Discuss the new infant vaccinations schedule with me…

[LittlePeachh]

My DC1 has received all vaccinations to date (minus flu shot).

DC2 child has started to receive their vaccinations. I’m feeling uneasy with new introductions and how many vaccines they’re receiving in such a short time (34 before 2 y/o if I’m correct).

I know this can be a heated topic for debate but I’m interested in all perspectives…
Hoping we can respectfully discuss this.

Link to changes - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/changes-to-the-routine-childhood-schedule-letter/changes-to-the-routine-childhood-vaccination-schedule-from-1-july-2025-and-1-january-2026-letter

I look at the list of diseases and think "which of those diseases do I want my child to get?"

Meningitis?
Pneumonia?
Polio?
Mumps which can cause infertility?
Measles which can cause deafness?
Hep B which is worse in children than adults?
Do I want my child to be miserable and potentially scarred by chickenpox?

No, I don't want any of those for my child. So I got them vaccinated.

Every time your child eats dirt, licks something that fell on the floor, or shares their food with the family dog, their immune system is meeting a MUCH greater diversity of possible nasties than any of the vaccines provide. Attending nursery or going to a soft play is as immunologically 'challenging' as a multi-disease vaccine, and most parents would do that without thinking twice.

Not seeing any dramatic changes and I don’t think there are any new introductions are there? Unless I’ve missed something, possible as skim reading but it looks like:

Swapping the order that PCV13 and MenB are given because it’s more important to have the MenB protection first.

Hib/MenC has been discontinued so are replacing with an extra dose of the DTap/Hib/IPV/MenB because that’s what’s available to provide protection against Hib.

Moving up the second dose of MMR. Seems sensible, high risk areas where the vaccine uptake is low have offered this for years (my now 4.5YO had it early).

You can spread them out if you want to, it’s you giving consent. All of mine had the MMR separately to the other vaccines.

@OtterMummy2024 I absolutely agree, which is why my first child is fully vaccinated.
I’m just curious as far I’m aware the uptake for vaccines has reduced, wondering whether further additions or reducing the time frame would further depreciate the uptake?

@Bitzee There’s a new addition of 6-in-1 (at 18 months to replace HIB vaccination) and potential addition of chicken pox vaccination later on. They are also bringing forward the 2nd dose of MMR to 18 months from 3 y/o

(please if I’ve got any of this wrong, let me know)

Interested to know at what age your DC had MMR at?
If you are happy to share.

Sorry @Bitzee skimmed over your reply. I understand that’s easiest for them to administer the HIB vaccine. It does make me feel uneasy at how many though in a shorter period of time.

Interesting to know that they’ve offered MMR early in specific areas!

Yes I think you’re correct, I read the same but still it seems like quite small changes to me? No new vaccines, just an extra 6 in 1 but it’s a straight swap for the Hib/MenC. And yes bringing forward the second MMR but again lots of areas, including most of London, have been doings that for years so it’s just being standardised across the country.

Chicken pox vaccine combined with MMR potentially coming in January. Training for that next month.
Practice nurse.

I had mumps as a child and developed type 1 diabetes shortly afterwards, probably triggered by mumps.

More than happy that there are vaccines to prevent children getting a string of serious illnesses which used to be life threatening or life limiting.

Exposure to attenuated strain in carefully controlled dose vs exposure to wild type measles with no innate or acquired immunity.

Sounds like a no-brainer to me.

Can you articulate why it makes you uneasy though?

Are you basing it on something concrete like peer-reviewed evidence that increased load of different vaccines in a shorter space has some sort of negative impact, or is it just “it seems a lot for a child” with no basis in scientific research?

Yeah they offer all these vaccines in such a short space of time to ensure your children live to the age of 5, basically.

Their immune systems can cope with the exposure (excepting any immunodeficiency situations which would be managed differently obviously).

Check out the https://vaccineknowledge.ox.ac.uk/home Oxford vaccine knowledge project if you’re really concerned or want to learn more.

Why? Because it’s a natural human response to question information rather than take it at face value…
I didn’t receive 34 immunisations in my first 2 years of life.

If I’m honest. No I haven’t read any peer reviewed evidence. That being said, I plan to specifically look at exposure to a specific vaccine compound & vaccination schedules.

And where will you look?

Have a guess at how many pathogens your baby encounters every day - go on, humour us.

Ooh I think I can guess!

OP, of course it’s sensible to not just take info at face value but unless you have relevant scientific analysis training and access to all the data on which they’ve based these decisions, it does make more sense to recognise when you do not have the specific expertise required.

These changes don’t even involve the introduction of a newly developed vaccine where you might worry that long term effects haven’t been studied. It’s just timings, and it’s timings that have been used for a while in specific places.

Questioning information doesn’t equate to it making you feel uneasy though…

Feeling uneasy presumably means there’s something about that it that makes you think it could be dangerous. You seem to be starting starting from the position of “it’s bad”, rather than “I wonder why they’re changing it?” and I was interested as to what had triggered that reaction in case there was something I’d missed or a paper worth reading. Apparently not.

My only concern with the changes would be that babies no longer have protection against MenC and they need to rely on herd immunity until they get the ACWY as teens.

The rest of it seems like small tweaks and all very logical given the Hib/MenC has been discontinued and measles outbreaks are a concern.

@GoBackToTheStart I think my you’ve misinterpreted what I’ve said. Who said I’m not wondering or considering why they’ve changed it. I’m not necessarily saying it’s bad either, just that it’s a lot.

I might be in the minority here that 34 vaccinations in the first 2 years of life, leaves me feeling uneasy.
Thats my opinion and how I feel.
I was curious of others opinions on the matter.

The only perspective you need to consider are these:

follow medically informed advice from the nhs
safeguard your child’s health and, by extension, everyone else’s too

and finally

just get them done

Would it not be more sensible to talk to a medical professional about your concerns than ask random people on the internet?

They encounter significantly more than 34 pathogens daily. So an additional 34 controlled and tested ones over two years is nothing at all for their immune systems.

What is it about 34 in 2 years that makes you worry?
Do you think that fewer or a longer time period is better?

I read (somewhere) that you can get like 50,000 pathogens just from a single handshake!!!

My concerns? I’m asking people what their opinion is.