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

MMR DROP IN CLINICS ACROSS WALES TOMORROW - please get yours

394 replies

Mosschops30 · 12/04/2013 21:33

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

OP posts:
noblegiraffe · 14/04/2013 19:47

Beachcomber, that would appear to be incorrect

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15088275

" Twenty cases [of aseptic meningitis] were temporally associated with the administration of a monovalent mumps vaccine and 34 with a trivalent measles, mumps and rubella vaccine (MMR)"

MikeLitoris · 14/04/2013 19:54

Mosschops do you know if these clinics are goimg to be open this week or is it just the weekend?

I had planned to take dd1 to doctors tomorrow but the cri is on my door step so could go there instead.

I cannot remember taking her for her booster and I cant find her red book.

Original poster
Mosschops30 · 14/04/2013 20:30

mike it was just weekend AFIAK through the week it would be your GP

OP posts:
CatherinaJTV · 14/04/2013 20:30

For example the MMR containing Urabe strain mumps virus caused meningitis in children in unacceptable levels whereas the single vaccine of the same mumps strain didn't.

one of Wakefield lies (lovely voice, the man, but lies as he breathes)

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15088275

Twenty cases [of aseptic meningitis] were temporally associated with the administration of a monovalent mumps vaccine and 34 with a trivalent measles, mumps and rubella vaccine (MMR).

CatherinaJTV · 14/04/2013 20:31

noblegiraffe did not see your post before I wrote mine :)

MikeLitoris · 14/04/2013 20:38

I'll stick to the doctors then. Will the receptionist be able to check if dd had the vacc? I wouldnt want to waste anyones time taking her unnecessarily.

slightlysoupstained · 14/04/2013 20:41

Beachcomber you've been asked several times politely to go start your own thread instead of trying to derail this one into the same old argument. Why are you continuing to try to start arguments with people, going so far as to use words like unethical sounds like goading to me.

I am getting increasingly nervous at how close to home this is getting, threads like this are important.

HugAndRoll · 14/04/2013 20:50

GPs are also allowing babies under 1 to have their vaccine early due to the increasing number of cases. Ds2 is booked in for tomorrow. I think the drop in clinics are for ages 1+ so those with babies ages 6mo-1yr ring your GP.

beach stop being so unhelpful. Easy for you to say what you are about the MMR in the safety of France but we are actually facing an epidemic here. It may also help you to look up the definition of "discredited" and also what it means and why a doctor would be "struck off" before you spout that shit anymore.

PoppadomPreach · 14/04/2013 20:54

Good thread, OP. shame an idiot is trying to derail.

sashh · 15/04/2013 05:32

I think it is very poor policy to refuse to provide the single vaccine. I wondered if the government was rethinking their position and prioritising children's health instead of just clinging to a political position.

Go read up on vaccine damage from single measles vaccine in the 1970s, then tell me it is better than MMR.

Sorry to be derailed, back on track

BUMP

bumbleymummy · 15/04/2013 11:42

Do you have any links Sashh? All that seems to come up is related to the MMR, not single measles.

Afaik, one of the two single measles vaccine that is offered by private clinics in the UK (rouvax) is offered as part of the schedule in France. It is manufactured by sanofi Pasteur (who also produce pediacel (5-in-1) vaccine) so I wonder why it would still be in use if it was considered dangerous and had been shown to cause damage.

gnushoes · 15/04/2013 11:45

bump

noblegiraffe · 15/04/2013 12:07

Single vaccines are not considered dangerous, they are considered more likely to cause children to miss vaccinations due to the need for multiple appointments, increase the risk of catching the disease due to the extra time between appointments and the simple unpleasantness of administering three needles to infants where one would suffice.

bumbleymummy · 15/04/2013 12:15

I was replying to this noble giraffe:

"Go read up on vaccine damage from single measles vaccine in the 1970s, then tell me it is better than MMR. "

In any case, there is an argument to be made for giving mumps and rubella vaccines at a later age anyway.

YoniRanger · 15/04/2013 12:17

Beachcomber you are very very far away from an outbreak caused by the kind of twatish thinking you are applying here.

