The MMR jab

[blackcountrywench]

AIBU to consider individual jabs instead of the single MMR? My DS is only 3 months old but dwelling on it already after scare stories from friends. I know research is stating that MMR is safe but is 3 huge doses of vaccine in one go worse than 3 separate jabs?

Yes, pagwatch, very odd. Also what a coincidence today of all days. I thought I'd seen wench before otherwise I would suspect a pro-troll, particularly with the instant disappearance.

I'm surprised the debate is still at this level. I can understand why you weary of it Pagwatch, quite apart from your situation. It's like Groundhog Day.

Why is having 3 vaccines at the same time such a big deal when it's the MMR but not when they have 6 or whatever for their first sets of vaccines?

It's all cocktails now! My DD1 needs a tetanus booster (we lived in another country when she had all her first rounds - different timetable) and the GP has said yes that's fine the nurse will do it but has to be the whole Tet/dip/hib and I think even polio in it now (no separate sugar lump - that was the only nice one!). There's no problem with her having the others as well, it's been ten years, but I distinctly remember getting a separate tetanus myself before travel to India a few years ago - now it appears it's just cocktails - why?

Not even going to comment on MMR - free country as others have said, except to say that other countries have different 'controversies' - in Belgium I had never heard of an MMR 'issue' when my DCs had it - and I don't believe that the incidence of autism is any higher even with a much higher take up. But I had certainly heard about thermorosol (sorry probably spelled wrong) additive issues and worried about them. Odd how different countries have different worries.

It is, really a big deal for the infant vaccines: but who knows what damage is done then. It's often hard to tell. Whereas with MMR people know their child was walking, talking etc etc and will notice and report a change very quickly. At eight weeks, what do we have to compare behaviour against? Was sleeping, now isn't? Well that sounds normal. Crying a lot? Well that sounds normal. Back arching? Can be normal. First ear infections? Bang on. Not catching your eye? Well it might not have been anyway. And so on and so forth.

noblegiraffe
actually people do worry in general about the size of the vaccine schedule and the number of multiple vaccines.
People choose to opt out of other vaccines too.

It is just less interesting to shit stirring journalists I think

Oh and finally - whatever anyone's choice - some pharmaceutical companies and doctors must be making an absolute packet out of all the controversy/worry/separate jabs etc - but then (see SF) - they always do don't they! (bellissima in the wrong profession).

The polio vaccination is compulsory in a number of other European countries - or no nursery/school. Only that one - but then as it's now in a cocktail you can't really help but have the others!

Re: less interesting to journalists, the early vaccines are probably less interesting to lawyers too. One of my relatives is severely autistic and after the diagnosis they got quite a few phone calls from lawyers saying they'd take their case on for suing the MMR vaccine company.

They lost interest when they were told that my relative had not had the MMR vaccine so it couldn't possibly be linked to his autism.

Personally, I think Wakefield is a wanker ? and a dangerous wanker at that ? who has preyed on parents? natural and understandable desire for explanations about their children?s autism.

That said, there?s nothing inherently unreasonable about considering single vaccinations. As both DCs have auto-immune conditions, we looked into the research and considered our options very carefully before making what we hope was an informed decision.

All any of us can do is what we believe is best for our children.

Personally, I think you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Wakefield, Mattelie.

noble

there were only aboutthree companies who were prepared to take on action againstthe vaccine manufacturers. The cases only folded when the legal aid was stopped. It had proceeded for several years with support ( mostly due to the complexity but also to the sheer number of manufacturers and their different lawyers using ( what the judge described as) disgraceful delaying tactics placing huge burden on the appellants.

The case needed about 10 million to complete and the legal aid board suddenly rescinded all the legal aid awards which meant that the money to date had been wasted.

The appelants tried to raise the moeny themselves to continue butthe vaccine manufacturers wrote to each one threatening that if they did not withdraw then they would persue thm for every penny of the defendants costs. This would have meant literally the homes of the appelant who, with disabled children to care for , could not risk it.
It does seem odd that the legal aid board backed out after such a long time when 10 million probably would have been money well spent in order to have a full hearing of the evidence.

I am pretty surprised that you had lawyers approaching you as it was specialised work and the proceedings were fraught

YANBU. I was considering singles too for my DS.

However, and I'm not sure if it's already been said, but the Mumps single vaccine is no longer available and is not looking likely that it will ever be available in the near future.

With this information I'm still undecided as having a son I really want him to have the mumps vaccine.

I gave mine the singles as I was very worried about the (then just out!) supposed link with autism.

