MMR

[Mog]

I know this has been covered before but it was before my time on mumsnet. At the risk of boring people, yes or no to the MMR jab?

"vegan swinternet" - 'nuff said!. The comments re polio here are astounding.

SophiaAmes, I agree with eveything you posted. When I studied the immune system (20 years ago ). We were told that the human immune system is challenged by a large number of pathogens on a daily basis. We simply 'notice' whan the system doesn't work. There are potential pathogens in the air we breath, the food we eat, and the environment we live in. You only have to study the way that pathogens affect patients with a compromised immune system to see this. HIV patients can develop a vast range of diseases, that we 'meet' almost every day. The difference is that we can kill the pathogen, and they can not.

The point I am making is the 'Three pathogens too much for the system' doesn't hold up to the scientific understanding of how the immune system works. And that is leaving out the fact that the three immunisations 'kick in' at different times anyway.

Just checked out that site. It doesn't bear up to the briefest of scrutiny.

Jo Pat - I really sympathise - my dd has hers on Monday and am equally nervous.
Angelmouse - have only just read your reply to my comment yuesterday morning - you asked did I really think my surgery would advise against it - yes I do!! If she is medically unfit and if I was not 100% happy, I know for a fact that my hv would not do it. She has made it very clear that both professionally and personally she belienves vaccination is the correct way to go for most children. However, is not a governmental puppet out to jab every child in sight at all costs! She is an intelligent and sensitive woman who has alwyas listened to my feelings and never belittled or bullied me into any decision. I phoned her yesterday afternoon and we decided that I would go along to my appointment, my dd would have a full health check and only then if i was totally happy would my dd have her jab. She is not the type to pressurise anyone. She said that if I wanted to go away and leave it totally or make another appointment at a better time that she would totally understand and support me.
If you have based your comments on your own experience with your hv, perhaps you should consider changing surgeries as I am sure that they are not all so blinkered to parental concern.

This thread has really confused and upset me at times - there is so many extreme opinions and - dare I say it - hype. I know how difficult a topic this is and am pleased that this debate is happening as it is really important. I can?t help wondering if some of you are reacting so strongly becuase you feel that you need to justify your own choice of action? Just a thought, not aimed at anyone in particular and not looking for a fight!

Our HV also said that if I had any worries to leave it till later, and they wouldn't mind. I actually did get it done, and ds didn't blink an eyelid - I didn't even know they had done it, I was waiting for him to scream, but he didn't flinch or anything. And we haven't had any ill-effects - no rash or anything.

Can I make one other point please - it's already been said, but I just wanted to reiterate that whilst a healthy child may well not suffer much from measles, mumps and rubella, it is the vulnerable who will suffer if epidemics return. I would have been so angry had I contracted rubella whilst pregnant with ds, leaving him with disabilites, because children had not been vaccinated.

One other point - my oldest friend was taught by Andrew Wakefield, and their advice was that the vaccine was the safest and most sensible option.

Jasper,I thought this was quite a civilised discussion. A shame that it has deteriorated into a slanging match. It is an emotive issue and obviously provokes strong feelings but I don't think name calling is appropriate. And I resent the implication that, because I came to a different conclusion to you, my decision is any less informed than yours. However, I don't wish to get invloved in a personal argument.

No one here has mentioned another obvious point. When I was a child growing up in the eighties there were 'measles parties.' When one child had the disease our parents flocked to get us infected too. Childhood diseases were an accepted part of childhood and parents were keen for us to catch the diseases so that we could have immunity. I have to say I never knew anyone at theat time who suffered any ill effects from this. But suddenly these are killer diseases to be avoided at all costs. It doesn't make any sense.

SofiaAmes I don't understand on what basis you are denying the quote made by Angelmouse.

Just as an aside, this story just landed in my inbox...

icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/page.cfm?objectid=12172694
&method=full&siteid=50082

Jenny, I have been following this debate and don't understand why you are so upset. Jasper didn't call anyone any names! I'm fairly unconvinced by MMR safety myself, but think Jasper's made her points in a totally non-confrontational manner. Are you confusing her with someone else?

Jenny, I have been following this debate and don't understand why you are so upset. Jasper didn't call anyone any names! I'm fairly unconvinced by MMR safety myself, but think Jasper's made her points in a totally non-confrontational manner. Are you confusing her with someone else?

Feeling desperately silly posting this but Jenny I have no idea what you are referring to re.slanging matches or name calling. I see none of that here including from me. I think you must have misunderstood something I said!
The website I posted was intended to inject some humour as things were getting a bit heavy.
Sincere apology if offence was caused by this or anything else I said.
You said "I resent the implication that because I came to a different conclusion than you my decision is less informed". Firstly I did not imply that at all, secondly I think every one of us here feels that way about our own stance on issues like this. Several contributors who do choose to vaccinate their children have said exactly this.
Again, I apologise for any offence caused to you or anyone else.

I strongly believe we are all entitled to make our own informed decisions but to say Angelmouse has condemned millions of children to death is a bit strong. I thought she was purely just putting across her own opinion.

Jasper and Aloha

"Was it the use of the term radical hype?
I was quoting another contributor ( who unlike me had moved on from considering the anti vax lobby in this way)"

I know you were quoting another contributor but I feel the implication here, as one of the 'anti-vax lobby' is that the idears I subscribe to are radical hype. I'm not 'upset' by it (I well know that you have to have a thicker skin than that on here ) I just feel that the comment was unneccessary and it detracts from the matter in question.

to sofiaames
you write: "my heart breaks for the all the children that you have condemned to illness and death in order to make sure the world doesn't "collapse from over-population." There is no credible evidence that the world population is not self-sustainable."

well my heart breaks for all the children that YOU have condemned for advocating vaccination! it is the poisons contained in vaccines, plus in many cases, a dose of contraception included for healthy measure, that helps to sneakingly reduce the world population!

you also write "None of this seems to fit in with accepted scientific methodology and understanding of how our bodies and nature works. Perhaps rather than telling everyone else to go back and do some research, you should doublecheck your sources and reread the information you have gathered."

it used to be the accepted scientific "knowledge" that the arth was flat. and there is still a lot unknown with regard to the human immune system.

you further write "However, as JayTree pointed out there is a social responsibility to vaccination that goes beyond just your own children... "

i do not quite comprehend how you can even remotely think of "social responsibility" with regard to vaccines that contain poisonous cocktails. you are either very cold or simply thoughless. if your child dies as a result of a vaccine, will it give you comfort that this death was in the name of "social responsibility"?

"I certainly won't be letting my children anywhere near any unvaccinated children until they are old enough to be vaccinatd themselves. I wouldn't dream of risking their lives, sight, limbs, well being etc. by contradicting decades of scientific research that highly recommends vaccination."

the "scientific" research you refer to was 100% paid for by pharmaceutical companies. there is not a single scientific, peer reviewed paper that shows evidence that vaccines are either safe or beneficial!

to sofiaames
you write: "my heart breaks for the all the children that you have condemned to illness and death in order to make sure the world doesn't "collapse from over-population." There is no credible evidence that the world population is not self-sustainable."

well my heart breaks for all the children that YOU have condemned for advocating vaccination! it is the poisons contained in vaccines, plus in many cases, a dose of contraception included for healthy measure, that helps to sneakingly reduce the world population!

you also write "None of this seems to fit in with accepted scientific methodology and understanding of how our bodies and nature works. Perhaps rather than telling everyone else to go back and do some research, you should doublecheck your sources and reread the information you have gathered."

it used to be the accepted scientific "knowledge" that the arth was flat. and there is still a lot unknown with regard to the human immune system.

you further write "However, as JayTree pointed out there is a social responsibility to vaccination that goes beyond just your own children... "

i do not quite comprehend how you can even remotely think of "social responsibility" with regard to vaccines that contain poisonous cocktails. you are either very cold or simply thoughless. if your child dies as a result of a vaccine, will it give you comfort that this death was in the name of "social responsibility"?

"I certainly won't be letting my children anywhere near any unvaccinated children until they are old enough to be vaccinatd themselves. I wouldn't dream of risking their lives, sight, limbs, well being etc. by contradicting decades of scientific research that highly recommends vaccination."

the "scientific" research you refer to was 100% paid for by pharmaceutical companies. there is not a single scientific, peer reviewed paper that shows evidence that vaccines are either safe or beneficial!

to sofiaames
you write: "my heart breaks for the all the children that you have condemned to illness and death in order to make sure the world doesn't "collapse from over-population." There is no credible evidence that the world population is not self-sustainable."

well my heart breaks for all the children that YOU have condemned for advocating vaccination! it is the poisons contained in vaccines, plus in many cases, a dose of contraception included for healthy measure, that helps to sneakingly reduce the world population!

you also write "None of this seems to fit in with accepted scientific methodology and understanding of how our bodies and nature works. Perhaps rather than telling everyone else to go back and do some research, you should doublecheck your sources and reread the information you have gathered."

it used to be the accepted scientific "knowledge" that the arth was flat. and there is still a lot unknown with regard to the human immune system.

you further write "However, as JayTree pointed out there is a social responsibility to vaccination that goes beyond just your own children... "

i do not quite comprehend how you can even remotely think of "social responsibility" with regard to vaccines that contain poisonous cocktails. you are either very cold or simply thoughless. if your child dies as a result of a vaccine, will it give you comfort that this death was in the name of "social responsibility"?

