Measles Outbreak?

[MoaningLisa]

I am sure you have all heard on the news that there has been an outbreak of measles.

Papers, Schools, Hv, Drs are saying if you or your child haven't had the vaccine(s) now would be a good time to get it done.

I cant help but think though that the parents who haven't and wont get their child vaccinated are putting their children at risk.

Aibu to think that its just bloody selfish and very daring to play with their own childs life?

I'm really worried about the outbreak as my DD, at 4 months, is too young to be vaccinated. Not really sure what to do to protect her. I would give her the MMR tomorrow if I could.

Oh my god. Are you a medical expert? If you aren't even close to that, what exactly is fuelling your absolute certainty in the views of the "orthodox" medical community that what they say is the absolute truth? Blind faith? You say the science and the numbers speak the truth but how qualified are you in judging what you read as the truth? Data is data and anyone can utilise data to substantiate their own arguments if they juxtapose the data in the right way. By

If you want to believe that moon was made in six days from green cheese then good for you.

Oh for goodness sakes. Who on Earth believes that?

The difference here is that the bull shit you're spouting is putting peoples lives at risk.

Your self-righteousness is laughable... And you just can't help yourself with the expletives can you?

If you had any evidence you would post it but you can't because there isn't any.

All you can do is instead attack the framework around which the evidence that conflicts with your view is produced - ignoring that that same framework produces everything else in your life - most of which you don't have a problem with.

You have nothing.

I find it ludicrous that some people are so bloody suspicious of vaccines. We should consider ourselves very lucky to have access to free inoculations. Refusing to give children injections is freaking stupid and dangerous.

According to the NHS own figures, the last "outbreak" was a whole 370 ish people out of 60 ish million.

OF those, around 75% had NOT had the vaccine and booster. Meaning of corse that about a quarter had!!

And I think i remember reading that non of those people died, and on average, 1 in 1000 people will be severely ill / possibly die.

So base your decisions on statistics. Its not "bloody selfish" for people to chose what to put in their own children.

They may not have died but they could have been left with serious disabilities. The USA had an outbreak amongst a grwoup of unvaccinated children when an unimmunised person brought it back from Europe, and 9% of those children were hospitalised :(

Any comments on my figures?

Yes I understand that some may have problems arising from the disease, but people should weigh up the stats for themselves before being scaremongered into thinking there is a massive outbreak.

The fact is they havent kept records before the 90's so we are not comparing it to much, and if there really was an outbreak in your area the doctors will call you up and offer you a booster vaccine.

I should say im not "anti vaccine" and i havent read the whole thread, just commenting on this idea that parents are selfish!!! when you chose what you give your children. Parents who send their children to school when ill because they cant be bothered to take a day off are selfish. Kids dont catch diseases from nowhere.

It's you prerogative to make choices for your children, however, I think that on certain things it is a good idea to follow the advice given by people who actually know what they are talking about.

your prerogative obviously.

OP, yes they have increased the risk to their own child's life, and the risk to that of others. It was going to happen sooner or later, as the number of people taking the vaccinations decreases so does 'herd immunity'. The people who didn't get the vac relied on other people getting it (the most selfish part of the whole thing), but there comes a point where herd immunity simply doesn't work any more as the immune percentage is too low.

I doubt it will be the fault of the non-immunisers though (in their eyes anyway )- surely it is the fault of the NHS for not making them/explaining properly to them/making the vacs 'safer'. It sure as hell won't be their fault I'm sure!

Windward, you are not answering my questions. Anyway, you seem to be on a mission to outargue anyone who happens to disagree with you. I'm not even anti-vaccine myself, but I certainly do not think worse of parents who choose not to vaccinate. My point was not to prove that the anti-vaccine camp is right, or that the pro-vaccine camp is wrong, but I think its wrong to censor and not allow any dissenting, unorthodox voices to be heard. People can make up their own decisions about whether they want to vaccinate their children or not, as long as its an informed decision. What I don't wish to see is people being told that its absolutely vital to get their children innoculated and that vaccines are perfectly safe when its still a matter of contention. If you go online and try to read up articles about vaccinations, you get pro and anti vaccine messages everywhere, but even the pro-vaccine medical experts would not go so far as to say that vaccines are absolutely safe. All they will say is that it is their belief that vaccines are perfectly safe. That is all it is. They might have substantiated that belief from their own conclusions from medical data they have come across, but that is just that - a conclusion that is their own opinion. Then you get medical experts who read all the same data and then come to the conclusion and hence belief that vaccinations are not safe. Its unfortunate that the whole fiasco surrounding Andrew Wakeley's research had caused many people to think that the anti-vaccine camp is all hogwash. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater and all that. If you choose to vaccinate, then vaccinate. If you don't, don't. What's so hard to accept about that??

