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'.

Mumsnet mafia hates the study because it relied on the data from parents

So it has a significant bias? It's not just Mumsnet that thinks this "study" is BS

No worries, I found snopes page about the study.

And in interests of fairness, original paper here. it's not a proper case control study. They don't adjust for confounders. The most grueling haul over hot coals I ever had (by journal & reviewers) was for a case-control study (that was to do with polluted water causing disease). The proper standards for conducting epidemiological exposure analysis, really are extremely high.

I assume it’s this one med

[[https://vaccinesworkblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/06/why-this-vaxed-v-unvaxed-study-is-not-valid/]

I’m not sure that’s the only study comparing vacced and unvacced populations. Although I can’t be 100% sure.

I should have read my own link to the bottom

There is a link to a large study looking at vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.

Cathmidston "The most comprehensive study compared unvaccinated homeschooled kids with their vaccinated counterparts....Mumsnet mafia hates the study because it relied on the data from parents"

MedSchoolRat "No worries, I found snopes page about the study."

Your move Cathmidston.

I’m Autistic. I’m finding your research sources rather disturbing cath

"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"

Leaving to one side the untrue statement that posters are claiming vaccines are 100% safe, this truly hits the nail on the head. You cannot argue with those who believe in conspiracy theories because they distrust the sources of almost all (if not all) research and evidence that most people consider credible. The content of evidence is therefore largely irrelevant. It must be a scary world if you believe in cover ups of that enormous scale and that depth of depravity.

The KIGGs vaccinated vs unvaccinated study

Teaonthebedsheets agreed. This is exactly why I’ve said that anyone here who doesn’t trust the evidence is welcome to apply for their own research grant to find out exactly for themselves. No one will of course.

I just wonder why crack pot theories prevail when there is no evidence for them either. That is also blind faith and even worse than the “misplaced trust” in science we are being told we have, because it literally doesn’t come from a place of any reliability at all. Is it evidence itself that people don’t trust? Anything with a methodology etc. And yet they do believe in some studies, the debunked ones usually. Is it the source of the study perhaps? Except that a lot of antivaxx websites have no sources or circular ones.

Unless it’s just a knee jerk reaction to being told what is best to do, by the state. A big fuck you, I can do what I like with my own children, that ultimately leaves the child unprotected and at risk.

agree with Cathmidston and Calledyoulastnightfromglasgow as per my previous post.

one pp said some chidren may not be suitable for vaxing because of their autoimmune system, i agree with that. but;
-how can these children be tested before having a vaccination? i havent heard its done anywhere.
-and why dont they do it to prevent horrible, rare side effects.
they just ask are you having or not.

its like roulette.

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

It will require long term cohort studies, but if it prevents infection with HPV, which has been shown as a major cause of cervical cancer (and recently suspected also in other locations) then it's not a very risky bet that it can prevent cervical cancer. But not, alas, all cancer.

This is an example of a balanced, scientific based comment, about HPV safety and how best to monitor.
This is what makes a good debate. And it shows that the issue is under discussion and attention of the scientific community, if not all governments.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5688196/

its like roulette.

... where the prize is not dying of a preventable disease, and covers >99% wheel.

their autoimmune system

It's only immune system. Autoimmunity is a problem not a system.

As it has been said, some people are recognizably at risk and aren't given vaccines.
It's very hard to determine causes of vaccine adverse reactions. Like it has been very difficult to pinpoint causes of many cancers or non communicable diseases.

Unfortunately we are still very far from personalised medicine.

For some reason it's not that easy to fund and recruit large cohorts for lifetime studies. And although the technology exists for genome studies, analyses are still complicated and time consuming. Then you have epigenetics.

Science slowly progresses as resources and technology allow. The unknowns are still more numerous than the knowns, but sometimes we have to use a pragmatic approach. Or nothing would be done. No new drugs. No vaccines. No new surgical methods...

bluebell34567

I don't want to be rude, but if that's your argument, are you high? There's plenty of scientific evidence supporting vaccination. Sure, life is a roulette wheel, stay in bed and a plane crashes into your house. But at least understand the probabilities behind it all.

thanks for correcting me Lweji about immune system
i think there can be some simple precautions like if the child is preterm born, etc.

i am not high showmeshoyu, i found your comment rude.

With respect Bluebell, the only reason you see it as a gamble is because herd immunity has kept the diseases down enough so that you don’t fear them. If there was a major outbreak of, say, measles around you and you became aware of kids being hospitalised, suffering deafness, brain damage and possibly even dying, your concept of the choice being like roulette would go out the window. You’d be down the jab clinic before you could say ‘red or black’.

To perceive risk in vaccinating is a luxury of freeloading on others who do it.

These diseases had declined massively before mass vaccination was introduced ... the way you’re talking is like they would return at the level they were before effective sanitation and clean water which is quite frankly ridiculous.
@pissingintherain Personally if there was a measles outbreak in my area I wouldn’t be remotely worried as in a healthy nourished child is it is a self limiting illness. I’ve had it and so have many of my friends... same experience

Personally if there was a measles outbreak in my area I wouldn’t be remotely worried as in a healthy nourished child is it is a self limiting illness. I’ve had it and so have many of my friends... same experience

It’s so sad to see such an ill-informed, selfish attitude prevail so often. Firstly, complications are more common but not limited to those who are malnourished or immunocompromised. Second, why aren’t you worried about those who are malnourished? Or immumocompromised? Or at greater risk? Are you really that selfish? Third, you do realise that while plenty of people of my generation who had measles uneventfully, there were people that died? You can’t talk about your benign childhood measles experience if you didn’t survive it. And plenty of people had complications; I know two people personally who have measles-induced hearing loss. I also know a child who has been diagnosed with SSPE.

If measles vaccination in the UK was to cease tomorrow, people would die within a couple of years. More people would die as the years went on.

So out of interest, how many measles deaths would it take before it started to become a problem for you? Clearly you think “pre-sanitation levels” would be bad but unlikely, so at what number of deaths would you put your hands up and say “ok we probably need to do something now”? 10 per year? 100? 1000? Or would you only care as long as your family were ok? I’d really like to know how many completely preventable deaths you’re ok with to satisfy your vaccine suspicions. Thanks in advance.

I found a study from Nigeria from early 90s which followed 25 vaccinated and 25 unvaccinated children for the first 5 years of their life. In that time period 3 of the unvaccinated died from measles and one from tetanus.1 of the vaccinated children got a mild case of measles
It wasn't that long that 1 child died every 18 minutes from measles worldwide

Personally if there was a measles outbreak in my area I wouldn’t be remotely worried as in a healthy nourished child is it is a self limiting illness.

So what you’re basically saying is that you don’t care if unhealthy, weak or disabled children die, because your healthy, nourished child won’t?

Cathmifsyon, measles had not declined massively before vaccination

UK measles notifications and deaths