to consider not immunizing ds against swine 'flu?

[deliakate]

And can we do a poll - who is and who isn't and what are the ages of your dcs?

Measles is also spread by respiratory droplets -- radically on the decline, in incidence, morbidity and mortality before a vaccine was introduced. Sanitation and nutrition had an enormous impact on measles and the impact of measles on the sufferer. I'm not sure why smallpox would be different. Less crowded conditions, better care and isolation of patients, the natural life cycle of a virus, the strengthening of the population through natural immunity: all of these will have contributed. I'm not an epidemiologist but the facts are there about its decline so I guess the only job is to explain them. Scarlet fever also declined heavily without a vaccine.

No, I mean I really don't live in a country with universal vaccination, not the UK.

Happy, I did know about Scarlet Fever and the lack of vaccination, it was kinda my point. And I did say more or less.

But Scarlet Fever is still around, we just have antibiotics these days and so it's quickly treated and so not spread (you were contagious for weeks before antibiotics were available hence my dad being sent away from his parents for 6 weeks in 1935 whereas with antibiotics you're not contagious within a couple of days).

Not sure I've heard of measles being linked to poor sanitation but if you have some evidence I'd be interested to see it. I do see your point about better understanding of illnesses and isolation being used and less crowded conditions but I'm not sure my two eldest sisters who both had measles in the 60s were affected by either of those.

Not just the morbidity : the incidence of scarlet fever is reduced.

But haven't you seen the graphs of disease decline? They clearly show that most of the decline occurred before vaccinations were introduced.

Also I'm surprised that improved nutrition isn't considered significant in the fight against disease -- not sure it was you that said that, but it's much mistaken. For eg: WHO vitamin A biscuits for measles.

No for DS who is 3. Why? Not because I have any real view on the short or indeed longer term impact of the vaccine but because I do not view swine flu as a real risk. Further DS (aside from a dairy allergy) is a healthy young boy who is highly unlikely to be affected badly by swine flu; I would rather he fought the disease with his own immune system if necessary.

DS1 9 not vaccinated, DS2 6 and in a high risk group has been vaccinated as have I (am pregnant).

DS2 had a sore arm and was under the weather for a couple of days and then fine. The risks of swine flu for him would be a hospital stay at least so we took the decision to vaccinate. I also spoke to his respiratory consultant and consultant immunologist as well as our own GP. All three agreed he should have it.

It is interesting, however, from reading this thread that the medical profession can also not agree on the necessity of vaccinating, so as parents it is doubly difficult.

I think I would be naive to not believe there may be no long term side effects whatsoever, but as DS2 has the normal flu vaccine and the pnuemonia one the medical profession do all agree that for him the risks of any flu are frightening and of an immediate life threatening concern.

"On guilliane barre syndrome, the likelyhood of getting it from the flu vaccine is around 1 in a million."

Do you mean the flu vaccine or the swine flu vaccine? In the case of the swine flu vaccine it is not true. Medical professionals have been asked to report GBS cases after vaccination for assessment.

Upandrunning, do you have links for the graphs?

I was speaking to my mother earlier and smallpox vaccination was compulsory until the early 60s. She had to have it 3 times because she didn't react to the vaccine and then her doctor had to fill in a form to say he had attempted it three times and failed. It was only then she was let off.

I can see your point about nutrition but I'm not convinced the diet of the general population is better now than the post-war years when all children and pregnant women had vitamin drops on the NHS and generally ate home-cooked food.

Do you mean morbidity or mortality? And I agreed that Scarlet Fever transmission is less but due to antibiotics. Sometimes it's not picked up on either. My nephew passed it on to my sister (he had flu-like symptoms for a week and that was what it was assumed to be) while she was very ill (she's normally v strong and fights off illness easily). If her husband and son hadn't had peeling skin on their feet her illness would have been put down as "acute throat infection" and not Scarlet Fever.

Oh gosh Happy I'm so tired (very late here) but will try tomorrow. I've seen them in books as well as on line so off the top of my head I just can't.

I have more to say about the other issues you mentioned but I'm dropping in my chair and will be back tomorrow

ps can you believe i came on here aftr a dinner party? I've got an mn problem ..

Message withdrawn

DS2, 23 months old, had Sf jab. No crying, no reaction. As soon as I get a letter for DS1 (6), I'll take him in. Too many children I know have been struck down very badly by SF, and I certainly don't want DS1 to get it next fall (when he'll be focusing in on 7+!).

DD2 (17mo) getting her's next week and DD1 (4.5yrs) will get her's too once appointment comes through. I seem to be in the minority amongst friends and colleagues who aren't getting their DCs vaccinated or if pregnant aren't having it themselves.

I think it's really hard when your DC is normally so healthy to imagine how ill they could become with SF
and understand why some are reluctant. For me I judge the potential effects of my DDs catching SF to be of greater risk than potential side effects of the vaccine.

at the end of the day your DC your choice

for use, DS2 is in a risk group so there was no real question there.

