MMR the rights and wrongs

[barry luxton]

I don't know how it works here in the UK. But are the pharmacueticals benefitting from government sponsorship of these jabs?

 

At the time our doctor told us for every child who's parents had declined the mmr jab, they got paid less by the government.

Edited May 18, 2008 by barry luxton

[Peter M]

it is of course a decision that has to be made by the parents, Doctors can't make the decision for you. however, as already pointed out on any risk assessment the risk of giving mmr is smaller than not giving the mmr. as for the single jab why should the nhs foot an increase in the bill for no good clinical reason.

[Sportsman]

Barry, please don't think that my response was a pop at you. Where there are genuine medical reasons for withholding vaccination then that would be a sensible act rather than a selfish one, and I would agree with the decision 100%

However

When the "informed" choice comes from scare headlines in the Sun then withholding vaccination based on the idea that "we don't have to worry, you never see that disease anymore because everyone else is vaccinated" is a selfish act.

If everyone took that position there would be no vaccinations and disease would run riot. Children would be dying in their tens of thousands. Luckily, the vast majority of the population take a responsible attitude.

[barry luxton]

Barry, please don't think that my response was a pop at you. Where there are genuine medical reasons for withholding vaccination then that would be a sensible act rather than a selfish one, and I would agree with the decision 100%

However

When the "informed" choice comes from scare headlines in the Sun then withholding vaccination based on the idea that "we don't have to worry, you never see that disease anymore because everyone else is vaccinated" is a selfish act.

If everyone took that position there would be no vaccinations and disease would run riot. Children would be dying in their tens of thousands. Luckily, the vast majority of the population take a responsible attitude.

 

No problem at all Sportsman if we all had the same ideas etc it would be a bit boring.

 

http://s118116599.websitehome.co.uk/

 

This is of interest to me particular page four of the individual mmr download. Obviously it is away from the governments point of view and i can't imagine that these guys would tell us a lie so it is not as straight cut as the government would want us all to believe.

[corydoras]

Barry, please don't think that my response was a pop at you. Where there are genuine medical reasons for withholding vaccination then that would be a sensible act rather than a selfish one, and I would agree with the decision 100%

However

When the "informed" choice comes from scare headlines in the Sun then withholding vaccination based on the idea that "we don't have to worry, you never see that disease anymore because everyone else is vaccinated" is a selfish act.

If everyone took that position there would be no vaccinations and disease would run riot. Children would be dying in their tens of thousands. Luckily, the vast majority of the population take a responsible attitude.

This is a big part of the problem. People read trash in the Sun/Mirror/Star/Daily Express/Daily Mail or whatever other comic for adults they subscribe to, then they beleive it.

[barry luxton]

This is a big part of the problem. People read trash in the Sun/Mirror/Star/Daily Express/Daily Mail or whatever other comic for adults they subscribe to, then they beleive it.

 

You didn't list this one, what do you recon.

 

http://s118116599.websitehome.co.uk/

 

Quote:'it is possible that a child will become immune to all three diseases with the 3 in 1 injection but this includes the risk of overburdening his or hers immune system which could lead to serious side effects.........' ?

 

 

What about Lid stating that there could also be a high rate of fails with the injection where there was an outbreak of measels when they had been injected with the mmr?

 

As opposed to the government saying that there is no problem, who do you believe?

Edited May 19, 2008 by barry luxton

[Newt]

I have found that a site called Web MD has consistently reliable information on any medical topic I've looked at and they do not seem to have any discernible bias toward or against drug companies or governments or lunatic fringe groups.

 

I just did a search for "mmr risks" on the site and found This Article discussing the whole topic. Nothing new or earth shaking but it does contain what seems to be some well documented opinions.

[Sportsman]

Because of the Wakefield study, the MMR vaccine has been subject to more scrutiny than probably any other. No-one has been able to duplicate his finding and no-one has been able to demonstrate any risk from the MMR vaccine other than a slightly raised temperature.

The risk from measles in particular however is well proven, and is responsible for tens of thousand of children's deaths in countries not lucky enough to have access to safe vaccination.

Of course parents should question every aspect of their child's medical care, but in this case we have on one side a single individual making claims and on the other dozens of reputable scientific and medical authorities saying very clearly that the claims are not substantiated.

This is not some government plot to save money, or even more laughable, a cynical ploy by GPs to make more money.

