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'.

*@Cathmidston
*
And viiz that’s a sensible and pragmatic approach to take which you’d think few people would argue with... but hey... here we are on mumsnet where vaccination and conventional medicine is treated like some kind of religion

I've never been hated this much in my whole life 😄

To the PP who said "I’ve had measles, mumps, rubella and chickenpox. Believe me I have no fear of childhood illnesses." your own experiences are no more relevant than anyone else's. A close relative of mine died after contracting measles from her son. It is not a mild childhood illness. Anyone can get it and it can be deadly. That is why we vaccinate against it.

The reality is that we now live tooth-by-jowl in an overcrowded world. This makes vaccination a sensible public health precaution. Obviously those vaccinations should undergo rigorous safety testing before being used publicly.

From a public health perspective, the more individual appointments required, the lower the vaccination uptake. Consequently, the aim has been to make it as easy as possible for parents to get their children inoculated by combining vaccinations and reducing the number of appointments required. I was somewhat concerned by the vaccination schedule when my kids were young. For example, MMR contains 3 illnesses and is given at the same time as another vaccination. I had no justification for feeling that way, but the nurse at our surgery was very accommodating and let me work out my own schedule and spread them out so that my kids only had one injection at a time.

@viiz tell me about it x

Anti vaxxers always take the hate personally. You’re not hated per se, we just don’t want your children, or other children to die or suffer lifelong disability from something entirely preventable. I don’t hate parents who don’t vaccinate. I hate the peddlers and frauds who perpetuate lies and suck in vulnerable, doubtful and gullible people, leading to child deaths. Are you a peddler of lies OP, deliberately? Or are you a victim of those lies? Only you can decide that. I guess it would depend on what faith you started this thread

I don't hate you, I just disagree with you.

Lweji this explains it
maronewellness.com/pasteur-vs-bechamp-an-alternative-view-of-infectious-disease/

Oh, dear. Just because some germs do cause disease, it's very well known that
A) the vast majority doesn't
B) the capacity for most germs to cause disease depends in large measure on genetic susceptibility/resistance of the host, it's immune status, nutricional status, etc.
C) that any infectious disease only develops when the corresponding germ is present.

It's interesting that germs have been increasingly found in association and even as cause of some cancers. It's even discussed the role of some germs with diabetes and epilepsy.

But do teach me about germs and disease. 😂😂😂😂😂

*@CostanzaG
*
viiz his theories have been discredited. He's a crank and that's well known and documented.

Like everyone and everything to ever dared to question vaccinations it seems.

My point was to show that many people disagree with herd immunity. Just a opportunity to get familiar with their arguments, consider it and form your own opinion.
At the same time I couldn't say which one I side with because I simply don't know enough about it.

Good points NotBad. Most of those with concerns about vaccines are frightened parents. You don't need to look far to see some of the people exploiting that fear. I don't doubt that Cath earnestly holds her views and thus while I disagree with her, I am very far from hating her.

cath did I miss where you posted those studies proving that childhood vaccines had an adverse effect on immunity.

See, it’s the opppsite to a religion. If it was a religion I’d have faith and I’d just believe it whatever pseudoscience you stated.

Did you read the vaccine information link i posted upthread viiz? I notice you keep saying you don't have a view but you only link to quite extreme anti vax sites.

If you actually want information the University of Oxford's project provides that for free and discusses downsides too. I hope you find it of use.

vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vaccines

Let's drop validating if author is even worthy to consider his words because this seems to be favourite way to discredit people on here.

Obviously biased sources are a huge issue in science, so it's a relevant point.

Look at his arguments to disagree with herd immunity, look at the numbers and do the math. You don't have to agree with the words of a person you don't respect so do it yourself.

Let's do that, shall we? The author begins with a graph of vaccines that are less common like the flu vaccine and hepatitis A, and claims they're bellow the threshold for herd immunity. He's right for those specific diseases, and as a result, there are flu outbreaks in the US in the winter, same as every other year;

www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season-2017-2018.htm

He then talks about the more common vaccines being below the herd immunity threshold again in 1985, and claims there was no polio outbreak, so the whole thing is rubbish. Here's the issue, he's cherry pciked the one disease that didn't see an increase in the near-aftermath, where as mumps did;

www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/mumps.html

and so did measles;

www.historyofvaccines.org/content/graph-us-measles-cases

So, there you go, a very quick summary of some of the problems with that blog post.

Like everyone and everything to ever dared to question vaccinations it seems
If you are going to question vaccines then you need to evidence to back those arguments up. He doesn't have that evidence nor is he trained to interpret the existing evidence. His arguments have been discredited numerous times therefore he is not a reliable source of information. He still believes that vaccines cause autism which has been proved to be 100% incorrect. Not only does he believe that he profits from it.

My point was to show that many people disagree with herd immunity. Just a opportunity to get familiar with their arguments, consider it and form your own opinion
Sorry but opinion does not trump medical fact. In cases like these your opinion is nowhere near as valid as medical evidence Why can't you see that?

At the same time I couldn't say which one I side with because I simply don't know enough about it
Then you should be trusting those that do. Medical professionals, immunologists etc. Not some crank conspiracy theorist on the internet.

