To think that anti-vaxers may actually being onto something?

[viiz]

I don't have children myself yet but I don't know what I would chose when the time comes. Most of pro vax/anti vax threads turns nasty with people not even willing to try and look at things with others side perspective. Not willing to even consider points of view different than their own and that's a very silly approach. People believed a lot of things that turned out to be false over the years and centuries. Why not to doubt a little?

I was born in early '80s and not in UK. Myself, my siblings and friends were all vaccinated at the time. I don't even remember what I was vaccinated against but had to be pretty basic. Just a few jabs throughout my whole childhood/teen years and nothing 3in1 or 10in1 or whatever they'll bring next.

Now to the point. Reading through hundreds of threads it jumps at me how many children have neurological, behavioural or emotional disorders. No one else sees it really?? I don't know even one person from my childhood including friends, extended family , neighbours etc who would have ADS or ADHD or any other issues like that. I see their children to have it though.

AIBU to consider there could be a link here??

Please be gentle. I hope to have a discussion here. I don't disrespect anyone's views and I only ask to try and ask yourself 'what if'.

Re the Gardasil link above - that’s the essence of my concern re vaccinations overall. The data on Gardasil and studies look good because the recording of adverse events is utterly flawed.

The research to bring Gardasil to market was also flawed.

Therefore I, as a cynical older person, do not trust much of the vaccine studies done. I simply don’t think there is as much rigour or recording of adverse events as there should be. The literature pushing the flu vaccine, for example, doesn’t relent the reality of its effectiveness.

I remain amazed at posters on this thread who assert so confidently that vaccines are 100 per cent safe and well studied. I sometimes think I must be mad. I simply don’t have this level of trust in research, scientist, pharmaceutical companies nor governments.

I simply don’t think there is as much rigour or recording of adverse events as there should be

Do you have any idea at all just how much research has gone into vacines? From multiple disciplines in multiple countries...all with the same basic result?

The literature on this is enormous.

Well it clearly hasn’t! That’s my issue. Many of us have huge concerns about Gardasil and they are dismissed. There are hundreds of families in the U.K. affected here. Daughters whose lives had been ruined.

So when I see glossy leaflets assuring me on safety, I don’t believe them.

If they said “1 in 100 girls will develop chronic health issues” I would feel more comforted as that empowers me to make a decision.

Interestingly, Gardasil hasn’t even been shown to prevent cancer yet. But that is nicely glossed over too.

Does no one else think like me?

MMR was banned in Japan some years ago. They now only have single vaccines.

Not only has there been no reduction in the rate of autism diagnoses - there has been a substantial increase.

It’s not all about bods in white coats making proclamations - there are real world observations that show the safety of vaccinations....and the vanishingly small (if any) chance of them being responsible for ASD.

From Wikipedia

1994 the government dropped the vaccination requirement for measles and rubella due to the 1993 MMR scare.[56]:2 Japan is nowadays the only developed country with large measles epidemics. It has been called a "measles exporter" by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.[56] As another consequence of the scare, in 2003, 7 million schoolchildren had not been vaccinated against rubella.[57]

Autism rates continued to rise in Japan after the discontinuation of the MMR vaccine, which disproves any large-scale effect of vaccination

@MrsBethel

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make to me, or what 'particular case' you are referring to that you say I was discussing?

All I have said is that it is not 100% inconceivable that vaccinations might cause some cases of autism. There is currently zero reliable evidence that that is the case and I doubt any will ever be found, but it is not a categoric impossibility.

However, even in the unlikely event that a link is later found, vaccines cannot be a contributor to the spike in autism diagnoses, because autism rates do not vary between vaccinated and non-vaccinated children.

If there was a possibility that vaccines increased the risk of autism, then you would expect vaccinated children to have higher rates of autism, but they don't. So even if vaccines did cause some instances of autism in vaccinated children, there'd have to be an equal, unknown pathology that only affects the unvaccinated. Realistically that isn't credible.

And even if there was a minuscule increase in risk (which there isn't) then that would still need to be weighed against the positives of vaccines.

If your issue with is with the lack of safety information and studies on Gardasil, why do you not trust the research into other vaccines that to have pretty significant safety information?

I'm confused, what 1993 MMR scare? Wakefield et al was published in 1998.

Autism diagnoses increased in Japan between 1988 to 2005. Japan has higher rate of autism diagnoses than most OECD countries (see chart). tbh, I'd say autism rates soar with per capita GDP from the 2nd graph. Could conclude that best way to avoid autism diagnoses in your child is ... to live in a poor country. The poorer the better.

It’s a mix really. Gardasil has good safety information too but it’s clearly defective which makes me suspicious about the whole damn process.

It seems clear the MMR doesn’t cause autism but what about the totality if vaccines and their impact on the immune system?

Or the launch of new vaccines generally and the process?

Or the reporting of adverse events? What if these are routinely dismissed if they don’t happen within a couple of weeks? This seems to be the case and so perhaps the studies generally on safety are flawed.

Yet I see children become sicker and immune dysfunction becoming so common.

Whilst I then people who allege conspiracies over vaccines sound a bit daft, equally I think most posters on here shouting that vaccines are completely safe and that anyone who alleges otherwise is stupid similarly naive and, to be honest, not very bright.

Or the reporting of adverse events? What if these are routinely dismissed if they don’t happen within a couple of weeks? This seems to be the case and so perhaps the studies generally on safety are flawed.