If there are medical grounds not to give the vaccine then fair enough, otherwise a proper program of vaccination could eradicate what is a real threat to children's lives.

The World Health Organisation eradicated Smallpox throughout the world by vaccination. It no longer exists (except for a couple of laboratories, but thats another story) How would it be if a few people decided, based on bad science and faulty information, that they wouldn't have the vaccine and so smallpox returned and continued to be responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, just as it once was.

Sorry, but for me the case is clear cut, the vaccine should be given, unless there is an overiding medical problem which suggests otherwise.

I probably fall just a touch short of saying it should be mandatory but that is due to my distrust of Governments in general, and this one in particular

[corydoras]

No problem at all Sportsman if we all had the same ideas etc it would be a bit boring.

 

http://s118116599.websitehome.co.uk/

 

This is of interest to me particular page four of the individual mmr download. Obviously it is away from the governments point of view and i can't imagine that these guys would tell us a lie so it is not as straight cut as the government would want us all to believe.

I just read this website and can scarcely believe what I see. Still spouting the long discredited theory that autism is caused by 'heavy metals' and offering chelation therapy as a cure. Chelation Therapy is a very painful and very dangerous procedure that should only be used for the treatment of serious heavy metal poisoning. More children in the US have died from chelation therapy given in hope that it would cure there autism than have ever been harmed by any vaccination.

 

Just so you know that I understand where you are coming from, I too am a parent, my first daughter was a hole in the heart baby and she still had ALL her jabs.

 

Louis Pasteur would be turning in his grave.

[chesters1]

Because of the Wakefield study, the MMR vaccine has been subject to more scrutiny than probably any other. No-one has been able to duplicate his finding and no-one has been able to demonstrate any risk from the MMR vaccine other than a slightly raised temperature.

The risk from measles in particular however is well proven, and is responsible for tens of thousand of children's deaths in countries not lucky enough to have access to safe vaccination.

Of course parents should question every aspect of their child's medical care, but in this case we have on one side a single individual making claims and on the other dozens of reputable scientific and medical authorities saying very clearly that the claims are not substantiated.

This is not some government plot to save money, or even more laughable, a cynical ploy by GPs to make more money.

If there are medical grounds not to give the vaccine then fair enough, otherwise a proper program of vaccination could eradicate what is a real threat to children's lives.

The World Health Organisation eradicated Smallpox throughout the world by vaccination. It no longer exists (except for a couple of laboratories, but thats another story) How would it be if a few people decided, based on bad science and faulty information, that they wouldn't have the vaccine and so smallpox returned and continued to be responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, just as it once was.

Sorry, but for me the case is clear cut, the vaccine should be given, unless there is an overiding medical problem which suggests otherwise.

I probably fall just a touch short of saying it should be mandatory but that is due to my distrust of Governments in general, and this one in particular

if its not money related why not the traditional 3 jabs ,no doupt even 3 old fashioned jabs are cheaper to buy (the patents for all of them must be long expired) than a new and no doupt expensive single dose with the patent in force (thus less choice over where it can be bought).

the government are the actual ones harming kids who's parents dont wish the triple vaccine by not giving single dose vaccine that parents trust traditionaly .

believe me money is the root of it ,it always is! kids come far down the line.

smallpox may be "eradicated" at the moment but you can bet your life natures just resting it before bringing out a new version present drugs cant touch ,cowpox with a far powerful big brother

flu kills and has killed far more than all diseases yet there's no cure and is considered nothing more than an annoying week of illness in most medical books.

 

foreigners are the biggest scourge on the planet ,stop world travel and it becomes under control .a disease that flares up does its job and retires on the back burner it doesnt get spread globally to infect those with a lesser immune system ,poxy spaniards killed 40% of the english and they were infected by foreigners themselves for christs sake don't people learn from history

get rid of all foreigners or at least stop F ing mingling with them and we can die of our own diseases thank you.

if i get a cold its from a foreigner those aldershotians have a lot to answer for ,colds and flue just dont appear you "catch" them and down the line its always from someone who has been or met someone thats been out side of the natural ten mile limit humans have ,foreigners live out side than boundary beware!!!

i'm a foreigner in our village but i let them get resistance to anything i was carrying by living on the outskirts then moving to the center after 15 years perhaps gated villages could be the future so the villagers can decide who enters? ,no point asking the gov they let any tom dick and diseases in

Edited May 20, 2008 by chesters1