Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

General health

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

DD is one next month which means MMR - help!

47 replies

MammyShirl · 11/02/2004 13:37

What is everyones opinion on this?

I dont think i am going to go for the single injections as i know this lives her open to infection in between jabs!

I am very interested to hear about all your experiences and the choices you made and why?

Also has anyones children had any side effects from the MMR jabs and the single jabs?

Thank you!

OP posts:

Hulababy · 11/02/2004 15:07

DD had the MMR aged 13 months after a lot of thinking on my part. She did, however, have a reaction to it. The reaction started 2 days later and it took me over a week and several calls/visits to HV and doctor to get them to admit it was the jab that caused it. DD became quite poorly with a temperature and rash. TBH I haven't seen her more poorly before or after since. But it wasn't life threateningly so - just very distressing for us.

I do not want DD to have the booster unless she definitely has to - I will pay for her to be tested for immunity instead.

Would I do it again?

Not as early no. I would definitely wait until older and more able to cope with it and any reaction. We felt we had little choice though at the time. The clinic here doing single jabs was one of the ones they found problems with and it was closed down. TBH, I am not sure if any other babies (unlikely but you never know) of mine would be given the MMR - I would, again, have to weigh up al the pros and cons.

Sorry - no real help at all this is it?

Original poster

MammyShirl · 11/02/2004 15:19

no it is.. really helpful.

thank you for all your advice and experiences.

im going to speak to my dh about it.

OP posts:

prettycandles · 11/02/2004 15:21

I gave ds the MMR at 13m, and dd had her's yesterday, also 13m. We did a lot of research first time around, ended up downloading many original articles from the Lancet and one or two other medical publications, as we were fed up of reading other peoples' interpretations. There is no neutral information available - not that we could find, anyway. We decided that the benefits outweighed the risks and went ahead with the vaccinations. I would have prefered single jabs, because I didn't want ds to have the Rubella jab.

fairydust · 11/02/2004 15:31

Mammyshirl -

At 13mnoths old my dd wasn't able to sit roll or do anything basically.

She was due to have her mmr but as we were waiting for the hospital appointment the GP decided to wait till after the appointment.

Well dd was diagonised with Cerebal Palsy.

Now had she have had the MMR jab before she was diagonised it would have been meidcally noted that the cause was of the CP was actually from the MMR jab...

They wouldn't have looked into my pregnancey history or the threatened miscarriage that probly actually caused it.

My dd's specialist explianed to me 9/10 children who are diagnoised with a MMR related condition -often than not already have the symptons prior to the injection but havn't been diagonised so therefore the MMR is put to blame as they then have no prove that the MMR didn't cause the condition.

Original poster

MammyShirl · 11/02/2004 15:58

fairydust - thats very interesting.

how is your little girl, how old?

OP posts:

coppertop · 11/02/2004 16:33

MammyShirl - I'm wondering about it too. It didn't help that the MMR appointment card for ds2 (12 mths) arrived the day after ds1 (3.7yrs) was diagnosed as autistic. Ds1's autism was evident long before the MMR though so there was no connection there, but it doesn't help with the decision-making. We probably will end up letting ds2 have the MMR but we just need a little longer to think it through.

fairydust · 11/02/2004 16:37

dd is doing fine is now crwaling around and is 22months old.

I'm not saying it makes it easier to consider - i'm just saying that not all these bad reports we hear are purely done to the mmr jab

tillymint · 11/02/2004 19:37

I did with dd1 and will do it with dd2 as soon as I'm able.
I get v angry that there are children in dd1's class (year1) whose parents have boycotted the mmr in any for (together or singularly). They are putting dd2 (7mths) at risk.
My GP feels strongly that too amny children are not having it, and the diseases are coming back stronger, and affecting the young ones.
Right,...I feel better now. Sorry if I've offended anyone.

Jimjams · 11/02/2004 19:49

hmmm if you vaccinate your child their immunity is actually boosted by being exposed to the live virus. So the best way to boost a vaccinated child's immunity is to expose them to someone harbouring the disease. So far from putting your child at risk (how? if the vaccine works anyway) they may actually be doing you a favour.

sorry tillymint but your GP is talking out of his arse.

Research has shown that whooping cough has mutated in response to vaccintion and vaccination does not protect against the new strain. However the new strain is appears to be less virulent than the old strain. (the evolution bit was from a published paper- the less virulent bit from talking to a GP and homeopath).

Jimjams · 11/02/2004 19:52

sorry misread your message- your dd2 should still be protected by your antibodies- especially if you actually caught measles as a child. This is why the MMR is postponed until after 12 months (and is better off left until after 15 months) giving it earlier than this means that maternal antibodies prevent immunity being established.

