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.

And you keep mentioning conspiracies, not me!

Wow! SO aggressive and hateful to someone you've never even met! Merely debated with online. On one subject.

Genuinely shocked. No call for that AT ALL.

Quibbled, do you believe Wakefield was struck off for fraud and abuse, or as part of conspiracy? It's obvious what you think, you've already said it.

Quibbled/Sue/Cath: black is white

Other poster: no black is black

Quibbled/Sue/Cath: you can't have an opinion on mumsnet at all can you? I never said black is white, I said there may be shades of grey

Don't worry Graphista. If Sue the Sock is angered it means you scored a hit.

Shows how little you know when you argue that things didn’t and don’t happen when it’s fact and happened on a number of occasions If you have no idea it’s best not to show yourself up I’d have thought

And yet you continue to do so Sue, it's a mystery to us all.

There’s nothing to score it’s not a game show

Best you tell that to those that suffered paralysis from catching the mutated polio virus from the newly vaccinated people

But don’t worry there’s fact then there’s your own idea

From an article in the LA Times:

"The MMR scare was based not on bad science but on a deliberate fraud," Dr. Fiona Godlee, editor in chief of BMJ, formerly known as the British Medical Journal, wrote in 2011. Such "clear evidence of falsification of data should now close the door on this damaging vaccine scare."

How on earth does the fact he falsified data close the door on the vaccine scare? His paper merely suggested a link and suggested more investigation needed to be done. His paper (falsified or not) was more of a set up for a hypothesis which needed to be tested. But the falsification in itself didn't disprove his theory.

The obvious inference is the door was barely ajar due to the research since carried out

Noticed you didn't answer my question.

Anyhow, think what you want, believe what you want, keep that chamber echoing.

But the research hadn't been carried out. That's the point. Nobody knew then if there was a link. Wakefield (and others who he referenced on his paper) had suggested a link but it hadn't been thoroughly tested.

MairyHole I did answer your question.

Vaccines work. They just do. Herd immunity is crucial. It just is.
Don't believe that? Maybe it's about time we refused state education to children who weren't vaccinated unless a UK GP had authorised it.
Don't want to fulfill your part of the social contract ? Taxpayer shouldn't pay to educate your children.

That was 2011. Almost all of the research was done

There is no increased incidence of autism in children vaccinated with MMR compared with unvaccinated children (Farrington et al., 2001 ; Madsen and Vestergaard, 2004 ).
There is no clustering of the onset of symptoms of autism in the period following MMR vaccination (Taylor et al., 1999 ; Mäkelä et al., 2002 ).
The increase in the reported incidence of autism preceded the use of MMR in the UK (Taylor et al., 1999 ).
The incidence of autism continued to rise after 1993 in Japan despite withdrawal of MMR (Honda et al., 2005 )
There is no correlation between the rate of autism and MMR vaccine coverage in either the UK (Kaye et al., 2001 ) or the USA (Dales et al., 2001 )
There is no difference between the proportion of children with a regressive form of autism (i.e. who appear to develop normally but then lose speech and social skills between around 15 and 30 months) who develop autism having had MMR compared with those who develop autism without vaccination (Fombonne and Chakrabarti, 2001 ; Taylor et al., 2002 ).
There is no difference between the proportion of children developing autism having had MMR who have associated bowel symptoms compared with those who develop autism without vaccination (Fombonne and Chakrabarti, 2001 ; Taylor et al., 2002 )
No vaccine virus can be detected in children with autism using the most sensitive methods available (Afzal et al., 2006 ; D’Souza et al., 2006

There you go again posting articles you haven't read.

This particular page is comedy gold. When you find you're in a hole, for the love of God, stop digging!

I clearly meant the research hadn't been done at the time Wakefield wrote his paper!

Funny that the government banned the judge John deed episodes the one about vaccinations a few years ago as it showed up a lot of unasked questions. And actually made lots think and question. A great way to hide the head in the sand and pretend it’s totally safe. There not even on the DVDs however through good utube people it’s all there along with the accused shaken baby episode also banned by the government also as it also involved questioning how good or bad MMR is. If it was as hundred percent safe as they try to promote they deffinately had no need to ban them.

MairyHole are you being deliberately obtuse?

Oops Quibbled we both used the adjective "obtuse" re MairyHole! Absolute proof we're one and the same.

Or simply it's fuckin plain to see.