Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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

Vaccinations and nursery schools

578 replies

Louise1010 · 13/07/2012 00:04

This is my first post so forgive me if I do anything wrong!

I am just beginning to look at nursery schools for my 15 month old son, and I am a bit surprised that they don't seem to care whether or not he has been vaccinated. I expected it to be a requirement.

It seems incredible to me that I have to provide evidence of my cat's jabs to the cattery but when it comes to children anything goes.

Has anyone come across a nursery school in the UK that does require it?

OP posts:
PigletJohn · 09/08/2012 15:28

p.s.

If you don't like turnips, anyone can attach great lists of any other substance, and any other disease, for which no causitive link has ever been found, and vaguely suggest that maybe there is a link that has never been detected, and maybe some research ought to be carried out by somebody. All of these would be exactly as valid and exactly as pointless as your idea about aluminium.

ElaineBenes · 09/08/2012 15:31

Do you have any evidence to show that not vaccinating and leaving your children at risk of avoidable infectious disease does not cause autism?

After all, we've seen plenty of evidence that the immune system may be involved and saintly gave an example of her son regressing following a virus. Therefore, in my opinion, NOT vaccinating may be a causal factor in autism. And in disability. And in mortality. Please provide me with evidence that not vaccinating is safe. I only do things which are safe. And there is solid evidence that not vaccinating is not safe. You don't understand. I want to know that NOT vaccinating is safe. Please provide evidence showing that despite all the evidence to the contrary, not vaccinating is safe.

Tabitha8 · 09/08/2012 15:38

Either on this thread or the other one, I was quite happy to say that not vaccinating isn't a "safe" option, either. Vaccinating (for me) and not vaccinating (for you) both have risks. You've weighed them up to your satisfaction. I have weighed up the risks to my (almost, as I'm still on the fence for some diseases and am now likely to remain there) satisfaction.

PigletJohn Those papers were not written by me. I merely read them and take notice. You choose to read them and are happy that aluminium isn't a risk factor for autism or anything else, presumably, so fine.

saintlyjimjams · 09/08/2012 15:42

God is this thread still going?

My son's regression followed a virus for which there is no vaccination. And if there was one I probably wouldn't give it to my children anyway, (they've all had it now, so no need to worry about boosters or anything which there would be with vaccination).

Just to be clear if anyone struggles into the end of this thread.

My impression is that many of the researchers who see viruses as having a part in their models see live vaccines as playing potentially the same role - although perhaps not as often. Certainly when I have heard them speaking about it, or when questioned - that has been the impression given (I would be stunned if any had committed that to a journal article). Of course with some sort of underlying susceptibility.

Rock and hard place springs to mind.

Tabitha8 · 09/08/2012 15:48

Quite, Saintly rock and a hard place.
And yes, this thread is still going. About aluminium. Have you seen the links I posted? They are quite interesting, but most on here just think the research doesn't need doing. (Not cranksphere links, by the way, hence why I thought it safe to post them, but no... Not safe at all).

PigletJohn · 09/08/2012 15:50

Tabitha, you are inaccurately putting words into my mouth
You choose to read them and are happy that aluminium isn't a risk factor for autism or anything else, presumably, so fine.

I have seen no evidence to suggest that Aluminium is a risk factor. If you have seen some evidence, let's see it.

A vague and unsubstantiated rumour is of no value. Aluminium and Turnips are of equal status here. You seem to dismiss the Turnip concerns out of hand, and show no interest in funding research into them. You even describe them as stupid Why is this? Have you no respect forthe concerns of others?

seeker · 09/08/2012 15:52

Can everyone read the papers when people link to pubMed things, or is it just me that would have to pay to read more than the abstract?

ElaineBenes · 09/08/2012 15:55

I could on the paper on alminium and autism. Not the other one. That's why I commented on it as well as it being in my area so I felt confident doing so.

It's not between a rock and a hard place.

It's a rock (infectious diseases for which there is plenty of evidence and quantification of risk) and ....no, there is no hard place (just some speculation but no hard evidence despite having looked).

Tabitha8 · 09/08/2012 15:56

Piglet Show me a paper published in a non-crankosphere journal about turnips and I'll concur. Until then, I'll stick with aluminium and the concerns of the authors.
So, if I've put words into your keyboard, are you saying you do have concerns regarding aluminium?

