AIBU to remind everyone that the MMR vaccine does NOT cause autism?

[TheHodgeoftheHedge]

Seeing as this worry comes up so many times on MN and in wider life, I feel obliged to post this and remind everyone that MMR has not link to autism whatsoever, as yet another HUGE study has found.

www.independent.co.uk/news/health/mmr-vaccine-autism-antivax-measles-study-andrew-wakefield-a8808086.html

Thanks.

why don't we get 10 yearly jabs against tetanus? I had one a while back after doing a bit of reading and as a keen gardener I questioned if I should have one and my GP agreed I should.

Yes, we should. I've got them as an adult as part of travel vaccines. Along with (IIRC) polio, hepatitis (A and B), and yellow fever.

It actually says in the article that deaths by tetanus have decreased (pretty much disappeared) since vaccination was introduced. There goes the theory for immunity through breathing spores.
(it's true it's not transmitted human to human)
It's still funny that it's a germ, and suprisingly a certain pp put them as cause of tetanus, instead of bad diet or something.

So you don’t actually want my opinion then...fair enough ... but I’m not going to lay myself open to more vitriol on here than I have alread.

I know exactly what i would do, I don’t feel the need to argue the toss about it on here...because atm cancer treatment protocol is up to the individual and there aren’t opinionated trolls everywhere to force anyone with it to have chemo etc...unlike the campaign for mandatory vaccination

Needless to say my approach and view on cancer has evolved massively since I left oncology.

@HIVpos I think you’re absolutely nuts to take the treatment... that’s what I actually think. ., but whether you continue to take it or not is neither here nor there to me.
If you were a loved one however I’d be jumping up and down to try and persuade you NOT to take it.... ditto with chemo .... does that answer your question

I’d like to hear your opinion, but on here, not off line as I’ve already said. If you are confident that you are right then what is the problem?

I very much doubt though that your plan B would would result in the near normal life expectancy CML patients have since treatment with TKIs began.

Cat... A 1975 article about natural immunity to tetanus, really?

Let me help you move to the 21st century:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21874642
"Tetanus can be only prevented by vaccination because immunity against this disease is rarely acquired, even by natural infections. To maintain long-term protective immunity against tetanus, booster immunization is essential for adolescents and adults. Most hospitalized cases and virtually all deaths occur in people over 60 years of age."

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5167047/
This actually recommends regular tetanus and diphteria vaccination throughout life.

If you were a loved one however I’d be jumping up and down to try and persuade you NOT to take it

Good thing she has more brains than to listen to you.

I feel sorry for your loved ones if they get a serious illness.

It doesn’t really answer the question though does is @Cathmidston?

What I want to know is what you would do to prevent your premature death if you were diagnosed with cancer? Or HIV for that matter.

3-7 years is the best my husband could exprect without treatment, he wouldn’t even see our children grow up - thankfully he’s not stupid enough to take the risk.

then again I tend to read books on the subject

So, not scientific articles?

Scientific articles certainly don't use emotive language. They tend to give actual numbers of people who die and don't die, for example.

I feel sorry for your loved ones if they get a serious illness

Here you have the reason why I’m not going to start a debate on cancer therapy on here

There are many things I would do if I was diagnosed with cancer depending on what type etc etc ... HIV on the other hand.... would be fairly meaningless to me

Lweji - I imagine that scientific articles don’t give the answers Cath is looking for. Whereas a book written by Dr Quack can say whatever it wants. If you keep reading you’ll find somebody nuts enough to back up your theory.

So would you do if you have had CML?

• take the TKI and have a near normal life expectancy (assuming diagnosis in the Chronic phase)
• not take the TKI ans die in 3-7 years

There really is no pother option is there Cath?

Well in that case, as you’re so sure then you’ve nothing to get annoyed about then have you... you do what you do and I’ll do what I do...

HIVpos I think you’re absolutely nuts to take the treatment

Cath - Thank fuck I’m NOT nuts. Now someone who tells me this most certainly is.

Have you not understood that no one here takes you seriously? Your links to back up anything you say are meaningless for reasons previously cited.

Awake - your Dr Quack post sums Cath up well. Thank god we have more brains.

