What on earth is wrong with vaccinating children ffs?

[poshsinglemum]

I'm sure this has been done before a million times.

A friend of mine who has gone all woo recently isn't vaccinating her dd because some quack gave a lecture on the evils of vaccinating. My ex boyfriends mum was a complete quack/chrystal healer and begged me not to vaccinate against typhoid, encaphalitus, rabies etc when I went to the third world. She gave me a homeopathic kit. Needless to say I got the jabs anyway.

I think that the ''evidence'' not to vaccinate is coming from the woo crew and is fuelled by paranoid conspiracy theories concerning the pharmeceutical industry. I am not completely convinced by the industry myself but I'd rather take a chance on them than my dd getting polio etc.

I just read the MIL thread but I have been meaning to discuss this for ages.

Oh and me? I happen to have a great faith in mothers, and not to believe that in general they are prone to lying and/or hysterical paranoia or exploitation of ill children for financial gain. Perhaps others, like limbo and windward, have a rather sicker view of the world. I will always be grateful to the women who have spoken out about this, from the very first mothers who complained that their children developed asthma and arthritis back in the early days of MMR, to silver, Leonie, Beachcomber, JimJams, Pag. Because there but for the grace of God go so many children, and the sacrifice made is never recognised, simply smeared, denigrated and denied.

Use the words knob, wanker? They are kind. Would you prefer cruel, ignorant, mendacious? I'm revolted by people like statalover, windward and limbo. They are utter goons.

Lady, and yourself. I'm sorry for what happened to your little one.

I say I'm grateful: what I mean is, I wish to God your children had never been hurt in this way.

because they are allergic to ingredients within the vaccination, because in their family there is a history of reaction to vaccinations, because for a very long time in the UK vaccinations contained mercury.

I think anyone who resorts to name calling has lost the argument, whether they are for or against vaccinations.

"mothers who catch rubella - all the more reason to have the vaccine and not the disease."

I disagree - better for the mother to have had rubella as a child so she is immune for life and can protect her unborn child rather than relying on a vaccine that may have worn off by the time she gets pregnant. For the person who mentioned it earlier, rubella is still around. Both my sons have had it. With ds2 we didn't even know he was ill until the rash broke out - the gp diagnosed it. (age 10 months)

Appletrees "People cannot conceive of it, literally, can't imagine that it is all about money, and that's the beginning and end of it."

Never a truer word spoken. IN the case of the japanese children, I'm guessing these polio infections have been going on for some time but nobody has been recording them. It's only now we have the blogosphere that mothers can compare notes with other mothers. Before now, how on earth was a mother to know that her chid wasn't a random, phantom case?
What gets me is, in the Japanese anti-polio campaign, it shouldn't even have to be a campaign. Who TF are they campaigning to ? The very people who should be taking on the job of sorting it out on their behalf???
The mind boggles

I don't think the name calling helps much, either. This could have been a more interesting thread, instead it's gone seriously downhill.

Fwiw my dh is a doctor ( medical oncologist). He didnt understand why vaccines are pushed so aggressively in a society where we have access to clean water, good food, great sanitation and free healthcare. Until he realised the billions of pounds/dollars the vaccine industry is worth.

His boss's wife had a baby around the same time as us. My dh asked him if he was having their dd vaccinated. His boss's words were: there is no way on Gods green earth I'm injecting that crap into my child.

The vaccine industry is probably the most reliable source of income and profit for big pharma because it is never questioned and people just go along with it. It is an industry driven by fear. Why do we still vaccinate against polio? Wasn't the uk declared polio free in the 1970's?

"I thought I had you converted when you said "I guess I'm a sucker for a politely argued evidence-based case"

I can't see any pro vaxxers presenting that around here."

After twenty five pages of posts there hasn't been a single reference to anything that would support the claims of those arguing against vaccination. Nothing.

On the other hand immunisation as a discipline has a history of 200 years of research and development behind it, millions of published research documents and proven benefits. LifeInLimbo has posted a few of them just recently.

Those who argue against immunisation do so from a position of fear and ignorance. They base decisions on anecdotes and dodgy websites rather the evidence.

As I've said earlier those who would argue against vaccination are the same as those who argue dir a literal six day creation. The only difference is that a belief in six day creation isn't going to kill someone.

And before we get the usual idiots, a possible link between vaccination (and specifically the mmr) has been exhaustively researched and investigated and no evidence of a link has ever been found. Ever.

For example (and I tend not to do this because its a waste of time, the usual suspects won't understand this even if they do read the abstract) see link below.

journals.lww.com/co-infectiousdiseases/pages/articleviewer.aspx?year=2007&issue=06000&article=00002&type=abstract

Please note that this is a proper, peer reviewed publication.

mitochondria, I totally agree!

Appletrees,

As ever, you never state where you are coming from? Are you a concerned mother of unvaccinated children, a doctor, a scientist, or merely interested in the issues.

