Measles vaccination plan in England targets 1m children Q- was Swansea a beta test?

reply to post by Elliot


Thank you for sharing! Blessing to you little ones...

Makes my blood boil!! Destroying lives/ futures and for what?! Share prices

reply to post by spooky1973

That's very kind of you!

Keep researching and try not to worry too much. Everything is a risk, INCLUDING having the vaccine, and so you must be strong about what you decide and stick with it.

Knowing what I know now, i would not be afraid of refusing a vaccination and would not be bullied into accepting one.

But the decision has to be yours and will always be a quandry.

The drugs companies do themselves no favours by trying to deny devastating reactions.

Personally, having seen my eldest suffer with reactive arthritis for so long when she was young has made it easy for us to make our decision and stick to it. We had the support of a very kind hospital consultant. We feel, rightly or wrongly, that we are protecting our child and that is our choice.

reply to post by spooky1973


I feel sorry for your son for the simple fact you're here on the internets reading bollocks about vaccinations which seems to be leading you down the path of not letting him get them. This is a major mistake.

Sadly, this is precisely why there was an outbreak in Swansea, because all the stupid as crap people there believed the MMR rubbish and neglected to get their kids vaccinated. You are of course aware that the Dr who did the study into the MMR and Autism has been widely and profoundly discredited by his peers, not just because of his results but his methods in obtaining the data were fundamentally flawed.

Yes, as with any medicine, there is a risk of a reaction or adverse side affects but the simple fact is that the risk of that happening is so minute it is not worth worrying about. However, the dangers of catching measles, mumps or any other disease, especially as an adult, is well documented and certainly not worth gambling on.

And before you ask, I have 3 kids all of whom have had their jabs and they have had no problems as a result.

It would be good to have some carefully weighed, cool, thoroughly researched journalism on this topic, in the newspapers as well as the Internet. We get incomplete or even completely one-sided stuff that sounds like it's there to manipulate us, we get sound-bytes that seem like they're there to make us feel disturbed about the topic, and we get will-o-the-wisp reporting, i.e. the topic is repeated all the time for a few days and then is replaced by something else equally disturbing before we really know anything about the outcomes.

I am rather on the fence about these vaccinations, having had measles myself as a child in the middle of another period when many children were getting it, and while it was bad, for me it wasn't as bad as when I had chicken-pox or scarlet fever. The attitude to these illnesses in those days was that it was good if you got them, because it would leave you with greater immunity when you were older. (Mind you, in my parents' youth it was supposed to be healthy to smoke and eat lots of sugar...) However there are a few facts in the middle of the general melee about Swansea that make me feel concerned about, particularly very young infants being included in this;

1. As the OP has pointed out, the man who died was clearly being portrayed widely at first as having died of measles. Then, rather more quietly a few days later it was said well, he had measles but might not have died of it - as it turned out, both of these reports were put out before a proper post-mortem had been done - which is another thing I think is wrong with news reporting, that rumours are reported as facts before anyone could possibly really know the facts. Now, it looks as if there is doubt as to whether measles was even a factor in his death. Was this in the manipulative category or the panic-inducing category? Not sure.
2. There was briefly another report about a whole class of about 30 children getting measles - well could it really be true that not a single one of those children had already been vaccinated? Was this an unsubstantiated rumour, or was it that someone didn't notice the logical conclusion when they put it out?
3. The best study on whether MMR causes problems, to my knowledge, was a big Scandinavian one which concluded that it doesn't. Perhaps this is right, however the study relied on any cases coming out statistically and didn't look at whether there might be a small number of children who are susceptible to damage for as yet unknown reasons.
4. Swansea has a measles epidemic and yet the vaccine being given is also against mumps and rubella. I suppose there might be an availability issue but noticed that last week a Swansea clinic that gives single vaccines was being "investigated" - so what is that about? A suspicious mind might think that someone somewhere might have an interest in closing down every avenue except one.
5. Scientifically, it's accepted that a coverage of most of the population - without looking it up, I think the figure is something like 85% - is needed before the vaccine can prevent the spread of measles. Yet its proponents have never taken steps to try to achieve this coverage other than by trying to get everyone to vaccinate young infants. At the moment they are also vaccinating teenagers but that's because of the active epidemic - previously, although individuals might have been able to do it they had no promotion of provision in place for parents to have children vaccinated at an older age because they had been worried about the effects on infants. They have also never done any studies of groups vaccinated at a later age to see whether the level of reported adverse side-effects was different. Why have they never done that rather obvious work?