I think HIVpos was right before.
Engaging just suggests that there is a debate; that there are two ‘sides’ to this.

This is someone who believes germs don’t cause disease

This is someone who believes HIV does not cause AIDS

Someone who is against the use of antiretroviral medication to keep HIV positive people healthy

Someone who is against the use of chemotherapy to treat cancer

This is someone who rejects medicine, science and believes that established medical treatments are not only unnecessary but actually cause illness. Not just vaccines, but antibiotics, antiretrovirals, chemotherapy and I’m guessing there’s more to add to that list. Link 10,000 pieces of research to back you up and they’ll link to a since discredited study from 1981 and a YouTube video of someone Very Important explaining why you’re all wrong.

You can’t reason with someone who believes that it’s the rest of the world that’s crazy and they’re just fine.

@cathmidston I almost never respond to these threads but I’ve followed this one. What is your background? You said oncology; is it nurse or doctor or research scientist? My knowledge is limited.

Engaging just suggests that there is a debate; that there are two ‘sides’ to this.

It really depends on how we engage.

@Cath, anyone reading this who isn't devoid of critical thought and who recognises bullying behaviour can see who has been reasonable, concise and respectful in this thread. The bait and attack thing going on is reminiscent of my days in primary school.

Them: "What would you do Cath?"
Also them: "Oh no shut up, we didn't really want to hear it, we just wanted to mock and deride you for even daring to have a voice on an issue that we are 100% confident we understand despite the constant changes in science and how it is applied and understood, even by most scientists"

Some self awareness from you lot, wouldn't go astray.

despite the constant changes in science and how it is applied and understood, even by most scientists

Surely that's why isolated articles from 1975 are virtually irrelevant, no?

Cath, you demonstrably don't understand scientific debate or where true scientific debate truly lies.

@MNdogmaistoneverquestion

‘a voice on an issue’?

This isn’t about Brexit or screen time for children or what sauce is best with a bacon sandwich. Since when is chemotherapy as cancer treatment ‘an issue’? Or taking antiretrovirals to control HIV infection?

A meta-analysis published in 2004 explored the contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to five year survival in 250 000 adults with solid cancers from Australian and US randomised trials.3 An important effect was shown on five year survival only in testicular cancer (40%), Hodgkin’s disease (37%), cancer of the cervix (12%), lymphoma (10.5%), and ovarian cancer (8.8%). Together, these represented less than 10% of all cases. In the remaining 90% of patients—including those with the commonest tumours of the lung, prostate, colorectum, and breast—drug therapy increased five year survival by less than 2.5%—an overall survival benefit of around three months.

reference?

The bait and attack thing going on is reminiscent of my days in primary school

Well you know how in primary school the teacher has to ascertain just how much knowledge and confidence in their learning a pupil has? And then tries to educate and correct inaccuracies? Well think of Cath as being the pupil who has a distinct lack of knowledge and what she does have is from the wrong, outdated text books. When the teacher tries to instil the correct knowledge, it is found that she is totally resistant/incapable of learning.

As we are all adults here, and some pretty knowledgable in our specialist field, it’s not surprising that we react like we do when faced with such ridulous, potentially dangerous thinking. This is why we can’t take her seriously.

The one thing newly diagnosed HIV+ are warned about is to only read from reliable sources. We know which ones they are and where we will find the most up-to-date info.

As for being self aware, due to past events I personally would say that being self aware, along with empathy, is one of my best traits.

@HIVpos

Well you know how in primary school the teacher has to ascertain just how much knowledge and confidence in their learning a pupil has? And then tries to educate and correct inaccuracies?

That you think of yourself in this way in comparison to anyone who disagrees with you is very telling. Are all those tickets heavy??

If you are so sure of who and what is credible, great! Awesome! Then why are you so aggressive towards anyone offering up information? You are 100% sure, so why not just be content with that, ignore what you don't want to know/read/see/hear and live happily ever after?

@Katterina That you think an issue worth discussing is what your kid eats with their sandwich and is comparable to Brexit is interesting...

@Lwejii I understand it must be difficult to acknowledge that people exist outside of your echo chamber, but surprise! They do. Cath and other pro choice people might be too polite to say it, but I'm not. You have been one of the biggest instigators of this childish pile on.