I feel the single jabs are best. weather the MMR jab causes autism or chrones disease or any other condition it has been linked with is a side issue for me.

I just dont see how giving a small child so many vacines at once can be good for a childs immume system.

It is terrible that parents arent given a choice. it reminds me of a comunist system, the state knows best.

The payments to GP's should stop, how on earth can we trust our GP's if we know that have a cash insentive to give MMR. the BMA is also in agreement with me on this at their confrence.

I find it a bit supsicious that GPs are paid to recommend this (and probably many other cash incentives from other drug companys for using theirs.

Personally I think you should have the choice.

I'm at this stage now - I had the doctors surgery ring me to remind me that Georgia needed to have her MMR jab.

I'm not purposely ignoring it as its been on the back of my mind for ages..... well since she was born basically - its just that I've not had the chance to make the appointment yet as I've been away weekends etc.

However, there is NOWHERE near me that offers the single jabs, the one place I have found is quite a way away and even then I have to pay for this service as its not available of the NHS.

I won't put a price on my childs health and would do anything to help her but on the other hand, what do you do when you can't afford to pay for single jabs?

Unfortunately for us it looks like she'll have to have the MMR as I obviously want to have her immunised.

I spoke to the surgery about this a while ago and basically they are pushing for her to have it done - I can understand this for immunity reasons but if they are pushing her to have it done purely for financial reasons then that would make me mad

I think I'll need to really concentrate on this issue when I come back from hols in a couple of weeks and see what happens then.

Jola , what I would say hun is to find everything and anything you can on it ..... and once you and Len are totaly satisfied go with what you decide and then you will know you have done the right thing , your local clinic should be able to advise you if there is a Dr willing to explain everything to you.

I know Sange - that's just the point.......

I've been looking into it already and Len being Len is leaving the decision up to me - Grrrrrrrrrrrrr

Jola - It may be costly and a way to travel, but once it's done its done.

Either that or fight tooth and nail for the singel jab at your GP's.

they get £3000 for a 90% imunisation rate. the other 10% must be having something.

**Keeny takes a very deep breath**

This is a subject close to my heart. I had Joel vaccinated when he was 15 months old. Joel is autistic.. and the vaccination did NOT cause his autism. You know i'm tired of people assuming this fact.. and while some parents may genuinely believe that the vaccination caused their child's disability, in Joel's case it didn't. I know my son, i know this to be fact.

Now, where to begin.....

The MMR is recommended to be given at around 15 months of age. At this point in time is when babies start communicating with the world around them and the people in them and it is also when parents notice if there is a problem should their child not be attempting to communicate as normal. While i'm not disagreeing that the vaccination doesn't cause reactions (ie, high temperatures and the chance of febrile convulsions), my opinion is, it is easy to put the MMR vaccination and its supposed link to autism together. In some cases (not all) i feel its a little too convenient to blame the vaccination. (Incidentally, Joel's autism was caused by being starved of oxygen for 6 weeks prior to his birth).

Then there was the intitial "report" of the supposed link. It hasn't been widely reported that the "link" hasn't been replicated under laboratory conditions again.. not once.

It has been reported that there has been an "explosion" of autism. My belief there is that because of these MMR stories, there is more awareness. Ten years ago autism was rarely diagnosed, and then only as a last gasp attempt to give a diagnosis. Six years ago, when Joel was diagnosed, it took me seven months (basically because i wouldn't take no for an answer, i read up on the subject and the criteria fit Joel to a tee). I also believe for a child to supposedly become autistic from the jab, there has to be a prediliction towards autism to trigger it if this is the case.

I intend to get Hannah vaccinated. But i'm delaying it til November, when she'll be 18 months proper. By rights, she should be getting it next month.

While it is up to every parent to decide how to get their child vaccinated, i believe they should be vaccinated, either with the single jabs or the triple. Measles is not the childhood illness of the seventies, it isn't a few days of feeling poorly and a rash... it can kill. It can cause encephalitis, inflammation of the brain.. brain damage in worst case scenarios.. i believe it's dangerous to think of it in such a cavalier fashion. Same with rubella... think of the risk of a child with rubella and a pregnant woman in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy?.. when i was pregnant with Hannah three children of friends of mine came down with it before i was 3 months along. Its frightening. And what about spreading measles to other children and the risks it poses to them?.. I believe the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks. I've talked about the MMR to both my health visitors as well as my GP, they've all recommended it to me, and they've both been totally honest with me..

