SIL has not vaccinated my nieces

[Pittcuecothecookbook]

My baby has been booked in for her vaccinations soon. I asked my sister in law, who has primary school aged kids, about the experience and I was flabbergasted when she said she didn't get their jabs. I can't quite believe it!

When I asked why, she said the risks outweighed the pros but she struggled to articulate what the risks were beyond 'potential death'. I said that that was also the downside of not getting the jabs too! She said she was persuaded when her friend said that the jabs couldn't be undone if her kids had a reaction.

AIBU to be shocked and quite disappointed about this? I'm not looking forward to it by any means, but the eradication of many awful diseases and protection against those still prevalent is surely a non negotiable?

When her kids don't get these diseases, she'll be vindicated but that will likely be because the majority have had their jabs rather than proving jabs were unnecessary.

I imagine I'll get over this - my child will be protected - but I'm just at hearing this news.

Oh look! Cathmidston’s screed was straight off a crank website: www.vaccine-side-effects.com

Sorry Plimmy ...not seen that website but good to see you can use google :)

Hang on, scarlet fever isn't the same thing. DS has had scarlet fever, it's just an infection similar to tonsilitis, chest infection, etc. It's not normally deadly or serious today because it can be treated with antibiotics, but it's also not something that you become immune to - he could get it again. And yes we were advised not to give ibuprofen. He actually wasn't very sick with it at all, as soon as he'd had one day of medication he was bounding around being a pain because he wasn't supposed to go back to school. Before antibiotics lots of things were deadly which aren't today.

I don't really understand what you mean about "alternative" medicines being designed for the sick. Most "mainstream" medicines are designed for sick people, because we recognise that it's not great to put drugs into our bodies - therefore it's better to do so as a response to something which is worse. Vaccinations are one of the few types of medicine which are designed for healthy people. This is actually why they are tested and scrutinised to a higher degree, because it would not be acceptable to make a healthy person sick, whereas we often accept side effects from medicine which fights illness because this is a temporary effect and the net gain is that the illness is taken away.

So Plimmy.....
Any info relating to vaccines being 100% safe and effective = bonafide reliable independent research from caring professionals

Any info questioning the safety of efficacy of any vaccine in any way shape or form = crank, conspiracy theory nonsense funded by anti vax morons

Just so we know where we stand

Oh Christ, scarlet fever is well treatable by antibiotics at all stages but whooping cough is largely resistant after expression (coughing).

I again invite readers to consider just what dross Cathmidston is posting.

Has scarlet fever declined? I wasn't aware that it had. I don't think everyone was getting scarlet fever in Victorian times or they'd all have been dying from it. The difference seems to be that in the past, scarlet fever was a terrible thing which had people in bed for weeks and weeks with it being touch and go whether they'd recover. Now you have it for three days, realise your cold isn't getting better, go to the doctor, get a week's course of antibiotics after which about two days of you feel better and go about your everyday business with basically no harm done.

Well, I found this from NHS which seems to suggest that scarlet fever rates declined in correlation with better understanding of hygiene practices, and have then recently increased but the cause of this increase is unknown.

www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/scarlet-fever-cases-england-highest-50-years/

It’s actually very rare to get scarlet fever more than once ...but it’s possible as with most infectious inc measles etc . and it was in decline before the widespread use of antibiotics too.... it’s also fairly mild these days without resorting to Antibiotics (your son would have undoubtedly been fine without them) .... so it’s still a valid example of a once very serious disease declining without vaccination

Please stop posting this garbage. For the love of god. It’s so irresponsible.

Yes the mortality/severity declined rapidly with better hygiene, cleaner water ..better nutrition .... as most illnesses (including measles) were doing before mass vaccination campaigns
And btw I’ve had measles.
Right off to bed Zzz

Personally, I think you should mind your own business. It literally has nothing to do with you whatsoever.

Why undoubtedly? I don't understand how you can say that without having been there and examined him yourself. Certainly I noticed a drastic change in his general wellbeing before and after the medication. The NHS also caution that it's important to have antibiotic treatment in order to prevent certain more serious complications.

As I understand it's rare to catch it more than once simply because it tends to come around once every few years and it tends to be young children who catch it. By the time it comes around a second time, they are older and less likely to catch it again - it doesn't mean that they are immune. If somebody was exposed twice they could catch it twice.

I think antibiotics have a place. Having ignored a UTI which I felt I could self treat, and do usually self treat without antibiotics which landed me in hospital very ill with doctors quite concerned about me, I am not sniffy when they suggest them. Thankfully I don't live in a country where they are overprescribed - I know this is a problem in some areas. I still do tend to self treat my UTIs by the way but I know if they hang around for some time or I start getting associated fever then it's probably time for some more serious measures - and I did have one where I had to go back and get a longer course because when I stopped the medicine it came back.

Fewer people died because we became better at keeping them alive. This is no argument against vaccination.

This subject is everyone’s business. Literally everyone’s.

