MMR and Autism- whats your opinion...

[hellosailor]

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> seems odd that someone who is saying children

> should be vaccinated is accused of being Daily

> Mail

>

> It was the Mail that did so much to spread that

> anti Vaccine message!

it is root's assertion that people who choose not to vaccinate should not be allowed to have children that put me in mind of The Mail, oh and his casual use of the word 'retarded'. Real nice.

[root]

hellosailor Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> StraferJack Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > seems odd that someone who is saying children

> > should be vaccinated is accused of being Daily

> > Mail

> >

> > It was the Mail that did so much to spread that

> > anti Vaccine message!

>

> it is root's assertion that people who choose not

> to vaccinate should not be allowed to have

> children that put me in mind of The Mail, oh and

> his casual use of the word 'retarded'. Real nice.

Never said I'm a pleasant person. I do have a strong social conscience though and recognise facts when I see them and realise the importance of vaccinating my kids and the avoidable risks I am exposing others in not doing so.

[root]

BeccaL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Also astounded that people are debating this -

> it's so selfish from a population/community health

> perspective not to vaccinate your children, in my

> opinion. However, just wanted to point out that

> "Dr" Tim O?Shea (mentioned above) is NOT an actual

> doctor, he's a doctor of chiropractic in the US,

> which means he has no medical qualifications at

> all. You should take that into account when

> reading his website...

That is hilarious!!!! I clicked on the site and the first thing that caught my eye was a link to 'supplements', totally unproven for any efficacy against anything but very bold claims:

http://www.immunitionltd.com/products.html#Cardiovascular

What Expel.

Why Safe, gentle and effective for all ages and colon conditions. Once the colon is cleansed, get ready for a whole new lifestyle

What Oral Chelation

Why Cleansing arteries, control high blood pressure, cholesterol levels, fatigue, memory loss, mercury/aluminum detox, anti-aging, autism

And finally ... you can order all the woo (the above 2 and 5 other bottles of crazy) for just $365.00 for a month's supply for 1 person!!!

[StraferJack]

"it is root's assertion that people who choose not to vaccinate should not be allowed to have children that put me in mind of The Mail, "

Maybe - as he/she admits, they never claimed to be a nice person but whilst I wouldn't go as far as THAT, the wider implications of people not vaccinating are deeply troubling

In a world full of difficult decisions, vaccinations against such powerful diseases shouldn't be a difficult decision for anyone. As many have said, it's not just a personal decision it's a decision that affects the wider group.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/09/13/2617061/measles-outbreak-vaccine-beliefs/

Healthy scepticism is a useful tool to have, but the vague, woo-heavy nonsense being linked to as proof of the "dangers of MMR jabs" is embarrasing

[hellosailor]

There is a middle ground too, tho it's expensive unfortunately and therefore I understand not a choice everyone could make, but if you want your child vaccinated but don't want the MMR, you can pay privately for separate jabs, which is what we did. We did not want the MMR (nothing to do with Wakefield, I have never read his claims even) but we did want her vaccinated. Will do the same for our second when the time comes. Not cheap but another option out there should people wish to take it.

[StraferJack]

that is an option but why would you take it?

What is it about the MMR jab that would make you consider spending hard cash?

[root]

hellosailor Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is a middle ground too, tho it's expensive

> unfortunately and therefore I understand not a

> choice everyone could make, but if you want your

> child vaccinated but don't want the MMR, you can

> pay privately for separate jabs, which is what we

> did. We did not want the MMR (nothing to do with

> Wakefield, I have never read his claims even) but

> we did want her vaccinated. Will do the same for

> our second when the time comes. Not cheap but

> another option out there should people wish to

> take it.

The overwhelming majority of those who opposed the MMR jab are plan anti-vaxxers so no vaccination protocol would have been acceptable to them.

hellosailor, I am a bit perplexed though. What prompted you to chose separate shots instead of the combined MMR?

There is an inherent risk to any shot. So the idea is to provide the most benefits to the individual, society at large, all at the minimum risk to the individual. That would include chances of things going wrong (such as seizures), cost (less visits to practice), missed shots, etc.

Not that long ago there was a proposal to merge MMR with Varicella but that was dropped because the risks of things going wrong with MMRV were considered unaceptable compared to MMR.

