Levenax wrote:
It's really only the educated classes who know about the controversy behind MMR triple vaccine and many of them have the means should they so choose to get single dose vaccines either by paying for it privately or making a pest of themselves to their GP. The poor probably don't know any better and just do what the health visitor says or maybe even don't bother with that and do nothing. Unfortunately their health inequality is then made even worse with possibly, on one hand, more vaccine damaged children or, on the other, children crippled with measles or mumps or years later babies born damaged to non immune girls. Whatever, it's a public health disaster.

I can't imagine why even the stupidest of people could imagine that giving a girl a vaccine that will protect her from a horrible disease in later life could turn her into a crazed teenage sexpot. It seems that it's mostly parents who send their kids to religious schools who have denied their daughters the chance of avoiding cervical cancer. Surprised? No, I'm not either.

Levenax

I am to say the least flabbergasted at your remarks. Your attitude is the Pitts. How dare you. This attitude of "well "they" live in craigmillar or pilton" that automatically reduces their ability to think - feel - reason - and their right to be thought of as thinking reasoning people. It seems when I meet this attitude from unthinking people it also reduces all human rights if you are poor.

I have news for you the Queen may sit on a gold plated toilet but she stills poo's and Pee's just like the rest of us. The tragedy of the inability of the poor to have their children vaccinated with singe jabs does not mean they do not give it every bit as much thought as you me or the queen.

The choice for people without money is harder but I can assure you that the same agony is there when making that choice. Their children and the future of their children are just as precious as yours or mine.

I am assuming that last crack was making a point about the catholic religion, when my explanation was trying to reach an understanding simply about how we felt about the 13 year old girl in our family. It just feels inconceivable that she would have sex, so we feel why so young, is all I meant.
No we do not think this would automatically make her a sex addict. Just the opposite actually, she still feels like a child. My point was that most people feel it is a little silly to give it so young because she is a child.

Having said that I am catholic and very proud to be so and I do not believe in sex outside of marriage but that is me that how I would live and want my loved ones to live but neither am I better than anyone else so therefore would not judge the actions of others.

DoricMan wrote:
I am old enough to have been infected with fatal infections in my early school years, such as Diptheria, Scarlet fever, mumps, whooping cough, measles and was lucky to have survived relatively unscathed. Diptheria was touch and go for me I must add.
One of my friends died from disease, another was crippled with Polio. Today its very different, we haven't experienced any of these killer diseases, and have not had to live with such memories as I had of my baby sister, in our mother's arms, having a major Whooping fit and wondering if she would ever breathe again, a frightening experience that today is preventable along with the ones I had as a child.


I have to agree with Doric Man about the horrors of some of these diseases. Like DM, I also have a friend who survived polio. She is now in her 50s and still has health problems because of this. I also remember my dad telling me about my uncle dying of diphtheria and the devastation it brought on the family. I don't think my gran ever recovered from the way my dad talked.
When my children were young, the MMR was not available. I remember when my son was 4, he caught mumps and I spent weeks up with him ever night as he fought this disease. One of the nurses said they had never seen a boy who was so ill with mumps. Her words were to haunt her though as one of his classmates at nursery school died as a result of developing meningitis through mumps. I would much prefer that they had single vaccines but I would still pick the MMR over nothing if I had to decide for a child of mine now.
There was still controversy over vaccines when mine were young. There were misgivings about the "triple" which was diphtheria, tetanus and whopping cough as the whopping cough part was seen as a possible cause of autism. I decided to get mine vaccinated with the triple as I remember my mum telling me about her experiences with whopping cough when she was young and the resultant health problems she suffered for the rest of her life. It wasn't easy to decide but the chances of being affected by the triple were far less than the chances of catching whopping cough and the problems following it.
The other point I would like to make is that there will always be people who cannot get vaccinated against certain diseases. None of my family could have the BCG for TB as a family member had nearly died from this vaccination. It always angered me that there were people who refused vaccination because they were relying on other people to keep the immunity level up. I had no choice in this and I have always relied on the rest of the population being responsibility to cut down my chances in contracting this illness.

