Live webchat with Professor David Salisbury, Dept of Health director of immunisation, Mon, November 2, 1pm

[GeraldineMumsnet]

We're very pleased to have Professor David Salisbury, the Department of Health's director of immunisation, as our guest for a live webchat this Friday, 30 Oct, at 1pm.

Professor Salisbury, who originally trained as a paediatrician, and also works extensively for the World Health Organisation including his role as chairman of the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Vaccines, is a timely guest given that the swine flu vaccination
programme is now being rolled out. Pregnant women are one of the first 'at-risk' groups being offered the jab.

There has already been a large amount of discussion about the vaccine, so this is your chance to put your questions, concerns and comments to the government's top vaccines expert.

As usual, if you can't join us on the day, please post your question here and Prof Salisbury will try to answer as many as possible.

[Beachcomber]

I really don't know stuffitllllama. I don't believe it as such, rather, I can't help myself from thinking it. I mean this more with regards to the US situation than the UK.

There have been many relieved declarations of how taking mercury out of childhood vaccines hasn't affected ASD rates in the US. The first few times I heard these relieved and almost triumphant declarations I didn't think much of it other than they were fools for not waiting until stocks of MCV had been used up before doing their sums. (And how shameful it was that they were just relieved that their vaccine programme was being let off the hook and to hell with the suffering of the sick children).

Then the pressure increased for pregnant women in the US to have regular flu vaccines (mercury containing). Babies and children are expected to have flu jabs in the US despite the withdrawal of the other MCV. It just doesn't make sense.

They have been vaccinating children for YEARS with a vaccine schedule that they know causes chronic health and neurological problems whilst lying about it. What I am suggesting is hardly worse than what they have already done, that is why I think it is within the realms of the possible.

They have dug themselves into a massive hole and there isn't really anyway out.

Just look at the craziness of it all; no single MMR jabs, the refusal to examine, help and acknowledge MMR damaged children, the attempts to discredit people and theories which help MMR damaged children, the dangerous and unproven HPV vaccines, Hep B in the US, the dangers of Men C and HIB by affecting ecosystems, the terrible history of the DTP, this badly tested full of crap swine flu vaccine being pushed on pregnant women....

It would appear that just about anything is possible.

[stuffitllllama]

I can see it. I think at some level people like Salisbury act in good faith. For example, I'm sure he knows about these issues and knows that MMR does cause these problems: mercury too. but despite all that he (plus cohorts) have probably convinced themselves that it's for the overall good of the population anyway. I do know people (well one person) quite high up in the industry who does act in very good faith but at the same time has the most dismissive attitude you can imagine to the parents of damaged children. Still it seems he can conflate those attitudes into a genuine belief he is doing the right thing.

However I also know there are those who, like the tobacco giants, simply don't give a flying fucking fuck.

[StripeyKnickersSpottySocks]

Hi,

My DD had the single vaccines against measles and rubella as a baby. However she has not been vaccinated against mumps. She's 8 years old now, why is it important that she has mumps cover? I'm happy for her to have MMR now she's older but still unsure whether mumps is serious enough to do it. Everyone I knew, inc me had mumps as kids. Isn't the risk of becoming sterile very minimal?

[Beachcomber]

ITA stuffit.

There are the ones who can't see further than the end of their noses and the ones who can't see further than their bank balance/position of power/add as applicable.

[pofacedandproud]

Beachcomber WHO have stated categorically that Squalene was not used as an adjuvant in any of the gulf war vaccines. Why it is not licensed in the States though is a question I would like answered.
I don't believe that WHO or Professor Salisbury are in on some huge conspiracy to poison the world. I don't think either that they are deliberately putting thimerosal in jabs for pregnant women to skew the results of taking it out of baby jabs. I do however think it is a product of the disjointed thinking of the public health system where they just don't see the two as part of the same issue. It is a problem.

[pofacedandproud]

I think a lot of the hostile stuff here is just going to alienate Prof Salisbury and enable him not to answer some of the very valid and pertinent questions by dismissing though with valid queries as coming from 'nutty anti-vaccinators'

[pofacedandproud]

by dismissing them

[Beachcomber]

Well pofaced you have your opinion and I have mine.