Hmm, yep, and that's something I'm interested in learning more about - obviously disease declines when you have better hygiene, nutrition, education etc and it's whether there is an increased decline with vaccination too. I assume that there must be - but I also see that the idea that there is no link/the link is weak is an antivax argument and I'm intrigued by it.

Recent measles outbreaks in areas where vaccination rates are low would heavily suggest yes, BTW, that there is a causation. I would guess that another source of good info would be people who travel to areas where certain infectious diseases are rife - when they are vaccinated they are much less likely to pick up those diseases whereas people who travel to those areas without the vaccine are more likely to catch it. I mean diseases we routinely do not vaccinate for in the developed world because they are not prevalent here.

Bertie scarlet fever is cause by reacting badly to the toxins produced by streptococcus bacteria .... these bacteria are everywhere ...they don’t appear in cycles as such.
This is why it’s most important to understand the nature of disease. Most people have streptococcus on them without issue. There has to be an underlying cause or susceptibility for the over growth to happen in the first place ..which then leads to a possible reaction to the toxin and then scarlet fever...
But....This is a vast subject

As for your UTI... I used to suffer from this... I found using a good probiotic orally worked far better and quicker than any antibiotic ... worth a shot if you get it again x

Measles again often doesn’t follow the standard infectious disease model. I had measles when I was 11. Isolated case. None of my friends caught it, no one at my school... none of my family ... and I certainly wasn’t in isolation. Leading credence to the assertion that it’s more a developmental disease in susceptible individuals. A learning experience by the body resulting in a fairly innocuous elimination rash depending on the health of the individual and the management of it..

Your nieces should be protected by the herd immunity if they're lucky - vaccination uptakes in the UK are generally high, which reduces their exposure to the diseases.

But it's ridiculous not to vaccinate - and discussions on MN about vaccination have been ridiculous for years. There are vocal anti-vaxxers on here that crop up on every thread and argue till the cowpoxxed-cows come home.

My sister's boyfriend's sister didn't have her son vaccinated - and I had to delete her off FB because she kept posting anti-vax nonsense and I just couldn't take it anymore.

The figures for vaccination in the Uk show that the vast majority vaccinate.

star classic case of you really should rtft - that point has been argued already. Personally (and quite a few agree) I think it IS op's business -

1 because her child is directly affected

2 because it's EVERYONE's business!

"I suggest MNers google the compiler, Ginger Taylor." Let me guess - prolific anti-vaccine campaigner?

"exactly this sort of crap that MN shouldn’t be allowing." I agree.

I have no problem with opinion presented as such, I DO have a problem with opinion falsely represented as fact. Posts that do so should be deleted.

"The fact is there’s an unprecedented rise in chronic immune disorders in children as well as developmental issues. This is NOT a cut and dried debate."

And ONE significant likely reason may well be simply a rise in Dx rather than in incidence because people inc medics are more aware of the symptoms!

In addition people don't exist in a vacuum - if there is an environmental cause it's not necessarily a vaccine. There's any number of pollutants we're exposed to which could be the cause.

Cath - I'd argue intelligent debate requires not posting links without HONESTLY acknowledging the agenda of the writer of said link!

"At least two if not more people have stated they are not anti vaxxers but simply believe others should have the choice." Personally I'm very sceptical of posters CLAIMING not to be anti-vaxxers who then VEHEMENTLY posit anti-vaxxing theories. Anti-vaxxers aren't completely stupid, some are well aware that as soon as they admit to actually being anti-vaxxers their posts will be viewed with the heavy scepticism such views deserve.

"Most vaxxers don't make one" [an informed choice] says who?! Certainly I'm aware that a lot of women who became mothers around the time of the mmr controversy did a good deal of research - and most of those went on to vaccinate.

Cath your post at 2359 - written by Trevor gunn? Anti-vaxxer? In an article with virtually no references to any scientific studies at all! I agree - cobblers!

"Sorry Plimmy ...not seen that website but good to see you can use google" oh please! I copied and pasted the first paragraph to search and got the same result!

I've had scarlet fever, treated with antibiotics which my mother (and I!) was very grateful for. Her mother had lost a sibling to scarlet fever in the 30's. I've only had it once. I've also had chicken pox once and whooping cough once (very recently) as I said WAY upthread, vaccination doesn't mean you'll never get x infection, it reduces the risk of getting it (partly herd immunity comes into this as it reduces spread too) and it means you likely don't get it as bad as you would if you weren't vaccinated. I'm vaccinated but I'm older - 46 - and it's a vaccine that loses efficacy. I'm also an asthma sufferer and I've had pneumonia twice and a more rare chest infection which has left my lungs scarred such that in laymans terms although I still have 2 lungs I may as well just have one. So I'm more vulnerable to this toe of infection. It was not fun! But I'm still glad I was vaccinated. It could have been a worse infection without being vaccinated, I could have caught it at a much younger more vulnerable point if not vaccinated. If I'd caught it during the first bout of pneumonia which nearly bloody killed me anyway I doubt I'd still be here!

