Big Rise in measles - thanks anti-vaccination activists

[Mo 10]

The MMR vaccine was introduced for a very good reason which is that so many parents just couldn't be bothered to make all the trips to the doctor necessary.

 

How does your 'easy solution' deal with this rather significant problem?

 

Quite simply, if parents are postponing having their children vaccinated because they fear MMR then give them the vaccines singly and I'm quite sure they will take them up.

 

 

If you assume that the decision to introduce MMR was one based purely on parents who 'couldn't be bothered to make all the trips to the doctor' then you are ignoring a very big factor, one of £££££££££££££££££££££££££££

[plekhanov 10]

simply don`t assume EVERY parent who hasnt had a child immunised has made that choice due to media hype over MMR.

Who said anything of the sort?

 

having to give emergency aid to one of mine, for a cause/ effect thats well known and presents a lot higher than your figures quoted at the start of the thread was quite enough of a reason to not take the risk again.

Specifically which figures in the article I quoted are you saying are wrong, what are your more accurate figures and what is their source?

 

now if you really did care, go and demand a list of contra indications - it is literally a list of side effects, BTW

No it isn't. As it's name would suggest 'contraindications' are things about a patient which suggest or 'indicate' that are particular medicine or procedure may be unwise in their individual case.

 

For reasons everybody apart from you seems to be able to understand the contraindications for MMR are of no relevance to parents refusing to get their kids vaccinated due to baseless media scare stories about MMR supposedly causing autism. Doctors are hardly likely to complain about kids who shouldn't be given the vaccine for valid medical reasons not taking it now are they?

Edited February 7, 2009 by plekhanov
fix typo

[plekhanov 10]

Quite simply, if parents are postponing having their children vaccinated because they fear MMR then give them the vaccines singly and I'm quite sure they will take them up.

What parents actually did in the past would suggest otherwise.

 

If you assume that the decision to introduce MMR was one based purely on parents who 'couldn't be bothered to make all the trips to the doctor' then you are ignoring a very big factor, one of £££££££££££££££££££££££££££

Well of course money was a factor and quite rightly so. The NHS has finite resources and as such has a responsibility to expend those it gets as responsibly as possible.

 

MMR had a number of major benefits over single vaccines due to it requiring fewer trips to the doctor & therefore less of our medical professionals costly time.

1. An increased proportion of kids getting their full course of vaccines.

2. Reduced cost of the vaccination program freeing up resources for other less essential treatments.

[saxondale 10]

 

For reasons everybody apart from you seems to be able to understand the contraindications for MMR are of no relevance to parents refusing to get their kids vaccinated due to baseless media scare stories about MMR supposedly causing autism.

 

 

 

 

your either bored and after an argument, can`t actually read or are just plain stupid .............. read my whole posts in one go then see if you can work out why your whole thread is based on making wrong assumptions (thats guesses to you) in the meantime i`m going to do my best to ignore you.

 

if whoever it is thats feeding you the prop. your posting wants to get involved then I may be back to argue the point with someone worthy.

[plekhanov 10]

your either bored and after an argument,

The only guy spoiling for an argument in this thread is quite obviously you, the rest of it has gone off pretty cordially.

 

can`t actually read or are just plain stupid

Says the guy who didn't realise this thread is about parents being scared off the mmr jab due to the bogus scare about autism.

 

.............. read my whole posts in one go then see if you can work out why your whole thread is based on making wrong assumptions (thats guesses to you) in the meantime i`m going to do my best to ignore you.

Whilst you're ignoring me perhaps for the benefit of the other posters you could substantiate your lurid allegations about the NHS putting out false stats about MMR, healthcare professionals lying to you... You've made a series of dubious assertions in this thread and conspicuously attempted to avoid substantiating them. Until you do so how do you expect anybody to take anything you say seriously.

 

if whoever it is thats feeding you the prop.

Yes that's right I'm part of a sinister campaign spread "prop." I certainly didn't read that article on the BBC News website and then post it here as I know there have been previous MMR discussions here.

 

your posting wants to get involved then I may be back to argue the point with someone worthy.

Talk about delusions of adequacy. You're by far the least 'worthy' contributor to this thread so far, the rest have at the very least responded to what people actually said and been coherent.

[jeremyjh1 10]

Well I hope all those anti-vaccination activists and the parents who fell for their scaremongering are once again happy with themselves.

 

Their fear of a theoretical risk which almost certainly doesn't even exist has exposed their and all other children to a real danger that unquestionably does exist.

 

I am one of those 'irresponsible' parents and I take serious umbrage at being branded as such.

