to think it's not terribly helpful to keep referring to parents who haven't MMR'd as "whack jobs"...

[MsGillis]

..or morons, or unfit parents, or up there with people who drink and drive?

I appreciate that people have very strong feelings around the subject, but I think that we need to understand that there are a significant number of parents who didn't/haven't vaccinated, not because they are crystal waving nutjobs, but because they are actually scared shitless and paralysed into indecision?

Surely there are ways and means to communicate information, and arrogantly shouting about how one person is right and anyone who disagrees is all kinds of nobhead is not going to be conducive in opening up reasonable dialogue?

And no, BG I am not discussing my children with you thanks - it's none of your business.

"This! When you've watched your child go from perfectly healthy to fighting for their life as a direct result of a vaccine (allergic reaction in DD's case), you think very carefully about your next steps"

You ever seen Measles in action? Thought not......

You are hiding behind the assumption that the herd immunity will protect you, but it's only patchy in the UK now.

Fucking snake oil sales men/persons, all of them.

As a scientist I am perfectly happy to call people 'whack jobs' if they think that they can make these kinds of calls from being armed with nothing but Google.

A parent who refuses to vaccinate may well be well-educated and intelligent, but even notwithstanding that, unless they have an advanced degree in whatever relevant subfield of immunology, they are not competent to assess research in it.

The idea that any layman's opinion is better than the current best advice devalues true scientific expertise.

It is the promotion of superstition. It is anti-science, anti-knowledge, is dangerous, and deserves to be ridiculed.

Hang on Bobbly I thought that was badgers ...

Come on, FairPhylis, you can sometimes get some good stuff from Google, don't be unfair on the Wack jobs. It is not their fault that they are too fucking thick to interpret the conclusive data from large scale clinical trial, presented to them in layman's terms.

They really aren't making an informed choice; let's not blame Google, it is their intellect, or lack of it, which prevents them from making one....

I was at school with a girl with a really badly disfigured face and one eye because her mother had rubella during pregnancy.

Do we really need to go back to the time when people were severely disabled or killed by preventable diseases to remind us why it's good not to have them?

And as for this nonsense 'I'm a free thinker, not going to be told what to do by government' line, words fail me. Actually, they don't. Grow the fuck up. You're a parent. If you want to live outside society, absolutely fine, that's your prerogative, but don't you dare impose your whackjob nonsense beliefs on children who are unable to override them.

I feel a bit strongly about this topic

FairPhyllis, agree completely. I rely on people with the relevant expertise to keep on fighting and demolishing arguments with no basis.

Badgers are less harmful Feckless.

I am getting angry now, so I am going to leave the thread and go to bed, as I am no use to anyone. Great debate, keep it going...

Fucking snake oil sales men/persons, all of them

They're mostly not knowingly mis-selling. They believe what they're saying.

You are hiding behind the assumption that the herd immunity will protect you, but it's only patchy in the UK now.

I'm not hiding behind anything - I am only too well aware of the risks associated with children not being vaccinated. I watched my daughter go into cardiac arrest because of a vaccine, how would it be responsible of me to give her another dose of that same vaccine?

I am not anti vax, I am a highly trained scientist who values good quality research and who openly acknowledges that in the majority of cases the risk of vax is minute in comparison to the risk of the illnesses. I'm also intelligent enough to know that giving a child a vax to which she has been proven severely allergic is as 'responsible' as giving peanuts to an allergic person!

FairPhyllis - Do you think it was in my DD's interest to be vaccinated against Rubella as a toddler?

As a scientist, of course, you know that (1) Rubella is a very mild disease for children. So mild that most parents miss it in their DC (2) Immunity against rubella is only ever essential when pregnant, and that (3) Having it confers lifetime immunity whereas vaccine immunity can wane or in some cases not even work.

I'm not a whack job. I am not armed with Google. I am armed with logic. And logic says that my DD's interests are best served by hoping she gets Rubella until she is of childbearing age, testing & if necessary vaccinating her at that point. And my DS' interests are best served by not being vaccinated unnecessarily.