reply to post by stumason

I once shared your opinion and had my children vaccinated for everything recommended.

however, you do not change your mind on these things until it happens to you or yours and that has to be respected also. When things go wrong, you do find an undercurrent amongst some doctors that are very sympathetic to what has happened and quietly say, just don't let him/her have any more vaccines after this reaction.

It's as if you joining a little 'secret club' where they know the risk, cross their fingers that your child will be fine, but give warning after the vaccine has caused serious symptoms.

No idea what they think or feel in cases of catastrophy.

But, the 'throw a few children under the bus' attitude of drugs companies in the hope of 'herd immunity' is sad.
Why sacrifice the well being of a few for the, well, well being of another few?

Makes no sense to my mind.

reply to post by Anthony2

Interesting that they are trying to make the MMR the only avenue of vaccination since the single dose vaccine worked perfectly for a long time. Are they trying to say that a vaccine doesn't work?! Heaven forbid!!

reply to post by Elliot


Unfortunately, I agree with the concept of the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Granted, it is unfortunate that a very small fraction of a percentage may have an adverse reaction, but this is far, far outweighed by the benefits to wider society. Like I said, this applies to almost every medicine out there, not just these injections. Some people cannot even take an Aspirin, but many can. Should it be banned?

Would you rather a handful suffered so many could not, or that many suffered so a few would not?

reply to post by stumason

I understand what you are saying but it would appear that we are allowing a few to suffer so that another few do not suffer.

That is my argument. There appears to be no real herd immunity, their is suspicion that the vaccine does not work and someone is allowed to suffer one way or another.

I did not mention earlier that one of my boys had MMR and a few years later had mumps very badly and a few very sick days with viral meningitis.

Gp's reaction, was that he thought the MMR did not work and sooner or later there would be epidemics of all three illnesses. Lo and Behold, just what we have.

My argument is, by all means have the vaccine. But do not try to force it on others.

I cannot agree with a throw this child under the bus so that this child doesn't get thrown under the bus view.

Respect choice and I will support anyones right to get a vaccine if they choose to as long as they do not force me to do so.

I'm 34. I never had the MMR, but had the seperate vaccinations around 2-4 years old. I still caught the measles though and was extremely unwell. Without the vaccine perhaps i woukd have been one of the complication statistics.

reply to post by Elliot


But it's not making a few suffer so another few can benefit - over 99.9% of people have these jabs with little or no reaction and get the immunity.

As for your boy, it is entirely possible that these diseases will evolve new strains - we see this with anti-biotic resistant bacteria. Again, this is not anywhere near a strong enough argument against immunisation. If people don't get immunised and it reaches a critical mass in the population, this can actually lead to the exact conditions needed for the disease to get a foothold and evolve resistance.

reply to post by stumason


His peers? One journal! British medical journal- which is heavily sponsored by big pharma!
Of course you knew this, as you've researched this .... Clearly as you don't know his name!

Point of fact based on his findings, Japan and several European nations have not only changed there policy's
On this issue but the laws in how hybrid vaccines are sourced, and used.

Bollocks indeed.
Dr Andrew Wakefield / dr Russle blaklock / professor sherri tenpenny /dr Rebecca carley / dr mayor Einstein

Glad your children are well.

reply to post by stumason
I do respect your opinion on vaccination.

But, have you ever read the research in the lancet and other medical articles which state that having childhood illnesses may well protect a child from serious illnesses such as cancer in the future.
I personally am partly deaf, have always been and you know what, life goes on.
Therefore, if measles caused some hearing deficit for example, it WOULD be a tragedy, yes, but I'd rather be half deaf, as I am now than get cancer in another so many years.

