Baby vaccines

[grubbysoles]

Hi all,

Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on the amount of vaccines that are given to young babies these days? With my 1st baby I took her along to all the jab appointments but always felt a bit uneasy about how many jabs there were (usually 2 at a time), how many combined germs were in the jabs, how close together the appointments were, and all before she was even 4 months old! But, like most parents, I went along with it in the belief that the NHS know it is all perfectly safe and for the best.

But I've been doing some reading since then (mainly Dr. Richard Halvorsen's 'The Truth About Vaccines') and now that it is time to start my latest addition on all her jabs, I'm getting cold feet. I've read some scary things, such as the amount of aluminium in the jabs, the possible side effects of the jabs, the fact that a lot of the diseases are extremely rare and, even if contracted, are very unlikely to kill a child who is healthy and well-nourished. It seems that the vaccines do come with associated risks which are sometimes greater than the risks of contracting/being permanently affected by the diseases.

Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this and if anyone has had the boll*cks to say no to vaccines? Should we be leaving the 'bug balance' alone and concentrating on keeping our children fit, healthy, happy and well-nourished? Is it actually good for children to get ill as, in most cases with no underlying health problems, the child will make a full recovery and benefit from life long immunity, whereas the jabs wear off....?

The only jab my daughter didn't have was the combined MMR, as I know of a little boy who had his arm paralysed by it. But Scarlett did have a single measles jab instead, which I had to fork out £100 for as the NHS refuse to offer it as an individual jab. I STILL have to explain my decision to doctors whenever they read through Scarlett's medical history, and they STILL look at me like I'm a paranoid fool, and it was nearly 2 years ago.

Any thoughts??

(I have high hopes for this becoming a very interesting thread!!)

[Penny Lane]

My DS has not had any jabs yet and we're both undecided about when/if he should have them at all. Mainly for all the concerns that you highlighted. It was originally thought that we'd delay until about a year old but having read more experiences, delaying until he's at least 24 months old.

We haven't had any opposition as such from the doctors or health visitors. I was invited to talk it through with the gp (declined) and the hv's were interested in my thoughts about it rather than aggressive. They still send me appointments for him but I can easily stop them by signing a disclaimer.

The worst reaction has been from my parents though! Especially when the recent measles outbreak hit the news. But they know my thoughts on the matter and I've let them have their say.

In short, no-one can make you vaccinate your children. I'm sure there'll be plenty of replies on this matter, all varied, but I'm the non-confrontational type so I'll get my opinion over now and scarper!

Hope this helps you sweetie

[citizentwiglet]

Although I am happy for my children to receive these jabs (the main ones - 5 in 1, meningitus, MMR), I wasn't happy with the very narrow window in which they were done (particularly with baby being so small), with sometimes three jabs given at the same time. I was very lucky, I think, with my HV, who was happy that I could organise and maintain the boys' own timetables, leaving a bigger gap between each set, and never having more than one at a time, without missing any out. And that is what we did, and it has worked very well for us, I must say.

But not everyone has a HV and GP as good as mine who understand that, even though I'm a mother, I do actually have some faculties left intact and don't need to be treated like a complete plank.

I must say - I was healthy and well nourished, and suffered very badly after having measles. I was off school with complications and secondary illnesses for the best part of a year and I am still partially deaf as a result, and damage to my inner-ear has permanently affected my balance....I'm dyspraxic anyway, but they are still unsure how much of my problems are due to dyspraxia and how much are due to the effects of measles. It might not kill, but it might be very nasty - for life. With your daughter, you chose to give her the separate jab and, IMO, you picked the right one. With boys, of course, the effects of mumps can be sterility. I have a lot of friends who are TTC, or are of the age where they might be looking to start a family soon, and I've seen the effects that Rubella can have on an unborn baby; so I decided that the MMR was best for us....I couldn't bear to have my children suffer the long term effects of having the illness, weighed against the very small number of issues from the vaccines.

It's a very hard choice to make, and I respect anyone's decision to choose what they think is best for their situation. But, in all honesty, there is more chance of your child being seriously hurt by a traffic accident, either as a pedestrian or as a passenger, than them being harmed by a vaccine.

But I do totally understand that people have misgivings, and I respect their choice. I think it is VITAL that we retain that choice. On other forums I have had a complete slagging for 'poisoning' my children - I'm sure that won't happen here which is why I'm happy to talk about it - it's an issue I normally shy away from, for fear of being branded irresponsible.

[grubbysoles]

Oh dear, Twiglet, I do hope there is no-one here who would be ignorant enough to tell you you have poisoned your children. Some people seem to grab hold of an issue and take it way too far whereas, as you say, choice should be the absolute most important thing and everyone should respect it. I've encountered similar attitudes from the Milk Mafia. Did you know that if you dare to exclusively feed/supplement a baby with formula it will grow into a mutant?

