in thinking Measles can't be more dangerous now than it was 15 years ago ?

[Onajourney]

Hi

Wondering if there are any GP's out there that can tell me this ?

My eldest child is 15 and I still have his baby books and they say Measles is a mild disease and just to keep their temperature down etc, they liken it to chickenpox. I remember not being worried about it at all when he and his 11 year old brother were small.

Fast forward 14 years and we have a 1 year old who is at "huge risk from this killer disease" according our GP, but I can't understand how it can have changed so much.

Can anyone tell me, is Measles worse now than it was 15 years ago and if so why ?

Thanks

I don't think you've had many responses for dropping, actually.

I said the bcg (it.already has been)

And that o believed the whooping.cough vaccine was not effective against the main current strain (again, no mention of dropping it)

Someone else wondered why tetanus was given so early, and I mentioned it had an interesting history. Clearly I am not for dropping that one, as I was recently at a doctors surgery enquiring whether I needed a booster.

You are extrapolating things which have not been said...

Must stop cross-posting, bttat

The whole premise of this thread, the reason it was started, was the idea that measles was a mild disease, and its seriousness has been exaggerated since the vaccination programme started.

Many many people have come on to say that their feeling is that it is a minor childhood illness and they cannot understand the need for vaccination.

Ditto mumps.

People do not want to see rubella given as standard, but instead test for immunity in teenage girls.

And so on.

That may not be your approach, but you cannot speak for everyone on the thread, they have spoken for themselves and I have found what they have had to say very interesting.

I am still interested for example, in when bubbly thinks would be an appropriate age for the first tetanus shot, if she thinks there should be one at all, given the low numbers of infections in the UK (which I would have put down to the immunisation policy, but could be wrong).

I think it's a device, rather than a fascination. If I might analyse this for a moment: I think in the absence of cogency, you are seeking an "aha" moment of obvious unreasonability on "our" part. I am of course happy to say I don't think you have found it

I think a lot of evidence has in fact been given that the seriousness of childhood disease has been exaggerated. (Of course in my view this is rather a sales rap, but others might not share that.)

www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Tetanus/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Bubblymummy - some more info for you on the treatment of tetanus - antibiotics are not the first line of treatment and many other treatments may have to be considered. Also, can you clarify your point about wound hygiene ? Are you saying that, for example a patient with a complicated lower leg fracture with say full thickness burns and soil contamination after an RTA, would not be at risk of tetanus if the wound was simply cleaned properly ?

Your talk of "dropping" though, reads to me as get rid of, don't manufacture any more.and cease vaccination altogether.

Which has been said by no one.

What has been said, repeatedly, is that product.would like more choice.over which jabs to give, and when to give them.

great minds mdear

people would.like more choice...

Think what you like, really. As I say, you cannot presume to speak for everyone on the thread, your ideas, views and agenda (if you have one) will likely be different to the next persons.

If a person says to me that they want to revert to not vaccinating for measles, I find that interesting. The reasons have been given. Ditto for mumps and rubella. I understand the reasons that people have given, whetehr I agree with them or not.

The BCG point has already been discussed, tetanus is throwing up some interesting comments, with some viewing it more positively than others.

And so on. How can it possibly not be interesting to hear these viewpoints. I had no idea before today that there were people with doubts over the tetanus programme. (Well apart from the one MNer who wwnated to stop all vaccinations but I can't remember her name).

?

People have said there is no need for vaccination for lots of things, on this thread.

Just beacuse you haven't said it, doesn't mean that other people haven't.

No, I can't speak for everyone on the thread, but I've read the responses and I really, really don't see what you see. Not on this thread.

Would you like to see more research yourself? for example, into the MMR? People have responded to your question, and I'm interested in why you don't find the reasons behind it all more fascinating. For example, the many, many reports of vaccine damage, regression and so on.

The way you've put things, it's as if you just want to say, Good Lord, and boggle. Rather than delve into the problems and research that have prompted people to reach their point of view.

'I must admit that tetanus has always scared the pants off me.'

There is a paediatric neurosurgeon who survived tetanus as a child in the 1940s.

His parents were told to have his last rights administered and wait for him to die.

He was 6 and remembers it as an agonisingly painful disease.

Again I would point out that your "dropping" comments read very much as though you mean "axe the jab so it is no longer available for anyone". They are disingenuous and misleading.

Which I don't believe has been said by anyone.

There have been people saying no need for rubella for boys. That is not the same as no need for rubella.

Lots of people saying no need cor mmr. Not really that many saying no need for measles.

I don't think the chicken pox vaccine should be made part of the regular programme, but that is not to say I don't think it should be available.

I'm not sure anyone has said that any one jab should not be available at all.

"When I read these threads I understand that what people want is the removal of the childhood vaccination program for measles, mumps, rubella, and for no further vaccinations to be introduced."

