Please be frank, how bad are the 2nd lot of immunisations?

[BlueJellie]

Basically my little DS of 15 weeks has taken a turn for the better the past week. Its like someone has taken my high maintenance, whingy, sometimes hysterical baby - and replaced him with a smiley content bundle of joy. This may sound ridiculous but it IS like he's a different baby! We've had a rough few months and this week it finally all seems worth the stress - he still needs a lot of attention but only in the way you would expect, i.e lots of playing talking and singing.

Well he is due his 2nd lot of jabs next week, and I'm dreading it. I'm scared my happy little baby will be taken away once more and it'll take forever for us to get back on track. I don't really know if his first lot affected him or not, as he caught the bug that was going around shortly after - which made him miserable anyway (and the rest of the family as we all got it!). He also had sickness and diarrhea recently so was ill for quite a while.

Sorry if this sounds over the top, but I really feel like I've gone through 3 months of hell and I don't want to have to start all over again - has anyone had good/bad experiences of these jabs? How long did it take your lo to get back to normal?

I think it is actually recommended that you reschedule jabs if your DC has been recently unwell.

My DS had his first set of jabs delayed by a week because he had had an operation for an inguinal hernia (at 7 weeks! it was harsh) and the medics and I both wanted to make sure he was clear of any reaction to that before giving him his vaccinations.

Delaying it for a while won't hurt. Have you spoken to your HV/GP about it?

I think what is worth thinking about is that we can never predict the effect various illnesses will have on OUR child. If we could predict that they would not be very ill and recover with a nice, healthy and natural immunity it would be great. Sadly we can't do that which is why I went with immunisations.

It has to be your choice at the end of the day though.

Believer07 . I know how you feel. I go through phases of not wanting to talk about it and phases of thinking the unsayable needs saying.

Tryingtobe my child was doing ok until she was vaccinated. Problem is risk/benefit is not really considered on an individual basis but at population level.

Until more effort is made to accurately record adverse reactions and to identify the causes, the whole concept remains flawed and unethical IMO.

Jolly pirate, can you comment on this other thread about reactions to jabs, some lady is advising a woman to give her 8 week old calpol + nurofen two hours after calpol.

thats got to be wrong.

Jollypirate there is an increasing movement that shares these concerns in the US.

I am based in France and the situation is similar to the UK except it is Hep B rather than MMR which gets most of the bad press.

Government webpage on vaccine damage payouts. They take it quite seriously if vaccine damage can be proved.

There is plenty of evidence of vaccine damage. They have recently added HPV vaccine (for teenage girls) to the list as well.

The difference between knowing what the effects of the vaccine and the effects of the disease will be, are that:

1. your child might never get the disease
2. the vaccines have more in them than just the attenuated virus or toxin or whatever part of the bacteria they are using and sometimes it is the extra materials that cause the reactions, not the infectious agent.

Beachcomber thanks, My son has also had a autoimmune disorder, years after the MMR and it made him so ill, it tooks months of nursing to get him though it, he got so thin, he got the more serious version of IPT. But he also got IPT after the MMR as well. Its always watching and waiting with every cold etc to see if its going to come back. But then the fact that he was constantly ill after ever lot of jabs and really ill after the MMR had nothing to do with it of course.

I towed the line, I thought of the herd, its just a pity that the herd never thinks of me.

I got a reminder for a second dose of the MMR this week PMSL..I bet they would give it to him aswell.

Bluejelly - you poor thing! Your thread has turned into something far from what you were asking! Aviod gaining information from the web, its not backed up by real findings.

Best wishes to you and your son believer07.

Like you say the herd doesn't really pay much attention to the likes of us.

believer - it seems you're implying that I was foolish to post on here and should have researched for myself - if this is not what u mean then I apologise,

BUT I did think I was doing the more sensible thing asking real mums rather than reading up via the web, as all the stuff from leaflets etc denies that the baby will be unwell fir more than a few days and if they are it's not down to the jabs - I wanted to hear from both sides really but this thread seems to have turned a bit sour. I'm very sorry for those of you who have had bad experiences and thank you for sharing as I weren't aware of these particular side affects - but I think it's best we leave it be now as it's all getting a bit hot in here and that was not my intention!

Bluejellie, not all websites are spurious or alarmist.
this is the Centres for Disease Control website info on the MMR - just as one e.g., they have the rest there too. This is from reported incidents, real findings.

Thumbwitch the problem is though that the government organisations themselves acknowledge that only about 10% of reactions are reported.

The current monitoring system in the US and particularly in the UK is shamefully inadequate. The CDC findings may be real but they only a snapshot of the small percentage of events that actually make it into the statistics.

Basing safety information and figures on such shaky ground is hugely irresponsible IMO. But then the CDC is hardly known for its impartiality is it?

Therein lies the problem. The discussion over vaccine safety is no longer purely scientific; it entered the realms of the political and commercial quite some time ago.

Sorry BlueJellie! I know you just wanted to hear about experiences, but the fact is that there are quite a few mumsnetters who have had bad experiences not only with the jabs themselves but also with the how their children were then treated by the system (and sadly often other parents).

blue, was not meant that you where foolish, its just that this question gets asked over and over and over. And everytime someone asks for real experiences, you get those who come on and share, and then they get called, alarmist, and patronised.

Exactly believer07, the fact is that our children are an inconveniant truth that most people would prefer to not have to know about. It is funny the number of folks who will say that they believe vaccine damage happens and then go on in the same breath to assert that it is so rare as to not really count. Bit galling if your child is one of those whose health was sacrificed in the name of the greater good to then have the greater good turn their back on you.

Fact is we don't know how rare reactions are 'cos nobody's counting properly (and anybody who claims different is deluding themselves). I'm astounded that people don't seem to see that safety info based on incomplete figures is bullshit not to be taken seriously.

actually beachcomber, did you read the link? some of the reactions quoted are quite enough to make anyone think twice about having that jab!

I am trying hard here not to demonstrate a "side" - my own research and thoughts on this give me pause for thought re. the MMR at the very least. I have several friends who have not given it to their sons but who have gone for the single jabs instead.

There IS a lot of alarmist stuff on the web but that doesn't mean that the web can be discounted entirely as a source of information, which is the point I was trying to demonstrate by posting that link.

Not sure what you mean thumbwitch.

Of course I read the link, wouldn't comment on it otherwise.

I agree with you that the reactions quoted are very concerning. It just seems to me that the CDC isn't doing a good job of finding out how often such concerning reactions actually occur.

I thought you meant by your link that whilst severe reactions occur they remain exceedingly rare. Apologies if I misunderstood you.

not at all. I was pointing out that they exist, despite various people's efforts to minimise them, and that they constitute "real findings" according to the poster who seemed to think that none existed on the internet.

I think we might have been talking at cross purposes a little, due to me trying to be non-committal about it. Sorry!

Sorry got the wrong end of the stick completely.

You are much more diplomatic than me!

just lack the balls, basically - I have been taken apart a few times on these threads so have resorted to being more covert.