Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To wonder why on earth you would not vaccinate your DCs?

999 replies

olimpia · 04/07/2012 20:49

I hear from another thread that some people choose not to vaccinate their DCs at all and I'm genuinely interested to hear why because I can't think of a single reason not to. I can perhaps understand opting out of the MMR if someone believes the bad press (not that I do) but all the other vaccinations? Why, oh why?
(not a troll! Just relatively new to MN)

OP posts:
bumbleymummy · 05/07/2012 17:25

Some studies show that it only provides protection for a year. The average seems to be around 4 years. That's an awful lot of boosters . Plenty of £££ to be made there.

Krumbum · 05/07/2012 17:30

I have read the thread. I still think its stupid and selfish. If everyone believed herd immunity protected them then no one would be protected!

StarlightWithAsteroid · 05/07/2012 17:33

Vol, it does if the coin had a predisposition for tails, known or unknown.

bumbleymummy · 05/07/2012 17:37

We don't have herd immunity in the UK and there are stil outbreaks if disease in areas that have nearly 100% vaccination coverage. I don't think herd immunity is reliable protection.

Some people have shared their reasons for not vaccinating such as previous history of vaccine damage etc. I think it is incredibly insensitive and rude to call them stupid and selfish.

minceorotherwise · 05/07/2012 17:57

Krum, you read the entire thread, and that's what you got from it?!

JollyBear · 05/07/2012 19:04

Vaccination is never going to be entirely without risk. However the risk of the vaccine is not as great as the risk of serious illness or death from catching measles. Otherwise why would the vaccine be given?

Re Autism. Before the mmr there are documented cases of regression of typically developing children. This is not a new phenomenon.

I can't remember who gave the anecdote about the school with more cases of children with profound Autism. That may be for all sorts of reasons. Closure of other specialist schools, increase in catchment area.

exoticfruits · 05/07/2012 19:05

While I can understand people not vaccinating -I can't imagine why anyone would take children to India or similar without protection.

elizaregina · 05/07/2012 19:08

there was clip on news about measles or something - the mums hadnt vacinated and were shocked by the ferocity of the diesea.

I found it strange they hadnt vacinated but also HADNT done thier rearsch on not vacinating!

CaptainVonTrapp · 05/07/2012 19:10

krum I hope you are up to date with all your boosters (dtp recommended every 10 years) and not relying on herd immunity to protect you cos otherwise you would just be stupid and selfish.

Dillie · 05/07/2012 19:20

I was not vaccinated for mumps, rubella and whooping cough due to a protein that showed up either on my mum or me ... Cant remember which.

As a result I had whooping cough at 6 months that led to compilations with pneumonia and was poorly for a long time, German measles at 7 and mumps at 9 years old.

I remember mumps being particularly nasty and I missed 6 weeks of school.

IMO unless there is a medical reason, all kids should be immunised end of.

My DD is but I know a few of her friends are not as the parents believed the mumbo jumbo on the net and not a medical reason.

Dillie · 05/07/2012 19:22

Meant to add before I had a twitchy finger and hit the enter button ....

I have heavy scaring on my left lung and slightly deaf.

Risks are not worth it

minceorotherwise · 05/07/2012 19:27

Did they tell you what the likely complications of your having the vaccines would have been?

bumbleymummy · 05/07/2012 19:28

Jolly bear, for some children the vaccine carries the greater risk. There is currently no way of knowing if your child is one of them.

JollyBear · 05/07/2012 19:51

Bumble If there is no way of knowing if you are more likely to be at risk then statistically you are still more likely as a member of the general population to have an adverse reaction to an illness than the vaccine.

bumbleymummy · 05/07/2012 19:54

It really depends on which disease you're talking about.

LadyInDisguise · 05/07/2012 20:02

Yes but I still have a few questions re vaccines.

