MMR injections

[Smellen]

Please could someone update me on the latest relating to the MMR jabs.

Is it now "safe" to let your baby have them? Is there any advantage/disadvantage to having the single jabs?

Sorry if this is another old chestnut.

various web sites - I'm not very good at links but you could try

www.ndsc.ie/A-Z/VaccinePreventable/ MMR/Publications/File,1233,en.pdf

"Serious complications have been reported for 1 in 15 notified"

library.nhsgg.org.uk/mediaAssets/ Newsletters/nhsggcphpunewsletter_vol5iss04.pdf

"It is important to remember that as. many as 1 in 15 cases of measles can result in severe. complications which include pneumonia, bronchitis, otitis..."

Plus several books that I have - will have to look up when I get home

On a final note - what about all your daughters who are not vaccinated? If they catch measles when they are pregnant then they run the risk of serious complications. Will you vaccinate at some point to protect them in the future or is this not important? Is it just that you think the MMR is not safe for them right now at the age they are - or ever? That's a genuine question

It would also be interesting to know how "severe complications" is defined as that is quite a vague term.

I can't get those links to work...

I'm about to go home - I can't get access to the web to down load the links beacuse my security settings won;t allow it. I will have a look when I get home and do it from there.

Similarly if you have any literature that shows the damaging effect of vaccinations I'd like to see that too since I don't think it's a black and white subject.

To answer your question, I believe that children who are very young, particularly under 5 are more at risk from neurological changes. I will continue to review my decisions as my children get older as diseases like measles are worse in adults.

sandradee, good on you for sticking to your guns. i agree with what you are saying, except for the fact that i dont think we should expect people to think of other people's children as much as they do of their own, or to think of things for the good of society as a whole. i'm sure i wouldnt do that. nevertheless, spidermama, i have read the arguements for and against, i had to cause my dd is 11mo and i will have to decide the best thing for her, as do all of us, and it is a very big deal. try \link{http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/Lancet-MMR-03-2004.htm\this site} or \link{http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/347/19/1477\this} for evidence based matreials.

choosing not to vaccinate your children isnt a new thing, my mum and aunt knew somebody when the were younger that (maybe) was vaccine damaged, as a result neither me or my brother or 6 cousins have ever had any vaccines (im 27, youngest cousin is 11) they have always had hassle from gps/health visitors.
as far as i know all of us had measles as children, thankfully none of us had any complications, my dd also caught measles at 10 months, she was also lucky enough not to have suffered complications. i dont think its anybodys place to judge people that choose to vax/not vax, its up to individual choice, i dont think you need to have a vaccine damaged child to earn the right to choose not to vax.

Measles and most other diseases are more likely to have serious complications and fatalities in developing countries. Also children between 1 and 9 are least likely to develop complications. A side effect of vaccination is to decrease the number of children in that age group who catch the disease and thus have it relatively mildly and develop life long immunisation. So a number who are unvaccinated but get the disease at a more vulnerable time in their life will develop serious complications which they wouldn't necessarily have suffered from if they had caught it in childhood.

15% of children develop complications ranging from diarrohoea and ear infections through to pneumonia (biggest casuse of death) and encephalitis..but presumably that is a WHO figure so doesn't account for which country you live in?

Good post zippi.
lanismum, you say your dd had measles and was lucky enough not to get complications. All of my friends and probably my entire primary school, all my family, all my relatives and virtually everyone I knew as a child had measles and, funnily enough, I didn't hear a single report of complications from any of them either.

I'm not denying it's a nasty illness which can lead to complications in susceptible individuals. I do though feel that people who have been allowed to contract and process the measles virus have natural, life long immunity to measles and related conditions.

It's well known that measles is best caught in childhood. Vaccination denies people the opportunity to get it at the right time leaving them open to the virus in adulthood which is much more dangerous.

Quite apart from that the vaccine often doesn't work anyway. During the recent outbreaks the children getting the measles had been vaccinated.

I really, really, really resent the allegations that I'm selfish and putting others at risk for my beliefs. I could say those who vaccinate are putting my kids at risk because vaccinations diminish the possibility of my child getting measles (and the others) at the correct time. However, I don't make such judgements about others because I realise we're all doing our very best in a very difficult subject area with lots of misinformation to contend with.

Also sandradee, you say it would have been so easy for you to choose not to vaccinate. Believe, I'm on this path and it is by no means easy.

haven't read the whole thread but something that does make me mad is when people say " Measles isn't really a problem anymore, hardly anyone evr gets it"

for a start one case is enough as it can kill and secondly

THERE'S A REASON that it is no longer prevelant: the MMR

Totally untrue trinity. You should have read the whole thread. Measles had already decreased by 95% BEFRORE the introduction of MMR, as detailed in an earlier link,.

Vaccine damage is a very difficult thing to prove but the authorities do not deny it can happen (just as with any drug). The problem I have is that the government publishes leaflets to reassure parents that are full of misinformation and propaganda. They are not prepared to be truthful about the risks (however small they are) and would rather tell us that the worst thing that can happen is a fever or a bit of a rash. We are told vaccines are "perfectly safe" but how safe is safe?

