MMR at three? Or should I wait until booster age?

[SoBroken]

To cut a long story short, DS has had all his vaccinations except the MMR. After seeing mothers talk very passionately about the effects it had on their children, DH and I decided we didn't want to do it, and would get single jabs instead.

However, he lost his job and things have been very tight financially. We have never had a spare £300 to actually get it done.

Looking at DS starting nursery after xmas and I'm a bit worried about him catching measles or something while there.

The private clinic where they do the separate jabs told us there is no need to get separate boosters at five, as by then, the danger of autism has passed.

I just want to know at what age this passes? Should i go and get the MMR done now, or should I wait until he's five? Our financial situation is still too tight to get the separate jabs at the moment, at least while DH builds his business up a bit.

"these families"?

I profoundly disagree with them being reduced to statistics.

Sorry you dislike being disagreed with maybe this will make it all fine!!!!

How is "these families" possibly offensive?
to make an end to all this then.

"far more likely risk of deafness, blindness, amputation or even death from Measles or rubella."

Not sure why you've attributed those risks to rubella. Rubella is mainly only a risk to a developing foetus, particularly in the first trimester of pregnancy.

Why does a risk to a foetus not count?

Why does autism not count?

You were talking about the risk of the diseases to a child who isn't vaccinated vs the risk of autism so the risks you listed aren't as relevant to rubella in that case. Wrt the risk of a foetus, why is it a child's responsibility to protect a pregnant woman? Why is it not the woman's responsibility to protect her child by ensuring that she is immune? Why is it not the responsibility of every member of her family that she comes into contact with to ensure that they also have immunity? She could just as easily catch it from a non-immune adult as she could from a non-vaccinated child.

I watched my child go through a potentially life threatening illness despite my choice to vaccinate, a factor in this was the low MMR takeup in the community due to tabloid scaremongering re. The risks associated with MMR.
I personally view vaccination as far less risky than failing to vaccinate, both for my family and the wider community.
You clearly hold a different view, and this is a forum to debate and discuss reasons behind these views. I have told you my reasons, but I would like to know yours.
Understanding breeds tolerance.

You don't sound very tolerant yourself actually. Get a grip folks is not very tolerant.

Your child could have caught the disease from a vaccinated person with waning immunity. Or a vaccination that didn't work, like your child's vaccination didn't work.

It's not a very convincing argument for taking the terrible risks involved in vaccination.

You still haven't told me the reasons behind your view that there are "terrible risks" involved in vaccination.
Risk is defined as the severity of an outcome multiplied by the likelihood of that outcome occurring. In my view the risk of not vaccinating outweighs that of vaccinating. Clearly you feel differently and I would love to know why.
Sorry for the "get a grip" comment, I wasn't sure whether to put it in my original post but thought it might inject humour into an escalating argument. Clearly I chose my words badly.
Have any studies shown a change in autism rates following the change in vaccination takeup? Surely the data would be available by now.

I wrote them in the thread. You read that personal testimony? There are at least two thousand "stories" like that. That's just in the UK, and that's not counting the people who've never been able to take further action, or pursue their suspicions and fears.

This is combined with an explosion in autistic disorder since the intorudction of MMR.

The epidemiology is supposed to reassure us. Unfortunately much of it is deeply flawed.

That's basically it I suppose.

Why are you jumping from rubella to measles? Do you think the risk to your child from rubella is greater than the risk from the vaccine? Or did you just have to get all 3 because you didn't want to pay for singles?

Every vaccine carries a risk btw. You can read them on the vaccine insert if your doctor/nurse actually gives it to you.

I watched my child go through a potentially life threatening illness too, chicken pox. And diarrhoea is a potentially life threatening illness. It's a question of perspective.

I'm afraid it's impossible to calculate the risk when so much adverse reaction is under-reported, dismissed or ignored.

Blueberties, that testomy means nothing.
Children have always regresased into autism it is not a new phenomenen. It was first recognised by Down (also discoverer of Down syndrome) back in the 1850s.
There is no explosion of autism that fits with mmr.
The percentage of children regress has not changed - back in the 60s there were studies that showed up to 33%
If you want perspective actually look at the illness versus the vaccination and you will see the risk of the vaccination is always far less than the illness.

You also have to consider the chance of actually contracting the disease as well though. It's not just a case of risk of vaccine vs risk of disease. It is risk of vaccine vs (risk of actually contracting disease X risk of disease).

(X meaning multiplied by - just pointing it out in case it reads funny)

In the 1960s, one third of children regressed into autism? Really? One third? Cirkey. That's now one third of the adult population of a certain age. Presumably the percentage won't have changed?

