AIBU to think non vaccination is child abuse

[alittlevoice]

There was this discussion in another thread and i thought i would make a new thread so it doesn't over taken someone elses

To me not vaccinating your child is akin to child abuse because you are putting them at undue risk of disease which is preventable due to scare mongering or from quack doctors that have long been struck off the medical register and shunned from the medical community

I hate the assumption that because there has been no reported cases it means you shouldn't vaccinate your children it's because children have been vaccinated regularly that there has not been a epidemic

leading doctors (not the quacks) have been worried for some time about the rise of mumps because of the scare mongering and children not getting vaccinated and get seriously Ill and have to be saved by modern medicine (which quack parents are always keen to take up on with there anti vaccination stance)

rubella has a incubation period as many other diseases so if your child has it and you dont know and child is near a pregnant woman and she loses her child due to non immunisation I don't understand how as a parent you'd do that to another person

So the long and short of it is why are some parents touched in the head and think they have the right for there child to possibly kill unborn children and infect younger babies too young to have the choice (and for those saying this is far fetched its as plausible of something going wrong from immunisations)

Any vaccine can have side effects. And it's true that the more modern vaccines are even safer than the older ones.

Take for example, the old pertussis vaccine. Due to negative publicity about side effects, he Japanese Ministry of Health decided to stop using the pertussis vaccine in 1975. In the three years before the vaccine was discontinued, there were 400 cases of pertussis and 10 deaths from pertussis in Japan. In the three years after the pertussis vaccine was discontinued, there were 13,000 cases of pertussis and 113 deaths! It should be noted that although the side effects of the pertussis vaccine were high, children didn't die from pertussis vaccine, they died from pertussis infection. The Japanese Ministry of Health, realizing how costly their error had been, soon reinstituted the use of pertussis vaccine. The children of Japan proved that the benefits of the old pertussis vaccine clearly outweighed the risks. In 1996 a new ("acellular") pertussis vaccine became available. The new "acellular" pertussis vaccine had a much lower risk of severe side effects than the old "whole-cell" vaccine. Therefore, the new pertussis vaccine is safer than the old pertussis vaccine. But because the benefits of the old pertussis vaccine outweighed its risks, it too was safe.

Exactly Edam.

So ds1 had them all, and developed health issues later on- woudl we do the same again? proibably not but my auto immune issues started later (fairly recently in fact but both sisters have early onset athritis).

But with ds3, and ds4, we have a lot more family history to build up a detailed picture of our unique genetic presentation.

I don't feel bad about ds1 at all; I did what I thought was right at the time. DS3 had his MMR of course (I do always give a hollow laugh when people who have seen a child regress post MMra re described as anti vac- er, we gave it no?) but will not have a booster; ds4 singles as far as available.

Notbdecisions palcing otehrs at huge risk but I feel the need to do for my family.

Intrestingly school felt fit to release ds3's non-booster status to the parents of a child with cancer; had parents asked I would probably have asked someone to take ds3 for the booster (though stats on need etc aren't high)- but they were far more understanding as parents coping with a difficult time than most of the parents of fully vaccinated kids. As soon as they relaised this mysterious unvaccinated child (which a booster free child is not in fact) was ds3, the then non verbal, nappy wearing one crying at the back of the class until an SNU place came up- they got it.

Stata - "the vax is a very very safe " - this is the type of thing that actually bothers me. You don't know that it is very very safe. The vaccines that were withdrawn because they contained thiomersal were called 'very very safe', the first MMR introduced into the UK was called 'very very safe', the whooping cough vaccine was 'very very safe' the Oral Polio vaccine was 'very very safe' - do you see where I'm going with this? You don't know what can happen with any vaccine - they all carry risks and some have proven to be more risky than others and with the benefit of hindsight you may not make the decision that you made.

'The groups who can't be vaccinated have been identified'

it's not a statis science.

Genetic mutations, interactions with other diseases etc all change risk factord and a set of tests done years ago does not necessarily reflect all risk now.