If you would like to bring your unvaccinated children to stay at my house in Powys and actually practice what you preach you are more than welcome. After all measles is only mild right? Right?

bumbleymummy · 15/04/2013 12:23

Well in the majority of cases it isn't life threatening yoni but in any case Beachcomber was asking whether the single vaccine is also bring made available and I think she raises a valid point. If the single vaccine had been left as an available alternative instead of being withdrawn while there were concerns about the MMR then there wouldn't be a problem would there? Politics.

noblegiraffe · 15/04/2013 12:28

But why would they make the single vaccine available when the MMR is perfectly good? Making the single vaccine available would suggest doubt that the MMR was the best method of vaccination. And it is better than three single vaccines for the reasons I listed. Why offer a less good alternative?

OpheliasWeepingWillow · 15/04/2013 12:41

Oh my goodness gracious.

What a horrible hijack!

It's such a shame when the minority preach extremist views that risk the health of the majority (yes, really)

bumbleymummy · 15/04/2013 12:56

Noble, if the point is to vaccinate children against measles to protect them in this outbreak then it shouldn't matter which measles vaccine people opt for. If making the single vaccine available would encourage more people to vaccinate overall then the politics shouldn't matter.

What extremist views have been expressed that would risk anyone's health ophelia? A single vaccine would still protect against measles. It should never had been withdrawn when there was so much concern about the MMR. If it had still been available then more people would have vaccinated their children (which surely is the whole point!) and there wouldn't need to be queues of people waiting outside pop-up vaccine clinics today.

noblegiraffe · 15/04/2013 13:07

Bumbly, if parents are that worried about the measles outbreak that they want their child vaccinated, but are still concerned about the MMR for some reason then they can pay for it privately.

The NHS is providing a vaccine. If they suddenly started providing a different vaccine for parents who can't get over the MMR scare, then that would be validating their concerns, sparking a rash of parents suddenly leaving the perfectly good MMR queue.

OpheliasWeepingWillow · 15/04/2013 13:40

Well I believe that scaremongering the supposed side effects of MMR is an extremist view with no basis in science or reality.

There is NO NEED for a single vaccine.

Anyway - I'm saying no more except if you are in Wales and especially South Wales there are clinics available to provide immunization against Measles.

Original poster
Mosschops30 · 15/04/2013 13:47

Thank you all for keeping this bumped and for fending off the hijackers who despite being asked politely several times, still feel the need to stay here and talk nonsense

We are offering MMR to children between 6-12 months in Wales now. Please spk to your GP if this is something you want

OP posts:
RandallPinkFloyd · 15/04/2013 13:54

I've been trying to find a thread to ask about my DS. But haven't seen one yet that hasn't been derailed by in-fighting.

I'm not interested in debating the vac. I have made my own decision based on all the information I could gather. I am happy with it.

My question is that DS is 20mo so has had the first mmr but not the second. I'm in north rather than South Wales but should I be thinking about getting the second jab earlier? Or is the gap important?

I'm not overly worried as we have no cases here and I believe the first vac is 95% effective, but if the length of time between doses isn't important I'd be of the opinion that he may as well have it now. He'll be having the second one when it's due anyway so it wouldn't be an extra one, just seems pertinent to ask.

If I'm not mistaken I think there are a couple of GPs on his thread (apologies if I'm wrong!) so I'd be very grateful for their advice.

Original poster
Mosschops30 · 15/04/2013 14:03

The vaccines can be given one month apart in children over 12 months. So potentially one at 12 months and then one at 13.

The reason they are spaced as they are is purely logistics of getting children back into clinic for all boosters before school.

I can't advise whether to have early, but there is no risk to having it early.
My ds2 is having his early tomorrow

HTH Smile

OP posts:
bumbleymummy · 15/04/2013 14:18

Oh don't be so precious mosschops. There is nothing nonsensical about anything I have said. It is perfectly legitimate to talk about alternatives to the MMR that also provide protection against measles. If anything, it is extremely irresponsible to suggest that the single measles vaccine (which many people have opted for ) is in someway dangerous as Sashh did. I don't see Ophelia jumping on her for scaremongering about that.

Most people will opt for the MMR anyway but if people were genuinely concerned about children catching measles rather than worrying about people's opinion of the MMR then they wouldn't care which one was used to protect against measles.