I don't see that. I've never seen that and I've been on loads of them. I'm amazed at how many people say "I still support vaccination but..." I see people begging for more research and for reports of regression and the possibility of damage in sub-groups of children to be taken seriously. That is definitely the majority view.

"Are there any other vaccinations in the existing program that people would like to see dropped?" This question assumes that your first observation is correct, which it is not.

"Anyhoo, I guess that tetanus is out." after people said they were worried about tetanus jabs. Not that it should be completed dropped, removed, no further ones to be introduced. You said that.

"It's a 5-in-1 jab, too. So throw out the other 4." expat.

It's you, jumping on doubts and turning them into removal, dropping etc etc.

Expat.

There were two healthy children, Anna Duncan and George Fisher.

They had the MMR jab.

They became poorly and died ten days later.

The parents find it agonisingly painful to be without their children.

They are not the only ones who have lost children to vaccination.

Loads of people on this thread have said

That in the context of the UK vaccination programme

They do not believe it is necessary to vaccinate against mumps ie it should be dropped

They do not believe it is necessary to vaccinate against rubella as a part of the programme, preferring instead to test girls for immunity at age 15

They do not believe that it is necessary to vaccinate against measles as a part of the programme, as it is a minor ailment ie it should be dropped

That BCG is ineffective, ditto whooping cough

That the tetanus programme may not be appropriate - too much / too young.

I am sure there are more but I'm not going to go back through the thread.

Certainly no-one on here has said "I really wish they had a vaccination for ".

Therefore it is quite accurate to say "When I read these threads I understand that what people want is the removal of the childhood vaccination program for measles, mumps, rubella, and for no further vaccinations to be introduced."

I do not understand why people are arguing to say that other people have/havent said things. If you haven't said them, they what does it matter if I find them interesting. This idea that one person can say "Well I don't think that therefore no-one has said it" is an interesting approach and not very helpful. How is a person who doesn't agree with dropping the mumps vaccination, for example, going to explain to me the reasoning of someone who does.

So that is a reason to scrap the whole thing, back?

re tetanus

bubbley said "Proper wound hygeine virtually eliminates the risk and if you are unlucky enough to contract it, you can treat it with antibiotics. It is not a communicable disease so there are no 'herd immunity' arguments. There is also very little evidence that the vaccine is effective. "

If that does not sound like she has very strong doubts (to say the least) about the suitability of inclusion of tetanus in the vaccination programme, then I don't know what does.

'When I read these threads I understand that what people want is the removal of the childhood vaccination program for measles, mumps, rubella, and for no further vaccinations to be introduced.'

A very small minority of people want that. What you are doing is called a straw man argument.

Of course low tetanus rates are mostly due to vaccination. For goodness sake can there be no middle ground in here where vaccinations are acknowledged as a good thing but the need for more stringent research and for vaccines to be made safer is also acknowledged? This argument always gets so polarized and becomes so circular.

Musukebba thankyou as always for your patience and civility and detailed expertise.

ISNT, this is like a Steiner or a dog thread. Seriously.

I have asked bubbley a few times what regime she would prefer for the tetanus innoculations but she hasn't been back. It's a shame as I am interested in what she has to say.

People may not believe it is necessary but who has said the vaccinations should be dropped entirely? That's you, extrapolating because it suits you. Unless you're changing your mind and now just find it "fascinating" that some people think some vaccinations are unnecessary and ineffective --- which tbh can be news to no one who has been on any of these threads ever.

For example, I said the BCG is largely ineffective (quoting my doctor at the time actually) but where did I say it should be dropped entirely?

Would you like to see more research into vaccine damage and regression or are you just asking the questions and not answering them?

Expat, in the same way that your emotional story is a reason for universal vaccination of babies?

Neither proves any point at all.

And now, the Steiner or dog thread comment, just silliness because you have run out of things to say

I am interested in what the small minority have to say. I am interested in hearing their reasons for thinking the way they do.

As for tetanus "Isnt, it is v rare to actually contract tetanus. There are about 6-10 cases ( cases not deaths) a year in the uk."

pofaced you say that "Of course low tetanus rates are mostly due to vaccination." That is what you believe. Bubbley believes something different and it is what she believes that I am interested in hearing. Don't you want to know what she thinks, and why she thinks it?

I have said about 18 times.

People on this thread have said there is no need for mumps vaccination, no need for measles vaccination, and that rubella should be dropped from the vaccination programme, opting instead for a test for girls at 15 to see if they are immune.

If saying "there is no need for it" does not mean that it should not be vaccinated against, well then I don't know what to say.

If I say there is no need for something, I mean that there is no need for it, quite straightforward really. It means that it is superfluous, unnecessary, people don't want it.