Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

SIL has not vaccinated my nieces

999 replies

Pittcuecothecookbook · 12/08/2018 19:49

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 Shock at hearing this news.

OP posts:
MairyHole · 17/08/2018 17:27

It's a very vague statement. I genuinely don't know what you mean by it.

bruffin · 17/08/2018 18:16

this article is interesting because as well as preventing measles, the measles vaccine helps prevent other infection and deaths

Wonder if this was why i was so ill with tonsilitis the year after i had measles at 9 years old

Ddcroker · 17/08/2018 18:49

I feel that before you judge her, you should research vaccinations thoroughly. I am a victim of vaccine injury. My daughter has her vaccination but I wouldn't judge anybody who hasn't had them. Vaccines do not provide certain immunity to the disease. My nephew had all his meningitis jabs and at the age of 7, he had meningitis.

Quibbled · 17/08/2018 18:57

Bruffin...how interesting that the research you link to is :

funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Science and Technology Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security [contract HSHQDC-12-C-00058 (B.T.G. and C.J.E.M.)], and the RAPIDD program of the Science and Technology Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security and the Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health (C.J.E.M. and B.T.G).

Quibbled · 17/08/2018 19:02

Find me some independent research that isn't funded by the people peddling new vaccines, and I'll be more inclined to believe it.

bruffin · 17/08/2018 19:05

You are getting a bit ridiculous now quibbled.

Quibbled · 17/08/2018 19:13

Am I? I just skimmed the whole paper and couldn't even find sample sizes in it. Have a look yourself and let me know if you do.

Cathmidston · 17/08/2018 19:13

No Quibbled is spot on ..or is it one rule for you and another for everyone else

bruffin · 17/08/2018 19:36

Ive just read the various reports , but it makes sense , measles does suppress the immune system and lead to higher mortality. Being funded by the Bill gates foundation isnt really a problem unless you believe the various conspiracy theories

Quibbled · 17/08/2018 19:42

It's nothing to do with conspiracy. It's a business. How does anyone sell a new product? Uptake is low so find a new angle that will boost sales.

bruffin · 17/08/2018 19:46

Its not a business its a charitable foundation. It doesnt make money from vaccination

RoadToRivendell · 17/08/2018 19:46

Find me some independent research that isn't funded by the people peddling new vaccines, and I'll be more inclined to believe it.

You do realise that Wakefield, who you believe to be a scapegoat, was funded by the suits who were in the process of building a class action suit against the MMR manufacturers?

funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Science and Technology Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security [contract HSHQDC-12-C-00058 (B.T.G. and C.J.E.M.)], and the RAPIDD program of the Science and Technology Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security and the Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health (C.J.E.M. and B.T.G).

I can't make heads or tails of these acronyms. Which of these are pharmaceutical companies? It appears to me that it's Bill & Melinda Gates, Homeland Security and NIH.

I scanned the abstract and it appears that this is an after-the fact regression analysis, so I gather it's based on CDC population-level data. I saw mention of the US and Denmark, so at least 2 countries. A more than reasonable sample size.

Cathmidston · 17/08/2018 20:07

Its not a business its a charitable foundation. It doesnt make money from vaccination
No, of course not Hmm

MissConductUS · 17/08/2018 20:11

The Gates Foundation is relentlessly data driven and they have concluded that the most efficient way to reduce morbidity and mortality is to raise vaccination rates in less developed countries. They fund these programs directly. They have been so successful that other major philanthropists are making grants to the GF to use in these programs.

Vulcano · 17/08/2018 20:17

there are links made with children who struggle to get the heavy metal out of their bodies which can in turn trigger autism/aspergers

NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!! And more fucking NO!!!!!

Quibbled · 17/08/2018 20:29

RoadToRivendell

You do realise that Wakefield, who you believe to be a scapegoat, was funded by the suits who were in the process of building a class action suit against the MMR manufacturers?

When I said "scapegoat" I did not mean to imply he is some sort of hard-done-by independent researcher. I just meant that having been accused of fraud and been struck off, people have been given (I think purposefully) the impression that this completely disproves the hypothesis of a link between autism and MMR. This is how it comes across from the many MN posters who ridicule anyone questioning vaccine safety by stating "There is no link, because Wakefield was struck off." etc. You get my drift?

MairyHole · 17/08/2018 20:51

So what did you mean when you wrote this?

"Also, Andrew Wakefield was ridiculed and struck off for a study based on its small sample size of 12, uncontrolled design and speculative nature of its conclusions.

Similarly:
Dr. Edward Jenner of Gloucestershire, England noticed that milkmaids exposed to cowpox appeared to be immune to smallpox. He tested his hypothesis by inoculating a boy with cowpox pus and subsequently challenging him with smallpox. The experiment was a success, and Jenner prepared a paper describing this case along with 13 other individuals who had contracted either horsepox or cowpox before being exposed to smallpox. In one of the worst editorial decisions of all time, the Royal Society rejected the paper and suggested that Jenner cease his cowpox investigations.

Yet Jenner's discovery eventually led to the eradication of smallpox."

MairyHole · 17/08/2018 20:52

And then this?

"I personally think he was made a scapegoat in order to pacify the masses of worried parents."

Quibbled · 17/08/2018 21:02

Uh? I meant exactly that. It seems quite ironic that they both conducted very small unethical studies and one has been demonised for it whilst the other seemingly saved us from smallpox.

MairyHole · 17/08/2018 21:04

Well Cath, sorry I mean Sue, sorry, I mean Quibbled, that isn't what you've said at all. You've heavily implied he was struck off as part of a conspiracy. Anyone who can read can see that. You've then explicitly said you think he was a scapegoat in order to pacify masses of worried parents.

Graphista · 17/08/2018 21:15

"If we could catch virus or get an infection and then stop it immediately or at least limit its effects on us to a bare minimum we would be far better immune and natural immunity of something also helps in immunity to other virus and infections."

Do you realise what you're describing here is basically how vaccination works?!

"the vaccinated infected the non vaccinated." Just more nonsense. Not how it works at all.

Good nutrition and hygiene help, but it's the combination of those and things like vaccination that have massively reduced infant mortality.

As for the bf argument - I'm pretty sure 150 years ago most babies WERE bf for a significant amount of time - didn't stop them getting polio, smallpox etc.

"there were no deaths before inhalers were introduced." Rubbish! More dangerous irresponsible rubbish!

"It's a wonder how mankind survived at all before vaccines were invented given the hysteria spouted on here!" As always with the 'well we survived! I don't know what the fuss is about' argument - the answer is no, many DIDN'T survive. That's why the progress happened.

Re nhs use - cath and others have heavily criticised the very knowledge and training of nhs practitioners and researchers who support vaccination. It's not about the hypocrisy of knowing excess eating/drinking/smoking or not having genetic testing & ignoring the advice and then benefiting from treatment, but if the nhs supposedly has it SO wrong in supporting vaccination, the question then becomes if anti-vaxxers or even sceptical vaxxers don't TRUST the knowledge, research and experience of these experts and professionals regarding vaccination why then would they trust that knowledge, research and experience when they or their child IS seriously ill or injured? It doesn't make sense.

"Yes, due to plagues, cholera, malaria, various flu pandemics, smallpox and more recently AIDS.....not "childhood diseases" " why do you think measles, chicken pox etc are somehow less dangerous than the examples you cited? And the word "plague" was historically used to describe several illnesses, including what you describe as "childhood illnesses" reporting wasn't always very accurate hundreds of years ago. Even just over 100 years ago here in the U.K. Few people would have seen a dr for suspected measles, chicken pox etc as most couldn't afford to. And wouldn't necessarily have been explicitly informed of the established cause of death. Even with it being recorded via death certificates significant Numbers couldn't read.

"I note that this question has been asked a number of times and each time she has refused to answer it." Exactly.

Cath - if stress etc makes children (and adults) more susceptible to infection then while reducing stress, improving hygiene etc is also important surely you understand that it's not possible to completely eradicate eg stress from people's lives therefore they're susceptible to infection therefore vaccinating them in order to protect them from certain infections IS necessary?

Suewiang · 17/08/2018 21:24

The hole has spoken so it must be right

Suewiang · 17/08/2018 21:27

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Quibbled · 17/08/2018 21:29

MairyHole

Perhaps scapegoat is not the correct word then. I am using it to describe someone who has been used as "evidence" that there is no link between autism and the MMR, to pacify the worried parents. What other word can I use?

MairyHole · 17/08/2018 21:30

Ah yes, I thought Sue the Sock would pop up soon to insult us all.

Swipe left for the next trending thread