I don't believe I, or others, are being hostile as we are not directing comments at Dr Salisbury, nor are we expecting him to comment on anything he chooses not to.

Dr Salisbury has chosen to come on our forum and he must take us as he finds us. I am a parent of a vaccine damaged child who has experienced only hostility, denial and dismissal from public health authorities. I have experienced first hand the attitude that my child does not matter, at all, in the least. Not nice.

If he, or others, wish to dismiss valid ideas and concerns by painting the people who express them as nutters or conspiracy theorists then that is one way of dismissing us yet again. If he and others wish us to stop feeling the way they do the first step would be to acknowledge that our children exist and that they matter.

[manfrom]

"They have been vaccinating children for YEARS with a vaccine schedule that they know causes chronic health and neurological problems whilst lying about it."

Your proof please?! I'll accept all double-blind, peer-reviewed clinical trials!

Here's some real statistics for you:

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7872541.stm

Measles kills.

[pofacedandproud]

Beachcomber I wasn't have a go at you. But the hostility and the idea that Prof Salisbury and others in his field are willingly endangering the public is going to do the cause absolutely no favours. You have some good research and theories at hand. Stick to those and ask some specific scientifically backed questions. I can understand why you feel angry but he isn't going to sit down and read all this stuff, is he, and the general 'aren't they all evil and pharma companies are just one big conspiracy' is just going to deflect away from difficult questions and align us with the David Icke brigade I'm afraid. I mean really, do you think WHO are corrupt too? they are flawed, certainly, but just money making mafia? Please.

[BobbingForPeachys]

Measles does kill manfrom and I am not arguing,but when you have a child who regressed and beleive that is MMR related it is pretty damned ahrd also, so peoplecan at least show empathy if not agreement- at best aprents like me are in a very challenging situation, and to beleive that your decisions caused it, well intentioned or not, is difficult.

I don't have any questions, my decisions are already made and we all have the luxury of having already had SF prior to vaccine introduction, but will read with deep interest.

[Beachcomber]

Pofaced, Stuffit asked me a question and I answered it, I'll accept that we are off topic and having a personal exchange (as happens all the time on MN).

Do me a favour though and try not to paint me as a conspiracy theorist and attribute ideas about 'evil', 'mafia' and the WHO to me that I have never expressed please.

Ok, to get back on track and ask questions to Dr Salisbury, here are two which are very important to a lot of people at the moment.

Dr Salisbury, many parents have been asking for many years that a comprehensive analysis be done to compare the overall health outcomes of vaccinated and non vaccinated children. (Obviously it would be unethical to withhold vaccines in order to achieve this but there is a large enough group of non vaccinated by choice individuals who could be studied). Are you aware of any plans to conduct such a study and if not could you please outline why not when it is clear that such a study is long overdue in the light of the fact that the vaccine schedule, as a whole, as never been tested for safety?

Dr Salisbury, I have read many times that only around 10% of adverse vaccine reactions are reported. Thereby it is my understanding that the current safety statistics are 90% inaccurate. Are you aware of any plans to rectify this concerning situation and to change the system from a passive one to an active follow up one which would reassure the public that vaccine damage is seriously monitored and dealt with?

Many thanks.

[VulpusinaWilfsuit]

Here's what I predict is going to happen though, beachcomber. You are going to keep asking a million questions that you think are the right ones. Salisbury won't possibly be able to answer them all. He will give you one or two responses and refer you to the scientific research he must use as his bread and butter. Which you will reject, because you already know what he is going to say. When he refuses to answer any more of your questions, you will be cross and assume he has something to hide. Which will then confirm your existing view of the DoH vaccination programme.

So I'm wondering what you're hoping to achieve by flouting the webchate guidelines that MNHQ set up for exactly this kind of eventuality, in order to continue to secure high profile guests so that everyone can have a chance to question them.

