Dear MNHQ why does this board exist?

[TalkinPeace]

Having the board encourages people to think that not vaccinating is a valid viewpoint.

Yes Bumbley, it was mild because I have already been vaccinated... Again, remember that although it is possible to catch diseases even after being vaccinated, the diseases are much milder and less likely to cause harm.

Just to remind you you said:

"Those so-called "mild" childhood diseases killed children. they caused them deafness, blindness, brain damage and death. "

So you acknowledge that this isn't actually the case for rubella? That it is actually a mild disease in childhood - that isn't misinformation?

How do you know it was mild because you were vaccinated and not just mild anyway? You got one dose of the single measles vaccine - yes?

If you had rubella as a child, you were a threat to pregnant women in that time. Rubella is famously known as being symptomless for the time it is contagious - far better to have a herd immunity to rubella that is population wide, so that no unborn babies are exposed to it.

Nope MMR (I was born in 1989). How do I know? Well I'd had MMR and a booster. The Doctor initially thought it was Foot and Mouth because it was so mild. Dad was convinced it was mild measles. It was. My mother is semi blind due to Measles and my father was hospitalised for persistent febrile convulsions, so very glad I was vaccinated!

I thought you considered unborn babies children, Bumbley? Or do they suddenly not count when it suits your rhetoric?

To ensure everyone that can be is is vaccinated, so we can start to eradicate more illnesses, save lives, stop kids being disabled and I'll unnecessary an to protect those who can't have vaccines.

And would you insist on teachers/other staff being vaccinated?

How would you feel if other people forced their health related decisions on you? Obliged you to be a certain weight/compelled you to eat a particular diet/do a certain amount of exercise in order to reduce your risk factors for certain diseases - would that be reasonable?

And rubella was extremely mild in my case, and the vaccine either hadn't been invented then, or hadn't been introduced in the UK.

They think the immunity lasts for 30 years, so vaccinate a 15 month old for congenital rubella syndrome, a condition which can't possibly affect them at that age, and then find that the immunity has worn off in the middle of their child-bearing years?

It needs a back up policy to tell women to keep checking their immunity status, which to my knowledge is not done. As I have said before, it's a bit late when you are pregnant to find out that you are not immune. There is nothing they can do at that stage, only offer MMR when the pregnancy is over or offer a termination if you contract it during the critical stage, which is something which not all women would agree to.

Not if they were immune too onholiday. :)

You're dodging this question - Why the need to have it at 15 months?

Just a young thing then Aly :)

Still not 100% effective so just wondering how you know for sure.

And would you insist on teachers/other staff being vaccinated?

Er... Yes! That would be nice. Unless they were medically compromised from being so, of course.

Vaccination works on prevention - the best medical intervention imo.

Not if they were immune too onholiday.

Oh, but bumbley, what if they weren't? You were a known risk to babies in the womb whilst infected with rubella. How do you feel about that? Surely better to be immunised? To prevent the rubella in the first place?

The rubella vaccine was introduced in UK in 1970 and was given to girls aged around 11-13. It does wear off, but offers good protection for 25+ years, maybe longer. So then, it did cover the peak child-bearing years.

I agree that at 15months, with same longevity of coverage but later child-bearing, it could be leaving gaps of vulnerability.

The point of having the rubella vaccine as a child is to stop outbreaks at nurseries and schools, which risk being spread to pregnant mothers.

Onholiday- Surely better for the pregnant woman to be immune yes. (Either through having had rubella herself or through vaccination). You still haven't answered - why 15 months?

Bumbley, did your mother quarantine you as a child when you had rubella? To make sure you didn't come into contact with any pregnant women who weren't immune? Or was that just not her problem? It was the pregnant wpmen's problem right? Even though you drip-drip-drip against immunisation on these threads and seem to post pro "wild" illnesses immunity. If everyone was for "wild" illnesses immunity - mass rubella infection in the womb would still be a thing. And it isn't - because - immunisation.

Quite right, merrymouse.

But why not have a policy of telling post pubertal women to check their rubella immunity? To me this seems to be something which hasn't been fully thought through.

Because not all women plan on getting pregnant?

How would you feel if other people forced their health related decisions on you? Obliged you to be a certain weight/compelled you to eat a particular diet/do a certain amount of exercise in order to reduce your risk factors for certain diseases - would that be reasonable?

How exactly do you compare a requirement to attend state school fully vaccinated with forcing people to go on early morning jogs? No child has to go to school - we have the freedom to homeschool in this country. No one is compelling you to have vaccines in this situation. It's just saying if you want your child to associate with the wider community, they must be vaccinated to do so, to protect those who can't be vaccinated and to improve public health.

How can I be sure I didn't really have full blown measles, just a milder version? Err how can you be sure of anything? A philosophical question! Of course it's impossible to know for sure - given my parents' susceptibility to Measles I think that's a sign. Who knows.

Given my ~individual risk~ in that case Bumbley, would you have advised my parents to vaccinate?

So I suppose the risk is weighed up between immunising the people who are likely to spread the disease and potentially (I don't know) leaving some people at risk if the vaccine has worn off. Presumably the theory is that they won't catch it if it isn't spread.

There were definitely outbreaks of rubella when I was at school in the 70's, and according to the NHS website cases of babies harmed by rubella have dropped to almost none since the introduction of mmr so the current method seems to be working.

Of course this could be a lie and the NHS website could be written by idiots or funded by mmr manufacturers. On balance I suspect not though.

Because it can be better controlled with immunity (near enough) at 15mth vaccines +booster. The very few young child get the wild rubella, it is virtually eradicated.

Siblings is of course the obvious answer - pregnant women are most at risk from childhood diseases their older children bring home.

Because not all women plan on getting pregnant? Not planning to doesn't mean you won't get pregnant!

My concern with the rubella vaccine is that they don't fully know how long the immunity lasts. Yes, it's a laudable enough aim to try to stop the illness circulating in schools and nurseries, (where the staff are likely to be young women of child bearing age), but why not go further and tell the women herself to be mindful of her immunity status, so that she can take action before she gets pregnant?

Because the younger the can vaccinate against childhood disease, the fewer diseases are in circulation amongst children. And as I just said - older siblings, at nursery and so forth, are a huge consideration there.

I am with Talkin on this btw MN. I take it this is a virtual island for the loons who don't want to vaccinate....

Anyhooo, my obn has reminded me that I need to have a rubella booster as I had my last vaccination at 12. She said that giving the shot at 12 was fine 30 years ago but today most women are starting their families at 35+ so they really should be giving it at 12 and then a booster at 25-30 (or earlier if you are wanting to start a family at that point) so you can get through your baby making years.