Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

MMR doctor 'fixed data'

135 replies

Bubble99 · 08/02/2009 20:41

article here

OP posts:
pagwatch · 09/02/2009 09:35

I'm sorry. I am very tired of this stuff being dragged up constantly. But I should not be so angry and rude.

Ignore me. I shall go out for a walk.

silverfrog · 09/02/2009 09:38

pagwatch, don't be sorry

I do understandhow it gets to you - my dd1 is another who has benefitted enormously from a GF/CF diet (not that I can get any medic to admit that oh no, it's all a coincidence )

But please don't be sorry for trying to put the other side (and I don't think you were rude, fwiw)

daftpunk · 09/02/2009 09:43

i feel so sorry for all the parents that took notice of that idiot...i'm glad i trusted my doctor...i never believed there was a link. it's all very sad really.

IorekByrnison · 09/02/2009 09:47

Jesus, daftpunk, have you read the last three posts?? ffs

silverfrog · 09/02/2009 09:59

daftpunk, i am glad that your trust worked out so well for you. But you see, I see that as a coincidence.

I trusted doctors too. My daughter will never be the same again because of that.

daftpunk · 09/02/2009 09:59

There is no link with the MMR and autism, never was and never will be. i have said this on here before IB, infact there was a thread on here about a month ago.

silverfrog · 09/02/2009 10:02

out of interest, daftpunk, what is your explanation for serious regression following vaccination (not exclusvely limited to MMR)?

do you really think that parents are mistaken when this happens? that they dreamed the fact that their dc were talking pre-jab, and not after?

that they missed obvious gut problems, and serious pain levels in their dc?

and only noticed in the weeks following vaccination?

wannaBe · 09/02/2009 10:09

"There is no link with the MMR and autism, never was and never will be. i have said this on here before IB, infact there was a thread on here about a month
ago." Just what are your cridentials dp? Given you know all of this and that you have already said so on other threads - just what qualifications/knowledge do you have that your opinion on the matter is so important?

You must be quite a medical authority, given that you also said on another thread that adhd doesn't exist?

daftpunk · 09/02/2009 10:18

what is my explanation?

listen, i'm not saying that any vaccine is 100% safe, and i'm sure there are children who should not be vaccinated due to pre-existing conditions.

i am saying that the link between the MMR and autism is untrue, and that the parents who fell for it probably feel abit foolish.

i can understand that.

silverfrog · 09/02/2009 10:21

so you are saying that a vaccination (presumably inc MMR) is not 100% safe, and that a child may become ill afterwards - again presumably including regression into autism (possibly due to an underlying condition which had previously not shown up at all)

Bt you are also saying that there is no link between vaccination (esp MMR) and regression into autism.

clear as mud then

IorekByrnison · 09/02/2009 10:22

daftpunk, I am aware of the many threads on this subject. I am amazed that you would read Pagwatch's post of 9:31 and respond in the way that you did. Did you read her post?

Penthesileia · 09/02/2009 10:32

I find it hard to understand why people can't accept the following:

  • that most children will have no reaction to any vaccine, and will benefit from vaccination
  • that an unfortunate few will, on the contrary, react to vaccines - possibly in devastating ways, e.g. autism - and will not benefit from vaccination.

Human biology, physiology and neurology are fantastically complex. Why is it so hard to accept that the 'broad stroke' approach, (which - let's face it - vaccines are, being the same for everone) may, just may, be dangerous for a very small percentage of children.

To admit this is pointedly not to say: all vaccines and vaccination programmes should be abandoned; all doctors are evil stooges of the government, etc. It is to say that we need much, much, MUCH more research into this matter, regardless of the controversy. If research were done into identifying which children were at risk, then parents could be more sure of their decision (not) to vaccinate.

I for one will be vaccinating my DD (8mo), because - on reflection - I believe she is low risk: there is no history of autism in our families; there is no - or very little - history of allergies (my dad developed late onset asthma & horse/dog/cat allergies in his 30s); there is no history of bowel disorder or disease, etc. I hope that this means that she is likely to be ok - the odds are that she is. As I said, it's only a very small percentage of children who are/were affected. But to deny that these children exist is unfair and cruel.

daftpunk · 09/02/2009 10:36

silverfrog; i am saying no vaccine is 100% safe, but that the MMR is not linked to autism...what don't you understand about that?...if the MMR gave children autism every other child in the world would have it.

IB, I have read pagwatchs post.

Peachy · 09/02/2009 10:39

'Tbh I've never understood what the conspiracy fruitcakes think that "they" get out of the whole imaginary deal.'

