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.

Ho Ho at my phone

Handful my arse. Poor you. No idea what you're talking about.

what are the signs of your child having a mitochondrial disorder?

chibi, they are many and varied, and so it all dpeends. severity is also varied, so if you do google, don't think that all you read means that is all there is to it.

dd2 had her results dismissed twice because they were an "anomaly" - due to her not presenting as previously thought all should... there isnow thought ot be a much wider range of severity than ever before (when the thinking was pretty much severe issues or nothing)

we found out with dd2 due to her being tested for an ever increasing range of htings - she was FTT as a baby, despite an appetite like a horse, and slowly, slowly, all the usual suspects were ruled out (CF, coeliac, heart issues) until all that was left was to do a full analysis)

how awful for you and for your dd2

oh, she's fine and happy, thanks

the tests weren't much fun, but then blood tests for babies never are... (and she doesn't remember it - she was under a year old)

but she's bouncing around the place now - still tiny, and looks (size wise) more like a 2 year old than a 4 year old, but hey, she's just petite!

I haven't had time to read the thread but IMO there is absolutely nothing wrong with vaccinating children against disease. There is, however, a great deal wrong with the way in which health professionals, Health Visitors in particular, feel they can dictate what parents should do but are able only to quote the mantra printed on the propoganda leaflet which does not quote the full story and who are unable to answer any sensible question in relation to immunisation. For example I wanted some information about risk factors relating to babies from families predisposed to asthma/eczema but the HV was unable to answer or even point me towards the information. That's what's wrong and that's why people do not have as much faith in the vaccination programme as they should have. In short don't tell me to do something if you understand very little about it.

This month's BMJ editorial

To quote:
"Clear evidence of falsification of data should now close the door on this damaging vaccine scare"

and

"The Lancet paper has of course been retracted, but for far narrower misconduct than is now apparent. The retraction statement cites the GMC?s findings that the patients were not consecutively referred and the study did not have ethical approval, leaving the door open for those who want to continue to believe that the science, flawed though it always was, still stands. We hope that declaring the paper a fraud will close that door for good"

To add to the GMC findings of unethical condct, this is pretty scathing as well.

Some robust and coherent responses here including the little known fact that Surendra Kumar, the chairman of the GMC trial, has a financial interest in MMR manufacturer GSK.

and a robust and coherent reponse here:

Statement From Dr. Andrew Wakefield: No Fraud. No Hoax. No Profit Motive.

AUSTIN, Texas, Jan. 13, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Dr. Andrew Wakefield issued the following statement today on the recent British Medical Journal articles:

"The British Medical Journal and reporter Brian Deer recently alleged that my 1998 research paper was 'a hoax' and 'an elaborate fraud' and that my motivation was profit.

"I want to make one thing crystal clear for the record ? my research and the serious medical problems found in those children were not a hoax and there was no fraud whatsoever. Nor did I seek to profit from our findings.

"I stand by the Lancet paper's methodology and the results which call for more research into whether environmental triggers cause gastrointestinal disease and developmental regression in children. In fact, despite media reports to the contrary, the results of my research have been duplicated in five other countries (to see citations to studies, visit tinyurl.com/4hrdt5y.)

"It is not unexpected to see poor reporting and misinformation coming from Brian Deer, the lead reporter of the recent BMJ coverage. But to see coverage in other media that cites Deer's shoddy journalism in the BMJ as a final justification to claim there is no link between vaccines and autism is ludicrous. The MMR is only one vaccine of the eleven vaccinations on the pediatric schedule that has been studied for causing developmental problems such as autism. That is fact, not opinion. Any medical professional, government official or journalist who states that the case is closed on whether vaccines cause autism is jumping to conclusions without the research to back it up.

"I continue to fully support more independent research to determine if environmental triggers, including vaccines, are causing autism and other developmental problems. The current rate of autism is 1 in 110 children in the United States and 1 in 64 children in the U.K. My goal has always been and will remain the health and safety of children. Since the Lancet paper, I have lost my job, my career and my country. To claim that my motivation was profit is patently untrue. I will not be deterred - this issue is far too important."

n addition Stata, as you would know if you hadn't run away when the going got tough, there is plenty of other evidence.

This is a moment of desperation. Why isn't this going away? Because parents are seeing and experiencing the evidence, and many doctors are quietly agreeing with them.

the babys great grandfather died after being vaccinated.

a tetanus shot.

Wow this thread has really taken off.

I struggled with the decision to give dd vaccines. I think there may be risks associated with vaccines especially with some children.

However in the end I decided that I'd rather have an autistic child for example than one who had died because of measles, meningitus, mumps or rubella. I wieghed it up and I do believe that the diseases are worse than any potential vaccine damage staistically.

I may be wrong but that is what I feel.

What annoyed me was that some man has been going around telling parents not to vaccinate.This is just as bad as telling people they should vaccinate imo. There should be a balanced argument of pros and cons. I suppose there is freedom of speech.

posh - children do not die from mumps or rubella. More information is definitely needed to help parents make an informed decision. Including information about the diseases themselves.

It is not wrong fir you posh because that is your choice having weighed it up.