[stuffitllllama]

Pofaced I think I understand you. I felt rather cross when about a month ago a lot of new posters came on MN and started TALKING IN CAPITALS about how PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES are trying to control the population and KILL US ALL. I think you feel that way now (correct me if I'm wrong).

But this is not like that. Neither I nor Beachcomber (excuse me if I speak for you BC) has the time or interest to search or even look at conspiracy theory websites. I avoid them like the plague, in fact: and to my certain knowledge on mn Beachcomber has only ever linked and referred to Pubmed pages and sound research. When this research leads you to think: how in the hell is this sanctioned? And what on God's earth motivates it? -- well so be it. Some questions and research do lead you to some very unpleasant places: as does following medical advice on occasion.

David Salisbury will read that part and will ignore, no doubt: tomorrow he may make reference to "understandably emotional" parents of "children they believe to be damaged by vaccines" or some such carefully worded comment.

I don't think anyone should worry that he is going to be put off answering certain questions. He will say what he was going to say anyway. All the questions will be looked at, and a number will be selected to allow him to wheel out the usual reassurances.

Beach's questions ARE the right ones. All the evidence points to the conclusion that a great deal more honest and independent research is needed into the adverse effects of the vaccination programme. Is this going to be done?

Excuse me if I second guess the good doctor, but no, it's not.

[stuffitllllama]

And if anybody thinks my posts are inappropriate, or against the rules, or heavens to betsy disrespectful, they can report them sure enough and leave Towers to decide whether to take them out.

[Beachcomber]

Don't worry I won't be around tomorrow to get cross, confirm views of anything, mind if Dr Salisbury chooses to answer questions other than mine or whatever.

I don't have any more questions anyway. Didn't realize was flouting rules, I thought we were only allowed one question on the actual live webchat didn't realize that we can't ask more than one on the preparation thread. Haven't participated in one before. Sorry MNHQ if have asked more questions than meant to on this thread.

[Beachcomber]

X posts with stuffit.

Yes, you may speak for me stuffit .

(and thanks)

[stuffitllllama]

I hope you have a nice day without steam coming out of your ears Beach.

I will try to be here but it's a funny time for me. But my expectations are low anyway -- no surprise there.

[pofacedandproud]

I don't want to upset either you or stuffit BC. i'm not saying you don't have good arguments, I'm just saying whatever is said has to be very carefully put otherwise it is easier to dismiss.

[MGMidget]

My son falls into a high priority cateogory for vaccination but he is allergic to egg. His allergy clinic have told us he should have Celvapan not Pandremix but our GP's practice say they are only getting Pandremix. Can he get the Celvapan vaccine somewhere else?

[2010Dad]

Dr Salisbury,

I am sure you are aware that the World Health Organisation recommends Celvapan for the vaccination of pregnant women, not Pandremix which contains an adjuvant and could be harmful to the fetus.

My wife is 15 weeks pregnant and we wish for her to be protected from the H1N1 virus.

Other countries have set aside the non-adjuvant vaccine especially for pregnant women. Can you ensure that you will do the same?

It is clear from the lengthy discussions on this forum that if you don't make Celvapan available, the majority of pregnant women will opt out of the vaccine and go unprotected and therefore risking the lives of both themselves and their unborn.

2010Dad

[pofacedandproud]

2010Dad apparently WHO have amended their advice on Pandemrix and pregnant women. But agree they should be able to get Celvapan.

[mumsrbest]

I am type 2 diabetic. Do you think I should have the swine flu vaccine. I am a grandma of 63 years.

[stuffitllllama]

Not upset Pofaced (but I still think he needs to be griddled)

[Thingiebob]

Is there any truth that it is possible for the vaccine to launch a harmful immune system response in some individuals?

As a sarcoidosis sufferer in the last trimester of pregnancy, I am uncertain as to whether I should definitely have the vaccine as I am in a 'high risk' category due to lung involvement, or if I am in more danger of having it and my immune system flaring up dangerously. None of my doctors can answer this question.

I should imagine this is a concern for all those women who have a history of autoimmune disease.