to be cross my ds has measles because other parents didn't vaccinate their children

[snickersnack]

He's 11 months old, poor little thing . Fortunately he's going to be ok - he got off quite lightly, I think - but it was scary and he was really poorly for a day or so. Spent 10 hours in A&E yesterday while he had chest x-rays, blood tests, IV fluids etc. Now we're just waiting to see if his sister,who's 2, gets it - she's had one dose of MMR already so fingers crossed she's immune.

We live in an area where immunisation rates are among the lowest in the country. Now I have to go and tell all parents of the other babies he's met recently that their children might be at risk as well...

I thought I remembered seeing data about the rates of autism in Japan that showed they had a similar rise in cases despite not having the MMR. I could be wrong as I only vaguely remember seeing this so please don't shout at me if it's rubbish.
I'm also intrigued to know what the cover ups were for asbestos and thalidomide. I know tobacco companies covered up data for tobacco but with thalidomide in particular, it seems pretty clear cut now the damage it causes when used in pregnancy (although it is great stuff in some diseases).

I have no idea if there is a link between autism and vaccines. As far as I know, there may well be a link between autism and the wearing of blue clothes during pregnancy. I don't mean to be flippant, but really, we don't know what causes autism.

What we DO know is that if there is a link, it affects a tiny, tiny minority. MUCH smaller than the minority who die or are permentantly disabled by catching measles.

Right now it is possible to choose not to vaccinate, with the knowledge that the child involved is very unlikely to die/be damaged by measles. This is NOT because measles is not dangerous. It is because the rates of measles infection are low, and thus so is the incidence of complications.

This is because most parents DO have their kids vaccinated, there IS a high degree of herd immunity in the general population and so it is possible to make a choice not to vaccinate and be reasonably confident that nothing bad will happen-measles just isn't around like it used to be.

What I am saying in a nutshell is that IMO parents who are not vaccinating are weighing up the risk of the MMR vs the risk of their kid getting measles, in a population where most others have vaccinated . So they won't take the risk, but are happy to benefit from it. I seriously doubt that people would be worrying about the effects of vaccines if we still had kids dying of measles-and kids DO die of measles.

I vaccinated my kids, knowing their was a tiny risk of complications, because that is, I believe, the socially responsible thing to do. It benefits society and so, ultimately, them.

What really winds me up is that if everyone just vaccinated for a generation or two, measles could probably be virtually wiped out, like smallpox. It would certainly be better if no one had to vaccinate against anything, because the dieseases weren't out there, but that just isn't possible without first a mass vaccination campaign.

ruty - "measles can be a devastating disease"

Sure. And driving can be a dangerous pastime. And childbirth can be deadly.

Except that in the western world, when you have doctors and hospitals in reach, measles and mumps are not so 'devastating'.

And if gov disagrees, rather than pushing MMR, they should (1) have single vaccines available on NHS (like single measles vaccine was available for DD on French 'securite sociale', and (2) research how and why a small subset of children react so badly to MMR.

Fairy, re "parents judge the risk of the MMR causing autism bigger than catching measles"

This isn't about catching. It's about judging the risk of having permanent damage - by MMR or by measles/mumps.

Both chances are quite small.

Sorry haven't read all the posts, but actually there was a huge study published this year www.medscape.com/viewarticle/569974here. I understand that parents of children who develop autism want to find something to blame, but i really don't think the MMR is it.
Many conditions for which we don't know the cause are described as being predisposed and that manifest after an environmental trigger. It doesn't matter what the trigger is, and this usually is a very normal experience to most other people. That is, it was always going to happen, but it could have just as easily been the common cold or a fall in the playground that set it off.
I see not getting the MMR as socially irresponsible TBH

sorry here

risk of permenant damage by measles is MUCH higher than from the MMR, if no one is vaccinating.

True, if most people vaccinate, the risks of complications from either might be similar, as the risk of catching measles are much much lower.

I have very little sight in one eye, btw, as a result of complications from measles. I am by no means the only person I have met with similar complications.

We are so incredibly lucky to be able to virtually guarentee that our kids won't get serious diseases.

Bitcat - I am sorry for your sister(s?), but you must know that death from measles has been very rare since 1950s, even before introduction of measles vaccination in 1960s.

In the UK, there were 740 cases of measles in 2006, and 971 cases in 2007. Out of these, there was only one death (in 2006), and that was a boy from a traveller family who was suffering from an underlying lung condition. That was the first measles death in the UK for 14 years.

None of which will of course alleviate your family's suffering, but neither does it justify your apparent belief that measles is such a big killer of a disease. In the western world, it is not.

Winky said it better.

Good post, Fillyjonk.

I think some parents have good reasons for not vaccinating their children (e.g. where a sibling has had an adverse reaction) and I understand the reactions of some posters to the risks involved. We all want the best thing for our children.

