MMR doctor Andrew Wakefield fixed data on autism.

The_Minister

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article5683671.ece
The doctor who started the scare that the MMR vaccine could cause Autism (a claim that has been pretty much debunked in a recent meta study) has been found to have rigged the data by a Sunday Times investigation.

THE doctor who sparked the scare over the safety of the MMR vaccine for children changed and misreported results in his research, creating the appearance of a possible link with autism, a Sunday Times investigation has found.

Confidential medical documents and interviews with witnesses have established that Andrew Wakefield manipulated patients’ data, which triggered fears that the MMR triple vaccine to protect against measles, mumps and rubella was linked to the condition.

The research was published in February 1998 in an article in The Lancet medical journal. It claimed that the families of eight out of 12 children attending a routine clinic at the hospital had blamed MMR for their autism, and said that problems came on within days of the jab. The team also claimed to have discovered a new inflammatory bowel disease underlying the children’s conditions.

However, our investigation, confirmed by evidence presented to the General Medical Council (GMC), reveals that: In most of the 12 cases, the children’s ailments as described in The Lancet were different from their hospital and GP records. Although the research paper claimed that problems came on within days of the jab, in only one case did medical records suggest this was true, and in many of the cases medical concerns had been raised before the children were vaccinated. Hospital pathologists, looking for inflammatory bowel disease, reported in the majority of cases that the gut was normal. This was then reviewed and the Lancet paper showed them as abnormal.

Despite involving just a dozen children, the 1998 paper’s impact was extraordinary. After its publication, rates of inoculation fell from 92% to below 80%. Populations acquire “herd immunity” from measles when more than 95% of people have been vaccinated.

Last week official figures showed that 1,348 confirmed cases of measles in England and Wales were reported last year, compared with 56 in 1998. Two children have died of the disease.

With two professors, John Walker-Smith and Simon Murch, Wakefield is defending himself against allegations of serious professional misconduct brought by the GMC. The charges relate to ethical aspects of the project, not its findings. All three men deny any misconduct.

Through his lawyers, Wakefield this weekend denied the issues raised by our investigation, but declined to comment further.

If you read the bolded section, you can see that his claims have led to many children becoming needlessly sick, some very disabled for life, and possibly a death or two.
MMR scare leads to the return of measles

There is a longer article here too, which details what happened

Robbo

Can't wait to read Ben Goldacre's thoughts on this in the Guardian this Saturday.

Quazzie

Alzheimers... Autism... are you working your way up through the diseases of the head... If so use Turd Ferguson as your case study. I hear he is sick in the head

Nehaxak

There's still no reason why single vaccines cannot be given, other than penny pinching.

We got both of our kids the single vaccinations privately for measles, mumps and rubella, forget the exact costs but they were expensive enough.
I'd gladly pay for them again if I had too in the future, I'm not taking any chances at all.
Have seen friends' kids get Autism soon after their MMR jab so regardless of all the crap going around, I've seen it myself and it's just too much of a risk to take the chance. Even if MMR is not responsible, my heart would be ripped apart if one of my kids got autism, especially soon after getting the MMR jab, so again, not worth taking the risk if you can get the jabs in single form privately.

Quackles

I have to say, even though autism has touched a couple of people in our family, I have no hesitation whatsoever in giving my kids the 3 in 1 - I don't believe for a second that the jab has anything to do with it. I believe that people see symptoms around the time of the jab because that is roughly the age you start expecting your child to interract more with you.. You expect them to start talking etc from about a year onwards. This doesn't happen, suddenly it's the fault of the immunisation.

tallaght01

Nehaxak wrote: »

There's still no reason why single vaccines cannot be given, other than penny pinching.

.

Or put another way, they're an unneccesary expense.

There is zero evidence that MMR causes autism. It's a crazy thought, based on an insanely bad "study" based on a tiny number of kids.

It's mental the amount of kids with potentially serious illnesses, such as babies with whooping cough, or kids with bad measles/mumps.

That Wakefield guy has a lot to answer for.

To put it as clearly as I can: Kids who have never had the MMR vaccine do not have lower rates of autism than kids who have had it. This changes not one bit when you add in the single vaccines.

I don't know what else to say. No one is trying to cover up for some random vaccine company that has nothing to do with your average paediatrician.

