Dare i raise the question....

[CharlotteACavatica]

who has let their kids have the MMR? how do you feel about it? Ihave a 6yo a 3.5yo and a 1yo and my 1yo dd is due to have hers next week, i havent let the other two have theirs and neither shall i be letting dd, but as so many people know its 'supposed' problems im still interogated and asked why why why? i have heard that the more patients your gp gets to have the MMR the more he/she gets paid, if they get 100% they get a shed load of money but if the percentage drops below 90 they start getting charged!!!????

Socci - it depends. Some screening tests are more invaise than others. Newborn hearing screening - they place some pads in the ears and on the head. I don't think that's invaise, some parents do. Cervical cancer screening - a swab, some may find it invasive. Etc.

Anyone interested in the concept of causality should look at the 'Flying spagetti monster' website. there is a stunning graph there, that shows the link between falling numbers of Pirates and global warming

3andnomore- can I suggest you read Andy Wakefields papers yourself. Check out the patent application yourself. And read his current research. You've seriously misunderstood everything he's said.

The "vaccine" incidentally was being developed as a treatment for auitistic enterocolitis (not to compete with the MMR). AFAIK no-one actually disputes the existence of autistic enterocolitis (as first described by Andy Wakefield), although the cause is disouted.

Of course it is, but, and of course this can't be proven, ever, I think, maybe those KIds would have develloped it also if they had the measles....so...not vaccianting or vaccinating all is not the answer, the research has to lie in who should we not vacciante, and ll the rest should have to bevaccianted and then we may be getting somewhere, those that get autism because of measels won't get this, because the vacciantion rate would be to high to because of herdimmunsation, etc...yeah, perfect world that...meanwhile I will vacciante my chldren, even though of course I worry it's gonna effect them badly, bhut I still believe it's the better of the worst evil!

could someone point me in the right direction to research the link between mmr and antibiotics at birth? dd was on antibiotics from birth to six weeks of age. i'd like to make an informed choice but where do i go for independent information or do i have to wade through the arguments of both sides and then make my mind up (how? not being a scientist..?!). sorry to drag thread off in another direction. thanks.

Did read something interesting about drugs companies withdrawing from developing vaccines because they get more hassle because they're used on healthy individuals. Whereas drugs can be a bit dodgier apparently as they're used on people who are already ill. It was on a pro-vax website. I think that might be what socci is getting at.

I rather like the idea of "first do no harm".

JJ2 - the article isn't published on PubMed, i searched under the author's name here shattock

Hm...I actually have read his papers, after theat TV drama documnetary a few years back! And sorry, I also have read recent work and also have read recent work of doctors working with him...and no, I am not impressed!

Oh and lol at the flying spaghetti monster website thig....that is soooo funny! NOw I like the badscience webside...they are far more clever then I ever wil be, but make so much sense!

The major reaso they don't like them is that they don't make them much money .....and I used o work for a drugs company.

There is more money is making a drug that people have to take regularly or for a reasonable about of time, to a one off jab.

in addition tere are grater probelms with keeping the thing working....it has to be an injectable, preferably not storred in a fridge....if it is going to be used world wide that is.

And also vaccination have potentaily the greatest live saving effect in developing countries, and these can't afford them anyway.

cynical, moi?

martian, a one off given to the whole population (or near as) has to be a lot of money. surely!

As an aside to everyone on here - I think this must be the first time ever that I didn't get upset or annoyed in such a debate! I think we're all doing pretty well in keeping our cool.

Screaning tests can be very invasice, but yes it depends on the individual how they feel aboutit!
IN my last pg I foudn scans very invasice because I didn't want them!
I also found dopplerts invasice and didn't allowe those, they were made to do teh old fashioned way, pinards....mammographie is sort of invasive, so is a smear...etc...

3andmore- I think you're very confused about what Wakefield actually found! The issues are far more complicated than getting measles.

enormouschanges. Several ways that antibiotiocs may be implicated. One is that they change the gut bacteria. If you follow the GWS link I gave below you'll get to the ARU which will talk about leaky guts etc- abnormal gut bacteria may be implicated in this- abnormal gut bacteria are commonly found in autism as well. Augmentin Duo has been mentioned previously, but not in a very well designed study. So the results are probably fairly useless.

If you were seriously worried I would get a urine test done at the ARU, and/or avoid gluten and casein until you're past the critical stage of language development etc.

thanks jimjams2. will read up.

sophiable, when I worked for a drig comapnay, about 10 years ago it cost £100, 000, 000 to get a drug to market. a good friend who still works in the industtry now tells me it is now more like £1000,000,000. It costs more to test etc a vaccine. so It would cost more than that!

the world popluation is 4,000,000,000. but most contries can't afford a rehydration sachet that costs 50p to stop s child dying, let alone a vaccination

Paul Shattock is fairly cautious with any interpretations made. Read the stuff at the ARU, it doesn't make any wild claims. And nor does he when you talk to him.

Aloha's GWS had been published.

leaky gut, that is the problem with not exclusively breastfeeding too, is't it, protein, foraigh one leaking into the gut..but ooops...I am now talking a perfectly acceptable thing, dare I mention leaky gut!
IT is still the measles virus they found...anyway, there is lots of stuff on the badscience website, I'd be very interested if you could find your corner there, effectlively or would they have plenty of researched showing the errors in your ways as they tend too...and no, I am not half as intelligent as those people, lol!"

hello mb....always a pleasure to debate you (badly on my part) on these threads.

agree cristina re civilised nature.

won't last though.

Can I just point the rather low number of cases that were examined, same with wakefields measles work back then....for numbers they just can't claim to be a proper medical study!

"won't last though." It will, it will. I like how MB called you Sophiable as I also think of Sophie-Amiable

The sad fact of the matter is that for a number of conditiosn a vaccine would be a great idea....for example malaria, whilch kills millions in the developing world. firstly it is hard because if the biology. But also ther eis simply no money in it for the drugs companies. we don;t need it in the rich west, and the por countries couldn;t afford a vaccine if it was develoeped comercially.

gates is putting lots of money into this, I understand

can I also just meantion how pleased I am about the very positive and non offeding nature of this thread!
And I hope it lasts, lol!

"gates is putting lots of money into this, I understand" Yes, at LSHTM. (Where I work, incidentally, but not in malaria or any other vaccines or anything of the sort.)

3andmore I'm not debating that they found the measles virus in the CNS. I am saying that the theory is not as simple as measles = autism.

I'm fairly certain I could fight my corner on any website if I could be bothered. I have a PhD in Biology after all, I might come to different interpretations of current work, but my thesis is only that a small number of suscpetible children have been damaged. It's not wild, I'm not calling for the entire vaccination program to be shut down.

I won't go and debate my corner because living with ds1 makes it far more personal. I have enough stress in my own daily life without having to seek out people enjoying a "debate". My interest in vaccination does not come from wanting to prove someone wrong or prove myself right, it comes from wanting to giive ds2 and ds3 the best possible chance to avoid the damage that their brother has suffered. To give them the best possible chance to reach adulthood and live an independent life of their choosing.