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?

no.

6, 3 & 12 weeks.

I wouldn't be giving them a normal flu jab

Another 'No' over here also.

No from me, too...my babes are 3 and 2, and we received our letter this week. When I heard from several friends who work in the medical profession that they themselves WOULDN'T have it, it made my own mind up pretty fast. I have never had a 'regular' flu shot, and neither have my DCs, though they are vaccinated with everything else.

Maxybrown - wrt to the swine flu vaccine, I have actually yet to make up my mind whether I'm a vaccinator or a non-vaccinator. I think on balance I am going to take DS, after I realised last night that I am actually quite scared of him contracting swine flu - just in case he's one of the minority who get it really badly. It was the same feelings that made me go for my own jab - in the end I was more scared of swine flu than I was of the vaccine, rightly or wrongly. I decided against fighting to get Celvapan instead of Pandemrix because Celvapan is produced using an untested method. I still don't know if that was the right decision or not.

I don't think I'm implying that people who choose not to take this vaccination are not making an informed judgement. But being informed does depend on going and reading the source material, talking to professionals, etc. - as I'm sure you and others on this thread have done - and not just believing what is written in the tabloids or on single issue campaigning blogs. It is very clear from some posts on this site that some people, not all, are making the decision based on hearsay and Chinese whispers.

I know there are no right and wrong answers, and of course if you have or know a child who has been unfortunate enough to suffer vaccine damage then this will sway your opinion substantially. You know a child who became deaf after having the swine flu vaccine. I, on the other hand, have an aunt who became deaf after catching diptheria as a child, hence I am quite scared of the complications of childhood diseases. As a result I really do worry, given that the vast majority of people are perfectly OK following a vaccine, that this continual eroding of confidence is going to lead to whole rafts of vaccinations not being taken up and a return to the bad old days - as we are seeing with measles in some areas. I do hope my fears in this regard are unfounded.

At the end of the day, for the huge majority of the population the risks from these diseases are still vastly greater than the risks from the vaccinations. We shouldn't forget that.

"At the end of the day, for the huge majority of the population the risks from these diseases are still vastly greater than the risks from the vaccinations. We shouldn't forget that."

Shouldn't forget it? We don't even know it for sure.

upandrunning I think that it is reasonable to say that vaccines have a net positive effect. I haven't met anyone who has died of smallpox recently for instance, unlike the c.2 million a year worldwide in the 60s .

I don't know anyone under 40 who has had diphtheria or polio either. Children in my parents generation however routinely died or suffered serious complications from these diseases.

A side note I know to the specific question of the sf vaccine.

I think it's clear these diseases were reducing drastically in incidence, morbidity and mortality before vaccinations were introduced. Also there are figures showing grand outbreaks of smallpox after each vaccination wave: and since a minority of the population was ever vaccinated it's hard to give credit to the jab.

Of course with these compare and contrast exercises one must always agree to disagree: because I will always see much higher incidence of vaccine damage (major, minor and deaths) than someone who is very pro-vaccination as an engine of public health. So my risk benefit assessment will be completely different to yours.

I would have had ds2 done (2.8) but when I read that it was making children quite poorly for a few days afterwards I just thought it wasn't fair.

This is based on the rumours I have heard that SF isn't really that widespread any more and therefore it's not inevitable that he will catch it.

however I might change my mind if cases appear to rise again significantly.

Btw is there a perceived problem with the pneumococcal vaccine? Ds is very overdue for that as well..Oh dear.

No FA, and neither is there with this one. There are risks with every single vaccine with give to our children. It's just that the pneumococcal disease vaccine isn't seen as a huge exercise in Govt deceit, and I'm curious as to why, because that one also seemed to appear suddenly out of nowhere and I had to think long and hard before allowing DS to have it alongside everything else.

You also suggest that the fact the SF vaccine might make children poorly for a few days is a reason not to vaccinate against a potentially, if rarely, fatal disease. I do see where you're coming from, and I don't want to inflict unnecessary discomfort on my DS either, but that just about sums up why I am so bothered by this whole issue. The vaccination campaign would not exist unless there was a real risk of children catching a disease that will do a hell of a lot worse than make them "poorly" for a few days. No GP is going to inflict a vaccine and the risk of unpleasant side effects on a child for no good reason!

upandrunning - you are clearly not going to even try to be objective about this, so you'll be pleased to know I shan't be making any further replies.

