'Unprecedented' rise in measles

[27]

link

The BBC this morning have a story about an unprecedented rise in measles cases over the last year.
I'll C+P to save you clicking the link

----------

There is an "unprecedented increase" in measles cases in England and Wales, experts report.

Data from the Health Protection Agency showed there were 1,217 cases of measles from January to November 2008.

And 75% of the 115 cases diagnosed in November were outside the traditional hotspot of London - in the north west, west midlands and south east.

The HPA's Dr Mary Ramsay said the rise in cases was due to "relatively low" MMR uptake over the past decade.

I recently got hassled at a school medical visit over why my daughter hasn't had MMR.

I told the doc to check out the page in her health book describing her DTP reactions and the state of her health since.

Doc said "yes but that was years ago, she'll be fine to have it now".

To be fair she was more gung ho than most though. Most docs or nurses would run a mile from the prospect of vaccinating DD1. They don't want to be the one who does the damage.

I was recently contacted (as a single jab user) by my local health authority to come along to a discussion meeting to air my views about why I had avoided the MMR. In the end I couldn't make it but I had a lengthy phone conversation with the researcher who made it clear that they were seeking the views of those who had worries about the MMR specifically so that they they could better "market" the MMR to the doubters.

Pag I get letters delivered via the scoll re ds3's mmr booster, and the mum of a cancer patient knew his statuis so pct must have told school

I was very

school not scoll

That is very Clarissisimo.

The only time it does make me laugh is when I attend my GP. The poor GP puts in DDs name and "UNVACCINATED CHILD" flashes up right across the computer.
Perhaps they should give me a bell we could ring...

The GP checked ds4's status yesterday, I almost said 'yes he has had them but he's already registered for single jabs....' but as GP had already suggested I stop BF and give goats milk (NOT suitable at ds4's age and I love BF) I had decided it was a battle not worth taking up LOL

Marketing techniques to sell cornflakes are dishonest, but at least you can choose not to buy any cornflakes. Using the same techniques in this context is immoral/unethical.

Every now and then I stop to wonder why it's to vital to this government to get people to use MMR and not single vaccines. They act like they are really, really desperate to make it 100% MMR - like their pensions depended on it.

To me having say 95% on MMR, 4.5% on single vaccines and the tiny remainder abstaining would be a success. Instead they'd rather have 75% on MMR and the remainder abstaining if they can't have it their way.

Paying people to study you and find ways to trick you into using MMR is way over the top.

onager

absoloutely. whilst it is MMR only the Govt force me to ignore their policy. and actually make my extended family more wary rather than less.
It is a completely counter productive position

Whatever side ofthe arguement you sit I think there are very very few people ( Govt excluded) who would seriously expect me to consider the MMR.Yet that is the only option offered

onager - the govt are in the invidious position that they now can't backtrack because if they do, they could possibly open the door to people suing them.
Shame, but that's why.

SIL nad BC - thanks for your support!

Isn't Barack Obama changing the US policy on vaccinations, and asking for research into the MMR/autism link? Didn't he sack some big medical chief? Or was I dreaming?

I think I have those dreams...

But then it was good old Arnie who first banned thimerosal in California which was so fabulous. So strange things do happen.

I don't know what to do.

DS2 is due to have his MMR tomorrow. He is 26 months old. He has a mitochondrial disorder. His specialist has said that it's "important" for him to have all "regular" immunisations.

In the past the nurses have been concerned enough about DS2 to question his drs before immunising. We have the OK from his specialist, but I am still uncertain.

this may help you mm22bys, it may not.

A friend of mine had several issues around the safety of giving her DS the MMR - he had reacted badly to the early shots, with febrile convulsions etc., although no apparent vaccine damage. His uncle has an unspecified developmental disorder. There is a high allergic history in the family. For these and other reasons she did not let him have the MMR but paid for the separate vaccines, which he had at about 20mo.
He is now at school and she was concerned over the measles situation - so she went to have the single measles booster. The consultant who administered it listened carefully to her points and concerns and said, almost to himself rather than to her directly, "you were right to wait this long".

In the end you have to do what feels right for you.

What's the position regarding MMR/single jabs back in Oz? I really wouldn't rush into this decision if you are concerned. I am in no way knowledgable about the science or about mitochondrial disorders but I think you should be aware of the US case where the government settled after a child with a mitochondrial disorder developed autism following vaccinations (appears that a lot of jabs, not just given MMR were given around the same time).

www.newscientist.com/article/mg19726464.100-autism-payout-reignites-vaccine-controversy.html

New scientist article about this case.

