Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

General health

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Debate on Vaccines

1000 replies

Emsyboo · 27/06/2011 14:18

I have seen a few threads where mums have an opinion pro or con vaccine and asking for more information I would like to know your reasons for being one or the other.
My MIL is very anti vaccine and told me 4 out of 30 children die from vaccinations - I don't believe this to be true think their may be a decimal point missing although I have seen some posts from people who seem to have backed up information about vaccines.

I am pro vaccine but like to see both sides before I make a decision so if anyone has any information pro or con and more importantly has info to back up I would be really interested.

Thanks

OP posts:
rosi7 · 20/07/2011 10:44

Pims, 'In science a hypothesis has to be proven before it is accepted'

But the same is true for vaccination. There has never been real evidence for the claim that vaccination does work and that the side-effects are 'not relevant' compared to the benefit.

Therefore the whole of the vaccination theory is based on mere belief itself. It is a hypothesis.

I feel very annoyed about the fact that we seem to accept the lack of scientific precision in this field on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry but always complain about the unscientific approach of those who are critical.

seeker · 20/07/2011 10:47

"There has never been real evidence for the claim that vaccination does work "

Well, there have been lots of proper trials that have proved that it does. Why do you think it doesn't?

rosi7 · 20/07/2011 10:49

so please quote them

larrygrylls · 20/07/2011 10:50

Rosi,

This is what gets me. There is an abundance of evidence and research that vaccines work. I think when people bring this up, they are being disingenuous.
The epidemiological evidence is clear, going back 100 years plus to infecting people with cowpox. In addition, the mecchanism is clear. You can test for antibodies to the disease in someone who is vaccinated. What further evidence would you like to prove that vaccination "does work"?

How many people would go on holiday to Africa without a yellow fever vaccine or into a typhoid or cholera outbreak without immunisation? Or how about being bitten by a rabid animal and relying on "natural immunity"?

rosi7 · 20/07/2011 10:54

..and as I mentioned earlier - the only evidence that would convince me that vaccination is efficient would be a long-term study showing that vaccinated people are healthier than those who have not been vaccinated. But such a study has never been done. Except the one in Germany where there are two contradictory results.

bruffin · 20/07/2011 10:59

No there not two contracdictory resluts. There was the official results and Angela analysis of them, which nobody seems to have worked out how she came to her conclusion as they don't seem to have been published.

PIMSoclock · 20/07/2011 11:00

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), ?Use of Combination Measles, Mumps, Rubella, and Varicella Vaccine: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices,? MMWR Recomm Rep 2010, 59(RR-3):1-12. Available at www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/rr/rr5903.pdf [PubMed 20448530]
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), ?Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP): General Recommendations on Immunization,? MMWR Recomm Rep, 2011, 60(2):1-64. [PubMed 21293327]
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), ?Syncope After Vaccination -- United States, January 2005-July 2007,? MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep, 2008, 57(17):457-60. [PubMed 18451756]
Klein NP, Fireman B, Yih WK, et al, ?Measles-Mumps-Rubella-Varicella Combination Vaccine and the Risk of Febrile Seizures,? Pediatrics, 2010, 126(1):e1-8. [PubMed 20587679]
Nolan T, Bernstein DI, Block SL, et al, ?Safety and Immunogenicity of Concurrent Administration of Live Attenuated Influenza Vaccine With Measles-Mumps-Rubella and Varicella Vaccines to Infants 12 to 15 Months of Age,? Pediatrics, 2008, 121(3):508-16. [PubMed 18310199]
Prymula R, Siegrist CA, Chlibek R, et al, ?Effect of Prophylactic Paracetamol Administration at Time of Vaccination on Febrile Reactions and Antibody Responses in Children: Two Open-Label, Randomised Controlled Trials,? Lancet, 2009, 374(9698):1339-50. [PubMed 19837254]
Steering Committee on Quality Improvement and Management, Subcommittee on Febrile Seizures American Academy of Pediatrics, ?Febrile seizures: Clinical Practice Guideline for the Long-Term Management of the Child With Simple Febrile Seizures,? Pediatrics, 2008, 121(6):1281-6. [PubMed 18519501]

PIMSoclock · 20/07/2011 11:00

The live attenuated measles vaccine was introduced in 1967 and by 1985 had prevented about 52 million cases of measles, 5,200 deaths, and 17,400 cases of mental retardation attributable to measles [3]. During the years 1989 to 1991, measles cases started to increase again, and the United States Public Health Service responded by recommending a two-dose immunization schedule [4]. The rationale for the second dose of the measles vaccine was not to serve as a booster but rather to immunize the five to 20 percent of people who had not responded to the first dose of the vaccine.

