MMR

[marshmallow2468]

Hi,

DS is 11 months old and so will be due to have the MMR soon. DH has reservations. I don't, I'm fine with it, but he's got concerns. A colleague of his has a relative who she claims started showing signs of autism soon after having the MMR. He says this woman is bright, intelligent, rational and so he believes her and is worried about DS. I have spoken to our health visitor, and also a community nurse, and I'm not worried. I don't want to convince him it's ok against his will, but I'd like to show him my side, research or something that refutes the autism claim. I don't know where to look, so I was wondering if anybody had any good links.

Thank you to anybody who can help me.

Hi - I absolutely don't doubt the story of the colleague's relative. However, after the fact is not because of the fact. My husband ran a 40 degree fever, for the first time in 20 years and for 3 or 4 nights, starting a few hours after a cancelled flu shot appointment. The human brain is wired as a coincidence detector, which served us great in the time when Ugg would taste that white root for the first time and would connect the violent diarrhea two hours later with that new taste. However, the brain also tricks us into seeing connections where there aren't any. This paper adc.bmj.com/content/87/6/493.long looks at that bias in connection with MMR and autism. I have followed the autism-MMR story for nearly 13 years now (since DS was a baby) and the easiest and really only way to consolidate all the various stories is if Brian Deer is right and Wakefield made a significant amount of his claims up.

Thanks everybody, I'll have a look at the links and we'll have another chat. Hopefully his fears will be lessened somewhat.

I think the timing of mmr coincides with the point at which you would notice signs of autism.

Which disease IamGluezilla? Rubella and mumps are extremely unlikely to kill/permanently disable your child. There is a single measles vaccine available if you are worried about contracting measles.

Not true Alex.

Rubella and mumps vaccines are given to stop your child passing these diseases on to someone for whom they would be dangerous, rubella is dangerous for a pregnant woman and mumps causes adult male infertility (although I think nowadays thinking is that it doesn't even cause that).

How would dh feel if your child was never the same again after having this vaccine when two parts of the vaccine aren't necessary for the child having the vaccine.

As for measles, if your really worried there is a single vaccine but even with measles I think the disease is more dangerous for those under a year old, by the time your child comes to vaccine age, much of the measles danger is over.

I'm not surprised dh doesn't want to do it.

my brother ended up permanently deaf in one ear after mumps as a teenager as he hadn't had the mmr so its not always an innocuous thing to contract.

IamGluezilla, not sure which disease you are talking about tbh but perhaps some people could accept their child being permanently disabled by the disease but not by the vaccine, since there is no 100% safe option, that may be a more attractive option for some people.

Ben Goldacre has convincing, science based critiques of the alleged MMR-autism link as well as compeling sociological analyses of how the media blew this up.

www.badscience.net/2003/12/mmr-never-mind-the-facts/#more-23

"Even if Wakefield were right. It is still more likely (by several orders of magnitude) that your child would die/be permanently damaged from getting the disease"

Which disease?

Surely not rubella, a childhood illness so mild that many people don't even notice that their children have had it.

"Rubella and mumps vaccines are given to stop your child passing these diseases on to someone for whom they would be dangerous"

So you want OP to to tell her DH that their baby will take the (real or perceived) risk of that vaccine for the benefit of a hypothetical vulnerable adult they have never met or might never meet?

I think the OP was asking for help to support her decision to vaccinate, not a list of scare stories and nonsense. OP if you look at Wikipedia regarding MMR there is a useful history of the vaccine, the scare and consequences, plus some links to the research. Hope this helps you to reassure your DH.

Please point out the nonsense in my posts, if you can

OP is not likely to win her DH over by saying the vaccine is not for the benefit of their baby but for some faceless stranger he might never even meet.

If you find something wrong with that logic, please point that out, too.

CoteDAzure, no op won't win dh over by pointing out that the rubella vaccine is to protect some faceless stranger he may never meet. However, that is fact and I like to tell things like it is.

Op, why not look on the nhs site for info about mmr, this will give you the official line and might win over dh.

ThebitterBoy - I'm not sure what you think is scaremongering and nonsense.

Also, Wikipedia?

Front doorstep - do you not think the responsibility of protecting the unborn child should fall to its mother rather than strangers?

I second the advice to look at Ben Goldacre's review of this.

I can't believe that people still believe this stupid autism/mmr thing. But are quite happy to shove the 5 in 1 in their babys at 8 weeks. Bizarre.

Cote DAur
There is a real chance that the OP's DHs decision NOT to vaccinate his DS could have real consequences to his son and to himself.
Have you thought about what could happen if a DS/DD was not vaccinated..then contracted it later in life and conveyed it to his similarly unvaccinated DP ( or in the case of DD, just conveying it to her unborn child causing catastrophic foetal abnormalities?
This happened to a grandmother I know who lived in a 'commune'. She did not vaccinate her DD and now has lived to see her grandchild severely affected by foetal abnormalities where the child will never be able to live and function independently. She is deeply regrets her decision and is reminded daily as she sees her DD struggling and her DG suffering. (This was Rubella btw)

we decided to hold off, my DH was wary too. in the end when she went to get her MMR she had her booster jabs first and she was absolutely screaming and was sick as the nurse was taking the needle out her - i decided there and then it was too much to give her the other jabs at the same time. even though she only had her booster jabs she didnt lift her head for 2 weeks after it - now im glad they didnt all get done together - i think they are too wee to give all those jabs to at the same time. we have decided we will do it later before she goes to school.

both ds's had single measles, mumps and rubella jabs. On the advice of the private doctor ( who would off lost money ) , he said the booster at the age of around 3-4 the combined vac was fine. Ds1 has a peanut allergy and the slightest of asthma. DS 2 is austic. I had the jabs done separate and paid a fortune because I was unsure but valued the need of the jabs. It didn't stop my ds2 from being austic. Do what you feel is right for your child(ren). If you go the single route and private they are very good at taking the payments in instalments

"Have you thought about what could happen if a DS/DD was not vaccinated.. then contracted it later in life "

I'm from a generation when everyone had all regular childhood diseases so not that vulnerable to this sort of scaremongering but going with your scenario:

If this baby isn't vaccinated, his parents still have the option to vaccinate him later on (before puberty) for mumps if he still hasn't had it at that point. They can vaccinate him for measles whenever, if they feel it is too dangerous a disease. There is no reason why a boy needs to be vaccinated for rubella.

"... and conveyed it to his similarly unvaccinated DP"

Anyone who is old enough to be in an adult relationship is old enough to have a grip on their own health situation, including going to get themselves vaccinated for childhood diseases they have not had. It is not a rational position to expect this little baby boy to be vaccinated now for the benefit of some future DP in 20 years or whatever. And that before even going into waning vaccine immunity etc.

Things is, though, most people who don't want to vaccinate their children in infanthood, do not go on to get them vaccinated later on unless they cannot go to uni without two doses of MMR which is a common situation, for example.
And again, people who were not immunised as children as their parents were against it are unlikely to get themselves immunised as adults.
The people I see commonly say ' My parents were against immunisation so I've never been immunised'.. End of.

But my main point was to point out that it needn't necessarily be 'some faceless stranger he might never meet'

' There is no reason why a boy needs to be vaccinated against Rubella'

My point up thread illustrates why, in fact, they do.

And that scenario has much more in common with waning vaccination rates as a result of the MMR scare (as opposed to waning vaccination immunity).

The scenario above could be taken as a metaphor for the importance of vaccinating a population and achieving herd immunity.