Posey · 11/02/2004 19:53

Dd who's 6 had it at 16m old and had no reaction at all, not even a bit grizzley (sp?)
Ds had his 2 weeks ago at 13m. He was fine initially but a week later developed an upset stomach and high temperature. This could be totally unrelated as there appears to be a bug going round. But he also briefly had a rash which the HV warned us could happen (by brief I mean a matter of a few hours)
We had them immunised because it felt right for us and IMHO the benefits outweigh the possible side effects. I might add that this is my opinion and I never judge anyone, I feel everyone does what they feel is right for their children. It is a tough one though as it is such a grey area, no definite rights and wrongs.

Jimjams · 11/02/2004 19:55

Exactly Posey- and everyone's individual risk/benefit ratio is different.

BTW although I no longer vaccinate my children I still vaccinate my cat () And dammed expensive it is too!

tillymint · 11/02/2004 20:20

Thanks for info about antibodies jimjams, makes me feel better. But my mum can't recall me having measles.

I'm a statistician, so I go for mmr. The odds are your kids will be better off. A bit like carseats and seat belts - you are statistcally better off using/wearing them, however, lives have been saved because people were not (personal experience) and lost, 'cos peole were!

PS I do not do the lottery. About 100 times more chance of a big win by doing the pools knowing diddly-squat about footy!

Jimjams · 11/02/2004 20:25

yeah but not everyone carries the same risk. I'd prefer every child to undergo a risk assessment before having any vaccination to get an idea of indivudual risk. it would be a bit rough and ready at the moment. If we had done that with ds1 I'm sure he would have recieved some vax but not others, and who knows he may not be autistic now (I strongly suspect he wouldn't have been had baby jabs been administered differently/not given).

popsycal · 11/02/2004 20:26

jimjams - yes it is me butting in on the mmr conversation again
what do you think the 'risk assessment' would entail....

sammac · 11/02/2004 20:33

My ds had the single vaccines as I was just not happy with all the information I found, including here.

I'm in Glasgow, and a London company comes up every month to hold a Sunday clinic for the jabs.

However, we started last May, and finished in January. So the whole thing was spread over 9 months( eek- I could have had another in that time!!) mainly because of out of stocks.

I'm glad we did it this way, but it's totally an individual choice.

Evita · 11/02/2004 21:23

I'm going for singles. I work part time for a medical history library in London and have looked at lots of unpublished reports on MMR and there are genuinly serious concerns from lots of people within the medical field, not just moms and other concerned parties. It's simply not worth risking dd's health as far as I'm concerned.

about the singles. Really the wait between jabs isn't an enormous risk. To think we've already waited at least a year without them, a few months more isn't going to make a load of difference. Also getting the measles done first as that's the most dangerous might set your mind at rest.

Good luck!!

kiwisbird · 11/02/2004 21:29

Don't speak to me about bloody mmr
DS went into anaphylactic shock with his (depsite not being allergic to eggs or anything else for that matter)
DD had to have hers in hospital and got extremely ill afterwards mega fever, and tra da mumps, mild it may have been but she was in massive pain.
I still do believe in vaccination though, my children are different and intolerant for a diff unknown reason, most have theirs no probs at all
My brother nearly dies of encephalitis when he got measles as a teen in 1991.
I've been advised to seek more info about vaccinating any future kids!

lyndsey66 · 11/02/2004 21:36

Mammyshirl - sorry if repeating what anybody has said already (havent tim to read everything).
We chose to have ds immunised using single jabs. The clinic we use has a good reputation - but is 4 hours away from our home!! So although this is an 8 hour round trip I dont regret our choice. I spent about 4 months talking to people and reading research and so on before making our choice - it isnt easy at all. For some really good info have a look at www.jabs.or.uk. Alot of the info is very anti MMR - but there is also some good balanced advice.
BTW our son has had the measles and rubella single jabs with no side effects at all.
Good luck - I know that this is a nightmare decision

Jimjams · 11/02/2004 21:37

atm mainly family history. In the future further immunity tests (eg test metallothionien function (i'm obsessed) before injectng bloody mercury!- dtp not mmr- can't be tested yet though).

Food for thought:

anthroposophical doctors (part of the rudolf steiner philisophy) are a funny mix of conventional and alternative. They suggest not giving mmr initially. If a child hasn't caught measles by the time they are 9 they then suggest protecting using mmr, as measles is more dangerous in teens than young children.

lyndsey66 · 11/02/2004 21:38

sorry mammyshirl - put the e-mail address wrong on post - it is www.jabs.org.uk

prettycandles · 12/02/2004 15:10

Jimjams, can you tell me a bit more about the maternal immunity business? It's a bit late for me now, as dd had her MMR 2 ddays ago, but she's still bfed and I had all three illnesses as a child.

I wish I'd kept all the bumpf from when we were researching MMR with regard to ds, but we assumed that, having made the decision once, unless things changed we would MMR all our children. I suppose the major change for us was that I'm bfing dd far longer than I did ds.

Flip

1 2