MMR DROP IN CLINICS ACROSS WALES TOMORROW - please get yours

[Mosschops30]

You can turn up to various venues
Ystrad Mynach Hospital
Belle Vue Surgery Newport
Children's Centre, CRI
Children's Centre, llandough

Don't worry if you're not sure If your dc has had booster, you can still attend.

Please protect all our children

Sorry, that was to Magdalen.
Cheers.

I think we've established that Bumbley is not saying on this thread that there is anything wrong with MMR, or that singles are better.

bumbleymummy Fri 19-Apr-13 14:18:34
To be blunt, who cares what people think of the MMR as long as children are getting some protection against measles?

bumbleymummy Wed 24-Apr-13 12:31:04
I didn't say it was a problem as such - just that it's unnecessary

bumbleymummy Wed 24-Apr-13 12:31:50
HAven't said MMR isn't ok anywhere.

but she feels it should be made available, at NHS cost, to anyone who wants it on a whim

bumbleymummy Wed 24-Apr-13 11:57:02
I think the choice should be available Randall, that's all. I don't like the all or nothing/one size fits all approach.

bumbleymummy Wed 24-Apr-13 12:31:04
I didn't say it was a problem as such - just that it's unnecessary

Separately from which, it is I think generally accepted that there are some people who may be advised by their GP that vaccination is unsuitable, so they have a medical need, not a whim, and these are the ones who need the protection of herd immunity, which is achieved by the rest of us being vaccinated.

"Results: The MMR vaccination rate in the city of Yokohama declined significantly in the birth cohorts of years 1988 through 1992, and not a single vaccination was administered in 1993 or there- after. In contrast, cumulative incidence of ASD up to age seven increased significantly in the birth cohorts of years 1988 through 1996 and most notably rose dramatically beginning with the birth cohort of 1993. Conclusions: The significance of this finding is that MMR vaccination is most unlikely to be a main cause of ASD, that it cannot explain the rise over time in the incidence of ASD, and that withdrawal of MMR in countries where it is still being used cannot be expected to lead to a reduction in the incidence of ASD. "

www.1796kotok.com/vaccines/news/pdfs/MMR_withdrawal.pdf

The authors do note:

"Epidemiological data, however, cannot test the very different hypothesis that MMR might involve an increased risk of ASD in a very small number of children who, for some reason, are unusually sus- ceptible to damage from the vaccine. There is no evidence in support of such a hypothesis and no indication of how such a postulated susceptibility might be manifest. Hence, the burden of proof must be on those who favor such a hypothesis."

But Wakefield wasn't talking about a small number of cases anyway, he looked at the graph of increasing incidences of autism (like the Japanese one, but for the UK and US) and said it was caused by the MMR. He was wrong to do so.

Ladygran,
How many studies do you want?
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01425.x/full

www.bmj.com/content/322/7284/460

europepmc.org/abstract/MED/9643797

www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021134

pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/108/4/e58.short

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X01000974

These are just six of the many, many studies that have been done on looking at a possible causative link between MMR and autism (some of which include looking at inflammatory bowel disease) that you can find by searching on Google Scholar for "MMR autism".
scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?start=0&q=MMR+autism&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5
If you read even just the abstracts it makes it abundantly clear that none of these trials have found a causative link with the MMR.

Cheers.

LottieandMia -- not sure quite what you are getting at, unless my point that rubella immunity does wane over time. Presumably its expected life is the same whether you're immunised at 3 (with the MMR) or as a teenager (in the old days when I had mine). So if it lasts 20 years, that remains the same: it's the start and end points that change. But since the point of the MMR is to stop rubella circulating it matters much less if immunity wanes.

Epidemiological studies are not credible, as your own study point out

""Epidemiological data, however, cannot test the very different hypothesis that MMR might involve an increased risk of ASD in a very small number of children who, for some reason, are unusually sus- ceptible to damage from the vaccine."

LadyG - I think there may be more than one.

No effect of MMR withdrawal on the incidence of autism: a total population study

Not credible. Does not look at possibility of MMR causing regressive autism in rare cases.

Magdalen,

No, I'm not denying that some people are still concerned about the MMR autism link but it's not the only reason. Some parents who do believe their child regressed after the MMR may not be as convinced that the link has been refuted and may therefore choose not to vaccinate any other children with the MMR - it may not just be a case of them reading something in the paper.

Mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine and the incidence of autism recorded by general practitioners: a time trend analysis - as above

No evidence for measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine-associated inflammatory bowel disease or autism in a 14-year prospective study - the famous Finnish study - as above

A Population-Based Study of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccination and Autism - as above

No Evidence for A New Variant of Measles-Mumps-Rubella?Induced Autism - same again

MMR and autism: further evidence against a causal association - Samer problem.

In order to refute a claim, the same study, in this case clinical study, has to be replicated. DO you have an example of a credible clinical study?

PJ, I don't need you to speak for me on this thread - particularly when you're going to quote things out of context and use phrases such as 'on a whim' . Unless of course you consider a woman with a vaccine damaged child choosing not to give the MMR to her other children 'a whim'. I am pleased that you finally seem to accept that I have not said that there is anything wrong with the MMR or that singles are better. Progress is good :)

Gnu, if immunity wanes then it will still be circulating - just in an older population - which could, unfortunately, include women who are trying to conceive.

Lady, the study is certainly enough to counter Wakefield's claims, the ones that started this whole mess.