If I ever sire some offspring, they will be having the MMR. You'll struggle to find a paediatrician that hasn't vaccinated their kids.

javaboy

tallaght01 wrote: »

There is zero evidence that MMR causes autism. It's a crazy thought, based on an insanely bad "study" based on a tiny number of kids.

Sorry can you rephrase that as an anecdote please?

We don't truck with no fancy pants city slicker evvy-dence round these parts. /spits on ground

tallaght01

javaboy wrote: »

Sorry can you rephrase that as an anecdote please?

We don't truck with no fancy pants city slicker evvy-dence round these parts. /spits on ground

Sure can....there was this unimmunised kid who came into our hospital a while ago with measles. It spread to his brain and he died.

seamus

Nehaxak wrote: »

MMR is not responsible

MMR is not responsible. Never has been. There is no "even if". There's as much chance of your child developing autism after the MMR jab as there is of your child developing Autism after you feed him/her a Farley's rusk.

Wakefield has caused a massive amount of suffering - not least those parents who've been lead to believe that their child's autism was somehow preventable and was their fault.

Irish Halo

tallaght01 wrote: »

What he said

Agreed.

Andrew Wakefield's biased paper has again and again been proven to be of a dubious (I'm being charitable) nature.

The lie he has perpetrated has killed and maimed children. For what? Some publicity and money from interested parties?

All well and good if you can afford to pay for the 3 separates but many people can't, there is no reason why the government should waste money providing them.

Also you will not have seen children get autism (can you even "get" autism? It's not some kind of communicable disease) after the MMR, you will have seen children diagnosed with autism after they have received the MMR. This is due to both events occurring about the same time in some children this does not make the events connected. I can probably guarantee more children have scraped their knee after having the MMR than have been diagnosed with autism so should we stop the bloody knee holocaust caused by MMR too?

Remember kids anecdotal evidence is no kind of evidence ...

tallaght01

seamus wrote: »

Wakefield has caused a massive amount of suffering - not least those parents who've been lead to believe that their child's autism was somehow preventable and was their fault.

Being fair and reasonable, I agree with seamus. Realistically, this is a bigger issue (in terms of impact on individuals) than our current rate of meales deaths. I've seen a fair few parents blaming themselves for their kid's autism, which isn't very nice at all.

Measles deaths are still very very rare because most people still get their kids vaccinated. But bear in mind it's the 4th (mebbe 5th, cant remember) leading cause of childhood death in countries that are too poor to provide the vaccine.

javaboy

tallaght01 wrote: »

Sure can....there was this unimmunised kid who came into our hospital a while ago with measles. It spread to his brain and he died.

That's made me said because I know it's true.

seamus wrote: »

MMR is not responsible. Never has been. There is no "even if". There's as much chance of your child developing autism after the MMR jab as there is of your child developing Autism after you feed him/her a Farley's rusk.

You heard it here first people. Farley's rusk linked with autism! :eek:

Dragan

Can anybody offer a reason as to WHY he would have fixed the data? Just to stand out and be different and known, gain more funding, what?

tallaght01

It's hard to know, Dragan. It's just a newspaper article at the moment, so we don't have the full facts. But after reading the article, I wonder did Wakefield take the parents' concerns at face value, without consulting their records properly.

I would imagine he's a shoddy researcher, rather than a bad person. I hope so, anyway.

The_Minister

There is something that I read about him that makes his motives seem impure, but it would be libelous if false, so you're going to have to wait.

javaboy

Dragan wrote: »

Can anybody offer a reason as to WHY he would have fixed the data? Just to stand out and be different and known, gain more funding, what?

Researchers tailoring or selectively using evidence to fit their conclusion is common enough.* It's very poor form but a lot of people do it. He probably realised he was wrong a long time ago and is trying to save face at this stage.


*sometimes it's subconscious or accidental though so I wouldn't necessarily say there was any malicious intent on his part.

Crash

Some of it, as well, can come from taking a very small part of your test case, and already formulating your idea based on that. Then when the rest doesn't match up quite right, someone may not see any problem in massaging it a little bit to fit, because they already have said preconception in their head.

seamus

javaboy wrote: »

Researchers tailoring or selectively using evidence to fit their conclusion is common enough.* It's very poor form but a lot of people do it. He probably realised he was wrong a long time ago and is trying to save face at this stage.


