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.

Do we get to choose what people spend 'our' tax money on then? TBH I can think of better things to object to than a concerned parent deciding to space out her child's vaccines a bit....

TBH I think the NHS have better things to do than waste taxpayers' money getting vaccination schedules wrong and making kids suffer . Having looked into the risk side of things extremely extensively at one point, I was actually impressed at how it all stacked up. I think people should just get on and do them according to the schedule and be grateful the vaccinations are free, tbh.

I still want to see that vax vs unvax cost to the NHS figure.

I really dont understand Milsean.

Surely on average, given one pot, people take out what they, on average put in.

or where does the additional money come from?

I'm not saying I put in mroe than I take out, or the OP, but it is nonsense to say everyone takes out more than they put in. Surely you can see that?

Please please explain

and screw the collateral damage, huh?

well that was meant for wrangler

how pacy we all are tonight

yy

I'm sorry bubbly, shouldn't rise to it but a ? really?

no clue

In terms of statistical population risk, it's better for everyone to be vaccinated than not to be vaccinated. In terms of individual risk, it is more complicated, but a personal view is that it is irresponsible not to take that risk because you may given a disease to a vulnerable person who can't cope with it and for whom it might prove fatal. For example, those people who resist or delay the MMR, think of people like me who have been vaccinated against Rubella multiple times but who fail to build up immunity. Your reluctance to vaccinate your children may result in them having a minor illness at some, but it may kill my next unborn child.

We're all in this together.

Sorry about typing - watching Nicola Horlick on Question Time.

stealth there are not enough tax payers in the UK to pay for everything the nhs offers This is because of an estimated 60ish million people a high proportion do not work i.e. elderly, unemployed, children. The working population is a small part of those who use the services. With advanced treatment in oncology, heart disease, diabetes, asthma to name a few, the money is being streched beyond capacity. Saving on visits is small but if the whole country chose to single vaccinate then the system would not cope. Like someone else said 3 sets of injections would then become quadrupled - do that for every child and the schedule would never be achieved There would simply not be enough appointments per practice and would mean cancelling other clinics.

so are you saying this is just about debt?
I agree the NHS is overstretched, but am I being naive in thinking that public funds are a closed system, with taxpayer money going in and money spent on services (and duck houses) going out, and therefore it is impossible for everyone to be a net user? Or rather it is if the pot's getting artificially inflated - i.e. debt

"we're all in this together" until you have a vaccine damaged child.

then no one comes near you for love nor money (well, actually, money does get oyu somewhere thnakfully)

honestly, do we have to have this debate again? AIBU is not the place for a discussion of this nature (NOT being thread police, but the local fight club is not the place ot try ot engage in reasoned debate)

bollocks. got drawn into a vax thread. off back to sit on my hands again (probably unsuccessfully now I'm here...)

I'm interested in how vaccine damage was proved? Unless there was anaphylaxis at the time reducing oxygen supply, then how can it be proved for example, that a child would not have been autistic if they had not been vaccinated . The risks of getting measles, mumps or rubella while not being immunised pose a far greater risk than the risk of becoming ASD due to being vaccinated or suffering brain damage through vaccination.

well, thankfully you are not my dd's doctor, captaincroc. vaccine damage accepted and noted in her case. well before her asd dx (and vaccine damage does not have to mean asd, as I am sure you know).

captain, I do not participate in vaccine threads usually. However the way to prove it (not commenting on whether these studies have been carried out) would be through epidemiological studies where the causality can be established.
Same as you "prove" smoking causes cancer really.

silverfrog, sorry to read your posts :( and sorry to be flippant in between them.

"oncology, heart disease, diabetes, asthma"

interesting that three out of four of those are auto-immune disease of epidemic proportions

"we're all in this together" is a joke, an absolute joke

"I'm interested in how vaccine damage was proved? Unless there was anaphylaxis at the time reducing oxygen supply, then how can it be proved for example, that a child would not have been autistic if they had not been vaccinated

this is so disgusting I might have to hide the thread myself

You have to assess the risk and be less emotional about it. It feels riskier to have the vaccinations because you are being proactive and making a decision that may change your child's life, but in statistical terms it is less risky than putting your child in a car.

FWIW I have a child damaged most likely by us getting slapped cheek disease while I was pg. Thank God it wasn't rubella - he might have died or be deaf/blind, simply because someone applied emotion rather than logic to the vaccination decision.

But captaincroc most parents will be happy to go with the current schedule without question. For the few who want it slightly different is that a bad thing?

All of ds injections were delayed due to his ongoing chest problems, the mmr was delayed further as at that point the nurse agreed with me that the flu jab was more important at that point. She said that she could have done both at once but agreed to split them as it was best for him

It may have cost the nhs more, but not much more and worth it IMO!

No Stealth tbh you can't use epidemiology - in fact int's been ruled in the US courts you can't use epidemiologity to prove causality in a particular individucal or episode.