Would I feel happier if I could ahve persuaded ANY medical professional to note that ds3 had a post MMR regressions? yes. but if these facts are note ven recorded then how can they be picked up on?

(the whole 'asd typically sets in at MMR age anyway' thing didn;t work for ds3, who had his MMR at 30 months for various reasons and then regressed, just meeting symptom presentation age cut off for asd dx).

If I had a teenage dd, I'd encourage her to have the HPV vaccine, because all the data shows it is very safe, IMO. But I regret being tricked into letting ds have the old baby jabs, the ones that contained thiomersal. Luckily he's fine, but I'm horrified that the NHS wasn't honest about injecting my six week old baby with mercury.

My sister delayed one infant vaccine for her dd - think it was the six, eight and 12 week ones as she knew the ones without thiomersal were about to come in and wanted to wait for them. (She's a nurse, btw.) Ruddy HV at the baby clinic tried to trick her, shoving some paperwork at her and saying it just needed a signature, without explaining it was consent for those jabs. Outrageous.

It's that kind of behaviour, and lack of respect, that destroys trust.

Statalover, have the groups which can't been vaccinated been identified? I haven't seen that anywhere, and I'm interested because of my dc's status.

Yes, LeonieDelt, with us it was initially gut feeling, plus what friends told us. Then it was doing an absolute ton of research, especially dh who is a science nut.

Paraphrasing from a systematic review. (Wraith et al. Vaccination and autoimmune disease: what is the evidence? The Lancet 2003)

Only in a few rare cases has autoimmune pathology been firmly associated with particular vaccine. One example is the 1976-1977 swine flu vaccine - and then you're talking about a risk of about 1 in 100,000. Subsequent swine flu vaccines have shown no association with autoimmune pathology. There is an increased risk on one in one million which is less than the increase associated with severe flu. There is one in 30,000 risk associated with MMR. But this is less than the risk associated with the disease. Only people with a history of immune thrombocytopenic purpura might need to be concerned about this risk.

The possibility of an association between the hepatitis B vaccination and development of multiple sclerosis was first raised in France, after a report of 35 cases o at a hospital in Paris between 1991 and 1997, within 8 weeks of hepatitis B vaccine injection. . Since the initial reports, at least ten studies aimed at defining the significance of such observations have been completed; there was no significant association between hepatitis B
vaccination and the occurrence of multiple sclerosis in any of these studies.

since the introduction of the hepatitis B vaccine into national childhood immunisation schedules in more than 125 countries, it has been used in more than 500 million people and has proved to be among the safest vaccines yet developed.

Over the past few decades, there has been a regular
increase in the incidence of type 1 diabetes in most
countries of the world. That childhood vaccines have been identified as a potential trigger event for this disease is,therefore, not surprising.
This possibility has been assessed in a few epidemiological studies. Results of a case-control study done in Sweden in the mid-1980s did not indicate any great effect of vaccination against tuberculosis, smallpox, tetanus, pertussis, or rubella on risk of diabetes. However, one group has suggested that the timing of vaccination could be of importance, and that certain vaccines?eg, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)?might increase the risk of type 1 diabetes if given at age 2 months
or older. This theory was not confirmed by a 10-year
follow-up study of more than 100 000 Finnish children involved in a clinical trial of the Hib vaccine. In this study, there was no increased risk of diabetes when children who had received four doses of vaccine at age 3, 4, 6, and 14?18 months were compared with those who received only one dose at age 2 years. Furthermore, the risk of diabetes did not differ between children in the latter two cohorts and those in a non-concurrent unvaccinated group. Additionally, findings of a study undertaken in four large health-maintenance organisations in the USA did not suggest an association between administration of routine childhood vaccines and increased risk of type 1 diabetes, irrespective of the timing of Hib or hepatitis B vaccination.
Therefore, at this time, there are no serious
indications of any great effect of childhood vaccines on the occurrence of type 1 diabetes

It is about trust Edam; ds4 having his hib jabs was delayed becuase of a aprent telling me a story similar to that about a nurse at our surgery 'slipping' in an MMR (for a chidd who'd already had it elsewhere but paperwork had nto transferred). I have also encountered in my work a child who had severe reactions to a jab and ended up severely disabled (medically attributed to vaccination damage) after similar.

