6-in-1 vaccinations and autesim links?

aristotle25

Hi,

Baby due the 6-in-1 vaccinations and having been hearing people go on about potential links to causing authesim?

Anyone got similar concerns?

Did anyone go and try to get the vaccinations done 1 at a time rather than 6 in 1 go?

Thanks

maximoose

Nothing but nonsense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_controversy

Neyite

aristotle25 wrote: »

Hi,

Baby due the 6-in-1 vaccinations and having been hearing people go on about potential links to causing authesim?

Anyone got similar concerns?

Did anyone go and try to get the vaccinations done 1 at a time rather than 6 in 1 go?

Thanks

I dont think you can get them done one at a time. They come combined in the one injection. Baby gets 2 - one in each thigh - 6 in 1 in one leg and PCV in the other.

I asked my GP straight out if she had vaccinated her children, and as I find her well informed and knowlegable, when she said she felt that the benefits of the vaccine far outweighed the (unsubstantiated) perceived risks and that she had no hesitation in vaccinating her own children I was happy to trust her opinion.

Fri.Day

Everyone to their own, i`d be against it for the reasons that i don`t think there`s much diptheria, hepatitus B or polio around my parish.
Probably more prevalent in Africa and Asian countries with less sanitation.

coolabula

Fri.Day wrote: »

Everyone to their own, i`d be against it for the reasons that i don`t think there`s much diptheria, hepatitus B or polio around my parish.
Probably more prevalent in Africa and Asian countries with less sanitation.

I could be wrong but doesnt it also include vaccinnes for Measles and Mumps. Mumps can cause long term damage and measles outbreaks have been more and more common lately.
My kids are 11 and 7 and both had the vaccine, I also asked my GP what he thought and his advice was the percieved risk of autism was so small compared to the damaging effects of one of these diseases it was a no-brainer.

Also with so many un-vaccinated people coming from abroad, these diseases are more previalant. I had a friend who was born in Nigeria and died about 5years ago from TB, didnt we wipe that out in this country years ago.

Many people will give you differing opinions but my personal belief is that vaccines are good and protect our children, from some very nasty diseases.

aristotle25

coolabula wrote: »

I also asked my GP what he thought and his advice was the percieved risk of autism was so small compared to the damaging effects of one of these diseases it was a no-brainer

This is what I dont understand. If it is a percieved risk then that is fine as it means there is no risk really.

But is the GP saying there is "tiny" risk? i.e. there is a actually a risk, even though it is tiny. I guess the wiki linked above shows its all rubbish.

I will ask my GP too.

Ziphius

aristotle25 wrote: »

This is what I dont understand. If it is a percieved risk then that is fine as it means there is no risk really.

But is the GP saying there is "tiny" risk? i.e. there is a actually a risk, even though it is tiny. I guess the wiki linked above shows its all rubbish.

I will ask my GP too.

Well there is no connection between vacination and autism. The Wakefield paper that first suggested this link was later retracted. It had a lot of things wrong with it.

Perhaps the GP wasn't aware of the retraction or his conversion with the other poster happened prior to this.

Even if there was a tiny risk of developing the autism this would be far outweighed by the reduced risks of developing measles, mumps, or rubella.

coolabula

Ziphius wrote: »

Well there is no connection between vacination and autism. The Wakefield paper that first suggested this link was later retracted. It had a lot of things wrong with it.

Perhaps the GP wasn't aware of the retraction or his conversion with the other poster happened prior to this.

Even if there was a tiny risk of developing the autism this would be far outweighed by the reduced risks of developing measles, mumps, or rubella.

this was exactly my point, you have just phrased it much better.
My eldest is 11, so it is some time since I went through all this.

As a parent you want to do your best and that is what the OP is doing now, getting as much info as possible. Only you can decide what is best for your child and family.
My personal opinion is to go with the vaccine, but at the end of the day it is up to you, good luck with it.

SandyRamp

Maybe have a look at your family history OP to see if there was/is any record of reactions to the vaccine?

I am saying this because in my family there have been a number of incidents where Sudden Infant Death has occurred shortly after receiving the (then 5-in-1). In one case the baby had not left the doctor's surgery. As well as that, there are a number of children in the family who developed convulsions after getting it.

The doctors told us at the time that it was the Pertussis (Whooping Cough) aspect that was the troublesome one, and up until a few years ago they gave the rest of the children in the family the vaccines separately without the Pertussis. Then I had my daughter in 2006, I was informed that they did not do them separately any more.