*sometimes it's subconscious or accidental though so I wouldn't necessarily say there was any malicious intent on his part.

Quite often though there are some people who hold very specific beliefs and are completely and utterly unwavering in that belief, despite any amount of evidence to the contrary. It's a natural human trait to use evidence that supports your theories and ignore contradicting evidence, but these people take that to a new level. I'd consider it a form of mental illness.

javaboy

seamus wrote: »

Quite often though there are some people who hold very specific beliefs and are completely and utterly unwavering in that belief, despite any amount of evidence to the contrary. It's a natural human trait to use evidence that supports your theories and ignore contradicting evidence, but these people take that to a new level. I'd consider it a form of mental illness.

Yeah those creationist/evolutionist youtube wars crack me up too.

stovelid

Also, the issue is that, unlike a lot of other scientific studies I guess, this research has had such a seismic public effect.

I wonder will Patricia McKenna revise her views in light of this?

The_Minister

It's funny to think that the Green party held this belief as policy until February 2007.

brianthebard

The_Minister wrote: »

It's funny to think downright scary that the Green party held this belief as policy until February 2007.

FYP.

I don't have much more to say, its crazy to think that so many people have not got the vaccine for their children because of this one 'study'.

kevmy

His study was as scientific as essentially going to a playground and asking 12 (I believe he based his study on 12 kids but it could have been 20 - either way ridiculously small) kids do you have autism and some saying yes and then he asked do you have the MMR vaccine and they said yes.

He then said Eureka!! It must have been the MMR that gave it too you!! By his reasoning it could just as easily been breakfast that done it.

Now this is extremely bad work (I can't call it science cos it isn't).

And there are a number of factors to blame.

1) The Wakeman guy that performed the study.
2) The journal that published it
3) The media for picking up on it
4) Vested interested for riding this as far as they can

Other wider issue include letting medical doctors do these kind of unscientific studies when they are not trained to do so. Not having proper statisticians on the peer review committee for medical journal - its quite shocking the amount of bad science that gets let through into medical journals. In fairness thats not what doctors are trained to do.

Nehaxak

Well, regardless of evidence or lack thereof - if I have any further children they'll be getting the single vaccinations as well. I just was not willing to take the risk, however small it may or may not have been.
What I don't like though is seeing children getting no vaccination at all because of this and that's clearly wrong.
Single vaccinations are only expensive in Ireland because they are (or where at the time anyway) administered by private doctors who traveled over from the UK every couple of months, to their private clinic setup near the IFSC in town, I'm sure with huge rental overheads and I'm sure also making a tidy profit for themselves of course.

If I remember right, it cost us at the time roughly 700 euro to vaccinate our two kids plus the extra's for the boosters (quite expensive)...

Talk going round at the time also of MMR vaccines in Ireland that were administered by the health service here being found to subsequently be "out of date" didn't help the matter either.

http://briandeer.com/mmr-lancet.htm

^^ Quiet a good site to read on the MMR scare.

Though I don't agree with Wakefield's study and nor do I doubt the factual evidence presented against it, I still was not willing to take the risk as single vaccinations were available privately, as were many other parents not willing to risk it - the clinic was always packed and there was a hefty waiting list.
People don't trust our government and especially don't trust our health service, they are not going to change their minds easily. So, give the option to parents of single vaccinations for their kids and all will be fine again yeah ?

Fat Harney chance of that happening though.

General Zod

Nehaxak wrote: »

Well, regardless of evidence or lack thereof - if I have any further children they'll be getting the single vaccinations as well. I just was not willing to take the risk, however small it may or may not have been.

There is no risk.

There is no risk.
There is no risk.
There is no risk.

There is no risk.

the more you continue to say "regardless of evidence or lack thereof" you are propigating the myth that Wakefield created.

There is no risk.

seamus

Nehaxak wrote: »

Well, regardless of evidence or lack thereof - if I have any further children they'll be getting the single vaccinations as well. I just was not willing to take the risk, however small it may or may not have been.

But then you better give up Farley's rusks too. And you better stop feeding them, and sleeping them and burping them. And tie them down so they can't learn to walk. Because there's a risk that if they do any of these things, they'll develop autism.

As far as we can tell, Autism is a genetic disorder and your child will develop it if they're supposed to, and there's nothing you can do to help or prevent it.

