OMG oh my god

[Jimjams]

OK you know how I've always bleated on about ds1 regressing following eczema herpeticum at 11 months, and how we felt the antibiotics were an issue. Well just read this . DS1 was prescribed augmetin duo by a consultant dermatologsit- the pharmacist questioned it when dh picked it up - as being veery strong for an 11 month old (and the packaging said not for under2's). But we gave it becasue it had been consultant prescribed.

Buggeration buggeration buggeration.

Jimjams, I am not saying giving single jabs is more dangerous. All I am saying is that Wakefield has only shaky evidence that the MMR causes autism, but even if he feels the evidence suggests it does then the mechanism by which it does is at best hypothesis. Therefore on what basis can he be sure the single vaccine is safe or even safer. It?s all hypothesis based on other studies into different things. If there is a subgroup of children with messed up immune systems who are susceptible to the MMR then how on earth can he know they would be safer with single vaccine? He can hypothesise that they would be but that is hardly a sound basis on which to completely change a vaccination schedule. Yet you ask most people who feel that the MMR is unsafe and they would say that the single vaccine is safer and this is a myth started by Wakefield.

You say more research should be carried out ? fair enough; and single vaccines should be used until then but why do you think they are safer? I can see why you think they might be safer but you don?t know. I have worked for a pharmaceutical company for 10 years and one thing we saw time and time again were results we wouldn?t expect or wouldn?t have predicted even when testing closely related drugs.

I?m sure you are right that Wakefield was moved by the parents? stories. When I heard Roy Pounder talk I asked him what actual evidence he had to show that the MMR caused autism. His answer was that if I had talked to the parents he had talked to then I would think so too. Perhaps I would, but it isn?t proof.

I agree that PCR can be a difficult method to use and that may be the reason why Chadwick didn?t find any virus in his samples. Of course the other possible explanation is that there wasn?t any.

Anyway we could could argue about his forever and my dh is getting fed up with me spending too much time reading things on the computer so I guess we will have to agree to differ. I honestly don?t have any axe to grind and my whole viewpoint is based on what I have read. No hard feelings I hope .

Haven't had time to read all the posts. Just wanted to add that my ds is autistic and has been quite clearly (although mildly) so since birth. No regression after any specific events, eg he had the MMR at 22 months. He has also never had a course of antibiotics. Just throwing that in for you Saker to show that autism has many causes and is NOT due to a/bs in his case. I agree that lots of children have had these drugs and are fine but obviously its not giong to be OK for those who may become autistic as a result of taking them. Trouble is how does one know? Also the difficulty is that if a child is prone to ear infections then that doesn't mean leading to autism itself either... and how do you treat them otherwise... is there a suitable antibiotic that would work? Or indeed any other kind of treatment that doesn't involve antibiotics? Sorry if some of these questions are already answered here.

Oh My God! OMG.
Don't know what else to say on this huge, huge thread, so many points of view etc etc...
All I know is that my dd is not having Augmentin or any more vaccinations. The theory is all very well, but would you, if you were me?!!!!

this is from Wakefield's home page . I think it shows that his research is reasonable and not off the wall. Also takes a bit of a histoorical journey.

The 7% figure I quote (for regression following MMR) comes from Paul Shattock by the way. (wakefield hasn't put a figure on it- but I know he talks to Shattock).

Eulalia- nowadays a lot of dr's don't give anything for ear infections as they supposedly clear up as rapidly as they would with antibiotics.

This is the first time I've logged on in days and the first thread I've seen. Jimjams, I don't know what to say, except so sorry, that must hurt like hurt and make you so angry, the injustice of it all........feel really upset for you.

JakB - I'm not in any way trying to criticise anyone in your position who feels like that. It's only natural you would. But that is why scientists (and the journalists who report their work) need to be so careful about the standard of their experimental design and the way they interpret the result. Once the seed of doubt has been sown it is impossible to remove it.

Eulalia, like Jimjams says I think you can avoid antibiotics for ear infections in general now. The evidence seems to be that they don't help much. Obviously antibiotics can be life-saving under certain circumstances but in day to day coughs and colds etc I think we can probably do very well without them.

Saker, don't feel at all criticised! I am saying exactly the same thing, that however small or unscientific, parents like me are bound to react to studies like this

WOW....this thread is HUGE....

I'm obviously not as well educated as most of you here BUT one thing I know for sure is that my baby changed after having his MMR and Augmentinfollowing his massive reaction to it within weeks.

There is no way I would give either of my kids anti-biotics....infact our GP very rarely prescribes them to anyone.

Just hope that one day the drug companies will hold their hands up and say that they were wrong....could be in for a long wait though, so in the meantime I'll just carry on loving my little devil...

I've only just seen this thread, it's sent a chill right through me. Jimjams, I'm so sorry, you must feel so sad and angry about it. To think that a prescription caused such damage, it's horrific.