Thread: Should MMR jabs be compulsory?

The whole MMR scare was nonsense. There is a clear alternative to the NHS pay for it yourself.

Originally Posted by exbleep

Give a young baby a measles injection and they have to wait a month before they can get their next injection for mumps. That means they are unprotected against mumps and rubella for a month. Give them the mumps vaccine and you have to wait another month before the rubella meaning no protection for that period. Give them the triple at one go and it is all finished.
1 GP says it might cause autism, 500 say it doesn't so they believe the 1 GP? Bit silly, really.
Also, nurses are pretty hard pushed to fit everyone in to get the triple vac done on time, three jabs would triple their work each time so a lot of kids would, inevitably, be missed. If 90% of the population isn't vaccinated, any of these strains could infect the others as the risks go up. So why not make it compulsory before getting free, state education? If that happened, I reckon the government would have to offer individual vaccines to allay the fears (rightly or wrongly) of those who object to the triple vac but, hey, at least everyone would be vaccinated then.
These vaccines have been around for decades. I remember the 50s when lots of kids missed loads of school time with measles and one of the lads in my class died. Thankfully, we are not at that stage yet but it is making a comeback as the uptake is now less than 80% which will affect many more kids.
Rubella can be very dangerous, especially for girls over puberty. It can cause pre-natal deaths if contracted by a pregnant woman and used to lead to deformities and mental retardation. (Also known as German measles).
Mumps can be dangerous, especially in an adult as it can cause breathing difficulties and oxygen deprivation. It is making a comeback especially among teenagers and young adults.

Why is it that there is now a problem with the month or so wait between vaccinations for the single jabs,but there wasn't before? Given all the money GP's are paid now,a little more work shouldn't be to much of a hardship?

As for your statement about the 1 GP,cast your mind back to the teams of Medical"experts",who stated "it is highly unlikely that a human being can be affected by consuming beef from an infected cow (suffering from BSE/Mad cow),then go and look into all the instances of CJD,and see how right they were,who is silly now?

By the way I have a bus pass,and wasn't vaccinated for any of them,way back in the day,and I managed to survive!

Originally Posted by homeworker

I do not believe that MMR should be compulsory. Mostly because I do not think that giving the three types of vaccine in one go is good for young children when their immune system is not strong enough to deal with it.
Then there is the question of what is next, MMR now and then a drugs company with a new (not tested as well as it could be, but we had to keep the costs down) wonder drug successfully lobbies our wonderfully objective and impartial MPs for a good backhander and a non-executive (but paid) seat on the board to require their drug to be forcibly administered to all children. Think about the causes of 'Gulf War Syndrome' or Thalidomide.
I may have my tin foil hat on but these things need to be thought about.

I will now get back on the conspiracy bus.

Your first point is drivel. With regard to the second point a drugs company can lobby our MPs as much as it like over a new vaccine, it won't get them anywhere as MPs don't get to decide what goes into the UK immunisation program nor which brand of vaccine should be used. The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) advise the Department of Health on vaccine policy in the UK. Every vaccine manufacturer I've ever spoken to bemoans the fact that the UK market is the hardest to crack because of the stringent economic and safety evaulations any new vaccine needs to get through before it is adopted here. They also don't like the fact that JCVI won't let them give evidence in person, all facts are presented in clinical trials etc.
The MMR scare, rubbish as it was has harmed efforts in the UK to protect against not only measles, mumps and rubella but also other vaccine preventable diseases such as chicken pox (varicella virus). In the US this vaccine is combined as a four in one injection MMRV which because of the sensitivities around MMR is unthinkable in the UK at present.

[quote="
By the way I have a bus pass,and wasn't vaccinated for any of them,way back in the day,and I managed to survive! [/quote]

Well good for you, there were plenty that didn't survive and personally I'd rather not go back to the days of hospital wards being filled with children like this, see the link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZ5jf-5MobE

Originally Posted by homeworker

I do not believe that MMR should be compulsory. Mostly because I do not think .

Clearly you don't, because most of your post is utter drivel

My kids had it for the simple reason that the risks of having it (if there are any) far out weighed the risk of not having it. Simple really.