I am not going to take him. He actually has an appointment with the GOS specialist for his specific condition on Monday, and if there is any person who will know what we "should" do it will be her.

I took DS1 (NT) for his MMR booster a couple of months back and I did get told off for not having had DS2 immunised yet (given the part of London we live in) but the media articles about the measles epidemic do concern me hence my booking DS2 in, but he has been sick on / off for a long time, and seeing he is well at the moment (touch wood) it seemed like a good idea to take him.

He doesn't go to a nursery.

I checked on the mitochondrial website, and it seems like there is just no research in this area. It states categorically on the site that there is no medical literature on the subject of mitochondrial disorders and immunisations, which would indicate to me noone knows. Mito stuff is so rare anyway (leaving aside autism), maybe years down the track someone will "know".

Thx for your responses, it seems I'm right to be concerned.

mm22bys,

I know how hard this is.

dd2 has a suspected mitochondrial disorder, and I am waiting with her jabs (dd1 is ASD, so that is another influencing factor in my case)

as you say, no-one really knows the implications of any of this - maybe one day they will.

In the meantime, my position was that i didn't want dd2 to be used as a guinea pig (or to end up as a statistic). She is completely unvaccinated, and will remain so until i can get some decent answers

DS1 is fully vaccinated, I started DS2 late but he's had them all up until this one. They've never had an extraordinary reaction, and there is no family history of allergies.

Even so, MMR scares me....

We'll see what the dr on Monday says and go from there....

MM22bys I second TotalChaos, best wishes with your decision.

Temerity, Beach did a link earlier to an article about new funding allocated to the field in the USA. I think you are not dreaming!

My own suspicion is that now that mercury is being largely removed from vaccines, it will be a suitable fall guy. I believe it has a massive role to play but it's not the whole story.

ps pag lol at your "no shit sherlock" file

Thanks for the earlier post Beachcomber. To reiterate, I am extremely unimpressed by anyone who sneers at people who are affected by these issues.

Just thought I'd throw in the following quotation about the difficulty of securing independent funding for scientific research:

'We don't like big pharma, because it makes money out of what we think should be a "helping people" industry: a wider, unspoken dislike of brutal capitalism, perhaps. But more than that, we don't like big pharma because we have disempowered ourselves and our states. Everybody has some kind of interest in their results; and everyone makes mistakes, perhaps - we'll say unconsciously - more often in their own favour. So science relies on independent replication; but drug trials are so expensive, and state funding of research so miserly, that pharmaceutical research is rarely independently funded. By which, of course, we mean it's rarely state funded.'

Don't suppose I need insult your intelligence by telling you who wrote it.

And yes IB, I'd put the kids into poorly-funded daycare for the day if we could get BG on here to debate with some of the more knowledgeable anti-vacc posters.

Hah policywonk, I've read that wishy-washy article.

I believe its title is "Don't Blame the Drug Companies".

The way I read that article is that he is saying that it isn't pharma's fault if they end up funding most research, it is the state's for being mean with their own funding.

He also presents the sort of manipulation of studies that might go on as being minor, transparent and basically no big deal.

Hardly going for the jugular is it?

Fact is the man lies in every article he writes about MMR and particuarly in the way he presents Dr Wakefield. He is attatched to an industry funded organisation known for misrepresenting organic illness (and he lies about this too). He is responsible for the mocking of sick children and the methods their parent's use to try to help them.

Anyway, thanks for your answer policywonk, I guess neither of us are going to change our positions on this. Perhaps we should move on, anyway the subject of Goldacre leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

If BG comes on can I ask him why he repeatedly gets it wrong about the contents of the 1998 Lancet paper he is so keen to rubbish?

Why does he refer to it as a study looking for measles in the gut of autistic children when it is no such thing?

Has he actually read the paper since he doesn't seem to know that it was a case study describing a new bowel condition not in any way a study trying to detect measles virus?

Does he feel like a fraud and a bad scientist for having won a writing award with an article in which he couldn't get his facts right concerning this basic but important matter?

Does he realise what an arse he looks for titling an article "Never Mind the Facts" and then going on and getting loads of his facts wrong in said article?

trust me, if BG came on here he would twist everything you said. I mean EVERYTHING - he deserves an award for that, it's some skill!

I heard tell - and I don't have independent verification of the info sadly so am offering it as anecdotal info from an autism conference - that the vast majority, if not all, research labs in UK Universities are funded almost completely by pharmaceutical companies. If this is true, then their influence on what research can be and is done must be enormous. Does anyone know?