What is this statement based on? Just gardasil, or other vaccines?

Yet I see children become sicker and immune dysfunction becoming so common.

Are you attributing this to vaccines? That's a pretty overt case of correlation without causation.

ok... usually I rate Wikipedia highly but that ref about "1993 MMR scare" is bogus. Wikipedia article [56] is [https://www.smh.com.au/world/japanese-measles-epidemic-brings-campuses-to-standstill-20070528-gdq8rj.html [Australian article about a huge measles outbreak in Japan in 2007]], and mentions that very unpopular laws requiring mandatory vaccination with MMR were repealed in 1994 (unpopular b/c govt fined parents who didn't get the jab).

It seems like Japanese university students in 2007 were esp. unlikely to have been vaccinated for measles b/c of the widespread opposition to the fines & mandatory vaccination programme 13-17 yrs previously.

And I’m also interested in animal vaccines too as I own dogs. The new lepto vaccines is declared safe and well tested and is causing death in many small dogs which is denied by vets. There are hundreds and hundreds of owners in the U.K. affected.

It seems a classic case of improper testing, improper recording of adverse effects, lazy or ignorant vets and companies placing profit first. And the regulations around animal vaccines are no less tough than for humans.

Do I think vaccines causes autoimmunity? I have no idea. Do I worry about the current vaccines schedule? Yes, hugely. Do I trust the medical profession? Sort of but I don’t think they are fully informed. Do I trust the regulation and reporting? No.

But I’m very cynical generally. I had had my kids vaccinated, in the main but not for all.

Do I worry about the current vaccines schedule? Yes, hugely.

Again, what is the basis for this? Is it another particular vaccine like gardasil? I'm not sure I'm following your reasoning.

Re Gardasil. I will link again This debunks the myths around Gardasil safety

It doesn’t though Bruffin. It merely shows the studies done.

What do you think when you read the previous link on Gardasil? That it’s all nonsense?

What about lepto 4? The literature on that is mind boggling.

philomena it’s as I state above. A fundamental cynicism about how comprehensive data is and the regulations.

A fundamental cynicism about how comprehensive data is and the regulations.

I understand that, buy why? What has led to you being cynical of ALL vaccine evidence? Are you unwilling to properly assess it yourself? Are you unable? I'm really struggling to comprehend the denial.

I’m not cynical of all vaccine evidence. Just largely distrustful of the whole damn thing. If the current concerns re Gardasil can be utterly discounted - as the head of public health did in our area last year - then what else is not being properly reported on? If the literature on the flu vaccine is misleading, then what else is? If new vaccines can be launched for dogs that clearly cause death in a minority of cases then how is the regulation effective? I could go on and on but I won’t.

It does seem clear that MMR doesnt cause autism! Again, I’m not sure about the totality of all vaccines and the adjuvants used. There haven’t been comprehensive studies on unvaccinated control groups as large numbers are hard to find.

My mind thinks the same way on statins, dietary advice from the NHS, views on other health issues such as sun avoidance

I just thing much if it is outdated or lacking in evidence, or corrupted by food companies or just incompetently advised on. I think some GPs are fantastic but most are pretty ignorant on various developments.

And why? Bitter experience I guess which started from shit advice given on a number of medical issues. Most people don’t question anything. They take it as read when presented with so called expert advice.

That’s fair enough I guess. I question every bit of expert advice. Bitter bloody life experience to be honest but it’s an exhausting way to live.

I read thread like this and think how nice it must be to be the “vaccines are utterly safe” person.

There are NO industry studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated groups as it considered ‘unethical’

The most comprehensive study compared unvaccinated homeschooled kids with their vaccinated counterparts. It showed significantantly more behavioural issues, digestive issues, and allergies in the vaccinated group. Mumsnet mafia hates the study because it relied on the data from parents and obviously doesn’t have the outcome they like ..but it’s the still most comprehensive comparison done

And calledyoulastnight you aren’t alone. There are plenty of skeptics out there ...good on you

Lot of info here about vaccination programmes in Japan.

0.00001% chance of developing some other serious condition [is not possible to detect]

I think that's 1 in 100 million? I'm not sure that's impossible to find; there are stats methods that might make it possible. I hope that at least 5 billion people on the planet have polio vaccination, for instance. If 2 billion had access to good sanitation but only half of them were vaccinated...

It used to be that "one in a million" was considered an acceptably rare risk. So that's 0.0001% risk. Lots of literature documents how Pandremix caused narcolepsy (roughly 1 in 100,000 risk, or 0.001%). Can definitely find the 1 in 100,000 events.

The most comprehensive study compared unvaccinated homeschooled kids with their vaccinated counterparts.

Please provide link?

The problem is you're cherrypicking examples that you consider to be examples of bad practice and extrapolating it to other evidence without actually knowing that it's the case. If you look at a study from a publicly funded group like the NHS, are you able to see whether it's good quality evidence?

The most comprehensive study compared unvaccinated homeschooled kids with their vaccinated counterparts. It showed significantantly more behavioural issues, digestive issues, and allergies in the vaccinated group. Mumsnet mafia hates the study because it relied on the data from parents and obviously doesn’t have the outcome they like ..but it’s the still most comprehensive comparison done

Would you care to provide the actual study? It's probably worth checking whether or not there are serious issues in it, based on your previous reportings.