Despite all of the good, nay, excellent advice on here re:mmr, and the debunking of the single inj theories I have just looked to the right of this box and lo, a google add for private single dose inj. At a cost of £285 for MM& R then a "consultation" fee of £40. Oh and another £285 for the second set of three. Total of £610 for what is free from the GP, and done in 2 sessions locally. Whilst this site appears to use licensed imported immunisation, their own data identifies that unliscensed products are being imported and given. Mmm.. thats safe then. And you have to travel to Leeds.

[quote="Jacques_Bustard"]

Originally Posted by "
By the way I have a bus pass,and wasn't vaccinated for any of them,way back in the day,and I managed to survive! :roll:[/quote

Well good for you, there were plenty that didn't survive and personally I'd rather not go back to the days of hospital wards being filled with children like this, see the link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZ5jf-5MobE

Fcuk it, let's go back to the days of middle ages... a fair few canny souls survived in them days too!!

Easy - vaccinate your child or take the risk they will die from something preventable.

I think the French have the right approach "Of course you don't have to vaccinate your child Madam, it's your right as a parent - but they can't enter the school system, as they are at risk of contracting life-threathning diseases if they mix with other children".

Homeworker, picasso and bovvy, its your kind of "the bloke in the pub told my brother" brand of science that is the cause of the current outbreak, and people like you will have the avoidable death's and brain damage on their hands. Just ask the parents of any of those children what they would do if they could turn the clock back.

Roofrat - you were lucky, lots of your generation wern't.

Originally Posted by flamingo

Easy - vaccinate your child or take the risk they will die from something preventable.

I think the French have the right approach "Of course you don't have to vaccinate your child Madam, it's your right as a parent - but they can't enter the school system, as they are at risk of contracting life-threathning diseases if they mix with other children".

Homeworker, picasso and bovvy, its your kind of "the bloke in the pub told my brother" brand of science that is the cause of the current outbreak, and people like you will have the avoidable death's and brain damage on their hands. Just ask the parents of any of those children what they would do if they could turn the clock back.

Roofrat - you were lucky, lots of your generation wern't.

Whilst my opinions of MMR are mine I am not irresponsible and I paid for my children to have the seperate vaccinations so please do not accuse me of causing damage to other peoples children

£600 quid for unliscened drugs? 'tis a bargin. What a load of balls and not good to see the medical profession exploiting the stupid. A dose of MMR costs the taxpayer about £7. But hey you get to travel to Leeds which is a huge bonus as its the finest city in the north.

Originally Posted by Biscuits_AB

Originally Posted by chocolate_frog

Originally Posted by Biscuits_AB

This was asked on Question Time last night. Personally I believe that they should be mandatory. Why the f*ck should people be allowed to risk the health of other people's kids?

How do they risk other people's kids?

A child who has a MMR jab is not going to catch measles, mumps or rubella.

A child who hasn't had the jab IS at risk... but the parents chose to take that risk inthe first place.

The only way for there to be NO risk would be to only have ONE child who wasn't immunised in each school.

Exactly.

Exactly wrong, actually.

Immunisations aren't 100 % effective; never have been, never will be. The trick to it is to give everyone the shots so that almost everyone ends up at least moderately resistant to the disease, so there are too few susceptible individuals for an epidemic to get hold.

If you allow things like the MMR scare to spread, or if you allow single vaccines to replace them (I'll explain in a mo) then the percentage of immunity goes down, and you then have the health service taking care of people who got sick when they never should have done; in the case of rubella you have deformed kids which need care for life to look after, which is a hell of a financial burden if nothing else.

The reason you have triple vaccines and not single ones is simple: even young kids are smart enough to learn that a trip to the doc is going to be painful. With triple vaccines, first time round they don't suspect a thing, second time for the booster they're getting a bit wary, then that's it; no more injections for a while.

With single vaccines, first time round they squeak a bit, second time squeak a bit more, third time they're getting to know the drill and put up a fuss on the way, fourth time its tantrums all the damn way in. Quite a few mothers will put up with all that, but a significant number will reason "Oh, everyone else will have had the jabs done, doesn't matter if this screaming horror misses out on a few".