Well there we have it - I did say earlier up the thread, the first page, that it woudl be treated as a lie. Caterina disappeared rather than deny it, DBennet, to his/her credit actually accepted the possibility of a link but you have come out and said it.

Of course you are wrong: personal testimony is where medicine starts. You go to your doctor with a problem and you're asked what happened just before. A fall, a trip abroad, something eaten, contact with an infectious child, a collision. Has this happened before, you're asked. Is there anything in common with the two events, you might be asked. You go on from there: it might have nothing to do with it it might be completely unconnected but that's the starting point of enquiry. It's the starting point for

sod must go

Where was I?

Yes - you mustn't forget that this is personal testimony presented to to clinicians; usually observed by clinicians (and ascribed to coincidence) and completed with a diagnosis and recorded incidence of disorder.

You mustn't forget that without personal testimony no drug would ever be withdrawn. That might suit you, of course; it might suit Merck,for example, whose Vioxx killed people; but it wouldn't suit most people of any decency.

You mustn't forget that the adverse events yellow card system is valueless without personal testimony; which also might suit you but wouldn't suit most decent people.

And - I think - on the other thread we were on you said drug companies continued to monitor drug reactions after roll-out. Now how are they going to do that without personal testimony?

Don't try to equate personal testimony with fairy stories. It's an underhand smear.

At least you came out and said it -- it's not a very sensible thing to say, and it contradicts the statement you made above (iirc) but you know, most pro-vaccinists are afraid to say it, even though they think it.

Now then - the problem existed forty-fifty years ago and no one noticed? So where's the evidence for that? Because it wasn't walking around at school then and it's not walking around in the supermarket now. Is there a miracle cure that should be shared with all?

And autism was first described and identified as a new condition shortly after mercury was introduced to vaccines.

www.webmd.com/brain/autism/history-of-autism

Worth a read.

I prefer personal testimony to epidemiology, which cannot, apparently, be used to prove that smoking cigarettes can cause lung cancer. So, of what use is it when investigating the safety of the MMR?

Thanks for that Tabitha but I can't open it.

Yes - there is an explosion of autism that coincides with MMR Bruffin - nearly missed that. What you said is not true.

and you can't look at the illness versus the vaccination because you don't know how extensive or how bad the effects of the vaccination are.

We've been over this, don't try to pass it off as some kind of "fact" when it's nothing of the sort.

And - re: the 60s - autism was not then and is not now a "notifiable" disorder. Obviously it's not a disease so it couldn't be "notifiable" as such, but even now the numbers are counted I believe by education authorities? I might need correcting on that. So there's no central register, it's not like measles. I'd love to see a link to a study showing that 33 pc regression to autism. If current studies are flawed, I can't imagine what that one must be like.

First few paras:

From the early 1900s, autism has referred to a range of psychological conditions. But where did the term come from, and how has knowledge about autism changed? Do you know how autism is diagnosed and treated? Do you want to know more about the different types of autism? Read on to learn about the history and the current understanding of this challenging condition.
Where Did the Term "Autism" Come From?

The word "autism," which has been in use for about 100 years, comes from the Greek word "autos," meaning "self." The term describes conditions in which a person is removed from social interaction -- hence, an isolated self.

Eugen Bleuler, a Swiss psychiatrist, was the first person to use the term. He started using it around 1911 to refer to one group of symptoms of schizophrenia.

In the 1940s, researchers in the United States began to use the term "autism" to describe children with emotional or social problems. Leo Kanner, a doctor from Johns Hopkins University, used it to describe the withdrawn behavior of several children he studied. At about the same time, Hans Asperger, a scientist in Germany, identified a similar condition that?s now called Asperger?s syndrome.

Autism and schizophrenia remained linked in many researchers? minds until the 1960s. It was only then that medical professionals began to have a separate understanding of autism in children.

Thank you - you didn't need to do that tks

Blueberties - I had a lovely extended weekend in the Highlands - can highly recommend - met family, had wonderful outings and exceptional food.

What did I not address? MMR does not cause autism, there is no epidemiological link and apart from prenatal rubella infection, also no mechanism for the MMR to do so. There are documented cases of encephalitis after MMR, which are in all likelihood causal. They have a very severe course, usually hospitalising the child for weeks, and a typical onset 9 to 14 days after the MMR. That is a recognised table injury - but it is not autism.

As for the "many stories" - I saw my husband come down with a 40+ deg fever, out of the blue, his first in over 20 years, the evening after a cancelled flu shot appointment (cancelled because of an event at school, not because he felt anything coming on). I saw my son make a huge positive developmental leap right after his second MMR at 2.5 (shot on Thursday, changes very noticeable on the weekend) - he totally snapped out of his very pronounced terrible twos, within days talked in 5 words sentences rather than in wails like the previous half year or so, started potty training soon after.