"Yes I understand that some may have problems arising from the disease, but people should weigh up the stats for themselves before being scaremongered into thinking there is a massive outbreak."

1. Vaccination isn't primarily for the bulk of the population (although that's a nice bonus), its to protect those who cannot have the vaccination or are at high risk from the disease. Not getting your child vaccinated probably won't make a great deal of difference if they get rubella - I'm sure they'll probably be fine. However your pregnant neighbour probably won't be...

1. Any risk associated with the MMR is significantly less than the risk from catching these whilst unvaccinated.

1. Vaccination is a public good. I pay a huge amount of tax for services that I will probably never use but that's okay (just!) as I understand that I will benefit in the long run from a safer, fairer community. Likewse I accepted the tiny risk associated with the MMR in the knowledge of the benefit it brought to my community as a whole.

People who refuse vaccination (caveat: without the support of their healthcare professional) are selfish, irresponsible, stupid and crap parents.

"a conclusion that is their own opinion. "

Based on a lot (an awful lot) of evidence.

You have no evidence.

Sorry, meant to say "Andrew Wakefield" instead of "Andrew Wakeley"!

" and that vaccines are perfectly safe"

No health professional would ever say such a thing. There is - as with all medical interventions -a degree of risk. However what we can say is that the (tiny) risk from the MMR outweighs the risk from not having it.

You're taking a much bigger risk every time you take a paracetamol.

It's also the reason why some vaccinations are not given as routine, as the benefit that the vaccination brings may not be worth the risk, the disruption or the cost. Its why we don't vaccinate for Yellow Fever as a matter of routine.

LookToWindward, wouldn't this hypothetical neighbour have already been vaccinated. If not then surely by your argument she deserves what she gets because she is " selfish, irresponsible, stupid and crap"

Nice facts by the way. Please pass them onto the medical experts who have been looking for absolute proof in what until now has been only a statistical likelihood.

Just to be clear where - there is no "contention" about the nature, effectiveness or safety about the vaccinations in the normal UK programme.

There is only the evidence that they work and work well and a tiny group of idiots who don't understand the subject or indeed science in general making some noise.

LookToWindward, exoticfruits and bruffin - you are voices of reason! Good on you for keeping in going in the face of stupidity. I find it too infuriating but thank you in the name of rational thought

the (tiny) risk from the MMR outweighs the risk from not having it.

I suppose that tiny risk is something which some parents are just not willing to take. The risk of serious allergic reactions, long-term seizures, deafness, permanent brain damage, encephalitis. Rare, but it can happen to anyone. Some parents are not happy to take this risk, no matter how rare it is. In the interests of community though, you might say that these parents should still vaccinate their children anyway. This is because their children might get off unscathed by their measles episode, but some other people they infect might not. So an individual's decision should not be based on what they want for themselves, but on what's best for the community. Kind of reminds me of the debate "Is it ever acceptable to kill someone to save a thousand?" Yours is an utilitarian argument.

In other words, let's restate this : Is a person's life worth less than a hundred (or 2 hundred, or 10, or a 1000, etc)?

not happy to take the risk of vaccination, but happy to take the risk of the disease, you mean?

by not taking the risk of mmr these sadly deluded parents are, de facto, exposing their darlings to the risk of measles (and the more parents who copy their behaviour then the greater the chances of actually getting measles so the fact that they proudly advertise their behaviour on the internet demonstrates to me just how stupid they really are!).

They're primarily benefiting their children by vaccinating them but with an additional social benefit for those less fortunate who can't be immunised for genuine medical reasons.

"Some parents are not happy to take this risk, no matter how rare it is. In the interests of community though, you might say that these parents should still vaccinate their children anyway."

And yet I bet the vast majority of these parents would happily give their child calpol even though the risk from the 0.5mg of paracetamol is greater than the risk from the MMR. I bet they would happily drive their kids to school even though this presents a massive risk to life compared to the MMR vaccine.

Vaccination is a civic duty. If you as a parent are not willing to contribute your community in this way then you should not be able to use the fruits of that community - schools, social services etc.

There should be no compulsion but if someone isn't willing to be a member of society then they shouldn't be able to use the benefits.

Yes. Not everyone who catches measles will die. And that's the risk the parents of unvaccinated children are taking.