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

General health

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Vaccinations - should I continue with them?

61 replies

Adashaw · 15/01/2005 23:17

Hi I am new to Mumsnet and it was suggested that I joined so to ask this question - I am possibly going away soon, but the trip was going to coincide with the 3rd lot of my daughters (she is now 3 months) Hib Polio etc so I was trying to find out on the internet if it would matter if it was administered late, well she is due her 2nd lot now and after reading some of the info regarding the link with autism, various other neurological disorders, asthma, SIDS etc (god the list is endless) I am really concerned about continuing with them at all or at least waiting till she is a lot older, the problem is that we do occasionally travel due to hubby's work, but I was wondering if anyone else has opted not to give the vaccinations and know of any implications?

Thanks

OP posts:
lockets · 20/01/2005 10:16

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

foxinsocks · 20/01/2005 10:19

lockets - I'm not saying those who've been vaccinated can't get the diseases (I'm not sure of the figures but I think about 5-10% don't get protected or something like that) but I think it's a bit strange of a GP to say that measles can be picked up from an recently immunised child because that's not how the immunisations work. I'm only asking because it's completely different info to the information that I got!

Anyway, I imagine they want her to have the MMR to get protection from the mumps and the rubella bit (as they refuse to give them on their own). Seems a bit silly though as surely she now has lifetime immunity for measles as she had the disease already, poor thing.

Jimjams · 20/01/2005 10:20

Do us a favour Fairymum and read my posts before saying the arguement is completely unbalanced- look at the one I've written below- I explain my reasons for not vaccinating my child (which is a specific family history). I state quite clearly that the risk of not vaccinating is that your child catches the diseases, and also mention that although we're not vaccinating we aslso don't travel abroad and aren't likely to in the future.

Probably about as balanced as you could get considering what we live with daily.

The book I have recommended has an endorsement on the back from an orthodox paedistrician. I like it because it describes quite clearly the risk/benefit ratio you are taking (for example mentions that tetanus is generally a safe jab, and that he treated a child who got tetanus from a splinter). When I say it is balanced - it really is. It doesn't pretend that by choosing not to vaccinate you guarantee that everything will be fine- it gives both sides of the risk/benefit ratio.

I like to think I'm a lot more balanced than the crap that comes out of the dept of health (who still won't admit that they withdraw the DTwP because thimerosil has almost certainly damaged thousands of children).

Jimjams · 20/01/2005 10:23

I don't know about the measles thing. They always said you could get polio from the live polio jab (and in fact the only cases of paralytic polio in the UK in the last decade has come from the jab). Very rare though and polio is in poo- so easier to transmit I guess. Mind you supposedly suddenly so dangerous they had to switch to the 5 in 1 (yeah right if you believe that you'll believe anything). As measles is a live jab I suppose it could bee possibly to pass on - although never heard much about it happening.

FairyMum · 20/01/2005 10:59

Jimjams, I wasn't referring to your post. I was talking about MN in general. I think it's important for new posters who might be unsure to know that the views on these threads are largely those of people who are against vaccines or very very suspicious.

Jimjams · 20/01/2005 11:42

ok fair enough- but I do try to be balanced in replies- and I often reply to queries from people who are vaccinating in what i hope is a balanced way. Still think I'm more neutral (in the case of other people's kids) than the dept of health

Socci · 20/01/2005 11:52

Message withdrawn

Adashaw · 20/01/2005 11:53

Hey alwaysaythanku THANK YOU, now that reading/research is going to take some time!

Regarding those of you who think that vaccinatios are the best idea, I completely understand your arguement, and I total agree with the theory of vaccinations but I do not believe in the safty of the ingredients and that the correct research has been put in place to test them, I seem that often the short term and long term effects far out weigh the disease. While on my soap box I have never really trusted any drugs, and I don't believe they always work and so I do try to seek alternatives, what has really p*ssed me off is that this time I really trusted the NHS, Drs etc and gave dd the first jab without being told the facts - will get down off the soap box now!

But I have decided that I will prob continue with the Hib as it seems to be the least reactive vaccination with perhaps the serverest disease and I have been given the number of a doctor who is also a homopath so will hopefully give good advice.

As far as travel, foxinsocks, it normally involves, America, Canada and Australia so I am actually checking statisics on the different diseases in those countries, - Also, don't always trust what the doctors say, often they are not properly informed or their souce of info isn't completely up to date, when researching other info (I am studying nutrition so do a lot of that) there was an artical in I think the American Medical Journal which said that from discovering a needed change a treatment it can sometimes take up to 10 years to get it implemented into hospitals (in the US).

It might seem a I am being a bit extreme regarding all of this, but the information and evidence just doesn't allow for me to trust having all them done without a lot more research with some positive results. Even getting the disease in some cases is supposed to be better for a healther immune system.

But thank you all for your advice, it has been incredibly helpful

OP posts:
mears · 20/01/2005 12:20

Just thought I'd let you know the dilemma never goes, no matter the age of you child, see here

HappyMumof2 · 20/01/2005 13:28

Message withdrawn

Mommy2Ro · 20/01/2005 13:58

I'm sure this is going to offend someone, and that is not why I am writing this. I believe the jury is not out on whether or not there are side effects to the MMR vaccinaton. However....

The MMR vaccine can not (technically) give people measles, mumps or rubella. Lockets, I'm very surprised that your GP was so misinformed. What can give people these diseases is a unevenly vaccinated population.

