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

My opinion is that exposure to 34 wild type viruses is several orders of magnitude more dangerous than exposure to the 34 killed or attenuated vaccines.

The former scenario is becoming more and more of a reality as herd immunity wanes as a result of the anti-vax scaremongering that is making you feel uneasy.

Yes, your concerns. You say you are uneasy. What makes you uneasy?

I find it hard to have an opinion as I don't really know anything about virus or immune systems so I have no reference for whether 34 is loads or barely anything.

I don’t think I have. You’ve said you’re feeling uneasy. You wouldn’t be feeling uneasy if you weren’t, at least subconsciously, thinking the change may not be a good thing or have the potential for danger because otherwise where is the sense of unease coming from? “It’s a lot” surely wouldn’t make you feel uneasy if it doesn’t also equate to some sort of risk? I was interested about that in particular because it seems to have triggered your post and you said you were wondering about the impact on vaccine uptake by adding more vaccines or decreasing the timeline, suggesting the possibility that people may not go ahead with the programme.

If you can’t put your finger on it beyond “it’s a lot of vaccines in a short space of time” then ok, but I do think it’s important to consider the thoughts behind the feeling. Feelings drive behaviours so we need to understand them, and when the fears are out in the open people can help assuage them with evidence.

FWIW I don’t feel uneasy about it. Interested, yes, but on a purely practical level I have no reason to believe that the NHS would roll out a national programme for something as important and expensive as vaccines in children without rigorously considering the possible effects of the changes in timings of the doses and basing the decision on evidence, which they are better placed than me to consider. Even being cynical and setting aside the moral and legal imperative to help make society healthier, it would make zero financial sense to implement something likely to cause more expense later down the line through litigation and treatment for vaccine injury if what is in place already is working effectively. Therefore, I don’t really care whether it’s 34 in two years or 100 in a year if there isn’t any meaningful risk in the increased figure but there is a measurable benefit.

The only time I have worried about the vaccination schedule was when we were struggling to get my daughter vaccinated. She had to have her 1 year jabs singly at the hospital due to a reaction to the menB at 4 months. Nothing bad it just bad her feel particularly shitty so she screamed for 3 days. She didn't get the full set until 18 months especially waiting for the MMR I was keen to get her covered against illness.

My uncle was born with a heart defect and died in infancy having spent most of his short life in hospital because my gran contracted rubella in pregnancy. My dad needed an operation on his eyes and lost hearing due to contracting measles.

I was in the era of children only having one MMR vaccine and mumps and measles was rife when I went to uni. There was a genuine state of mild fear if you heard a person you had been out with the night before came down with mumps.

There's so many in the first 2 years because this is when they are vulnerable to getting more unwell if they caught this illnesses and haven't been exposed to them. Would you rather your child was vaccinated before or after they were exposed to that virus or bacteria in the community with the risk of getting acutely unwell?

My dad needed an operation on his eyes and lost hearing due to contracting measles.

The MMR vaccine was rolled out when I was an adult, so I had measles as a child. It affected my hearing and my eyesight.

I would definitely not worry about it. I paid for the chicken pox booster for my children (had the first in the USA as we were living there). It was well worth it in my opinion.

You are correct

They won't have decided upon this schedule lightly, much research by expert medical professionals will have gone into it. Clearly, having them is the best way to protect your child. Ultimately, that's all there is to it.

I have just filled out my youngst UK jabs to our new doctor as we relocate to Scandinavian at Christmas. We paid for checken pox at 6 yo.

The Scandinavian doctor was amazed how well our daughter is covered compared to local kids.
I don't see a big diffence in the new jab schedule.

But this isn't an opinion question is it really? You should be looking at facts.

Have a look around the world, there are people who will walk for days to get their child vaccinated in countries where these diseases are more common.

I didn't have 34 vaccines, I'm too old. I had mumps and chicken pox and I was miserable with both of them.

One vaccine I did have was smallpox. No one has that vaccine now because the world got together and vaccinated everyone.

Polio was nearly eradicated, but then anti vaxers started spreading rumours.

Do you want to be a grandparent one day? Wouldn't it be great if your grandchild didn't need vaccinations because the diseases are eradicated?

I waited 4 weeks after the others, and they had it then.
We have vaccinations in this country that the medical bods know that we are at risk from. There are people in this country that are unvaccinated, protect your child.

Unqualified people's opinions aren't in any way equitable to those of experts, immunologist etc. You can look into research on vaccine compounds, but if you don't understand the chemicals in them, the risks of the diseases without the vaccines and other factors. You can't make an informed opinion of the evidence. I'm not saying don't do this but you need to keep this in mind and above all correlation is not causation.

For example, something can have an association (in science this does not mean cause). So PCOS is associated with insulin resistance and weight gain but that does not mean PCOS = insulin resistance or causes it. But the metabolic factors which occur with PCOS make insulin resistance more likely. For example, higher androgen levels. So we have to go beneath the surface to see the somewhat causal link isn't PCOS as a whole but the other factors. Therefore in other conditions with these factors we also see insulin resistance. PCOS and insulin resistance often coexist and influence one another, but one does not singularly cause the other. That's a different example but still shows the point.

As someone earlier pointed out in places like London and other cities the changes have been in for a while and have worked fine. So I suggest perhaps looking at places like that. All this is, is standardised across the country.
https://vaccineknowledge.ox.ac.uk/home
Link shared by PP as well, I'd have a look.

Okay so you didn't have 34 jabs, how old are you? But you didn't have mumps or measles (coming back now and killing children), look at Texas or even the small events recently in Liverpool. https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2025/expert-comment-child-dies-liverpool-after-contracting-measles

Also things like Hep B can cause meningitis and pneumonia, especially in children under five who have a higher risk, so protecting them from that very early is key. You likely had vaccines for the majority of these conditions, science develops and males them more effective. A vaccine is a dead very very small protein of that disease, so that if they ever get it they can withstand it. Also for many vaccines you need 90-95% of people to get it for herd immunity. Even a small reduction in those numbers can cause many more incidents of the disease, so doing this helps other children.

Also new vaccines like HPV could lead to wiping out cervical cancer in a couple decades - unfortunately the WHO has now said the UK may not be able to do that because people aren't letting their kids get that. Especially boys, why wouldn't we where we can want to get rid of a cancer.

Useful link from the NHS for research, make sure to use reputable sources, and people who are qualified. NHS website, NICE guidelines etc.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-complete-routine-immunisation-schedule/complete-routine-immunisation-schedule-from-1-july-2025

Some useful good explanations I think on various studies etc looking at various factors. Particularly the first video.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DPi_E6dEVid/?igsh=MWhpOWp5eHZzZThqcw==

https://www.instagram.com/rubin_allergy?igsh=OWI1Ym56N2d5eXE=
I hope this is helpful for you, because it's not bad to look at things etc.

Chickenpox can be very serious- it’s considered a mild disease and often is but both my dc had it badly and my dd was in hospital for 4 days. I wish I’d vaccinated them.

My only concern is the replacement of HIB/MenC with 6-in-1. As far I’m aware, the previous HIB / Men C vac didn’t have any Aluminum (nor does MMR / rotavirus).
By increasing the 6-in-1 and introducing 18-month vaccinations will expose children to more aluminium in a shorter time frame. This has been said, it’s argued that a minuscule amount of aluminium present and necessary for the vaccine to work, research has shown this is based upon singular vaccines not multiple at once.

Not an anti vaxxer, not saying we shouldn’t vax nor am I refuting the importance of vaccines and danger of not having them.
As mentioned, my DC1 has all vaccinations on the schedule to date.

Ah right, you’ve finally explained what you’re concerned about. I don’t know the quantities of aluminium in the various vaccine presentations. Do you?

Aluminium is excreted quite quickly (hours/days) and doesn’t accumulate in the body AFAIK, so frequency of vaccination should not be a problem.

https://vaccineknowledge.ox.ac.uk/vaccine-ingredients#Added-ingredients info here about aluminium content of vaccines.

If you give your child a tuna sandwich they're likely to eat more aluminium than they'd get in all their vaccines I believe..

I’m not anti vaccines at all but I felt uneasy at the schedule too so I paced them out. Especially as older dc had so many allergies as a child. Not saying that there’s a link but I wanted to be cautious. Dc have had all their vaccines but just a bit later than the schedule. GPS were fine about it.

I think in the past, many children DID get exposed to all these naturally in such a short time (which is one reason why infant and child mortality was so high well into the 20th Century...) but natural selection meant that many didn't get the whole 30 odd at once because, well, they were dead already. I think we need to remember this when we think about how bloody amazing vaccines are.

Multiple vaccines at once is not more dangerous. TBH the idea that they are is something which comes from antivax circles because it sounds logical, but it's not really logical as people have said.

Reading the link in the OP, the MenC vaccine will be dropped (albeit because it's no longer available) so that is actually one less vaccine under age 2 as well as the other changes mentioned.

Combined vaccinations e.g. 6-in-1 are better IMO because it is just one jab - the actual needle itself is usually the most unpleasant part of a vaccine and definitely the part I dread personally. Combining also means that you need less of things like the adjuvants. It ought to be a win for anyone concerned about safety of vaccines, but the problem is that antivaxxers (which I am not saying you are, but I think you have come across some of their misinformation which has understandably stoked anxiety) are not consistent in anything other than the fact they don't like vaccines. Rather than having valid concerns, examining evidence around this and ending up with questions about vaccines, they have an agenda which is to dispute the safety and efficacy of vaccines and they seek out and twist the evidence in order to further this agenda. That's why their concerns flip and change around all the time and contradict each other.

There are some really good resources now dedicated to debunking common antivax myths, which I understand the "too much at once" and aluminium concerns both come under.

Vaccines that use aluminium do it to help promote the immune response because they need a boost. HIB/MMR/Rotavirus are all live vaccines, so they get a good response relatively easily without help because the body recognises them as active threats, hence no aluminium salts. Vaccines that don’t use live viruses (eg diphtheria/pertussis/tetanus) use aluminium (or something else) as an adjuvant to help prompt the response. They basically stick the toxoid to the surface of the aluminium to kick start the immune system and to keep the virus in circulation longer in order to get better protection, so it’s needed in combos too and has been used in combos for years.

According to the ingredients of the GSK Infanrix 6 in 1, it contains the same 0.5mg of aluminium for the pertussis/diphtheria/tetanus elements as the other historical combos that cover them (eg 4 in 1). The Hep element uses a different aluminium compound with 0.32mg of aluminium. The HIB and Polio elements of the 6 in 1 use don’t add any extra aluminium at all so having them included in the combo makes no difference. In total, it’s 0.82mg of aluminium in the vaccine, none of which is new because they’d have been getting vaccines for all of those regardless if they were combo or separate needles.

When aluminium is injected, half is out of the bloodstream in 24 hours, and three quarters in two weeks. We have more settled aluminium in our bodies from food than anything else (there’s a surprising amount in grains and vegetables), and given how quickly it’s processed after injection, I can’t see how there is any meaningful increase in risk by adding an extra 18 month dose containing 0.82mg of aluminium in order to cover the necessary HIB booster they’ll miss due to HIB/MenC being out of production. The last dose of aluminium would have been 6 months before in the MenB and pneumococcal vaccines and would be all but entirely cleared from the system by then.

If there was an issue with the amount of aluminium in the 6 in 1 they certainly wouldn’t have been giving repeat vaccines at the 8/12/16 week appointments since 2017.

It should never be a controversial topic to discuss. Never! There should always be room for open discussions. Calling something “controversial” is often a way to silence people from raising valid concerns and questions. Always ask and seek information — there’s nothing controversial about wanting to make informed decisions about your children’s health.
Each year, more vaccines are added to the schedule in the U.S., yet it’s worth asking: are children getting any healthier? The system can seem like a consistent money-making machine — from the chickenpox vaccine to the flu shot and the COVID jab. Not every vaccine may be necessary for every child. Parents should feel empowered to decide which ones are crucial and to space them out if needed to monitor for possible reactions. Everyone deserves the right to make an informed choice.

Follow your gut feeling. If you'd like to space them out a bit for your second child, organise it with your doctor and do so. Every child is different and maybe your mother's intuition is telling you your second born needs a slower schedule than your first one.

I meant to add to my post as well (but lost internet last night) that I think we accept trade offs in risk in many areas of life. For example it's not great to breathe in all the pollution from cars, and of course there are measures to reduce this such as unleaded petrol and move towards electric vehicles, but overall we accept a small amount of pollution from cars is an acceptable trade off for the convenience of being able to drive around.

When we travel by plane we are exposed to small amounts of radiation, similar to receiving an X-Ray. This is acceptable because most people fly less than a handful of times in a year. X-Ray technicians and dentists leave the room when making X-Ray images because to be exposed many times a day would be harmful, but most people receive very few X-Rays over a lifetime and they give us such useful information e.g. about dental health or a potentially broken bone that it is worth the risk.

If you are especially worried about aluminium then that is fair, but it makes sense to try to reduce aluminium exposure in other ways, for example eating less tuna. Trying to reduce it by avoiding vaccines doesn't make sense because it is such a tiny amount of exposure and it is avoiding something which is of considerable benefit and is arguably worth it many times over. Reduce aluminium elsewhere to make allowances for the small amount in things like vaccines.

I noticed that when I had DS1 in the UK when he was a baby first weaning, there was a lot of concern about salt. The worry was that it would overload a baby's kidneys if you let them eat too much. When I had DS2 in Germany, I was surprised to find there are no such concerns about salt and quite young children are routinely given salty pretzels as a snack. However, here they are incredibly concerned about the risks of paracetamol and prefer that you avoid it unless in excruciating pain - again because of the risk to the kidneys. I thought it was interesting (at least in 2008/9, when DS1 was little, most UK parents gave calpol very easily for teething) and showed me that you can have similar concerns (worries about kidney damage) and express them in different ways depending on what is felt to be important, and that there is often much more tolerance than official guidelines usually express. I would imagine if someone was equally as relaxed about paracetamol as the Brits and as relaxed about salt as the Germans, the result wouldn't be great, but if you followed one or the other guideline, the effect is roughly the same.

My DD has had everything available and I paid for chickenpox. I have just had flu and covid vaccines myself privately.

I have absolutely no unease about any vaccine or the vaccine schedule and if DD were starting from now with vaccines she’d have the lot.

I have a completely batshit anti vaxxer in the family who I am NC with, all vaccine “unease” comes back to that to some degree. I’m much more persuaded by actual science. I work in HE with access to some people with amazing expertise in vaccines and there is absolutely no credibility to any “concerns”. Some vaccines are less effective for sure, compared to others. But I’m happy to have all of them for my DD to have the same.