PigletJohn · 09/08/2012 16:01

Tabitha

You have not shown us a paper published in a non-crankosphere journal with evidence to suggest that Aluminium is a risk factor for Autism (or, if that's not the risk you have in mind, please say what is) or anything else

Have you ever seen any such evidence? If so, please show it.

Tabitha8 · 09/08/2012 16:03

Are we actually talking about the same links? Clearly we cannot be, so now I'm very confused and just don't know what to say. What links are you talking about?

mathanxiety · 09/08/2012 16:03

It's not just you Sad Seeker.

saintlyjimjams · 09/08/2012 16:06

If the models are correct then it is a rock and hard place until more is known about susceptibility.

If you actually have a child who has regressed it's particularly difficult. Especially if the regression 'fits' the model. . I know some find it incredibly difficult to understand there's even the remotest possibility their child could ever regress.

Sheesh.

seeker · 09/08/2012 16:09

Sorry, I missed Jo.
Read the links and you'll see what the authors were saying.
Here they are yet again:
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22099159
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21568886

Tabitha- can you read all of these papers or are you just working from the abstracts?

PigletJohn · 09/08/2012 16:12

Tabitha

The links you've recently posted do not show any evidence of a causitive link. They say maybe there is a relationship that no-one can see and maybe somebody ought to do some research

They are also very poor quality and written by a person who does not appear to know what a causative correlation is. He appears to be at a Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences. Perhaps he has an interest in vaccines as some kind of hobby.

So I repeat, you have not shown us a paper published in a non-crankosphere journal with evidence to suggest that Aluminium is a risk factor for Autism (or, if that's not the risk you have in mind, please say what is) or anything else

Have you ever seen any such evidence? If so, please show it.

Tabitha8 · 09/08/2012 16:17

Seeker In the first link, you can see statistics if you click on the full text article button at the top right of the screen.
PigletJohn I am pleased that you are satisfied by your thoughts. That's good for you. You must sleep well. You do not think the research needs doing. I am not asking that you do it if you were able to.

bruffin · 09/08/2012 16:18

this has the following conclusion
"Using these updated parameters we found that the body burden of aluminum from vaccines and diet throughout an infant's first year of life is significantly less than the corresponding safe body burden of aluminum modeled using the regulatory MRL. We conclude that episodic exposures to vaccines that contain aluminum adjuvant continue to be extremely low risk to infants and that the benefits of using vaccines containing aluminum adjuvant outweigh any theoretical concerns."

This was next to the links Tabitha listed on pubmed

Tabitha8 · 09/08/2012 16:19

By the way, I'm not exactly working from the abstracts or anything else. Like you, I'd have to pay to see the full article. I merely raised on here the concerns of the authors.

Tabitha8 · 09/08/2012 16:20

Bruffin Which link was that? One on the right, that needs clicking on?

bruffin · 09/08/2012 16:20

and from the mitoaction

"Vaccinations are critical in protecting the health of our children. All children, even those with suspected or known mitochondrial diseases, should receive the recommended vaccinations. The risks of these communicable illnesses outweigh the risk of vaccine-related reactions"

Tabitha8 · 09/08/2012 16:20

Ah, I see where that was. Thanks.

PigletJohn · 09/08/2012 16:29

Tabitha

I am sorry that you suggest you are not able to sleep soundly.

I note that you are not able to produce any evidence to support your concerns, although I have asked you several times, and I gather from your lack of response that you have never seen any such evidence.

I don't see anything to be gained by circulating unsubstantiated rumour with no basis of evidence.

Tabitha8 · 09/08/2012 16:33

All children should receive vaccinations? Even those with an older sibling damaged by a vaccination?

For the record, I sleep fine.

Tabitha8 · 09/08/2012 16:40

There are, obviously, other of papers on PubMed saying aluminium isn't a concern. Others say it might be. Who is right?

bumbleymummy · 09/08/2012 16:41

PJ, you seem to have a lot of trouble reading what people actually write. I find it very hard to follow your posts because you keep going off on tangents and accusing people of saying things that they haven't. I might come back later and try reading them again when I have more time.

Swipe left for the next trending thread