 

I have a 13 year old son who has autistic spectrum disorder and his condition came to light AFTER having been given the triple vaccine.

 

I have two other children and I have not given them the triple vaccine nor have I gone private - for political and ethical reasons I confess.

 

I have sent letters and emails to Liam Donaldson and other learned people regarding this subject, but each time the response has been the same - I am an being irresponsible with the health and well being of my children.

 

I do not agree and I will spell it out.

 

I do not consider the vaccines for measles, mumps and rhubella [sp?] to be dangerous, I feel that the triple vaccine is not fully vindicated and there are unanswered questions concerning is effects.

 

There are too many cases of autism that occur around the time when the triple vaccine is administered that fuel my concern.

 

The fact that nothing has been proven does not mean there is no link - it means that none has been found. And is there any chance of one being found?

 

No! Absolutely not. The doctor in Sunderland (I forget his name) posted some findings that suggest the possibility of a link and look what happened to him!! Do you think any other doctor will either consider looking in to possible links to the triplle MMR and autisim?

 

No, unless they want to see their career be destroyed.

 

And, do you think any doctor would get any funding for such research?

 

No - the govt say there's no link, so that's it.

 

There is no link.

 

Imagine if, back in the 15th century, the govt of GB or Spain or Portugal had said 'look, there is no land beyond the Atlantic - it's never been found, so it doesn't exist'.

 

America would never have been discovered!!!

 

The fact that no link has been established does NOT mean there IS no link, it just means there that no link has been established.

 

Back to my situation - my eldest son has autism - life is not 'simple', we are faced with many challanges and unusual situations. But, to my wife and I (and our other chidren) this is normal to us.

 

But, given the fear that the triple MMR might have prompted or promoted our eldests condition and knowing how that affects us, but more importantly him, to then take up the potential loaded gun and point it at the head of our second and third born and pull the trigger, fingers crossed, that they would not endure the same, well, sorry, my children are far, far to precious to me for that.

 

As someone else said, and I advocate the same, as a responsible parent, allow me, on the NHS, to have single dose vaccines and I will be there, dilligently and on time.

 

Deny me that option for a service I pay towards with my taxes, then I am faced with two options:

 

Potentially expose my children to 'getting' autism (a condition with no cure) or exposing my children to measles, mups and rhubella (for which there are treatments and the effects are not always life-threatening nor damaging).

 

Now, put it like that, who is being irresponsible?

[jeremyjh1 10]

What parents actually did in the past would suggest otherwise.

 

 

Well of course money was a factor and quite rightly so. The NHS has finite resources and as such has a responsibility to expend those it gets as responsibly as possible.

 

MMR had a number of major benefits over single vaccines due to it requiring fewer trips to the doctor & therefore less of our medical professionals costly time.

1. An increased proportion of kids getting their full course of vaccines.

2. Reduced cost of the vaccination program freeing up resources for other less essential treatments.

 

If the govt felt the lack of vaccination was a significant threat to the health of the next generation, then you can be sure they would make the funds available.

 

It's all about 'bean-counting' - how many potential cases of autisim/measles/mumps/rhubella may occur if triple vaccine not taken up or if triple vaccine taken up an autism the outcome (in a percentage of the population)?

 

The will have done the math and computed the outcomes and determined that, should there be a lack of take up, this is an acceptable 'risk', though they will spend funds advertising and promoting the need to take up.

 

It would be interesting to see to cost of adevrtising and promoting the take up verses the cost of offering the single dose vaccine.

 

But, don't be fooled, it is purely and simply down to cost and nothing else.

 

The health and welfare of the people of this nation are at the very least second on the list of priorities, behind cost.

[Phanerothyme 12]

I do not consider the vaccines for measles, mumps and rhubella [sp?] to be dangerous, I feel that the triple vaccine is not fully vindicated and there are unanswered questions concerning is effects.

Don't worry about Plek branding everyone as morons - depending on which thread he's posting, basically if you're not plek, you're a moron.

 

But what unanswered questions are there about the effects of the triple vaccine?

 

There are too many cases of autism that occur around the time when the triple vaccine is administered that fuel my concern.

One case is one too many, but isn't the triple vaccine given around the time that autism is diagnosed if present?

The fact that nothing has been proven does not mean there is no link - it means that none has been found. And is there any chance of one being found?

What has been proven is that the Doctor agitating against the MMR also had a financial interest in single vaccine replacements and that his is the only study ("Fatally flawed" according to the Lancet) that suggests a link (even though the original paper was at pains to point out that no causal link was discovered or implied). Hundreds of other live and records based studies haven't even found the correlation, let alone any evidence of direct cause and effect.