Have you ever read 'Doctor Mary's Monkey'?
A fascinating read and sadly, all true.

Anyone who doesn't get their kids vaccinated because of some consipiracy theory is an idiot.

Kids die all the time in the USA now from diseases that have simple, cheap or free vaccinations, because the parents of the children "read something on a website somewhere" that vaccinating your children is bad.

reply to post by spooky1973


It is bollocks - millions have had this jab, but how many got Autism? While the figures suggest a 12 fold increase in Autism over the last 40 years, this is largely down to an expanding definition and better diagnosis. Seeing as MMR only started being used in 1988, there cannot be a correlation between it and the increase in Autism diagnosis, as the latter began long before the former.

And it wasn't just the BMJ who discredited Wakefield, but also the CDC, the GMC, the Lancet, the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, the UK National Health Service and the Cochrane Library. Pretty much everyone of the most respected medical institutes and journals has panned his research.

EDIT to add: Even the National Autistic Society dismisses any link...

reply to post by stumason

Isn't that 'research' issue what the problem is though?
Doctors in other countries, will search for links later but going to bed now, are doing research that are replicating Wakefield's findings.
I chose to have mine vaccinated despite Wakefield and refused the second simply because of the very bad reaction, but people used to say the world was flat and were thrown to the dogs if they said it was round.

There is a lot of money involved in vaccination and so that also causes doubt in people.

There is growing doubt that some of the vaccines work, after all after a long run of the very succesful measles vaccine, suddenly the drugs companies are screaming 'oh! single measles vaccine doesn't work!'

So, things are not as straight forward as it would be nice for them to be!

But that's life and as I said before I agree with people having vaccines if they wish to but NEVER may it be compulsory as NOTHING should be compulsory when it comes to medicine and someone making money from a forced decision. Now that really would be suspicious and very much the thin edge of the wedge.

I have relatives who would never take a blood transfusion because of their religion and yet they felt that all children should be made to have vaccinations. I pointed out that perhaps they should be forced to have a blood transfusion if someone else decided that they needed one. They soon changed their minds.

It is all about respect for eachother as well as many other things to take into account.

reply to post by Elliot


I totally agree with you (and so does the BMJ actually) that Vaccinations shouldn't be compulsory, like they are in the USA.

The system that we have in the UK works well enough, but unfortunately in this age of the internet anyone can have their opinion heard, no matter whether it is truth or not and people will generally only read with things they already agree with, so if you go looking for "evidence" to back up your position as to why you shouldn't be vaccinated, you will find it. That does not mean, however, it is valid evidence and, like many things on the interwebs, it is probably rehashed nonsense.

Bottom line is this though, there is scant evidence that vaccinations are in any way dangerous, except for isolated reactions, whereas there is empirical evidence that they work and save lives.

reply to post by stumason


Im so glad i got my daughter vaccinated now, and I live in Swansea. It seems like everyone knows a few people who have it, and ive seen pics of one of my daughters class mates with it, and it is horrific.
At the time of the controversy, i weighed up the pros and cons, and the pros definitly won.

They also said the cervical cancer jab was safe.

Yeah I started out a true believer in Medicine until big money made serious profits and got immunity from law suits.

We don't and won't vaccinate, but every year the schools harass me about the already signed exemption forms.

I'm at uni here in Swansea, I had my first vaccination when I was 1 (and I got German Measles when I was 2 anyways) but I missed the booster because of all the drama about it causing Autism. I had my booster about 3 days before I came back after Easter hols, and I got told that I wouldn't kick in for about 10-14 days... About a week after my jab I got both Measles and German measles, I'm still recovering over a month later.

The rubbish part? The doctor thinks that if I hadn't had the jab that I wouldn't have got either of them, she said that while my immune system was pre-occupied battling the dead strains of the diseases, the actual diseases snuck in through the back door and that was that.

And also, the bloke who died had apparently been into hospital the day before for "asthma related complications"