MMR the rights and wrongs

[barry luxton]

Precisely why would you put your child through six injections when two would do the job at a lower risk.

It certainly would be six if it is with the nhs, they wouldn't do blood tests to see if three is enough. Equally the same with the second mmr jab, a blood test would determin if the second one was required or not.

[corydoras]

Perhaps you would look at the link in my last post and slag that one off as well wakefeild certainly dont have anything to do with that one, feel free. Are those parents who take the decision for single jabs all willfully ignorant then.

Don't take medical advice, or any other advice from someone who is trying to sell you something. I don't know what you mean by 'Wakefield certainly don't have anything to do with that one'. The website is typical of many others that spread the fear, uncertaincy and doubt about MMR that Wakefield created for their own ends.

 

Those who opt for the single jabs, despite the overwhelming evidence that MMR is safe are indeed wilfully ignorant in my opinion.

 

Every culture has different, but similarly potty beliefs about vaccinations.

 

In the US of A the culprit was not the MMR vaccine its' self, but a substance called Thimerosal. This is a preservative that is in many vaccines, but has never been used in MMR. In the last 10 years Thimerosal has been phased out of nearly all childhood vaccines in the US of A, but still the rate of autism rises.

 

In France their are nutters who think that the 'flu jab causes MS.

 

There are some misguided parents who think that giving a three-in-one vaccine will somehow 'overload' wee Johnnie's immune system. This is a lot of nonsense too. Wee Johnnie's immune system will receive a much bigger challenge crawling over the average living room carpet than he will from a three-in-one vaccination.

 

Autism can be a devastating condition for child and family. I know because I have worked with those with autism. But autism is not caused by vaccination. There are many hypotheses as to the causes but we don't really know what they are yet it, but we do know it's not vaccination.

[corydoras]

It certainly would be six if it is with the nhs, they wouldn't do blood tests to see if three is enough. Equally the same with the second mmr jab, a blood test would determin if the second one was required or not.

Three is never enough, it's not worth the risk doing without booster shots. Edited February 4, 2010 by corydoras

[The Flying Tench]

Have a look at this link. Comment if you wish.

 

http://www.babyjabs.co.uk/mmr.htm

 

Fascinating link, Barry. Clear evidence, they claim, that there is some link between the MMR and autism. As you say, not linked to Wakefield. Personally I've been unsure about it, but some of the anecdotal evidence for a link from people I know has been so strong that it has been hard to think it is all coincidence. I would need a better explanation of some of the anecdotal evidence before I would accept the MMR was in the clear. Mothers are well tuned to their babies, and when they see an immediate and dramatic change following an injection one has to take that seriously.

[Sportsman]

Sorry but the link is to a commercial company trying to sell something that is not necessary.

 

No medication is 100% free of side effects, including the single vaccinations.

Having said that, the MMR vaccination is not linked to autism and just because people with commercial interest in selling you something say "it might be, so better give us your money" doesn't mean that it ever was or is now.

 

Simples

[RobStubbs]

Fascinating link, Barry. Clear evidence, they claim, that there is some link between the MMR and autism. As you say, not linked to Wakefield. Personally I've been unsure about it, but some of the anecdotal evidence for a link from people I know has been so strong that it has been hard to think it is all coincidence. I would need a better explanation of some of the anecdotal evidence before I would accept the MMR was in the clear. Mothers are well tuned to their babies, and when they see an immediate and dramatic change following an injection one has to take that seriously.

 

With respect annecdotal evidence is simply that. It describes the one in a million case when coincidences happen. Try taking a look at how many babies have caught the disease(s) by not being vaccinated and suffered permanent disability or worse.

 

I think you have to remember that nothing is 100% safe - open any packet of medicine and read through the list of possible adverse reactions. The key is that they are rarer and therefore less problematic than the disease itself.

 

Rob.

[corydoras]

Fascinating link, Barry. Clear evidence, they claim, that there is some link between the MMR and autism. As you say, not linked to Wakefield. Personally I've been unsure about it, but some of the anecdotal evidence for a link from people I know has been so strong that it has been hard to think it is all coincidence. I would need a better explanation of some of the anecdotal evidence before I would accept the MMR was in the clear. Mothers are well tuned to their babies, and when they see an immediate and dramatic change following an injection one has to take that seriously.

No, no, and thrice no. It's not a fascinating link. It's a web site using fear uncertaintcy and doubt to sell a totally unnecessary product.

 

What clear evidence? The evidence that MMR is linked to Autism not is not 'overwhelming'. The plural of anecdotes is NOT data. Becoming a mother does not endow one with some instant mystic powers.