LYDIA REID wrote:I am to say the least flabbergasted at your remarks. Your attitude is the Pitts. How dare you. This attitude of "well "they" live in craigmillar or pilton" that automatically reduces their ability to think - feel - reason - and their right to be thought of as thinking reasoning people. It seems when I meet this attitude from unthinking people it also reduces all human rights if you are poor.

The plain fact is that a large number of the underclass who live in sink estates can't make a reasoned decision about anything. Some may say that's because they are underprivileged or deprived but is in fact because they are much less intelligent than normal and are poorly educated. Upwards of 50% of sink estate dwellers can't read properly. I make no judgement about this unfortunate state of affairs other than to say that the education system has failed millions of children in the last three or four decades and condemned them to a life of misery and waste. It's obvious that some folk trapped in poverty ARE intelligent and do engage with the issues that affect their own and their children's health. These people will do their best but their example is ignored by their peers and that's why the health of Scotland's people is amongst the worst in the developed world and why men where I live can expect to live 25 years longer than those who live in Easterhouse. This ongoing attrition of the so called underprivileged is one of the biggest challenges facing the Scottish Government. Radical measures are needed but I fear the left of centre ethos that hangs like a cloud over Scotland may stifle those with the ideas to remedy this malaise.

Religious types do object more to HPV vaccinations as the results from the pilot sites have shown. I've no idea what brand of god they buy into but it'll be the usual rampant misogyny and mania about sex at the root of it.

LYDIA REID wrote:
DoricMan wrote:
LYDIA REID wrote:
DoricMan wrote:
Wakefield and his wholly flawed opinion, and its publication, was in my view a crime. Yes a crime. It effectively stopped other more credible research from being viewed as having the credibility they deserved, let alone the fallout of unimmunised children who died or were permanently harmed by not having MMR.
I am old enough to have been infected with fatal infections in my early school years, such as Diptheria, Scarlet fever, mumps, whooping cough, measles and was lucky to have survived relatively unscathed. Diptheria was touch and go for me I must add.
One of my friends died from disease, another was crippled with Polio. Today its very different, we haven't experienced any of these killer diseases, and have not had to live with such memories as I had of my baby sister, in our mother's arms, having a major Whooping fit and wondering if she would ever breathe again, a frightening experience that today is preventable along with the ones I had as a child.
Preventable disease and its prevention needs to be taken seriously, and not rubbished as has happened with uninformed or damaging opinion.

doricman
No one would deny the want for good research but do you really believe that it will happen. Their is no way in this world that the drug companies will allow this to happen. The results of some of these diseases are terrible but so are the consequences for parents of children who are at risk from MMR. Do you really believe that it is an easy life, having a whole life lived looking after a damaged child. Then wondering should I kill them before I die as no one else is around to look after them when I die. That is reality for parents of damaged children.

If a vaccine is safe then it is wonderful it changes life for many and can save many. When it is flawed as I believe the MMR vaccine is flawed then they have no right to market this when it is proven to hurt even if only a few get hurt. it is not the choice of the scientist that it will be diphtheria you die from or if instead you will live your life damaged.Yes we want, not only good world wide research, and its findings concerning the safety of clinically proven vaccines, as is this case for MMR.


One needless death of an innocent child by not being properly vaccinated is something I cannot comprehend, or accept.
My views are totally at odds with yours Lydia and were formed from my early experiences of fatal and crippling disease. How I wish my childhood friends, and myself, had access to today's medical advances, but I am here as their advocate, hopefully a worthy one.

I wonder if you would say that if you were the parent of a child who maybe like one of ours is too bright for their age astounding everyone with the things they can accomplish and then you watch that disappear before your eyes. You watch all this hope for the future replaced by a child that is completely shut into their own world and may very well be aggressive and incontinent and unrecognisable as the child you started out with.

That is the reality of autism, but probably not the worst scenario for vaccine damaged children, some are no better than vegetables totally dependant on their parents.

Vaccines which save lives are indeed something we should go down on our knees and thank the scientists for. When they are needlessly given in a triple dose to save money. When they contain preservatives that damage children. The scientist and the ruling government of that day should go to prison because this is one of the worst forms of assault.

My aunt died from one of the diseases you speak of and my mother often spoke of her of her illness and her death and the devastation it caused in the family. Of course this was heartbreaking and of course we want this to end but what do you choose death from diphtheria or living death from a vaccine. Especially when it is unnecessary when all this could be different if the children were given the three doses separately.MMR does not cause Autism.