Whether a patient currently contracting scarlet fever is in need of antibiotics is for a qualified dr to decide. It's not just about the severity of the illness, it's about patient history, knowledge of the strain concerned etc.

"So Plimmy.....
Any info relating to vaccines being 100% safe and effective = bonafide reliable independent research from caring professionals

Any info questioning the safety of efficacy of any vaccine in any way shape or form = crank, conspiracy theory nonsense funded by anti vax morons

Just so we know where we stand"

No

Any info from stringently conducted research by well qualified people who've undertake many years of training & education that shows that the risks of NOT being vaccinated are higher - both in terms of rate of occurrence and severity - than being vaccinated =
bonafide reliable independent research from caring professionals

Info based purely on opinion, with no scientific basis whatsoever, using misleading stats and misquoting, even potentially defaming, expert professionals in a deliberate attempt to mislead and discredit vaccination = crank, conspiracy theory nonsense funded by anti vax morons

Just so we know where we stand 😉

Ffs! Measles is airborne and highly contagious. You probably caught it from a stranger who coughed or sneezed near you, or on a surface you touched. It's a persistent bugger than can live for a good couple hours outside the body. Just because nobody you KNEW caught it or had it prior to you catching it doesn't mean you didn't catch it from a person! It is NOT developmental. Why do you keep spouting such utter twaddle?!

As for repeated uti's - the first things I'd be saying to someone with this issue are:

Are you wiping front to back?
Are you drinking enough?
Are you wearing tight nylon knickers, tight trousers?

Resolving those issues far more likely to prevent the recurrence!

Serously - what's your background cath? Level of education? Genuinely interested.

Leading credence to the assertion that it’s more a developmental disease in susceptible individuals.

If you weren't infected with a single-stranded, negative-sense, enveloped (non-segmented) RNA virus of the genus Morbillivirus within the family Paramyxoviridae you didn't have measles.

Thank you @BertieBots I’ve enjoyed your honesty on your comments. Thank you @Graphista and others who are taking time out to clarify things. I would prefer to read research directly but even with some understanding of research methods - issues of reliability and validity etc I struggle to fully understand the language - because let’s face it research papers are not written for lay people. Consequently most of us rely on other people to interpret the results and that is where the danger lies- on both sides of the argument. Good science is impartial and looks at the results to form its conclusions. My first concern about anti vaxxers is their motivation. What drives their curiosity about this? My guess is that many are driven by a personal experience which is emotionally charged, such as the diagnosis of autism in their child or a negative reaction to a vaccine in their own family or friendship group. Naturally there is a drive to look for answers but that drive is not dispassionate and impartial because this person has a vested interest in the outcome “ Was it me? Did I do something?”. Finding information that “ proves “ it to be an external source must be very powerful for a parent who may be doubting themselves. Its very easy then to find other people who support your view and the whole thing becomes an exercise in confirmation bias. Good science does not have an emotional attachment to the outcome and interprets the results dispassionately. My second concern is the ability of the lay person to correctly interpret the findings of any research. Since good research does not ignore results / the pluses and minuses/ the pros and the cons and often lays them out clearly, it’s very easy to cherry pick the results that support your view and ignore the results that don’t. Or to apply the results to a different set of circumstances not intended by the parameters of the original research. What training do vocal anti vaxxers ( or anyone) have which enables them to interpret / promote their opinions in the way they do. Someone posted a link upstream to scientific research allegedly linking autism and vaccines. Those articles are promoted by Ginger Taylor who is the mother of an autistic child. How can anyone view this information with anything other than mistrust?

I see the argument is being given that smallpox was erradicated by the vaccine, therefore every vaccine is good.

But that is not a logical argument.

The fact been pittcue is that it’s nothing to do with you at all not your choice and nothing to do with what you want like or dislike in any shape or form.
Everyone has the choice to do as they see fit.
Everyone can use there own brain to decide if they have one that is.

I'm confused, Plimmy. Isn't TB also bacterial, and treated with anti-biotics too? And a vaccine exists for it?

Yes Madam Edam it is bacterial and the vaccine is the BCG vaccine and yes antibiotics are taken if you contract it.
But you must understand that plimmy thinks she knows everything and everyone else knows nothing.

@cathmidson pretty much everything you write is taken from 'research' funded by anti-vaxx groups. You might think you're reading impartial, medical research but you aren't. There have been some very interesting academic studies on the information available on vaccines which showed information, particularly on the internet, was heavily biased towards anti-vaccination information. The worrying thing was it was often presented as being impartial, medical and academically robust when in fact, if you dig deeper you find the websites are funded by organisations which support the anti-vaxx movement. The research presented will often be misinterpreted or only partially presented to support the idea that vaccinations are dangerous. It's hugely worrying.

The simple fact is - medical professionals state that unless there is a medical reason not to, the benefits of vaccinations massively outweigh the risks. Vaccinations DO NOT cause autism, ADHD etc but the diseases they are vaccinating again do cause death .