To ask you to help me argue with an anti-vaxxer on fb

[GoesDownLikeACupOfColdSick]

I know, I know. But it's Saturday night, DP is out and I am just home whilst our (fully vaccinated!) DD is asleep.

What do I say to someone who is convinced that we should all do our own research, that vaccines are only about big pharma making big bucks, and that the govt hushes up vaccine damage??

OP - You aren't just saying my attitude "comes across badly", though. Are you? You are calling me "cuntish" and continuing to attack over many posts.

Parents care more for their babies than for hypothetical strangers. Nobody will perform a medical procedure on their baby if they know it has a risk but no benefit to said baby, for the good if someone else.

Let it wash over you, get over it and move on.

Cote - why has rubella testing been stopped??
I will let you research that for yourself.
Here is a clue though- it has to do with vaccinations

My mum is deaf in one ear from measles.

Her life is a fuck of a lot better than my (eldest) adult son who needs 24 hour 2:1 care to the extent he can no longer live at home. We are very very lucky that he isn't hundreds of miles away in an inpatient bed. Funnily enough she's happy enough for the younger ones not to be vaccinated. The 'good for society' argument only really works if you properly look after the ones who are damaged. That is nowhere near happening yet.

Re licensing. I emailed the dept of health about that way back in about 2002. They said that singles were unlicensed because the manufacturers hadn't renewed or requested licenses but they were more than happy to consider any that came through. Presumably it costs ££££'s & doesn't make commercial sense for the drugs companies to do that.

They (dept health) also said in that same letter in 2002 that confidence in the vaccination programme was high & vaccination rates were high & not a cause for concern. They're a lot higher now - so I can't imagine they're remotely worried- whatever the headlines say.

Oh you're funny

Vaccinations are quite the thing here in France, too, but everyone is still tested for Rubella immunity at the beginning of pregnancy. Surely it is good practice to do so, if the goal is to prevent fetuses catching Rubella and being permanently damaged. Especially since people in childbearing age these days mostly have vaccine immunity from early childhood, which can wane.

It was before I met her - I've only known her as an adult - so I'd have to check to be certain, but I think about 4.

Her brother who is a bit older had it at the same time and he and his wife are just having testing for infertility now after trying for a baby for a while. Probably purely coincidental, but it is on their minds as one possible reason. Not all kids get these things mildly!

Stopping rubella testing is bonkers - esp as vaccine induced immunity wanes - particularly when a disease is no longer circulating.

Can you still request it prior to TTC? (I did - even though I'd had rubella as a child).

No, Cote. I have not made one "attack" on anything other than your attitude to fuckemall on the question of vaccines. Maybe you should look up "harassment" too!

Agreed - the rubella vaccine was so effective. That will only change if some parents think they are cleverer than the system!

Actually I didn't email the dept of health - it was so long ago I wrote to them.

GoesDown, if she was 4 wouldn't she have had the MMR herself? I'm not sure how old your friend is but the mumps vaccine was only introduced in the UK in 1988 - as part of the mmr I.

Her brother would have to have had it after puberty for mumps to affect fertility.

I had mumps, so did my brother, father, every childhood friend, their friends and families. You will find it hard to scare those of us who have actually had all of these childhood diseases.

{snigger} I like your reply best, SmallBee

Devilish - "Stopping rubella testing is bonkers - esp as vaccine induced immunity wanes - particularly when a disease is no longer circulating. "

Exactly what I'm saying.

Unfortunately, I know someone whose baby was born with Hepatitis B because, apparently, UK authorities don't believe in testing for Hep B in pregnancy, either. If known beforehand, she could have had a CS and prevented transmission to her baby.

Hep B is tested for during pregnancy in France, as well.

Mumps is often asymptomatic in childhood.

