Mumps outbreak in people who had the MMR...

[hunkermunker]

I heard a girl talking on the radio this morning. She had just got over mumps, as had most of the people in her halls of residence at university (think she said she was in Cheltenham).

She had the MMR and the booster, so did most of her peers.

This girl's GP said, "The MMR doesn't work". Is he wrong?

DS is 14mo and hasn't had the MMR. Given that it would seem it's no good, why should he?

i will be flamed as usual for this, but i believe (it's an opinion, i'm not claiming to base it on anything other than lots of reading and so called common sense) that if you prevent children getting the diseases that would naturally boost their immune system, they will be a) more at risk of said disease in later life and b) will find other illnesses that do that job.

anecdotally, i've heard of a massive outbreak of mumps in teen boys in a private school. the boy talking about it had not been vaccinated, and did not catch it.

i just don't think that repercussions of vaccinating are even slightly recognised (or researched) yet.

Oh goodness BL, that's awful. My dh had mumps four times as a child - luckily no long-lasting effects but just goes to show individual immune systems vary.

yes, but having those illnesses can also be very bad.
And as I say... i had mumps when I was little. But it did not give me immunity as I got it again when i was older!

so i had twice as much chance of suffering from side effects of the illness...

I tend to agree with Sophable.

Starlover, if you'd been vaccinated, you may still have caught it though (I realise you probably know this!).

i think there are pros and cons of each way.

I would hate to not get DS vaccinated and then have him go blind from measles... which i could have prevented.

I would hate him to suffer from something caused by having a vaccine too..

it's a very difficult choice

yep.. realise that HM...

just wanted to say that having it as a child doesn't guarantee that you will be immune to it.
so arguments about wanting kids to catch stuff when they're little really don't hold much weight with me!!!

Ds was born in April 1988 and dd in March 1985 they both had the MMR in May 1989, but it was not offered to dd1 who was born in November 1983.

All three had mumps and chicken pox in early 1989 but the younger two still were recommended to have MMr although i was doubtful because ds had only just had chicken pox. He had a meningitis illness 14 days after the MMR and was extremely ill I am sure it was as a consequence and also related to his recovery from chicken pox. He was ill for 6 months (personally believe it had long term effects).

That particular vaccine was subsequently withdrawn.

I knew four other children in ds age group who had chicken pox and then the vaccine and they were all hospitalised.

Dd1 has been at uni this last semester and was worried about getting mumps as it was prevalent she knew people who had had mumps who got it again and some who were vaccinated and got it. She didn't although everyone in her house (not residence) did.

My dd1 (dob 1987) was one of the first to have MMR and also the booster when she was ?5. I have to say, I am now concerned that a simlar scenario to this one with mumps will arise with rubella when girls of her age eventually start to have babies. My ds's were born pre-MMR, when these diseases were merely 'mild childhood illnesses' and tbh, I wish my dd's had had German Measles and I could be surer of their immunity.

Concerned about that myself suedonim.

A secondary school locally had an outbreak of mumps last year, the majority of the children had had MMR when it was introduced in 1988.