Waiting for single mumps jab or mmr? Confused

[cockneysparrow1977]

My daughter who is now 2 and a half had the single jabs around 15 months old no mumps yet tho, she's gonna be starting preschool jan and I ideally wanted her vaccinated fully before she starts although like lots of other mums out there worried about the whole mmr /autism thing I know it was never founded and all the doctors I've spoken to have told me it's safe etc and there kids have had it which reassures me to some degree although you can't help but worry about the cases where patents have reported autism symptoms soon after mmr, I have a cousin who is autistic and auntie believes it was NMR related it's a tough call as I'm sure these parents obv feel strongly that mmr I'd the cause! I'm registered with a clinician London who have told me they are expecting mumps jab in December although in
Not sure I feel confident that's going to come off it was July but it was pushed back to December! I'm in a dilemma as I don't want my child starting preschool unvaccinated and poss catching mumps but on the other hand like many others am scared about the mmr ! One friend who had her kids vaccinated with the mmr said the singles are the sane vaccines as used in the mmr just singles so how can it be any different?
Sxxx

That's an terrible comment from the clinic. There is no link with autism. OP - fwiw my three have all had MMR with no problems whatsoever.

Morebeta (as I'm sure you know but just for anybody reading this who hasn't come across the argument) the problem with single vaccines is the difficulty in ensuring you get everybody completing the course for all three. At present the highly motivated parents who source singles are much more likely to go to the trouble of completing the courses than the general population would be. MMR requires you to get the child to the surgery only twice not 6 times and it doesn't leave the wimdows of opportunity for infection that doing one vaccine and then another and then another does.

Sashh, the scar on our arm is from the BCG vaccine not the measles vaccine. The 'modern' BCG still leaves a scar so I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make.

Mumps and rubella are usually mild in childhood so a delay in getting vaxed against them isn't a problem.

Your info about Wakefield is incorrect re. a link to the production of a single vaccine and the study itself which had absolutely nothing to do with trying to prove a link between MMR and autism. I'm sure someone else will be along to correct you or you could read a bit more in the vaccine topic - it has been done to death but there is clearly still a lot of misinformation out there.

Ruebella is always a problem actually whatever the age of the patient because of the risk of passing the illness to a pregnant non immune woman. The cosequences for the baby are disastrous.

It's a woman's responsibility to know whether or not she is immune to rubella. The majority of women are already immune either due to contracting the disease in childhood or through being vaccinated in their teenage years. If they aren't sure what their immune status is then they have the option of being vaccinated again as an adult. She could just as easily contract it from a no longer immune adult or a vaccine failure as an unvaccinated child. It is dangerous to depend on another person to protect your unborn child for you when you have absolutely no idea of the immunity status of any person around you.

What about women with unplanned pregnancies? They may not know their immune status. A immunised population of children is by far the most effective way of protecting unborn children from harm. I vaccinated my children to protect them from harm AND to protect those around them. It sickens me tbh when people declare that they will only think of their child, as if their decision affects only them. That simply isn't the case.

I totally agree, Northerlurker...

What good is an immunised population of children if you have a population of non-immune adults who can still pose a risk to a non-immune pregnant woman? She could as easily catch rubella from a baby who is too young to be vaccinated or a child who can't be vaccinated for whatever reason. Whose fault is that then? The only way you can protect yourself against the risk is to take responsibility for your own immunity and not rely on other people. IMO teenage girls should be tested for immunity and that way they have the choice to get (re)vaccinated if required.

Childhood is the peak time for the transmission of this type of illness. If the child population is vaccinated you reduce incidence in the general population hugely. By and large, vaccination saves lives. Not vaccinating risks them.

"Childhood is the peak time for the transmission of this type of illness."

By this argument a pregnant woman would be unlikely to catch it anyway.
By not taking responsibility for knowing her own immune statues the woman is taking a risk. No one else should have to take responsibility for that. Personally, I would rather my daughters (if I have them) contracted this mild disease in childhood so that they have guaranteed immunity to it when they need it and don't have to worry about the vaccine status of population in whichever country they choose to live in.

Immunity can never be guaranteed. Because of that the safest thing is for an incidence of a disease to fall to such a low level that you are not at risk of catching it when particularly vulnerable. Vaccination will always achieve this far more successfully than 'wild' illness out breaks. That argument doesn't suit people who don't want to vaccinate their children though because it makes it clear just how much of a social reponsibility vaccination is. Of course there will be some children for whom vaccination is not appropriate but that is a very small number - and all the more reason why children who can be vaccinated should be.

Immunity from a vaccine can not be guaranteed, you're right. Contracting the disease itself is more likely to confer lifelong immunity but I accept that there is no guarantee with that either because there are a few people who will not have immunity even after the natural infection (they don't tend to have it after a vaccine either). However, I would rather that my children have the opportunity to acquire their own natural immunity that is more likely to give them long lasting protection and imo other women can and should take responsibility for themselves. They are putting themselves at risk if they do not and the risk goes beyond the 'unvaccinated children' group that you are focussing on. Thats my opinion and i know you disagree with it but im not going to change my mind about it.

I'd be very interested to read how you were able to identify the 'small number' of children for whom vaccination is not appropriate though so if you have access to some information that the rest of us don't then please pass it on. :)

MoreBeta
The reason the government has dug in is that MMR is manufactured here, is effective and safe.

The single jabs are imported, which means that there are difficulties if they are not refrigerated properly at every stage of the journey.

Also they are an 'old recipe' so fewer people seroconvert and there is more risk of encephalitis.

"The reason the government has dug in is that MMR is manufactured here, is effective and safe." Having spoken to someone at GSK - manufacturers of Priorix - and Sanofi Pasteur MSD - manufacturers of MMR-VaxPro, that comment is not necessarily true, if "here" you meant as England - it depends where exactly "here" is.

Try to find out for yourself exactly where (location wise) the 2 licenced MMR vaccines are manufacturered. You will be for a surprise.

Anyway, cockneysparrow1977,

I don't know if you are still reading this thread, but just to say that I know how you feel as my family is in the same position. My oldests have had the single vaccines and I was intending for this to be the case for my youngest.

However, the GP who previously gave the single vaccines to my other children has moved, so I had to find an alternative clinic -a long way away. Then I discovered that Merck no longer manufacture Attenuvax and Rouvax's export from France has been restricted by the French Government. Anyway, to cut a long story short (OP can PM for the longer version), I have opted out for the MMR for my youngest. Probably against my better judgement, we will find out in 10 - 20 day's time or whenever.

My husband and I rarely row, but this issue has caused serious friction between us. My husband says single vaccine or nothing. I have opted for the MMR. Time will tell if that was the correct decision.

In the meantime, I would like to give you a massive hug. Whatever decision you chose, will be the right one.

Flying start: Ahhh thanks for your message and for your hugs, hugs coming back your way it really is a tough call isn't it and I understand too what your going through! Can I ask how old your youngest is? And is your decision re the mmr due to no single mumps? My hubby and I have also been arguing lots over this decision, he thinks we should opt for mmr as pre-school booster she's starting nursery in feb and I'm
Pregnant again baby no 2 due February, hubby thinks we should give it to her in feb shell just be 3 then and that's just before preschool and baby but like you unsure am sure it must be fine I've had long conversations with my gp who has two kids and a friend of mine who is a microbiologist who both given it to their kids and have told me it's not connected to
Autism the worry is once the seed of doubt is there it's hard to get it out of your head isn't it? I just think if it's that unsafe would these professionals give it to their own children?
I'm sure your little one will be fine Hun but if your anything like me you'll ve watching and analysing everything they do now
Hope your still reading this post
Lol and hugs xxxx

Btw what is op can pm for the longer version?

Thank you for the hugs! PM means private message. There are things that I would rather not write on a public message board but I am willing to share with you in a private message. My youngest is 2 years old. We've been waiting over a year for the single vaccines. Measles and mumps in particular.
And yes, you are right. I am - and will be for the rest of the month - watching my daughter like a hawk. Even as I type this - which has so far taken 10 minutes, because I keep checking up on her - she's sleeping in a junior bed in our room (it's a squash and a squeeze!). If she has a convulsion at night or her temperature shoots up with shallow breathing, I want to be at hand for her.
From what I can gather, if there are going to be problems, they tend to kick in 10-20 days post immunisation. I will keep you updated on developments, but so far so good. No problems to report!

Flying start yes send me a personal message be nice to hear your experiences! You sound exactly like me my daughter had to flu jab yesterday and has been sleeping in our room I'm the same jumping up in a panic everytime she coughs checking her temp! I think from
What my gp has said that you can develop measles like symptoms around 10 days after but hopefully your little one will be fine! My little one had the singles measles and rubella jabs at 15mins and was ok afterwards so fingers xd your little one will be fine, anyway look forward to hearing from you with a pm! Any ideas where I get a pm on this site his I'd retrieve it I'm not totally ofa with this site
Hugs xxxx