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.

Original poster

No more thimerosil

131 replies

hoxtonchick · 07/08/2004 10:54

look

OP posts:
wobblyknicks · 08/08/2004 08:54

They must mean mandatory in the sense that it'll be scheduled for all babies, like the DTP, you won't have to ask for it like you do the flu jab. If they mean mandatory in the sense that you HAVE to have it, then I wish them all the good luck in the world because they'll need it!

Jimjams · 08/08/2004 14:03

I've had a browse in the supermarket this morning at the papers- and something I find incredibly depressing is that no-one seems to be picking up on the fact that if they are removing it because of links with autism then there will already be damaged children. Really no one gives a damn about them.

Did discover the reason they may have come clean now- the WHO has said it should be removed as a precautionary measure.

Don't know why its taken them so long. When I researched whether or not to vaccinate ds2 the reason I didn't was because of the thimerosil risk. That was 2 and a half years ago. I remember saying to my GP that I wanted thimerosil free vaccines and he asked what the point was as if they removed thimerosil they'd only have to replace it with something else. Actually they wouldn't- they could make it in sterile conditions then you wouldn't need anything- but that would cost more.

karen99 · 08/08/2004 16:30

Thanks Angeliz. Hadn't seen that announcement till then.

Found this link on the WHO website which shows the different schedules across Europe. Each country must think their's is the best combination/timings... but why do they vary SO MUCH?!? Ours definitely looks like one of the more aggresive schedules.. (very strange there are no infant jabs mentioned for Germany??)

Angeliz · 08/08/2004 17:43

Karen that link is interesting too.I've looked at loads and am saving it to go over later.
One thing i want to do is space them out more, (If that's best- i don't know really am just looking at it all again in preparation for the bump)

Heathcliffscathy · 09/08/2004 13:10

ARGHGHHHHHHH

Elizabeth miller and david salisbury on one o'clock news: change in vaccine 'nothing to do with thiomersal'!!! only to do with inactivated polio vac as now the risk of imported polio is less! they make me SO SO SO SICK i can't even begin to express how angry i am at this.

They are lying. on the news. and the bbc is letting them.

argh

aloha · 09/08/2004 13:31

Sophable, I was shouting at the Today programme this morning for exactly the same reason. Aaargh! Lying bastards. It's obviously lie of the week for the government and they aren't being challenged at all by the newly craven BBC. They could at least say, 'So would you otherwise be ignoring the World Health Organisation recommendations? And what about the study linking mercury to autism?" Can't imagine how frustrated Jimjams must get if it makes us feel like this.
BTW Jimjams, have contacted you via MN.

Heathcliffscathy · 09/08/2004 13:39

aloha, i've emailed you thro contact another talker.

Angeliz · 09/08/2004 13:41

Makes me angry every time i see it mentioned

I think it's pretty obvious that people aren't as trusting anymore though. I have a good few months but i really feel for people whose babies are due vaccines right now!!!!

dinny · 09/08/2004 14:07

Sophable, just watched BBC News At One - feel exactly same as you. And how dare the BBC let them get away with only one tiny mention of mercury!

My baby is due at the start of September - was in two minds about jabs anyway. Am certainly not reassured by the bloody HPA!

Heathcliffscathy · 09/08/2004 14:09

dinny, this is a tremendously difficult decision whatever you decide to do...damned if you do/damned if you don't kind of thing: the one piece of advice that i received that i really appreciated is that there is no reason at all not to delay until at least 12 weeks: esp if your baby isn't going to have too much contact with others...is it your first?

just thought i'd pass on some advice that i found really useful, in that it bought us time.

hth

dinny · 09/08/2004 14:21

Sophable, it's my 2nd. Am ragingly angry (as I'm sure millions of people are) that I let my dd1 be jabbed - against my better judgement. Not enough confidence to question the Establishment. She's not had MMR though - thank goodness.

Will definitely be delaying the early jabs this time - or maybe won't have them at all. It's so hard. Did we receive all these jabs as children?

Heathcliffscathy · 09/08/2004 14:40

not sure dinny, definitely not as early.

Jimjams · 09/08/2004 16:49

Well I listened to Radio 5 this morning and that had me screaming with rage. A grandmother described how her grandson had a small seizure 3 days after receiving his first DTP. He was told to have his second- he did - three days later had a massive seizure and is now unable to walk, talk, sit up, feed himself. And the stupid GP (I think it was that one with the actressy voice who deosn;t believe in ADHD) said that it quite problbly wasn't linked??????? FFS- MAYBE it wasn't linked- but lets at least CONSIDER the most likely explanation as a POSSIBILITY.

Jackie Fletcher from JABS said that the single tetanus and the DT licened for under 10's is no longer available. Recently dh and I decided that we would like ds2 to recieve a tetanus jab at some stage- probably at pre-school booster age. SO now the only choice we have is for a 5 in one vax. Well THAT'S not going to happen! So they have effectively removed DS2's (and the next baby's) chance of having a tetanus jab before the age of 10. Nice one government. I suppose if we didn't have an autistic child we could travel abroad to get it- but we do so we can't.

Dinny our schedule was as follows:

During first year of life:

DTP (no age given but think it was around 2 to 3 months)
3 months later Polio
6-8 weeks later DTP and polio
4-6 months later DTP and polio

During second year of life Measles - and this is the bit I find interesting in my source- NOT LESS THAN 3 WEEKS FOLLOWING ANOTHER LIVE VACCINE

I'm not sure everyone had measles jabs- I didn't- and caught it and was obviously fine.

Jimjams · 09/08/2004 20:21

Well I've just seen a party political broadcast on behalf of the government aka the BBC news. The corporation seems to have had a collective lobotomy.

