Reactions to MMR - how long do they last?

[MrsMoppetMama]

My DD (13 months) had her MMR 11 days ago, she had a bad reaction after about 3 days (high temp and trouble breathing) and we took her to urgent care center. Although this has now passed, she seems to be really out of sorts and has stopped sleeping through. Her normal routine was brilliant as she went down from about 7 - 7. Now she is waking every two hours and is very unhappy. Is this normal? is this because of her MMR or is it just a phase? She has also stopped taking her bottle before bed, is it likely that she has weaned herself? Help! It's been pretty easy going with her up to now so a bit stressed by all this.

Elaine - you seem to be completely overstating anything I have said. I have lined to papers the raise the possibility that the world of vaccines isn't quite as black and white as you portray. Nothing more. I am interested in possibilities. I actually think that people working in public health should be interested in possibilities. Both as an ex evolutionary biologist (truly I find it fascinating), and as the parent of children who seem towards have a tendency to inflammation.

I agree with pagwatch. My son attends as school where there are children damaged by disease, vaccination, birth and genetics. It all looks pretty similar when you're actually dealing with it rather than just waving around someone else's loss to prove a point. Shit happens, those of us with children who regressed have had the luxury of easy decisions taken away from us. Do you think Roald Dahl's loss is news to us? I've known about it for years. Just as I've known that my mother was left deaf in one ear by measles for as long as I can remember. My mother, by the way, who was damaged by measles, agrees with our decision. It's a world of subtleties out there.

My son at 57 will require 24 hours care and i very much doubt he'll have added to his one word spoken vocabulary. Forgive me for doing my best to avoid a repeat of that for my other children. I asked my 7 year old last week where he wants to live when he's a grown up. He looked at me as if I was mad and said 'with ds1 of course, he will need me to look after him'. He at least, appears to understand the reality of the situation we're in.

Describing the elderly as measles 'survivors' could be seen as scaremongering. In 1962 there were (according to HPA figures I have dredged up) just short of 185,000 notifications (presumably more cases?) and 39 cases.

In 1979 when I had measles there were 77,000 cases and 17 deaths.

Ok in 1963 the UK measles death rate was1 in 5,000 but 1 in 10,000 for healthy children. Yes measles carries with a risk of death- which increases dramatically if you are poor, undernourished or unhealthy. But please don't scaremonger Elaine.

As for your point that 'so many funds' are going to the autism-vaccine link. Really? Who is funding this work? Other than the nonsense epidemiological studies which treat autism as one thing (and are therefore pointless - I would agree) the only organisation I'm aware of that funds research into autism and vaccination (and they don't fund much) is Autism Speaks which is PARENT led and parent funded. They fund research that PARENTS want.

What 'much more promising lines of enquiry'? If genetics - they get the biggest slice of research funding currently. Personally I think the immune system and gut related research is the most promising for treatment - both underfunded areas.

Do tell more, it sounds fascinating.

As for books being peer reviewed because they are being published by a university press. I have just completed a chapter (on autism) for a university publisher. The review process is not the same as a journal.

MrsMoppetMama how is your daughter doing?

Ignoring the personal insults (very childish but I can appreciate your frustration), I explained why a screening test is not possible. You will end up exposing children who are perfectly fine to be vaccinated to something far more dangerous. How do you know that the child left unvaccinated will not die from measles? Even if you could develop markers, Will you choose sensitivity over specificity? There's not a zero risk option. You're wishing for the impossible and then using that as evidence of lack of caring.

Iinfo on measles complications is from the center for disease control, an authoritative source.
www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html

I've also written for a book in a university press as have many of my friends and colleagues. I can ensure you that an established academic university press wil always peer review. It's a long and painful process. I'm glad you seem to have been spared it, saintly

So you're all for collateral damage then? Even if it's your child that is affected.

I didn't say I was spared peer review - I said the peer review process was not that same. Please stop changing what I say?

Are you suggesting my measles figures (published by the HPA - so UK rather than US figures) are not authoritative? The CDC mortality figures look rather high - compared to the UK 1960's figures (apologies I forgot the reference for the death rates - Deaths from Measles in England and Wales in 1961. A Report from The Epidemiological Research Laboratory, Colindale, London, N.W.9. Monthly Bulletin of the Ministry of Health & the PHLS 1963; 22: 167-75.) I wonder whether they are taken from high risk populations?

I am not sure I have insulted you. I have responded to what you have posted. I don't have any gies on you personally as I have no clue who you are or anything else about you.

I do have a view upon your postingly a tragic, yet in the context of this thread, horribly mawkish and inappropriate anecdote. I find that, juxtaposed with your seeming indifference to the anecdotes of others strangely lacking in empathy.

I am not looking for 'zero risk option'. I said any testing that might help a few would be a blessing. I am not sure why that position is unreasonable. I can see why you do as though who are damaged by vaccines seem to be rather an annoyance more than anything else to you.

I may of course be wrong. I can only assume that you feel this way by your choosing to be sneering, smug and superior when discussing things with mothers of severely disabled children. You are probably perfectly nice.

I Think the evidence shows that the mmr vaccine is safe and effective, that is all. I have intentionally avoided bringing this down to the personal level so as not to cause offense and certainly have not sneered at anyone's story of disability and I'd didn't say one word about yours.

Dr paul offit details some of the abuse he has received in his book, some of very similar lines, so i can certainly see the pattern although I'm hesitant to align myself with someone as learned and respected as he is.