Lots of publications out there making this point, but here's one: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3255929/#!po=10.4839

Whereas mumps was historically a disease of childhood, these outbreaks predominantly involved young adults, nearly all of whom had a history of vaccination during childhood, most with the recommended two-dose schedule

The minutes from the original decision making re the introduction of mumps vaccine is still available on the govt website. It's interesting reading (was very a cost analysis rather than a clinical one - always true to some extent for vaccinations but this was very heavily so, iirc the potential for vaccination to turn it from a mild childhood illness into a serious adult one was also discussed - would have to check back though).

Yeah I know cote - definitely agreeing with you :) The numbers affected probably mean it isn't cost effective to test everyone any more - but in terms of the potential impact on families it should be done.

My son caught rubella from a vaccinated child. Luckily we knew it was likely to be on its way & stayed in for the infectious period - from before the rash appeared.

No, won't give exact year, but we are just too old for mmr. Which is why I was seriously ill with measles at 2 as well. Her brother is her half brother, and a good few years older. Although as I said, I doubt their current difficulties are due to mumps, but of course for some young men it can be a real problem - which is why the fewer people going around with it the better from that angle too.

I had the rubella jab as a teenager but I did think they tested for it when I got pregnant (although not until I had been exposed to lots of young kids through a volunteer reading scheme I do for the first few weeks of my pregnancy), but maybe I'm mixing it up with other tests.

GoesDown, well if the mmr wasn't available then it's not really fair for you to blame your friend's deafness on someone deciding not to give their child the MMR as you did above -

"It's thanks to someone who thought fucking mumps was a harmless disease and her kid didn't need the mmr jab that my best friend caught mumps as a child..."

I'm also too old to have had the MMR. I had measles, mumps, rubella, wc as a child.

You will find it hard to scare those of us who have actually had all of these childhood diseases.

Now, that's just silly. No-one can assume that, just because they survived, say, measles with no ill effects that it's nothing to be worried about. The measles death statistics demonstrate otherwise.

Wow this thread has degenerated since I last looked. GoesDownLikeACupOfColdSick , can I assume you are quite young and have never had a childhood illness? In the 70s we all had everything that was going round...mumps, measles...you name it! The majority survived unscathed. There's a fear today of what used to be classified as " normal childhood illness" ...as though anyone catching them nowadays is certain to die. Yes, in third world countries with poor sanitation and no food these diseases kill many many people. We're not living in one of those countries.
And, there's also a fear of unvaccinated children, as though they are walking around dripping in diseases!

No - MMR wasn't available when SHE was 1. Maybe her parents should have paid to give it to her at 4 upwards when it came in, I don't know if that was an option, tbh. But it was available when she caught it, because the parents of the younger child next door thought the diseases were rites of passage and declined it. It's just one anecdote but it left a big impression on me because I see how it affects her every day.

DD was born before 1 April 2016 so I guess I was tested for rubella as apparently that's when the change came in - I thought I hadn't dreamed it!

Crossed post. I see you say you had measles.

Ha, I wish I was young. No, I was very very poorly with measles, but nobody seems to be saying that at least shouldn't be vaccinated against! I succumbed to everything really badly, cp, wc, mumps - but luckily with no long lasting effects except for a really nasty cp scar on my back. I was lucky with measles though, I had encephalitis. My DM said it was utterly terrifying.

It's daft to say that you can't scare anyone who had those diseases. what you really mean is, you're more willing to dismiss them because you were lucky!

"No-one can assume that, just because they survived, say, measles with no ill effects that it's nothing to be worried about."

And no one did. That comment was about mumps and infertility.

Then why did you say "all of these childhood diseases"?

Vaccinating populations changes the way diseases 'work'. So for example if your newborn baby is exposed to measles then if you had measles they will be assumed to have immunity from you, if you had a vaccination they will be sssumed to have no immunity. (If you dig around long enough on google you will find the dept of health guidelines for this scenario).

There's quite a lot of literature (academic) on various ways in which vaccination can exert selection pressures on pathogens. It never really gets considered though. Personally I think vaccination committees should include an evolutionary biologist - especially for vaccinations such as mumps where the consideration whether or not to introduce was largely economic.

Devilish - now that's v interesting. Although I thought immunity from the mother wore off after a few months, is that not the case for some diseases?