New MMR study(85 Posts)
Sorry, can't do link, but wanted to post this interesting link FYI:
here's your link
Was literally about to post the same thing!
Gosh, does no-one else have an opinion on this?
I just don't know what to thing flashingnose. My dd is sue to have hers next week. Have done some research and I feel that I'm caught between the devil and a hard place.
My gp has actually advised postponing the mmr for a while as she has molluscum that has become infected- he wants that to go before she has the mmr.
I cry myself to sleep worrying about it. I feel that I could be damned if I do but i could also be damned if I don't.
We have a child in the school where I teach(well off sick now) who has mumps. letters have gone out to all parents advising them to get their kids immunised if they're not. If we were to have an outbreak at school then I could carry that home to dd couldn't I. I had mumps as a child and had no ill effects BUT Dh had it and had meningitis which left him partially sighted and my db had it and it's left him sterile.
So my answer is I don't know what my opinion is on it.
Research,research and even more research needed.
What other research should they do MM?
Would like to state at this point that I have no agenda on this - am very interested in everyone's opinion.
Flashingnose, I do but I really don't want to get into a vaccines debate - a bit exhausted from the breastfeeding one!!
I've never believed there is any link anyway so it's doesn't change my view (my kids are vaccinated with MMR) but I think that those who are not confident about MMR are not going to be swayed. I think the damage has been done and I'm not sure anything will change the minds of those who have decided against it.
I was horrified to hear that this original research that scared all the parents was based on a study of only 12 children!! Careless and irresponsible IMO.
It only takes ONE small study to scare people, but a million large scale studies showing the opposite will still not convince many parents. The damage seems to be done.... and as a result Measles, German Measles and Mumps are making a terrible come back.
Years and years and millions of pounds of NHS time and money wasted trying to eliminate these diseases. Slowly but surely as people choose to not have their children vaccinated that will have counted for nothing much.
Since it's unlikely that parents will believe anything that discounts the link between MMR and Autism..... the government should react appropriately and offer single vaccines. It's not ideal, but it's better than the alternative of no vaccine at all!
NB: Ds had his MMR.... dd will have the MMR next year. I never put any belief in the original study. But I've never been effected by autism, noone in my family suffers. So I can totally understand why other people are so wary.
pixiefish if I were in your shoes I would take your GP's advice. Normally GPs are so gung-ho about the MMR - if s/he thinks that you ought to wait, then s/he must have good reason for advising this.
Why is the dabate on the safety of MMR always reduced to the Wakefield study?
Why does no one put some effort into explain what the cause is for the autism rise rather than only looking at the MMR link. If someone could say x is causing the rise in autis it would do a lot more towards convincing me that it isn't the MMR. And, also, someone needs to convince me why I can't give single jabs (assuming I give them all.)
Research how Autism has evolved and why it's still rising, Flashing nose.
IMO the Wakefield study, has been blown up out of all proportion. I know that sometimes a psychologist can spot the signs of autism in babies under 1 year even tho parents haven't noticed anything.
This study shows that autism is increasing in Japan despite the withdrawal of triple MMR and the introduction of single vaccines. The link proposed by Wakefield and others is with the measles virus which is present in the environment anyway. It remains a theory of autism rather than a proven cause.
uwila, regarding the single jabs. I was wondering if you had found any research that indicates that they are safe. As far as I know there aren't any statistics or studies about the safety of the single jabs. In contrast there is a lot of research on the mmr to indicate that it is basically safe. I can understand the decision to not vaccinate at all, particularly if your family has had a reaction to the mmr or if you are philosophically opposed to vaccinating (though I do personally disagree with this position), however I do not understand the choice of single jabs as a "safer" choice when there is little to no evidence to indicate that they are in fact "safe" or "safer" than the mmr.
By the way, there are many great scientist working on explanations for autism. My parents work in a place that is linked to a children's hospital and does research specifically related to children's diseases etc. Unfortunately, they just haven't come up with any answers and I think that everyone is very wary of publishing anything before they are very very sure about it because of the mmr scare that resulted from Wakefield's study.
i think that jimjams believes, as i do, that if there is a link it would only be responsible for triggering (not causing) a small proportion of autism cases (i think the figure is something like 7%). but the whole big point thing is that the children who's parents feel their autism was triggered by mmr should be studied, not widescale studies that don't prove or disprove anything.
sorry jimjams if i've got that v wrong!!!!!!!!!!
I have decided my sons will not have the MMR and Gobbledigook and Toothache are right when they say some peoples minds will never be changed. No matter what the new research says I don't believe the MMR is safe and would not risk giving it to my children. I can't discount the numerous parents who are 100% convinced the MMR has damaged their child and no Government or pharmaceutical research claiming it is safe will convince me. I just wish the Government hadn't made the single jabs unlicenced then people like me would get their child immunised. (Have paid for single measles but not everyone can afford it)
I do a lot of research as part of my job, and the information that I found just wasn't enough to persuade me that MMR is 100% safe. That and the 2 GP's that told me there was no way on earth they would give it to their own kids - but had to follow the Govt guidelines.
An "off the record" piece of advice was given to me by a GP friend, who said that they believed MMR was safe, but if they had a child they would wait until 18months to give it, when the immune system has fully matured.
Paolosgirl - There isn't any research that shows that paracetamol is 100% safe in pregnancy, but it is assumed to be as its been around for a while and noone has ever shown a dangerous effect of it in moderation.
You can NEVER prove a theory, you can only DISprove one. That was the first thing I was taught at Uni regarding research. You can put a good argument forward and show the probability of something, but can never prove it 100%.
Now that a 'theory' has been planted in the minds of every parent.... it can only be disproven.... but that will never be satisfactory.
For those looking for a study showing that MMR is 100% safe, it will never happen. As with any vaccination, medication, treatment, food etc etc.
Agree whole-heartedly that more research needs to be carried out into just what triggers autism.
I agree with SofiaAmes - there is a lot more research on MMR triple compared to single. The single jabs would be my last option. The choice for me is MMR or nothing.
That's very interesting spongebob (great chat name by the way) because I waited till ds was 17 months and he did great. The time recommended for MMR used to be 12-18 months, why is it meant to be given now by 15 months?
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.