[Yuuna]

I actually was thinking of another link I had that I didn't post when I wrote about the doctor. The supplements are to help improve people's poor diets along with eating better... Anyway, his articles are sound and well referenced.

It's interesting that no one challenged the figures on vaccinated people still getting illnesses they were vaccinated for... The only decision that affects the wider group is made by the parents of vaccinated children; it's their children likely to pass on the diseases to non vaccinated children. I am indeed worried by this. There is a great under reportage of those adversely affected by vaccinations so the true number is not known. It is not selfish to not want your child injected with toxins not proven to strengthen their immunity. Anyone can say 'they shouldn't have children'. The truth will be plain to see for all one day.

My niece has had vaccinations and had adverse reactions to them before. Vaccinations are essentially drugs; of which she has a history of bad reactions to. Her doctors refused to record this until we threatened to complain. Our belief is that she ought never to have been given the 'swine' flu vaccination. People's faith in vaccinations is largely based on lies and cover ups they are fed and duped into believing. How many people actually read the statistics of illness among vaccinated populations? It's higher than it should be if what we've been told is supposed to be true. The diseases around now are the man made mutated versions, not the old versions that were virtually eradicated before vaccinations were so widespread.

Yes, people die in Africa, not just 'sub Saharan' Africa, of diseases, have you been there? Have you seen the conditions people live in? So you think vaccinations will be their saviour? How about plentiful food and clean water? How about freedon from war, torture and rape? Who are we to trivialise their lives and their suffering? People die of starvation. Shall we vaccinate them too? It's easy for us to say how bad it is in Africa yet not look at the situation in our own country. Are we the healthiest country in Europe? No more obesity, heart disease or cancer, is that right? I believe penicillin was a true success story, until we used and abused antibiotics and created 'superbugs' go figure! Yay science!!

Roots, obviously your intention isn't to convince me of vaccinations being good. The government sly threats are no 'conspiracy theories' they have a nice history of underhand behaviour. Protip: insulting and offending people won't get them to respect you or anything you say. Also, I'm not a Christian. I follow the Ryukyu traditional religion (somewhat similar to Shinto). I'm not sure we have doctrine that reads the Earth is 6000 years old or about these 'evolutionary theories' you write of, awkward... (Your trolling is half amusing, sometimes...) Anyway, you're just writing bland statements that you'd not say in person unless you knew how to run, fast.

I will acknowledge that this thread has turned more into a discussion about vaccinations in general as opposed to a MMR and autism link thread. I think that there is enough compelling evidence, worldwide that there is a link, however big or small, however MMR is not the only dangerous vaccination. Wakefield originally stated that the triple vaccination was dangerous and children should be given them singularly. The government's response? About six months later, following public demand for the single vaccines, they withdrew it! I won't post a link; do the research yourself. Find out for yourself how unscrupulous, deceitful and immoral the government is. Learn how they shipped a dangerous vaccination over to Brazil, after it had been recalled in the UK over safety concerns, and children got sick! Let's not forget that GlaxoSmithKline were given indemnity by the UK government so charges may not be brought against them... Oh yes, I have perfect trust in vaccinations the government 'recommends' for my children.

The British government: it's profits before people.

I am confident that I am not adversely affecting children around me by not having my children vaccinated. I have read enough, offline (as is in library books, reports obtained under freedom of information acts etc.) as well as online (both from laypeople and medical professionals) and talked to a whole host of individuals. I know, full well, without a shadow of a doubt, I made the right, ethical and moral choice. I would never knowingly limit my children's immune systems and neither would the rest of you; if you only knew.

[StraferJack]

it's been a while since I read a genuinely bonkers post -

[hellosailor]

>

>

> Not that long ago there was a proposal to merge

> MMR with Varicella but that was dropped because

> the risks of things going wrong with MMRV were

> considered unaceptable compared to MMR.

Where did you find that information root? Can you please provide a link? Why was the risk deemed greater out of interest?

[hellosailor]

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> that is an option but why would you take it?

>

> What is it about the MMR jab that would make you

> consider spending hard cash?

Forgot to answer your question SJ, My daughter had a serious reaction to one of the infant jabs and it was very scary, it was deemed more likely to have happened because it had been a mutlti jab, so we didn't want to take the chance of the same thing happening again. hence went for separate jabs next time.