"I certainly won't be letting my children anywhere near any unvaccinated children until they are old enough to be vaccinatd themselves. I wouldn't dream of risking their lives, sight, limbs, well being etc. by contradicting decades of scientific research that highly recommends vaccination."

the "scientific" research you refer to was 100% paid for by pharmaceutical companies. there is not a single scientific, peer reviewed paper that shows evidence that vaccines are either safe or beneficial!

Wow YPUK you do feel strongly - posting it three times!

Sneaky dose of contraception? Where on earth did that come from??? Also, scientists died for saying the world WASN'T flat. That hardly seems a good argument. I happen to not be as convinced by the safety of MMR as sofiaames, however, this kind of posting makes me despair of the anti-MMR 'movement'. I believe there is some evidence of vaccine damage with all vaccines (and scientists wouldn't contradict me, I think), but to say all vaccination is bad seems like madness to me. I certainly wouldn't want to risk my ds getting polio or smallpox or diptheria and was, if not happy, at least resigned to getting my son vaccinated against these deadly and terrible diseases. I would love to see vaccines against AIDs and malaria too, as malaria is currently the world's biggest killer of children. However, not so keen on, say, vaccination for chicken-pox, a very different matter.

I would like to post a very helpful website that provides information on MMR and measles.

www.cdc.gov/nip/publications/pink/meas.pdf

Other posters have expressed doubts on the veracity of information given by the UK goverment following BSE, and others have doubted the trustworthness of the pharmaceutical industry, This website is from the American Centre for Disease control ( not funded by the pharmaceutical industry as far as I am aware). It outlines all the risks of Measles, and also the side effects of the MMR vaccine. IMO it is very heplful, but you do need to read all of the data, and not just 'cherry pick' the areas that suit any one given argument.

musica, didn't mean to, don't know how it happened. i think it might be my puter...
YPUK

aloha, scientists don't die nowadays when they speak out against vaccines, they just get slammed. look at how dr wakefield, dr singh, dr buttram get discredited constantly. o'leary didn't have the guts to repeat his stance against MMR despite clear evidence after funding was withdrawn.
i wouldn't want my kids vaccinated against anything, simply because there is no evidence that they work. all cases of polio in the western world since the early 1980s were CAUSED by the OPV, even the CDC admits it.

the CDC itself is not funded by pharma, but many if not all its high profile members, the decision makers, work independently for pharma companies, as consultants, as researchers etc. paul offit who is on the board which decides which vaccines are mandated in the US, not only consults a pharma company, he even holds the patent for a vaccine. very independent i say.

the CDC itself is not funded by pharma, but many if not all its high profile members, the decision makers, work independently for pharma companies, as consultants, as researchers etc. paul offit who is on the board which decides which vaccines are mandated in the US, not only consults a pharma company, he even holds the patent for a vaccine. very independent i say.

So tell me a truly unbiased source. The CDC report give the good and the bad, but I see that you choose to cherry pick. Very scientific and measured reponse.

i don't think there are any really unbiased sources. and i don't cherry pick, but if i make a living from working for a pharma company then obviously i would promote their views in order to keep my job, which is why i don't work for them. the pro vaccine sites are either funded by the pharma or issue government information which is pro pharma. and the anti-vaccination sites are generally accused of telling rubbish. personally, i like www.whale.to it's anti vaccines but gives a lot of information. another very good one is www.vaccinationnews.com

You say 'the "scientific" research you refer to was 100% paid for by pharmaceutical companies. there is not a single scientific, peer reviewed paper that shows evidence that vaccines are either safe or beneficial! '

Would you like to explain why there have been no cases of smallpox since 1980? (WHO figures) Do you think that there are cases that are being hushed up, do you think that something other than vaccination caused the eradication, or do you think that the elimination of a disease that killed 20% of patients wasn't 'beneficial'?

Sorry to sound pointed, but I am seriously interested in your reply.