There are a lot of people who say the anti vaccine lobby have done a lot of research before reaching an informed decision. I would like to know what kind of research and what assumptions they have made. If you cannot get access to medical papers or understand statistics in depth, you cannot really do meaningful research. Reading anecdotal evidence on the web is not meaningful. And, if you decide that vaccines DO carry some risk, what risk are you comparing it against. Have you also researched the risks of catching disease and the dangerous sequelae that might follow? You cannot research one side of the equation in isolation.

And, I ask again, what about the selfish angle. Healthy children need to be vaccinated to protect the very young and very weak who cannot be vaccinated.

Can any of the anti-vaccine posters reccomend a anti-vacc book that I can buy from Amazon. I mean an easy to read book that clearly states the anti-vacc argument. I've looked on Amazon and there are so many I don't know where to begin. i don't really want to start looking on the internet as there are so many millions of pages.
There was a book i saw on amazon, that I can't find again called something like, 'what the doctor's don't tell you about vaccines'...or something like that.

Blimey apples you are really going for it aren't you?

I am pro vaccination. Like everybody, I want the best for my children and feel that helping to protect them from diseases that kill, maim and seriously affect their lives is a good thing.

I think that reading peer reviewed papers by experts in the field, who have spent years to get the qualifications and experience to be a specialist in the subject is a good way of getting my information. I have never understood the view that these people are in it for themselves nor do I think that they would compromise their reputation or anybodies health for personal gain - peer review is there for a reason (unfortunate that a certain MMR scare Dr didn't realise this). Personally I think that having such a sceptical view of researchers is rather condescending to those experts and shows an utter lack of understanding of how the scientific community works.

I don't particularly want to get my information from anecdotes and from people with no qualifications/experience in the field. And have seen NOTHING written here or elsewhere that gives any proper scientific evidence to change my mind.

And all this natural immune system/I breastfed stuff - breast feeding works to protect the immune system while you breast feed and for a time afterwards. This was one of reasons why both my children were breastfed. And yes, they may have a natural immune system but not against the diseases they have yet to be exposed to.

mumsgotatum "What your doctor may not tell you about children's vaccinations" by Stephanie Cave & "The truth about vaccines - making the right decision for your child" by Richard Halvorsen are a couple I'd start with, both from Amazon

There's been plenty of name calling on either side and I agree that it's unhelpful. I'm actually pro-vax on the whole. But not for every child under any circumstances.

And if the government were truly concerned with eliminationg these diseases they'd offer choice. Singles for those that need or want them, including a stand alone tetanus. And more flexibility with the immunisation programme.

The calpol research is persuasive but again a tiny sub section so backs up what I am saying really. It's also something that vanished into the ether rather (I was the first one to post that on MN) so need to check out why on EBSCO when I can.

I am neitehr pro nor anti jab, just pro choice but am hugely ooffended by 'I'll think I'll side with the posters citing major peer reviewed scientific studies to argue their (often quite nuanced) point rather than the anti-vaccers on this thread who insist these who disagree with them are knob trolley wanker, smelly closet homo, troll cunt wankers who can fuck off.

I guess I'm a sucker for a politely argued evidence-based case'. FInd where I may have been ride please?

'LookToWindward Mon 17-Jan-11 22:33:35
Presumably those banging on about "vaccine damage" are just as vociferous on warning people about "paracetamol damage" because that's the level of "risk" you're talking about.

AS I said I was the first to post that on MN in fact

Next, please.

The problems with flexibility in the vaccination programme are that there needs to be an evidence base for medicine - and from my understanding, there is no evidence base to suggest that at a population level individual vaccinations give a better health outcome (awaits barrage of abuse but would genuinely be interested in genuine evidence). Actually, the evidence is the opposite. Using individual vaccinations and more flexibility means that fewer children receive all the immunisations and more get them at the wrong time. Although there is already a degree of flexibility - I delayed my second childs MMR as he has a bad head cold.

I agree - there does need to be consideration of the individual child, but in general terms and as far as I am aware, for the population as a whole the benefit lies with a standardised vaccination programme.

Peachy sorry if have hugely offended you, but I dont't think a lot of the info around does give choice.

Completely agree on the whole calpol thing - all medicines have a risk hence the bit of paper that comes with the bottle.

Larus: 'they may have a natural immune system but not against the diseases they have yet to be exposed to.'

What do you mean by a 'natural immune system'?
You don't have immunity to any disease until you are exposed to it. We have some passive immunity from our mothers but then it is only through exposure to things that we develop our immunity to them.

bubbly - was just responding to previous comments and completely agree with what you posted. Can't actually believe I wrote the 'natural' bit as immunity happens in response to a trigger and not in some mysterious way!

Apples, Very interesting post. DS1 was also diagnosed with arthritis at the age of 4.5yrs, and developed asthma around the same time.

I will never believe ALL of us parents who noticed a change - a drastic one in some cases - are "just looking for an excuse/reason"

As parents we can only do what our instincts tell us and I 10000000% wish that I had listened to my instincts and not others when I was having DS1 vaccinated.

Neither of mine have had the swine flu jab.

Quite alright larus! :) I thought maybe you were talking about passive immunity or something... Just wanted to clarify!