All of you who CHOOSE not to vaccinate your children

[UniqueAndAmazing]

Do you realise that's the reason why there's now an epidemic of measles in Wales?

You know children with auto-immune problems, children with cancers, children with allergies that mean they can't be medicated, children who react badly to drugs?
You know them? They're suffering because of you not wanting to vaccinate your child.

You have no medical reason for not vaccinating, but plenty of reasons TO vaccinate.

You are causing a whole generation of children to be endangered from a preventable disease.

Measles can be fatal
(that means it can kill )

People demanding single vaccines be provided - can anyone explain with reference to medical research and evidence why they are any better?

QOD
it's never been a good idea to intentionally expose children.to chicken.pox, especially when they're already usinv their immune systems to build up resistqnce to something else

very dangerous to expose to cp.

Thing is, she still COULD have been exposed to it unknowingly and they same would have happened

The worst thing is the guilt my two sils have

But back to my point, I'm out of touch now as dd is 14, but don't most people vaccinate in some way? What's the age group and ethnic mix of the children who are unvaccinated and catching it?
Is it travelers? Is it immigrants? The town I work is has a high amount of temporary housed immigrants, we are near to Dover ish.
Or is it just folks like me and you, but who didn't know what to do so did nothing?

Whereas you did mmr and we did single.

Agree with OP altho with caveat that discrediting Wakefield after the event does make it quite difficult.

In America there is a fund for vaccine damaged children. Your GP or Health visitor will not give a written undertaking that your child will not be adversely affected by the vaccines offered because they do carry risks. The pamphlets they provide in surgeries do not provide any figures or real data it is just badly written dumbed down one sided crap.

I spent months agonising over the right decision for my ds. i didn't give my ds the cocktail of jabs given when babies are 8 weeks old because I, after hours if research, didn't think it right for my son.

He has had each vaccine done separately every other month so as to not overload his system. This is what we felt was right for OUR son.

It is for each parent to decide. I am not actually convinced the vaccines even work surely if you did you wouldn't catch the illness. Coincidentally my GP confirmed that saying the vaccine results in a weaker case of the illness is a person who is vaccinated is actually rubbish.

UniqueAndAmazing

I assume you personally have flu jabs every year, and your entire family because people with compromised immunity are at risk from that as much as they are from measles. So you have a duty to protect the community.

If not, how selfish

'Your GP or Health visitor will not give a written undertaking that your child will not be adversely affected by the vaccines offered because they do carry risks. The pamphlets they provide in surgeries do not provide any figures or real data it is just badly written dumbed down one sided crap.'

Exactly. It is the responsibility of the authorities to be more honest about the risks. If they had been to start with and had given the choice of single vaccines and not treated people like idiots, maybe the outbreaks that are happening now wouldn't have.

lottie not the same thing at all.
the nhs gives flu jabs to those at risk from flu.
not everybody because it's unlikely to help.

my dh has a flu jab because he is asthmatic

racmum
at least you did the vaccines

I think it is the same thing actually. That's why people who work in a hospital are expected to have flu vaccines - so that the vulnerable people they work with will be less at risk.

This argument that you have to vaccinate children to protect others just doesn't stand up to scrutiny because

1. Vaccination carries an unquantified risk to the person having it

1. it's not 100% effective

If it was 100% safe and effective then there would be more of an argument wrt the herd immunity concept. Children are more at risk from neurological changes than adults. That's why it ends up being a hard decision for parents to make because on one hand you have the risk of the disease and on the other the risk of the vaccination.

Most people in favour of vaccination will now say 'oh but the risk of the vaccine is minute' For some children maybe. And for others, not so. So how do we know who those children are? We don't.

And because we don't, at this point the herd immunity and social responsibility argument falls down.

it's not the same thing because they don't recommend you have it unless you are at risk or are working with those at risk.

Well yes, that illustrates my point. They don't recommend it and they don't encourage people to call each other selfish for not having it because they don't have a mass vaccination programme for flu.

I don't think anyone would deny there is a risk attached to single and mmr vaccine so of course no-one is going to give you a written undertaking. You won't get an undertaking for a single vaccine either.

Why would the NHS/govt attempt some kind of ongoing MMR cover up? They would inevitably be caught out in the end through research here or elsewhere and the cost of the resulting litigation would be huge. The saving they make by offering the MMR rather than the single vaccine would pale by comparison. It would make no sense at all.

It's not an ongoing cover up - it's a failure to consider that some children do react badly to some vaccines.

There is a small risk with all vaccines which I think parents ought to take to protect other children so you build up that total herd immunity and diseases die out. We kind of owe it to others to accept our child may be damaged by vaccines.

I don't vaccinate my children. It s my choice and I should not be compelled to do so. I do have a child with a serious illness and actually she has had measles (way before she would have had the MMR anyway) and I will still not randomly give them to her. She and her sister will have German Measles jab when they are older.

The reason MMR is given is because it is cheaper than single vaccines given over a longer period and certainly cheaper than treating the diseases themselves. IT IS NOT BECAUSE GIVING THEM ALL TOGETHER IS BETTER, IT IS JUST CHEAPER.

Agree with the OP.

Well, actually I disagree Xenia. Particularly as we take the decision on our child's behalf - the child does not have a say. You mean to tell me that you would vaccinate your child if you knew in advance that they would become disabled as a result? Of course not.

Whose responsibility is it when a child is brain damaged by a vaccine?

I am not a doctor but I expect the reason why there is no mass vaccination programme for flu is that there are a large no of viruses that can cause it and so the vaccine only provides v limited protection. I believe the flu virus also mutates quickly. MMR is not 100% effective but I suspect very strongly that it is far more effective than the flu vaccine which as I understand it probably would not provide herd immunity.

"We kind of owe it to others to accept that our child may be damaged by vaccines?"

I haven't read such utter crap in a long time.

I vax'd my dcs because I don't want them to get the measles and because I believe they wouldn't be damaged by the vaccine.

I didn't do it for anyone else's children. That is the truth.

All those claiming they acted through social responsibility are dubious imo. And I very much doubt that ANY parent would vax their child for the sake of others if they truly believed their child would be damaged.

I'm not denying its cheaper for an all in one vaccine given twice than six individual vaccines, with i guess six associated appointments? But there is more risk of people missing appointments or some of the series with more vaccines and if each injection has a risk then doesn't it tally that with three times more injections, having them singularly, there is a different set of risks over having them as two combined?

I do wish that the NHS would plug the double but have the singles available for those who have done their due diligence as parents and feel more comfortable with that. But then I'm also prepared to pay a little more towards the NHS and more choice would have cost associated with it.

but you can never be sure there will be no reaction.
but that's the risk you take as a responsible human being.

Agree op.

If I thought the risk of a reaction was too big, then I simply wouldn't vax my children.

There is no way I would sacrifice my dcs on the altar of social responsibility.

I'm not a martyr and neither are my children.

yy. but it's not too big a risk.
the benefits far far far far far far outweigh the risks
(they wouldn't do it if it weren't so, because people would sue in great swathes)