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?

Thanks Bruffin -- at least everyone knows now that didn't before.

I'm surprised, you're normally in the pro-vax brigade.

this is one peer reviewed piece of research

murphy - are you suggesting that all the thousands (and thousands and thousands) of cases of autism diagnosed in the last twenty odd years above the previous average are not real?

so far I've only read the first study - but that suggests that autism was wrongly diagnosed previously as developmental delay - will read to see if the others consider autism as previously diagnosed as something different

so presumably there would have been a drop of thousands (and possibly thousands) of people diagnosed with developmental delay if there are to be no "new" cases?

here

here

here

I think you would do well to note that a great deal of epidemiological research which claimed to prove there was no link was dismissed as not fit for purpose. Not by people like me, but by researchers who claimed to have produced a definitive study on MMR safety. That statement has never been challenged by the scientific community or the original researchers. I'll provide the link and the quote if you're interested.

I am provax it is evidence of what LWW is saying - a load of nonsense - He even admits that they rest of the team didn't agree with his view.

well yes - I just said that

it doesn't make him wrong, especially when the evidence starts to pile up

on what grounds do you call it a load of nonsense?

how extensive is your reading?

I'm still wondering if there is ONE country/state or whatever in the world, just one, that doesn't recommend the MMR? With all this incredibly convincing evidence about how dangerous the MMR is, has any country in the world stopped using it? I've been asking this a few times but it's been ignored. I looked and as far as I can see every single developed country in the world recommends the MMR. Why?

murphy you didn't respond to my question

Truly bruffin, murphy, windward, you should just read the other thread and all its links. If you are truly interested of course.

I'll answer your question GBB if you answer mine.

My answer is that the research seems to say that the true incidence of autism is stable or only slightly increasing. The evidence seems to say that the increase in diagnosed autism is due mostly to improved diagnostic techniques and better surveillance. Or am I misinterpreting the research?

So, now, over to you. Why is it that not one country, state, authority in the world has been convinced by the 'evidence' against the MMR? Surely out of all the countries and states in the world, ONE would have been convinced? They can't all be in on the conspiracy, can they?

the increase in ASD dx is not due to better dx process, or better dx criteria.

this may account for some extra numbers - the extreme high functioning end - where previously the person in question would have been thought to be " a little odd" or "eccentric"

but if you look around the severe end of the spectrum - the 24 hour care, residential placement end. no. there are more children being dx'd with severe autism - and the rise in numbers is exponential.

if it were just down to a better dx process, then you woudl see a corresponding downturn in GDD dx, or SLD, SLI, CDD - any number of different dx's, tbh. but you don't.

there are more childrne like my daughter - severely autistic and likely to need help for the rest of her life - not in a "make a list so you don't forget what you need at the shops" kind of way, but in a "if she isn't reminded to eat she will starve to death" kind of way, or a hundred other things.

there have ever been 1 in 64 children being diagnosed with a severe disability - along the GDD, CDD, SLD lines - and now there are.

the rise is real.

sorry, there have never been 1 in 64...

For gawd's sake!! I've just been reading that thread you linked to GBB. . Are you proud of that??? Sorry, you're a disgrace and I can't believe that you're so brazen as to proudly link to that thread. I'd be hiding my head in shame at what went on there if I were you. Wow, wow. And I thought you were nasty and aggressive on this thread.

It's just reinforced my view that this all the hoo haa about vaccines is firmly based in fantasy and lala land - and actually detracts from any genuine and rational concerns about vaccine safety. What a bunch of loons!!

The Wakefield interview sounds like the sort of answer you get from a politician-a load of waffle. I would have to read it several times to see what he is saying-which I suspect is nothing much!

tbh - go and talk to people who have worked in special schools for 20+ years.

in the late 70s/early 80s, they would see maybe one severely ASD pupil every couple of years.

now, they see several each year - the schools are usually full of severe ASD pupils.

this is not a case of "oh, the dx is X, but the behaviours are the same" - it is that 30 years ago there were not as many peopel around fulfilling the dx criteria for ASD as a primary dx. and now there are.

sure, dx has been tightened up.

but even since the introduction of the concept of the Triad of Impairments, somethign which made the dx more straightforward, the numbers continue to rise exponentially.

tbh -with the whole "oh no, the rates are steady" crap - it just makes you sound like all the posters on AIBU who claim that parents are able to get ASD dx's for their "badly parented" children.