OOh am I a fruitcake? I like fruitcake. As long as I'm not a cheesecake- yuck.

DS1 / 2 / 3/ vaccinated; ds4 not. Won't be when old enough. Anyone on here who knows our story will at elast understand if not agree I would guess (two of the boys are asd, both with gut issues).

DS4 will get single jabs, if I MMR'd him and he developed ASD (major rosk) I would feel immense guilt.

silverfrog · 09/02/2009 10:39

daftpunk, your post is illogical.

The MMR jab could be linked to autism without it affecting every child who has the jab. Just as haemophilia is linked to males, but not all men/boys suffer.

Penthesileia · 09/02/2009 10:40

It's clearly not as simple as 'giving children autism', daftpunk. No-one here is saying that. You're creating a straw-man. (I do admit, though, that "popular" perception of the problem may go like that - but not here on MN, I believe).

People are arguing that certain children have a predisposition to be badly affected by the vaccine.

subtlemouse · 09/02/2009 10:42

Peachy, just for interest, will you also feel guilty if he develops it after the single jabs (obviously I very much hope he doesn't)? Or will the jabs then be irrelevant, or will single jabs also be unusable?

I'm sorry, I don't know any of your past history and don't want to cause offence; genuinely interested.

Peachy · 09/02/2009 10:46

DP can I ak what you make of the American case where the Courts have awarded compensation to a family with an ASD child on the basis of MMR? r is it all garbage because you know better.

TC's point- yes it is true that Medical Records are not a good indicator. DS3 isn't recorded as regresive becuase no HCP saw him in between 9 month check and regression just before he turned 3 (we moved in that time) to verify where his skill level lay. I know he was chatting but that's not enough for his dx to be regressive so it is just ASD.

I think it's a shame more study isn't done not because we want compensation- I made a bad call allowing ds3 to have jab with ds1 being suspected of having ASD at that time- (wewouldnt ask for comp) but because if we can ID who is at risk then those who are nto can have the jab which is surely a win-win?

daftpunk · 09/02/2009 10:49

it's the middleclass's that fell for it Penthesileia...why i'd expect the reactions i get.

MMR is not linked to autism...end of.

IorekByrnison · 09/02/2009 10:49

Daftpunk, I don't think you have really got a handle on this issue. The hypothesis is that the vaccine may be dangerous for some children - a very small proportion of the total. The problem is that we don't yet know how to identify which children will be vulnerable. It is absolutely not a case of "if the MMR gave children autism every other child in the world would have it."

Perhaps you are just saying that the MMR is OK for most children? In that case I agree with you entirely. But that doesn't mean we should just say "tough luck" to those children for whom it's not OK.

Peachy · 09/02/2009 10:51

subtle I haven't seen anything to make me think he would develp it (history- 2 bioys with asd, one regressed after MMR).

sorry for typing wriggly ds4 bf atm.

No I don't think I'd feel guilty having weighed up everything; there's a risk to not having vaccinations also and all I can do is my best on the evidence I have seen- single jabs. DS4 has up to an 80% chance of asd (best professional guess based on 2 of 3 chhildren with it)- all we can do is minimise triggers- gf/cf diet, single jabs, bf until self weans, even baby signing- after that it is fate, genetics, luck (in terms of unidentified triggers), and that's just the way it is.

2shoesformyvalentine · 09/02/2009 10:53

I always thank god, ds and dd had thye jabs before I have ever heard of the link"

HecateQueenOfGhosts · 09/02/2009 10:54

My children both have autism. Bowel problems and are gluten intolerant. All things many argue are caused by the mmr.

Except they never had the mmr, because, ironically, I was worried about autism!

So I don't know what to think. IF they had had the mmr, no doubt I would be convinced that was the cause of it, but given that they have the same things that are atributed to the mmr, without having had it, does that not indicate that mmr may not be the only cause? In which case, how can anyone be 100% sure that it is or is not mmr in any particular case? My kids didn't have it, yet they have these things. Why? And if they have them without having had the mmr, how can we be sure that others who did have it, and who have the same thing as mine who didn't have it, have it because of the mmr. If you make sense of my ramble, have a medal

I feel like I spin in circles. I don't understand and I don't know what to think about it all, tbh. I wish there would be a lot more research on it.

Peachy · 09/02/2009 10:57

'I wish there would be a lot more research on it. '

I agree with you Hecate

It's research- proper, reliable, unbiased research- that we need, not palliatives from interested authorities who see £ signs for damages if they don't get the result they want.

I look at America with interest.

2shoesformyvalentine · 09/02/2009 10:58

common denominator imo

How can people be sure that their child wouldn't have had autism anyway?