|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Shut-the-fuck-up... please!
|
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Adam Finn also said:
His proposal for single vaccines was not based on any observations in his published paper. It came straight out of his head.
I think, Prof. Finn, it might have come straight out of somewhere else.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Bastard scumbag - and I would *love* to see the peer reviewed evidence for whatever he's touting will help autism.
Not that I am cynical in anyway, oh no not at all ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Siegfried
Ship's ferret
# 29
|
Posted
Calculated legal strategy to avoid liability perhaps?
--------------------
Siegfried
Life is just a bowl of cherries!
Posts: 5592 | From: Tallahassee, FL USA | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
And as much as I like Private Eye they deserve a large measure of roasting for what they were printing at first.
[ 12. April 2013, 21:33: Message edited by: George Spigot ]
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Watch out in Texas. "Dr" Wakefield has been 'over there' since 2001 (see last para in AFZ's link).
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
And meanwhile, we got the results of my daughter's blood test back today confirming she has no immunity to measles, and we have no very clear idea of how to go about making her immune (see TICTH). However a helpful health visitor has said she'll discuss it with colleagues and get back to us, so perhaps we'll get this sorted out yet.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
3rdFooter
Shipmate
# 9751
|
Posted
As the parent of someone who was a child at the time of the MMR debacle, this bit scares the bejasus out of me:
quote:
Dr Wakefield moved to Texas, US, in 2001 where he is director of Medical Interventions for Autism and in January was promoting a reality TV series on autism.
Has he got Gillian McKeith advising on nutrition?
--------------------
3F - Shunter in the sidings of God's Kingdom
Posts: 602 | From: outskirts of Babylon | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Panda
Shipmate
# 2951
|
Posted
If he's been struck off, doesn't that mean he can't call himself Doctor anymore?
Posts: 1637 | From: North Wales | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Panda:
If he's been struck off, doesn't that mean he can't call himself Doctor anymore?
It just means that he can't practice medicine in the UK. I can't find a list of his degrees, so I don't know whether he has any kind of doctorate, or just the courtesy that holders of the MBBS and similar are afforded.
But the title "Doctor" isn't regulated - we're not Germany. He may call himself "Doctor" all he likes, so long as he doesn't pass himself off as a person able to practice medicine in the UK.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
argona
Shipmate
# 14037
|
Posted
Speaking generally, with libel antennae fully extended, I can't understand how any individual who perverted research, feeding an immunisation scare which led to an outbreak of a potentially fatal, and frequently disabling disease, wouldn't be looking at the inside of a jail cell.
Posts: 327 | From: Oriental dill patch? (4,7) | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
quote:
posted by argona
Speaking generally, with libel antennae fully extended, I can't understand how any individual who perverted research, feeding an immunisation scare which led to an outbreak of a potentially fatal, and frequently disabling disease, wouldn't be looking at the inside of a jail cell.
Two reasons:
1. Burden of proof required by the courts is higher than that required by professional disciplinary bodies, such as the GMC.
2. In any case, there is an ignoble history of the courts allowing the GMC to discipline doctors and then behaving as if nothing has happened because doctors are "professionals": how else to explain Shipman being allowed to continue as a doctor despite previously being found by the GMC to have (i) forged prescriptions; (ii) helped himself to unused Class A drugs; (iii) having not kept his controlled drugs register accurately; (iv) not having completed a recognised treatment for drug addiction. And then after a local undertaker reported the oddness of the high number of his patients being found dead fully dressed in their own homes the doctor alerted to investigate (the local coroner)failed to consult the GMC or ask them whether they knew of him, etc, etc, etc.
Post-Shipman things were meant to improve but they haven't.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Craigmaddie
c/o The Pickwick Club
# 8367
|
Posted
Of course, the single measles vaccination could have been made much more available rather than just to those who can afford it.
My wife and I decided not to get the MMR for our daughter but, instead, to get the single measles and rubella vaccines. The single mumps vaccine appears to have been withdrawn in the UK.
For those who are so sure that there is absolutely no correlation between multiple vaccines and damage to children (especially boys) the recent Italian MMR case should at least raise some questions.
But then we could maybe just prefer the warm glow of mouthing the opinion of the herd rather than actually investigating the facts.
--------------------
Via Veritas Vita
Posts: 1093 | From: Scotchland, Europeshire | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
In all honesty, I wouldn't trust an Italian court judgement as far as I could throw it. That country is developing a certain notoriety in my eyes when it comes to assigning responsibility to people who clearly wouldn't be assigned responsibility in most legal systems.
Such as scientists getting in trouble for the l'Aquila earthquake.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sandemaniac
Shipmate
# 12829
|
Posted
ETA - cross-post with Orfeo.
Given that the Italian judiciary recently jailed a group of scientists for failing to predict an earthquake (ie for something that cannot yet be done...) I'd say that anyone placing faith in said judiciary's judgement on science needs to think very, very hard about what they are saying.
Perhaps you'd care to share with us how you have investigated the facts of the case?
AG
[ 18. April 2013, 16:06: Message edited by: Sandemaniac ]
--------------------
"It becomes soon pleasantly apparent that change-ringing is by no means merely an excuse for beer" Charles Dickens gets it wrong, 1869
Posts: 3574 | From: The wardrobe of my soul | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Craigmaddie
c/o The Pickwick Club
# 8367
|
Posted
Here's the award statement of the United States Court of Federal Claims which awarded damages to the parents of Ryan Mojabi who suffered "a severe and debilitating injury to his brain, described as Autism Spectrum Disorder" "as a result of his receipt of the MMR vaccination on December 19, 2003".
I am not claiming to know for certain whether the MMR is a contributing factor to the development of autism or gastrointestinal disorders. I'd be relieved to find out that it does not. But why the dogged insistence that it is not and never has been a contributing factor, without at least taking into account evidence to the contrary? It seems to be more a matter of dogma than anything else. In the meantime, surely the prudent attitude is that of caution and falling back on what has a proven track record of safety, namely the single vaccines?
Perhaps we should start calling those who have doubts about the benefits of the triple vaccine "MMR deniers"?
[ 18. April 2013, 16:35: Message edited by: Craigmaddie ]
--------------------
Via Veritas Vita
Posts: 1093 | From: Scotchland, Europeshire | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Craigmaddie
c/o The Pickwick Club
# 8367
|
Posted
And just for the record, the reason that the MMR became such a live issue for my wife and me was that her nephew - who already displayed a certain slowness in development - was damaged in an obvious way after being given the MMR. It was a dramatic change within two days of being given the vaccine. It is possible that for certain children a predisposition to autism is activated by the triple jab. Thankfully, most children are not damaged, but for the sake of saving money it appears that a minority of children - especially boys - are put at risk.
[ 18. April 2013, 16:46: Message edited by: Craigmaddie ]
--------------------
Via Veritas Vita
Posts: 1093 | From: Scotchland, Europeshire | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
This Wikipedia page cites statistical evidence form Canada and Japan which shows that autism rates increased even when MMR rates declined. This would not be the case if there was a causal link between MMR and autism.
[ 18. April 2013, 17:09: Message edited by: BroJames ]
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Craigmaddie:
Here's the award statement of the United States Court of Federal Claims which awarded damages to the parents of Ryan Mojabi who suffered "a severe and debilitating injury to his brain, described as Autism Spectrum Disorder" "as a result of his receipt of the MMR vaccination on December 19, 2003".
What joy. A pro-disease acolyte of Nurgle has showed up on the thread. Whose first post on this thread was to cite the Daily Heil.
First we're going to start out with the fact that the only statement in that judgement that says anything about autism say that the parents alledge autism. The poor kid is undoubtedly brain damaged - but the finding of autism is not upheld. Indeed when the kid was screened for autism in 2004 he turned out to be negative.
So not autism then. But some form of brain damage. And the evidence given by the parents is massively different from the evidence in the medical file. And the trip to Tehran obfuscates everything.
Now it's possible that the child was the one in a million to be brain damaged by the vaccine. As opposed to the one in a thousand to be brain damaged by Measles. And that's a tragedy and why the fund was set up.
quote:
But why the dogged insistence that it is not and never has been a contributing factor, without at least taking into account evidence to the contrary?
Who says the evidence is not taken into account? Other than you and your fellow Acolytes of Nurgle? The evidence is taken into account, weighed, and found wanting. People have investigated the statistics pretty thoroughly and found no correlation. They have also investigated Wakefield thorughly and found he was in the pay of lawyers to find something to attack vaccines with - and his research methods were unethical and his findings unsubstantiated.
quote:
It seems to be more a matter of dogma than anything else. In the meantime, surely the prudent attitude is that of caution and falling back on what has a proven track record of safety, namely the single vaccines?
Because we're using the vaccine with an actually proven track record, that leaves children vulnerable for less time, and appears to be safer and more effective. Surely the prudent attitude is that of caution and falling back on what we have tested and used more thoroughly - MMR.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Craigmaddie:
I am not claiming to know for certain whether the MMR is a contributing factor to the development of autism or gastrointestinal disorders. I'd be relieved to find out that it does not. But why the dogged insistence that it is not and never has been a contributing factor, without at least taking into account evidence to the contrary? It seems to be more a matter of dogma than anything else. In the meantime, surely the prudent attitude is that of caution and falling back on what has a proven track record of safety, namely the single vaccines?
What at 3 x the cost to administer? Where is the NHS to find that kind of money from? Support for parents with disabled children?
The point is there is no evidence to contrary and the precautionary approach will cost lives somewhere else in the age of limited budgets.
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr Clingford
Shipmate
# 7961
|
Posted
Well said, Justinian.
--------------------
Ne'er cast a clout till May be out.
If only.
Posts: 1660 | From: A Fleeting moment | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
Originally posted by Craigmaddie:
quote:
Of course, the single measles vaccination could have been made much more available rather than just to those who can afford it.
We have been round and round in circles. My daughter was ill after her first MMR and our GP refused to give her the booster. We've been advised by our NHS doctor and health visitor that they'd recommend we go private and get the single measles vaccine, but that privately administered vaccines aren't covered by the same regulations as NHS. And they don't recommend that we use non-NHS for precisely the same reason that they wouldn't give her the booster MMR.
I have no idea why the measles single vaccine isn't available on the NHS for children whose GPs won't adminster the full MMR but would be happy to administer a single vaccine.
Blood tests show that my daughter has no immunity to measles.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
This Wikipedia page cites statistical evidence form Canada and Japan which shows that autism rates increased even when MMR rates declined. This would not be the case if there was a causal link between MMR and autism.
Excellent point. The Tubblet needed her MMR at the height of the scare. We went through it all with a family member who's a GP. Children have the MMR vaccine around the same time autism usually starts manifesting which was one of the reasons people saw the potential connection. But even when the number of people getting MMR declined, the number of cases of autism remained unchanged. If there was a connection, you'd expect a decline. And you'd expect a difference in numbers between children presenting autism who'd had the MMR and who hadn't. IIRC, they said there wasn't one.
The Tubblet had the MMR. Not just for her, but for others she comes in contact with.
The protection that vaccinations give only works if enough people have it. Then North East's child would be protected. But because of Wakefield's research they didn't, so she isn't as covered as she could be. Although why the NHS doesn't provide single vacines for people in that situation is a mystery to me.
Oddly enough, I remember all the documentaries where parents where being interviewed at the height of the scare. They knew heaps about autism and fuck all about the diseases the vaccine protects people from. I always wondered how many of them would have been willing to risk measles if they'd known what it could do.
Tubbs
[ 20. April 2013, 20:22: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Measles made my uncle deaf in one ear. He's obviously lucky it wasn't worse than that.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Antisocial Alto
Shipmate
# 13810
|
Posted
I have heard BS from anti-vaxers along the lines of "But all those terrible side effects from [measles, mumps, polio, etc] happened a hundred years ago when people were malnourished. Modern children who get enough vitamins wouldn't be affected so badly."
Drives me nuts.
Posts: 601 | From: United States | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
Whereas I used to know quite well a friend's brother who lost the use of his legs through measles. He'll be in his 40s now, I guess. [ETA also the risks of sterility to adult men from mumps are well known]
[ 21. April 2013, 06:09: Message edited by: BroJames ]
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Antisocial Alto:
I have heard BS from anti-vaxers along the lines of "But all those terrible side effects from [measles, mumps, polio, etc] happened a hundred years ago when people were malnourished. Modern children who get enough vitamins wouldn't be affected so badly."
Drives me nuts.
What a load of nonsense. But there's plenty more where that came from. We moved somewhere posh because of Rev T's job. There things that were seen as signs of bad parenting and not on - like not treating your kid for nits - where we lived before were now acceptable. Kids shouldn't have chemicals poured on their heads ... There could be side effects! They were going to try something they'd found on the Internet ... And then they'd wonder why everyone else's kids and their families kept getting nits every few weeks. (Frankly, I would have covered our heads with almost anything if would get rid of them. I hated having nits).
Tubbs
[ 21. April 2013, 16:35: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
redderfreak
Shipmate
# 15191
|
Posted
According to the British Medical Journal BMJ 10% of children develop fever, malaise, and a rash 5-21 days after the first MMR vaccination. Our son had a febrile convulsion, which really scared us.
--------------------
You know I just couldn't make it by myself, I'm a little too blind to see
Posts: 287 | From: Exeter | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
my eldest son had febrile convulsions whenever he had fevers for the first two years of his life. had nothing to do with his shots. scary as shit, but it passed. and he's fine. hale and hearty, even. obsessive mountain bike rider and was prom king at his high school last week. studies medieval italian history in his spare time. girls call the house constantly. he eats anything that doesn't bite back.
has all his shots. obviously not seriously harmed by them and HEY he's alive despite asthma and a heart murmur, so hooray for immunity.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Antisocial Alto
Shipmate
# 13810
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by redderfreak:
According to the British Medical Journal BMJ 10% of children develop fever, malaise, and a rash 5-21 days after the first MMR vaccination. Our son had a febrile convulsion, which really scared us.
Yes, but- I assume you read the whole article- that statistic about side effects is given in the context of how much worse the side effects of the actual diseases are. A fever for a couple days is nothing compared to blindness, sterility, heart damage. Or death.
Some tiny number of people are injured by air bags or seat belts every year. Nobody argues that we shouldn't have air bags in cars because of those few people; air bags save so many more lives than they endanger.
Posts: 601 | From: United States | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Antisocial Alto:
Some tiny number of people are injured by air bags or seat belts every year. Nobody argues that we shouldn't have air bags in cars because of those few people; air bags save so many more lives than they endanger. [/QB]
I think some people do argue in such a way. I remember the row before seat belt legislation was brought in. Some will never be convinced by the fall in road casualties.
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Every individual cases of possible side effects is disturbing and shocking to those who are affected. The hard thing to realise is that those events do not effect that general conclusion that it is better for the population as a whole to take the very very small risk of a bad side effect in exchange for the very very high percentage benefit of both individual and population disease prevention.
What seems to be at fault is the failure to understand that there is no such thing as an absolute copper bottomed 100% guarantee that any form of medical treatment is free from risk. We have this idea that our children must be 100% protected because we cannot bear the thought of anything bad happening to them. And that's not realistic.
The MMR vaccine is very, very safe. Which does not mean that proper follow up to rare cases of side effects is not a good idea. We might get some kind of better idea of why that happens and be able to reduce the exceptional risk thereby. But that has to be done calmly and carefully, avoiding jumping to conclusions. And even if some causation link is found in a rare case, that does not invalidate the general evidence of very very low risk, nor the sensible choice to decide to have children protected this way.
There is the well known logical fallacy that "after means as a result of". A few months ago, my wife and I both went down with a bad dose of 'flu very shortly after receiving 'flu jabs. By far the most likely reason is that we were already carrying the 'flu virus when we received the jabs and the incubation period was completed before any protection kicked in. None of which stopped some of our relatives querying the safety of the jab. We think we were just unlucky.
Coincidences happen. Apparently obvious conclusions don't stand up to detailed examination of the facts. And referring back to the OP, those so-called professionals who play on people's very natural concerns for reasons of their own are beneath contempt for the damage they cause.
I have sympathy for all those who, for whatever reasons, feel they were on the "down side" of the very very low risk and as a result have been drawn to question just how low that risk actually was. Trying to get to the bottom of what might have happened in any particular case is both understandable and necessary. Drawing any sorts of general conclusions from an individual case or from anecdotal evidence is really not wise. So far as Wakefield's so-called "evidence" goes, you can safely take it that he wasn't struck off without very good reason.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The hard thing to realise is that those events do not effect that general conclusion that it is better for the population as a whole to take the very very small risk of a bad side effect in exchange for the very very high percentage benefit of both individual and population disease prevention.
And, what is more, in the absence of known risk factors in a given individual, it is a better risk for that person to take the risk of a vaccine than to take the risk of the disease.
That balance of risk does change as the population achieves 'herd immunity', but even then, as the current measles outbreak is now demonstrating, if you are not immunised you are vulnerable to the decisions of others who may also choose not to be immunised, which, together with your decision, will lead to a breakdown in the herd immunity and leave you exposed to the disease in later life.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Antisocial Alto:
quote:
Originally posted by redderfreak:
According to the British Medical Journal BMJ 10% of children develop fever, malaise, and a rash 5-21 days after the first MMR vaccination. Our son had a febrile convulsion, which really scared us.