DM and Lydiam I'd like to jump in here very quickly before we go down the road of "yes it does; no it doesn't".

I have a real problem with the medical research community nowadays. It seems to me, the basic, educated, man in the street with no specific knowledge of medical affairs, that these so called experts publish conflicting opinions on an almost monthly basis. One group tells you it's good for your heart to drink a glass of red wine a day while another group tells you that, if you do, you are an alcoholic. One group tells you that cholestorol is bad while another encourages you to eat eggs. And, yes, one group tells you that MMR causes autism while another says it doesn't.

Where does that leave the likes of me? Frankly, in a complete quandry. So I have decided that I will read what I can and form my own opinion. Since they cannot agree among themselves, then I reckon I am as capable as any of them despite their superior knowledge. I believe their main objective is to ensure another lot of funding more than to seek truth.

To that end, I am strongly against compulsory vaccination. I understand the benefits and the drawbacks, but I still want to form my own opinion. If the "herd effect" is required, then the medical community needs to get together and sell me that message instead of continuously contradicting each other. Frankly, I would rather go to jail than allow myself or my family to receive a treatment I did not agree with. As to using education as a bargaining tool, this is beneath contempt and I would withhold my vote forever from any party who used it.

Martin wrote:
DM and Lydiam I'd like to jump in here very quickly before we go down the road of "yes it does; no it doesn't".

I have a real problem with the medical research community nowadays. It seems to me, the basic, educated, man in the street with no specific knowledge of medical affairs, that these so called experts publish conflicting opinions on an almost monthly basis. One group tells you it's good for your heart to drink a glass of red wine a day while another group tells you that, if you do, you are an alcoholic. One group tells you that cholestorol is bad while another encourages you to eat eggs. And, yes, one group tells you that MMR causes autism while another says it doesn't.

Where does that leave the likes of me? Frankly, in a complete quandry. So I have decided that I will read what I can and form my own opinion. Since they cannot agree among themselves, then I reckon I am as capable as any of them despite their superior knowledge. I believe their main objective is to ensure another lot of funding more than to seek truth.

To that end, I am strongly against compulsory vaccination. I understand the benefits and the drawbacks, but I still want to form my own opinion. If the "herd effect" is required, then the medical community needs to get together and sell me that message instead of continuously contradicting each other. Frankly, I would rather go to jail than allow myself or my family to receive a treatment I did not agree with. As to using education as a bargaining tool, this is beneath contempt and I would withhold my vote forever from any party who used it.

I share your views about the contradictory nature of what's published. I'm against compulsory vaccination too because nobody has the right to impose medication on another person (well OK, mad people excepted).
I don't understand your point about education...?

Sorry, Lev, maybe I expressed this badly.I was just making th point that I am an educated and I would like to think well read person who takes a real interest in issues, yet I find all this very confusing.

You may very well both have good points to make. My particularly strong views on this subject are formed by the parents that contact this organisation. They have done their homework. They have worked hard not just to find out if anything can be done to help their children but they are convinced if they find out what happened and what damaged there children they may find something to help. My heart goes out to them as they speak of the damage done to their children. They really have fears about what will happen to their children if anything happens to the parents. If you watch the video scunnert posted earlier, it and many more on u tube, they seem to agree with the parents point of view. They are convinced that the preservatives in the triple dose cause the damage. The reason they believe this is that this same preservative is in other vaccines that cause damage and in other medicines.

I often go to hospitals to support parents from the lets call them less salubrious parts of Scotland. The difference I can make in the treatment a child will receive is ludicrous. The doctors look at parents and children who are not so well dressed or not so well spoken and until I speak, they treat me in the same offhand way, as if this child was totally without rights. As if, this child is a nuisance or does not deserve the best treatment. When I start to ask intelligent questions and make it known I expect the best for this child you can often actually see the attitude change. Then I am dressed in a suit.

In my view, each child is a gift; I do not care whether their parents are less educated or do not wear designer trainers. They have the right to be treated as the precious little people they are. Their parents have the right to be treated with civility and not have someone assume that they will not understand because they live in a poor area.