I think it’s pretty clear what the OP’s view is

You say you and your siblings are all vaccinated and don't have any disorders. So there is your anecdotal "evidence" that there is NO link. This has been researched and no links could be established.

People who don't vaccinate their children are piggy-bagging on those who do. They also put people at risk who for medical reasons cannot be vaccinated.

"If you don't like the vaccine, try the disease!"

*@Teaonthebedsheets
*
Did you read the vaccine information link i posted upthread viiz? I notice you keep saying you don't have a view but you only link to quite extreme anti vax sites.

Sorry I missed that. I'll have a look.

As far as I remember this is the first link I posted on this thread. I might be wrong of course but I just don't remember posting any other links. That particular article was the only one I read on that site so I wouldn't know if it's an anti vax website or not.

That particular article was the only one I read on that site so I wouldn't know if it's an anti vax website or not

Something to bear in mind. Information on the internet is heavily biased towards the anti-vaxx movement. They dress it up to look professional /medical but if you dig a little deeper then you can often see that they are funded by anti-vax organisations.

Reputable organisations are generally pro-vaccine so if something reads like its anti-vaxx it's because it is!

You’re so quaintly naive OP, not knowing what type of website you’re linking..

*@CostanzaG
*
Something to bear in mind. Information on the internet is heavily biased towards the anti-vaxx movement. They dress it up to look professional /medical but if you dig a little deeper then you can often see that they are funded by anti-vax organisations.

Why do you think it's biased towards anti vax movement? Anti vax are in minority surely and probably hiding somewhere where the majority pro vax can't get their hands on them 😂
I don't know many people who started family already so I don't know how this looks in real life and if there is any bias, but I would imagine it would go towards pro vaccination.

Why do you think it's biased towards anti vax movement? Anti vax are in minority surely and probably hiding somewhere where the majority pro vax can't get their hands on them 😂
I don't know many people who started family already so I don't know how this looks in real life and if there is any bias, but I would imagine it would go towards pro vaccination

There has been some academic research done on the information online relating to vaccines. They found online information to be heavily biased towards the anti-vaxx moment. I work at a university and I attended an open lecture given by a Professor in Immunology on the topic of vaccinations and she referenced it as part of the lecture. She suggested that it was because the medical profession and most of the general public were on board with vaccinations they didn't need to shout as loudly to be heard. Also, for anti-vaxxers it is an opinion where as she works in scientific fact which speaks for it'self.

Oh and by the way...this professor had dedicated her career to the subject and was unequivocally pro-vaccine. That's all I needed to know.

Let's drop validating if author is even worthy to consider his words because this seems to be favourite way to discredit people on here.

Are you kidding?! Do you really think it’s irrelevant that the author has no medical or scientific experience, that he makes money from the anti-vax movement, that he has LIED about research in order to give fake evidence in support of his beliefs? Do you really not think that these are relevant factors you should take into consideration in deciding whether or not to believe him?

Tell me this - if you suddenly fell very ill, who would you seek help from? A doctor, trained in medicine and regulated by an ethics board, or a business man who said ‘buy my medicine instead, it’s totally safe although I have no evidence for that’.

Do you really think we shouldn’t use our own intelligence to make any discernment about the information we receive? Do you really think all information is equal, regardless of how inexperienced or dishonest the person providing it is?

his theories have been discredited. He's a crank and that's well known and documented

Like everyone and everything to ever dared to question vaccinations it seems

Well, that's usually the case when people desperately try to prove something widely evidenced as false, yes. I wonder if back in the day there were members of the general public moaning how odd it seemed that anyone who tries to say that the Sun DOES revolve around the Earth is a bad scientist. It was presumably all a BIG ASTRO conspiracy.

@YoGert

The point is that if there were a very small increase in risk, you wouldn't be able to see it above the statistical noise.

If there are ~1000 cases per year +/-20 standard deviation, and you add in a vaccination programme that causes 2 extra cases per year, no statistician will ever be able to see that above the noise.

You would end up with 2 parents who think 'well, that was a bit of a bloody coincidence, or was it?', but then you might equally well end up with a load of parents thinking that anyway because of actual genuine coincidences.

The point is we literally can't know. All we can do is make a best estimate.

Also, imagine you are one of those parents whose children immediately descend into a fever post-vaccination and then emerge permanently behaving very differently.
If I were them I'd prefer to hear 'there is no evidence of a link, coincidence is much more likely. If there is a link it is weak and there is still a huge net benefit.'
I wouldn't want to hear 'there is categorically 100% not a link, unless and until it can be proved otherwise', which is essentially calling them either mad or a liar unless they can prove something that is actually impossible either to prove or disprove.

Cath are you children adult? If so have they chosen to remain unvaccinated?

Haven't RTWT but my father in law, husband's uncle, husband and my eldest nephew ALL are on the autistic spectrum. Due to their greatly varying ages they all had different combos of vaccines. The increased rate of diagnosis is due to it being recognised by medical professionals and becoming widely known about. Not due to vaccination.

How measles damages the immune system