A very close friend is a nurse in paed ICU and he advised me to get DS1 vaccinated too. He said that too many under 5's with no underlying health conditions were being admitted to the unit with H1N1 - proportionately more than I have nursed in adults. I was concerned about the carrier agent for the H1N1 vaccine and its links to Gulf War Syndrome but there is NO proved evidence so I have decided that the proven statistics for ICU admissions outweighed the unproved links.

I didn't see any mention of mercury in these threads. Mercury is present in the flu vaccine in the form of thiomersal. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal
I take the view that it is barbaric to inject anybody with mercury, and to inject children is incredibly barbaric. There is so much more I could say but if this is not generally known then it is a valid contribution to this discussion.

papacass - it doesnt contain mercury, it contains Thiomersal which is a mercury-based preservative. I know that there has been some controversy (not unlike the MMR scare) abouts a possible link to autism but this link has been disproven

My concerns were more to do with Squalene

fledtoscotland - thanks for the lead on squalene (never 'eard of it), as for the other - if thiomersal is mercury based and SF vaccine contains thiomersal ergo SF vaccine contains mercury. There simply is no safe limit of mercury and in any case it is 50% of thiomersal by mass, we are not talking a few molecules here. Mercury is bad news and so very toxic. I reject the idea that it is has been proven safe (a logical impossibility for a start). We are back into the usual vaccination debate - SF will be catastrophic for some and the vaccine could perhaps have prevented it, but the suppressed truth is that the thiomersal will be catastrophic for some too, and where not giving it becomes a no brainer for me is that I firmly believe it to be an 'insult' to the system which has all manner of unwelcome effects on developing bodies and brains.

OK, so I'm still reading this thread. I'm fully prepared to be shouted down again by several posters, but here goes anyway.

The thiomersal issue has been discussed in depth on other threads. The quantity of thiomersal in this vaccine is 10 times lower than the quantity that was in pretty much each one of the childhood vaccinations that we all (presumably) had. And it is one single dose only, not multiple quantities. 5 microgram of thiomersal. 2.5 micrograms of ethyl-mercury.

This leaflet gives information about thiomersal, ethyl-mercury and how an injection compares with the recommended safe daily limits for ingested methyl-mercury (more dangerous). Remember it is talking about vaccinations with 10 times the amount of thiomersal/mercury.

Thiomersal was one of my main concerns when deciding to take the vaccine as a pregnant woman. I didn't really think about squalene at the time, which is probably a good thing or I'd never have had the vaccination and spent the last couple of months being a nervous wreck every time anyone near me so much as sneezed.

I'm not saying I would have been right to worry about squalene to that extent, however. I agree with fledtoscotland that the risks of swine flu are far greater.

Many people have commented that their DCs are healthy so wouldn't be badly affected by swine flu. Bad assumption to make IMO. 80% of children hospitalised were previously perfectly healthy.

As I said at the start of the my original reply Papacass, its the OP's children so her choice.

Choices should be informed made by looking at available research and weighing up costs & implications against possible benefits. None of the research about Thiomersal (which is incidentally 49% mercury by mass) or Squalene is proven or peer reviewed. Thiomersal is very different molecularly from mercury ie it is NOT mercury.

gaelicsheep - I didn't know about the 10x factor - interesting and must be significant. I cannot prove anything but I make the following observations:

There are ever more toxins in the environment and we are ever more reactive to them. This is a postive feedback loop or rather a vicious circle - the more chemicals in the system the less able the system is to protect itself and the more likely it is to breakdown - hence the unprecedented prevalence of allergies and intolerences. That is even allowing for fashionable allergies which are psycosomatic.

Something is up with modern children. It is widely reported that this generation will die younger than its parents - not for much longer will we be hearing the never had it so good propaganda.

The curse of these times is short termism. Little Johnny didn't drop dead after the injection so it must be safe.

There may have been more mercury in a given shot in the sixties but children are getting a lot more shots these days. I can buy the idea of innoculation, but the way its done on an industrial scale has a lot of worrying implications.

Hope I don't come across as paranoid!

Papacass - my feeling is that it's a single dose that will be broken down by the body within days at the most. A child that eats a lot of fish will be ingesting much higher quantities of a more harmful form of mercury that doesn't break down, but instead accumulates in the body. So unless I'm going to ban my DS from eating fish, I'm not going to be worrying about the minute quantity in one single vaccination.

I take your point about short-termism. But on the other hand if we spent our lives worrying about the long term effects of absolutely everything we'd send ourselves mad.

you dont come across as paranoid but because of global travel/mobile workforce, we are being exposed to new diseases. Diseases are mutating and the new side effects are potentially more harmful than they were say 35yrs ago.

I have never heard that this generation will die younger than its parents. The latest life expectancy figures I read were saying something along the lines of mid 80's for our children.

You pay your money and take your chances. To me, H1N1 is a very real problem and I couldnt live with myself if either DC had had an ICU admission because I was scared of an unproved link.

DS is 2. Not vaccinating. End of.