Nehaxak

seamus wrote: »

As far as we can tell, Autism is a genetic disorder and your child will develop it if they're supposed to, and there's nothing you can do to help or prevent it.

Sorry but "As far as we can tell..." - just isn't good enough actual factual scientific evidence, neither may I add is what was put forward by Wakefield. However, any doubt in any right thinking parents mind would cause them enough worry to look for alternatives or in what seems like a lot of cases these days, no jab at all.
Again, coupled with the fact at the time there was huge worry over out of date MMR jabs being used by the health boards along with the doubt created by Wakefield and the inherent lack of trust a lot of people have in government = enough doubt in many a parents mind not to listen, not to trust and not to take the risk with the MMR for their kids.

Wasn't there also a story doing the rounds at the time that Tony Blair got his kids single vaccinations as both him and his wife even doubted what their own government in the UK, of which Blair was the leader, were saying.

seamus

Nehaxak wrote: »

Sorry but "As far as we can tell..." - just isn't good enough actual factual scientific evidence, neither may I add is what was put forward by Wakefield.

But there's a huge difference between saying, "All the evidence so far supports it being a genetic trait" and "The MMR jab is likely to cause autism". You can't say that Andrew Wakefields astounding level of incompetence is in any way comparable to the years of study which went into autism before he came on the scene.

However, any doubt in any right thinking parents mind would cause them enough worry to look for alternatives or in what seems like a lot of cases these days, no jab at all.

I understand the "play it safe" mentality, I really do. But that doesn't mean that it's right, or that such parents are "right-thinking". It doesn't change the fact that it's an unnecessary precaution and an overreaction.

If there were actual questions about the safety of the MMR jab in relation to autism, then I would support the idea that "right-thinking" parents would avoid getting it to be on the safe side. But there are no doubts, no links, no risks. None whatsoever.

kevmy

Nehaxak wrote: »

Sorry but "As far as we can tell..." - just isn't good enough actual factual scientific evidence, neither may I add is what was put forward by Wakefield. However, any doubt in any right thinking parents mind would cause them enough worry to look for alternatives or in what seems like a lot of cases these days, no jab at all.
Again, coupled with the fact at the time there was huge worry over out of date MMR jabs being used by the health boards along with the doubt created by Wakefield and the inherent lack of trust a lot of people have in government = enough doubt in many a parents mind not to listen, not to trust and not to take the risk with the MMR for their kids.

Wasn't there also a story doing the rounds at the time that Tony Blair got his kids single vaccinations as both him and his wife even doubted what their own government in the UK, of which Blair was the leader, were saying.

I'm sorry but saying stuff like 'All evidence points towards ..." or "As far as we can tell .." is exactly what good scientists will tell you on these issues. This is what they think but they aren't sure so they will not commit.

However this myth that has been propagated is just that a myth. By saying to play it on the safe side you might as well say to your kids not to jerk off cos they might go blind. This is the same amount of risk.

Also the bit in bold. Most people are ignorant of science and medicine. It's not their fault they have loads of stuff to do themselves. But they are taking a HUGE risk by NOT getting their child vaccinated. Any right minded parent should get their child vaccinated - if they really want to do the best for their child they should get the right information and not rely on hearsay, the tabloid media and some questionnaire by a dodgy doctor.

If they have half a brain and the correct information they will get the jab to prevent the children from getting 3 deadly diseases instead of putting their child's life at risk for the mistaken belief that their child might get a non-fatal treatable social condition.

Nehaxak

kevmy wrote: »

I'm sorry but saying stuff like 'All evidence points towards ..." or "As far as we can tell .." is exactly what good scientists will tell you on these issues. This is what they think but they aren't sure so they will not commit.

...and that's what I'm saying isn't good enough. I would prefer them to come out and just say "we don't know what exactly or how exactly Autism is casued but we do know, 100% correct in our knowledge, that it is not caused, cannot be caused and never was caused by the MMR vaccinations".

if they really want to do the best for their child they should get the right information and not rely on hearsay, the tabloid media and some questionnaire by a dodgy doctor.

The fact that at the time anyway it was backed up by other scientists and published in the Lancet added some substance behind it all though, it wasn't just the media.