Yes, but- I assume you read the whole article- that statistic about side effects is given in the context of how much worse the side effects of the actual diseases are. A fever for a couple days is nothing compared to blindness, sterility, heart damage. Or death.
Some tiny number of people are injured by air bags or seat belts every year. Nobody argues that we shouldn't have air bags in cars because of those few people; air bags save so many more lives than they endanger.
IIRC, you got a leaflet that went through the potential side effects and gave some advice about what you did depending on what happened – ranging from Calpol to “Go to A&E, straight to A&E, do not pass go …” etc – and what you needed to flag up with your GP as it meant you shouldn’t have the booster. You’re only the second person I’ve come across whose child had convulsions – it’s very rare. Hopefully your child had no lasting effects from this – the other child I know is built like a brick shed and getting ready to go off to uni FWIW.
The BMJ you linked too states that 90% of children have no reaction to the vaccine at all and there has been no change in the number of children diagnosed with autism or Crohn's since the MMR was introduced in the UK. If there was a connection between the two things, there would be a change. The family friend who was a GP that I mentioned in a previous post also commented that no one had ever managed to reproduce Wakefield’s findings – that’s no one ever – and that wasn’t for want of trying.
The measles epidemic in Wales has resulted in a death. RIP Gareth Colfer-Williams. ![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif) The sad thing is that heath bosses fear that there could be more.
Tubbs
[ 22. April 2013, 12:02: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Unfortunately this doesn't mean that Wakefield will be charged with manslaughter although morally he perhaps ought to be.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
redderfreak
Shipmate
# 15191
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Antisocial Alto:
quote:
Originally posted by redderfreak:
According to the British Medical Journal BMJ 10% of children develop fever, malaise, and a rash 5-21 days after the first MMR vaccination. Our son had a febrile convulsion, which really scared us.
Yes, but- I assume you read the whole article- that statistic about side effects is given in the context of how much worse the side effects of the actual diseases are. A fever for a couple days is nothing compared to blindness, sterility, heart damage. Or death.
Some tiny number of people are injured by air bags or seat belts every year. Nobody argues that we shouldn't have air bags in cars because of those few people; air bags save so many more lives than they endanger.
Thankfully he's never had a febrile convulsion since. And now he's a healthy teenager.
--------------------
You know I just couldn't make it by myself, I'm a little too blind to see
Posts: 287 | From: Exeter | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amorya
Ship's tame galoot
# 2652
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Craigmaddie:
But why the dogged insistence that it is not and never has been a contributing factor, without at least taking into account evidence to the contrary?
Because there isn't any evidence to the contrary. Wakefield lied in his paper, and was struck off the medical register for it. Other studies have been done and they haven't shown a link. Where is this evidence we should be taking into account?
Posts: 2383 | From: Coventry | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
@ Amorya
On the other hand the health "professionals" do sometimes ignore genuine concerns about the safety of the vaccination schedule for certain infants, specifically the premature and underweight.
I know of pre-term twins who weighed exactly half the average when the date of the first vaccination was reached. After emergency hospital admission they spent 4 nights extremely unwell before being able to go home. The mother was referred to a consultant paediatrician who recommended that either the vaccine dose be reduced to be commensurate with their weight or that vaccination be delayed until they were bigger.
The health visitor dismissed this out-of-hand, backed up the the GP. So the second vaccination was given, followed by a blue-light admission and 14 nights in hospital. Vaccination given assumed baby weight somewhere between 5 and 7 1/2kg - babies weighed 3 1/2kg.
When the next vaccination date came around the mother refused, backed up by a letter from the consultant paediatrician (now very cross): health visitor again questioned and GP threatened to remove family from list.
Mother found another GP who worked with consultant. Repeated letters from NHS demanding babies be presented for vaccination were replied to by consultant but ignored.
Vaccination eventually worked out by consultant so that it took account of low weight: immunity achieved and children not hospitalised.
However, NHS websites still say very small babies should be vaccinated as normal -in fact say more important: that may be but until and unless doses are reduced proportionately I'd not be prepared to risk it - would you?