My own GP did some research and found that the only place the vaccines could be sourced individually were in Asia somewhere. As an alternative, my daughter was referred to an immunologist in Temple Street. After she turned 1, She was taken in overnight and given the 6-in-1, whilst being closely monitored, and this was repeated for her boosters. All went well, no adverse reactions .

From my own experience however, I got very conflicting information from a number of doctors before it was sorted out. Some claimed that the reactions were nonsense, (at one stage I was threatened with HSE involvement for not getting her immunised) whilst other doctors refused to give her the vaccine (hence being referred to Temple Street).

I would advise OP that you do a bit of background research yourself, both on the vaccines and regarding your own family history. Discuss your worries with your GP, but remember it is your decision at the end of the day, and what you feel is best for your baby.

Good Luck

*EDIT : As far as I know also it is the MMR vaccine that is more commonly linked with Autism rather than the 6-in-1? I chose not to get this one at all ( I am fairly sure the rubella is available on its own anyway) as I have heard far too many stories from people I know about the effects of it on their kids.

aristotle25

The difficult thing is I need accurate real information to make a decision but all there is is conflicting, vague information.

implausible

aristotle25 wrote: »

The difficult thing is I need accurate real information to make a decision but all there is is conflicting, vague information.

Well, an accurate real fact is that Andrew Wakefield's article has been truly debunked and even referred to as fraudulent: http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c7452.

The risk of a child having an adverse reaction to being immunised is absolutely tiny, especially when compared to the risk of your child coming into contact with a non-immunised child (either from another country or one whose parents are anti-immunisation).

pwurple

There is no advantage to getting them done one at a time instead of all at once.

There are several disadvantages.
-Delaying a vaccine makes it more likely your child could ge the disease before they are vaccinated
-More visits and more injections = needless.
-They are tested with the current schedule and are deemed safe. Changing the schedule is untested.

As mentioned above, the only study to ever link autism to vaccines was the Wakefield study. That "study" was retracted and Andrew Wakefield was struck off. He did a huge amount of damage to public perception. The man was planning to profit from inducing fear needlessly in people with autistic children. Utterly heinous.

In a BMJ article on 11 January 2011, Deer said that based upon documents he obtained under Freedom of information legislation, Wakefield—in partnership with the father of one of the boys in the study—had planned to launch a venture on the back of an MMR vaccination scare that would profit from new medical tests and "litigation driven testing".The Washington Post reported that Deer said that Wakefield predicted he "could make more than $43 million a year from diagnostic kits" for the new condition, autistic enterocolitis.According to Deer's report in BMJ, the ventures, Immunospecifics Biotechnologies Ltd and Carmel Healthcare Ltd—named after Wakefield’s wife—failed after Wakefield's superiors at University College London's medical school gave him a two-page letter that said:

"We remain concerned about a possible serious conflict of interest between your academic employment by UCL, and your involvement with Carmel ... This concern arose originally because the company's business plan appears to depend on premature, scientifically unjustified publication of results, which do not conform to the rigorous academic and scientific standards that are generally expected."

implausible

pwurple wrote: »

More visits and more injections = needless.

This is quite important when dealing with young kids. They will quickly associate the doctor with pain if they have to go several times for immunisations when it's unnecessary. Given the choice, most adults would prefer to get it all over and done with using the minimum amount of time and needles.

mickydcork

Fri.Day wrote: »

Everyone to their own, i`d be against it for the reasons that i don`t think there`s much diptheria, hepatitus B or polio around my parish.
Probably more prevalent in Africa and Asian countries with less sanitation.

There is not much diptheria, hep B or polio around your parish because we have a very effective immunisation program where the vast majority of children are immunised, this even leads to protection for the small number of children who are not immunised - it's called herd immunity.

However if we start to see a larger number of children not get immunised for these diseases, it could lead to outbreaks and serious consequences.

Polio was almost elimated off the planet by a very effective immunisation campaign until the religous in Africa objected on irrational grounds. Polio started to reappear in Africa and is now killing and maiming children there as we speak.

liliq

pwurple wrote: »

They are tested with the current schedule and are deemed safe. Changing the schedule is untested.

Not disagreeing with your post, but just a quick point of the scheduling... The schedule for vaccines here is at the earliest acceptable date for many of them, followed by appropriate gaps between them so as not to overload the immune system bytrying to get it tomake too amny antibodies at one time, and liklihood of the child encoutering the diseases here at certain ages etc.
In many other countries the scheduling is very different even with many, albeit not all, of the same vaccines.
You can choose to delay vaccination, or to only get certain vaccines.

