Really hacked off with article about mumps

[Furball]

This story was the headline in the local paper tonight. OK so it starts off about it hitting the student population. Then goes on to say about young children need protection. Fine. What about those parents, who have thought long and hard about whether or not they want MMR for the children and then decided on singles. Well, tough, cos a seperate mumps vax is rarer than hens teeth these days. So this sort of scaremongering for all the single jab people is out of order. There must be thousands of children waiting for single mumps vaccines (we had to wait 14 months, but have now had it), but Mr Blair will only allow so many in the country per week. Great! So apart from sitting around waiting for the actual illness, which in most cases is probably a very good option, lifelong immunity and all that. What else can be done apart from having the MMR, the very thing parents are trying to avoid in the first place. Even most people who have decided against having any vaccines, have done so not because the appointment was forgotten etc, but parents who have actually thought long and hard about ALL the options. I just think this sort of headline is not fair on people on the mumps vax waiting list and have been for ages.

Another case of vaccine blackmail, I guess. We took ds in for his second DTaP last week. I had agonized over it and we had thought long and hard about when and if to give it. Still had to listen to a long lecture from the nurse (same one she gave us LAST time) about why were we not following the recommended schedule, etc. I would think that if it were my job to shoot up little ones with all of this stuff I would at least try to educate myself on all aspects of the issue. We have still not been able to find anyone to give the singles. One office said we could be put on a year waiting list but would have to come in and pay ($150) for a well-baby check first. I'm dithering about that one.

The funny thing about this scaremongering is that it is such obvious propaganda to anyone who has looked into the situation at all that it makes every other statement released about vaccinations less reliable.

I started off pro-vax (really), found out a bit about MMR, came across lots of distinctly dodgy/misleading statements from those with responsibility for the vaccination programme and then decided I ought to look in more detail at the others.

The most hilarious one recently is that the DTwP has been chanaged to the DTaP 5 in one because of fears about the oral polio vaccine- nothing to do with thimerosil or the fact that a paper was published in June showing that if you inject mice prone to autoimmune conditions with thimerosil then they become autistic. Nah injecting kids with a known neurotoxin is perfectly safe its oral polio we need to worry about.

Right- I could laugh all the way to my son's PECS board.

Hows tricks these days Jimjams?

Same as usual furball thanks (so "pants" as one of my friends put it )

Yeah, and mumps is a killer disease too now. Like chickenpox will be soon.
And I'm another one on the endless wait for the single mumps vaccine. Thanks Tony.

we're waiting too

And us, since Summer 2002 .

You could go for single jabs to the continent. My dd had her single measles jab there. Only needed an appointment with doctor and reserve the vaccine in the local apothecary/chemist... The vaccine and doctor's fee were less than here, but of course there were the travel costs...

I work for a medical history foundation (the biggest in Europe) and if you saw / read some of the things I've come across you wouldn't do the triple jab believe me. my dd's 2 and I'm struggling to find somewhere to get singles done in London. There's a Dispatches report on next Tuesday I think which will include some of the info I've heard about at work. The government have to face the fact that there IS a risk and that the only reason they don't offer singles is because it's too expensive.

The dispatches programme won't be reliable!. it is by Brian Deer who has stated publically that he intends to discredit Andy Wakefiled (has a bit of a vendetta against him). This was Wakefiled's reponse after the last hatchet job on him:

"Serious allegations have been made against me and my colleagues in relation to the provision of clinical care for children with autism and bowel disease, and the subsequent reporting of their disease.
These allegations have been made by journalist Brian Deer who has expressed, in front of witnesses, his aim of destroying me.
All but one of the allegations, which are grossly defamatory, have been shown to be baseless. One allegation remains against me personally.
That is, that I did not disclose to the Lancet that a minority of the 12 children in the 1998 Lancet report were also part of a quite separate study that was funded in part by the Legal Aid Board.
It is the Lancet's opinion but not mine that such a disclosure should have been made since it may have been perceived as a conflict of interest. This is despite that fact that the funding was provided for a separate scientific study.
It needs to be made clear that the funds from the Legal Aid Board were not used for the 1998 Lancet study, and therefore I perceived that no financial conflict of interest existed.
The Lancet defines a conflict of interest as anything that might embarrass the author if it were to be revealed later. I am not embarrassed since it is a matter of fact that there was no conflict of interest. I am, however, dismayed at the way these facts have been misrepresented.
Whether or not the children's parents were pursuing, or intended to pursue litigation against the vaccine manufacturers, had no bearing on any clinical decision in relation to these children, or their inclusion in the Lancet 1998 report.
It is a matter of fact that there was no conflict of interest at any time in relation to the medical referral of these children, their clinical investigation and care, and the subsequent reporting of their disease in the Lancet.
As far as the 1998 Lancet report is concerned, it is a matter of fact that we found and reported inflammation in the intestines of these children.
The grant of £55,000 was paid not to me but to the Royal Free Hospital Special Trustees for my research group to conduct studies on behalf of the Legal Aid Board. These research funds were properly administered through the Royal Free Hospital Special Trustees.
The Legal Aid research grant to my group was used exclusively for the purpose of conducting an examination of any possible connection between the component viruses of the MMR - particularly measles virus - and the bowel disease in these children. This is entirely in line with other studies that have been funded by the Legal Aid Board (latterly the Legal Services Commission) and reported in the BMJ . If and when this work is finally published, due acknowledgment will be made of all sources of funding.
It is unfortunate that, following full disclosure of these facts to the editor of the Lancet, he stated that in retrospect he would not have published facts pertinent to the parent's perceived association with MMR vaccine in the 1998 Lancet report. Such a position has major implications for the scientific investigation of injuries that might be caused by drugs or vaccines, such as Gulf War Syndrome and autism, where possible victims may be seeking medical help and also legal redress.
Health Secretary John Reid has called for a public enquiry. I welcome this since I have already called for a public enquiry that addresses the whole issue in relation vaccines and autism.
It has been proposed that my role in this matter should be investigated by the General Medical Council (GMC). I not only welcome this, I insist on it and I will be making contact with the GMC personally, in the forthcoming week.
This whole unpleasant episode has been conflated to provide those opposed to addressing genuine concerns about vaccine safety with an opportunity of attacking me - an attack that is out of all proportion to the facts of the matter.
I stand by everything that I have done in relation to the care, investigation and reporting of the disease that I and my colleagues have discovered in these desperately ill children.
My family and I have suffered many setbacks as a direct consequence of this work. As a family, we consider that our problems are nothing compared with the suffering of these children and their families. For the sake of these children, this work will continue."

Also spoke to a friend today whose dd is autistic- and had a series of very bad seizures following the MMR. The paediatrician has told her (off the record of course) that they can never be sure whether she would have been ASD with/without MMR but that it is his belief that some children are more inherently fragile than others and the MMR can push them over. I agree completely!

No struggle to get singles in London. We went to Holborn Medical Centre (Google for it) in Lambs Conduit St. No waiting and very straightforward. (sorry to be boring, just posted this elsewhere).