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.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Refusing to vaccinate your child

575 replies

Organic100 · 15/08/2013 22:34

For a while now I have been researching the dangers of vaccines and all the cases of children dying or being made sick after having a vaccine, all of which is not reported in mainstream media. How do you feel about vaccines? I've heard that the medical profession encourages pregnant women to get the flu vaccine, and that babies are vaccinated at birth. I've also researched stories where parents have been reported to social services by a spiteful doctor or nurse, simply for refusing their child a vaccine. It seems parents are losing their rights. What do you think?

OP posts:
Crumbledwalnuts · 28/08/2013 16:43

Why is it an empty statement? It isn't at all. What a strange thing to say. It's what people do all the time. Who hasn't got the courage of their convictions? Again, very odd. Why do you want to make it personal Jo? Are you having trouble with the issues and arguments here? You seem desperate to make it personal.

Neither bumble nor crumble have ever formally analysed whether any vaccine is more dangerous than the disease it reduces.

Again, very odd. Of course a vaccine is more dangerous than the disease for some children. Not for others. What's to argue about?

You could call people dogmatic and bloody-minded who ignore the direct experiences of people, as relayed to them, without explaining why.

Crumbledwalnuts · 28/08/2013 16:45

I do agree with the thing about other parents and emotional blackmail. They don't know much better.

CatherinaJTV · 28/08/2013 17:07

Crumbled - I think some parents are in for a rude wake up call. Those parents trusted God (or the version of God their pastor preached to them), just like these parents:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8483622

Crumbledwalnuts · 28/08/2013 17:19

My children haven't had had some vaccines. Do you think I'm relying on God ?

JoTheHot · 28/08/2013 17:22

where have you come across this?

The OP. I see most of her ravings have since been deleted.

Neither bumble nor crumble have ever formally analysed whether any vaccine is more dangerous than the disease it reduces.

Again, very odd. Of course a vaccine is more dangerous than the disease for some children. Not for others. What's to argue about?

either a spectacular comprehension fail, or a more likely, another total ducking of the question. I wasn't talking about people with allergies to a vaccine ingredient or similar. It's the remaining 99.9% of the population for whom you have never done the analysis. At least you attempted the question, which is better than bumble who prefers to take affront at a few home truths.

Why are you pair so reluctant to state your views on the relative dangers of vaccines and diseases, to people without proscribing medical conditions, back them up and then let us all have a good laugh. Oh dear, I seem to have answered my own question

CatherinaJTV · 28/08/2013 17:23

Crumbled - I am talking about the parents in Texas.

Crumbledwalnuts · 28/08/2013 17:41

Oh. So not really relevant Catherina. OK :)

I wasn't talking about people with allergies to a vaccine ingredient or similar. It's the remaining 99.9% of the population for whom you have never done the analysis. At least you attempted the question, which is better than bumble who prefers to take affront at a few home truths.

This doesn't make any kind of sense at all, and is rude to bumbley, who was pointing out where you were rude to her earlier, and you don't seem to like that very much.

Of course vaccines are more dangerous for some children than the diseases.
This makes sense.

Which children are more at risk? We don't know.
This makes sense.

Is my child at risk? I don't know. My doctor doesn't know. You don't know.
This makes sense.

I don't wish to take an unknown risk with the health of my child. You are welcome to take the risk with yours.
This makes sense.

bumbleymummy · 28/08/2013 17:42

Jo, I haven't said the things you are accusing me of so I'm not sure how you want me to respond. I have said that for some children the vaccine is more dangerous than the risk of contracting the disease. This is true - a poster on this thread had shared her own experience with her children. Vaccines are contraindicated for them. Are you denying that these children exist?

Crumbledwalnuts · 28/08/2013 17:44

It's the remaining 99.9% of the population

Meh. Too many vaccine reactions go unrecorded for this to have a shred of credibility.

bumbleymummy · 28/08/2013 17:48

I think she's just plucked that figure out if the air Crumbled - or perhaps we should ask her to show us how she thoroughly researched all the reported reactions, analysed them and came up with that figure. Hmm

specialsubject · 28/08/2013 17:53

frontdoorstep tetanus IS a risk in the UK, it is found in all soil especially where animals have been. It is very rare that people actually get it in the UK because - guess what?

polio has been eradicated in the UK and most of the rest of the world. But not all. Now, how did that happen?

attending school is not mandatory. Education IS. Listening in science lessons and being better informed clearly isn't.

still, it is your choice to risk your child. Of course if you keep it indoors for its whole life it definitely won't get tetanus.

Crumbledwalnuts · 28/08/2013 17:55

"polio has been eradicated in the UK and most of the rest of the world. But not all. Now, how did that happen?"

Don't be patronising when you don't know the facts, specialsubject. Why don't you google AFP and polio in India, then come back.

LaVolcan · 28/08/2013 17:57

A statement of fact, yes, but a statement as near to being empty as is possible.

Some people do rely on their immune system and healthy lifestyle. You might think they are ignorant and stupid and try to persuade them so, but it doesn't alter the fact that such people are around.

Re those Texans who rely on God: presumably if their children die from diseases for which their is a vaccine, they will say that is the will of God. I don't share that understanding of God, but in America especially, less so the UK, those people most definitely exist.

bumbleymummy · 28/08/2013 18:12

Special, again, you are attributing the low incidence of tetanus to vaccines. This is not the case. Even before vaccination was introduced, there were very few cases of tetanus. Proper wound hygiene and availability of the NHS has done a lot - worth recognising imo.

bumbleymummy · 28/08/2013 18:14

entirely* to vaccines - that should be

twistyfeet · 28/08/2013 18:18

thinking of tetanus. dd wasnt allowed into a US university without an extra tetanus jab. Which we had to pay inflated US prices for. It wasnt like she was going to go round giving people tetanus. She'd had all her UK jabs but the US have extra. I was a bit miffed as it was a stupid rule.

bumbleymummy · 28/08/2013 18:22

YEah, the US are a bit 'needle happy' with the old tetanus jabs. PEople waiting in the hospital for hours to get boosters when they have a superficial cut from a kitchen knife. Hmm

chocolatemartini · 28/08/2013 18:32

Crumbled- all but one of the cases I mentioned were acknowledged as being vaccine related. The boy with polio was a straightforward case of polio caught from the vaccine- no dispute. The whooping cough reaction was I believe a common problem with the vaccine used then (late 80s/ early 90s? Not sure exactly when). Of the two recent cases the first was definitely reported by the GP as a vaccine reaction and the second I'm not sure, it was the height of the measles outbreak in Wales and I'm pretty sure it's harder to get MMR reactions acknowledged and reported anyway since Wakefield, let alone when there's a national campaign to increase MMR uptake. I know the doctors she saw agreed the initial fever was a vaccine reaction but I don't think his subsequent non recovery was reported as a vaccine reaction.

And I didn't even mention another friend whose 1 year old was as ill following the MMR than I was when I had actual measles as a child... That one definitely wasn't reported, her dr said a week with spots, high temps and vomiting was a normal reaction.

Crumbledwalnuts · 28/08/2013 19:13

CM - this is exactly why I think there's no accurate figure for the number of vaccine reactions. No accurate official figure at all. Sorry about your friends' terrible experiences.

crikeyitshot · 28/08/2013 19:32

Always a good time to bring up

bumbleymummy · 28/08/2013 19:41

That's a crap video Confused Why would you link to it?

Do you think the majority of people in the UK are crap parents then because we don't routinely vaccinate against CP and rotavirus? (Although I guess RV has just been brought in so maybe new parents can be redeemed...

He's using figures from early last century when we didn't have antibiotics to treat the complications of many of those illnesses and comparing it to now..

He just brushes over this hypothetical 'one child' that gets damaged by vaccines. "Greater good" and all that I guess... Hmm lovely.

Why did you think it was good?

Frontdoorstep · 28/08/2013 19:58

Specialsubject, I think that better nutrition, better hygiene, better living conditions, improved medical care in Britain were a great help in eradicating tetanus and polio, like bubonic plague, scarlet fever, typhoid, cholera. As for tetanus and that old rusty nail thing wasn't that cleaned up when we had improved transport rather than all these horses going about.

I agree that education is mandatory, not attending school, tbh I can't see Britain having resources to educate a huge amount of people at home.

Of course it's my choice if I risk my child, I've chosen not to vaccinate so I don't take that risk. I don't keep my child(ren) indoors to avoid tetanus btw.

chocolatemartini · 28/08/2013 20:09

crumbled I agree, I can't trust the data for safety or efficacy at all. My DS had what would definitely have automatically been called Rubella in my childhood, and it was diagnosed as non specific viral rash, because, as my GP explained, she couldn't be sure what virus was causing it (fair enough), but when I pressed her about Rubella, as I'd had recent contact with a pregnant friend, she said that they assume it's not rubella these days as the vaccine has caused Rubella to become very rare, THEN in the same breath she said that rubella-type rashes are never swabbed for. I didn't have the time or patience to ask her how on earth we come to assume rubella is on the decline. I would be very happy to listen to doctors' advice if anything they said made sense! I'd also be much happier to take the risk either way with decisions about vaccines if I felt reporting was accurate and transparent.

Crumbledwalnuts · 28/08/2013 21:12

Thanks for the review BM - I shan't bother clicking now! Martini: I think those are very good reasons for distrust. I also have seen similar reports. I think the official figure of "one in a million" is - well, frankly, made up.

CatherinaJTV · 28/08/2013 21:16

rubella is nearly eradicated because most children are vaccinated against it. The reason we know is that we don't see babies born with congenital rubella syndrome, born blind, deaf, heart defects, intellectual disability, cerebral palsy - hard to miss and nowadays nearly exclusively seen in areas of vaccine refusal or countries in which only the girls/women are vaccinated, like Japan - a colleague of my mums has a daughter with full blown CRS (she is now in her early 40ies) - certainly impressed me.