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.

But I also think think the government should have been more sympathetic to parents who were concerned and offered individual vaccinations, instead of decreeing from on high.

But the single jabs are/were unlicensed. They were also not available in the UK.

The clinics that sprang up had to import them, and they were not always imported refrigerated.

Anyone who gave their child single vaccines should have that child tested because you do not know if they have any immunity.

Wakefield not only has blood on his hands because of MMR, he has also caused millions to be spent studying MMR that would otherwise have been spent on other research.

still waiting for an alternative explanation from all you armchair vaccine damage experts.

what has happened to the thousands of children observed to react badly to mmr and then go on to develop intestinal disease and behavioural issues?

imean there are people here who know it wasnt the vaccine (despite the vaccine containing viruses known to be causes of intestinal disease and behavioural issues)

you claim to know what is not wrong with these children (that you have never met) so it is only logical that you have an alternative.

because to claim that you know the parents are wrong but admit that you dont have a clue what the right answer is is arrogant beyond belief.

do you agree with children being denied appropriate medical care? because that is what is happening to children damaged by mmr.

Newmumonline,
You wrote:
'That doesn't compare to UK data I have seen, where largely deaths are due to underlying health conditions in the measles patient, yet they use the words "as a result of the disease itself".'
Well, due to the dramatic fall in measles cases since the introduction of the vaccines there have been very few measles deaths.
If you look at the data from the HPA, which you link to several things are worth noting:

1. In 1949-1958 measles cases rise (on figures for the previous decade), and then remain much the same for the next decade (1959-1968) at about 4 million cases. The deaths however fall, initially by 70% then again by 47% of this already much reduced number. What could have happened? Could the fact that the NHS and the Welfare State were created in 1948. Suddenly you have health care for all, free at the point of use. So deaths, unsurprisingly fall when free health care is available. Note, however that the number of deaths in the decade 1959-1968 were still 865 and cases were over 4 million.

1. Then in 1969-1978 the cases fall dramatically from 4 million to just shy of 1.5 million and the deaths fall too, though the rate of deaths falls by a much smaller amount. What happened to cause this dramatic fall in measles cases? When was the measles vaccine introduced? That'd be 1968, wouldn't it? In the following decade 1979-1988 there was again a drop in measles cases, as the vaccination programme proved effective.

1. In the decade 1989-1998 cases and deaths both fell again, from 837,424 to 106,210. What happenned in 1988? Well, the MMR vaccine was introduced. The deaths in fell from 140 to just 18, though it is worth noting that the death rate remained almost exactly the same (though admittedly, thanks to vaccination, the numbers are getting pretty small by now).

1. In the decade 1999-2008 cases fell again (good old vaccination) to "just" 29,694 cases and a mere eight deaths, which is actually a rise in the death rate but the figures are so low I'd hate to draw any conclusions.

What the figures are going to look like for 2009-2018, I will be interested to see.

I find this oft repeated statement (from certain quarters) that measles deaths occur in those with "underlying medical conditions" really extremely offensive. These are still people. I have family members with "underlying medical conditions", if they die from a preventable disease because people have been misguided into not vaccinating their children then that's OK is it? They've got "underlying medical conditions", but it will still have been the measles that kills them.
Just for your information, in a study done on measles in Europe 2006-2007 (link www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19131097) there were a total of seven deaths. In 2006 there were six deaths, one of which was in an individual taking immune suppressing drugs (as noted on the HPA page), in 2007 there was a single death, this time in an individual with a congenital immune related condition. That leaves five of the seven deaths with no noted underlying condition. These five deaths were: a nine month old male infant, a 20 month old girl, a 23 month old girl, an infant and a two year old.
The same paper has interesting statistics on the vaccination status of those catching measles:
Of the total (12,132) in 2006 94% were either unvaccinated (77%) or incompletely vaccinated (17%). In 2007 97% were either unvaccinated (87%) or incompletely vaccinated (10%). So fully vaccinated individuals accounted for 6% of cases in 2006, and 3% of cases in 2007.
Just some food for thought.
Cheers.

Beachcomber- I don't have an alternative explanation. People whose training and vocation it is to do such things are searching for one. But there have been many studies that show that MMR is not implicated in autism. And only one, flawed one that does.

beachcomber,
Why on earth should I, or anyone else here have to present an alternative explanation for the onset of bowel and behavioural problems?
What we are doing, effectively and with some ease (since the weight of the scientific body of research to date is firmly behind us), is pointing out that the MMR has been studied extensively as relates to this and been shown not to be a causative factor. That is what we are doing.
Research is currently being undertaken into the causes of behavioural problems linked (or not) to bowel disorders and of ASD.
We aren't claiming anything about children we have never met, we are pointing out what the current scientific consensus is.
There is no onus on us to provide an alternative causative agent.
We are not being arrogant, in fact I think the vast majority of us are being overwhelmingly polite and informative. This is despite accusations of arrogance, dismissiveness etc.
Of course I think children should get appropriate medical care, it'd be pretty weird not to want that.
However, the overwhelming evidence (did you check out those papers I linked to for Lottie and the google scholar results) is that the MMR is not causing behavioural problems and gut disorders.
Cheers.

Cases in vaccinated children are likely to be under reported given that doctors are less likely to consider a measles diagnosis in a vaccinated child. Many rule it out as a possibility and diagnose a 'measles-like' illness.

bumbleyummy,
Do you have some evidence to support this suggestion that doctors are failing to diagnose a serious and notifiable disease on the basis of vaccination status? Because I, for one, would like to see it.
Cheers.

Go have a look over on the children's health board. Lots of parents with sick kids who were told, "well, it can't be measles because s/he's been vaccinated". There was a mum whose (unvaccinated) daughter was hospitalised with measles, the vaccinated girl in the next bed with the same symptoms had 'a measles-like virus'.

