Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Measles Outbreak?

1003 replies

MoaningLisa · 27/05/2011 13:56

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?

OP posts:
Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 13:08

Ok now I have to go to Sainsbury's. See you later Silver. Btw somebody pm'd me - I'm sure you know who Shock and Sad

BulletWithAName · 31/05/2011 13:20

Well...having a friend who first got measles and nearly died, only to recover and then get mumps almost straight away after, I think those who don't vaccinate are incredibly selfish. No amount of conspiracy about autism etc will change my mind.

Oh and my friend wasn't vaccinated for a very good reason as he is allergic to egg.

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 13:22

And yet someone else's "anecdote" about an MMR near fatal reaction is dismissed? how hypocritical of you.

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 13:22
onagar · 31/05/2011 14:13

I find the Wakefield thing fascinating. I have no idea if there is a connection between autism and MMR. As a taxpayer I employ doctors/researchers to look into these things for me and to let me know.

What I've seen is one of those researchers (who is paid to do just this) saying that research suggests a possible link. Not proven - he made no such claim. Just the merest indication that there might be a problem caused by the combination of the 3 vaccines. Something to be looked into carefully and perhaps dismissed.

When pressed he insisted they did not know for sure. bruffin showed us the transcript demonstrating that he was trying not to scaremonger. (not sure that was bruffin's intent)
He said it needed investigating before anything definite would be known. Again when pressed he said he leaned towards preferring the individual vaccines in the meantime, but he stressed it was a personal opinion and not an official recommendation.

Now all that looks perfectly fine to me. What was the reaction amongst those in power and those in forums like this?

Roughly speaking it went

"WE HATE YOU"
"you are evil and spreading lies"
"You are hateful and ...and .. and probably gay and communist .. and and... you make me physcially sick.."
"He said all MMR babies will get autism!!!! he did he did I heard him!!"

And that was just the responsible people in government and in the vaccine supply industry. The people in forums got even more incoherent with rage - even those who didn't have a clue what it was about. Especially those who didn't have a clue what it was about.

None of this proves anything about a connection. Sadly we will never know now one way or another because it's blasphemy to talk rationally about it. I liked it better before we replaced science with the mob.

bruffin · 31/05/2011 14:28

Onagar - it was pretty obvious he was trying to scaremonger. He already had a patent for a single vaccine therefore it was in his interest to suggest that single vaccines were safer.

onagar · 31/05/2011 14:31

We read the words bruffin so we know you are making it up. You must feel a fool now for posting it, but really most times people don't read the words and you can get away with it.

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 14:33

It's so obvious he wasn't. And he didn't have a patent for a single vaccine - that's kinda a lie. Well, it's just a lie really.

Onagar: I think you've hit it on the nose. I really don't think it was Bruffin's intent to give such a clear indication to all that AW was measured, mature, restrained and cautious.

But I've certainly seen you write this before: it's not nec'y what AW said - but the reaction to it makes one smell a rat.

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 14:34

"incoherent with rage" that is well put

silverfrog · 31/05/2011 14:35

oh, bruffin - is that the patent that is held by the Royal Free?

the one that is absolutely nothing to do with a single vaccine, but instead transfer factor?

the one that owuld have benefitted Wakefiled, oooh, let m see - absolutely zilch?

silverfrog · 31/05/2011 14:37

oh, btw - you also need ot add in the factt aht before that press conference - all the contributors were asked how they would respond to that queston.

Wakefield said then that he woudl (in his opinion) have to recommend singles. he was the only one to do so.

the question was directed at him deliberately.

he gave the answer he said he woudl give.

exactly what is there to blame the man for?

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 14:41

See this is what happens when people who don't know things shout very loud about the things they don't know much about.

It's annoying. Do cease and desist.

bruffin · 31/05/2011 15:00

In denial again Silverfrog and gooseberry, the patent reverted to wakefield when he left the Royal Free. The patent was for a transfer factor and a vaccine for measles and mmr because apparently a safer one is needed.

patent

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 15:22

And why did he leave the Royal Free?

Why, he was driven out.

So if he hadn't been, it would never have reverted to him.

It wasn't exactly something he asked for Hmm

misleading people again ?

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 15:23

ho ho at a link to the Brian Deer website - are you joking?

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 15:28

Talking about denialism: I'm going to cut and paste a post by someone else because it basically says it all:

The naysayers;

Fail to address that the MMR originally introduced to the UK was known to be unsafe. The vaccine was introduced in the UK in the same month it was withdrawn in Canada.

Fail to address that it is thereby highly unscientific to declare the MMR vaccine to have a sound safety record (although the DoH does so regularly).

Fail to address that they have yet to produce a solid, unflawed study which gets anywhere near even examining Dr Wakefield's findings, let alone challenging them.