I'm sorry you disagree with me regarding vaccine safety. If new evidence comes to light showing that they are in fact dangerous, I would change my position. For now, the evidence is that they are one of the safest medical interventions known and, at least for measles, far far far safer than the disease.

Ah, but Pagwatch's evidence shows that the MMR clearly is not safe.

Dr. Paul Offit - isn't he involved with that dodgy Rotateq vaccine? Not biased at all towards making money vaccines, then?
There is tons of evidence of adverse vaccine reactions if you look for it.

I'm struggling to see where anyone has been abusive towards you.

And as repeatedly pointed out over the years on these threads, I am sure that vaccines are relatively safe for the majority of children. Presumably it's why both pagwatch and I have vaccinated children. The question, once you have a child who has regressed via after an immune reaction is 'is this safe for my child who appears to react differently from the average child', which is, a little different. The best way, imo, to find the answer to that is not to look at epidemiological research that shows that MMR is safe for the vast majority of children, rather to look at the research (ongoing) into children like my son. Those who have autism and immune system dysfunction. It would seem a more sensible approach, and I watch the ongoing research into autism and immune dysfunction with interest.

I find the 'you don't care about our childre' cries quite rude. Not from you. I disagree with you about a lot of things (!) but you don't descend to personal insults or goading which I respect.

What you don't know though, saintly, is if catching the disease will be even more dangerous for your children. That's the issue. I'm not questioning your own personal decision, that's between you and your doctors.

I see the 1 in 1000 figure quoted quite a lot but when you actually look at the figures for outbreaks the fatalities are never as high as that. I think they must be taking figures from undeveloped countries into account. If not, then I'd like to know why measles is more deadly than it was in the 1960s.

Well actually, it's not actually my doctor's decision. It's ours. Ds1 hasn't been to the GP in 8 years and they don't know anything about autism. My last GP didi - he started off thinking we'd made the wrong decision, then changed his mind. Although last time I spoke to his paediatrician in very general terms about vaccinations she did say she felt if there was a group of children more suceptible than others then steps should be taken to identify them. His neurologist thought our sequence of events made sense and hopes to be able to offer further tests/treatment in the future.

I am interested in where you disagree? You disagree that some children are more susceptible than others? I take your point that a natural infection might be problematic as well but the option to vaccinate is always there and they're not that likely to come into contact with many of the diseases (and yes I know that's because the vast majority have been vaccinated - but I feel I've done my duty to society in caring for a severely disabled child - I save the state hundreds of thousands a year). There are also other issues that I"m not going to go into that contributed to the decision.

Or do you just disagree that steps should be taken to identify the susceptible children? It's not as hard as you make out - and could be done relatively cheaply. The alternatives wouldn't be no vaccination versus vaccination anyway - if they made singles available an altered schedule might be suitable for some. There are two vaccinations I would give ds2 (not ds3 or ds1) if available as singles. Unfortunately they're only available (paid for) in London and I can't get the childcare for ds1 and certainly couldn't take him with us. I did try and persuade a local private GP to offer them but after going away to think about it for a few weeks he said although he sympathised, and he might change his mind in the future he was concerned that if he offered singles he might end up at the GMC.

It would seem entirely reasonable to me to investigate ways of saving families the pain of experiencing regression. I'm saddened that's controversial actually - it's really not much fun.

Or perhaps you disgree that immune dysfunction appears to be relevant to autism? I don't think that's particularly controversial these days. Like gut issues in autism - it was controversial 10 years ago, but not now. in fact when we saw the neurologist the paediatrician who was with him asked whether we'd tried a special diet (yes, I nearly fell off my chair in shock).

Elaine: do feel free to ignore me and respond to the posts above.

But you were insulting quite some time ago. You really shouldn't do that on this kind of thread, it's unkind and silly, and then to accuse others of doing it is ludicrous.

What you don't know though, saintly, is if catching the disease will be even more dangerous for your children. That's the issue.

Catching the disease via the normal methods of transmission e.g. via droplets spread by coughing and sneezing, and it going into your digestive tract is a very different transmission than direct vaccination, so we are not entirely comparing like with like.

Elaine

If you're free-riding on herd immunity (although that strategy may not last unfortunately), you could at least say so.
Huh, what herd immunity? There's always the talk of approx 95% vaccination rate needed for herd immunity. So, is that 95% of children? 95% of the entire population? Presumably it is the latter. So, do we give adults booster shots of measles vaccine? Nope.
Incidentally, I simply do not fear measles in the way that your clearly do.

Elaine's gone, twas a game of vaccination knock knock ginger

call names and run away

Anyway I agree with your point about herd immunity, and I think pro-vaxxers while they like to think of us as "free riders" might be a bit suprised that some of us are peed off at the loss of the possibility of childhood mumps and rubella and even measles infection for their family.

And in response to the question "what! have you forgotten what those disease are like!" the answer is no, I haven't. I remember them, I had a lot of them, so the scaremongering doesn't work.

We're ok - ds1 caught rubella from a vaccinated child

I hope Elaine's university press-published book wasn't on this subject as she doesn't seem to have done her research that thoroughly.

Elaine's insults so far - "bizarre", "crank", "quack", "cranksphere"

"I have intentionally avoided bringing this down to the personal level so as not to cause offense"

uh huh

anyway word to the wise for next time Elaine .. pack it in

Qed