Did anyone vaccinate one child and not another?

[dinny]

Can't believe it's already time to start thinking about what to do for ds with regard to MMR. DD had single measles and single mumps (mainly because at this age - 16 months - she was at nursery and not breastfed). DS isn't at nursery, doesn't go to any creches and is breastfed (I've had mumps and measles as a child).

So, am thinking may not give him any jabs, at least for now. But it feels really unfair to DD. I'm more paranoid about him & jabs as he's a boy.

Had both of mine done the week of their birthday... dd and ds

done with what, Cece? not considering MMR jab, just singles.

mmr

DS is vaccinated for everything ...
DD has had her baby jabs but that is it ...
DS was 14 months when he had his MMR ... DD will be 2 in a couple of weeks and I still haven't done it (can't get single jabs in NZ as far as I can tell)
I don't know why I am dragging my heels ... just am ... just don't want to do it right now ... I am under a lot of pressure from DH and it is driving me mad because I can't really explain myself only that I don't want to do it ...
Sigh ...

Ghosty, that's how I feel. Just don't want to have him vaxed. Though didn't with dd either but then she was at nursery so felt a more pressing need.

i don't think there are any particular risks with singles, if there are no gut problems. What makes you hesitate about singles?

just because he's a boy, really, Ruty.

just don't want him jabbed...trying to weigh up how likely he is to get wild measles/mumps atm...

i know what you mean dinny, i find it a difficult one, because my ds has severe gut probs we are going to do singles when he is three. but the more people who don't have any va [theoretically] the more likely our kids are to catch measles. Tho the anti- vax argument doesn't put much store by that argument - i really don't know. I don't know if breastfeeding, the amount my 16 month ds takes now, will protect him from measles or mumps. Just have to hope for the best. I would have thought if you delayed it till he was 18 months to two years and had singles it would be OK, but its your decision.

Ruty, fwiw, my old neighbour was a dr of infectious diseases and she said the mumps vaccine is only about 70% efficacy...

t

take him and get them over and done with....

thats interesting dinny - i think mumps is generally a mild disease in childhood anyway. measles is the biggy, isn't it? Its the one i worry about. but sorry, i wasn't trying to pressurize you either way, i know its a hard decision.

I actually know 2 people who have been quite seriously effected by measles so that is why I was banging down the door to get my 2 down asap.

My old boss vaccinated the 1st (with Single vaccines)

then read lots of research on why vaccines dont work anyway.

As a result from 2 years the eldest will have no more vaccines ever, and baby (Well toddler now) will also have no vaccines.

Having read all the information she got i will NOT vaccinate my children against ANYTHING either!

NannyL, I have also read so much about it, esp about the dubious efficacy of the vaxs.

Lockets, not sure if I should be more or less inclined to vax him...? Well, my instinct says not to...

that's very simplistic Nanny L. Vaccines do work in many cases. The whole issue is complex and difficult, but it can not be simplified on the for or against side, no matter how many times you write it in capitals.

ds1 had DTP men C hib, polio, measles

Ds2 nothing

ds3 nothing

Would like to give them single tetanus - but am waiting for one to be introduced (or risk them with the adult one?)

I totally agree with you Ruty, you know my views on vaccines.

Hope lucks on your side NannyL and your children don't develop any of the deadly diseases such as meningitis.

My daughter died from a deadly form of meningitis called pneumococcal last April aged only 19 months. It has a very safe vaccine used only on 'at risk' children in this country. I am campaigning for it's introduction.

Dinny, you have to make your own decision on what you think is best for your child.
Goodluck.

amyjade- can I ask a quick question. You've said before that your dd had some immune system problems- does that mean she should have been given the vaccine - ie was she at higher risk of the disease? I ask because I'd like to see a vaccination system where the vaccines given are tailored to the child. You may know that we believe our eldest son to have been vaccine damaged (to the point where he will never live independently and probably never speak). I think in his case there was enough family history available for a tailored vaccination system to have said "jab him, but space them and don't give him thimerosal", and that could have made all the difference. I suspect we're after the same thing, although it looks at first sight as if we're not.

I feel so angry that I was persuaded to let people inject mercury into my son. It has made me very mistrustful.

Can I just ask, why are you so agianst the mmr?

jimjams
My daughter was a perfectly healthy toddler with absolutely no problems with her immune system or any other problems which would have put her in the 'at risk' group.
The majority of children that develop pneumococcal disease are also perfectly healthy which is why this vaccine is so important.
If Dd had been in an 'at risk' group then i certainly would of had her vaccinated.
We think she developed it from an middle ear infection she had 2 weeks before as 80% of middle ear infections are caused by the pneumococcas bacteria.

In your case if my Dd was proven to be vaccine damaged then like you i would be very wary of vaccinating my others.
Every parent has to make the decision not from other peoples opinions but on what they think is right for their child.

dinny- remember if you don't jab now you can still jab later. If ds2 and ds3 don't catch measles before age 9/10 I may well get them jabbed then for measles (far more dangerous after puberty). By delaying it you make it less likely that protection will wear off in the teens/early 20's as well.

Thank you amyjade. It's always a hard decision and never black and white is it (wish it was)- repeated ear infections can be a sign of being at risk for autism (although lots and lots of children have repeated ear infecitons without becoming autistic of course). In that case it may be the repeated use of antibiotics that is the problem perhaps for children who already have some git problems- certainly ds1 (who had about 8 ear infections before he was 2- antibs each time) regressed following aggressive antib treatment.

It's the whole greyness of the area that leads me to wish they would look at tailoring the vaccination system. I'm also never sure how it all impacts on other diseases. if you remove one - do others then fill the space? I don't know much about microbiological ecology but I guess there must be some effect (for bacteria at least even if not viruses). It must alter selection pressures on all. Mind you its the added ingredients (eg thimerosal) that worry me more.

Sorry rambling. Do you know why they haven't introduced pneumonoccal vaccine? Is it cost? I would assume the arguments for it are the same as the Men C (and presumably it has a better safety record- the men c's is a bit dodgy). I would have thought the arguments for giving it to babies would be stronger than for men c (which has a stronger case in teens). Cost always seems to confuse the issue.