To think she should have informed me her kids are unvaccinated?

[InMemoryOfSleep]

I went to antenatal yoga with a lovely teacher, who then visited my house with her two children once my baby was born. I also attended her baby group several times with my DS, and her children were also present.

I've just found out that she's an anti-vaxxer, and I cannot stop thinking about the fact that she exposed my tiny baby to her unvaccinated kids, without my knowledge! AIBU to think she should have informed me before bringing her kids to my house, knowing my baby was too young to have been vaccinated yet?

And what about all the babies at the group - I get that it's her personal choice to not vaccinate (though I am vehemently against it) but as she is acting in a professional capacity surely she should be informing parents that her unvaccinated children will be there? I certainly would have thought twice about taking my DS before his vaccinations.

I don't know about others but I don't have the necessary knowledge. No biology A level, degree or PhD.
However, there are a variety of medically trained researchers I know and trust who tell me the case for vaccination is unassailable.
Institutions like the NHS and the BMA are clear about the case for vaccines. This is true not just in this country but across all countries and continents. It is not marginal.

I will read and question big pharma when genuine issues are raised. This is clearly not needed in this case.

Just wandering around an old Victorian cemetery in west London and the number of graves where the same family had lost several young children is a real eye opener. Unaware of this thread, DP just commented: "and you get idiots now who don't vaccinate".

Quite!

Completely agree with mousse - this is just not something that most people are qualified to research safely. Those who do not have any qualifications but think they understand it all and that it's easy, are kidding themselves as they spectacularly miss the point!

Again, it really depends on what you're reading. Most people would be able to understand the vaccine inserts (and actually should be reading them because you're giving consent with the knowledge that there can be side effects).

You don't need an MSc or a PhD to read scientific papers. In fact, you wouldn't be able to get an MSc or a PhD in a science related subject unless you read them! I think you're probably selling yourself short. If you've never attempted to read them, you don't know what to expect.

As for lots of children dying in the past, it's not just a case of vaccines coming along and saving the day. The introduction of the NHS and the availability of good healthcare and antibiotics etc made a huge difference.

DP just commented: "and you get idiots now who don't vaccinate"

My grandmother lost a child to a botched forceps delivery. How do you vaccinate against that?

Well of course it wasn't the only reason lots of young children died then. But things like measles and smallpox and polio were a big factor.

Bumbley - I really don't understand the point of your posts. Why are you pushing this agenda of "read everything, anyone can read anything" - but never ever drawing a conclusion as to why? What do you suggest people do once they've read it? Spit it out!!

Bumbley - I really don't understand the point of your posts. Why are you pushing this agenda of "read everything, anyone can read anything"

What is your problem with people being informed, Apple, especially about medical treatments they are giving their children?

I had a doctor prescribe me a really dangerous anti-inflammatory for a very minor problem. Since then I don't believe in using any medicine without first getting the relevant information:

www.worstpills.org/public/page.cfm?op_id=5

Also google Iatrogenesis

And, in the end, doctors are not gods. They don't have the time to check every single drug or treatment they recommend and it would be impossible to memorise all their possible side-effects

I don't have a problem with people being informed. I have a problem with anti vaxxers putting other people at risk. (That is of course not the case for people who can't have vaccines for good reason.)

I think that suggesting anyone and everyone is capable of reading and understanding medical studies and research is at best plain daft and at worst could seriously worry some people and convince them not to vaccinate for no good reason.

If you want to say that everyone should seek professional advice, and have tests to see if they can be vaccinated, fine (although you may also have to offer to pay for it). Otherwise you're simply telling them to go off and "research" - what does that mean? How is it to be done? How can people be sure they have accessed the right things? What are the conclusions going to be? How are they to be drawn, if someone has no experience in reading and interpreting scientific studies? How will the conclusions be tested (other than deciding it's risky and relying on everyone else to vaccinate and then telling yourself it all worked out fine)?

People study medicine and statistics and immunology and pathology and other related subjects for years. To think all that is unnecessary because absolutely anyone can read it and interpret it all accurately is just... bizarre.

Of course she should have told you. Such selfish behaviour. Fair enough expose your own kids to god knows what but the risk to tiny babies and other young kids who have not yet been vaccinated is huge.

Mind if anti-vaxxers actually told everyone else that their kids aren't vaccinated, not many people would ever want to be near them or their kids when they have small children themselves.

My kids had no MMR until 14.

I would never have though to mention it.

If you want to say that everyone should seek professional advice, and have tests to see if they can be vaccinated, fine (although you may also have to offer to pay for it)

Well, just as I thought, there isn't any test you can get to see if your child might have an adverse reaction.

www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-07/is-there-a-test-children-can-take-before-getting-vaccinated/8332698

See how simple it is to google, Apple.

