by a very nice,sympathetic immunologist.They were all broken up into smaller doses and spread out.Ds1 was about 4 before he had them all.He was then given seperate m,m and r.
When it came for time for ds2 to have mmmr ( about 2) immunologist just couldn't get hold of them.Every way of getting them had been blocked.
He offered to administer them if we could get hold of them privately, but we couldn't.
We could have gone to a clinic and had them done seperately but we wanted the continuity of care offered by our dr.after much nashing of teeth and wringing of hands, we gave him mmr.Luckily he was ok.Still don't know what we are going to do when it comes to booster time.(ds1 didn't have the booster and will have to have blood tests to check his immunity when he is 9)
Ds1 and ds2 both had the MMR. Both are autistic but this was nothing to do with the MMR.
The main concern I had about giving the MMR to ds1 was that he had reacted badly to the DTP imms he was given and stopped breathing. He was given the first MMR while being observed/monitored at the childrens assessment unit and luckily had no reaction at all.
Thanks for all your feedeback. Alexsmum - i'm intrigued to hear that there is such thing as an 'immunologist' - maybe I will find and consult with one of these.
Jimjamskeepingoffvaxthreads - The ulterior motives I mentioned were that (and so I've read and been told by HV) the people who contributed to the research would profit from the sale of single jabs through patents.
It's such a horrible decision to make. Why couldn't they just keep the single jabs in the first place? Cost cutting in this area of medical care is just plain unethical! I know me and DP are going to have a hellish time making this decision and if I do go against my instincts and get it done I will be so paranoid about it damaging him.
Has anyone just opted for just the measels jab alone?
cheesypeas it's not all about cost with the single vaccs there's a lot more to it. Personally I wouldn't even entertain the idea of single jabs but that's just my opinion. I can understand why it's a very difficult and emotive time for some parents.
why would you think the separate vaccinations are better? just wondering
both mine had the MMR and both had reactions - dd got a sort of measles like rash and temp and ds got a mumps like reaction. Both were around 10-14 days later. Dd had an egg allergy but her paediatrician was absolutely adamant that it was fine for her to have it done by the nurse at the GP surgery so we did and she was fine. Both mine had mild reactions to the earlier vaccinations aswell (high temp, rash etc.).
I personally didn't find it a hard decision to give them the vaccinations. I spent a lot of my youth around Africa so I've seen these diseases wipe people out and seen what a benefit vaccinations programmes can do. Obviously, if there were immune disorder problems that ran in my family, I would have been more concerned and would have got specialist advice.
Hi foxinsocks - I liked the fact that the single jabs have been around for much, much longer and the fact that they were administered more gradually (possibly at an older age but I'm not sure).
Some babies having to be monitored and observed when they are administered and having reactions...It's the idea of injecting my baby with something so potent and then watching him, fingers crossed, to see if he will be OK. If medical proffessionals could stamp it with a lable saying '100% safe' then great, but they wont so therefore I feel like I'm taking a gamble.