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 believe that in order for a population to be low risk everyone has to be vaccinated.
Ruty... thanks for that I tried to skim read and totally missed the point and was about to say it proved nothing .

That was my point riven. We all have anecdotal evidence of each side of the debate as I see it there is no question about what measles, mumps and rubella can do but there are questions about the link between MMR and autism.

interesting final sentence from the BMJ here (and similar to the cochrane's finding regarding MMR safety research)

hatrick google independent prevenar. It's about the increase in other types of pneumonia.

`Thought this sentence was interesting as well:

"The large gap between policy and what the data tell us (when rigorously assembled and evaluated) is surprising."

Think that sums up my problems with vaccination policy.

oh sorry hatrick x-posted that was from the BMJ, not the Indie article

Dr Nick Chadwick, a scientist who was a PhD student in Wakefield's team in the late 1990s. Dr Chadwick was responsible for devising the scientific techniques that would later be used to detect the presence of the measles virus in the guts of children with autism. Dr Chadwick told Deer categorically that using these techniques he had not detected any live measles virus in the guts of any of the 40 children examined. Nor was any measles virus found in any of the cerebrospinal fluid samples obtained. And yet, despite this, these findings were not made public. Dr Wakefield claims that he subsequently published the fact that he considered the technology used by Dr Chadwick to be insufficiently sensitive.
Dr Wakefield now spends much of his time in the United States, where he is linked to a company that promotes products said to be of benefit to autistic children. He continues to address huge audiences at major conferences on autism. And he continues to refuse to be interviewed by Brian Deer.

Posie - Your mistake is thinking a mother feels equal responsibility for all children of the world. Which is not the case.

A mother's primary responsibility is to her own children. As such, she will not vaccinate her child when the (real or perceived) benefits of vaccination are less than the (real or perceived) risk involved.

'Risk' = (1) a major adverse reaction to vaccine or (2) a complication with measles/mumps etc.

Oh please don't bring Deer into it. His mistakes/confusions/lies are being exposed at the GMC. I wrote to Brian Deer and asked why he misrepresented the patent application - he didn't reply. Why on earth would Wakefield be interviewed by Deer. The only people who listen to Deer are the BBC and last week had to remove inaccurate information from their website.

GOSH found measles virus in the CSF of the girl who died from the MMR (on the video) as did Prof O Leary's group. There are always problems with contamination/sensitivity surrounding PCR. Chadwick is not at the GMC (AFAIK) and his 'evidence' was far from clear. There has been a recent thread about this.

Wakefield is now a Director of Thoughtful house who provide paediatric gastro-enterology services.

I really wouldn't rely on Deer's evidence. Read the GMC hearing diaries (oh said that already didn't I?) and you will see why.

old, but Deer, Wakefield and Chadwick played out on the pages of the BMJ

Deer was hardly the bulk of that extract.
Where's this video, could you repost the link, please?
To be fair I have had measles, mumps and rubella and I'm fine. You write a compelling argument and I am, more so than ever, willing to look at the whole thing again (although my dd has just had the MMR).
Nothing in medicine seems without financial benefits.
But the question still begs should we all, baring in mind some people cannot afford the single jabs, suspend our uptake of the vaccine?

BMJ 2005
BMJ, there's no end to this

i personally find the herd immunity issue very difficult. My son has gut problems and we have a history of auto immune illnesses in the family so I am wary of the MMR. But then there are many other parents whose children don't have those issues who are concerned about MMR and that is their right. But probably, if more and more people don't do singles or MMR, measles cases will rise, and not all of them will be non-serious. So it is a catch 22. And those of us who delay/select/ don't vaccinate at all, do I feel have the luxury of choosing what is best for our children in a country where diseases are managed pretty well, and there is no polio or diptheria, etc. In other countries we may not have that luxury. And that is probably due to vaccination. so it is an impossibly torturous subject for me.
However, I do find claims of vaccinating ones child for the greater social good a little disingenous. One always does what one thinks is best for one's child, I'm afraid. And if you think that your child is more at risk from vaccines than another child, and that there is a real risk of harm, then you can't really do it can you. Impossibly difficult topic though.

rubella of course is a very real risk to unborn babies- my mum lost a baby to rubella damage, so personally 9and this is all ultimately about personal decisions) i'd see rubella as a priority

But Peachy, if your mother had had rubella as a child, she would not have lost that baby, as she would already have full immunity.

I had rubella as a 10 yr old. It is a very mild illness UNLESS you get it for the first time in early pregnancy. Immunity from the actual illness tends to last a lifetime. The vaccines wear off. I don't know why they are merely deliberately infecting everybody with rubella at 6 or 7. It would make a lot more sense.

aren't deliberately etc...

you can't just infect everybody though- there will always be kids and adults who are risk from any infection, so benefitting from herd immunity from vaccination in a big way, rather than being at risk from rubella etc in the way they already are from the common cold

i'm with ruty really, it's all very complex and i honestly don't think there's a right or wrong. you just make the best decision for yor kids that you feel you can

Rubella vaccine should definitely be given to all adolescent girls. IMO it is very irresponsible for the govt not to do this. Rubella immunity often wears off if you are given it as a baby, at the crucial age when you need immunity. I know women who have had several rubella jabs and are still not immune. I am grateful i had it as a child.

I had a few narrow minded opinions as a child, immunity does not always follow!!

Well the BMJ rapid responses are interesting.

the video

And I would recommend that after that you read the BMJ hearings diaries (on the same website).

You can't get an unbiased report because the transcripts of the hearing have not been allowed to be released. The reports are detailed though.

I, of course meant GMC hearing diaries.

As said before, there is no reason to vaccinate who whole population against rubella.

Most will catch it in childhood and will be immune against it for life. Out of the rest, only girls need to be vaccinated before they are sexually active.

I have no intention to vaccinate DD against rubella. In her early teens, we do a little test and vaccinate if not immune.

I've worked with HVs in the past, and like myself they also agree that there's no link with MMR and autism. It's bulls**t. Sorry for being so blunt. There's no scientific evidence to prove that MMR triple vaccinations cause ASD. This myth only materialised because one person felt the need to scaremonger, so all the other parents jumped on the bandwagon, and hey presto, it's in the media spread like wildfire.

thanks, Posie. Nice to see there's someone else out there with a similar view.

No, I'm not reading through all the posts, I've got other things in my life to do, I only pop on MN briefly. I'm responding to OP statement.

just to add, the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the diseases themselves, which I'm sure has already been commented anyway.