For me what it comes down to is my right to make my own decision. I work in carer and asd support but would never ever advise on vaccination- would point blank refuse to do so. But for my own children it comes down to Dh and I. And even if I wanted to do so, science-undergrad Dh would absoluely refuse.

You can relax about thimerosal. Amounts were very small and it was in the form of ethylmercury and not methylmecury. Methylmercury makes its way through the food chain in fish, animals and humans. At high levels, it can be toxic to people.Studies comparing ethylmercury and methylmercury suggest that they are processed differently in the human body. Ethylmercury is broken down and excreted much more rapidly than methylmercury. Therefore, ethylmercury (the type of mercury in thimerosal) is much less likely than methylmercury (the type of mercury in the environment) to accumulate in the body and cause harm.

Methylmercury is found in low levels in water, infant formula and breast milk. Although it is clear that large quantities of mercury can damage the nervous system, there is no evidence that the small quantities contained in water, infant formula and breast milk do. An infant who is exclusively breastfed will ingest more than twice the quantity of mercury that was ever contained in vaccines and fifteen times the quantity of mercury contained in the influenza vaccine.

Gut feelings are all very well. I preferred to base my decision making on scientific evidence. But at least you admit that it's all intuition and mumbo-jumbo rather than rigorous scientific enquiry. I know what I prefer but horses for courses I guess.

Well if it doesn't pose a risk Stata then when did they bother to remove it from childhood vaccines?

StataLover, any chance of a link to that Lancet article on vaccines and auto-immune disease, please?

Gut feeling and common sense were the starting point of enquiry for us, but then we did a ton of research.

There are no facts in science, and only fiction when you have the likes of Wakefield just making shit up.

Stata - "the vax is a very very safe " - this is the type of thing that actually bothers me. You don't know that it is very very safe. The vaccines that were withdrawn because they contained thiomersal were called 'very very safe', the first MMR introduced into the UK was called 'very very safe', the whooping cough vaccine was 'very very safe' the Oral Polio vaccine was 'very very safe' - do you see where I'm going with this? You don't know what can happen with any vaccine - they all carry risks and some have proven to be more risky than others and with the benefit of hindsight you may not make the decision that you made

Absolutely bubbly. I agree with that. If new evidence comes out showing that the vaccines is associated with something terrible that was just missed out in all the studies, then of course, I'd not make the same decision. But based on the best available evidence, which is all I can do, vaccines are safe - in the sense that they are safer than the disease they protect against. As things develop, vaccines become safer and safer with less side effects - which is great!

havent read all replies but my view on non vaccinations are:

If a 6yr old was carrying a disease in which could have been prevented and that disease was like chicken pox (cant remember which is like CP that can be dangerous before outbreak) and that child goes near a 1mth old baby who hasnt had injections yet, they could potentially put that babys life in danger by passing on that disease.

I feel that vaccinations should be compulsary not voluntary. I under stand there can be certain side effects from some vaccines but not vaccinating is putting your childs life in danger. Specially with more and more foreign nationalities coming into this country.

Stata - yeah, I know all the claims about the form of mercury used in vaccinations. Funny how they took it out of the baby jabs, isn't it? Some people are less good at transporting heavy metals out of their system than others. All that stuff about ethylmercury might well be true for Baby Average but not for every human individual. Autism researchers suspect that mercury in baby jabs may be the original insult that later triggers problems when the baby encounters something else. (Sorry, forget all the details, ds is now 7 so it's a long time since I was researching this - with the assistance of my colleagues who were expert independent reviews of medical evidence akin to Cochrane - I did have all the research at my fingertips back then.)