As it turns out, they are autistic anyway! So had they had the mmr I may well have been convinced it was that. ds1 was clearly autistic from birth, whereas ds2 had a marked regression at the time he would have had the mmr. If he had had it, I would have def linked the 2.

That said, I know and know of many many people who are 100% certain their child's autism is the result of the mmr.

So I think there must be 2 types of autism - genetic and - what would be the word? environmental? not environmental but something like that!

I think the problem is we just don't understand autism.

I can assure you I do, upandrunning. Have read extensively owing to DC?s medical conditions. Frequent and occasionally extended hospital stays do tend to make you pretty skeptical and questioning of the medical ?establishment?. Unfortunately Wakefield tried to take shortcuts and as a result rather then advancing the research he has actually set it back.

?So I think there must be 2 types of autism - genetic and - what would be the word? environmental? not environmental but something like that!?

heQet, this is very interesting, particularly coming from you with your direct experience of it, as this is exactly what Wakefield claims. He calls it autistic enterocolitis.

A US court case last year was largely sceptical about its existence and called the research to date speculative, but nevertheless left the door open for further research and investigation into links between GIs and autism.

Anyway, I?ll stop droning on about if for now, the US case has been widely documented and is readily available for anyone who?s interested in reading up about it.

does he? Must admit I have never read his work . What I know of it comes, well, mainly from mumsnet. Oh dear. again.

It just makes sense to me, based on what I have read.

But then I also think autism is 'normal' human behaviour taken to the extreme. Again, just my musings. I think of it like - all humans are on a line. Grouped in the middle are the 'normal' people, then dotted here there and everywhere are the aspies, the auties, the eccentrics and when you get to the end of the line, the behaviours are so - extreme if you like, that the people are not able to function as part of 'normal' society.

I'm no expert of course, and I fully expect to be torn a new one but it's just how it seems to me. I see autistic behaviours in everyone, those little odd behaviours, those little routines etc but in most it doesn't affect how they deal with the world. iyswim.

or maybe I just spend too much time thinking about it.

Other people have come to quite different conclusions, Mattelie, including the parents of the children in the original study. Sweeping statements like "he is a wanker" -- well really.

blackcountrywench, we gave singles.
It's entirely up to you, why would it be unreasonable?
Check out where the outreach clinics are and be prepared to travel. We were so worried even about the baby jabs (new five in one was introduced when dd2 was born) we gave them seperate too. Was a nightmare tbh but i don't regret it as at the time i felt so uneasy. When ds came along we couldn't do seperate baby jabs so he had 5 in 1 and i hated it but didn't know what scared me the most for him so got it done.
Be sure you make the right decision for you, i don't envy you, so so glad the jabs are 'nearly' done for me.

I gave my son the three separate jabs and when it was time for his pre-school booster, the clinic did a blood test that tested his immunity to Measles, Mumps and Rubella. His immunity to Measles and Mumps was very high so he didn't need boosters for those, but his immunity to Rubella was slightly lower than average so he just had that booster jab.

The GMC has struck Wakefield off! (someone just started another thread on it).

About bloody time.

HeQet, you clearly are an expert because you have 2 autistic children. How much more of an expert do you want to be?

upandrunning, sorry you were offended, it was the politest term I could think of. Nothing Wakefield did in his study of MMR and autism holds up. The fact that no study before or since has been able to replicate his findings pretty much proves it. (I suppose it?s just about conceivable that he is so far ahead of his time that he discovered something no one else is bright enough to do, but the odds are heavily against it.)

His slightly tangential current research into links between GIs and autistic spectrum conditions is, IMHO, much more interesting.

But let me ask you this: do you think he is more or less likely to be listened to in the future now he has been accused of falsifying his research in the past?

As a parent whose DCs suffer from incurable chronic medical conditions, I am hugely sympathetic to the very human emotion of wanting to know what causes such conditions. But Wakefield hasn?t advanced that understanding one iota.

They haven't struck him off.

Yes, I spoke too soon.

HeQet DS1 was born in 2002 when all this was in the press so I too opted for single jabs, he had an ASD diagnosis in 2008, and if I'd given him the MMR would probably had blamed that too. I have had a nother baby since, DS2 born last September so he's only 5 months old but am wondering what to do about the MMR even though I know it didn't cause DS1's autism, how mad is that!

OP - as two other posters have said, I looked into singles when DS was younger. But the fact that the mumps vaccine was not available made the decision for me. Having read up the possible long term implications for DS if he got mumps, was a no brainer.

It is a very personal decision and totally dependant on how you view things. If something had happened to DS (or another child) as a result of not getting the MMR vaccine, the guilt for me would have been terrible.