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Patdys
Iron Wannabe
RooK-Annoyer
# 9397
|
Posted
Absolutely. Anecdotes like this are often not tested and are often second or third hand. It does not discount the evidence based medicine that vaccination is safe in pre-termers and low birth weight bubs.
I have seen children die from vaccine preventable diseases. It is unpleasant.
This does not discount the emotional validity or distress of your friends. But their account may be coloured by their distress and not represent the factual medical truth. Any number of factors may have contributed that are not vaccine specific. This does not discount the pain caused to your friends, or their understandable concern.
[ 23. April 2013, 10:31: Message edited by: Patdys ]
--------------------
Marathon run. Next Dream. Australian this time.
Posts: 3511 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:
This does not discount the emotional validity or distress of your friends. But their account may be coloured by their distress and not represent the factual medical truth. Any number of factors may have contributed that are not vaccine specific. This does not discount the pain caused to your friends, or their understandable concern.
Exactly. There's a difference between a concern being genuine and the reasoning behind a concern being well-founded.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
quote:
posted by Patdys
Anecdotes like this are often not tested and are often second or third hand. It does not discount the evidence based medicine that vaccination is safe in pre-termers and low birth weight bubs.
1. Not an anecdote: twins were close family; I took my turn sitting between cots in paediatric ITU.
2. I accompanied on visits to the consultant paediatrician. Also went to first GP with parent to try to mediate.
3. I didn't say that vaccination isn't possible/safe in pre-term and low-weight infants: but what I did say - based on conversations with paediatrician at the time and subsequently - is that a "one-size fits all" approach in relation to dosage is not sensible and can be unsafe. And parents of low-weight infants should be extremely cautious because there are plenty of health "professionals" who can't be bothered to find out about exceptions/special cases and so don't consider they exist.
I think vaccination should be pursued by all responsible parents - but I also think the health staff should consider genuine concerns and learn about instances where things may need to be different.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
quote:
posted by Patdys
This does not discount the emotional validity or distress of your friends. But their account may be coloured by their distress and not represent the factual medical truth. Any number of factors may have contributed that are not vaccine specific. This does not discount the pain caused to your friends, or their understandable concern.
Apologies if it was unintentional but, frankly, this sounds unbelievably patronising: "emotional validity" - what the hell is that? "Factual medical truth" is what I gave you - and said so in my original post.
"Any number of factors" - you were told the specific factor - extreme low weight. That factor was not invented by the mother or father, it was cited as a factor by 2 consultant paediatricians.
My family members (and friends, by the way) were not "caused pain" - their children became extremely ill and were taken to hospital by ambulance with blue lights flashing, sirens, etc. Don't know if you're UK based? Here in the land of the NHS you don't get admitted to hospital unless its an emergency - you can't book yourself in: you certainly don't get cots in a paediatric ITU unless there is a bloody good reason - quite apart from anything else we don't have enough of these facilities and doctors will move heaven and earth to get babies out of them as quickly as possible because there's usually a queue of infants who need an ITU cot and one isn't available.
An in-patient hospital consultant paediatrician was sufficiently concerned he wrote to a colleague to refer these infants - and copied the GP in on that citing the vaccination, low-birth weight and continuing low weight.
The "understandable concern" was understood by and confirmed by the second consultant: both consultant paediatricians put those "concerns" in writing - shame those concerns were ignored by a GP, 2 health visitors and a practice nurse.
Whilst I realise that an instance like this may be rare, your reaction does not inspire confidence in people who can observe on an almost daily basis genuine concerns, even those expressed by other, more senior doctors, being routinely ignored by GPs and nurses.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Craigmaddie:
But why the dogged insistence that it is not and never has been a contributing factor, without at least taking into account evidence to the contrary?
There is consistently strong evidence that MMR has no large-scale effect on incidence of Autism.
The simplest evidence is that after MMR was withdrawn in Japan, and replaced with single vaccines, incidence of autism continued to rise.
The Japanese study cannot rule out the possibility that MMR triggers autism in a tiny minority of children who are susceptible for reasons we don't yet understand. However until we *do* understand those reasons - if any, and can identify the tiny number of susceptible children - if any, there's really only one sensible option.
