Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
General health

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

Original poster

Vaccines and Scaremongering

153 replies

expatinscotland · 10/02/2006 14:36

Let's just put it this way: I do NOT trust the NHS when it comes to vaccines. These are the people who until last year were allowing jabs w/mercury to be given to 2 month old INFANTS, years after the substance had been banned in many Western countries, in order to save a few bucks.

I'll never know if this was what has caused DD1 to be delayed w/nearly all her motor skills. I had no idea they were still using mercury. I'm from the US, where it's been no longer put into jabs for infants. I just assumed that was a no brainer and the UK had done the same.

These are folks who allowed children to die, for years, of pnuemoccocal meningitis, b/c the vaccine is expensive.

So yesterday I bring DD2 for her 2 month checkup. I'd already understood that Prevenar, the new vaccine, would be out in Scotland sooner than April and I could put off DD2s vaccines for a fortnight until it was out.

Then I get there and they're telling me, 'Well, by the time the Health Ministers bring it out, maybe she'll be eligible for hte catch up programme.'

WTF?! The 'catch up' programme sounds like a load of shite to me. Upon further questioning, they're only going to give under 2s in the catch up programme two uptakes, one w/their MMR. As infants in the US, they get 3. I asked, what if they're under two but have already had their MMR?

Silence.

Seems the brain donors hadn't thought of that.

Sorry, but I smell a RAT. The HV and GP were encouraging me just to go and pay for it privately. Of course they were.

I told them flat out I trusted them about as much as I trusted a three-armed pickpocket and walked out. I mean, these were the ones who gave mercury filled jabs to infants.

Took some time out and composed a nice letter to my MP and MSP.

I'll post their response here when I get it.

TBH, I don't trust the jabs they give to kids here.

The GP tried to frighten me by telling me my daughter would contract pertussis if I waited until Prevenar came out to vaccinate her at all.

How, I asked? DD1 doesn't go to school and is fully immunised. In fact, we hardly go out at all and when we do, it's to play and walk outside.

OP posts:
Original poster
expatinscotland · 10/02/2006 18:28

pregnant women can also chose to shoot heroin. doesn't mean it's a good thing.

OP posts:
Socci · 10/02/2006 18:30

Message withdrawn

chapsmum · 10/02/2006 18:31

Without the vaccine preservative the vaccine would never have lasted long enough to be effective.
There have been extensive studies done edam, one in america found the incidence of motor co-oridnation delay actually increased when the mercury was removed from the jabs.

If you looked at every aspect of medicine like that edam there would be no chemotherapy....

Socci · 10/02/2006 18:33

Message withdrawn

chapsmum · 10/02/2006 18:35

socci you are all being a bit selective about what you are reading here.
I had mentioned the priciple of medicine would be that the benifit of the intervention must outweigh the risk, edam asked me to consider the principle of first do no harm, I did.

Socci · 10/02/2006 18:35

Message withdrawn

chapsmum · 10/02/2006 18:37

I guenuinly would be interested to read it!

Socci · 10/02/2006 18:39

Message withdrawn

chapsmum · 10/02/2006 18:41

expat I really wasnt looking for people to be agressive, the onfo I have based my thoughts on is based on rigorous clinical evidence.
I am aware that mothers inject heroin whilst pregnant, I witness it on a regular basis.

I am almost upset that some of you become so agressive when talking about vaccines and it makes me reluctant to post on these threads.

TRhe points I have made hae been valid, I have not said anything without proper knowledge to back it up.

I heartily agree that the dicision to vaccinate should be infomed and to make this informed choice you must be able to trust your GP.

To trust your GP you must know that his decisions are impartial and free from financial pressure.

Socci · 10/02/2006 18:41

Message withdrawn

Highlander · 10/02/2006 18:43

A. no-one, but no-one would use mouse models anymore as a proof of point when modelling human disease. It's a very useful pre-clinical startpoint, but the mouse is too far removed in every aspect of physiology to extrapolate data into the human disease state.

B. Sadly, genetics are the most likely cause of most cases of autism, neurodegeneration etc. Yes, definitely there will be a tiny number of cases where something like an intense vaccination schedule will accelerate the disease presentation, but there are too many other additional influential factors in the environment that probably do the same thing, to a greater degree.

C. There's no conspiracy from the DoH. We all love the NHS - it's free, we have access to the best medicine. BUT, the NHS works on a One Size Fits All Model - the treatment we receive has been shown to benefit most members of our society. Financially, the NHS has to work this way, so there's very little room to tailor medicine for each individual's needs. If that bothers you, then vote for a substantial increase in income tax!!

D. Successive govts have thrown money at the UK's biggest killers, at the expense of investing (and researching) effective preventative medicine and primary care. You can eat, smoke and abuse your body - you'll get cutting edge cardiological care that isn't bettered anywhere in the world. But as for investing in research into vaccines, giving our kids healthy food in schools, making sure every woman BFs? Forget it. Not trendy.

Socci · 10/02/2006 18:44

Message withdrawn

Highlander · 10/02/2006 18:44

PS won't be able to stay and debate - DS is needing abthed etc. Sorry

chapsmum · 10/02/2006 18:51

That is a interesting link socci. However it is not a rigourus conlclusive medical study. If one is published I will read it with interest. At this time there is no conclusive evidence and no mercury in injections.
I am not suggesting anything, and the us removed the mercury based on the WHO recommedation.

Really could you stop being so aggressive.

I am being quite open mided about this but I really do feel like your ignoring the things I have said relevent to expats origional question.

Other than my opinions relating to that I have not said anything that is opinionated or not factually based.

Original poster
expatinscotland · 10/02/2006 18:59

This GP told me my daughter had a 30% chance of contracting pertussis if I waited till April or May to begin her vaccination course and get the Prevenar, not play 'catch up, perhaps'.

How'd she arrive at that statistic? Especially given that the baby lives w/three fully immunised people and doesn't get out much except to open air parks - we like to get fresh air daily, and walk/play at least an hour no matter what the weather. My older daughter doesn't go to school or nursery, either.

I'm just curious and mistrustful, tbh. She also right away encouraged me to buy the vaccine course privately.

Hmmm . . .

I dunno, call me a skeptic, but I just find that all a bit dodgy and so I elected to put off the decision for now.

I'm not saying I'd leave her unvaccinated, but I fail to see just why it always has to be at 2, 3 and 4 months?

I'd be willing to bet cost is involved somehow.

As for the NHS being 'free'. It's free at the point of service, but it's definitely NOT free.

OP posts:
Original poster
expatinscotland · 10/02/2006 19:01

I freely admit that I've never been one to buy every line the government feeds me hook, line and sinker, especially when it pertains to my body. Or my child's.

OP posts:
Fauve · 10/02/2006 19:04

Remarkably, the Mail on Sunday reported this on Sunday:

Gobsmacking.

chapsmum · 10/02/2006 19:07

exactly expact. I feel that politics and finacial constraints shoudl be completley removed so that the information we recieve from our drs really is impartial.
I will be really intereste in the response from you mp

Original poster
expatinscotland · 10/02/2006 19:11

It had better not be a load of spin b/c you can never bullshit a bullshitter . needless to say, i can smell it a mile away.

i want to know when i'm going to get a definitive answer about when this jab is going to be available to all infants.

i think it's bs that kids miss out on the opportunity b/c they were born a few months too early.

and they can go f*ck themselves, b/c i do NOT trust them. i think they're fobbing me off and trying to scaremonger me in order to get out of providing it for me child thru the NHS. so all be happy to wait till it's out and then they're beholden by law to give it to her.

OP posts:
Original poster
expatinscotland · 10/02/2006 19:12

the HV tried to scaremonger me the entire time i was in there, telling me i was risking my child's death from pertussis if i didn't have her jabbed up that day and for wanting to wait till prevenar was available. sorry, but that just seems fishy and pushy.

OP posts:
chapsmum · 10/02/2006 19:13

Now what would be interesting to find out is that gp's used to get money for every course of immunisations completed this was in the days before trusts, I wonder if that still stands...

Fauve · 10/02/2006 19:14

Just to summarise the Mail on Sunday article: it quotes at length Dr Peter Fletcher, former Chief Scientific Officer at the Dept of Health. He says:

"There are very powerful people in positions of great authority in Britain and elsewhere who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR and they are willing to do almost anything to protect themselves...there has been a tenfold increase in autism and related forms of brain damage over the past 15 years, roughly coinciding with MMR's introduction, and an extremely worrying increase in childhood inflammatory bowel diseases and immune disorders such as diabetes, and no one in authority will even admit it's happening, let alone try to investigate the causes."

Original poster
expatinscotland · 10/02/2006 19:18

but what's interesting, fauve, is that the US and Denmark have been giving the MMR for a long, long time. I had it, in fact, and I'm 35 next week. But they only started to see the sharp rise in autism over the past 20 years or so. So that's when some US universities, etc. started to look at what role thiomersal might play. Of course, there are better diagnostic procedures in place, but that still doesn't explain the sharp rise.

OP posts:
Flossam · 10/02/2006 19:20

I think they are concerned about whooping cough because it has become more prevelent again. I read up about all the various diseases just before DS had his first Jab. That was all i needed to see to know I had to let him have it. I am medicalised and do beleive vaccination programmes work, however.

chapsmum · 10/02/2006 19:22

well if it was in the daily mail....
Sorry,but I cannot concide that the mmr has anything to do with immflammatory bowel conditions.
Autisms is a genetic condition.
Autisism and asbergers have only been recognised and investegated more openly in the last 15 years
There are no medically accredited papers which link MMR and autism.
There hae been a great many other things introduced in the last 15 years which could be attributed to that cause, not least consedering industrial disasters, chirnoble etc.