 

The proof that MMR does NOT cause Autism does not cause MMR is indeed overwhelming.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC554056/

[barry luxton]

Anyone wish to discount this bit:

 

The vaccine was introduced into the UK in 1988 without adequate safety testing.1 Not one of the safety trials on the MMR ‘actively’ followed up the vaccinated children for more than six weeks, and most no longer than three weeks.2 The trials would not have been able to detect either rare, or long-term, side effects of the vaccine, such as autism and bowel disease.

 

Case not proven either way then? Why would this doctor stick his neck out and state the above? Is he telling a lie? Not because of commerial interests surly?

 

Commercial or not, this company, no doubt there are more, have been jabbing kids for the last twenty years, if there was a problem do you think someone might just have sued them by now. They are offering a choice that was around many years before the mmr jab and has i would think a strong case to continue, it ain't broke, so don't fix it. The guy also states that it would be wrong to discount the parents who also claim that the mmr jab caused a problem with their kids. Anyone to say he's a crackpot? It hasn't been proved either way. Chuck your toys out of the pram if you wish. Until proof either way, this is good enough reason for the debate to continue. Much the same as any other tradesman i suppose, you have to have a bit of trust.

 

 

 

Tell me, if your first kid had the three jabs without problems, your second who has health issues that are linked with autism and had been diagnosed while this issue started, would you have made the same decision as we did? As a parent it don't take any working out, does it. Our file on our kid is about two foot thick over the years, do you think we were wrong? Simple choice for us at the time. And thank goodness we had the choice as far as i'm concerned. We took the single route, even after discussing it with our doctor in detail, he told us, it was our choice, even though he would heve been paid by the nhs for giving our kid the mmr if we had chosen

Edited February 5, 2010 by barry luxton

[chesters1]

i read somewhere the flu jab were using at the moment was "tested" on 200 polish homeless persons 10% died within a month believe what you will but the scientists who made it the companies who sell and the govs that use it dont really care so long as the income is greater than the outcome (should it be found out) if the drugs faulty ,the government dont really care anyway as it was stockpiled for the non existant bird flu epidemic that never was so are glad to get shot of the rubbish before its out of date

bacxk to the MMR as i said before the combined vaccine is purely for cost reasons nothing more ,if kids are not using it for ANY reason (real or imagined) then the jabs not being used for "safety" reasons merely monetary if you want safety you provide both types of jab

 

the govs not interested in health when it comes to the masses if they did why did they invite TB carriers into a near TB free country? now we have strains we never saw before what next new leper colonies around the country.

ever more puzzling is why the gov stopped the vaccinations with the flood gates open

Edited February 5, 2010 by chesters1

[RobStubbs]

i read somewhere the flu jab were using at the moment was "tested" on 200 polish homeless persons 10% died within a month believe what you will but the scientists who made it the companies who sell and the govs that use it dont really care so long as the income is greater than the outcome (should it be found out) if the drugs faulty ,the government dont really care anyway as it was stockpiled for the non existant bird flu epidemic that never was so are glad to get shot of the rubbish before its out of date

bacxk to the MMR as i said before the combined vaccine is purely for cost reasons nothing more ,if kids are not using it for ANY reason (real or imagined) then the jabs not being used for "safety" reasons merely monetary if you want safety you provide both types of jab

 

the govs not interested in health when it comes to the masses if they did why did they invite TB carriers into a near TB free country? now we have strains we never saw before what next new leper colonies around the country.

ever more puzzling is why the gov stopped the vaccinations with the flood gates open

 

Well if 10% of poles died then 10% of the rest of us should have died - and we didn't so what does that tell you ? Wherever you read that it was garbage. Try doing a little bit of searching on the drug trials database, the EMEA and the FDA websites and then re-evaluate the 'evidence'.

 

The vaccine is a totally different drug than what was made for bird flu - they are totally different viruses and neither vaccine protect against the other.

 

I'm not really sure why you keep referencing the government. They don't make drugs and never have, they don't even license them.

 

 

Anyone wish to discount this bit:

 

The vaccine was introduced into the UK in 1988 without adequate safety testing.1 Not one of the safety trials on the MMR ‘actively’ followed up the vaccinated children for more than six weeks, and most no longer than three weeks.2 The trials would not have been able to detect either rare, or long-term, side effects of the vaccine, such as autism and bowel disease.

 

Yes Barry, I'll comment. For a start drugs never stop being on a drug trial. Adverse events reports are taken (by law) for the entire lifecycle of a drug. So if any problems were seen then they would have been reported, and the health agencies have immediate access to all that data and that's why drugs such as Vioxx were withdrawn from the market.

 

Rob.

Edited February 5, 2010 by RobStubbs