to think that there is a witch hunt against Andrew Wakefield?

[MagalyZz]

I just can't believe that they're still gunning for this guy!?

Whatever you make of his research, it WAS his research and he found what he found and he should be allowed to "suggest a link"

I have a child on the spectrum who had the MMR and I do not think the MMR had anything to do with it, but I do believe Dr Wakefield that a tiny percentage of people do react very badly to this vaccine.

Leave the guy alone ffs!!

novicemama did your dd die? Does she have brain damage or a permanent disability as result of measles?

A press conference was certainly held though. This may or may not have been at his instigation (I know how comms departments can get 'overexcited' about things they don't understand.)

LeonieDelt - you do have a choice. The single vaccines are available privately.

And at theatres conference wakefield called for further studies. And advised (when pressed, he did not volunteer the info) caution for a small sub group of children, who might be better off having singles.

He never said not to.vaccination. he has always maintained mmr safe for.majority ( he gave it to his own children).

The gov are responsible for withdrawing the option to give singles.

Oh, and the herd immunity rates do not account for people who have given singles. So of the 20% in novice's area who haven't given mmr, it is unclear what the singles uptake is.

Mumps s no longer available privately, I believe.

All the evidence shows that uptake of single vaccines is very low - people have to keep going back to the doctors and they forget and the upshot is that the vaccination doesn't happen. Hence the MMR.

I suppose my argument would carry more weight with you wannabe and Leonie if my DD had died or suffered brain damage as a result of measles? sorry to disappoint you.

I can understand why parents who read about Wakefield in the news and saw all the media scaremongering subsequently would start to think perhaps they shouldn't give MMR to their kids. I can understand it. But it's those parents who say 'I've done my research and I'm still not giving them MMR' that I don't understand, because even a cursory glance at the masses of available evidence shows that there is no link between MMR and autism.

Now that Wakefield has been discredited (which he has btw) can we agree that a) possibly more research should be done into specific tiny groups of people who may be affected by MMR but b) for the vast vast majority of the population there is now no reason not to vaccinate and that continuing to deny vaccination to your children is anti-social at best and at worst potentially highly damaging - perhaps not to your child but to other people with compromised immunity.

Yes, my daughter is fine. Other people are not and you are putting them at risk. But I've noticed that people who won't vaccinate generally think their precious little darlings are worth about 10 of anyone elses.

"But I've noticed that people who won't vaccinate generally think their
precious little darlings are worth about 10 of anyone elses." So when you express your anger at the fact your daughter contracted measles, who are you thinking of here? Your daughter? Or the children of people who have decided not to vaccinate, some of whom will in fact fall into the subset of children who could be put at risk through vaccination?

At the end of the day we all do what we perceive to be best for our own children.

Can you honestly say that if there were autoimmune conditions in your family, you would be prepared to put your child at risk anyway for the greater good? Get real.

The NHS needs to make cost benefit decisions. It costs more for less benefit (due to the number of appointments there is a higher rate of children not fully immunized as they miss one or more) to vaccinate seperatly. So the MMR is the state provided solution. If you chose too opt out you have paid for options.

wannabe - but the thing is that if you chose not to vaccinate you are putting your and other children at risk. If you chose to vaccinate you are minimising the risk for your child and everyone elses.

novicemama, I am very glad your dd is well.

However, please stop talking rubbish. there has NEVER BEEN ANY SUGGESTION OF A LINK BETWEEN MMR AND AUTISM. (sorry for shouting, but this point really doesn't sink in, it would sem)

Wakefield SUGGESTED a link between mmr and AUTISTIC ENTERCOLITIS, a new form of bowel disease.

He said he thought it was worht further investigation.

he also said, that for a sub group of children, giving singles was probably safer.

That's it. That's all he said.

So all this "people who say they have done research and still don't give mmr are thick" shit is just that - shit.

people can do the research, and come to the same conclusions as Wakefield - it is a possibility (and his research has not been discredited, btw. the science was described AT THE GMC TRIAL as "good science, which still stands". his methods actually adhere to criteria for good practice layed down over a decade later, never mind at the time.)

And given that the government, and the media, and the science community seem to want to ignore the exostence of this subgroup (you should try getting treatment for a GI disorder in an ASD child), then you cannot blame parents with a fmaily history of immune issues for being cautios.

I will not offer up my children as sacrifices to bolster a herd immunity statistic, which is probabl irrelevant anyway.

what are oyur sources for saying singles uptake is low? No data can ever be got from the dept of health on this, as no centralised records held.

People with autoimmune conditions in their families do not by any stretch of the imagination make up 20% of the population. For herd immunity to work about 5% of the population can be unvaccinated. This covers obvious cases such as small babies and people with medical reasons to avoid vaccination eg: people with autoimmune conditions.

So who are all these other people who have no contraindications in their medical history but who still persist in not vaccinating? They are parents scared off by Wakefield and the shoddy reporting of his 'research' by the majority of the press. People who should vaccinate, have no reason not to, but don't care about society generally. They genuinely do think that their little darlings should not be exposed to this supposed 'risk of autism'. Even though there is no link proven anywhere. You do know that there is no proven link right??

LeonieDelt - what do you mean by protecting policy? It's cheaper to do MMR, and there is no evidence of any greater risk than from the single vaccines. I don't think the NHS should pay for single vaccines anymore than it should for infant cranial osteopathy.

Uptake of single vaccines is pretty low and many children don't complete the course leaving them vulnerable to illness. Measles for example is very contagious and an unvaccinated child coming into contact with the illness has a pretty good chance of getting it.

I gave my son the MMR - my reasoning being that I am not convinced by the "overloading the immune system" arguments. Children come into contact with more different antigens every time someone sneezes in their vicinity and yet nobody claims that sneezing three times in quick succession over a child will cause autism.

No government will sanction the use of singles because to do so would place children at risk whether we like that fact or not. It is also noted that the MMR seems to offer more liklihood of children achieving full immunity than the singles do.

All academic though if you are convinced that singles are the way to go. In those cases I believe that parents should be able to go and ask for them on the NHS with the proviso that they are making that decision in an informed way - perhaps by having a meeting with an immunologist first who would ensure their understanding of how the immune system works. That would be necessary as some members of the public have very odd and erroneous information on that score.

Hi Leonie - sorry if you have already been asked this but do you think that Andrew Wakefield carried out his research 'in an ethical manner'?

LeonieDelt - Ok then - minimising the real risk of harm, but increasing an imaginary risk of harm.

Let the model of ethical behaviour speak for himself link. I'm glad he was such a caring doctor

silverfrog - why don't you just go and get the singles then? You think you can percieve a risk and you have an option that allows you to avoid it.

Uptake of singles was low. The Health Protection Agency say "One of the most striking features of the replacement of single measles vaccine with MMR in 1988 in this country is the significant improvement in vaccination uptake which followed".