If they have half a brain and the correct information they will get the jab to prevent the children from getting 3 deadly diseases instead of putting their child's life at risk for the mistaken belief that their child might get a non-fatal treatable social condition.

Sure thing but in the interests of national health, it would be better at this stage to introduce single vaccinations as an option/alternative, maybe for a modest fee. So those parents who probably always will have doubts, can at least vaccinate their children.

astrofool

Nehaxak wrote: »

So, give the option to parents of single vaccinations for their kids and all will be fine again yeah ?

Fat Harney chance of that happening though.

If someone is stupid enough to believe that the MMR shot causes autism despite no evidence at all to support it, then I firmly believe that removing money from that person is a good thing, the more money the better.

You can do a lot of good things for a childs life with €700, let alone finding a worthy charity for it, where you could save multiple lives.

allabouteve

javaboy wrote: »

*sometimes it's subconscious or accidental though so I wouldn't necessarily say there was any malicious intent on his part.

That happens, but not that often. I'm hoping its true though, because a wanton disregard for the health and wellbeing of hundreds of thousands of children is nothing short of sociopathic.

Nehaxak

seamus wrote: »

If there were actual questions about the safety of the MMR jab in relation to autism, then I would support the idea that "right-thinking" parents would avoid getting it to be on the safe side. But there are no doubts, no links, no risks. None whatsoever.

As a parent, I don't agree with you and I'll play it safe by getting single vaccinations for my kids, which I've already done. I distrust the government, the HSE, the scientists involved and the drug companies behind them all.
I know I'm wrong but I will not put the life of my kids in the hands of complete and utter morons in the HSE and the government and I will play it safe as I have done and gone for the alternative vaccination programme, at a high financial cost to me personally but at least my mind is at ease in that regards. My choice and nice that the choice was there. If the HSE/Government had their way, we wouldn't even have the choice of getting our kids privately vaccinated and would've had to travel to the UK for it (which we were more than prepared to do at the time).

The_Minister

Nehaxak wrote: »

Sure thing but in the interests of national health, it would be better at this stage to introduce single vaccinations as an option/alternative, maybe for a modest fee. So those parents who probably always will have doubts, can at least vaccinate their children.

At a huge and unnecessary cost to the taxpayer.

The Real B-man

Anyone who thinks MMR Vaccine leads to Autism is retarded you are born with it you cant get it although it may take time for the signs of it to be noticeable there’s kids going around with MMR and everything cause there parents didn’t get them vaccinated!

Nehaxak

astrofool wrote: »

If someone is stupid enough to believe that the MMR shot causes autism despite no evidence at all to support it, then I firmly believe that removing money from that person is a good thing, the more money the better.

You can do a lot of good things for a childs life with €700, let alone finding a worthy charity for it, where you could save multiple lives.

Well, if ever in the future you can muster up the sperm count to have children of your own, come back and let us know how you got them the MMR and how you were not worried one single bit about them getting Autism afterwards.
God forbid they actually did get Autism, as the burden of their infliction would forever be on your shoulders as you as a parent had a choice of spending the money to get them single vaccinations but instead gave the money to the cats and dogs home and saved a few puppies instead.

Nehaxak

The Real B-man wrote: »

Anyone who thinks MMR Vaccine leads to Autism is retarded you are born with it you cant get it although it may take time for the signs of it to be noticeable there’s kids going around with MMR and everything cause there parents didn’t get them vaccinated!

You have the nerve to call other people "retarded" ?

:rolleyes:

allabouteve

Nehaxak wrote: »

As a parent, I don't agree with you and I'll play it safe by getting single vaccinations for my kids, which I've already done. I distrust the government, the HSE, the scientists involved and the drug companies behind them all.
I know I'm wrong but I will not put the life of my kids in the hands of complete and utter morons in the HSE and the government and I will play it safe as I have done and gone for the alternative vaccination programme, at a high financial cost to me personally but at least my mind is at ease in that regards. My choice and nice that the choice was there. If the HSE/Government had their way, we wouldn't even have the choice of getting our kids privately vaccinated and would've had to travel to the UK for it (which we were more than prepared to do at the time).

I think this shows the real harm Wakefield has caused, people who insist on not using the triple vaccine, even in the face of overwhelming evidence of its safety and efficacy. Its irrational.