For me, having had measles and mumps (as did my siblings and most of my 30 plus cousins) without any problem whatsoever - and having a child who has serious health problems after his vaccinations - the decision not to have them was equally clear.

That really ought to be the end of it.

Telling other parents, aggressively and with some vindictiveness, aren't the actions of pleasant or civilised people

Some man? Well he doesn't do those things so hopefully now you'll wthdraw your ridículos op. Even more ridiculous if that is what you based it on.

As you are liitle more than some rude badly informed person on the on the internet you'll accept there is no reason for anyone to take you seriously at all.

Babies/fetuses are damaged by rubella. Mumps can cause viral meningitis, not a pleasant disease.

I believe that some children are damaged by vaccines, that some parents believe that their children are damaged by vaccines but know that measles, polio meningitis whooping cough, diptheria etc, killed even well fed middle class, breast fed children in the past.

Anyway let's agree to differ. My boys are fully vaccinated and very healthy. I also know unvaccinated children who are healthy too, however I won't have to worry about complications arising from measles etc in future.

posh, if you're talking about Andrew Wakefield then he didn't tell people not to vaccinate- he recommended choosing single measles/mumps/rubella vaccines which were still available at the time. If you want to be annoyed with someone then be annoyed with the government who withdrew single vaccines and took away people's choice at a time when there were concerns about the safety of their only alternative.

Catrimn - yes rubella is dangerous in pregnant women but it is not dangerous in childhood so it is better for a girl to catch it in childhood and be immune for life .

Viral meningitis is not the same as bacterial meningitis. From meningitis uk:

"Although viral meningitis can make you feel very unwell, treatment is usually rest and pain killers and most people tend to make a full recovery within two-weeks without being admittted to hospital."

"n addition Stata, as you would know if you hadn't run away when the going got tough, there is plenty of other evidence."

lol!!! I work full time and have two small kids - I wasn't hiding in fear from the force of your arguments. :)

Look, science is always changing. Just recently evidence came out that DTP in high mortality settings can have greater side effects among girls than previously thought. Should we take this on board - of course! Vaccines AREN'T some holy cow.

However, the best evidence available at the moment (when you look at ALL the evidence and critically appraise it for quality such as in a Cochrane review) is that all the childhood vaccines are safer than the disease that they vaccinate against.

There is no evidence that the single vaccines for MMR are any safer than the combined and the NHS is quite right not to fund it. In the same way, the NHS decided not to fund the chickenpox vaccine. Now there you could have a debate about the pros and cons - not for diseases with high rates of complications.

Just think about the stats. Measles has - at best and most conservatively in developed countries - a case fatality rate of 1/10,000. Say all the 750,000 or so babies are exposed to measles, you'd have AT LEAST 75 children dying of measles annually in the UK. Plus many more left brain damaged, blind, deaf etc. How many children have died from the MMR vaccine?

Every intervention has risks. No doubt. But childhood vaccines are one of the most studied and safest interventions. To imply otherwise is simply medical denialism - exactly the same process that led to Mbeki denying that HIV leads to AIDS.

And if similar shit hadn't blown up in Nigeria over polio, we'd have eliminated polio from the world. How frustrating!!! How many children have needlessly died because of this???

bubbleymummy

I WANT the governemnt to fund chickenpox vaccines. They won't. Too bad, huh? So why should they start funding NON evidence based medicine? Like we have money to throw away???

poshsinglemum

you made the right choice.

If you did have an autistic child, there is zero evidence that it has anything to do with any vaccines you've given.

I'm not a fan of big pharma either. I think they do some pretty unpleasant things and diseases, like malaria, which do kill millions, are neglected in favour of developing cold medicines. But the conspiracy theories are so out there and completely not based in reality.

I always wonder, though, if maybe big pharma might be supporting the anti-vax lot. After all, if polio HAD been eradicated, a helluva lot of sales would have disappeared. Could big pharma have started the rumours in nothern Nigeria? Do you think we'll find some village chief with shares in GSK?

stata - where are you getting the 1 in 10000 figure from? Also, you can't apply a worldwide statistic to the UK without adjusting for better sanitation, nutrition and healthcare.

As I mentioned in an earlier post - vaccines have been labelled as 'safe' before and then have been withdrawn due to safety concerns.

bubblymummy

that's the best and most conservative figure for measles in developed countries (the lower end of the estimate for developed countries - the higher end is 1 in 1,000)

it's much much higher in developinig countries.

Stata, I'm not sure what your reason for vaccinating against CP would be but if you are interested in evidence based medicine then why on earth would you vaccinate against a mild childhood disease? Unless you are one of these people who are terrified of all illness and want to vaccinate against everything?

bubbleymummy

way that I see it, I put my children in the car and drove 200 miles for a holiday by the sea.

was there a risk? sure there was. it was safer to stay home. did we have a great week and was it worth it? yes

same with cp. i know it's a mild disease but it's pretty unpleasant. i also work full-time and my leave is precious to me - i want to enjoy it with my children.

therefore, in order to save my children from an unpleasant 2 weeks, i vaccinated/will vaccinate them. it's worth it for me, even if there is a small element of additional risk to that offset by the very small risk in cp but i understand why the nhs decided not to.

cp isn't measles, diptheria or polio