I could fill pages with examples but I will give just one. The baby was born at 32 weeks gestation and two weeks later when she was just over four pounds in weight she was out of the hospital because she was according to the nurses breathing well and feeding. This little thing was taken back to the hospital five times because she could not feed.
This mum, when the baby was ten week old took her to the G Ps surgery in Craigmiller in Edin. She kept on saying this baby was ill. They kept on sending her away at one point they offered her pills for depression saying she was over anxious. The mum phoned me one night desperate. She was convinced this baby was dying and what could she do. I was in bed ill which was why she had not phoned me earlier. I took her and the baby to the Sick children’s. The first three doctors dismissed us as over anxious. I just kept on asking to see another doctor, eventually a Seiko doctor walked in. he was just amazing. Within an hour she was in intensive care, she had pneumonia. By the middle of the night, they were telling us she would not live.

Luckily, she was a determined little thing, she is now five, and full of cheek with a smile that melts your heart. This is what can happen to children from poorer areas. These doctors are of course well educated.

Martin I know what you mean. It is often a case of, well, who do we believe? It isn't helpful to anyone and especially for parents it must be horrendous making major decisions about vaccinations. I had the rubella one at 12 or so I think. Only girls got that one for obvious reasons. Perhaps there is wisdom in not combining the three in one vaccination. Perhaps combining all three is what is creating the problem.

It is often the case that the "We know best." approach, usually taken by those with a vested interest in telling us that, is the one that triumphs. That approach however can only be challenged when people are willing to speak out against it and demand more from those who make major decisions for us and for our children when it comes to drugs and their safety.

Clare wrote:
Martin I know what you mean. It is often a case of, well, who do we believe? It isn't helpful to anyone and especially for parents it must be horrendous making major decisions about vaccinations. I had the rubella one at 12 or so I think. Only girls got that one for obvious reasons. Perhaps there is wisdom in not combining the three in one vaccination. Perhaps combining all three is what is creating the problem.

It is often the case that the "We know best." approach, usually taken by those with a vested interest in telling us that, is the one that triumphs. That approach however can only be challenged when people are willing to speak out against it and demand more from those who make major decisions for us and for our children when it comes to drugs and their safety.The problem with multiple vaccinations Clare, I believe, is down to the number of visits to the doctor or Clinic to have these done in an acceptable timetable. Next the whole thing has to be repeated for the necessary follow up boosters, with the parent or guardian committed to the more complex timetable. The other issue is to do with appropriate vaccine storage and the record keeping involved.
Against this is the first MMR vaccination and the follow up boosters, provide fewer windows of opportunities for infection, due to the simpler time table with the triple immunisation.

DoricMan wrote:
Clare wrote:
Martin I know what you mean. It is often a case of, well, who do we believe? It isn't helpful to anyone and especially for parents it must be horrendous making major decisions about vaccinations. I had the rubella one at 12 or so I think. Only girls got that one for obvious reasons. Perhaps there is wisdom in not combining the three in one vaccination. Perhaps combining all three is what is creating the problem.

It is often the case that the "We know best." approach, usually taken by those with a vested interest in telling us that, is the one that triumphs. That approach however can only be challenged when people are willing to speak out against it and demand more from those who make major decisions for us and for our children when it comes to drugs and their safety.The problem with multiple vaccinations Clare, I believe, is down to the number of visits to the doctor or Clinic to have these done in an acceptable timetable. Next the whole thing has to be repeated for the necessary follow up boosters, with the parent or guardian committed to the more complex timetable. The other issue is to do with appropriate vaccine storage and the record keeping involved.
Against this is the first MMR vaccination and the follow up boosters, provide fewer windows of opportunities for infection, due to the simpler time table with the triple immunisation.

Diricman

i accept totally the risks involved in single vaccination. I do believe in the " herd effect" of vaccination. I come back again to the choice, especially if a parent knows a damaged child or knows of a damaged child or knows that for instance children in their family are susceptible to asthma eczema or any other likely problem their child could suffer because they were given the MMR.

Would you not want to play safe and pay for the single dose. some parents simply look at the evidence, weigh it up and decide not to take the chance.

Do you not reason that in the thousands of children that have the single doses not one case of autism or any seemingly related condition is apparent.

If this were your child damaged in this way would you want answers.

Do we get the full truth of the numbers of children damaged.

