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.

The NHS was designed origionally as a service for essential medical treatment, it is now beyond this because 'essential' is dependent of whether treatment is available i.e. 30 years ago no ultrasound scans for all pg ladies, fewer c-sections, fewer cancer drugs/operations/ successful maintainance of HIV/ no hip or knee replacements and fewer elderly patients/ less heart disease/ less diabetes etc which have all now become 'essential' and expected services which cost billions each year. Cutting back on non essential things means that the essential services can continue.

Also I would say that measles can be very nasty and end up damaging a child well beyond anything that ASD can present, so parents need to consider that as well.

Okay, take a complication such as ADEM for instance (which is an infection of the lining of the brain). The risk for contracting it from the measles vaccination is far less statistically than from measles itself. It can cause seizures, coma, loss of sight and permanent motor disfunction.
So I would like to know how NOT vaccinating a child prevents something that can also (but less commonly) be caused by a vaccine?

SeniorWrangler Thu 15-Sep-11 23:02:03
"Also I would say that measles can be very nasty and end up damaging a child well beyond anything that ASD can present, so parents need to consider that as well."

I thought you believed there was no link? Why are you presenting a risk-benefit analysis involving ASD when you think there's no link with ASD?

Bimbo the statistics in the area are skewed, to say the least. I think it's hard to trust quite a lot of them. well to be honest we don't even know a lot of the figures because there's so much under reporting and denial so a risk-benefit analysis is utterly pointless.

Cros: if you're interested in NHS stats and cost why don't you look at how much it spends on auto-immune disease these days?

Why don't you look also about education spending on the needs of ASD children?

Why don't you compare them with the figures of thirty years ago?

It's just you seem to be quite interested so it might be worth a glance for you.

But why say its skewed? Who by? Im sure you wouldn't say it was skewed if figures showed vaccines DID cause higher cases of brain damage/disability? Its a cop out to dismiss statistics as being skewed to please your own argument.

I never said there was no link to anything - I said the risk of being damaged was a lot lower than the risks associated with getting one of the diseases concerned, or the risks for certain groups of the population if you end up acting as a carrier.

Well look, you agree with Andrew Wakefield then. He thought there could be a link too. And so do you. Now all we need is some more research and people to start listening to the parents of damaged children instead of calling them whackjobs and nutters.

But what about listening to some of the parents who have children damaged BY the illnesses themselves? Would that make you think twice about your stance?

Epidemeology evidence was used in us law in the omnibus vaccine lawsuits. It was quoted in the judges findings

raises hand mine got immediate breathing difficulties, and then 5 days later was full of a measlesy rash, had a throat swab as he also had 'spots' in his throat. fortunately all his symptoms were put down to 'post viral wheeze\post viral rash' which is odd, as 15mins before having his jabs he was absolutely fine,in fact,the gp (who diagnosed the postviral stuff examined him,fully)

Yes SW but the stats of measles deatha re minimal comapred to a hypothetical (thre is no central data collection system) 1% with ASD, and some of those ASD cases are extremely, life destroyingly, severe.

We separated outs; we already ahve two children with ASD so gave measles but separately. DS4 still ahs ASD it would seem (no DX yet) but I am glad I did, it's quite easy to drive oneself amd with guilt in these situations, with 'what if...' scenarios. DS3 had his jabs very late: due to meical advice as he had a run of illnesses. Then he regressed. I don;t think the MMR caused it, ds1 was 'different' before his jabs, I do wonder if it exaccerbated the mechanisms (from what I know of autism aetiology, enough as I have passed the MA Module with a decent garde, there is no know cure but probably in famillies such as mine a genetic predisposition with an environmental trigger of uncertain cause. there doesn't seem to be anything to say a tiny, tiny subgroup could not have MMR as that trigger but that's ahrdly surprising. We do have autoimmune issues, psoriasis / eczma etc.

Anyway who knows; I made my choices as best I could with the minimum of risk to others but also to my own MH.

He is going to have his MMR at preschool age, which is in a year.

Unlike with ds3 I don't have a voice in my head saying what IF you skipped the jabs / BF him longer (ds4 fed until over 3) / did the DF thing.... I did it. It didn't work (he's not as severe as ds3 though so maybe it did), but I don;t feel it's my fault.

Blueberties as I said earlier the link was disputed in 130 separate scientific studies using random as opposed to hand picked participants. Wakefield was struck off. I have never suggested that I am a doctor nor an expert in your or anyone elses child. I simply questionned how vaccine damage was proved in the case of the child. For example the symptoms of ASD often don't become apparent until toddlerhood, brain damage is not always obvious and can sometimes take years to become apparent and can happen for a variety of reasons i.e. lacking oxygen at birth, serious head injury etc etc etc there are so many. Other viruses and infections can cause septicaemia, undetected meningitis...... I'm not saying the lo didn't suffer vaccine damage, just want to know how they concluded that? Just because something happens close to another event doesn't mean it is the cause. Its like saying that the cat was in the house and made me fall down the stairs when it wasn't actually in the room.

It's incredibly hard to establish whether it's a consequence or a subsequence of vaccination. Efforts would be better spent establishing proper care for any and all children with such problems rather than assuming a conspiracy.

Why do you think it's to please my argument?

You could read back so many threads on here that say = "xyz happened to my kid after vaccination. The doctor said it was a virus at the same time but definitely not the vaccination" (or some such). No report made.

Under-reporting on a massive scale. And when it IS reported - why, the parents are dismissed as whackjobs. Someone like croc thinks a child must suffer anaphylaxis at time of vaccination for damage to be proved (odd, but there we, that's what he or she thinks). I meanm, how can you assess a risk when thousands of people who report damage are dismissed as whackjobs?

Then you've got the dangers of measles and mumps. They seem to have been exaggerrated hugely as soon as a vaccination came along. Hep B - for goodness sake, where's the risk of Hep B to your average baby? And yet it's pushed on new mothers with scare-mongering talk.

SW

I flap and I pased the stats module too. I get stats. I know what there are stats for and not: if the research is out ther I have read it, not from bigoted sites but the University databases.

Parents of Sn kids whose situation came out of the blue flap, of course we do. Many of us at least want the answer to why.

Really? You don't think efforts would be better spent trying to prevent such cases of damage by identifying the vulnerable? That's what AW wanted, after all.

Cap Croc speaks sense.

Sorry couldn't be doing with reading all the hysterical posts regarding vaccinating/not vaccinating. It's late and I have no patience so I'm keeping well out of that.

But to answer the OP where I live (SW London) Men C and MMR are routinely done at 13 months and the others mentioned at 12 months. So yes, the nurse was bu and factually incorrect.

Its not HUGELY exaggerated at all, try looking after someone who has been left brain damaged due to measles and see how hugely exaggerated it is then...thats as offensive as me saying vaccine damaged kids are hugely exaggerated. What was I saying about arguing the toss to suit your own view?

Blueberties, I vaccinate my children. But I completely agree with you that the whackjob comments (well more like the rantings of an overheated mind) were out of line. Logically, I know the risks of the disease are greater than the risks of the vaccine and therefore all else being equal I vaccinate my children. I also realise that this is a controversial (rightly or wrongly) topic, that parents who choose not to vaccinate/not to vaccinae to schedule do not take that decision lightly, and there are people out there who are convinced (again, rightly or wrongly) that vaccines have harmed their child, which is tragic. Therefore I make my decisions based on my decision making processes for my children but do not want to comment on the rights or wrongs of the decisions other parents make. However, when preventable diseases, such as measles, make a comeback, something needs to be done. I don't see any wasy answers.