Fail to address the fact that the disease documented in children with regressive autism who present gastrointestinal symptoms following vaccination with MMR is extremely similar to conditions such as CDD (childhood disintegrative disorder) - a condition which has been associated with measles encephalitis following wild infection.

Fail to address the documented evidence that the risk for IBD is elevated following atypical infection with mumps, measles and or rubella with close temporal relationship.

Fail to address the documented evidence of highly elevated measles antibodies in affected children - levels which are consistent with presentation of measles encephalitis.

Fail to address that fact that the MMR vaccine is neither necessary nor ethical.

Fail to address that regressive autsim with gastrointestinal symptoms has been consistently shown to be a condition which affects the gut, the brain and the immune system. (i.e. this condition has been consistenly shown not to be psychiatric.)

Fail to address that the incidence of the above syndrome is increasing (i.e. it cannot be a purely genetic phenomenon but must be one which has an environmental element).

Fail to provide any evidenced alternative explanation for what has happened to the children considered to have reacted badly to MMR vaccination (indeed fail to even examine the children in question).

Fail to address the fact that declaring that they know what has not happened to these children (whom they have not examined) whilst remaining entirely ignorant of what has happened to them, is a ridiculous and unscientific position.

Fail to address that the only explanation they have provided on the entire issue can be summed up in one unscientific word - coincidence.

Denialism much?

alistron1 · 31/05/2011 15:29

So, gooseberry are you denying that vaccines work? Wakefield issue aside, why do you think that so many diseases (that we vaccine against) have declined? I am genuinely interested to find out why people are so certain that vaccines are a 'bad thing' when their benefits to humanity as a whole have been so demonstrable.

I find the arguments re diet/sanitation interesting 'cos when disease was rie 100 years ago or so, fatality was no respecter of class. Even people who lived in sanitary conditions and arguably had better quality 'organic' food than we do now still popped their clogs.

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 15:33
Hmm

er...weird question alsitron

no, they work sometimes, the effectiveness wanes, sometimes they don't take, sometimes they also damage people, the risk benefit ratio is unknown

here are some questions for you: what's your response to the papers posted above, including the latest one by silver? do you deny that vaccines cause damage? do you deny that there has been a rise in the rate of autism?

your ref to a hundred years ago is bizarre, absolutely bizarre

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 15:37

just completely bizarre - for example the maternal mortality rate was higher for a long time among wealthier women - the doctor who realised that it was due to infections transferred by doctors died in penury but now it's accepted by everyone that poor hygiene affects birth conditions

and you know seem to know little about the diet of the wealthy one hundred years ago - organic veg my arse. recommended diet for a middle class five year old in a book published one hundred years ago last year included five portions of boiled veg a week, to accompany vast amounts of boiled dumplings, dripping, marmalade, fat and batter.

Gooseberrybushes · 31/05/2011 15:37

organic veg

tigercametotea · 31/05/2011 15:43

People in the olden days associated good health with a high fat diet. They were mistaken, of course. But that could well have been one of the causes of the rich and wealthy falling ill and dying earlier because they are the ones who could afford a diet rich in fats - cream/butter/red meat. Eating an unhealthy diet leads to higher mortality rate no matter what your class.

alistron1 · 31/05/2011 15:46

Why is it a weird question? On this thread people have argued that quarantine alone got rid of smallpox. I've read/heard people espouse the argument that good food is all you need to fight disease and that vaccination has been deleterious to human health.

I'm astounded really that people are still debating this issue. There is NO link between MMR and autism, vaccine programmes have saved countless lives and contributed to a decrease in infant mortality globally.

In countries where vaccines are not available children are still dying.

From WHO

"Launched in 1974, the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) was first designed to deliver vaccines against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, measles and tuberculosis (BCG) Together, these vaccines prevent close to 2.5 million deaths every year"

What's WHO's agenda gooseberry? Are they part of some bad pharma wakefield discrediting conspiracy theory?

alistron1 · 31/05/2011 15:47

And as for the 'organic' food argument, I reckon the wealthy of a 100 years or so ago probably came the closest to the waitrose/farm shop organic that most mumsnetters aspire to!! Locally produced foods, free from chemicals etc...

tigercametotea · 31/05/2011 15:53

Yes but you can eat all the "organic" veg and fruit you want but if you are still gulping down too much saturated fat, it will clog your arteries! For good health its not enough to just eat organic veg. Or have clean surroundings. What about exercise? The rich seemed to employ people to do most of the manual labour for them. Eating too much (especially of the saturated fat variety) and doing too little physical activity can pop your clogs earlier too!

alistron1 · 31/05/2011 15:55

I think keeping on looking at this thread is going to make me pop my clogs - it's bad for my blood pressure Grin

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.