We are told autism is on the rise year on year. Asthma and eczema are on the rise and that can be pinpointed to the years following the start of MMR.

www.documentary-film.net/search/watch-now.php?&ref=5

A documentary on the origin of aids. The film supports the idea that the polio vaccine developed by Koprowski was the source of this disease. Worth watching - very convincing.

LYDIA REID wrote:
DoricMan wrote:
Diricman

i accept totally the risks involved in single vaccination. I do believe in the " herd effect" of vaccination. I come back again to the choice, especially if a parent knows a damaged child or knows of a damaged child or knows that for instance children in their family are susceptible to asthma eczema or any other likely problem their child could suffer because they were given the MMR.

Would you not want to play safe and pay for the single dose. some parents simply look at the evidence, weigh it up and decide not to take the chance.

Do you not reason that in the thousands of children that have the single doses not one case of autism or any seemingly related condition is apparent.

If this were your child damaged in this way would you want answers.

Do we get the full truth of the numbers of children damaged.

We are told autism is on the rise year on year. Asthma and eczema are on the rise and that can be pinpointed to the years following the start of MMR.
"Parents look at the evidence", "Single doses . . not one case of Autism", "the full truth", "autism is on the rise year on year".
As a child I was damaged with life threatening infections and disease Lydia, I was in isolation for weeks, and somehow survived them all. I do not want to see a single child death from the diseases I suffered, and of course a child living the rest of his life with severe, permanent disability.
We have a choice, immunisation thankfully is available and does not depend on Herd Immunity or good luck.

DoricMan wrote:
LYDIA REID wrote:
DoricMan wrote:
Diricman

i accept totally the risks involved in single vaccination. I do believe in the " herd effect" of vaccination. I come back again to the choice, especially if a parent knows a damaged child or knows of a damaged child or knows that for instance children in their family are susceptible to asthma eczema or any other likely problem their child could suffer because they were given the MMR.

Would you not want to play safe and pay for the single dose. some parents simply look at the evidence, weigh it up and decide not to take the chance.

Do you not reason that in the thousands of children that have the single doses not one case of autism or any seemingly related condition is apparent.

If this were your child damaged in this way would you want answers.

Do we get the full truth of the numbers of children damaged.

We are told autism is on the rise year on year. Asthma and eczema are on the rise and that can be pinpointed to the years following the start of MMR.
"Parents look at the evidence", "Single doses . . not one case of Autism", "the full truth", "autism is on the rise year on year".
As a child I was damaged with life threatening infections and disease Lydia, I was in isolation for weeks, and somehow survived them all. I do not want to see a single child death from the diseases I suffered, and of course a child living the rest of his life with severe, permanent disability.
We have a choice, immunisation thankfully is available and does not depend on Herd Immunity or good luck.

doricman
I can truly understand where your views come from, that time must have been terrible for you and I can see why you would not want any child to go through that. I have two points to make. Immunity depends on which vaccine we are talking about whether or not it gives total protection which is why the theory of herd immunity is used to describe what happens if some are not vaccinated.

I still state though that for many parents it is a difficult choice, many have heard of the terrible effects of some of these diseases. When a parent must weigh that against the effects of some of the vaccines and the possible consequences for their child, it is not easy.

A possible solution is honesty, if scientists told parents that particular children may be susceptible to particular conditions as an effect of taking a vaccine the evidence could be weighed with intelligent reasoning. Their is of course a better option. Knowing that the large quantity bottles of vaccine for the triple dose must contain preservatives they could use just a little more money and pack and dispense in single doses which would remove the danger for many children.

The luck issue comes in when you consider that maybe a whole class of children can have this vaccine and maybe only one or none or half may show these effects in varying degrees.

If the drug companies or the government had the courage, commitment to children and the honesty to do the research there may very well be some simple explanation and maybe some simple way to overcome these problems.

My point is always that they do not have the right to choose that most people will be protected and some will be left disabled for the rest of their life.

scunnert wrote:
www.documentary-film.net/search/watch-now.php?&ref=5

A documentary on the origin of aids. The film supports the idea that the polio vaccine developed by Koprowski was the source of this disease. Worth watching - very convincing.

scunnert
That film does look interesting I have not had time to watch all of it yet 1 hour 29 but I will