This actually happened in the 1970s; a triple vaccine was replaced by single vaccines on safety grounds. Like I said, people skipped out on some, and quite a few kids ended up dying of whooping cough, PREVENTABLY dying of whooping cough, because of the alteration in vaccine types.

That's why MMR comes in triple form and needs to be nigh-on compulsory: people are complete bloody morons and their kids need protecting from their parents' stupidity. This is, BTW, a special case; I have nothing at all against adults dying because they're morons, I just don't like to see kids snuffing it because their parents are berks.

Could the schools not issue the vacinations.... on a "exclusion by request" basis.

Originally Posted by Doc1701

Originally Posted by Biscuits_AB

Originally Posted by chocolate_frog

Originally Posted by Biscuits_AB

This was asked on Question Time last night. Personally I believe that they should be mandatory. Why the f*ck should people be allowed to risk the health of other people's kids?

How do they risk other people's kids?

A child who has a MMR jab is not going to catch measles, mumps or rubella.

A child who hasn't had the jab IS at risk... but the parents chose to take that risk inthe first place.

The only way for there to be NO risk would be to only have ONE child who wasn't immunised in each school.

Exactly.

Exactly wrong, actually.

Immunisations aren't 100 % effective; never have been, never will be. The trick to it is to give everyone the shots so that almost everyone ends up at least moderately resistant to the disease, so there are too few susceptible individuals for an epidemic to get hold.

If you allow things like the MMR scare to spread, or if you allow single vaccines to replace them (I'll explain in a mo) then the percentage of immunity goes down, and you then have the health service taking care of people who got sick when they never should have done; in the case of rubella you have deformed kids which need care for life to look after, which is a hell of a financial burden if nothing else.

The reason you have triple vaccines and not single ones is simple: even young kids are smart enough to learn that a trip to the doc is going to be painful. With triple vaccines, first time round they don't suspect a thing, second time for the booster they're getting a bit wary, then that's it; no more injections for a while.

With single vaccines, first time round they squeak a bit, second time squeak a bit more, third time they're getting to know the drill and put up a fuss on the way, fourth time its tantrums all the damn way in. Quite a few mothers will put up with all that, but a significant number will reason "Oh, everyone else will have had the jabs done, doesn't matter if this screaming horror misses out on a few".

This actually happened in the 1970s; a triple vaccine was replaced by single vaccines on safety grounds. Like I said, people skipped out on some, and quite a few kids ended up dying of whooping cough, PREVENTABLY dying of whooping cough, because of the alteration in vaccine types.

That's why MMR comes in triple form and needs to be nigh-on compulsory: people are complete bloody morons and their kids need protecting from their parents' stupidity. This is, BTW, a special case; I have nothing at all against adults dying because they're morons, I just don't like to see kids snuffing it because their parents are berks.

Everything that doc says (less ranty than I would put it).

Also was doing a bit of checkin' and according to badscience the single jab process would involve 6 jabs in total (1st jab and booster). Evidence has been shown (can't find it on webby thing at mo tho.) that people taking the single jab course for there children are more likely to NOT complete the course of jabs (forget about them, "don't want my child to suffer" etc etc).

I would quite like MMR to be made compulsory, but then again that be construed as being against human rights. I would consider penalties such as barring them from the state school system, if they refuse to take it up. i believe certain states in the US have MMVR, as a necessary requisite to being part of the public school system, the only exception being those who cannot for medical reasons.

People's lives are being endangered by the ignorance around these vaccines. I can't believe people are more prepared to take the word of a celeb over that over a doctor when it comes to the welfare of there children.

As a side note: imagine what would happen if all the anti-vaccine parents had all their children at the same school. I shudder to think what would happen.

Can someone dig out some stats?

Originally Posted by rampant

As a side note: imagine what would happen if all the anti-vaccine parents had all their children at the same school. I shudder to think what would happen.

If you bring in the rule that they have to have the jab to go to a state school, then you would surely produce such a facility?