Ah, bumbleymummy, anecdotes...
Super.
I was actually looking for evidence.
Cheers.

Well what else do you think you're going to get? How many doctors do you think are going to record 'we think its measles but we're not going to diagnose that because they've been vaccinated"

I'm not saying that they are necessarily intentionally not diagnosing it but one of the first questions they will ask is 'are they up to date with their vaccines?' If they are then they assume the position that it is extremely unlikely that it is measles. Otherwise, why even ask if they've been vaccinated? Why not just diagnose/test for it based on symptoms regardless of vaccination status?

"what has happened to the thousands of children observed to react badly to mmr and then go on to develop intestinal disease and behavioural issues?"

Where do you get the information that there are 1000s of children who were perfectly normal then developed intestinal disease and behavioral issues directly as a result. It's just annecdote on the internet. You are just as much an "armchair damage expert"

My son's first febrile convulsion happened within weeks of the mmr, he went on to have 20+ and and had his last one at 13. I could easily connected the two if i wanted something to blame for them. His allergies appeared when he was due for his booster. I have been told in the past by someone on a forum his allergies were due to vaccines again if i was that way of thinking and he had his booster on time it would have been easy to connect.

I said above read the evidence of the medical reports of the gmc hearing, they were not perfectly normal children one day then suddenly became autistic and gut problems.
We dont know that measle causes long term intestinal disease, that was an Andrew Wakefield hypothosis info here
lots more information here on links with crohns disease

Its all very well harping on about those affected by vaccine damage, nobody denies that it happens but severe damage is very rare, then you completely ignore that consequences of the disease themselves.

There are parents on here who have lost their child or have been severely affected by preventable diseases which will come back if we dont vaccinate/

The other side of the vaccine story by SENSE

Encephalitis.org

Mumps and deafness - there were 10 cases deafness attributed to vaccine, [although 6 of those may have been mmr] out of 5.4 million vaccines- before vaccination mumps was the leading cause of deafness.

Bumbley- as a point of information, any doctor who behaves in the way you describe is actually breaking the law- doctors are obliged to report any suspcted (not just confirmed) case of measles to the health authority.

seeker,
Thanks for that, I was just coming here to point out that, Bumbley,

"A doctor who makes the diagnosis (confirmed or suspected) of a notifiable infectious disease is required by statute to notify the Proper Officer of their local authority.
The only circumstances in which notification is not required is when the doctor has reason to believe that a colleague has already notified the case. This is not a voluntary reporting system and there are financial penalties for failing to notify a case of a notifiable infection disease."

So doctors would risk financial penalties for failing to notify a case of measles.
Cheers.

i suppose you armchair experts all know better than Emily Molloy's mother and doctors.

bruffin we all know there are thpusands of cases waiting to be heard. do not deny these choldren's very existence. only the very ignorant still try to do that. even the CDC has stopped denying that these children and their condition exist.

Tell me about Emily Molloy?

Oh, and also, please could you show me where the CDC agrees that there are thousands of vaccine damaged children.

as i say the question is no longer do children lile Emily exist. it is now HOW MANY children like her exist and how can we help them.

this issue is not going to go away. these children exist, in high numbers,they are very sick and society owes them compassion and care.

Well if they don't suspect it's measles because the child has been vaccinated then they aren't breaking that law are they?

wow.

What is so wrong with our education system that people can reach adulthood and still be under the impression that if even B follows event A then event A must somehow be implicated in causing B.

bit tricky to expand just now seeker am posting from phone as in hospital with my dd.

did not say that cdc accept these children are vaccine damaged. i said the cdc no longer denies that a specific group of children exist who have autism and intestinal disease - and that they exist in numbers that are concerning. before the cdc denied the exostence of their conditipn and the number of children affected.

" i said the cdc no longer denies that a specific group of children exist who have autism and intestinal disease - and that they exist in numbers that are concerning. before the cdc denied the exostence of their conditipn and the number of children affected."

I really don't see how this is relevant to the MMR.

I am so sorry you are in hospital with your dd- I hope she's better soon. Might it be a good idea if you hold off posting until you can do so in more detail? At the moment you are making unsubstantiated half statements, and I don't think that is particularly helpful to anyone. I did try googling Emily Molloy so I could inform myself, but I couldn't find anything.

bit tricky to expand just now seeker am posting from phone as in hospital with my dd.

did not say that cdc accept these children are vaccine damaged. i said the cdc no longer denies that a specific group of children exist who have autism and intestinal disease - and that they exist in numbers that are concerning. before the cdc denied the exostence of their conditipn and the number of children affected.

"Well if they don't suspect it's measles because the child has been vaccinated then they aren't breaking that law are they?"

If I had a doctor that incompetent I would not let him anywhere near my child.

seeker,
There is no Emily Molloy* relevant to this debate. There is an Emily Moller (who I can only assume beach is referring to), who was awarded damages by a court. I mean the fact that the HHS didn't actually admit that the vaccine caused the encephalopathy or her autism (and has never concluded in any case that vaccination causes autism) is completely by the by.
Some children do have serious reactions to vaccinations, this is not something anyone at all is denying. The chances of such reactions are public and well known, and also extremely rare. The serious reactions are not accepted to include the development of ASD. The fact remains that the risks inherent in vaccination are hugely outweighed by the benefits.

Cheers.
*Unless beach is for some obscure reason trying to bring an associate designer at Disney into the debate, or a singer from Ontario....

"
"Well if they don't suspect it's measles because the child has been vaccinated then they aren't breaking that law are they?"

If I had a doctor that incompetent I would not let him anywhere near my child."

sorry seeker is moller not molloy.

try huffington post for coverage of parents point of view.

pharma shills will claim is irrelevant,refus