To think Andrew Wakefield has blood on his hands for causing so much distrust over the MMR?

[chicaguapa]

That's it really. He's caused so much damage with his stupid little study. It was years ago, he was struck off, the study was discredited, but people still don't get the MMR because of it.

Hang on northernlurker - how do you know whether it's safe before giving the jab? You don't. Until there is some way of identifying those susceptible then surely you either accept the risk to your child and vaccinate or decide you're not prepared to accept that risk and don't vaccinate. I don't see why people should be called names for deciding they're not prepared to accept the risk. Heck I wish I'd thought a bit more about the 'very small' risk we exposed ds1 to. Er.... whoops....

I suspect those who cannot be vaccinated support those who choose not to because they live with the day to day reality of vaccine damage and wouldn't wish that on their worst enemy. And they recognise that vaccinations can be harmful in reality, rather than just theory which many seem to find hard to believe. They're all into 'yes vaccinations can of course cause damage in a small number of cases' until presented with a child who regressed post vaccination when suddenly the parents are delusional.

All 3 of mine suffered very badly after the MMR.

I delayed the booster for that reason.

I don't know if it safe. My eldest was born in the middle of the MMR scare (15 this yr) I had him done. I told myself then that he would survive with autism, maybe not from measles...

Personally I don't know why they had to mess with the vaccination time table that I was given (as a baby small child in the 70's)

healthy children dont die from measles,if they have been pumped full of toxic ingredients such as aborted fetal tissue at the age of 8 weeks,12 weeks and 16 weeks ,then yes maybe,a healthy breastfed(or even formula fed)child,there is a low risk.

Ambersocks can you back up this statement?

By not vaccinating you exchange the small(as in not often occurring) unknown risk that your child might suffer a serious adverse reaction for the larger and known risk that a virulent illness may cause them harm. You don't know that your child will catch such an illness and you don't know that by vaccinating you are subjecting them to harm but one outcome is vastly more likely than the other. There is no such thing as 100% safe/not harmful. But why are parents so inclined to fear the small risk and ignore the huge one?

I went off Brian Deer when I found him making a snide comment online about a mother with an MMR damaged child who had died in a road traffic accident (the snide comment was about her death, all very tasteless).

northern I think its guilt isn't it?

It doesn't matter what the subject.

Once the seed of doubt has been planted, is almost impossible to real confident.

*feel

Brian Deer is not a dodgy character.
Andrew Wakefield is very letigious and has tried to sue Deer before. The judge was very scathing about him in that court case, basically saying that he was misusing the court system to silence his detractors and using delaying tactics. He paid Deers costs in that case. He then left it to the very last minute for the current case in Texas. He didn't stand a chance there because of che anti slapp law, also there is no reason for the jurisdiction of Texas and it has been thrown out there, although he is appealing. He can't sue in the UK because of his previous misuse of the court system. It is much easier to win libel cases in the UK than the US.
The bmj and Deer will have crossed every t and dotted every I when they wrote the last article because they knew exactly the nature of AW and his threats of suing.

Everything Ambersocks has said
Measles itself isn't dangerous. What measles does is weaken the immune system which makes the sufferer vulnerable to separate diseases complications which is what causes the problem....eg pneumonia etc

The healthier a child is to begin (and therefore the healthier their immune system) with the less likely he/she is to have problems. Hence why a healthy breastfed baby will most likely experience measles as a mild disease.

I haven't vaccinated and I am not expecting to rely on herd immunity either. I couldn't breastfeed so I expressed all my milk so DS had the healthiest start he could. I still express 4.5 years later

Northern its because so many seem to think there us a great big conspiracy over it. That for some reason thousands of medical professionals and scientists around the world are in cahoots and presumably all making £££. Utter rubbish.

Really not sure why it is seen as ok to spend a lot of money privately to have single jabs (provided by people who have spotted a gap in the market) but then object to the very small financial payment gp surgeries receive for vaccinating a child.

There are a very small number of children for whom the risk of the vaccination outweighs the risk of the disease. This is sufficient for a lot more people to then decide against vaccination for their child.

Measles respects no-one. The benefit from bf is a degree of immunity from the mother. For many measles is a relatively minor disease, for some its nasty and for some its life changing or life ending.

Brian Deer is not a dodgy character? The parents of the children whose medical records he obtained without consent are pretty pissed off and have been pretty vocal about trying to find out exactly how he got hold of the records.

They were invited to present evidence to the Leveson about exactly that but that was withdrawn a week before they were due to appear.

Its not just extra immunity from the mother, its the perfect diet for a baby and the perfect way of making their own immune systems as strong as it can be. Please don't make me do a massive list.

For some children measles is life threatening, for others it is no worse than a cold. Why is that? The child's own immunity of course. The healthier you are the stronger your immune system, end of.

He didn't get them without consent. He got to see them as part of the original libel case. Nothinge dodge about that. They are also now a matter of public record through the gmc hearing.

I believe that an under 12 who is pregnant has other bigger issues than rubella.

Giving an unnecessary component to half the population seems a very strange strategy.

Could you tell me the proportion of under 12's who do get pregnant please? I've never been able to find a study that is just under twelves rather than under 16's.
It's an interesting statistical issue.

I wonder if statistically, there are more pregnant twelve year olds than children damaged by vaccines, and if its even possible to find out.

But of course, that's not the purpose of this thread.
FWIW I think that Wakefield has done untold damage to the vaccine questioning community (if there is such a thing) as it makes them an easy target.

Er not according to the parents. Maybe they're lying.

babyhammock - measles kills children all over the world every year. What you're actually relying on is an assumption that 1st world health care will protect your child, even when you've chosen not to accept one of the major benefits for him. Lets hope you're right.

my Gran lives opposite a couple who have a son my age (mid 30s) who is severely disabled from vaccine damage

it happened even then for heavens sake

I find the survive with autism posts really ignorant, but maybe you do not have experience of severe or profound autism

Northern I'm not relying on 1st world health care at all. I've done everything I can to ensure that DS has the healthiest immune system possible....As I said I still express milk for him which is really hard but I do it because I think that's best for my child....its called taking responsibility for your own health.

I would never expect someone else to do the same though and would never lecture them on what they should and shouldn't be doing.

'I've done everything I can to ensure that DS has the healthiest immune system possible....' except for vaccinate him.

For natural immunity that is..which is far far better than vaccine aqquired immunity.
FWIW Wakefield had nothing to do with my decision either. My personal opinion is that vaccines compromise the immune system and probably cause a whole host of auto immune responses. Ezcema, asthma, cancers etc etc etc are all caused by the immune system not working as it should.

This was how I weighed up the risk and autism was just a small part of it for me. I don't care if you think I'm wrong, but DS is incredibly bright, healthy and happy and I don't regret my decision for a second.

You do what you think is best and I will do the same.

Same principle to statins... high cholestrol = change your lifestyle

Someone will talk about having an active immune system and not needing vaccinations or some other such bollocks in a minute.