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
MarsmanTJ
Shipmate
# 8689
|
Posted
I have a totally untested and unscientific theory, but based on observing a lot of different children who I worked with as a TA responsible for SEN children. That children with autism generally have both a phenomenal memory (and struggle to just shrug things off like normal children. Getting over things that concern them takes hours/days longer than other children) and also have a strong aversion to physical touch. It strikes me that 'autistic symptoms' that comes up from the MMR (or any other jab-type vaccine) might simply be from panic caused by someone unfamiliar with them touching them, causing them minor pain, and not being able to get over it quickly. Fundamentally what is happening is not that they 'become autistic', but that it is the point at which the world stops being a safe place and the symptoms start to emerge, particularly as it is at about that age that the first signs of autistic behaviour generally start to emerge. However, as I say, I have virtually no basis for this in science, merely observation.
Posts: 238 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amorya:
quote:
Originally posted by Craigmaddie:
But why the dogged insistence that it is not and never has been a contributing factor, without at least taking into account evidence to the contrary?
Because there isn't any evidence to the contrary. Wakefield lied in his paper, and was struck off the medical register for it. Other studies have been done and they haven't shown a link. Where is this evidence we should be taking into account?
There's evidence - such as the case highlighted by L'organist - that in very specific circumstances it's better to wait before vaccinating. But those are the exception rather than the rule.
But there is no external / independant evidence that supports Wakefield's findings.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
quote:
posted by Tubbs
There's evidence - such as the case highlighted by L'organist - that in very specific circumstances it's better to wait before vaccinating. But those are the exception rather than the rule.
Exactly: my own children were vaccinated as a matter of course.
The only reason I wasn't is that I'm so old the only thing available was Whooping Cough (pertussis)and Polio - BCG at 13. (Oh, and polio done with a HUGE needle...!
I think part of the problem is a disconnect between the medical profession on one hand and the older generation on the other.
Example? Well, I've had chicken pox, and measles, and German measles (rubella), and mumps, and whooping cough as well (vaccination too late...). No, I personally didn't suffer any lasting side effects other than multi-coloured teeth from the whooping cough (the disease and the early form of vaccine could affect the developing 2nd teeth - annoying but not deadly). And while most of my peers had the same list of illnesses I personally don't know of any who suffered any lasting effects. My partner knew of one chap who developed hearing problems some time after measles - but he came from a family with a history of deafness so who knows??
And I'm not unique - that is pretty typical of many of us born before the vaccinations became available, because the side effects were pretty rare. You see, one's mama knew that your eyes would become sensitive and so you were kept in semi-darkness: now I'm told that was a side-effect but we didn't know it at the time and some of us don't know it or acknowledge it now.
Meanwhile, the message being broadcast by the health professionals is that measles is is very serious, that side effects are common, that people will die, etc, etc, etc - and we just don't believe it because it didn't happen to us or anyone we knew. And this apocryphal belief is handed down in families...
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Apologies if it was unintentional but, frankly, this sounds unbelievably patronising: "emotional validity" - what the hell is that? "Factual medical truth" is what I gave you - and said so in my original post.
It was an extremely patronising post.
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Meanwhile, the message being broadcast by the health professionals is that measles is is very serious, that side effects are common, that people will die, etc, etc, etc - and we just don't believe it because it didn't happen to us or anyone we knew. And this apocryphal belief is handed down in families...
Quite.
Me and my mates in Indonesia had measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox and most normal childhood diseases. They were not scary diseases.
The stats people come up with these days for diseases like measles are most likely based on hospitalised cases rather than normal cases. Hence they are skewed
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
And since we're sharing rare anecdotes, my son reacted badly to two vaccines.
It was the first time I thought to think twice.
My GP new fuck all about possible side effects.
I was never warned my son might end up significantly disabled from a vaccine (regardless of how rare it might be).
That's just so, so, so, so wrong.
I believe laws have changed more recently tho. I think parents are legally obliged to be warned now.
Better late than never.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Meanwhile, the message being broadcast by the health professionals is that measles is is very serious, that side effects are common, that people will die, etc, etc, etc - and we just don't believe it because it didn't happen to us or anyone we knew. And this apocryphal belief is handed down in families...
I'm not so sure about that. I think the reason that people of my generation (with rare exceptions) were all given all our vaccinations is that when our parents were children, their families all DID know someone who had a lost a child to measles, whooping cough and the like. My maternal grandmother, for example, had a little sister who died at the age of 11 months from an infectious disease. Our grandparents knew perfectly well how dangerous all those childhood illnesses could be.
When vaccinations were performed in my school (child of the 80s), the only person who didn't get them was someone who was allergic.
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
