MMR back in the headlines - Italian Court rules it WAS cause of boys Autism

[doradoo]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2160054/MMR-A-mothers-victory-The-vast-majority-doctors-say-link-triple-jab-autism-Italian-court-case-reignite-controversial-debate.html - sorry for DM link....

This is surely going to reignite the debate around the jab - fwiw my DCs were vaccinated with VMMR (with chicken pox too as we're not in the UK) - but I was concerned about the jab having heard / seen the reporting surrounding it.

So is the court right - and what does it mean for the UK and parents here who believe that MMR damaged their children?

Bang whatever you want. I plan to test DD at age 16 or so and vaccinate her then if necessary.

That's fantastic, thanks, didn't know the GP would do that.

Where are the MMR vaccines manufactured? Are they FDA or whatever the UK equiv. approved? These single Vac's where are they manufactured?

Schools, nurseries etc also want to see a copy of your childs vaccination certificates before entry so really its not a choice.

You mean in the US, Clareypen? I'm pretty sure there are parents who do opt out.

Do you know if, for example, a family history of auto-immune disease would qualify for exemption in most US states?

would in any case be better to routinely test girls at puberty and vaccinate then becasue it would raise awareness in those girls. At them moment, they are probabaly unaware. I was tested by the GP when we decided to try for a baby.

(I was immune, as it happens, tho had never been vaccinated or been known to have disease - so must have had it too mildly for anyone to notice)

Where are the MMR vaccines manufactured? Are they FDA or whatever the UK equiv. approved? These single Vac's where are they manufactured?

This is what worries me, how are they stored, where are they manufactured.
It could be that everyone who has had single vaccines is no more protected than mine who've had none. But at least I know that and keep my wits about me.

It's fucking disgraceful of the Daily Mail to pull up a minor judgement from a foreign court and use it to justify their history of ludicrous scaremongering.

It's a shame that there's not a UK equivalent of the jennymccarthybodycount.com site for Melanie Phillips (which could be a twofer and include the Norway massacre as well as her hysterical support of the quack Wakefield)

'foreign court' because they can't be trusted, can they, those 'foreigners'

Is that the best you can do? Why didn't you comment on the 'minor court' part?

Always good to see rational debate on this topic.

This might be a stupid question...

...BUT I know that autism isn't diagnosed often until after aged 2. Does that mean that in most cases the DC develops normally then regresses (at about, I understand, 13 months, coincidentally or otherwise when MMR is given...)

Or are the signs of autism frequently present from birth?

Or both?

Presumably the parents that feel that MMR caused their DC's autism fall into the first category. It does seem strange to me that a child can develop completely normally and then suddenly regress - something must trigger it.

I opted for single jags for DD1 (minus mumps which isn't available, thanks government) and will do the same for DD2. I don't feel that in the vast majority of cases that the MMR does cause autism but my instincts tell me that giving three live, albeit inactivated vaccines, at one time, can't be a good thing for a young developing immune system to deal with.

speeder - there are many different types of autism. the problem with the majority of studies carried out is that they tend to treat autism as one thing. and it isn't. it is a whole range of things under an umbrella term.

as you point out, some children develop entirely typically, and then suddenly and catastrophically regress. others may lose skills slowly, with a regression happening over a longer period. others still have symptoms present (in hindsight) from birth.

there is, of course, no way of knowing which category (if any) your child may fall into until after the fact.

there is good evidence for a genetic link in some types of autism. and strong evidence for latent-and-environmentally-triggered-at-some-point links for other types of autism.

my dd1 was autistic before she had her mmr (but she had a shitload of jabs - not all of them necessary imo, and several given without consent - when she was a newborn as we lived abroad). but the mmr did damage her gut to some extent, and it has taken many years to even get her back on an even keel with that side of things (she is doing well now). my dd2 is in a prime category for latent-but-could-be-triggered, and so has not had any jabs (yet). dc3, due next month, will also have delayed jabs.

One of the things that worried me was being told that only the measles part of the vaccine needed a booster at 4 yrs approx and yet they are more than happy to give the mumps and rubella again even though it is totally unnecessary.

The NHS don't tell you that do the?? They certainly didnt tell me, it was the private doctor who gave Dd3 single vaccines. I believe him because he could make a lot more money giving 6 jabs instead of 4.

I have pretty much made up my mind not to let my DS have the booster jabs, after the reaction he had to the MMR at 14 months.

Speeder for DS yes that is exactly how it happened. He was toddling, had several words, good eye contact, would play with toys etc; within two weeks of his MMR, he had lost all of those skills.

As DH and FIL have some autisitc traits, then I do believe that it is genetic within our family.

What we will never know is whether DS would have been less severely autistic if he had not had the MMR.

For public health, it is acceptable to have individual casualties for the the greater good. For an individual parent it is not acceptable that their DC are casualties for the 'greater good' Therefore parents have to make decisions based on thier own circumstances. Health 'professionals' make a big thing about the fact that only a tiny proportion of people who are vacinated have vaccine damage, and so they insist on it, even thought in fact only a tiny proprtion of measles sufferers are adversley affected, a tinier proportion of mumps sufferes, and no rubella sufferers...

Yes, that is true. You have to decide whether to take a risk for your own child "for the greater good" - and there is a vast amount of pressure to put your child forward "for the sake of other children". But actually, if you start to read about vaccination programmes, you realise that vaccination policies aren't necessarily for the greater good anyway. They are very good for profits, however.