[StraferJack]

ouch - sorry to hear that

I have found that seeing my little ones suffer any illness far more upsetting than I would have ever thought possible - so i do understand parental caution esp if you have already tried something which didn't work out

[Yuuna]

Easy to label it 'bonkers' than to consider its content. That's how people are these days or I suppose how they've always been; ridiculing what they cannot or willnot understand. Just for the record; I am very openminded. My disagreeing with your opinion does not render me closedminded. Only one with a narrow mind would think that. I had doubts previously and I considered both sides, then I made my decision. Of course, I don't have to justify anything to any of you. Anyway, for a so called bonkers post it had better punctuation than your one liner.

[root]

hellosailor Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> StraferJack Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > that is an option but why would you take it?

> >

> > What is it about the MMR jab that would make

> you

> > consider spending hard cash?

>

> Forgot to answer your question SJ, My daughter had

> a serious reaction to one of the infant jabs and

> it was very scary, it was deemed more likely to

> have happened because it had been a mutlti jab, so

> we didn't want to take the chance of the same

> thing happening again. hence went for separate

> jabs next time.

Seems I was actually wrong and there's only a small elevated risk:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/mmrv/studyfeature.html

Sorry to hear about your daughter. Who advised you on seeking separate jabs and do you recall the explanation given?

[StraferJack]

I have considered

I do understand (despite your accusation)

And look! Pedantic nit-pickery to boot!

all this from the person who wrote: "Protip: insulting and offending people won't get them to respect you or anything you say. "

[hellosailor]

>

>

> Sorry to hear about your daughter. Who advised

> you on seeking separate jabs and do you recall the

> explanation given?

The GP we saw as a follow up advised us to do separate jabs for MMR, I don't remember her exact explanation but it was to do with the chances of bad reactions being greater with multi jabs than single jabs apparently. Her son had also been hospitalised after the MMR so she knew first hand how scary a bad reaction could be.

The nurse at the surgery who I spoke to afterwards said she didn't feel right about advising me what to do about vaccinations in the future as she didn't have either of her children vaccinated due to the risks?not very reassuring from the very person administering the jabs..

[david_carnell]

Yunna wrote:

"Vaccinations are essentially drugs..."

What does this even mean?

"...of which she has a history of bad reactions to..."

Your niece reacts badly to all drugs? All medicines? Only heroin and crack?

"Yes, people die in Africa, not just 'sub Saharan' Africa, of diseases, have you been there? Have you seen the conditions people live in? So you think vaccinations will be their saviour? How about plentiful food and clean water? How about freedon from war, torture and rape?"

Errr....so you think if you give people clean water and stop war they won't get measles??? Riiiight. And not only that, but immunisation has the potential to boost a country's growth. Immunisation makes economic sense. Many analyses weighing the costs versus the benefits of vaccination have shown positive economic impact. What's more, the infrastructure, management and acceptability of immunisation programmes offer a platform to deliver other integrated health and nutrition interventions.

"Who are we to trivialise their lives and their suffering? People die of starvation. Shall we vaccinate them too?"

Are you actually this dim or just pretending for effect. If anyone is trivialising the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children, it's you with your non-sequiturs and straw men.

"It's easy for us to say how bad it is in Africa yet not look at the situation in our own country. Are we the healthiest country in Europe? No more obesity, heart disease or cancer, is that right? I believe penicillin was a true success story, until we used and abused antibiotics and created 'superbugs' go figure! Yay science!!"

I'm not even sure which of your many idiotic points I want to fisk here. I think I'll just leave it in bold for others to read.

[root]

hellosailor Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> >

> >

> > Sorry to hear about your daughter. Who advised

> > you on seeking separate jabs and do you recall

> the

> > explanation given?

>

> The GP we saw as a follow up advised us to do

> separate jabs for MMR, I don't remember her exact

> explanation but it was to do with the chances of

> bad reactions being greater with multi jabs than

> single jabs apparently. Her son had also been

> hospitalised after the MMR so she knew first hand

> how scary a bad reaction could be.

That is weird. It's the first time I've heard of such a recommencation. I would have imagined that if there had been a specific ingredient to which your daughter may have reacted badly that the GP would have checked thoroughly against the other shots too. I tried to see what the NHS had to say but it seems very close to nothing. The following links makes some good reading:

http://www.babycentre.co.uk/x554800/should-i-give-my-baby-the-mmr-or-have-the-vaccinations-done-separately

(Incidentally I am an computer engineer with a background and interest in science not a clinician)

> The nurse at the surgery who I spoke to afterwards

> said she didn't feel right about advising me what

> to do about vaccinations in the future as she

> didn't have either of her children vaccinated due

> to the risks?not very reassuring from the very

> person administering the jabs..

