Should MMR jabs be compulsory?

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by _Artemis_, Jun 5, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Easy to miss in all the Cabinet furore, but there have been increasing calls recently to make MMR jabs mandatory for children before they're allowed to attend school. Raises a number of interesting questions: does the State have the right to effectively make decisions about immunisation on behalf of parents? Should there be exemptions on religious grounds from programmes which affect the rest of the population?

    Full article here.
  2. 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?
  3. Another giant step forward in the march of the nanny state.
    Why stop there, why not ban over weight kids and kids of parents that smoke?
  4. All for it. Nothing worse than trying to get round Tesco's when you're stuck behind some fat wheezy c*nt and her equally fat wheezy offspring filling their fat wheezy faces with bags of Cheesy Quavers (which they haven't even paid for) in between drooling over the pies. The only time the c*nts put some step into it is when they get close to the cake section. Being stuck behind them at the checkout is a f*cking nightmare. There's alwasy a fight between them and the check out lass, as the fat wheezy c*nts who couldn't wait until they got out of the shop, have by this time, usually eaten half the contents of the trolly. Stood there in their ill fitting joggers, cream cakes and crumbs slapped over their fizzers trying to deny everything.

    C*nts are costing the taxpayer a f*cking fortune.
  5. 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.

    Re fat kids and other dramas.

    The schools should start education on such matters, and get some descent school sports clubs going again.

    Sunday matches between the schools?
  6. Exactly.
  7. No! MMR should NOT be compulsory. (But my daughter chose for my granddaughter to have MMR.)

    I believe there should be the option of single jabs. The argument against this is always that there are 6 seperate jabs and compliance is a problem. Why can babies not just be given measles jab?

    My daughter (now aged 26) was given measles jab at 13 months? or 18 months? She then had rubella jab around the age of 11. (She might have been given MMR around the age of 14/15 at school?)

    I guess that ALL parents would wish their children to be vaccinated against measles. It is very dangerous. I see no reason why BABIES need to be vaccinated against mumps or rubella.

    Is not the risk of rubella to pregnant mums? And the jab can be given to girls at puberty? Is german measles not pretty harmless in children?

    Is not the risk of mumps to males after puberty? And that jab can be given to boys? Is mumps not pretty harmless in children?
  8. You don't get this at our Waitrose.
  9. You have to go to the supermarkets catering for the less discerning clientel....

  10. Vaccination doesn't work like that. You rely on a "herd" vaccination, which means you need the majority to be vaccinated to fight off the disease. If only a few are vaccinated, it becomes almost worthless
  11. Sorry, but thats not true.

    If the level of immunity in the population is high enough (only about 100,000 non-immunised individuals) then something called herd immunity results, which means that the virus cannot survive as there is nowhere for it to hide.

    However, if enough people are not vaccinated the the virus can mutate and will therefore render all previous vaccinations irrelevant. 10% of people can avoid vaccination without disadvantaging themselves or anyone else, but if 20% dont get vaccinated then everyone is at risk. This is the current situation and we are due for a measles epidemic in the very neaf future with a lot of dead kids as a result.
  12. Surely the only way this works is by the mutation of the diesease in the unprotected.... whilst if only a few are vaccinated, then yes, it is useless.

    But if it is only a few who don't take the vaccine then the problem is lowered.
  13. So, in the case of those refusing MMR, why not offer JUST the measles vaccine (see my post above)?

    * No measles epidemic.
    * No compliance problems with 6 jabs to give.

    Surely mumps and rubella are pretty harmless to those under puberty?
  14. True, but vaccination uptake is well below the levels required. It is not a case of just a few.