The single vaccines are too expensive for the taxpayer to cough up for, because some parents refuse to be reassured.

Nehaxak

The_Minister wrote: »

At a huge and unnecessary cost to the taxpayer.

That sounds like what Harney said about the Cervical cancer vaccination programme for children when she denied it funding...

So we have a choice, force the MMR vaccination on to parents because we aren't prepared to fund single vaccinations (or even part fund them as a choice) or suffer the way we are with a huge amount of children completely unvaccinated in any way whatsoever.

allabouteve

Nehaxak wrote: »

That sounds like what Harney said about the Cervical cancer vaccination programme for children when she denied it funding...

So we have a choice, force the MMR vaccination on to parents because we aren't prepared to fund single vaccinations (or even part fund them as a choice) or suffer the way we are with a huge amount of children completely unvaccinated in any way whatsoever.

There is absolutely no benefit in single vaccines. There is immeasureable benefit in cervical cancer vaccines.

Big difference, no comparison, irrational argument.

Nehaxak

allabouteve wrote: »

The single vaccines are too expensive for the taxpayer to cough up for, because some parents refuse to be reassured.

They are not expensive, the only reason we had to pay what we did for them is because they doctors had to travel over from the UK every few weeks for their clinic in a central Dublin location, along with getting approved here plus all the legal costs and insurance costs they had with all of that.
The vaccinations themselves costed under 10 Euro each.

Padraig Mor

Nehaxak wrote: »

complete and utter morons in the HSE ).

Kind of ironic thing for someone who ignores all the MMR evidence to accuse other people of......

BTW the HSE doesn't want to use single jabs because people are far more likely not to complete the full course due to number of jabs involved - people will forget etc.

astrofool

Nehaxak wrote: »

Well, if ever in the future you can muster up the sperm count to have children of your own, come back and let us know how you got them the MMR and how you were not worried one single bit about them getting Autism afterwards.
God forbid they actually did get Autism, as the burden of their infliction would forever be on your shoulders as you as a parent had a choice of spending the money to get them single vaccinations but instead gave the money to the cats and dogs home and saved a few puppies instead.

Had the MMR, not one bit worried.

Your fear is completely irrational, one can only hope that your children don't inherit that.

Nehaxak

allabouteve wrote: »

There is absolutely no benefit in single vaccines. There is immeasureable benefit in cervical cancer vaccines.

There is absolutely no beneift to combined vaccines over single vaccines other than cost benefits for the respective health boards, drug companies and I suppose other vested interests.

Big difference, no comparison, irrational argument.

I'm not arguing though...so go tell it to Harney, she might listen to you...

allabouteve

Nehaxak wrote: »

They are not expensive, the only reason we had to pay what we did for them is because they doctors had to travel over from the UK every few weeks for their clinic in a central Dublin location, along with getting approved here plus all the legal costs and insurance costs they had with all of that.
The vaccinations themselves costed under 10 Euro each.

I believe the triple vaccine costs about half that, but I'm open to correction if I'm wrong. It adds up, and to expect others to fund reluctant parents paranoia is nothing short of selfish. The evidence is there that its effective and safe , and if I ever squeeze out a humanoid, they'll be getting one jab, not three.

allabouteve

Nehaxak wrote: »

There is absolutely no beneift to combined vaccines over single vaccines other than cost benefits for the respective health boards, drug companies and I suppose other vested interests.



I'm not arguing though...so go tell it to Harney, she might listen to you...

You're the one who tried to make comparisons between MMR and CC vaccine programmes, not me.

The health board is not a ''vested interest'' the taxpayer is. No evidence exists that shows the more expensive, time consuming, less sucessful single vaccines are in any way a better option than the triple.

They are less sucessful, because as already said, its more likely that the course will not be completed.

Nehaxak

Well, all you non parents out there are having a field day with this one but not one of you have addressed the fact that *regardless* of how crap Wakefields report was, a lot of parents will STILL NOT TAKE THE RISK of getting the MMR jab.

So, come back to what I've said, we have a choice, either ignore them and let children continue being unvaccinated OR we introduce single vaccinations.

But no, it again comes down to cost. So your arguments go out the window as meaning nothing because you refuse to look at the alternatives as they are deemed "too expensive" in which case it's nothing about saving children and vaccinating them against Measles, Mumps and Rubella but more about saving costs and/or pushing vested interests in the drug companies selling the MMR.

1) Spend billions on PR exercises telling everyone how the MMR doesn't cause autism and how you "think" it might be casued by genetical defects or whatever... Cost = 7.9 billion or some other stupid figure.

2) Ignore it all and rabble rabble rabble for days on end about it, blah blah blah... Cost probably 3 million keybaord worn out by keyboard warriors.

3) Initiate single vaccination programme, part funded by the government in the absolute interests of ensuring more children are actually vaccinated, thusly solving the problem. Cost probably 100 million.

Option 3 is the easiest, cheapest and best serving solution that is immediately possible.

Nehaxak

astrofool wrote: »

Had the MMR, not one bit worried.

Your fear is completely irrational, one can only hope that your children don't inherit that.

I had the MMR too, not the point...

"Well, if ever in the future you can muster up the sperm count to have children of your own, come back and let us know how you got them the MMR and how you were not worried one single bit about them getting Autism afterwards.
God forbid they actually did get Autism, as the burden of their infliction would forever be on your shoulders as you as a parent had a choice of spending the money to get them single vaccinations but instead gave the money to the cats and dogs home and saved a few puppies instead."

allabouteve

Nehaxak wrote: »

Well, all you non parents out there are having a field day with this one but not one of you have addressed the fact that *regardless* of how crap Wakefields report was, a lot of parents will STILL NOT TAKE THE RISK of getting the MMR jab.

So, come back to what I've said, we have a choice, either ignore them and let children continue being unvaccinated OR we introduce single vaccinations.

But no, it again comes down to cost. So your arguments go out the window as meaning nothing because you refuse to look at the alternatives as they are deemed "too expensive" in which case it's nothing about saving children and vaccinating them against Measles, Mumps and Rubella but more about saving costs and/or pushing vested interests in the drug companies selling the MMR.

1) Spend billions on PR exercises telling everyone how the MMR doesn't cause autism and how you "think" it might be casued by genetical defects or whatever... Cost = 7.9 billion or some other stupid figure.

2) Ignore it all and rabble rabble rabble for days on end about it, blah blah blah... Cost probably 3 million keybaord worn out by keyboard warriors.

3) Initiate single vaccination programme, part funded by the government in the absolute interests of ensuring more children are actually vaccinated, thusly solving the problem. Cost probably 100 million.

Option 3 is the easiest, cheapest and best serving solution that is immediately possible.

1. There is no risk with the MMR jab.
2. Sure if you're paranoid enough, and refuse to consider the huge evidence in favour of the jab, go ahead, exercise your options and get the single jabs seperately. At your own expense.
3. Yes, the alternatives are too expensive considering they are no better and are certainly no worse than the Triple Vaccine. See 1.
4. Paranoia does not save children from Autism.
5. Single vaccine programmes are expensive, unneeded, and less likely to provide protection to the children they aim to serve.

Nehaxak

allabouteve wrote: »

You're the one who tried to make comparisons between MMR and CC vaccine programmes, not me.

Eh..no I didn't !?? Stop making stuff up so you can "argue".
I made a comparison between a response and that said by Harney in her refusal to fund the cervical cancer vaccination programme.

The health board is not a ''vested interest'' the taxpayer is. No evidence exists that shows the more expensive, time consuming, less sucessful single vaccines are in any way a better option than the triple.
They are less sucessful, because as already said, its more likely that the course will not be completed.

The Health board in this country is an absolute joke, I cannot believe a single person in this country with no vested interests would ever even try to defend them :rolleyes:
The argument put forward, as always is the case, of "the single vaccine course not being completed" has no evidence to back it up and is purely hearsay and conjecture, a weak argument to justify the typical "can't be arsed doing some actual work" mentality of those few within the medical profession who usually come out so (worryingly) strongly against single vaccinations. Again, vested interests by drugs companies comes to mind...

seamus

Nehaxak wrote: »

"God forbid they actually did get Autism, as the burden of their infliction would forever be on your shoulders as you as a parent had a choice of spending the money to get them single vaccinations but instead gave the money to the cats and dogs home and saved a few puppies instead."

You see, this is the point. It would never be on your shoulders, ever. If the child is to develop autism it will develop autism whether or not you vaccinate them and regardless of what type of vaccination you get.