Anyway, yes, measles can be awful, hence the single jab for Scarlett, and I will definitely make sure she gets the Rubella when she is older. I just wanted to try to minimise how much was pumped into her in one go. And Penny Lane, I know what you mean about the reaction from the parents! Whatever I decide to do with DD2, I think I probably won't even tell my parents. I'm 31 and still live in dread of a daily b@llocking for not doing things exactly how everyone else does. I'm still getting nagged for my tattoo collection. (Not too much I can do about that now...) I think it's likely that I will choose which jabs she has and decide how spaced out they are (urm, like, VERY!). They do a lot of scare-mongering about how your baby is more at risk each day that they are not immunised. I'm not too sure how true that is when she is at home with me all day. If she was in a nursery or something I'm sure the risks would be greater as she would be exposed to more people and more germs, but I'm fairly sure she is not condemned to serious illness by having her jabs spread out a bit.

I hope those won't turn into Famous Last Words....

[Muscroj]

my boys have both had all of their vaccines, however I too delayed the jabs, starting them at 3 months instead of 6 weeks & only taking them when they were completely fit & healthy, no sign of a snivel.

It wasn't something I discussed with my HV/GP, I just did it, took them when I felt they were ready for the next lot, at the end of the day no one can 'force' you into giving them, they can only offer advice & then it's up to the parent to decide what is best for their child.

My decision to give the jabs was based on ' better the devil you know'. Of all the children I know who have had their jabs I have no first hand/personal experience of any of them becoming ill. But I know of an adult who had polio as a child & now has a badly disfigured leg because of it.
I also felt that if I didn't give my boys the jabs & something terrible were to happen then how could I ever live with myself.

It is a personal choice & no one should feel pressured into doing something that they have made an informed decision about it.

[Annpan]

IMO.... (here she goes )

There is a large amount of social responsibility involved.

Chances of my daughter suffering badly from say mumps is very slim, I had mumps as a child and I am just fine, however.... if my daughter is carrying the mumps virus and goes to play with another family and say one of the children has a low immunity issue... and what if they catch mumps from my daughter? and horrendous consequences occur?
Now exaggerate that problem to cover all the children who live in a city.... say 200,000 children, say 1 in a thousand is likely to suffer serious consequences of having mumps.... that is 200 children likely to suffer serious problems, hospitilisation, permanent health issues or worse and think of the knock on consequences to the 200 families, the work of the parents, the strain on the health service, etc, etc. So protect those 200 children (some of whom, because of their low immunity issues, may not have been able to receive the mumps vaccine) we immunise ALL the children, thus mumps can't spread because everyone else is immunised creating a huge buffer zone around the children who couldn't have the immunisation.
(using mumps as an example, without knowing very much about it I must admit... but my point still stands)

For the sake of the pregnant Ugandan lady who my daughter shares a playgroup with.... my daughter is immunised against rubella. For the sake of the friend who has baby with downs syndrome my daughter is immunised against measles.... and so on and so forth.

I also believe that the reason the NHS want to give all these jabs to your baby within 4 mins of being born (I know that is what it feels like) is because there have been studies that show that the take up rate falls dramatically after around 4 months. I was told this by a HV who was a very nice lady, she basically said to me that she had families to visit later that day who's children live in extreme conditions (poverty, drugs, alcoholism,and basic cleanliness) She was happy if she managed to get all those kids to school age without disappearing, or going into care. Getting those children immunised against serious disease as early as possible is crucial in having them survive without worse problems than they already have (these are not happy, healthy, well fed children)


All that said, I hated having needles and diseases poked into my perfect little wriggler.

[Islay]

I think the social responsibility thing is very important - I would feel too awful to risk infecting pregnant women and immuno-comprimised children and adults with my possibly very healthy but contagious baby.

However, I have delayed and spaced out all the vaccines my son has had so far (the ones that the NHS has them have at something like 8, 12 and 16 weeks), he had them at about 3, 4.5 and 6 months.

MMR I am undecided on - I will probably fork out for individual jabs, he will have them a bit later, and more spaced out.

Some people argue that diseases like polio were reducing before the vaccines were introduced, but having done a little bit of research I think that vaccination contributes enormously to national and global population health. I do think that there's a lot to be said for questioning whether the NHS, with its tightly controlled budgets, is offering the absolute best solution in terms of vaccines (i.e. several vaccines in one, use of certain preservatives etc), and perhaps making a different choice if you (a) feel it is important enough and (b) are fortunate enough to be able to afford to make that choice.

[Ron and Jean]

We have 3 boys and they are not vaccinated. We found it was more difficult to decide not to vaccinate, as you are going against the advice of the medical profession. You then take on the responsibility if it all goes wrong. In a way it would have been much easier to get them vaccinated.

We had to fight to get oral Vit K when they were born, and made to feel we were going against the grain then too. We were told that we needed to speak to the consultant first who gave us a heavy handed script on why the jab was best.

The health visitors were supportive of our decision not to vaccinate and made sure we had the pro-vaccine arguments to study.

We were not convinced vaccination was the right (or wrong) thing to do after reading both sides of the argument. Our feelings were that we would wait until they were past 24 months and thier own immune system was developed. We still haven't gone back to get them done and our oldest is now 7.

I am most concerned about tetanus and the NHS can't do a childs vaccine that is just for tetanus. They need to have the 5 in 1 jab. I need to research if it can be given to children on it's own privately. Mumps will be a worry in a few years....

It is such a tough decision. I know friends who used homeopathic vaccinations for their children, but even homeopaths can't agree on whether these work or not.

Good luck