Bruffin, can you point out exactly what you consider to be nonsense in that interview? Or where AW said that MMR causes autism given that when asked that question directly he replied:

"No, the work certainly raises a question mark over MMR vaccine, but it is, there is no proven link as such and we are seeking to establish whether there is a genuine causal association between the MMR and this syndrome or not.". What exactly is wrong with him expressing his opinion that, until further research is carried out, people should use the single vaccines which were available at that time.

Exoticfruit, the case numbers are not really the issue though - it is how dangerous a disease is that concerns people. The fact that the death figures had dropped so much despite there still being so many cases shows that treatment of any potential complications had improved. When the vaccine was introduced, the incidence may have dropped but the death figures did not decrease at the same rate. So even if the vaccine hadn't been introduced, those deaths may have continued to decrease, as they had been doing for years.

That's your opinion silver. But with all due respect I'll put my faith in the 7 peer-reviewed and published articles which showed little or no increase in the true incidence of autism. Is there any reason not to?

er, no murphy.

not jut my opinion.

it is also the opinion of most who have nothign to hide, and no reason to claim the asd rate is lower than it is.

it is a fact that there has been no corresponding downturn in dx of just about anythign that might have been confused with ASD in previous years.

it hasn't happened.

the rates for other dx's, such as SLD, SLI etc are stable.

so are you claiming that all these severely ASD children were just missed, somehow?

The death figures had already decreased long before the vaccine-I would suspect with antibiotics.
I think the case numbers are the issue. Hundreds of thousands of people who died from infectious diseases would be alive with modern medicine.It doesn't mean you want the diseases. My DS would be dead if he had lived 100yrs before he was ill-it still didn't do him any good-that level of antibiotics on a small body can't be good-he is however alive and healthy.

Good grief Murphy, you seem obsessed with something being 'peer reviewed' you do know that doesn't mean something is gospel don't you? Interesting quote from Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet:

"

The mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was any more than a crude means of discovering the acceptability?not the validity?of a new finding. Editors and scientists alike insist on the pivotal importance of peer review. We portray peer review to the public as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong."

I think people should just agree to differ-there seems little common ground.

when mine were growing up there wasn't a measles vaccination and when one of the children got it we all went round for tea in order that they all then got it. same with all the illnesses. provided you care for the child properly when it has measles there is not danger.

Latootle, maybe you should inform the WHO of your findings re measles.

there is an amusing image that I would like to paraphrase, Vaccines work bitches. Seriously they do.

'Good grief Murphy, you seem obsessed with something being 'peer reviewed'

bubbley -
I've mentioned the word 'peer-review' once! Hardly obsessed or maybe it is in your wold, who knows? Well aware of issues with peer review (a la Wakey for ex) as I peer review myself and submit work for peer review but would say necessary but not sufficient for any research to be taken seriously. Better than relying on internet drivel with no quality control at all which seems to be going on here.

Sorry Murphy, I must have mixed you up with someone else. 'peer reviewed' has been mentioned so many times on this thread as if it guarantees that something is true.

I've been popping in and out of this discussion so apologies if these points have been made.

re rise in autism....

as a SEN teacher (not specifically autism) here are some thoughts of why they MAY be a rise.

1 the rise in the survival of very prem babies (autism can be associated with brain damage)
2 the rise in the survival of children with complex medical needs (see above)
3 the labelling/ diagnosing of children who were one thought of as ineducable and put in a home, the Warnock report in the 70s stated that all children should access education
4 The inclusion of children away from special schools into main stream settings may mean children with autism are more visible
5 The change in diagnostic criteria .

Of course they could be a virus like the CMV virus which can damage the brain of the fetus.

Vaccines area a red herring. If there was any REAL evidence of vaccines causing autism someone somewhere in the world would have shown it to be the cause. For thousands of medics to in dozens of countries to be hiding the face that the MMR or any other vaccine causes autism the conspiracy would be huge. IMHO it's a conspiracy theory on par with Diana was murdered by Prince Philip, the Moon landings were fake and George Bush ordered the 9/11 terrorist attack.

It's not vaccines, some children are born with a variety of learning difficulties. Apart from the tiny minority of disabilities which are caused by maternal substance abuse perfectly decent human beings give birth to wonderful children with varying degree of special needs.

It's not fair but it's not vaccines.