This two-dose approach appears effective. In 1990 a peak of 27,000 measles cases were reported in the United States; in 2006, only 45 cases were reported. Of the vaccine eligible subjects (ie, born after 1957 and older than 12 months) who developed measles, 69 percent either did not know whether they had been vaccinated or had not received two doses of the vaccine [5].

While indigenous measles is rare, continued protection of adults and children remains important, particularly since imported cases still have the potential to serve as a major source of future exposures. Adults with measles are at increased risk of mortality compared with older children, and measles in pregnancy is associated with premature labor and spontaneous abortion [6].

Like measles, the incidence of mumps in the United States fell dramatically after the introduction of the live virus vaccine in 1967. There was a resurgence of mumps in 1987 to 13,000 cases, probably because mumps immunization was not recommended by the American College of Pediatrics until 1982, leaving a cohort of young adults, born after 1956 but before 1982, at risk. In 2006, 6339 cases of mumps were reported in the US. Eighty-four percent of these cases occurred in six states - Iowa, Kansas, Wisconsin, Illinois, Nebraska and South Dakota [7]. The median age of cases with mumps was 22 and almost all cases occurred despite receipt of 2 doses of MMR vaccine. Factors such as close contact in college dormitories have been suggested as a reason for the 2006 outbreak of mumps.

As a result of the outbreak, ACIP recommendations for prevention and control of mumps have been updated (www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5522a4.htm). Evidence of immunity through documentation of vaccination is now defined as one dose of MMR for preschool-aged children and adults not at a high risk for exposure and infection and two doses of live mumps vaccine for school-aged children (ie, grades kindergarten through 12), and adults at high risk for exposure and infection (ie, healthcare workers, international travelers, and students at post-high school education institutions). Additional recommendations for outbreak control include administering a second dose of MMR for preschool children and adults not at high risk for exposure and infection if these persons are part of a group that is experiencing an outbreak.

Continued protection of adults remains important because the most serious complications of mumps arise more frequently in adults than in children, including neurologic complications, orchitis leading to sterility, and fetal death.

While adults born before 1957 are considered immune to measles and mumps, rubella immunity is not assured for adults. Rubella immunity is established by a positive serologic test or documented evidence of rubella or MMR immunization on or after one year of age. A clinical diagnosis of rubella is not reliable. The rubella vaccine was effective in reducing cases from 57,600 in 1969 to 213 cases in 1996 [6]. There was a brief resurgence in rubella in 1990 to 1991, with 40 to 45 percent of cases occurring in adults and teenagers aged 15 and older. Disturbingly in 1991, there was also an increased incidence of congenital rubella syndrome, representing a failure of the immunization campaign. In 1992 to 1994, eight percent of young adults were estimated to be susceptible to rubella [6]. Data from NHANES III indicated that persons born from 1970 to 1974 had the lowest rate of protection against rubella (78 percent), further highlighting the need for continued vigilance in immunization of children and adults against this disease [8]. Even though rubella is rare (only 8 cases were reported in 2006), continued protection of adults (particularly women of childbearing age who could become pregnant) and children is essential if the most important consequences of rubella (congenital rubella syndrome, miscarriages, and fetal deaths) are to be eliminated.

PIMSoclock · 20/07/2011 11:01

Bloch AB, Orenstein WA, Stetler HC, et al. Health impact of measles vaccination in the United States. Pediatrics 1985; 76:524.
Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Measles prevention. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1989; 38 Suppl 9:1.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Epidemiology of measles--United States, 2001-2003. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2004; 53:713.
Watson JC, Hadler SC, Dykewicz CA, et al. Measles, mumps, and rubella--vaccine use and strategies for elimination of measles, rubella, and congenital rubella syndrome and control of mumps: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR Recomm Rep 1998; 47:1.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Brief report: update: mumps activity--United States, January 1-October 7, 2006. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2006; 55:1152.
Dykewicz CA, Kruszon-Moran D, McQuillan GM, et al. Rubella seropositivity in the United States, 1988-1994. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33:1279.

PIMSoclock · 20/07/2011 11:02

shall I continue to paediatrics or would you like some time to read these ones?

