Advanced search

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

MMR or not, and where to go for single vaccs? Lone parent, would love advice

(183 Posts)
missperelman Fri 15-Mar-13 19:49:28

hello, i think i have decided to go for single vaccs for mumps and measles for my one year old daughter. i wondered if anyone knew where was best to go for this in London? the childrens immunisation clinic on harley st? is there cheaper, does anyone know? also, would you not bother with rubella until the child itself is of childbearing age. ??
confused as to which way to go, even to have them at all. but i think i will do mumps and measles separately. aaaargh. confused
lone parent

bruffin Sun 17-Mar-13 11:44:47

Why didn't you say that in the first place.
Its a oft repeated myth that babies immune systems can't cope with vaccines or mmr and they want to put if off until the immune system is stronger.
There are very few reasons for delaying vaccines if your children have them fair enough but you shouldn't be recommending it for no reason.

Bunbaker Sun 17-Mar-13 11:58:49

rosi7 I am not medically qualified to make important decisions about my daughter's health and prefer to talk to medical professionals about whether to have my child vaccinated rather than believe all the scaremongering I can read in the press or on the internet.

I take it you have spent 5 years plus studying medicine so that you can make decisions about your child's health without having to talk to your GP.

Welovegrapes Sun 17-Mar-13 12:16:17

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bruffin Sun 17-Mar-13 12:28:33

There is nothing wrong with questioning. But there are unfortunately there is a glut of misinformation on the web about vaccines. It is pure scaremongering with no evidence to back it up.
There is no evidence whatsoever for the need for single vaccines.

seeker Sun 17-Mar-13 12:30:09

Rubella may be mild for your child, but it may not be mild for the unborn child of the woman who sits next to him on the bus......

WinkyWinkola Sun 17-Mar-13 12:49:12

But then that woman can get the rubella jab as a teen. Just like we all did at school.

And if she's not been brought up in this country, then she can go to her G.P. and get the jab before she gets pg.

I'm not really comfortable with being held responsible for other people's life choices.

The immuno suppressed are another issue, however.

Bunbaker Sun 17-Mar-13 12:50:27

That's an interesting point Winky. Why do boys need the rubella jab if all girls are offered it?

seeker Sun 17-Mar-13 12:51:12

Wow. What a socially responsible attitude. hmm

Flojobunny Sun 17-Mar-13 12:54:41

OP 'makes them a bit sick'. How sick do you think she'll be if she has mumps?
I'm a lone parent and think using that as an reason is ridiculous. If you are that bothered about having no car then why not get one? Simple.

WinkyWinkola Sun 17-Mar-13 12:58:10

I think all of us need to be socially responsible. Including the pregnant woman on the bus who hasn't had the rubella jab. That's her choice. Not mine.

I'm saying this as someone who is pro vax btw. I detest the blaming of some individuals and not others.

And the constant claiming of moral high ground from the self righteous.

It doesn't achieve anything.

And mumps rarely makes children very ill. Adults - terrible illness to get.

bruffin Sun 17-Mar-13 13:18:32

Even if you go with the high ground arguement, there is plenty of reasons for creating herd immunity for those who can't be vaccinated or are immune deficient.
There is no arguement whatever for singles but if you want to pay for them more fool you.
Mumps is not always mild for small children it used to be the leading cause of deafness and does cause encephylitis.

bruffin Sun 17-Mar-13 13:24:02

Even if you don't go with high ground

WinkyWinkola Sun 17-Mar-13 13:24:02

Those side effects of mumps are extremely extremely rare.

bruffin Sun 17-Mar-13 13:29:23

And the side effects of mmr are rarer.

WinkyWinkola Sun 17-Mar-13 13:40:19

Well, we don't actually know how often the side effects of the MMR occur.

It's very difficult to (dis)prove reactions happen as a result of the MMR.

My dcs have had it with only slight temperature 8 hours later. Was this rise in temp definitely due to the MMR? Who knows. I assume it was because of the jab but I can't be sure.

My nephew on the other hand had a convulsion 11 hours after his MMR aged 5. This was dismissed by the G.P. as coincidence.

Who knows?

But we do know that all this certainty about vax etc is quite unfounded at times.

I wonder how many damaged by vaccines - and there is a vaccine damage fund - are regarded as coincidence.

We just don't know enough to be so very sure.

bruffin Sun 17-Mar-13 13:46:09

A febrike convulsion is not a serious side affect i should know my ds has had over 20 of them.
If you look at the iom i linked above there is plenty of evidence about the side effects of mmr. There is actually a greater risk of anaphylaxis from singles. There is also less official reporting of side effects from private doctors who give singles.

bruffin Sun 17-Mar-13 13:50:32

My Dss first febrile convulsion was within weeks of his mmr. Normally febrile convulsions are not the same day from mmr it over a week or so after.

Welovegrapes Sun 17-Mar-13 13:55:25

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

WinkyWinkola Sun 17-Mar-13 14:05:56

Bruffin, the severity of the side effects wasn't my point.

WinkyWinkola Sun 17-Mar-13 14:07:02

Good point grapes. ALL men should get the rubella jab to be socially responsible in that case.

bruffin Sun 17-Mar-13 14:29:32

I dont get your point as you are happy to go with unlicensed singles which have not been tested in the UK.

WinkyWinkola Sun 17-Mar-13 14:38:34

I'm not happy to go with unlicensed singles. Where did you get that from?

Please read my posts.

My dcs have had the MMR.

bruffin Sun 17-Mar-13 14:48:47

Too many Ws i am getting confused with Welovesgrapes.

rosi7 Mon 18-Mar-13 05:51:12

Reading all of these comments - I am again truly amazed how powerfully some people are still defending a dishonest system.

In the end does not matter if a pharmaceutical company lies about the side effects of vaccinations or remedies - and I had clearly stated that it was about a remedy, Catherina, I never claimed it was about a vaccine - the fact that even doctors start fighting against the powers in place shows the we are slowly waking up.

seeker Mon 18-Mar-13 06:04:25

I don't defend a dishonest system. But I do believe that scientists can be and usually are, honest. And that properly peer reviewed scientific papers can usually be trusted. They are certainly more trustworthy than anti science speculative bullshit, like the Chopra thing linked to earlier.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: