To think this nurse was exaggerating the truth...

[Likeaheadlesschicken]

I have just been to take my DD (13 months) for her injections. I very politely requested to have the 12 month boosters on a separate visit to the MMR. The nurse then told me that every other child in the country has their's together. AIBU to think this isnt the case???

In the end she agreed but after trying to make me feel silly and very PFB-ish. I definately don't want to turn this into a MMR/vaccinations debate, I just feel that it should be "my baby my choice" on how things are done (obviously working within the constraints of the NHS) and that it simply isn't true that ALL children have their injections together.

Oh and please don't let me start ranting about Wakefield and his hand picked sample of 12 autistic children with the incidental link to MMR, when all the children obviously would have been vaccinated due to their age and clearly the 18month schedule that used to be was incidentally when autism begins to become more apparent (same age as speech development, playing with others etc!)

I was told last week that the 12 and 13 month injections are now given together. I asked if DD could have them separately and the nurse said there's no reason why not. I might choose this option just because I think it's horrible for a child to be jabbed 3 times in one go, often they barely notice the first one it's the second one that hurts.

Captaincroc - looks like you could use a little visit to the vaccination board too re. Wakefield

Also, their 'little bodies' don't get injected with all those bacteria and viruses everyday. Injections actually bypass quite a few important parts of the immune system so it's not really a good comparison tbh.

"the doctor who 'discovered' the problem with MMR has financial links to a company selling single vaccinces which he chose to hide. you cannot take soone"

Not true.

"18 months that used to be was incidentally when autism begins to become more apparent (same age as speech development, playing with others etc!)"

wouldn't that be 13 months now? or is that just since they changed the schedule?

I'm happy for mine to have them altogether, which they did at 13 months.

So far, of all the injections they have had, they have had no adverse reactions at all, literally a little localised swelling for a couple of hours and that was it. Neither of them even cried, tough little buggers!

The nurse at my surgery said she was very happy to do them in two separate visits. In the end as he didn't seem to even notice the first jab, I went ahead and got all three done at once. I know that is an irrational way to make the decision! It was fine - he had the reaction to the 12 month jabs that night and the MMR reaction a week later. No probs.

Well they're offered all together now. That's the new schedule.

That doesn't mean you have to have them all together.

Her phrasing was poor.

I am a big believer in vaccinations (and have no truck with the anti vaccination nutters school of thought), that said when DD2 went for her jabs (3 injections!!) I insisted she only have 2 and then went back for the third a few weeks later because I think having 3 needles stuck in her in one go is too distressing. The nurse was perfectly undersatnding about this.

as someone previously said. schedule changed due to non attenders for 13 month vaccine a 'clever' way to get people to agree to MMR as they are already in the room or manipulation depending on the way you view it. There are several vaccines you cannot give together. Individual choice. Mine had them split as was the scheduling then and I would keep them split if had another one. You could also say that the more times a young child attends for jabs (only) possibly they will get more worried by surgeries.

There are many more children who develop autism who are not vaccinated and suffer brain damage as a result of contracting the diseases . The Wakefield study was widely discredited by 130 peer reviewed studies which found no link what so ever. Also they were much bigger studies specifically looking for a link, whereas the first study was an incidental finding.

Thanks but I definitely know what's best for my children and I definitely know that you don't. In fact mine are costing a whole lot less than most vaccinated children we know, which is a shame for those children, which I'm sure include yours. I wouldn't really call that a whim healthy and money-saving - who could ask for more?

"There are many more children who develop autism who are not vaccinated and suffer brain damage as a result of contracting the diseases . The Wakefield study was widely discredited by 130 peer reviewed studies which found no link what so ever. Also they were much bigger studies specifically looking for a link, whereas the first study was an incidental finding."

yes I think you're making stuff up now

the 18 months thing is when they first did the MMR, now 12 months. They have found with studies that the overall rate of ASD is no different in the general population with or without MMR but it started to be better diagnosed around the time of MMR as well, so it looked like the rate had increased iyswim.

"they have found"?

uh huh

Croc - I believe you are talking about epidemiological studies which aren't going to be much use in identifying a small group of susceptible children in a huge population. I really didn't want to derail this thread and send it down the well trodden MMR/Wakefield path - it has been discussed in great length on the vaccination board. I would, however, be interested in seeing the figures for those unvaccinated children who suffered brain damage as a result of catching the 'diseases' - which one/ones in particular are you talking about?

DD has just had hers and the nurse said that the national scheme switched earlier in the year from doing them separately to together, though some areas had been offering them together for some time. So clearly the NHS thinks that it is the norm to have them together, but as other posters have said "every other child in the country" would be an exaggeration.

doesn't include mine at all thanks, but whatever.

is just so irritating

what about a few s for the vaccine damaged children

but no, their parents are nutters and don't deserve any s

Your children aren't vaccinated?

Bumbley its far more unlikely a child will suffer complications from a vaccine than they do from measles etc, which isnt uncommon at all.

Mislead, if the NHS is not paid for by people's taxes, what is it paid for by?

Some people pay more some less. For all you know the OP may have had a private midwife and birth not using NHS and she may be a 50% tax payer. I used the VAT as an example as all people will pay that even if they don't pay income tax.

The cost of 2 visits to the nurse at the survey is not going to increase the national debt

Get some perspective and don't mislead the rest of us.