I have to put in writing that I am taking responsibility for the risk that my baby might die from not vaccination

[StarlightMcKenzie]

The exact words the nurse spoke!?

I'll put something in writing if that is what they want but not that.

Apparently they have a duty to inform the HV of the risks that I am taking and have I heard the recent news oday of all the babies dying?

I'm bloody cross with this nurse tbh.

DTB is just as reliable and expert as Cochrane but sadly you have to pay to get the paper.

Oooh, this is interesting

You know what. I might just print off the links for my letter. No-one will be bothered to read them I bet.

That's worrying, Starlight. Although at population level vaccination is still better than not vaccinating - depending on the vaccine, of course, I think the flu pandemic one turned out to be far less effective than the manufacturers had claimed IIRC.

Where did you find that list Lougle?

edam I don't disagree with you, but I would still have some concerns for my family on the back of what happened to my DB. I also think that it our GP would probably prefer for us to forego the vaccines than pay for any tests that would highlight risk, if such tests even exist.

Although I sometimes wonder what would have happened had we vaccinated against and irradicated cowpox before the smallpox vaccination was developed.

Interestingly though, having had a kidney transplant, DB is always advised to have the flu jab.

See, I SAID it was all complicated.

My dd is 11 and was due her MMR at the height of all the media hoohar about it. She didn't have it.

I remember at the time reading on the JABS website about some cases where the government had paid out compensation to families of children who had been affected by the MMR.

Now I know JABS are probably a bit biased, but there were proper links to these cases, interviews, etc. I don't think they were made up. Can't remember exactly how the kids involved had been affected but it was serious, permanent stuff iirc.

2 second google and I found this;

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-11125343

I do get that such events are rare but they do happen.

'I read somewhere that the single most important thing that parents can do for their child's health is to breastfeed. That the benefits of breastfeeding are higher than the benefits of vaccination.'

That's why so many in the past and present, who were breastfed, still got polio, whooping cough, tetanus, diphtheria, etc. It's important, but it's not a substitute for vaccination.

My dad was breastfed till the age of 2. He still got whooping cough, measles, mumps, diphtheria, etc etc as a child. They lived in mortal dread of polio before the vaccine was developed.

I found it here but given that the site is 'think twice' I think we can safely say they are anti

That's interesting about medical records being lifelong - I always assumed they were too, until I recently asked my GP about something that I had as a baby (which I wanted to know if was genetic). It turns out they have no idea as my medical records only go back until sometime in the 1980's, when they were computerised.

No, I'm not suggesting that breast feeding is a substitute for vaccinations at all.

But not doing either of them has its own risks. So I'm just saying its silly to make people not doing one of those things sign a disclaimer if you're not also going to make the other group sign a disclaimer.

Just playing devil's advocate as I don't actually think that either group should sign a disclaimer.

But there is research that states that if you have a bottle fed child and an unvaccinated child then in the UK, with a healthy child the biggest risk to that child is due to being bottle fed rather than been unvaccinated. Quite possibly due to herd immunity meaning that their chances of catching mumps, etc is low and if they do catch it then the chances of them not been seriously ill are good.

And of course with bottle feeding there are the million and one things such as asthma, excema, obesity that are now thought to have the risk of occurance raised by bottle feeding.

I think I read a daft paper somewhere that suggested breastfeeding was harmful to the vaccine programme as it didn't allow the live viruses to do their thing.

Wonder if I can find it?

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20442687

It might have been this.

Ah yes, one of the recommendations was to delay breastfeeding until after the vaccinations had been given. Not sure if they mean don't bf at all, or whether they mean don't bf within a few hours of jabbing!?

The disgrace in the Fletcher case is a) the paltry sum b) the length of time they had to wait for payment and c) the abuse and ridicule that Jackie Fletcher has had to endure over the years.

Vaccinate your child, watch them become damaged then get ridiculed for years. Nice.

If your child dies from a vaccination no compensation is payable unless they die after the age of 2. Now while I assume compensation is neither here nor there if you have lost a child, I don't understand the reasoning behind paying out if you child is older than 2, but not under.