Maybe now you want to launch into a monologue on social responsibility, herd immunity, etc but then you are not talking as a scientist anymore, are you?

shouldkeep would she accept advice from homeopaths who support vaccination?

"The British Homeopathic Association and Faculty of Homeopathy said they would do so. "There is no evidence to suggest homeopathic vaccinations can protect against contagious diseases. We recommend people seek out the conventional treatments," a spokesman said.

"I don't know where the parents in Totnes are getting their information from ? it certainly is not us. There is no legal regulation of homeopathy in the UK and anyone can set themselves up as an expert. It is those people who tend to give us a bad name."

Philip Edmonds, chairman of the Society of Homeopaths said: "The Society does not endorse the use of homeopathic medicines as an alternative to vaccination for the prevention of serious infectious diseases and recommends that members of the public seek the advice of their GP, and/or relevant Department of Health guidelines, concerning vaccination and protection against disease."

m.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/apr/15/homeopathy-measles-mp

Whilst some parents who did not vaccinate their children deserve the description 'whack jobs' (Hm. I wonder where that term comes from? Anyone know?), so do some parents who did vaccinate.

Most parents who did not vaccinate did so through fear. Because they didn't know who to trust, and the bastard press were pushing the Wakefield line. And although I do believe that these fearful parents have had years to correct the situation, they're still not whack jobs, just fallible. As we all are.

"You ever seen Measles in action? "

Well, I have. I've had it twice. Once as a baby, then as an 8 year old. It wasn't fun but neither was it worrying at any point.

Anyway, DC have had single measles vaccines.

"Oh no, not Homeopaths! Hunt them down and kill them for the greater good..."

No need. Just send them all into an area where polio is still endemic.....
.

I need to leave this thread now, because I am a bit pissed and angry, and I need to get up for work tomorrow.

I don't know you Lottie, so anything you post about your children, to back up your argument, will remain anonymous and, therefore, non of my business. You didn't give a valid reason, remember, so I am not really sure what it is that you think you are contributing to the thread. We heard from PurpleFluffyDice, and no-one seemed to have an argument with her, so I think people on this thread are receptive to valid medical reasons against vaccination.

Hello

We do know that this is a very heated topic for lots of posters, but please remember our Talk Guidelines, especially those about personal attacks. Attacking an argument is fine; attacking another poster is not.

thanks noble - i'll keep that in my back pocket incase there is talk of 'alternative vaccinations'.

"You ever seen Measles in action? "
Me... I was examining myself for spots in the hope of a day off school (sunday night in the bath...remember it quite clearly) and I was covered! It was measles. Spent a week with curtains drawn (eyes quite sensitive to light) feeling mildly poorly and making soap sculptures and watching tv.

It's the fact that some kids can't be innoculated due to allergies/surpressed immune function that makes it so important that the ones that can have the jab do have it so as to minimise the chances of the vunerable minority getting the disease ... It's the adults who put their half-baked theories above the health of their own and other peoples children that really get my goat!

I'm off to argue about string theory with the cats now ...

Quite, feckless.

'I don't know you Lottie, so anything you post about your children, to back up your argument, will remain anonymous and, therefore, non of my business. You didn't give a valid reason, remember, so I am not really sure what it is that you think you are contributing to the thread.'

So, let me get this straight - you are asking me to explain and justify myself to you? Why should I? when so many people on this thread are posting in a way which comes across as nasty and aggressive.

Do not tell me that in order to have a valid opinion I have to ask you first to assess whether my opinion is valid or not. You can't tell me not to post on here because I won't discuss my children on this thread.

My children are real people - I will not use them in arguments for point scoring.

In any case, I am not trying to convince anyone not to vaccinate and I view vaccination as a good thing, generally.

What I take issue with is a one size fits all approach to vaccination. Because one size doesn't fit all.

"Measles in Action"

is a good name for a band