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.

Slightly flawed explanation in that a population doesn't necessarily have to be vaccinated in order to become immune to a disease. The concept of herd immunity actually originally came from when a percentage of a population had natural immunity to a disease through being infected. This percentage was much lower than what is usually required to achieve 'herd immunity' through vaccination due to vaccines not being 100% effective and waning vaccine immunity.

bumbley not sure that can be mathematically correct. A certain % of the population needs to be immune to get herd immunity, either due to vaccine or naturally, the herd immunity % is not dependent on how they became immune

Carol, a certain percentage needs to be immune. With vaccines, immunity can wane (natural immunity is usually lifelong) and also, vaccines are not 100% effective (natural infection usually results in immunity) This means that whereas 95% of people may need to be vaccinated in order to achieve the levels required for herd immunity, fewer people could be naturally infected to achieve the same level. The term 'herd immunity' was coined by a reseacher, Hedrich, who studied measles epidemics in the US in the 1930s. He found that epidemics ceased when around 68% of people had natural immunity. Much less than the 95% we're told that we need to achieve with vaccination.

I hope that makes it a bit clearer for you.

My point is, taking your numbers, 68% need to be immune to get herd immunity, it does not matter how they become immune.
Herd immunity did not exist (except in relatively small areas at certain time points (ie after an epidemic)) before vaccines.
Polio, for example, is almost non-existent and smallpox was wiped out.

So you think we'll achieve herd immunity to measles by vaccinating 68% of the population? I think you will find that you are mistaken there.

As I said above, the term 'herd immunity' was coined by a researcher, Hedrich, who studied measles epidemics in the US in the 1930s. So obviously the concept of herd immunity did exist prior to vaccinations.

Never said only need to vaccinate 68% - agree would need more, but you only need 68% immune, regardless of how they got that way.
The idea was around, as as i say, did occur, but not at the levels across the country we have now.
For those against the MMR, did you have DPT and polio vaccines?

Well then I'm not sure why you disagreed with my first post, Carol,if you are admitting that you do need to vaccinate more people to achieve the same level of immunity. If you look at all the vaccine literature it says that 95% vaccine coverage is required to achieve 'herd immunity' - much higher than the 68% that Hedrich found when he studied natural measles infection.