Fri.Day

Fri.Day wrote: »

Everyone to their own, i`d be against it for the reasons that i don`t think there`s much diptheria, hepatitus B or polio around my parish.
Probably more prevalent in Africa and Asian countries with less sanitation.

You really wouldn't vaccinate your child against the risk of Polio?

January

Moved from Parenting to Health Sciences.

SandyRamp

SandyRamp wrote: »

*EDIT : As far as I know also it is the MMR vaccine that is more commonly linked with Autism rather than the 6-in-1? I chose not to get this one at all ( I am fairly sure the rubella is available on its own anyway) as I have heard far too many stories from people I know about the effects of it on their kids.

There is absolutely no evidence that the MMR injection has any correlation to autism/ adverse effects. Like literally none, I can't believe that people are so ignorant as to put their children's health at risk.

opinion guy

When did we start vaccinating kids for hep b ??

I thought that was only indicated for health professionals in Ireland

RobFowl

Some good and detailed advice here http://www.immunisation.ie/en/

Just to reiterate the link between autism and the MMR has been refuted and the paper in the Lancet withdrawn and the author (Dr Wakefield) struck off. There has never been any suggestion the 6 in 1 causes autism.

SandyRamp

Deleted User wrote: »

There is absolutely no evidence that the MMR injection has any correlation to autism/ adverse effects. Like literally none, I can't believe that people are so ignorant as to put their children's health at risk.

Not being ignorant, I am familiar with the lack of solid evidence. However I am speaking from personal experience having spoken with parents who have very convincing grounds to claim otherwise.

I made a personal choice not to get the MMR for my daughter, mostly based on the family history of severe reactions, which both my GP and the immunologist in Temple Street supported.

SandyRamp

SandyRamp wrote: »

Not being ignorant, I am familiar with the lack of solid evidence. However I am speaking from personal experience having spoken with parents who have very convincing grounds to claim otherwise.

I made a personal choice not to get the MMR for my daughter, mostly based on the family history of severe reactions, which both my GP and the immunologist in Temple Street supported.

and what were these reasons specifically for the MMR injection?

RobFowl

SandyRamp wrote: »

Not being ignorant, I am familiar with the lack of solid evidence. However I am speaking from personal experience having spoken with parents who have very convincing grounds to claim otherwise.

I made a personal choice not to get the MMR for my daughter, mostly based on the family history of severe reactions, which both my GP and the immunologist in Temple Street supported.

This forum is a bit different from the parenting one. As it's a scientific one its preferred if posters quote references and evidence to support opinions.
Basically the more evidence you provide to support your opinion the better.

Hope this helps.

SandyRamp

Deleted User wrote: »

and what were these reasons specifically for the MMR injection?

1. The main reason was that in my family, the convulsion reaction happened after getting the MMR vaccine. I myself only received the Rubella as it is what my GP recommended. He refused to give myself or my siblings either the full MMR or the full 5-in-1 (as it was then). Fast forward to when I had my daughter, the individual components of the 6-in-1 were no longer available, so I decided to get it done, as my doctor recommended, in the hospital where she could be monitored. She also had to get genetic tests prior to them proceeding with it. When I inquired about the MMR in the hospital I was told that I could get the Rubella for her which they recommended.

2. Secondly, and this is a very minor reason as to why I would be wary when compared to my first, I used to work in a fairly large primary school. During my time there I got to know a lot of the parents, and it shocked me that a significant number of the parents of special needs kids (mostly autistic) swore that their kids changed significantly after receiving the vaccine. One mum had 4 boys, 3 of whom she insisted were normal, healthy kids until they received the vaccine. In the weeks following she claimed they became distant, withdrawn etc. until they were eventually diagnosed. Her 4th kid wasn't immunised, and hasn't been diagnosed with anything. I realise that I do not know the ins and outs of each of their experiences, but she was not an isolated case. This alone wouldn't have persuaded me not to get it, had I not had the family history I do I probably would have went ahead with it. But it does make you think.

SandyRamp

RobFowl wrote: »

This forum is a bit different from the parenting one. As it's a scientific one its preferred if posters quote references and evidence to support opinions.
Basically the more evidence you provide to support your opinion the better.

Hope this helps.

Didn't notice it was moved until now!

Well as we know there is little/no scientific evidence of the link so my experiences are fairly null and void here.