PIMSoclock · 20/07/2011 11:04

or perhaps I could look at a different vaccine for you?

larrygrylls · 20/07/2011 11:05

Pims,

I would just like to propose one single experiment. That those against vaccines (accompanied by a vaccinated control group) go into a "hot" zone with one of the less pleasant viruses such as bubonic plague, cholera, typhoid or yellow fever. After a month or so, we will see who has come down with any of the above viruses and how their healthy immune systems dealt with them.

Any volunteers?

PIMSoclock · 20/07/2011 11:06

I would like to nominate GB Grin

PIMSoclock · 20/07/2011 11:08

Ive been vaccinated against all (plus rabies) except the BP, so I am happy to be the control group as long as you remove that bubonic plague or at least give me a set of antibiotics for when the unpleasant symptoms kick in!!

larrygrylls · 20/07/2011 11:08

I think Rosi would like to join her as she believes that there is no evidence that vaccines "work". :)

larrygrylls · 20/07/2011 11:09

True,

Bubonic plague is bacterial but still vaccinatable against.

illuminasam · 20/07/2011 11:10

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I've had measles. I'm glad I had it as when my baby was born I was able to give him strong immunity for the most vulnerable period of his life via breastfeeding. If I'd merely been vaccinated I would not have been able to provide this.

I'm afraid I fall into the "nature knows best" camp. And yes, that does include accepting a certain amount of death.

If we control all disease and all live to be 100, we will still die. Just maybe from poor conditions in a grim overcrowded old people's home staffed by young adults who don't care because they've never suffered an illness in their life.

PIMSoclock · 20/07/2011 11:10

sign me up!

Gooseberrybushes · 20/07/2011 11:11

Firstly: the risk-benefit debate has no bearing on the MMR-autism question.

It's the other way round - the MMR-autism question has bearing on the risk benefit decision.

No one should bring in the risk-benefit debate as a factor in the MMR-autism question. That is decided by an entirely different set of evidence. Once the question is resolved, then that resolution can be introduced into the risk-benefit decision.

I hope that's clear to all who've sought to do it the wrong way round. Possibly deliberately, to distract attention from the MMR-austism question - possibly because they really don't understand how the process works.

Secondly: "childish noise" - I read that as nonsensen

what does this mean - childish noise?

Thirdly: yes it's natural to defer to silverfrog, or indeed anyone else who knows more than me about gut disorders and as diagnoses than I do. It doesn't prove me wrong that there are questions to ask and research to be done. I note that Larry did not come back with an explanation of whether he thinks epidemiological research is the only possible kind.

illuminasam · 20/07/2011 11:12

Also, not all vaccines are equal and should be approached in the same way. Just like all diseases are not equal.

Lumping yellow fever in with mumps is simply ridiculous.

PIMSoclock · 20/07/2011 11:13

illum, Im sorry. I dont accept that. If nature knew best and we left this life to a survival of the fittest I would be dead, my oldest son would be dead, my father in law would be dead, three of my four siblings would be dead.
We have all at some point required life saving treatment and I do not accept that is is moral or ethical to let 'nature take its course'
If I did this at work, I would be accused of neglegence

illuminasam · 20/07/2011 11:14

PIMS - you may want that for yourself, I'm afraid I don't.

PIMSoclock · 20/07/2011 11:16

and yellow fever and mumps are equally serious.
mumps can cause encephalitis and meningitis, leading to learning difficulties, sterility, still births, pancreatitis
need I go on?

Gooseberrybushes · 20/07/2011 11:16

I also note that Larry is continually deferring to the wider vaccine debate as if it has some bearing on the MMR-autism question.

Also that he/she declines to address the point about temporal correlation.

Also that he/she considers it acceptable to bring in the emotional element of "children with cancer" - would be interested to find out if he/she would give the same weight of importance to the tragic stories of victims of vaccine damage or whether he/she would consider them mere collateral.

Also note that PIMS has turned from a text speaking innocent who knows nothing to a regurgitator of vast quantities of CDC material.

illuminasam · 20/07/2011 11:17

PIMS - that's because you are a medic. Yes, of course, saving life is a moral and admirable notion. You will still die though, so will your son and father in law and your siblings. From one thing or another, you will still die.

The only thing that is happening from all this is an ageing population putting a strain on services and dimishing quality of life for everyone will be the inevitable result.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread