MMR-pros and cons?

[hazlinh]

Many many apologies if this has been discussed in great detail in the past...but dd is just going to turn one next week and am wondering what pros and cons there are to having her MMR jab.is it really necessary?or is she better off not having it done

All my children have had one MMR vaccine - I was loathe to do a second as I really felt at the time it was recommended to try and catch those who had not done the first vaccination. I felt confident that as I was also breastfeeding my children would be protected. There is evidence that breastfed babies respond better to formula fed ones.
I have had my belief challenged in the last few weeks because of the dramatic rise in mumps. My DS1 was advised to have another MMR to protect him. I did not believe it was necessary however he became ill and I was worried he did infact have mumps. I started a thread on it because I felt so guilty. However it was infact tonsillitis and an ear infection he had. I asked the doctor if he could have his immunity checked for mumps. He checked with the consultant bacteriologist who said it was not possible.(Will post link for that in a minute) The test could only say if he had an antibody but that would not determine whether he was immune or not. It is the same for measles. Rubella status can be checked however. We do that in the booking bloods for all pregnant women. One of my neighbours was rendered sterile after having mumps and I did not feel confident any more to take the risk of not vaccinating. He certainly had no problems with any of his other vaccinations so he is booked to have it next week.
What I am trying to say is that you need to be confident about your decision and how you would feel if your child became very ill. I thought I was confident and then felt really challenged when I thought he actually had mumps. Sterility is a really rare outcome of mumps but it can happen. The doctor said to DS at the end of the day it was his testicles we were talking about DS has decided also to go ahead so I feel better about that. I am so glad that I do not have a new baby to make all these vaccination decisions about.

immunity

I am not going to get into this discussion as it's been done so often and there is always trouble! but one thing I will say, which I mentioned on a similar thread a week or two ago: my HV told me recently that any woman needing a rubella vaccination / booster ( eg if she was tryingto conceive) in the UK now will have to have a full MMR as there are no longer single vaccines available for that purpose. And that makes me furious.

On the subject of singje jabs vs. the mmr and this is point which sent us for single jabc it is all down to what is best for the population as a whole vs. what is best for your particular child. The government is opposed to single jabs (and even goes so far as to make then very difficult and expensive to obtain -- not to mention costly!) because they do not want parent go and get the measels jab and then not get the other two. This would be bad because a rubella (German Measels) or a mumps epidemic would be very expensive for the NHS. A real inconvenience for THEM. So, they figure it's worth the very small percentage of children who are in fact adversely affected by the MMR jab. This is what's good for population as a whole bit.

On other side of the coin is what is good for your particular child. What if your child is one of the few who might be adversely affected? Then, he/she would be better off with single jabs.

So it all comes down to the government wanting what is best for the population vs. parents wanting what they think is best for their child.

Now, the detail in this that makes me positively livid is that government is demonstrating through advertising and restricting our ability to obtain single jabs that their right to protect the population overrides my right to protect my child.

No way no how do I subscribe to this notion!! My child is not ever going to be a guinea pig for the good of the population. My dd has a second cousin who was diagnosed at age 3 at moderately autistic. I therefore go for single jabs. The government has no right to tell me I shouldn't.

Donnie,
Interesting. When I was pregnant with DD (two years ago) I tested very low on the immunity for Rubella on my booking bloods. I was offered (and accepted) the rubella jab upon leaving the hospital. I am pregnant again now. It is interesting that I would now be offered the MMR. I don't know if I would take it. So, had this been the case 2 years ago, the baby I am carrying now would be more susceptible due to that change in policy.

Right, single Rubella jabs have run out? Maybe they could go and get them fro Dr. E-med.? What they mean is they have chosen to not to offer them.

uwila ,the single rubella jabs haven't run out but they are not available in the uk and do not have a current licence.the jabs you obtain from clinics are imported from abroad.

donnie, but I recently talked to Merck and they said single jabs are being manufactured. Is that the company used in the UK or a different one?

So, why can't the NHS import them if they aren't "available". Sorry, I'm rather a ceptic when it comes to listening to the NHS. It's been my experience that "not available" generally means can't be arsed.

they won't import them as they are not licensed to be given in this country. any unlicensed medication has to be given on a private named patient basis so the doc is operating outside of the NHS. while some unlicensed vaccines are given in this way giving them to babies is another thing all together.I'm sure if problems were noted after these were given then parents would be furious even though if you receive an unlicense medication you should be told that the side effects are unknown as there are no recent uk trials on it.

Perhaps it is their job to locate and source rubella vax which can be licensed.

Lockets
What were your questions? I haven't reposted as I'm busy looking after my dd and i don't have time to write very long threads and bore everyone at the same time.

I do 'sleepeasy' thanks, chill out!!!

Lockets - the measles vaccine provides good but not perfect protection. It has an efficacy of around 90% (increases to much more after the booster). It is possible therefore for your child to get measles from an apparently vaccinated child. If you want to reduce the risk you can vaccinate your own child and hope s/he is covered by it.

All vax's are a matter of choice, and a personal one at that. A parent will do what they feel fit for their child and NO ONE has the right to discriminate against it.

I was just correcting your facts, Locket, as I thought your "accusation" of the mum who had vaccinated her child was unfair. I try and steer clear of emotive terms, such as "failing", and I have no wish to get into your argument with NYM.

Lockets
I apologised yesterday for using the word failing, as I'm sure you've seen. I accept it was totally inappropriate, and if you look back at the debate since then we've actually moved on from there.

Personally I've learnt a lot from what people have said and I think the point of these boards is just that.

I'm sorry you're so upset by what I wrote. You make some good points but when you say things like 'that is of course if you have time in your world of being a perfect non failing mother of course' then frankly I'm totally disinterested in responding to you. Of course I'm not a 'non-failing' mother! I wish I was! If my daughter could talk she'd probably complain about all sorts of things about me (not least the fact that I spend too much time on the internet instead of playing!)

And for the record, the answers to your questions are 'no' to the first one, because you should have vaccinated your own daughter if you wish to protect her from measles and no, I can't list every single ingredient in a vaccine, but I have informed myself enough (see previous posts) to believe personally that vaccinations are overwhelmingly safe and to distinguish fact and well grounded analytical research from other language which is used in this debate.

For what it's worth (probably not a lot to you, given that you accuse me of using teenage language!) this whole debate has raised points which I have never considered before about this issue.

We all love our children and I don't have time to be angry with you in my perfect, non-failing world