  • Are all the 'side effects' of vaccines actually reported? There seems to be a reluctance from doctors to do so, even more when the 'side effects' are felt in a long term (such as asthma, autism, chron's disease etc...)
  • Negative effects of vaccines are never talked about by GP or nurses before the injection. At most you have a chat about raised temperature. If it was that safe and OK, why not giving the full picture to patients?
So for example, my son was (lightly) allergic to egg. But that this could be an issue with the MMR wasn't mentioned until I raised the issue myself. Cue for a nurse who didn't know what to do, question to be referred to 'consultant' etc... and a decision that was made (saying it was OK) without seeing the px (my son) or doing an allergy test Hmm. In the same way, the fact that some vaccines are made with heavy metal in them isn't mentioned. Why?
  • There doesn't seem to be an agreement on whether improvement on mortality etc... due to these diseases is actually due to vaccination or to improvement on living conditions, diet etc...
  • If the vaccines do not last for life and they need regular top, why is it that there is so much focus to childhood immunizations but not on adult immunization? I mean TB is just as dangerous as a child as an adult.

The issue with the lack of clarity is that it creates distrust.

JollyBear · 05/07/2012 20:10

Bumble Measles for example?

Lady How would improved living conditions prevent someone from getting measles? All the healthy eating and fresh clean water in the world can't prevent known complications.

Also you are given a leaflet which outlines the schedule, possible side effects with information about the government fund for vaccine damage.

CockyPants · 05/07/2012 20:15

Hello
Appreciate that this thread isn't just MMR, but at first we withheld consent for MMR for our DD. We felt using 3 live vaccines all at once in a young child was not safe or desirable. However when she reached 5 we went ahead with jab and now DD fully up to date. Choosing to vaccine or not is a difficult subject, and really is up to parents involved.
Sometimes docs don't always yellow card bad vaccine reactions...so the full facts about safety of any vaccine is unclear.
Almost a matter of conscience, really...risk of vaccine side effects vs risk of child catching disease and being damaged through illness..

bumbleymummy · 05/07/2012 20:17

JollyB, vitamin A deficiency is a known risk factor for measles complications - one of the reasons why it is so deadly in developing countries with poor nutrition. Vitamin A supplements are given in those countries to help prevent complications. so actually having a good diet does make a difference.

JollyBear · 05/07/2012 20:35

There is a difference between being vitamin deficient and 'healthy eating'. Healthy eating in a developed country is unlikey to help in the event of measles exposure if unvaccinated.

CaptainVonTrapp · 05/07/2012 20:45

Healthy eating in a developed country should avoid Vitamin A deficiency which is a recognised risk factor for severe measles.

Why the resistance to the idea that healthy eating contributes to keeping you well?

JollyBear · 05/07/2012 21:31

I'm not resistant to the idea that healthy eating is good for general health. However during a UK measles outbreak being vaccinated is going to be the best protection.

LadyInDisguise · 05/07/2012 21:36

Well I though it was obvious that a good diet would help you fight disease (any disease) much better. From a benign cold to mumps or whatever.

But what I was thinking is more about what happened when they started to introduce vaccination in the general population. Around that time, some countries introduce vaccination and other did it at a later date (a few years difference) but in all countries there was a decrease of these illnesses.
People who are pro-vaccines said 'Look, the vaccines have decrease the occurrence of such and such illness. People are better. We have to continue for the good health of the population'.
People who are against vaccines say 'Look these illnesses decreased in all countries, regardless of whether there was vaccination or not. So vax aren't the reason of the decrease. Better living conditions are'.

Re leaflets, I have never being given a leaflet telling me that X vaccines could lead to my child having x% chances of developing this or that. Actually when the vaccine for tuberculosis (I think) was still a live vaccine, I was never told my child could catch from the vaccine (but was told, I could catch from the stools etc...). None of them mentions using heavy metal in them or anything like this either.
So no I don't believe that as patients, we are being given the full picture of all possible side effects of immunizations.
But we are told on a regular basis how awful parents we are if we don't immunize our dcs.

LadyInDisguise · 05/07/2012 21:40
LadyInDisguise · 05/07/2012 21:42

Also if you read that sort of article on the ethics of big pharmaceutical companies you can wonder how safe their studies are....

Swipe left for the next trending thread