 

No! Absolutely not. The doctor in Sunderland (I forget his name) posted some findings that suggest the possibility of a link and look what happened to him!! Do you think any other doctor will either consider looking in to possible links to the triplle MMR and autisim?

Lots and lots of doctors and pathologists have investigated whether there is a statistical link and whether there is any cause and effect. Every single study has clearly concluded that there is no statistical link and there is no cause and effect.

No, unless they want to see their career be destroyed.

 

And, do you think any doctor would get any funding for such research?

Yes, they have done. Repeatedly, worldwide.

No - the govt say there's no link, so that's it.

No, you're wrong. The government has accepted the clear findings of many many studies which demonstrate no link, no causality

The fact that no link has been established does NOT mean there IS no link, it just means there that no link has been established.

It's not that no link has been established - It has been established that there is no link.

Back to my situation - my eldest son has autism - life is not 'simple', we are faced with many challanges and unusual situations. But, to my wife and I (and our other chidren) this is normal to us.

 

But, given the fear that the triple MMR might have prompted or promoted our eldests condition and knowing how that affects us, but more importantly him, to then take up the potential loaded gun and point it at the head of our second and third born and pull the trigger, fingers crossed, that they would not endure the same, well, sorry, my children are far, far to precious to me for that.

It is fear that you made your decision upon, not knowledge.

As someone else said, and I advocate the same, as a responsible parent, allow me, on the NHS, to have single dose vaccines and I will be there, dilligently and on time.

 

Undoubtably, but thousands wouldn't. And then your children may get infected anyway, in spite of vaccinations, as herd immmunity is compromised.

Deny me that option for a service I pay towards with my taxes, then I am faced with two options:

 

Potentially expose my children to 'getting' autism (a condition with no cure) or exposing my children to measles, mups and rhubella (for which there are treatments and the effects are not always life-threatening nor damaging).

 

Now, put it like that, who is being irresponsible?

 

Well, giving your child any injection at all is potentially exposing them to a lot more than autism by penetrating the sealed circulatory system.

 

The probability of your child contracting a fatal bloodborne diseases from any kind of injection, or MRSA/C.Diff from a hospital or surgery, is much higher than your child acquiring autism from the MMR. But even that risk is low enough for most parents not to mind. Are they being irresponsible too?

[plekhanov 10]

I am one of those 'irresponsible' parents and I take serious umbrage at being branded as such.

 

I have a 13 year old son who has autistic spectrum disorder and his condition came to light AFTER having been given the triple vaccine.

At what age is the first dose of MMR given? At what age do the symptoms of Autism generally become evident?

 

Your child was diagnosed with a distressing condition so you naturally looked back to find the last notably unusual event in their life you could think of and concluded that that event caused the autism. This doesn't necessarily mean it's the case though, you are confusing correlation with causation. It's exactly this kind of mistake that medical research with control groups and so forth is designed to avoid.

 

Because of the age at which the MMR vaccine is given and the age at which autism becomes evident it is only to be expected that such conditions "come to light AFTER having been given the triple vaccine" as before they are given the MMR jab children aren't sufficiently developed to be diagnosed as being within the Autistic spectrum.

 

I have two other children and I have not given them the triple vaccine nor have I gone private - for political and ethical reasons I confess.

It's an odd form of ethics which leads you to unnecessarily risk your and other children's health and even their lives. Even if you fall for the scare stories at least try and get them vaccinated privately.

 

I have sent letters and emails to Liam Donaldson and other learned people regarding this subject, but each time the response has been the same - I am an being irresponsible with the health and well being of my children.

 

I do not agree and I will spell it out.

 

I do not consider the vaccines for measles, mumps and rhubella [sp?] to be dangerous, I feel that the triple vaccine is not fully vindicated and there are unanswered questions concerning is effects.

Unanswered to what standard of proof?

 

There are too many cases of autism that occur around the time when the triple vaccine is administered that fuel my concern.

Again you are confusing correlation with causation. Autism is nearly always diagnosed within a relatively short time period after the MMR jab is typically given regardless of whether or not the children in question have received the jab, as that is the age at which children are sufficiently developed for autism to become evident.

 

The fact that nothing has been proven does not mean there is no link - it means that none has been found. And is there any chance of one being found?

 

No! Absolutely not. The doctor in Sunderland (I forget his name) posted some findings that suggest the possibility of a link and look what happened to him!! Do you think any other doctor will either consider looking in to possible links to the triplle MMR and autisim?

 

No, unless they want to see their career be destroyed.

 

And, do you think any doctor would get any funding for such research?

 

No - the govt say there's no link, so that's it.

You are simply wrong, in no small part thanks to the hysteria promoted by Wakefield's flawed research a great many doctors have received a great deal of funding to specifically search for a link between MMR and autism and found that no such causative link exists. iirc one such study even found that in the USA where they've been using the MMR vaccine for longer than us there was a slight negative correlation, I don't think it was statistically significant though.

 

There is no link.

 

Imagine if, back in the 15th century, the govt of GB or Spain or Portugal had said 'look, there is no land beyond the Atlantic - it's never been found, so it doesn't exist'.

 

America would never have been discovered!!!

If no further research on this issue had been done you might almost have a point. However a huge amount of research has been done, just because you refuse to acknowledge it that doesn't magically mean it doesn't exist.

 

The fact that no link has been established does NOT mean there IS no link, it just means there that no link has been established.

When repeated large scale studies across many nations have found no link it is very strong evidence that there is no link. To deny this is to deny the validity of a great deal of the research which our health care system (which has helped deliver unprecedented live expectancy to us) is based upon.

 

Back to my situation - my eldest son has autism - life is not 'simple', we are faced with many challanges and unusual situations. But, to my wife and I (and our other chidren) this is normal to us.

 

But, given the fear that the triple MMR might have prompted or promoted our eldests condition and knowing how that affects us, but more importantly him, to then take up the potential loaded gun and point it at the head of our second and third born and pull the trigger, fingers crossed, that they would not endure the same, well, sorry, my children are far, far to precious to me for that.

Touching as this appeal to emotion may be it is based upon a nothing more than you mistaking correlation with causation.

 

As someone else said, and I advocate the same, as a responsible parent, allow me, on the NHS, to have single dose vaccines and I will be there, dilligently and on time.

And what of the many thousands who won't be thus further weakening our societies herd immunity?

 

Deny me that option for a service I pay towards with my taxes, then I am faced with two options:

 

Potentially expose my children to 'getting' autism (a condition with no cure) or exposing my children to measles, mups and rhubella (for which there are treatments and the effects are not always life-threatening nor damaging).

 

Now, put it like that, who is being irresponsible?

You are, exhaustive studies carried out by professional researchers across many nations have conclusively shown that there is no link between MMR & autism.

 

As the spokeswoman for the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health is quoted as saying in the article in the OP "Overwhelming scientific evidence shows that the vaccine is safe." In contrast measles, mumps and rubella are the exact opposite of safe.

 

You are letting the fear of an imaginary risk which almost certainly doesn't even exist expose your and all other children to a real danger that unquestionably does exist, if that's not irresponsible nothing is.

[plekhanov 10]

If the govt felt the lack of vaccination was a significant threat to the health of the next generation, then you can be sure they would make the funds available.

 

It's all about 'bean-counting' - how many potential cases of autisim/measles/mumps/rhubella may occur if triple vaccine not taken up or if triple vaccine taken up an autism the outcome (in a percentage of the population)?

Once again there is zero reliable evidence that the MMR vaccine causes autism and a huge amount of evidence that it doesn't. The cost to the NHS "if triple vaccine taken up an autism the outcome" (sic) is zero, zilch, nada, nothing as the MMR vaccine doesn't cause autism.

 

The will have done the math and computed the outcomes and determined that, should there be a lack of take up, this is an acceptable 'risk', though they will spend funds advertising and promoting the need to take up.

 

It would be interesting to see to cost of adevrtising and promoting the take up verses the cost of offering the single dose vaccine.

 

But, don't be fooled, it is purely and simply down to cost and nothing else.

 

The health and welfare of the people of this nation are at the very least second on the list of priorities, behind cost.

At base the 'health and welfare of the people of this nation' is an issue of cost atleast when it comes to the provision of medical services all of which cost money.

 

Every penny that the NHS spends upon vaccination programs is a penny taken away from other programs.

 

As such your demand that the NHS spends significantly more than necessary on expensive single vaccines which in turn are very expensive to administer is a demand that the NHS deprive other patients of care.

[LibertyBell 10]

Cases have actually fallen in this area.

 

Link

 

Seems we are a bit of an anomaly.

[quisquose 10]

Today's Times:

 

MMR doctor Andrew Wakefield fixed data on autism.

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article5683671.ece

 

From the blog of PZ Myers:

 

Will this revelation matter? Not one bit. The anti-vaxers have ignored all the evidence that they are wrong so far, so one more demonstration that one of the primary promulgators of this nonsense was an outright fraud won't change a thing, I'm afraid. This is still a clear-cut case where delusions can kill.