Aside from severe reactions there is also the possiblity of long term effects that have not been investigated. That is the problem - that nobody really knows enough about it. My GP shrugged her shoulders when I asked her why three doses of DTP are given to babies and then said "two should cover it". As I said earlier, mercury was used here for years after it was discontinued in other countries. So I'm not prepared to have blind faith in something that not enough is known about or in the words of a government who clearly has an agenda that does not consider my child's best interests first and foremost.

spidermamma, i know what you mean, i dont know anybody that has had severe complications from measles either, but i didnt want to say oh we all had it as kids and were fine, iykwim.

apologise to spidermama and all

sorry, I didn't know about that

am actually very interested by that wheres the link to this info?????

\link{http://informedparent.eway.co.uk/Portals/2/mmr.html\Here} Trinity. There are quite a few good books on the subject if you did want to look deeper. \link{http://www.wholehealthnow.com/books/mass-immunisation.html\This one} is good and its author tirelessly lectures around the country.

thanks

1 in 15 serious complications- that is utterly wrong. I'll dig out my book later which gives figures for the various complications. It's a family health book published just before MMR was intoduced here and portrays measles as a self limiting illness which is unpleasent (it is I had it), but from which a full recovery is expected. It goes onto say you don't need to catch measles because there's a (single) jab, so it's not anti vax.

Off the top of my head I think ther complication rate is about 1 in 2000 - but that includes pneumonia etc, the death rate for a healthy well nourished child from a community such as ours that has been around measles for a long time is minute. It's devastating in previously unexposed communities.

I'll look up the figures once ds3 is in bed. (currentl,y being fed on my lap)

Great links, Spidermama.

I don't want to keep going on this thread becasue we are going round in circles now. However please can you honestly answer this question: are you relying on people like me TO vaccinate so that your DSs and DDs will be protected because you are not sure if it's the right thing to do and you are worried about the effects?

Well I worried about the effects but I don't live in a bubble and am therefore not going to rely on other people to protect my child from what is one of the nastiest killers (along with Whooping cough. And yet, why should I take the risks to vaccinate (and we've already debated whether there are) in order to protect your child who really is the same as my child and anyone elses in terms of risk. You could say "don't then" but like I say I don't live in a bubble.

You have to think of society as well as your own child and do as you would be done by.

By not vaccinating ds2 and ds3 I assume they are reasonably likely to catch measles. If they haven't caught measles as they approach puberty then I'll worry about it then- possibly would give a measles jab around age 10 if they haven't caught it.

WRT the baby jabs. Tetanus- not giving them that (which I would incidentally like to give them, but not as part of a 5 in 1) doesn;t really affect anyone else. Diptheria- not present in the UK, so not going to affect anyone else. Whooping cough- was a bit concerned when small but ds2 was repeatedly exposed to whooping cough as a 4 month old and didn;t get it. polio, Not in UK so doesn't affect anyone else. Hib is a bit weird, but I hope they will do it the old way and establish immunity themselves aged around 5- if there's enough floating around- without getting ill. Men C- isn't spread in the way measles etc is so doesn;t affect anyone else. Rubella- that's the one most likely to affect another seriously, but ds1 caught it from a vaccinated child.

Incidentally every time they get runny eyes/noses or a barking cough I check inside the mouth for koplik's spots- my civic duty if I see any they would be kept in.

But anyway irrelevent because my children's risk from jabs is higher than yours.

From this book of mine (published 1981) - measles
In most communities of the western world the condition is mild and hardly ever dangerous. The only complication they give a figure for is encephalitis- 1 in 1000. Treatment - "severe cases need intensive home nursingand plenty of reassurance that they will come to no hard; but even these need only to retire to bed if feeling too poorly for anything else. "

A pro jab book - it goes onto say "ONe attack of measles gives life-long immunity and recovery is complete with no after effects, except when patients are unfortunate enought to suffer from one or two of the most severe complications. In view of this immunization makes overwhelming sense esepcially if a child is ill or delicate"

This was pre-MMR days of course. All in all seems a sensible summary to me. Measles can be nasty, but in most cases is not"

See its things like the 1 in 15 thing that annoy me so much because it's propaganda.

JimJams I understand why you do not vaccinate. I don't know you or anything about why or what or when your child developed autism and I would not even want to begin to comment on the causes etc.

It's really difficult to explain it but there are so many people in society who read the media hype and get their nickers in a twist and take things to the extreme. They rely on others to vaccinate and protect their children when in reality there is no reason why they can't be vaccinated like everyone else. Call me / "everyone else" sheep / offensive for thinking this and for not reading more around the subject but I am not stupid and I really do believe that these vaccines are developed for the good of society.

sandradee I hve to interveen as I know exactly what jimjams reply to this will be.
iff youwere given the choice of 10 childern diying or your own child dying what would you choose?
the concept of vaccines are devoloped for the greater good however there is a two fold argument here.

1. the vaccine schedual is based on finacial constraints and evidenced based practise IE the medical decisions and time and number and order etc of vaccinations are influenced by burocracy not just the evidence of effectiveness. 2)would you vaccinate your child if you knew you child to be at risk just for the greater good?

FWIW I am pro vaccine but I feel that the NHS are shooting themselves n the foot by not alying fears with valuable relyable information which is avaliable. I have heard alot of health professionals add to the MMR myths with some shocking statements and there is simply no need for it. the facts speak for themselves

sorry jimjams not meaning to put word in your mouth but I have seen your responce to the greater good argument before!
that is My thinking