Starlight that is true of any passive immunity. It's why the measles shot works slightly better with increasing age (and why it doesn't work that well under the age of 12 months) - passive immunity from the mother before then (assuming she has the immunity to pass on - until mass vaccination she almost certainly would have been immune) interfered with the immune response, so immunity does not last very long.

Interestingly when ds2 (unvaccinated) was exposed to whooping cough at 10 weeks of age 10 years ago everything I read said that w/c immunity wasn't passed from mother to baby. But he didn't catch it and I think recent papers have suggested that some does pass. I definitely found a paper showing it passed in piglets! I presume it does otherwise I guess they wouldn't be vaccinating mothers now.

I do also wonder whether measles shot should be given at 18 months rather than 12 months (as it used to be not that long ago).

Time will tell I guess.

"No, I'm not suggesting that breast feeding is a substitute for vaccinations at all."...you might not be, but think twice are, along with ....whole foods, and ......homeopathy. All that and publishing lists of papers which they haven't read, and which don't support their crazed agenda.

How did you estimate the increased risk of membranous glomerulonephritis in your children starlight, and thereafter that it outweighed the benefits of vaccination?

'How did you estimate the increased risk of membranous glomerulonephritis in your children starlight, and thereafter that it outweighed the benefits of vaccination?'

Interesting question. I asked the GP. She didn't know. She didn't want to pay to find out so I will have to be anetdotal. Member of family had vaccine = member of family terminally ill. Member of family had diseases = member of family miserable but not dead, nor vaccinated for that matter.

Breastfeeding and homeopathy should not be put in the same camp though.

I have read this thread with huge interest. My DS had his first vacs at 9 weeks (Dr was on hols at 8 weeks - I love the implied hypocrisy in that alone!) However he had a bad reaction to the jabs and was unwell for 2 weeks+ and only in the last couple of weeks us he getting back to himself.

Some will say it was a developmental spurt, others a virus and others coincidence but all I know is I took a healthy happy boy in and got a screaming, unsettled, feverish, uninterested, glazed little boy back. I personally have faith in some alternative therapies and used cranial osteopathy and homeopathy (placebo or not I'm not here to debate but I was desperate to help him and it appeared to have some effect but I understand for many it is hogwash and I am on the fence).

We are now in a position we didn't foresee as to where to go from here. At times I just think we should push on and vaccinate and at other times I fear what could happen if we did. I'm trying to research but as said above there is either camp pro or camp anti and nothing in between and all I got from the GP and HV was the expected party line of 'you must'.

If anyone can point me in the direction of any research on either side, please do, just no 'be wise, immunise'! Please! I know the risks not to also especially with WC so please no lectures. I am particularly interested in research showing percentage protection from 1, 2 or 3 doses if 5in1. I know for expanded Sweden only do 5in1 twice which they feel us sufficient for 80+% protection and many countries suggest 8 weeks between jabs rather than NICE's 4 weeks but I'm interested to read more.

Expanded = example! iPhone autocorrect at its best!

I'm glad your little boy is getting better Culmsasaurus.

I think you'll struggle to find what you're looking for because in a way no-one is going to know which would be the 'best' course. I had reasons to be wary of jabs for ds2 and ds3 (having happily taken ds1 for all of his at the earliest possible age). Probably the most sensible thing any doctor said to me was 'if you vaccinate he'll probably be fine, if you don't vaccinate he'll probably be fine', so I decided to delay (not just based on that!)

And we've delayed and delayed. DS2 is 10 now, and there a couple of jabs I would give him if I could get them without having to give every other bloody jab at the same time :rolls eyes: DS3 I am much much more wary about vaccinating at all as he share many of what I now consider were red flags with ds1.

If we ever do vaccinate ds2, or if ds2 or ds3 decide they want to be vaccinated we will (or I will advise them to) be certain they are in full health before proceeding. And I would allow as much time as possible after an illness.

In our case I read as many peer reviewed papers as I could lay my hands on. In the end it was largely the blatant misrepresentation of some of those by the dept of health that put me off or at least made me very wary. I did manage to find some sensible doctors at various times and was able to have sensible discussions, but it is hard finding ones who have enough knowledge of potential difficulties.

It's a decision we revisit fairly frequently, still.