Ziphius

SandyRamp wrote: »

2. Secondly, and this is a very minor reason as to why I would be wary when compared to my first, I used to work in a fairly large primary school. During my time there I got to know a lot of the parents, and it shocked me that a significant number of the parents of special needs kids (mostly autistic) swore that their kids changed significantly after receiving the vaccine. One mum had 4 boys, 3 of whom she insisted were normal, healthy kids until they received the vaccine. In the weeks following she claimed they became distant, withdrawn etc. until they were eventually diagnosed. Her 4th kid wasn't immunised, and hasn't been diagnosed with anything. I realise that I do not know the ins and outs of each of their experiences, but she was not an isolated case. This alone wouldn't have persuaded me not to get it, had I not had the family history I do I probably would have went ahead with it. But it does make you think.

Autism is, at least partly, genetic. That multiple members of a single family would have it shouldn't be surprising.

According to Wikipedia "11 per 1,000 children in the United States are diagnosed with ASD as of 2008", so if 5-6 children are diagnosed in a school in a year after vaccination it might sound high but it's just the normal rate.

It's been said before but I'll repeat there is no evidence that MMR vaccines cause autism in children. The idea that it does has caused far too much needless suffering in recent years.

Joolet

SandyRamp wrote: »

2. Secondly, and this is a very minor reason as to why I would be wary when compared to my first, I used to work in a fairly large primary school. During my time there I got to know a lot of the parents, and it shocked me that a significant number of the parents of special needs kids (mostly autistic) swore that their kids changed significantly after receiving the vaccine. One mum had 4 boys, 3 of whom she insisted were normal, healthy kids until they received the vaccine. In the weeks following she claimed they became distant, withdrawn etc. until they were eventually diagnosed.

I remember reading that one of the reasons parent's of autistic children were so convinced by Wakefield's paper was that children the age at which babies get the MMR (around 14months far as I can remember?) is in and around the age that signs of autism become apparent.

I think what people don't realise is that by not vaccinating your children it is not just your children you are endangering but you're putting certain vulnerable groups at a huge risk. I know of a a 3 month old baby (too young for the vaccine) who contracted whooping cough and nearly died. Doctor's told the parents baby had probably gotten it from an unvaccinated child in creche or wherever!

pwurple

liliq wrote: »

Not disagreeing with your post, but just a quick point of the scheduling... The schedule for vaccines here is at the earliest acceptable date for many of them, followed by appropriate gaps between them so as not to overload the immune system bytrying to get it tomake too amny antibodies at one time, and liklihood of the child encoutering the diseases here at certain ages etc.
In many other countries the scheduling is very different even with many, albeit not all, of the same vaccines.
You can choose to delay vaccination, or to only get certain vaccines.

This is true liliq, I believe the OP was considering making up their own schedule, rather than following a tested schedule from another country.

Fri.Day

Deleted User wrote: »

You really wouldn't vaccinate your child against the risk of Polio?

The OP asks if we parents had similar concerns and yes I do.

SandyRamp wrote: »

2. Secondly, and this is a very minor reason as to why I would be wary when compared to my first, I used to work in a fairly large primary school. During my time there I got to know a lot of the parents, and it shocked me that a significant number of the parents of special needs kids (mostly autistic) swore that their kids changed significantly after receiving the vaccine. One mum had 4 boys, 3 of whom she insisted were normal, healthy kids until they received the vaccine. In the weeks following she claimed they became distant, withdrawn etc. until they were eventually diagnosed. Her 4th kid wasn't immunised, and hasn't been diagnosed with anything. I realise that I do not know the ins and outs of each of their experiences, but she was not an isolated case. This alone wouldn't have persuaded me not to get it, had I not had the family history I do I probably would have went ahead with it. But it does make you think.

This also concerns me as the mother of a precious little boy I have seen autism being most prevalent in boys in my dealings with kids through my job.
I love my little boy way too much to vaccinate him, just in case he might get a rare virus/disease, just scare tactics as I see them, not to mention who benefits financially from these "products"

MrCreosote

Fri.Day wrote: »

.
I love my little boy way too much to vaccinate him, just in case he might get a rare virus/disease, just scare tactics as I see them, not to mention who benefits financially from these "products"

Measles, mumps, whooping cough- none of these are "rare".

Who benefits financially from the products?
The pharmaceutical companies who sell them
The medical professionals who are paid to give them
The parents who don't have to take time off work to nurse sick kids
The country which doesn't have to pay for hospitalisation costs
The children who don't suffer from lifelong complications from preventable diseases.

