To be a bit worried and consider splitting the m m r jabs

[scarednoob]

DD is only 5 months but it is playing on my mind already, as a fair few people have said they won't be vaccinating their babies at all and hinted ominously about doing my research.

I had measles quite badly as a little girl; i wouldn't wish it on anyone. So I am certainly not saying she won't be having the jabs. But from the reading I'm doing, the m m r does seen like a lot to give a little body all in one go.

I was wondering what people thought - is there any benefit to spreading them out? Am I being daft/unreasonable to worry? (I know it would mean going privately; that's not an issue.)

Thanks all!

No, they shouldn't have done any such thing. Legitimising his nonsense by changing a sensible policy to investigate...it didn't need investigating, the man was a fraud and a fool.
The people who panicked and spread this shit should be ashamed of themselves, particularly the media.

my son reacted to the earlier vaccines they investigated and finally said it was most likely a coincidence and because of various illnesses and an administrative error he didnt have his mmr when he should have so we had to do a catch up one then the other a month later i stocked the house with food got childminders on standby got the calpol in and nothing he had no reaction to it at all neither of them he had a slight blip a week later high temp for half a day but he was happy with it! the reality was he coped brilliantly and he has a compromised immune system like me

Go for the singles if your worried. I went for combined after lots of research and my DS had a significant behavioral changes afterwards, it has taken years to undo. It may just be something DS would have went through anyway, but the timing and the idea it might have caused it, has given me years of guilt and heartache.

I did single vaccines instead of the MMR.

I don't think there is much evidence to link the MMR to autism.

However, I based my decision on minimising the risk of vaccines. And there is a risk, but we aren't allowed to talk about it. Especially not on mumsnet.

Here is my theory. Vaccines work by teaching the body to react to a disease. Measles is a fairly serious disease. My instinct tells me that the body will cope better doing this one at a time. It would be unusual for a child to suffer three infectious diseases at once, so why vaccinate them this way. When I did my research, there was a fairy mainstream study that linked immune dysfunction to children having suffered measles and mumps at the same time. That, plus a few others, plus a friend's child whose febrile convulsions after the MMR was enough for me.

I don't give a shiny shit about the nay sayers. I'm the kind of person who is very untrusting of "research", whether formal studies or the anti-vax shit. Too many hidden agendas.

If in doubt I recommend reading "the truth about vaccines" by Richard Halvorson. It's not full of bs, it's full of research and historical facts about vaccines. He has a clinic in London called Baby Jabs which is quite expensive but you can book him just for a consultation if you are worried.

Hmm...on the GCSE science course you have to be able to identify potential issues with bias in sources of evidence. Even my lowest ability pupils could see a link with those two sentences.

I disagree, Ziggy. It's all very well to say that now but nobody had any reason to doubt his credibility as a Dr at that point.

Both the gastro consultant that DS was under and the immunologist who advices us believed it was badly handled and that the government's panic did more harm than good.

It is common for children with autism to start displaying traits around the time they are due to receive the MMR vaccination, around 13-15 months.
The Wakefield research was disproved and thrown out.
Why are you worried?

Why do lay people, parents, think they can have theories about really quite complicated science that they don't know the first thing about? Or do research, by reading a few articles on the internet (because its not like you can either access or understand the actual serious research that has been done)?

may how did you undo the behavioral changes?

Anti-vaxxers are dangerous, selfish fools with an inability to differentiate between science and pseudoscience.

ziggy perhaps it is because the dopey, thick lay people like me see studies and research on all sorts of subjects in conflict with each other and contradicting themselves. Science is constantly changing. Some studies are funded from sources who may have a vested interest in proving something.

I have never been the kind of person who does what I am told. I like to make my own mind up and whilst I may be a mere thicko lay person, I am lucky to be of sufficient intelligence to research matters myself.

Here is my theory.

What are your qualifications rooner? You'll forgive me if I don't immediately discard years of peer reviewed high quality scientific research for your theory.

By way of example, consider saturated fats. For decades they have been demonised. This was based on some flawed post-war studies. Increasing evidence suggests saturated fats are not so problematic. The NHS and the clever medical people who aren't mere lay people are incredibly slow at catching up.

So it's up to all us to make our own informed decisions, based on our own attitude to risk.

My DS did not have his MMR jab as he was due to have it just as the Andrew Wakefield report was first published. I tried to get him the single jabs but the Government put a stop to it before he could get them. We live in a rural area so nowhere near enough to conveniently get the single jabs done privately with the schedule that would have been required.
Fast forward 14 years later and an outbreak of Measles in South Wales. DS is now 16 and I tell him it is his choice whether or not he wishes to have the MMR jab now in view of the outbreak of disease. He reads up on the Wakefield report and decides to have the vaccination.
He was diagnosed with HF ASD at the age of 6 - which clearly has nothing to do with the MMR jab as he had never had it in childhood.

It's not about being thick, its about not being a scientist. How do you research matters yourself? Where do you get the info? What does "science is constantly changing" even mean?

If you don't have a medical or science education, and access to the materials (its not like you can just google this stuff) you can't possibly have done any serious research. Please don't pretend you did.

purple I don't give a shiny shit if you forgive me or not! The OP asked for opinions and I provided mine.

I can't tell you how much the "ooh are you a scientist" comment just amuses me - on which, please see my comment above.

I'm sure it does amuse you. But you could you answer a simple question: where did you access the materials to do your research?

ziggy it's possible, believe it or not, for a lay person to research almost any subject. Pubmed is also a wonderful resource and largely available online.

I certainly don't need a formal qualification to read and understand.

And yes, of course science is constantly changing. It would be foolish to suggest otherwise.

ziggy the problem with attitudes as entrenched as yours is that it prevents open discussion.

That there are risks to any vaccine goes without saying. By shutting down any cries or concerns only fuels mistrust and cynicism.

I am, believe it or not, cautiously pro-vaccine. I know plenty parents who are anti-bad and I believe it is because there is no middle ground discussion to be had. The sides are that entrenched.

The difficulty that Internet information has is that for every paper you find that tells you vaccine are bad there is another one telling you they are good.
The main difference between these papers is peer review. Doctors challenging and testing and retesting each other's results.
There is very little of this with the more alternative points of view.

Mine had the MMR all at once, but came back to get the Dip/Mencoc/HibCwhatevers injection at another time. I didn't split up the MMR, that didn't seem to be practical.

purple I don't give a shiny shit if you forgive me or not!

Didn't you read my post properly? Where did I say I forgave you for anything? I was politely staying that your "theory" based on absolutely nothing credible is of no scientific consequence whatsoever so I wouldn't be changing my view on the safety of the mmr vaccine.

If you say so. You can understand the statistics, and assess the reliability and validity of all the studies, and the medical terminology, to know better than the people who've studied all their careers, without a scientific qualification of any kind?
Sure you can. And I'm the wizard of oz.

purple forgive me. I wouldn't dream of trying to change anyone's mind. I merely serve to provide my opinion, when asked, and bow out gracefully.

We must not question experts. We have neither the ability nor intelligence to do so.

Aye.

BTW, I don't shut down any concerns...from people qualified to give them.

The sheer arrogance of thinking everyones opinion has equal weight, that qualifications and experience are unnecessary.....bet you don't think that if you need neurosurgery, for example? Your neighbour can have a lash on the kitchen table, because she's got pubmed and an opinion.....