So people who question vaccines are accused of ignorance, stupidity, trying to force their agenda on other people, while at the same time being criticised for recommending that people do their own research and assuming that other people are as capable as they are of doing so.

I would never have though to mention it.

Even if you were around a newborn? How about a child you knew had a compromised immune system?

If you would never think to mention it ever, I find that kinda selfish. obviously its your choice though but you are putting other children at risk without a care.

I haven't had the MMR either- is that worth mentioning?

So chatting to a GP isn't good enough when you are concerned because they are not an immunologist.....but the word of a GP that you should have the vaccine is ok?

Can you not see the cognitive dissonance there apple?

Apple, I have absolutely no issue with people wanting to be informed. If they have concerns about something then I do think they should read about it and speak to people to help them understand and enable them to make an informed decision. This does not have to mean reading through reams of scientific papers. The vaccine inserts have information about effectiveness and side effects and you can find information about the diseases on the NHS/WHO websites. I haven't been pushing that idea on this thread though so I'm not sure why you think I have an 'agenda' in that respect.

In any case, where is the logic in the agenda of anti-vaxx people being to discourage people from vaccinating? Surely if you think they are protected by all those who are vaccinating it would be better for them to encourage as many people as possible to vaccinate?

Holy shit, atenco, that's twice you've suggested google as an answer. you're actually serious. You really think a "simple" quick Google search is sufficient. Despite the fact that anyone can put anything on the internet. And you'd recommend this to parents..... The mind boggles.

GF - well, no. People who are still concerned despite the recommendations made by the NHS and other bodies should take proper advice. Simply saying that your Gp's wife agrees with you is not the same thing at all. Can't you see that?!

Wanking monkey, the majority of people over the age of 30 won't have had the MMR. Neither will children under the age of 1.

Bumbley - and when they are "informed", then what?

Apple, you realise that most medical students use google, right?

Mind, thinking about this a bit more, maybe the onus is on the person with the baby/immune compromised child to ask people if they are vaccinated. I do think those who chose not to vaccinate are puttin g other children at unnecessary risk though, especially in schools and such...how does that work? Do normal schools not have a problem with unvaccinated children? There is a child at DSDs school who has a compromised immune system and parents have been told if their children show signs of illness to keep them off to protect this child (at the same time parents are being penalized for their childs attendance if its not 100% or near )

I also didn't know people over 30 wont have had the MMR? I have mine and I am over 30.

Don't be disingenuous. It's not google itself that's the issue. It's the user. So the fact that medical students are studying MEDICINE makes their ability to filter out the right results from the millions of hits and to understand the conclusions properly rather better than your average Joe.

Otherwise why does anyone bother studying it? We don't need doctors. We only need wifi!

I've actually read quite a few papers myself in my field, so patronising and disingenuous nonsense about "ooh why don't you just try you never know what you're capable of and don't be so elitist" frankly doesn't fucking wash.

Some papers may be intelligible to a lay audience to a superficial degree that provides some interest and amusement - when I had access to a university library I spent many happy hours doing so. However, judging how well designed a study is, the quality of the data analysis, what the paper's authors may have missed/misinterpreted/are implying, extrapolating from those papers to make life and death decisions, et bleeding cetera, is, however, not in any way within the grasp of anyone from a few comfortable hours on the sofa spent browsing on your iPad.

I know full well that certain papers in the field I studied for my BSc that I do not currently understand, are well within my grasp if I dedicate all fucking summer to them. I also know that although I am perfectly intellectually capable of understanding medical research if and only if I do the fucking work to understand it that I am not currently capable of reading any random research paper and staking my son's life on it

The "anyone can read a research paper and understand it well enough to make life changing decisions" shtick is frankly, just "we don't need no stinking experts" dressed up in head-tilty faux-empowering disingenous manipulative clothing.

Round of applause for glitter - brilliantly put.

Waking, the MMR was introduced in the UK in 1988. People before then may have had the single vaccines or may have had the diseases, like I did. Some people still chose single vaccines after the MMR was introduced (This was the MMRI that ended up being withdrawn due to issues with the mumps component) so there are quite a few people wandering around without having had the MMR. I doubt many of them would think to mention it to anyone.

Apple, I'm glad you realise that it's the user. I don't know why you think medical students are the only ones capable of identifying reliable sources though. You're criticising Atenco for using google and you have no idea about her qualifications or abilities.

We don't need doctors. We only need wifi!

Have you heard of WATSON?

Who said anything about a GPs wife? the poster said she'd spoken to her GP.