Ziphius

Fri.Day wrote: »

This also concerns me as the mother of a precious little boy I have seen autism being most prevalent in boys in my dealings with kids through my job.
I love my little boy way too much to vaccinate him, just in case he might get a rare virus/disease, just scare tactics as I see them, not to mention who benefits financially from these "products"

What?!? Do you also love him too much to let him wear a seat belt? As this is a science forum I feel it is only right that I call you out on this dangerous, unscientific, nonsense.

After the Wakefield study vaccination rates dropped from about 92% to about 84%, at the same time measles rates rose. Cases increased from about 60 in 1998 to nearly 450 in 2006.

Vaccination saves millions of lives every year. That you would deny it from your children and recommend others do the same is incredibly irresonsible.

Ziphius

MrCreosote wrote: »

The children who don't suffer from lifelong complications from preventable diseases.

I'm actually dumbfounded that people -- parents! -- can't see the value in this.

Ziphius

Fri.Day wrote: »

Everyone to their own, i`d be against it for the reasons that i don`t think there`s much diptheria, hepatitus B or polio around my parish.
Probably more prevalent in Africa and Asian countries with less sanitation.

Jesus Christ! I am actually stunned. Actually stunned. I can't understand this. I thought this was a troll at first but if you are serious this something so selfish and so irresponsible that I cannot even fathom it.

Fri.Day

Fri.Day wrote: »

Everyone to their own, i`d be against it for the reasons that i don`t think there`s much diptheria, hepatitus B or polio around my parish.
Probably more prevalent in Africa and Asian countries with less sanitation.

Sounds like a form of "security through obscurity" - never a good thing.

Ziphius

Karsini wrote: »

Sounds like a form of "security through obscurity" - never a good thing.

I'm unfamiliar with the term. How do you feel it applies here?

Ziphius

Ziphius wrote: »

I'm unfamiliar with the term. How do you feel it applies here?

"A system relying on security through obscurity may have theoretical or actual security vulnerabilities, but its owners or designers believe that if the flaws are not known, then attackers will be unlikely to find them"

You could apply that here. Deciding not to vaccinate because you feel that the infection is uncommon. If enough people do it, it becomes less obscure and therefore more likely to become a threat.

As mentioned above, shortly after the Wakefield papers, vaccination rates plummeted. Measles epidemics became much more widespread than they had been for many years.

Ziphius

Karsini wrote: »

"A system relying on security through obscurity may have theoretical or actual security vulnerabilities, but its owners or designers believe that if the flaws are not known, then attackers will be unlikely to find them"

You could apply that here. Deciding not to vaccinate because you feel that the infection is uncommon. If enough people do it, it becomes less obscure and therefore more likely to become a threat.

As mentioned above, shortly after the Wakefield papers, vaccination rates plummeted. Measles epidemics became much more widespread than they had been for many years.

I see. I think you're right. Thank you for the explanation.

gctest50

Wouldn't Fri.day just be playing the herd game ?
Safe-ish as long as everyone else immunises their child ?

Ziphius

gctest50 wrote: »

Wouldn't Fri.day just be playing the herd game ?
Safe-ish as long as everyone else immunises their child ?

Well yes, that's why it's selfish. She's also hugely increased the risk of her own children developing potentially fatal diseases.

endacl

Vaccinate your child. The only place you won't get this advice is over on the Conspiracy Theories forum. That in itself speaks volumes. There is no credible link to autism. There isn't even a non-credible link to autism. All there is are headlines. Who would you trust to give you medical advice? A doctor with a degree in immunology, or a 'journalist' with a 'degree' in mediajournalosity...

If in doubt, find a single person alive today suffering the appalling after-effects of smallpox.

Not vaccinating spreads all kinds of nasty conditions, not least among them being stupidity.

Science rocks. When did it become sensible to ignore knowledge, evidence and experience....?

endacl

Ziphius wrote: »

Jesus Christ! I am actually stunned. Actually stunned. I can't understand this. I thought this was a troll at first but if you are serious this something so selfish and so irresponsible that I cannot even fathom it.

To paraphrase Fianna Fail...... How do I thank this early and often. It deserves more than one.

Jimoslimos

Fri.Day wrote: »

Everyone to their own, i`d be against it for the reasons that i don`t think there`s much diptheria, hepatitus B or polio around my parish.
Probably more prevalent in Africa and Asian countries with less sanitation.