That is completely messed up. Was this on the NHS?

My experience with the NHS has been a postcode lottery. When I lived in Newham I had a very bad breakdown in health and all the GP surgery did was screw me over until they eventually struck me off their register when I threatened to sue them after a succession of very big mess ups that could have had very dire consequences (for me). They messed up test results giving me all clear when in fact they were not, and even left front desk idiots to phone me to tell me that other results were all clear and that I do not need to come to the practice (because an X-ray showed no broken bones which is pretty much to be expected when all the damage is in soft tissue).

Then I moved to Tower Hamlets and registered with a new GP. What a difference!! Over a period of two years and approximately an average of 10 GP/Hospital/Physio/etc a month I had my health back under control.

[root]

Yuuna Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> I will acknowledge that this thread has turned

> more into a discussion about vaccinations in

> general as opposed to a MMR and autism link

> thread. I think that there is enough compelling

> evidence, worldwide that there is a link, however

> big or small, ....

No Yuuna, that is what you're not getting. There is *no* link!!

[hellosailor]

root Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> hellosailor Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > >

> > >

> > > Sorry to hear about your daughter. Who

> advised

> > > you on seeking separate jabs and do you

> recall

> > the

> > > explanation given?

> >

> > The GP we saw as a follow up advised us to do

> > separate jabs for MMR, I don't remember her

> exact

> > explanation but it was to do with the chances

> of

> > bad reactions being greater with multi jabs

> than

> > single jabs apparently. Her son had also been

> > hospitalised after the MMR so she knew first

> hand

> > how scary a bad reaction could be.

>

> That is weird. It's the first time I've heard of

> such a recommencation. I would have imagined that

> if there had been a specific ingredient to which

> your daughter may have reacted badly that the GP

> would have checked thoroughly against the other

> shots too. I tried to see what the NHS had to say

> but it seems very close to nothing. The following

> links makes some good reading:

No, they did not suggest it was likely that it was a particular ingredient. Yes, my NHS GP did recommend we do separate jabs in the future if we could afford it, the reason being a multi jab was apparently more likely to cause an adverse reaction. The other option we were offered was to go ahead with the MMR and have it administered in hospital, so my daughter could spend the day on a ward in hospital to monitor her, so they could treat her immediately if the same thing happened again. Out of interest would you have done this?

> http://www.babycentre.co.uk/x554800/should-i-give-

> my-baby-the-mmr-or-have-the-vaccinations-done-sepa

> rately

>

> (Incidentally I am an computer engineer with a

> background and interest in science not a

> clinician)

>

> I didn't for one moment think you were a clinician.

> > The nurse at the surgery who I spoke to

> afterwards

> > said she didn't feel right about advising me

> what

> > to do about vaccinations in the future as she

> > didn't have either of her children vaccinated

> due

> > to the risks?not very reassuring from the very

> > person administering the jabs..

>

> That is completely messed up. Was this on the

> NHS?

Is it messed up? Should she have lied to me then? She gave me her honest opinion, presumably based on being a nurse at a GP practise who spent her days vaccinating children, an opinion, with respect, that is of more interest to me than that of a computer engineer. Yes she was NHS.

>

> My experience with the NHS has been a postcode

> lottery. When I lived in Newham I had a very bad

> breakdown in health and all the GP surgery did was

> screw me over until they eventually struck me off

> their register when I threatened to sue them after

> a succession of very big mess ups that could have

> had very dire consequences (for me). They messed

> up test results giving me all clear when in fact

> they were not, and even left front desk idiots to

> phone me to tell me that other results were all

> clear and that I do not need to come to the

> practice (because an X-ray showed no broken bones

> which is pretty much to be expected when all the

> damage is in soft tissue).

>

> Then I moved to Tower Hamlets and registered with

> a new GP. What a difference!! Over a period of

> two years and approximately an average of 10

> GP/Hospital/Physio/etc a month I had my health

> back under control.

[etta166]

MMRV is common in other countries. The US and Canada spring to mind.

The component that people worry about the the Varicella vaccine. On a population level, it is thought that it could increase the risk of older people getting shingles because it will prevent the younger population getting chickenpox. Once the chickenpox virus is not in circulation, us older people who had chickenpox as children stop being exposed to the chickenpox virus. Our level of immunity drops, which makes shingles more likely. Although I haven't read any papers that demonstrate this increase in shingles in areas that use the MMRV.

There might be other concerns. I've not looked into it deeply, so any further info would be interesting for me too.

As for single vaccines, the main reason that this isn't a great idea is because there are no longer any approved suppliers of the mumps vaccine in the UK. Even if you can find somewhere that provides it, you have no reassurance that the vaccine meets the efficacy and safety standars required for a UK licence. MMR is now the indicated vaccine if you need any one of the components (e.g. woman of childbearing age with no rubella immunity).

[root]

hellosailor Wrote:

> following

> > links makes some good reading:

>

> No, they did not suggest it was likely that it was

> a particular ingredient. Yes, my NHS GP did

> recommend we do separate jabs in the future if we

> could afford it, the reason being a multi jab was

> apparently more likely to cause an adverse

> reaction. The other option we were offered was to

> go ahead with the MMR and have it administered in

> hospital, so my daughter could spend the day on a

> ward in hospital to monitor her, so they could

> treat her immediately if the same thing happened

> again. Out of interest would you have done this?

>

> >

That is double messed up.

The first thing I do whenever a GP recommends anything is check is go to the NHS website and read up on what the GP said. If there is anything that raises any alarm bells I would go back to the GP and ask him to justify his advice. What was it based on? Can he cite any research studies? Is it from personal experience? Research studies usually list any associations or interests. What were this GP's? Was he acting impartially and objectively?

In this case the NHS website clearly states that on the NHS individual vaccines are not available and cites some reasons.

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccinations/Pages/mmr-vaccine.aspx

If put in your position multiple alarm bells would have gone off. For starters the decision put in your hands is very emotionally charged. He basically told you to either pay money or leave your daughter in the hospital in case she reacts badly. No parent would bear leave his daughter in hospital in case she has a bad reaction when the problem can be made to go away by throwing some money at it.

I really suggest going back to this GP and ask him to substantiate his advice. If he just made it up to try to swindle you out of some money he could have potentially exposed your daughter to even higher risks!!!

> >

> > That is completely messed up. Was this on the

> > NHS?

>

> Is it messed up? Should she have lied to me then?

> She gave me her honest opinion, presumably based

> on being a nurse at a GP practise who spent her

> days vaccinating children, an opinion, with

> respect, that is of more interest to me than that

> of a computer engineer. Yes she was NHS.

And that's why it is triple messed up. She was in a position of expert authority and because of that position you gave more weight to that of a computer engineer. What does this nurse know that over-rides the guidelines of the medical body and the established gold practices? Has her judgement been clouded by some incident that is not representative? Did she add 1 and 1 together and came up with 10? That is one of the reasons research studies are carried out and the numbers crunched. To get rid of the gut feelings and links and causality established.

Frankly? You should have filed a complaint and she should be struck off.

[hellosailor]

Root, I'm beginning to think you might be a troll...

Firstly I fail to see how my GP was trying to swindle me out of money? In fact it's my understanding that GPs get paid per jab so she was in fact 'swindling' herself out of money by recommending we have separate jabs (and therefore go privately).

Secondly, I'm confused, you think a nurse should be struck off for a.) not vaccinating her children or b.) admitting to me that she has not rather than lying.

You're quite the charmer.

[TE44]

http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/syrian-refugees-create-huge-new-market-for-out-dated-live-polio-vaccine-over-20-million-children-to-be-vaccinated/

d carnell, I'm sure people in third world countries can make up there own minds about the effects of vaccines. These countries have been used in studies for years, without safety being put first.

India to get polio free status amid rise in acute flaccid paralysis

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/XS6vPor5jFX3vKkaE7Ri6H/India-to-get-poliofree-status-amid-rise-in-acute-flaccid-pa.html

This link explains non polio acute flaccid paralysis.

[TE44]

http://m.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/polio-free-does-not-mean-paralysis-free/article4266043.ece/?maneref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.timesofisrael.com%2Fpolio-vaccine-debate-hits-the-high-court%2F

oops heres the link explaining non polio acute flaccid paralysis.