where do i start? dtp research

[minnietheminx007]

hi all, i have a 8 week old daughter who is due to have her first jabs. im not convinced about the safety and want to weigh up the risks involved with the injection against how likely she would be to catch any of the diseases it immunises against. has anyone here decided to opt out of all injections?? if anyone can advise some sites that are impartial or any other reading material it would be much appreciated!

I recommend the Halvorsen book about vaccinations - can't remember title but you can look it up on Amazon. He is a gp and offers pretty good, balanced advice. If you are not travelling then the risks of your dd getting diptheria, tetanus or polio are very low. Pertussis is apparently circulating and can be nasty for under ones. They also include Hib, Prevnar and Men c in the first vaccinations now and they prevent the most prevalent meningitis strains. You can break up the vaccines so she doesn't get them all at once but you would have to do that privately. Good luck.

sorry should say you can get tetanus anywhere but unlikely to get it until she is crawling or walking at least. And then has to be a deep wound. But vax should be considered then IMO, when they are running about.

I think you might struggle to find impartial advice it all seems to be either for or against. I know what you what, I think you want a clear risk benefit analysis so that you can make up your own mind. Unfortunately many of the official statistics can be somewhat skewed and only 10 per cent of adverse events are reported, apparently. So unless you look at websites like whale (against), or Jabs (also against) alongside the NHS sites (for, bien sur) then the balance won't be there.

If you can retrieve original scientific papers off the web, from the BMJ, say, you can look at the original studies and see if they really say what the press release claims they say. But you might have to subscribe and pay for them.

Please bear in mind that while if you feel you need to "do the right thing" socially, and that could make your mind up, that there is no vaccine compensation scheme for under twos. If anything goes wrong no one will say thanks for your sacrifice, we'll help as much as possible to make things better. The official response will be denial.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is, make your mind up for your baby and not for so called "herd immunity".

what you want

excuse

my ds is unvaccinated.

it is a horrible decision and one that dh and i revisit regularly.

there isnt' much out there that isn't polarised one way or the other: nhs and dept health advice treats you like you're thick (no mention that there might be a case for not vaccinating or proceeding with caution if there are autoimmune conditions in the family).

anti-vax stuff can be just as dogmatic.

halvorsen is good, but has his own business that he is making out of single vax.

vera schrieber, is full on vax sceptic but intelligent with it.

put it this way: i was going to simply delay vaccinating ds as i believe the schedule starts way way too early esp if baby is breast fed (mother's immunity passed on).

however, i was repeatedly told that thimerosal was fine, and then it was withdrawn in the UK, and no one even now admits that is due to health risks. which lead to my total distrust of the mainstream vax pov tbh.

a single tetanus is only available after 11yrs so ds will have it then. in the meantime, i dig every splinter out with incredible attention...

sophable can I just correct you it's viera scheibner

Yes, she's interesting. She presents research to back up a possible link between vaccines and SIDS.

soph spoke to Halvorsen recently and he now offers single thimerosal free tetanus for babies onwards

thanks stuffit.

and pofaced, thanks for that too.

I'm afraid I'm not sure minnie is real

how bizarre.

i am indeed real, dd has been keeping me busy thanks for the info guys, i shall start trying to go through some of the avenues you have suggested, its a minefield though and such a big decision

ok fine. good luck.

sorry minnie, congratulations and good luck

there is such a thing. Gps are not very helpful but if you asked to be referred to a paediatric immunologist they may be more helpful - this happened to us and they offered us a much better strategy. But the only place I know for certain that offers a single tetanus vaccine for children is Dr Halvorsen's private clinic in London.

There is a single tetanus it is unlicensed and contains thiomersal.

NHS only provide 5 in 1, 4 in 1 or 3 in 1 depending on age and immunisation status.

Halvorsen says his single tetanus is thimerosal free.

well guys, i have been picking my way through the info and it seems like the only real risk is tetanus and as pofaced said its not really a risk until they are mobile. does anyone else find it quite depressing when you mention to people you arent too sure about the vaccinations they all say "well if the doctor says its whats best then im going to go for it" i erad a rather worrying statement that dr's wages are structured and they must achieve 90% vaccination level, not sure how true it is, has anyone else heard this. i understand all dr's will be pro vaccination, is this because the trials themselves are carried out by the companies who sell the vaccine which is then promoted to the dr?? ive got an appointment with the dr tomoz and i just know he will quiz me about the vaccines and why i dont want to have them

i think doctors have to think from a public health perspective and in that sense, vaccination does save lives. I think they are genuine when they believe vaccines to be a good thing. On the whole, they are, IMO. But there are obviously some children vulnerable to serious side effects. I am getting my dd vaccinated on a delayed schedule, with vaccines broken down into singles, and this is something you might want to think about in the long term. HTH.

minnietheminx, you could always ask your doctor to sign an guarantee that your child will not be affected and that he will be personally liable for any vaccine damage for the rest of her life

of course he might sign it because vaccine damage is almost always denied..

and there is no compensation for vaccine damage for babies under the age of two

I think you find on here that NO ONE who has not vaccinated will recommend another mother not to do so, because it is always a decision that you need to make about what is best for your child. It's not always the other way round however.

Minnie he may not neccessarily bring the subject up. I only recently received a call from my health visitor asking as to DS's vax status - he's 2.5 ! I just declined all the appointments. After doing stacks of reading, weighing up the risks / benefits and talking to lots of people, we opted to hold off on vax's for the time being.

That's good to know about the tetanus jab pofaced....

We will vax DS against mumps when he's a teenager if he hasn't had it.

The main problem, I find, is that because most people vax - getting him into contact with any of the illnesses it would be good to have natural immunity against is difficult.

You also find that you constantly weigh up your decision in your mind.. and if DS ever starts with any illness I would say I am extra vigilant and stay off work / go to the docs probably more than is neccessary !

puffy lovett i think you are me!

I think my (and your) children are less of a "risk' to others than the vaccinated non immune -- we are hyper aware and more likely to spot something early!

"The main problem, I find, is that because most people vax - getting him into contact with any of the illnesses it would be good to have natural immunity against is difficult."

Seriously? What illnesses do you feel it would be better for the child to catch?

In terms of the risk of your children to others - please note that Rubella can be very mild, many cases are sub-clinical, but would cause devastating damage to any unborn children that come into contact with yours.

well if your daughter has mumps she is statistically less likely to have ovarian cancer, if your son has mumps under ten he is less likely to have it when it is more dangerous and can in rare cases cause sterility, if your child has measles he or she is less likely to have asthma which kills 1400 people every year in the UK, and then you've got your general benefits from a healthy and primed immune system fighting off infection, gaining strength, functioning appropriately and possibly forestalling immune system disorders later in life

not sure if that's what puffy has in mind but that's what I have in mind

in terms of the risk of our children to others, please note that infants should not be made to take a risk which adults are not prepared to accept

Are you saying, then, that immunisation compromises a 'healthy and primed immune system'?

Sterility, as you say, is an uncommon consequence of catching mumps during puberty, but for under 10's what about sensorineural deafness or aseptic meningitis? Encephalitis caused by Mumps only effects between one and two percent of sufferers, but meningitis is up there at 10%. And if you immunise then your son is less likely to have it when it is 'more dangerous', too.

And what does "infants should not be made to take a risk which adults are not prepared to accept" actually mean? That children shouldn't be immunised unless every adult has been?