Fri.Day wrote: »

This also concerns me as the mother of a precious little boy I have seen autism being most prevalent in boys in my dealings with kids through my job.
I love my little boy way too much to vaccinate him, just in case he might get a rare virus/disease, just scare tactics as I see them, not to mention who benefits financially from these "products"

Attitudes like this confirm to me that humans are notoriously bad at judging risk. We partake in all manner of risky activities, smoking, drinking, unprotected sex, etc., yet it is the unseen, usually statistically negligible ones that make us sit up - any Daily Mail article on the latest cause of cancer is testament to this. Heck, your child is probably at more risk of being seriously injured or killed in a RTA by being driven multiple times to/from the clinic for separate vaccinations than any adverse reaction.

SandyRamp wrote: »

I would advise OP that you do a bit of background research yourself, both on the vaccines and regarding your own family history. Discuss your worries with your GP, but remember it is your decision at the end of the day, and what you feel is best for your baby.

I'm all for the general public being fully informed on the treatments they and their children receive, however people seem to reckon that research involves getting 'balanced' viewpoints of pro-immunisation (medics) and the quacks on the anti side. It really isn't.

Fri.Day

Fri.Day wrote: »

The OP asks if we parents had similar concerns and yes I do.





This also concerns me as the mother of a precious little boy I have seen autism being most prevalent in boys in my dealings with kids through my job.
I love my little boy way too much to vaccinate him, just in case he might get a rare virus/disease, just scare tactics as I see them, not to mention who benefits financially from these "products"

If you would rather your child have a physical disability from "your perspective" by all means go ahead, but I pity that your child child having such a illinformed parent.

avalon68

Fri.Day wrote: »

Everyone to their own, i`d be against it for the reasons that i don`t think there`s much diptheria, hepatitus B or polio around my parish.
Probably more prevalent in Africa and Asian countries with less sanitation.

The reason there isnt much around is that people are vaccinated......these diseases re-emerge when people fail to vaccinate and "herd immunity" levels drop.

RobFowl

Mod Note

I understand this is an emotive issue where people have strong feelings but please avoid personal comments and attacks. Also please try to post evidence rather than opinions when backing up your position

MrTsSnickers

Ziphius wrote: »

I'm actually dumbfounded that people -- parents! -- can't see the value in this.

For the love of jebus, don't tar us all with the same brush. I find it absolutely astounding that people want to put their children's futures at risk, because they choose to believe some quack in the daily mail.

I can't find a link at the minute, but I remember in college a few years ago, a mass email was sent around, saying that there was X amount of cases of meningitis and mumps reported to the University - everyone be vigilant etc. As for this b****ks of "my child won't be exposed to those nasty diseases", what happens if they are in a class that many parents have decided not to immunise? Oh no, a family may go on holidays, all their kids are immunised but they may bring some thing back to your parish.

In my view it's down right irresponsible to take the chance with your child's life and future. Now, another poster had a family history or reactions to the immunisation schedule. Fine, they took appropriate steps to make sure their kids were immunised in a safe environment, where, should something go wrong, there were professionals on hand to deal with it.

I have this conversation at least twice a year with people who are going down the line of not wanting to vaccinate their kids. This is the one subject I do no hesitate to strongly imply that they are stupid and taking an enormous risk.

RobFowl

RobFowl wrote: »

Mod Note

I understand this is an emotive issue where people have strong feelings but please avoid personal comments and attacks. Also please try to post evidence rather than opinions when backing up your position

Am posting this once more then will have to start editing/deleting and issuing infractions

mickydcork

avalon68 wrote: »

The reason there isnt much around is that people are vaccinated......these diseases re-emerge when people fail to vaccinate and "herd immunity" levels drop.

Thanks for backing up my point that I have already made.

Maybe read the full thread?

Ziphius

MrTsSnickers wrote: »

For the love of jebus, don't tar us all with the same brush. I find it absolutely astounding that people want to put their children's futures at risk, because they choose to believe some quack in the daily mail.

Well, I didn't literally mean all people or all parents can't see the value of vaccination, just some. I think we pretty much agree completely on this issue.

pjproby

I was an inpatient in a hospital a few years ago and in an adjoining ward, a male teenager had suffered from measles which eventually affected his brain.
His entire life was ruined by measles.

avalon68

mickydcork wrote: »

Thanks for backing up my point that I have already made.

Maybe read the full thread?

<snip> Maybe, just maybe, as an immunologist and virologist with an extensive background in the area I feel it's a point worth making again. :rolleyes: