Arguing with DH over whether to vaccinate or not

[LetsGoToTheHills]

This is causing a lot of conflict and we are both really upset about it. He is for, I am against (never had them myself). Both equally passionate. This is my first time on MN and I have found a lot of useful information and interesting viewpoints, but was wondering if anyone has been in a similar situation? How did you manage to resolve it?

What a lovely post sashh :)

OP, disclaimer, I don't live in the Uk so can't give you a local perspective but just wanted to share some thoughts.

When we had DS, I was feeling more anti-vaccines than pro, and because I work in the health care field, DH always said that he was leaving the decisions up to me because I was better informed. (I have to say I didn't feel very happy about that because if anything ever went wrong I'd have been to blame for whatever decision was taken [eek].)

I was very nervous about all the combined vaccines, and the vaccine schedule in this country. I felt that what was routinely given was too many vaccines, too frequently, and at too young an age.

Due to some extraordinary pressure by my GP at what was a vulnerable time for me, I had DS given the 5-in-1 vaccine (DPT, HIb and Hep B), and the meningococcal and pneumococcal vaccine at 6 months. I really felt very pressured and like my hand had been forced at the time.

After that, I managed to avoid the issue with the GP for a while and then decided to have a consultation with a different doctor who specialized in alternate vaccine schedules. She went though each possible vaccine with me, their purpose, potential side effects, morbidity and mortality rates from both vaccines and disease, and really helped me clarify what I wanted and didn't want. In the end, we started with an alternate vaccine schedule when DS was just past 3 years old and will be completing it this year. Mostly we've done separate jabs, unless those were simply not available. It's been time consuming, but very worth it as far as I'm concerned.

If you have the opportunity to have such a consult, I'd really recommend it. It may lay some of your concerns to rest. Or it may not. If you and DH still find yourselves in opposite sides of a line, I wonder if you could negotiate. Along the lines of "If I agree to his vaccine, do you agree that this one could safely be left out?"

I don't know if this was helpful to you at all, I hope so. Ignore if not.

To answer the OP - yes I would highly recommend Dr. Oakley. One thing he doesn't do, and which we're going to do in a year or so, is take DD for blood tests to check immunity so we will know whether she needs a measles or other booster. I think there's only one clinic doing these, and it's in London.

Sassh - do you consider polio and diphtheria to be endemic then?

Bumbleymummy

Polio - it has been erradicated in Western Europe but is endemic in some parts of the third world, and the areas it is endemic in have historical links to the UK, so a child in an inner city in the UK may well come into contact with a child who has visited an endemic area / or indeed visit an endemic area themself, if that child is unvaccinated then they may have the disease and be passing it on with no symptoms for who knows how long. So in some areas of the UK, without vaccination it would be endemic.

It is sensible (from a government / WHO point of view) to continue to vaccinate until it is irradicated. This is what happened with smallpox, there is no need to vaccinate now.

I was vaccinated for smallpox, although the risk of catching it was miniscule. Then in 1978 there were cases in Britian, so suddenly you had more chance of getting smallpox in Birmingham than in India.

Diptherea - again not endemic in the UK but so easily could be without vaccination. It is endemic in Eastern Europe, we have a lot of immigration from Eastern Europe as well as parts of it becoming popular as holiday resorts.

There have been cases in Britain in the last year.

Until a disease is irradicated there is always a risk of being exposed to it.

I supose in answer you your question, I would consider an area that has many visitors from endemic areas to be at risk of becoming endemic at anytime, unless there are other factors such as method of tranmission, malaria needs mosquitos so people comming back from holiday infected are not going to infect other people.

If that was the case - don't you think it would have happened by now? There hasn't been a case of polio in the UK since the 1980s.

But Polio is endemic in India, Pakistan, Nigeria and Afghanistan.

There are many British families who have relatives in those coountries, either living there or in the armed forces.

Polio is highly contageous, one person can infect a thousand before a case is diagnosed. Once infected there is no cure.

There has not been a dignosed case of polio in the UK since 1998, but as 90% have no symptoms, or have flu / D and V we don't know if there has been a case.

There was an outbeak in China late last year.

An epidemic would be devastating, look how quickly SARS spread around the world, and that was a disease with clear and sudden symptoms.

The world is very close to erradicating polio, once that happens no one will need the vaccine

Polio has been endemic in those countries (and others) for years and we still haven't had an outbreak. Do you not think it would have happened by now if it was going to? I really think there is a very slim chance of a child contracting paralytic polio in the UK.

"Polio has been endemic in those countries (and others) for years and we still haven't had an outbreak. "
Why do you think!
We have high vaccination rates against polio!
Vaccination prevents disease!
So therefore maybe we don't have endemic polio because we vaccinate.

basic logic!

The polio vaccine only has an efficiency of 95%, so that means that 5% of the population in the UK are not protected. So the argument does stand, that if it was likely to have any kind of outbreak or even one single case in the UK population, it would already have happened at some point over the last three decades when travel between those areas where polio is endemic, and the UK, first became common.

The fact is that there hasn't been one single case of polio despite one in 20 of the population not being protected via vaccination.

Inner cities (high immigrant populations) have low vaccination rates too, again, this would increase the likelihood of a polio case occurring, but it hasn't happened.

The UK has a 92% rate of vaccination. Full dose of 3 gives 99% protection so only it is nowhere near1 in 20 that have no protection.

Sorry I need to rewrite that.
There is a very high vaccination rate in the UK even with immigration.
Babies after their full 3 doses will have 99% not 95% and anyone travelling abroad to places where there is still polio are still advised to get a booster.

There were only a 1352 cases in the world in 2010, so nowadays a rare disease so the chances of the uk is probably is low even with immigration, however until it has been completely eradicated there is no room for complacency.

I have been reading everyone's posts with interest, and I think that lots of them reflect the fact that it's very hard to approach this topic neutrally. Most people don't sit on the fence, and therefore we all seek out information or evidence that compounds our original feeling. I could do with a table comparing the pros and cons side by side. I'm thinking we can each do some research that backs up our thoughts and then present it to the other!

ion review on vaccine safety
There is also a nice table available which I will dig out which compares dangers of disease against the risk from vaccine

risk of diseases against vaers reported risk

Personally I would be with your husband on this. Two of my grandfather's brothers died from childhood diseases now vaccinated against and I know several people with disabilities caused by Polio. So the effects of those diseases and the benefits of vaccination are very obvious to me.

In fact, if I were in your DP's position I have to confess I feel so strongly about this that I would probably refuse to compromise and have the children vaccinated anyway, behind your back if necessary.

However, I do understand that is a very extreme reaction and it sounds as though you and your DP do genuinely want to reach a happy medium. If delayed / single shot immunisations would make you feel happier, then I think that's the only workable compromise you can really aim for. Any other outcome will be one person browbeating the other into submission and I appreciate not everyone wants to run their marriage along those lines

I do sympathise with you and your DP as unlike most other "marmite" issues (politics etc) there isn't really an option to agree to disagree here. The idea of pros and cons lists sounds a good one. I'm less convinced by the idea of a private consultant giving better advice than a GP (although of course they will have much more time to talk you through it!) but perhaps if you looked at it as essentially paying someone to referee mediate your family discussion on this issue it might seem cheap at the price!

LetsGoToTheHills HELLO!!! I am in exactly the same position. And would quite honestly love to go to the hills to avoid all the anger this issue seems to provoke in so many people. My DH listens to me, and respects my instincts and the fact I've read a lot on this issue but he would prefer DS to be vaccinated. I agree Dr Halvorsen's book is good and seems better written than most on the subject. It is INCREDIBLY difficult to get impartial information when so much big pharma money is involved in research, statistical analysis, and government decisions. I have an abiding memory of my maths teacher saying beware statistics, a good statistician can make anything they like out of raw data. I have read everything I can, pro and anti, and everything I read, including Dr Halvorsen, has convinced me further that I don't want DS to have any of them. DH on the other hand, tends to just look up the illnesses themselves and how awful they are, and sees vaccination as an 'insurance' policy. I see it as giving known poisons to an extremely strong and healthy baby. I have thought about compromise too, and it may yet come to that, maybe we will get some of the vaccinations done before he goes to school/ nursery. I am trying to keep an open mind, and do what seems best at any given time. My experience of people who do this (such as my grandparents, who used both conventional and alternative therapies occasionally when they felt each was appropriate, and often against doctor's advice, and who lived healthy, independant lives into their mid 90s) is that people who automatically trust their HCPs and NHS protocols almost invariably end up with more health problems than those who pick and choose according to their own judgment. I've often wished I could trust my doctor because then all responsibility would be his, but I don't, and therefore have to take responsibility myself if I make mistakes. That's the part I'm finding harder in relation to DS than I did when I only had to make decisions for myself. And also the part that I'm sure many mumsnetters will quickly tell me I'm being irresponsible about.

Hi MrsSP,

It's interesting that your husband is more worried about the disease after reading about them. I actually found reading about the diseases, their incidence and risk of complications quite reassuring because they weren't as bad as I had been led to believe.

I think many people don't read too much about the diseases themselves and just assume that because there is a a vaccine for it then it must be a dangerous disease and it would be too risky not to vaccinate/delay vaccination. You only have to look at the US and the chickenpox vaccine to see that. Chickenpox is viewed very differently in the US compared to here and I can only think that it is because the vaccine is available that makes people think it is much worse/dangerous than we consider it to be.

As far as the 'polio is endemic in other countries therefore we should vaccinate against it here in case someone brings it over on a plane' argument - by that logic shouldn't we ALL be vaccinated against things like typhoid fever then? It just doesn't make sense.

I agree with your husband and if I were him I would be vaccinating the child and disregarding your views as they will only endanger them. No other resolution would be possible for me/. Good job we're not married

Typhoid is spread differently to polio, it far easier to prevent in the UK, hence the only need to vaccinate if you are travelling to risky area.
Surely you have to weigh the risk of disease to the vaccine and not just look at the disease to make a properly informed decision and that dorsn

That doesn't mean taking the word of dodge gps like Halvorson who is making a nice living out of a scaremongering badly researched book.

Polio is mainly spread through contact with infected faeces bruffin same as typhoid. There are hundreds of thousands of cases of typhoid worldwide every year compared to around 1000 a year of polio and there are a few hundred cases of it each year in the UK.

Vax threads are always horribly polarised and tend to be a very vocal 90% shouting down the sceptics accusing them of playing roulette not just with thier kids but with the herd.

I don't vaccinate for all sorts of reasons and none of those involve autism or Wakefield. I don't go on these threads any more because they make me sad and I feel bullied and attacked by people who just don't get it or me. They get quite nasty.

The same is true in real life.

I have four children and have never vaccinated any of them.
For the record they all had measles (or 'wild' measles as it has now become known ) and even while I was looking after 4 measley children all at the same time I didn't regret or doubt my decision.

I know people on the other side of the debate from me are equally convinced about their decisions. I think the difference is that I respect their right to be.

Of course other doctors don't make ANY money out of vaccines at all do they bruffin?

Polio is also spread by coughing and sneezing.
Most gps don't set up Harley street clinics just to give advice on jabs.

That is not the main way it is spread though Bruffin- it is usually through the faecal-oral route.

In any case, seeing as there are a few hundred cases of typhoid a year in the UK compared to zero cases of polio it doesn't really make much sense to worry about one but not the other. The chances of you contracting typhoid either through travel or within the UK is much higher than the chances of coming into contact with polio, catching it, being one of the 1% of cases that are actually paralytic polio and then being one of the cases that result in a permanent disability.