Separating 3month old Vaccine

[BrookeCowan]

Has anyone had their child's vaccines separated recently? They've changed the vaccines now so babies are having 5-in-1 which is too much for their little bodies. After being persuaded, my son had his first vaccine and was hospitalised shortly after. I want the rest of his vaccines to be given separately, however the NHS won't give me any advice on how and where to get them done.

Instead of trying to hit me with science, let's talk reality.

Science is reality. 🤦🏻‍♀️

Someone on a board I’m on said she didn’t believe in evidence based medicine a while back. Where do you even begin.

@MissLawrence you just come out with more and more nonsense without actually answering any questions or reading anything scientific.

How exactly did your son become ill after vaccines? What was his diagnosis? How long did you stay in hospital for?

Which children exactly have died after vaccines? What evidence can you link to supporting that vaccine has been cause of death for a baby?

Reality is that your information is coming google searching, NOT from any informed professionals and you just want to continue to spread uneducated crap. Like I said in an earlier post, let's hope I don't encounter you when your child is potentially on life support from a vaccine preventable illness because it does happen and I've seen it much more than I ever want to.

This is interesting re: aluminium in vaccines. The OVG is very sensible I think.

I think the problem of offering single or spaced vaccines as an alternative undermines the 'faith' (for want of a better word) of the schedule currently offered. The current schedule is based on disease prevalence in our country, and immune responses based on an infant's immune system. It is unreasonable to compare our schedules and vaccines to those given in other countries - whilst the CDC and FDA are perfectly decent organisations they are US-centric and not UK, so we shouldn't use their data blindly.

there has been many injections and vaccines which one minute have been okay then the next minute it's all changed and they go back on what they've said... There hasn't - there really hasn't. Medicine and immunisation development do change over time, of course, as we extend our knowledge and resources. We changed from wholecell to acellular pertussis vaccine a long time ago due to research and review; we fairly regularly have an amended UK schedule to reflect varying disease prevalence and risk eg the introduction of rotavirus vaccine, Men B, Men ACWY, HPV, Hep B.

Why should we all be followers? Why is it so shocking for people to have their own mind? It's only shocking when people's own mind has no basis in actual evidence based science, just some feeling that they know best and seem proud to be fighting against the system...

There's a really interesting Seriously ... podcast I listened to yesterday about Wakefield and the longterm ramifications of his fucked up agenda

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p05zfl70

Worth a listen - especially for the anti-vaxxers

sidge that’s the document that bruffin linked to upthread, and I already noted some questions about it. I agree that data doesn’t always translate between countries and would accept that the schedule might differ because of this. Things like how much aluminium is safe must surely be universal questions though, but I think I’ve made my points on that.

I understand that the assumption is that giving choice accepts that the schedule may not be ideal, and might undermine faith in it. There may be truth in that. But if the reality is that babies are having a harder and harder time with vaccinations (and recent data suggests 1 in 200 have a severe adverse reaction) parents will notice this. This in itself will undermine faith to a much greater extent, particularly if emerging evidence does prove correct and adjuvants are increasing the risk of autoimmune disease. This is without even considering the ethical questions surrounding informed choice. I guess I just think parents deserve to be treated as intelligent adults and given all of the arguments, not just those designed to make them make the ‘right’ choice.

If youu have issues with the article then contact The Oxford Vaccine project "Y0uCann0tBeSer10us" they are good at answering emails.

I think I will bruffin. I’d be genuinely interested in any more up to date data they have.

Apologies Youcannot, I somehow missed that! This thread is moving fairly quickly.

Where does the 1 in 200 serious adverse reactions come from? I wonder if that is fever since the introduction of MenB? I honestly don't see that many serious reactions; I should find that data as I like to keep up to date with both sides of the vaccine debate. I totally agree that we should treat parents with respect and understanding, I never mind having a sensible discussion with parents and understanding their concerns. I find that some have concerns based on misunderstanding and historical fears, so it doesn't take much to give them correct information. But ultimately the choice to vaccinate or not is theirs, it's their baby. I do find it difficult though when they have unfounded fears or irrational ideas; I don't see many of those parents though.

I am always alarmed at the lack of real research into the effects of multivacciations and the assertions that because we are exposed to bacteria all the time, then 6 in 1 vaccines must be safe.

There is a lack of control group for any proper tests on fully vaccinated and unvaccinated children. I simply don’t believe that the immune system reacts the same way to a single vaccine as it does to a 6in1 vaccine.

I remain troubled by the unexplained rise in children’s illnesses, particularly autoimmune disorders and allergies and cancers. I suspect it’s multi-factorial but I am uncomfortable with the current vaccination schedule.

I chose to separate my children’s schedule (I didn’t forget or give up; i managed it myself). However single vaccines for the diseases in the 5 in 1 aren’t generally available.

I’ve also lost track a bit! Yes, the 1 in 200 is because of the MenB vaccine sidge. The Lancet Infectious diseases paper reviewing all the studies notes this rate (5.4/1000 for serious adverse events) compared to just over 1/1000 for other jags.
www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/laninf/PIIS1473-3099(18)30048-3.pdf

Another paper looking at Scottish children noted an equivalent incidence rate of hospitalisation following MenB of 1.6/1000 doses for the first jag (lower rates for subsequent doses).

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28931535

Thanks Youcannot - will go and have a read

@Dioskouri. Not at you. Agreeing with you.

Hi Brooke, not read the thread, you can delay. You can do ten /eleven weeks, leave it six weeks, then leave it another six / seven weeks, slow it all down. You wouldn't even have to tell the doctor, save yourself an argument, just make slightly later appointments.