Pamina3 · 20/01/2005 14:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Socci · 20/01/2005 14:05

Message withdrawn

Jimjams · 20/01/2005 14:16

I have 2 completely unvaccinated children (and one who had DTP, hib, men c and single measles- no boosters and will not have any more).

This is because my eldest son (the vaccinated one) is severely autistic and we believe this was part/all triggered by thimerosil which he received in his baby jabs. We have a family history of autoimmunity- and recent research has shown that mice with a genetic pre-disposition for autoimmunity are more likely to develop autistic like characteristics following exposure to thimeorsil. Other (less robust) research shows that vaccinations in general aren't always a great idea for people prone to autimmunity. (upsets ratio of TH1/TH2 cells)

My eldest vaccinated son has been far sicklier than my unvaccinated child. he has about 8 courses of antibiotics before he was 2. 3 year old ds2 has had 2 courses so far.

So all in all I think that when it comes to vaccination risk children are not created equal. I beleive that my children are more at risk from vaccination than little Freddy down the road. Also I live every day with a child I know will never be able to live independently and will probably neveer speak. We think that vaccinations at least contriburted to that - so there is no way I could possibly have them given to my 2 other children. Couldn't physcially take them into the room and do it. Unless I was very convinced that the benefit my children were receieving was greater that their risk. I'm not convinced in our family that is true, so they remain unvaccinated. DS2 is now a healthy, very NT 3 year old who will be able to do whatever he wants with his life. DS3 is 2 weeks old and will hopefully grow up NT as well. Unfortunately DS1 will not- I know that I am going to die knowing that he is unable to care for himself (and the thought of him being with people who don't love him kills me to be honest).

Jimjams · 20/01/2005 14:17

so i guess the quick summary is that I think ds1's brain damage was caused by a vaccination (or at least an additive in the vaccination), so I'd rather take my chances with the diseases.

Jimjams · 20/01/2005 14:18

An additive which didn't need to be in there either- although it would have made the vaccination more expensive to make it single dose.

Jimjams · 20/01/2005 14:23

ALthough I've just read this and guess who regressed after receiving augmentin duo. Fuck.

HappyMumof2 · 20/01/2005 14:37

Message withdrawn

ruty · 20/01/2005 14:42

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

ruty · 20/01/2005 14:44

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

alwayssaythanku · 20/01/2005 14:52

For those who need some proof that MMR is dangerous, along with the other vaccines look at the statistics of the American and British vaccine compensation units. they pay out in the hundreds of thousands each year. Even their statistics are not accurate because many parents do not believe (or cannot believe) that their child was damaged by a vaccine so they do not pursue the matter.

If you child has a reaction you should tell your GP straight away. GP's are supposed to log reactions to vaccines. But they dont. Thus the stats on bad reactions are twisted and false.

Lets put it this way, if your doc was to give you a drug and say, ok, immediately after taking this drug, you might feel nauseas, your arm might blow up a bit and you will be cranky for a few days, etc etc, would you take the drug??? I bet you wouldnt. Yet they inject our poor babies with this crap, babies who dont have a formed immune system yet (that dosent happen till 3yrs old.

The argument on vaccinations is NOT a balanced argument. In my estimation there is NO argument for vaccinations and any pro argument can easily be shot down by research, evidence and scientific theory. The very theory of vacccinations do not work and if anyone is interested I will be happy to talk about that. Its all a con, and in 20 years time, we are going to be suing our doctors left right and centre for malpractice and we will be beating ourselves up for not knowing the facts!

Adashaw · 20/01/2005 15:15

Reasons I do not think I am going to continue

Besides that no one know if they are safe, and most are made by experimental proteins from rotting diseased samples of animal tissue neutralised by formaldehyde and aluminum (linked to cancer and alzheimer's. The also contain mercury in the form of thimerosal. There is also an article out there by a doctor who links the polio vaccination used in Africa with some kind of money protein to the start of HIV (that might just be very extreme - but you can see how serious it could possibly be)

  • no one really knows how long the vaccines work
  • they are not necessarily going to work
  • when japan increased the age of vaccination to 2 SIDS almost disappeared, when put back to 2 months it re appeared - about 10,000 US children die of this each year
  • one statisic is that since 1986 US government has paid $1.2 billion to parents of vaccine injured and killed children (I also read somewhere that only 1 in 4 claims are paid out and you have to have reported a reaction within 4 hrs of the injection!!!)
  • linked to increase asthma - more that 5,000 children die from attacks in US each year
  • the amount of chronicled incidents of post vaccination neurological disorders as well as auto-immune disorders -MONEY in 98 the market for pediatric vaccine was $1.8 billion! -in Australia 80% of recruits immunized for rubella contracted it -plus autism where's 10 years ago it was 1 in 10,000 now it is as high as 1 in 150

The list is endless, but dd has just woken from her nap so lucky for you I better go have a read of this

Before I go Socci and Jimjams I have just read something in the link alwaysaythanku posted regard a homopathe who helped with a child that had the mental age of a 2month old (due to vaccination) - I am sure you have both researched and try everything so hope you don't think I am interfering

OP posts:
MistressMary · 20/01/2005 15:21

Hello Ada just seen this hope you feel happier with your thoughts regarding your question.
I visit a homeopath with my boy and must say she is very good. Any remedies he has works for his individual chracter and health. So I feel it's far more benefit to him and a safer alternative too.

ruty · 20/01/2005 15:22

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Adashaw · 20/01/2005 15:26

Suppose i should have just said it seems there are more vaccine related injury/illnesses/deaths then there are from the disease you are being vaccinated from - must say when i tell my hv about my decision she is going to love me - not!

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread