To be really narked with this FB status re vaccinations?

[catgirl1976]

A FB friends has put this as thier FB status

"How can my unvaccinated child be a risk to your vaccinated child is vaccines work?"

He has a history of putting stuff about vaccines, linking them to autism etcf.

DS is 5 months and was sent home form nursery on Tuesday with a rash and they have case of measles. DS has suspected measles so I am a little sensitive.

I have already responded to this status (and I know I should have ignored) saying "You're right vaccines don't work. Small pox got bored and went away. Correlation is causation and Daily Mail scare stories are much better than actual science."

Then someone else commented that an unvaccinated child is not a greater risk than a vaccinated child.

That narked me so I commented that they clearly don't understand how "risk" works.

There are now a few more comments on the "thread" in support of not vaccinating.

Am I irrationally annoyed by this today. Arrgh

I don't see why a parent should have the choice to put their child in a very unsafe position. Just because your a parent does not give you the right to choose if you child gets sick or not, lives or dies. It could only be a positive thing for the CHILDREN if vaccinations were made mandatory, I don't care what the parents think if it is at the expense of young lives. If everyone made this 'choice' then millions of ppl would get ill and die. I don't think that's a risk worth taking.

MrsC, the statement in the OP was about the risk of an unvaccinated child to a vaccinated child. I was just pointing out that there is nothing wrong with what he has said. Although even if your child is vaccinated, they may still contract the disease because vaccines aren't 100% effective but in that case, that particular vaccinated child is just as much a risk to others as a vaccinated one.

Your 9 week old should be protected by your maternal antibodies from measles. The reason we don't vaccinate earlier is because maternal antibodies interfere with the immune response to the vaccine. Although now that most mothers are vaccinated, their antibodies don't last as long as those with immunity from naturally acquiring the disease so there is the possibility that the vaccine will be moved forward.

Going back to what Krum said, I think that every child who has tonsilitis should mandatorily have their tonsils removed. It's selfish not to and will save the NHS millions on ABs in the long term. I think that every person with a grumbling appendix should have that removed too, by law. And that every person who's expecting a disabled baby should be made to have an abortion.

Hang on a minute. Lack of autonomy over our own bodies, that removal of the right to deny medical procedure, that taking from us the freedom we often take for granted in the Uk doesn't look so attractive any more, does it Krum.

"they are designed and scheduled to provide immunity for the period that the baby/child/teen/adult is most at risk of the disease."

Not true Sidge, most vaccines are against diseases in that are actually more risky inadulthood eg mumps, measles, rubella, chickenpox etc...

EmphaticMaybe - yes.

Emphatic, do y know we don't have ( and never have had) the levels of vaccination required for herd immunity in the UK?

For mmr*

Krumbum, vaccines aren't risk free either you know. You are taking a risk to vaccinate too...

Graham you did say you made your decision based on your child being unvaccinated in a largely vaccinated society, you have to admit other people are taking the risks for you.

There sure isn't a high enough level for herd immunity wrt MMR where I live, bumbley. This has been put down by the experts to a higher than average educated, middle class population which decided not to vaccinate.

So, are the anti choicers getting confirmation that their and their DC's jabs worked and are they also getting regularly checked to make sure that they and their DC haven't lost their immunity? Or is it possible that they and their kids are as unimmune as me and mine?

EmphaticMaybe - yes.

It's their choice to take that risk though emphatic. Most people are choosing to vaccinate for their own child's benefit. Why would it matter to you if someone else chose not to take that risk?

Actually, EmphaticMaybe, I didn't say what I based my decisions on, I made it clear that I wasn't being drawn into that one. But, if you want me to "admit" that other people are taking the risks for me then sure, yes.

Your right bumble I don't know the figures but if you don't vaccinate are you happy for everyone else to stop? There is definitely a correlation between the recent outbreaks of measles and uptake of vaccination falling below 80% in some areas.

Graham, they aren't taking risks for you. They are taking their own risk for, what they consider to be, their own benefit.