I wonder though whether the posters on this thread who decided not to vaccinate their child want EVERYONE else to do the same. I suspect that if they were really honest they would say not ... which does rather bring the question of social responsibility into play.

Cote, sorry, but even with doctors and hospitals in reach measles can be devastating
I'm glad you had a mild case of it and were fine but some children are not, despite all drugs available. This is the point that people like me who are pro MMR as well as the antis are prepared to agree upon and it is just plain wrong to keep saying it's not such a big deal when it can be. Believe me I've met half a dozen parents of mentally and physically disabled children who caught measles in the 80s and 90s when hospitals were pretty up to speed as I recall

I don't everyone else to vaccinate their child if they don't want to.

Sure, Winky, but I bet you kind of want most people to want to ...

so there is a 1/10000 (approx) chance of dying from measles?

Thats quite a lot really. I don't epecially want to take that risk for my kids.

it will actually be higher-there will be deaths from, for example, encephalitis, a known complication of measles, which are not recorded as measles-related deaths.

IIRC chances of measles related deaths from complications are around 1/1000.
And a death is a death.

fillyjonk - re "very unlikely to die/be damaged by measles. This is NOT because measles is not dangerous. It is because the rates of measles infection are low".

No.

The rate of complications in measles is very low in the Western world where malnutrition is rare and water is clean.

Does anyone know if there are any downsides to getting the single jabs (apart from the fact that you have to pay for it yourself obviously)?

I was right-deaths from complications 1/1000 in the west

(rising to 30 % death rate if you are immunocomprised. jesus. I think I am correct in saying that certain coditions will depress your immune system without diagnosis. But regardless, imagine if one's child was asymptomatically incubating measles and gave them to someone, say, taking immunosuppressants to prevent organ rejection, etc...)

still standing-I personally wouldn't give the singles. They are not the same vaccine components and are much, much less tesred. the MMR is the world's most tested vaccine.

of course its up to individuals re risk but I am not prepared to take a 1/1000 risk of my kids dying.

That graph on the 'informed parent' link is very odd indeed. It shows the death rate as 0, down from a peak of 1230ish, at the point when the vaccine was introduced. But the text on the page says the death rate had declined 95% before the vaccine was introduced.

Too right mrsshackleton, it was in the 80's(and its not that long ago) that i lost my sister..whilst there isnt much measles about today is because of the vaccine and in smaller much more vunerable children and less able to cope with the illness can be devastating. In that i mean young babies that have not yet had the vaccine and those who cannot have it for whatever reason, these are the children who will suffer if the uptake carries on declining as it is. And cote we only lived about 10mins from the hospital and my sister still died..there was nothing the doctors could do..it took a hold of her and that was that. I wonder if people would be so quick to dismiss if we were talking about menigitis..which is extremely hard to spot because it is so similar to flu at the begining and once its got so far its very hard to reverse.
I had measles so did my mum, and other siblings..it didnt effect us as bad..but then i wasnt 6mths old! And this is the point the younger, the more vunerable they are to complications. And i'm sorry cote but i will not take that risk with my children and will not have a guilty conscience for those parents and children that do have to deal with the horror of measles.

fillijonk - 1/10000 is an unacceptable risk, is it?

What do you think risk of death during childbirth is? 1.3/10000 in the US and 0.99/10000 in the UK.

"I don't epecially want to take that risk for my kids"

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when you forbid your daughter to ever have children on this basis

Thanks, Filly

Death during childbirth is something we cannot prevent(unless it is caused by medical negligence, which most are)..what we are talking about is something that can be prevented by a vaccine.
In which case doctors and midwifes are to blame for this, inadequate care!
And yes cote that risk is unaceptable to me..

Filly that link was very helpful and i know i have made the right choice..1 in a 1000..what if that 1 is mine!

I do wish people would read thread.
It is not about not wanting to vaccinate your child, it is about wanting a more honesty and more research into vaccine safety.
different children have different risk factors. for some children there may be a 1/1000 risk [or much bigger] of developing autism after MMR. More research needs to be done that is all, Bloody hell, why can't that be an acceptable desire?
Fleximum the Japanese study was giving singles 4 weeks apart - not enough time in between for any difference in autism rates. Anyway as i said we are talking about a small subset of children being affected by MMR so difficult to see in statistical studies.

ok let's be clear about this. We are arguing about the severity of measles as a disease. This is a known disease, is serious, and causes fatal complications in a proportion of sufferers.

In all the studies looking at MMR and autism no link has been proven.

Where's the problem here? I really don't get it.

What about mumps and rubella? They can also be pretty nasty- maybe not with the risk of death, but serious complications like infertility in mumps in boys, and death of foetuses in pregnant women catching rubella