No, sorry, I do have one more point to make and then I'm retiring from the thread as it's making me really mad and quite upset.

Do upandrunning and others like her refuse to realise that the only reason their children are protected from all these deadly childhood diseases is because the rest of us, who are also very aware of the potential risks of vaccinations, are choosing to take the risk and have our children vaccinated for the good of society as a whole? If we all stopped vaccinating tomorrow they'd have to stop being so complacent and start worrying about these diseases along with the rest of us.

I most emphatically do not.

I don't live in a country with universal vaccination anyway.

So I owe you nothing.

"At the end of the day, for the huge majority of the population the risks from these diseases are still vastly greater than the risks from the vaccinations.
We shouldn't forget that."

But the vast majority of the population are not at risk from swine flu. The vast majority of people who have had swine flu have described it as a mild flu. It's estimated that only 10% of children who catch swine flu will display any symptoms at all, and of the 10% who catch it and display symptoms, the number without underlying conditions who have died have been in single figures.

So it would appear that if you get swine flu you might be poorly for a few days, or you could react badly to it and be seriously ill or worse, but the chances of that are apparently minimal unless you have an underlying medical condition that might exaserbate symptoms.

If you have the vaccine you might be poorly for a few days, or you might react badly to the vaccine and end up seriously ill or worse, but the chances of that are apparently minimal.

Except that there's probably quite a good chance your child won't catch swine flu. But by giving a vaccine you are deliberately giving your child a dose of swine flu.

I was offered the vaccination when pregnant & declined it as I believed it hadn't been sufficiently tested. I've since read that it's not actually a new vaccine just that it hasn't been used for this particular strain of flu before & has therefore been tested as well as any vaccine ever is. Yesterday I got a letter for ds1 (almost 5) to have his vaccination & I'm now torn particularly with an 8 week old baby in the house who I'm concerned enough about catching the cold I've currently got never mind the flu of any description. Still undecided but leaning towards not letting him have it for reasons already mentioned in this thread.

ds 4 and 1. Not getting it. It hasn't been tested on under 3's and I wouldn't give them the normal flu jab, so why give them this one?

I agree with upandrunning and wannabe

Upandrunning, I'd be interested to know what you think was the cause of eradication of smallpox. I believe that most of the population did receive the vaccination but if you have figures and evidence to the contrary I'd really like to see them. Do you think the same about polio?

Not trying to be controversial, just genuinely intrigued to know where that came from.

Probably sanitation and improved nutrition, like, for example scarlet fever, which more or less disappeared on its own. It was already declining steadily but there was at least one significant outbreak shortly after a period of compulsory vaccination.

DS is 14 months and no idea completely undecided. The nurse told me that a lot of people will turn it down. Will keep watching this until invite arrives

I have 6 year old and 2 year old.
I think both my husband and 2 year old have already had it so won't bother to vacinate her. She is up to date with everything else and has no health problems - to date!

Gaelicsheep, sorry you have given up but I can see why it was driving you mad.

On guilliane barre syndrome, the likelyhood of getting it from the flu vaccine is around 1 in a million. The likelyhood of getting it from flu is over 50 in a million.

My three year old recieved her invitation last week. We are vaccinating and I hope my 5 year old is invited to be jabbed too.

Upandrunning, Smallpox and Scarlet Fever aren't related to hygiene or nutrition and sadly Scarlet Fever hasn't gone. My sister was admitted to hospital in the summer with it after her symptoms were mistaken for swine flu and she was prescribed tamiflu but not seen by a doctor. She ended up vomiting blood and collapsing with tachycardia due to dehydration before a GP saw her. It's still a notifiable illness although thankfully is quite curable using antibiotics (it's a bacterial infection not a virus).

You're right that you don't live in a country with universal vaccination but for herd immunity to protect the masses you only need approximately 85% uptake and so other people's children do benefit when the majority agree to be vaccinated.

Sorry, forgot to say, you have never been able to immunise against Scarlet Fever.

Can't decide. Wait on your poll!

Upandrunning - small pox is transmitted via respiratory droplets. Can you please explain the mechanisms by which nutrition and sanitation led to it's demise as a killer disease ? Or anyone else who knows ?