Emphatic, my decision has nothing to do with others so I don't care what they do. Someone posted something interesting on the vaccinations board about the recent figure - quite a high percentage of the cases were vaccinated. It doesn't guarantee anything.

Recent outbreak - the figures from the HPA showed that...

Surely a non-vaccinated baby is only 'safe' becasue those around him have been vaccinated

He seems like a tool. Hide or delete.

Someone I know once said "There is no WAY I am vaccinating my DD, do you know they put Anti-freeze in them?" My reply was "Do they, or do they put in an ingredient that can also be found in Anti-Freeze?" as she didn't know the answer I was able to rest safe in the knowledge that she was simply spouting DM info ratehr than having done any actual research.

bumble I guess it matters because I vaccinated at the height of the autism scare and have a ASD child. I feel that if your child has legitimate health concerns fair enough, but yes I do feel cross when I don't feel your reasons are legitimate, because I agree there are concerns with vaccines, but I'm taking the risk for those who really can't.

When my late-grandfather was very young and before vaccinations for measles, he contracted it, they turned to mastoids and affected his ears. He spent his entire life with no hearing in one ear, and only 20% in his other. His entire life was affected...non-vaccination is very dangerous and both my kids were vaccinated with a moments hesitation.

The risks of vaccination have not been proven and I agree there could be a risk. Personally I felt it was a risk worth running

I'm in the North west and there have been outbreaks of mumps and measles here - and rubella. It mainly seems to be in high school pupils, which I think correlates with the autism panic. Any pregnant woman in my school has been asked to go and get their immunity checked.

GLad I'm on mat leave, but it does make me concerned for dd - she won't be vaccinated until January; that's a lot of soft play areas and chances to catch one of the three diseases. I had all three diseases as a child and was fine, but I immunise my children because I want them protected and because I think we have a duty to other people to keep the herd protection up.

"Graham, they aren't taking risks for you. They are taking their own risk for, what they consider to be, their own benefit."

That's a very good point Bumbley. And in my PHCT area there's no herd immunity for MMR anyway, it's below the necessary rate, so no-one is taking any risks on that score, perceived or otherwise, for our sakes.

Here's his latest post..........

I'll dig out the papers on risk assessment for small communities to the WHO: a small community accepts no fallout, no death, no side effects and no deformity: a Global risk assessment allows for millions of each and says its ok and worth the risk... I'll also get the details of the Scottish vaccinating gp who was all pro-vaccine til the thimerisol (mercury preservative) gave his daughter autism:
I understand risk very well. Historically, doctors knew what they jabbed kids with... These days they don't.... I trust Natural selection and billions of years of bio-evolution, some don't: I don't judge them for it, nor attack their intelligence, nor gang up on them or buddy up to feel stronger....

The posters on this thread made their positions clear: from emotional hear-say repetition to well reasoned points... Don't speak for each other or try to claim another's voice... It's weak positioning and doesn't look like a good conversation.

I agree with your points xx, I just don't have the trust of big pharma profits that you do: I had mumps vaccine and got mumps, sister had measles vaccine and got measles: ergo, not a experience-less position... It didn't work for my family: stats show dangerous measles complications are worse in the vaccinated: the POST and POINT was on the EFFICACY of vaccines NOT their morality : every one of you made it some crap moral argument of righteousness, intelligence and bad parenting... Very much clouding the matter unnecessarily...

xx, having the vaccine would not have guaranteed your little one would not get measles but now that child is guaranteed to have a stronger immune system...

There was a heartbreaking documentary on this on Panorama or similar recently. Find it on iplayer and send him a link.

Many of my friends (mostly educated intelligent folk) tell me that knowing my family made their decision to vaccinate a whole lot easier. My sister is brain damaged by measles, the whole family has so far had 55 years of shit to deal with and probably a whole load more to come.

Catgirl

I think the thread has been absolutely unanimous that he is a dick and you should block him.
Block him if for no other reason than that the mmr never contained thimerosal.

The rest of the fight on the thread is just the usual moderately upsetting stuff. But everyone agrees you should block him. Posting his stuff is not going to make anyone say 'oh actually you should read his uninvited diatribes'