Angeliz · 09/08/2004 20:32

Haven't had the pleasyre yet but at your description!!

edam · 09/08/2004 20:35

Jimjams, my sister works with adults with learning difficulties and some of her service users were vaccine-damaged as children. Says so quite openly on their notes. So it clearly used to be recognised as fact that children could be damaged by vaccination. In fact I'm sure I remember the Government paying compensation for vaccine-damaged children (I came across this as a rookie medical journalist, around 95/96).
Why has history been re-written so that the establishment completely deny any link between vaccination and damage to children?

MummyToSteven · 09/08/2004 20:40

dinny - I'm 27 and I didn't have a triple jab DTP - there was a whooping cough vaccination scare at the time, so my mum didn't vaccinate me and I caught whooping cough when I was 13 . I'm pretty sure I received jabs against the D and the T - so there must have been a single or double jab option. I think I didn't have a measles jab till I was 5, and ended up having MMR instead of rubella single jab at 14 from my GP.

misdee · 09/08/2004 21:02

i am utterly confused and upset. what the ehck are we meant to do? we all want to protect our children but the information is too much to take in. I dont know whether my children are at risk if they have the jabs, or if they dont? what the heck are parents meant to do? We have studies showing possible links to measles part of MMR, links to thermisol and autism, the fact they want us to hit our babies systems with a 5in1 jab. i was not happy with giving my dd's the 1st lot of baby jabs anyway, dd2's were more spaced out as i didnt want to overload her system. surely a 5in1 is too much for a small babies system to take?

(even dh agrees with me, and he doesnt truely belive that the MMR is to blame for autism rises, tho does think that the MMR is also too much to take all at one)

zebra · 09/08/2004 21:07

Babies already are getting 5 at once (3 in once + meningitus+oral polio)... my only worry was whether the proteins would interact with each other if stored together inside the viles, and if that would somehow be bad.

Otherwise, I think the argument is that tiny babies are actually primed to take lots of viruses/bacteria at once, much better than older children are, in fact...

It's not small news now... all over the media today.

Running off to hide, now. I don't want to get involved in arguments about the past. Just want to know what possible drawbacks there are with the new vax regime.

dinny · 09/08/2004 21:18

As far as I can gather the riskiest to children from toddling upwards is tetanus. Was thinking today that I would just give this next baby tetanus but it seems I won't be able to (see Jimjams' post). Does whooping cough pose a real threat this days? Can you get any of the 5-in-1 separately?

ps I work for the BBC and found the News at One today cringeworthy.

misdee · 09/08/2004 21:20

Th only case of whooping cough i know is mieow. She had it when she was tiny, and the docs refused to aknowledge what it was. they told my mum she was a paranoid mother. mieow actually went blue, and ended up in hospital. buts that 25 years ago now.

Davros · 09/08/2004 21:34

Oh dear, I was pleased that Polio would no longer be a live vaccine but not this way! Thank god we are through this phase with DD (16 mos) and got the thimerosil-free jabs without any difficulty. She is booked in to have single measles in Sept and who knows when the others will happen, I'm not that worried about those other two yet. I must say that, I think the option of leaving her un-vaccinated is not one I would take happily so prefer a compromise. However, totally support those who have good reason to leave the kids un-vaccinated but do think that anyone who doesn't have very clear indicators that it would be harmful should probably try to get in quick with the current jabs and get thimerosil-free. I was also very worried about tetanus.

shrub · 09/08/2004 21:46

can anyone clarify if this new vaccine is infanrix? is this vaccine made in sterile conditions? if not - what have they replaced the mercury with?

Jimjams · 09/08/2004 22:47

Dinny - whooping cough does pose a threat to babies under 6 months. Not so bad between 6 and 12 momths, and no risk major risk after that. I was pretty concerned when ds2 was exposed at 4 months tbh- but he didn't get it. To complicate matters there is a new (less virulent) strain doing the rounds which is protected against by vaccination.

Zebra- no wish to get into an argument- but do wish that we had the luxury of not having to worry about the past vacinations and only the future ones.

Anyway the coverage to day had me so incensed I did something I've been meaning to do for ages and contacted JABS to see if I can get involved with them.

Edam- there used to be a (woefully inadequate) vaccine compensation scheme- I think it still exists but very very rarely makes payments (and they are platry- nowhere near providing for lifetime care). The US HAD a better system. There the manufacturers had to pay a certain amount into the scheme for eacdh shot given- like a tax- and they had to pay more the more dangerous the vaccine. The "most expensive" vaccine was the DTP, followed by the MMR. The DT and single polio were far cheaper (can't remember the figures although I think I've put them on mumsnet in the past) but anyway they were a factor of 10 cheaper. I'm not sure what's happened to the system there now. Bush changed it- something to do wiht the gulf war and smallpox vax- and I don't think its currently making payments. I've read about it but never paid much attention as its in the States.

Misdee- no-one working in autism realy believes that the INCREASE in autism cases is due to the MMR. It's probably accounted for a very small %- researchers now think about 7% of autism cases. Most researchers actually think that the big bad guy may well be thimerosil. The rise in cases (and now the drop in California) mirrors the rise and then fall in the use of thimerosil. Remember Aus, NSZ, USA and I think a lot of Europe began to phase out thimerosil years ago. Vets got rid of it in animal vaccinations a decade ago (apparently- have NEVER been able to confrm that story- although heard it a lot of times- if anyone has any data on that please let me know). And I still want to know why if its so unsafe to eat tuna when pregnant because of mercury content- is it perfectly safe to inject it into an 8 week old baby. Oh right its a different form- that's OK then. Bollards.

Jimjams · 09/08/2004 22:49

aggh got that first paragraph wrong! the new strain of pertussis is NOT protected against by vaccination- and has evolved because of vaccination.