Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

147 replies

scarednoob · 15/02/2016 19:07

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!

OP posts:
ollieplimsoles · 15/02/2016 22:17

I don't believe shutting down cries or concerns is a good thing either. I think people should be allowed to discuss concerns over vaccines. But they should go to medical professionals, not to google.

By the time she got to a doctor, my neighbour's mind had already been made up, she wasn't vaccinating. When the doc tried to reason my neighbour said he was apparently 'just repeating what he had been told at uni'

If you don't want to vaccinate fine but don't go around telling concerned parents that life threatening diseases can be prevented with homeopathic treatments- they fucking can't.

Roonerspism · 15/02/2016 22:17

Yes ziggy believe me, I can! Aren't I the lucky one.

It's actually not too hard. What's really hard is separating the good stuff from the bad stuff. The studies paid for by less than independent sources. The studies that conflict and why that might be so.

ollieplimsoles · 15/02/2016 22:18

Shit ziggy your last post was tremendous, where were you when I was up all night worrying...

poppiesanddaisies · 15/02/2016 22:19

Does anybody know why you can't get single vaccinations now? Confused

Roonerspism · 15/02/2016 22:20

ziggy you are being a little silly now.

Tell you what. You carry on taking as you are. I am too busy setting up a home operating theatre on the back of Google research.

Roonerspism · 15/02/2016 22:21

poppies it is basically to prevent parents accessing single vaccines. Rubella and mumps are both unavailable.

poppiesanddaisies · 15/02/2016 22:22

But why, Rooner - does anybody know?

ZiggyFartdust · 15/02/2016 22:22

Rooner, if you think all the material you need is on pubmed, you haven't even understood what you need to be reading, let alone what you are reading.
I'm all for open source intelligence but it does lead to people thinking they can be experts in anything, which is dangerous.

ScrimshawTheSecond · 15/02/2016 22:23

One should always listen to what clever people say, especially the ones who insist how much cleverer they are.

Roonerspism · 15/02/2016 22:24

Yes - it is to force an increase in the uptake of the MMR. I guess the theory is that parents will be too scared to leave their kids unvaccinated against rubella and mumps and therefore the MMR will become the only viable option.

I would like to see a breakdown of vaccination choices by socio-economic group.

poppiesanddaisies · 15/02/2016 22:25

Isn't it more likely to lead to non vaccinated children full stop? I don't want a row on here but I do have reservations about MMR (for good reason, not just vague readings) and this has startled me a bit to be honest.

ZiggyFartdust · 15/02/2016 22:27

Well of course it is to force an increase in the uptake of MMR, as too many people have "done their research" and think such nonsense as all the diseases have been eradicated, or that mmr causes autism, or that big pharma is out to get us all, or any other daft notion.
We shouldn't need to force an increase, but sadly we do.

OwlinaTree · 15/02/2016 22:27

Surely there a single rubella? Aren't girls given that at 11 anymore?

midnightmoomoo · 15/02/2016 22:27

My kids are 12, 10 and 7. When we had DS1 the MMR debate was still very fresh and we were concerned as DH has two autistic cousins. In the end and after lots of research and talking to our GP we decided to go with the MMR but to wait until we could see that he was developmentally on track. I say this because one of the things we read was that due to the age of the immunisation, it wasn't always clear cut at that point whether the child was already autistic or whether it was or could be a result of the MMR. The other factor was the amount of jabs involved in giving the single vaccines (plus there was a shortage of the mumps vaccine at this time so he couldn't have had it then). We felt that actually, the stress of multiple jabs was a potential issue rather than just having the two.
Then DD had measles at 14 months, before she was old enough to have the jab anyway!
So yes, my three had MMR but later. GP was very supportive and I've no doubt now that it was the right decision, having got them to an she when we could see there was no firm indicator of them being autistic.
Good luck OP.

Doublebubblebubble · 15/02/2016 22:27

Please everyone just watch this. This is 100% the best thing ever made for vaccinations!!!

X

Roonerspism · 15/02/2016 22:27

I must add that the people "qualified" to give opinions aren't always in agreement either. There is no magic to it

My ex partner was a GP and privately admitted that he and a number of his colleagues thought that the MMR could be problematic for some kids but that the greater good argument took priority. Research is just that. It is one particular study and that is that.

BlackeyedShepherdsbringsheep · 15/02/2016 22:28

I made the gp do the research as to whether dd could have the vaccine. [lazy] she has egg allergy and there was some question about the link between the vaccine production and eggs. turns out it was fine. my mum nearly died of measles pre nhs so was keen for her to have the vaccine in some form.

I did know one friend who did not vaccinate.

ollieplimsoles · 15/02/2016 22:28

What are your reasons poppie?

In my area you can have all the vaccines separately, they cost around £300 each and you need to get two vaccines per disease!

ScrimshawTheSecond · 15/02/2016 22:28

unfortunately there's utter hysteria about vaccines from both sides. It's really tedious, and unfortunately means it's hard to even raise the issue without having a row.

Roonerspism · 15/02/2016 22:30

Yes poppies I think it probably will although I haven't seen numbers on it.

I think I would be concerned about leaving a boy unvaccinated against mumps. I think the risk of the MMR is much less than the risk of mumps related complications. (Caveat - who knows. I'm not a scientist but a mere prolific reader)

poppiesanddaisies · 15/02/2016 22:30

Ollie - I accept it was one of the 'rare cases' but a relatives child really was left severely and permanently disabled following his MMR.

I know it's a minority but still very frightening to witness if you can understand my thinking.

poppiesanddaisies · 15/02/2016 22:31

Yes; agree re mumps. It can have nasty repercussions especially relating to fertility.

Myredcardigan · 15/02/2016 22:33

Ziggy, did you read the bit where I said those opinions came from highly qualified specialists?
Although only medically qualified not qualified in political science and therefore unable to offer an opinion on whether the government handled it badly. Hmm
At no point did I suggest they upheld Wakefield's findings as true. They merely pointed out that the government acted out of panic and had they offered singles whilst investigating, the net vax uptake in the immediate aftermath would have been much higher.

sugar21 · 15/02/2016 22:36

Please read my thread titled I am going to ask you all to consider something.
Im hopeless at links but my thread is about illness and vaccines

ollieplimsoles · 15/02/2016 22:36

poppies ah sorry to hear that, that is a really bad situation :(