As the authors of the Japanese study say, it is up to the people who hypothesise that the MMR might trigger autism in rare cases to prove it, as to prove it isn't the case is, well, proving a negative.

So, have you got any credible studies to support that hypothesis?

Yes, but still better than previous situation of giving to girls only as teenagers (when it could wear off before pregnancy) or not being given at all (because who'd bother if single vaccines available). But, there should be more publicity about checking rubella status pre ttc. As I said, one place would be when girls get HPV jab at 13.

Noble, did AW actually say that the MMR was the cause of the increased cases of autism? Do you have a link? From what I remeber reading he was proposing that there may be a small subgroup of susceptible children that could be at risk.

Gnu, why is it better? If it wanes after 20
Years and is given in early childhood it will have worn off by the time they may start considering having children. I'm sorry, I don't understand your argument. What do you mean by:

"not being given at all (because who'd bother if single vaccines available)"

They would bother because they want to be protected during pregnancy surely?

I do agree about immunity checks though. Although if they do need a booster that means a third dose of MMR being introduced into the schedule.

as bumbley said.

An epidemiological/population study is incapable of disproving AW and other studies. The Japanese study looks at a broad trend. We aren't interested in autism, per se. We are interested in the developmental disorder, tagged as autism, that may or may not be triggered by the MMR.

Why is rubella single vaccine more likely to wear off than MMR though? It used to be government policy for girls to have it at 11 (rather than MMR given at 13 months).

I don't think it was at all true that people didn't bother to get single rubella - we used to get letters home from school explaining about congenital rubella and everyone was aware how important that was for all girls to have it. I don't remember anyone not having it tbh.

Bumbley, yes, see this letter to the Lancet

www.medicine.mcgill.ca/epidemiology/seminars/MMR_wakefield.pdf

Note the graph of increases in autism cases where he has put the arrow for MMR at the start of the increase. It's clear that he is blaming the MMR for the increase. (Don't worry about the graph, btw, it's an awful example of a misuse of data).

The Japanese graph of increases in autism with the arrow "MMR withdrawn here" blows Wakefield's argument out of the water.

So Lady, what you're saying is that you don't have any credible studies to support that hypothesis, and even if it's correct, it's very rare?

Ladygran,
Would you like some studies on measles virus (be it vaccine or natural) persisting in children with ASD?

adc.bmj.com/content/93/10/832.short
"Results: No difference was found between cases and controls for measles antibody response. There was no dose?response relationship between autism symptoms and antibody concentrations. Measles virus nucleic acid was amplified by reverse transcriptase-PCR in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from one patient with autism and two typically developing children. There was no evidence of a differential response to measles virus or the measles component of the MMR in children with ASD, with or without regression, and controls who had either one or two doses of MMR. Only one child from the control group had clinical symptoms of possible enterocolitis."

www.pediatricsdigest.mobi/content/118/4/1664.short
"INTERPRETATION. There is no evidence of measles virus persistence in the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of children with autism spectrum disorder."

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmv.20585/abstract
"This study failed to substantiate reports of the persistence of measles virus in autistic children with development regression. ."

www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0003140
"This study provides strong evidence against association of autism with persistent MV RNA in the GI tract or MMR exposure."

informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13550280701278462
"No significant differences in antibody titers to measles, mumps, and rubella viruses and diphtheria toxoid were found among the four groups. Additionally, there were no significant differences between the four groups for total immunoglobulin (Ig)G or IgM"

These are just the first five I came across, how many more do you want. Scientists have attempted to replicate Wakefield's findings, and they haven't been able to. His study itself was fraudulent, as is described in the BMJ:
'In an editorial, Dr Godlee, together with deputy BMJ editor Jane Smith, and leading paediatrician and associate BMJ editor Harvey Marcovitch, conclude that there is ?no doubt? that it was Wakefield who perpetrated this fraud. They say: ?A great deal of thought and effort must have gone into drafting the paper to achieve the results he wanted: the discrepancies all led in one direction; misreporting was gross.?

Yet he has repeatedly denied doing anything wrong at all, they add. ?Instead, although now disgraced and stripped of his clinical and academic credentials, he continues to push his views. Meanwhile the damage to public health continues.?

?Science is based on trust,? concludes Dr Godlee. ?Such a breach of trust is deeply shocking. And even though almost certainly rare on this scale, it raises important questions about how this could happen, what could have been done to uncover it earlier, what further inquiry is now needed, and what can be done to prevent something like this happening again.?'

Do you want it spelt out any clearer? There is no link. Studies have looked for the link and not found it, and Wakefield's original paper on which this whole thing is based was fraudulent. Not just wrong, but fraudulent.

Cheers,
Rosewind

But why don't any of them look at children that are said to have regressed into autism following MMR?

There is no question at all that MMR causes autism. My own uncle is autistic as a result of oxygen deprivation at birth. If they used him in one of these studies, they wouldn't be able to come to the conclusion that MMR has a link with autism, would they? They are asking the wrong questions and using the wrong subjects.

But since the point of the MMR is to stop rubella circulating it matters much less if immunity wanes.

I have to take issue with this statment. You would need to eliminate rubella world wide for it not to matter about immunity. Otherwise a woman's immunity wearing off slap bang in the middle of her childbearing years could matter very much.

The Singh study has replicated the results of Wakefield's study. It has been poo-pooed by the media but the reasons for that are very unclear indeed.

I do need it spelled out clearer using credible studies. Show me one.

We also need to look at who funds the research. It would be awful to assume that a study of such seriousness was biased just because it was funded by a biased party, but the risk is there.