'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.

daftpunk. there is a link. It has been proven in a US court of law. what is not in dispute is the extent of those affected.

there is no point for you in offering single vaccines. For a number of other people, there is .

I was more querying why you would see it as "risk-taking" to have the MMR if there were single jabs available as well. a point which you declined to answer...

I hope your doctor is one of the fairly few who has time to keep up to date with all the lateset research etc. then, and is informed by more than just the pharmaceutical company literature, daftpunk.

and please can we not conflate things here: NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT THE MMR HAS BEEN PROVEN TO CAUSE autism. but that there is a link that it may be a trigger for those children with an underlying vulnerability to the condition.

daftpunk - re "i listen to my doctor yes, because i have faith in his judgement & ability"

Q.E.D.

Just like I said, there will always be people like you who put absolute faith in what authority figures tell them. Those people will prefer MMR over singles.

Sophable

The link was not proven as the case was settled without proof of causation.

silverfrog;

the government either come out and say.."ok, we realize a lot of parents have lost confidence so we will get rid of the MMR and introduce single vaccines for everyone".....my point was, if you keep both options, everyone would go with the single vaccine because they'd probably think if it's available i'll take it....the govenment would in effect be admitting that they have lost faith in the MMR vaccine. that will never happen.

"everyone would go with the single vaccine because they'd probably think if it's available i'll take it".

Would you?

No?

Then the above sentence is false.

You can count on the majority trusting their GPs (like you) and preferring a single vaccine to the hassle of three separate vaccines.

also a little bit at the idea of the US court as the ultimate arbiter of medical truths.

I dont agree, daftpunk.

what you are, in effect, saying is that everyone who is so sure that the MMR is safe (as you are) would suddenly change their mind because singles were available.

If the MMR is safe now, then it is still safe if singles are available. And since it is undoubtedly more convenient to have just the one jab plus booster, rather than 3 jabs plus boosters, then surely all these totally convinced people would keep using MMR?

or is your conviction not as strong as you say it is?

I really am baffled as to why people who think a prduct is totally safe would use a different product just because it was re-introduced (with extra inconvenience added in)

cotedazur;

you know exactly what i'm saying...you can try and break me down all night but you'll never do it....you know i'm right.

There's an awful lot of people wouldn't take it: I would suggest that if you want to have to show up (often with time off work etc) three times at the health centre compared to once, to have your child with possible fever three times- then you really want the single jabs. It will cost us £310 to vaccinate ds4. He has a big chance of some form of asd- initially about 80% on the highest estimate due to two siblings with it, now I believe reduced as he has so far developed alng NT lines. if I give him MMR and he regresses then I am going to spend the next fifty years with the same response I had when ds3 regressed- asking everyone 'did I do this to hm? When I gave him the MMR?'

£310 is far too much for us to 'afford': carers allowance is £50.51 a week. However its a much lesser cost than the guilt and fear I eprsonally would attach with the MMR.

It's the same reason I don't give hiim casein, or gluten, or allow him to view television: to keep my sanity I have to do everything in my power to avoid ASD, so that if he develops it I have nor eason for guilt.

"Break you", LOL

No use trying that. Your unquestioning belief in authority is obviously unshakable and demonstrably fact-proof.

What I am doing is to show you the falseness of your statement that nobody will go for MMR if singles are allowed. Which is nonsense, because there will always be a faithful majority like you.

yes, there IS a point in offering single vaccinations daftpunk - for the simple reason that a shedload more parents would then entertain the idea of getting their DC vaccinated and therefore the measles epidemics and similar would be far less likely.
And that IS a fact!

I personally know several parents who have elected for no vaccinations rather than MMR, but who would get their children sepvaxed ( excuse ghastly new verb )

donnie; single vaccines are availabe, all i was trying to say was if the government brought out single vaccines for everyone because of "safety concerns" most parents would go with them.

I read UK was considering adding Chicken Pox vaccine to the MMR.

Hands up those who think uptake will decrease even further.

I honestly don't understand why you think that would be the case, daftpunk.

People who definitely would not use MMR might use singles.

some people who have grave misgivings re: MMr but go ahead anyway (with crossed fingers) probably would.

But the rest? Why would they change to a schedule tht is vastly more inconvenient?

If you have researched the issue, and are happy that the MMR is safe, why would you change your mind just because an alternative is available? Why would the MMR be viewed as riskier (your words) just because single vaccines are available too? It is the same jab, after all.

Same for the 5in1 - why can singles not be available alongside so that people can avoid those which they wish to?

why does there have to be this insistance that it is all or nothing?

Silverfrog , to your last sentence...I have come to the conclusion it is all about money and the funds being tight for the NHS anywya (although, I think most of the money problems are self inflicted by pathetic mismanagement...but that is a whole different story anyway)

because, silverfrog, parents are stupid, and must be protected from themselves.

just reading about hannah poling and the article i read suggests that it was the thimerosal in the vaccine that caused the problems - this isn't included any longer is it though?

sorry - am trying to find out as much impartial info as possible as DS2 is 12 months so due it soon and am worrying as mil has an auto-immune illness.

is it just me or is it incredibly hard to find decent info about mmr - the nhs stuff is woefully inadequate.