MMR again!! Baby Leo had Singles!!

[pfer]

Anyone else catch the paper headlines on TV this morning. Allegedly a Doctor has told them that baby Leo had the single jabs. If this is true I feel a little decieved.

I'd always make my own choice anyway but for Tony to say quite categorically that it's safe then go for the other option.......hmmmm

true, but him least of all. grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

The Dr who claims Leo has had the singles was just relating gossip he'd heard, he isn't invloved professionally with the Blair's so presumbaly he's not broken any confidences. he also sayd Leo hasn't had the booster shots yet.

Re the Blair family's right to privacy, I would have a lot more sympathy for that view if Tony wasn't forever trotting out his 'kids' in public when it suits him. Examples I can think of - on Xmas cards, the 'Euan' factor at the Millennium Dome and Cherie sobbing over her little boy going away to uni when other people's 18yo's were being sent to die in the war against Iraq. Talk about hypocrisy.

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

depends what you mean by a life or death difference. If a mother who has witnessed her child change overnight from an NT child to one with autistic behaviours, because she trusted the govt to provide safe vaccinations for her child, if that mother finds out Blair has gone ahead and got singles for his own son, meaning he is well aware they may be risks, she's going to feel that lives have been destroyed for convenience and cost effectiveness. I suspect. But of course the govt and many people claim some parents are so stupid that they can't tell their children are autistic before the MMR, and that they are looking for someone to blame. Parents, eh? So tiresome.

I've got an idea from somewhere, don't know where, that Cherie has an autistic nephew. Anyone else heard that? Hmmmmmm She came to the opening of DS's school (before DS went there) and one of the kids has "obsessive questions". It had been "what car do you drive?" but at the time of Cherie's visit it was "what does your husband do?"..... he asked her of course, I never did hear her answer. PMSL.

I've got an idea from somewhere, don't know where, that Cherie has an autistic nephew. Anyone else heard that? Hmmmmmm She came to the opening of DS's school (before DS went there) and one of the kids has "obsessive questions". It had been "what car do you drive?" but at the time of Cherie's visit it was "what does your husband do?"..... he asked her of course, I never did hear her answer. PMSL.

It's Leo's right to privacy. He hasn't chosen any life in the public eye. That's why I think it should be private. TB is different

suedonim - so agree with your last sentence.

its every child's right to have healthcare that doesn't damage them.

ruty - agreed, but would knowing what TB had done affect your decision in the slightest?

if i didn't already know the dangers of MMR to a minority of children, yes i guess it would.

instead of 'know' let me say 'suspect' before i get jumped on!

Just want to say as I started this thread the story was in the Express this morning. It said that a Harley Street Doc. who is acqainted with the Blairs has told two mothers that he knows for a fact that they had arrange for Leo to avoid the MMR. Is it true or not only Tone and Cherie know really. But I do think they should say something about it don't you. Before you lot go on about privacy and all that crap, the Blairs made their choice to be in the public eye and force their opinions re the MMR onto all parents taking away our freedom of choice so as far as I'm concerned they should just be honest with us - for a change. Just say Yes or No. That's all we want isn't it - unless it's a no then we want blood and gall bladders!!!

I've always thought that Leo would have had singles. If he had had mmr you can bet your life TB would have made certain we all knew about it. Also, Cherie's friend (and source of all wisdom, apparently)is Carole Caplin, she who had a series of articles in a sunday magazine in which she stated that she believed mmr to be unsafe and condemned the use of mercury in vaccines.

The Express today continues the debate "Just Tell us The Truth" headline.

As someone who has a brother and nephew who are autistic,I would like to know what triggers this condition, particularly as I now have sons (who have had the MMR jab by the way and are absolutely fine). Personally, I think it is genetic. I also found this article interesting this . Japan has had the single vaccines for a number of years and still the rate of autism is increasing.

What the Blairs do is their own business and I find this witchhunt against them quite distasteful, particularly as it is based on malevolent hearsay. The name calling that some of you have expressed is quite vitriolic, particularly as you do not know the actual facts concerning their personal situation. I do not want other people to know my private medical details so why should expect the Blairs to declare theirs? Whether they gave Leo the jab or not is their business and it would not have influenced me at all. I look at the facts and make my own mind up.

Two points:

1. This is about Leo Blair's right to privacy - he did not choose to be in the public eye
2. The Blairs are not forcing their MMR beliefs onto us - if you seriously think that they are single handedly responsible for government policy then you really have no idea how the system works.
3. The "source" is a doctor who has no regard for patient confidentiality.

Every single day I read this as "baby leo had shingles"

I think that TB is absolutely right to resist making his (and his family's) personal choices a matter of public debate. To bow to this kind of pressure would be quite intolerable, and to take the reverse position would be objectionable in the extreme, i.e. to use one's children as pawns in this kind of debate.
I was thinking of John Selwyn Gummer forcing his little girl to scoff a beefburger in from of the camera in the midst of the mad cow disease frenzy. enough to turn my stomach all these years later.

Here Here Soupdragaon and Harpsichord.

speedymama that pro MMR majority have been touting that Japanese study for a long time now. The problem with the Japanes study was that children were being given singles 4 weeks apart - not a long enough gap between jabs - so effectively they were getting the MMR. You need at least six months between each jab for it to be safe, according to those who are studying the possible problems. No one is saying MMR is not safe for most children. It probably is. But there is emerging [and fiercely suppressed] evidence to show that a very small minority of children could be damaged by the MMR. The govt may think these children are expendable for the greater good. I think that is incredibly callous and a million times worse than any name calling used by angry mothers who feel betrayed. The debate as to whether Blair has a right to privacy for his children will go on, as people will always disagree - there is no objective answer. But i for one feel sick to the bottom of my stomach to know that it is possible he took his child out of the country to get single jabs whilst refusing to let other parents have the same right to licensed single vaccinations.

and BTW Blair single handedly took us to war in Iraq without the support of his government, so its no good saying he can't be single handedly responsible for govt policy!

In my opinion, this thread has been largely bereft of common sense and rational debate. Too much malicious gossip and a preponderance of conspiracy theories adds nothing to the MMR debate.

i've just given you some rational debate!