When i was little, apparently there was a singular measles jab. My mum decided against it for me, and i did get measles. I can't remember much about it, but my mum tells me i was very ill with it, so she got my sister and brother vaccinated. So who is to say that the single vaccinations are safe?.. who is to say that the gap between the single vaccinations could be dangerous too. Truth is, we just don't know. No one knows the true cause of autism... and for every report that claims a link, another three will appear disclaiming it. The vaccination has been in existence since 1988. I'd like to know from when this "explosion" of autism began.

It's up to each parent as i've already said, and it's a hard decision to make. I've been worrying about it myself even though i believe in it and the right to choose.

There are always scare stories... always.. (there was a nasty one about the whooping cough a few years back i seem to remember)

As i've said, these are my personal beliefs, apologies if i seem to have rambled on a bit, but if there is a point in there, i hope i've made it.

---

by ..
There are always scare stories... always.. (there was a nasty one about the whooping cough a few years back i seem to remember)

---

If i remeber correctly Galaxo have now admotted the Whooping cough jab did cause problems (memory fails as to the details tho)

Unless they've changed the vaccination, or it was a faulty batch, they're still giving out the whooping cough vaccination and the scare stories have since subsided.

There will always be new and old scare stories surrounding any vaccination or disease. They were rife when they began handing out the meningitis vaccinations in this area last year and nothing would pursuade me to refuse that for my daughter. I didn't listen to stories. I talked to the right people and made up my own mind. My daughter had the MMR vaccination and was absolutely fine.

Yes, all parents should make up their own minds once they have the full facts necessary to allow them that privilege.

I did read a short time ago, in one of the teaching magazines that sit in the staff room, there are fears (from whom I don't actually know, government, doctors?) of a huge measles epidemic, focussing specifically on the Southern regions (so say the 'statistics'), due to a dramatic fall in children having the MMR vaccination. What this could mean I have no idea. Rubbish? Scare tactics? Maybe so. But I'm just glad that my daughter has been immunised.

*There are fears that some parents do not trust their GPs to be impartial about the controversial measles, mumps and rubella vaccine's safety because of the system.

Currently, GPs receive up to £910 each year if 70% of infants on their list are immunised, or up to £2,730 if 90% complete their vaccination course*

I think I heard on the news that doctors want to scrap this system now because of the breakdown of trust.

There seems to be so many people that either are refusing to get their children vaccinated , or are feeling pressured into doing so, to me what makes the most sense is for them to offer the vaccine in separate jabs.
I'm sure I heared, read somewhere that when Tony Blair was asked wether he had his son vaccinated he had confirmed he had , but he would not confirm wether he had recieved the Triple jab or had them one by one ( would be greatfull if anyone can confirm this )

There was a few cases of German Measles recently at my childrens school.

I have also heared stories of the Government wanting to give the children even more vaccination cocktails, I just think it's about time that parents were given the choice, I want my Boys vaccinated against Mumps and Measles and Rubella , I'm just not willing to have them given the Triple jab.

Firstly, I thought that was a fantastic post, Keeny. You certainly didn't ramble.

Secondly. The biggest problem is the lose-lose aspect of all this. From a parents perspective their are stories linking the MMR jabs to autism, and no parent wants to be responsible for their child becoming autistic. However, the MMR diseases can be fatal, and no parent wants to be responsible for their child dying, or anyone else's child dying through contagion, because they didn't get their child immunised.

It's the same for the government. As long as they stick to the triple jab they will be condemned for not listening to parents' concerns. However, if they make available the single jabs they run the risk of dropping uptake of one or more of the single jabs, and will be blamed for giving into mob rule over good science.

Everyone is too scared to make the wrong decision, and inertia pushes them to do nothing, which can be just as bad as taking action.

But we need to weed the facts from the horror stories.

There has never been a proven link between the MMR jabs and autism. Ever. As Keeny said, the age which autism is usually first noticed, and that of the MMR jab being recommended are about the same. This doesn't mean one leads to the other.

The government introduced the MMR because a large number of parents would take their child to the first jab, but not to the second and third. Usually, time constrictions and cost were cited as reasons, but this lead to the diseases perpetuating. Also, as I understand it, if the time gap between the three is too large it has implications for the effectiveness of the jabs. MMR has always been the best solution for the eradication of these diseases, side effects aside.

So here's the real quandary – there is no scientific evidence that there is anything wrong with the MMR jabs, only anecdotal. So on the basis of that, what's more important - parental choice or child welfare?

However, being the liberal kinda guy I am, I don't like the government forcing itself on people. I suspect the best answer is to allow both the single and triple vaccination options. However, parents that do not ensure that their children receive the full treatment should be placed at risks of fines, or even social services intervention.

I'm sorry, but if you don't immunise your child you're not only putting your own children at risk, but also anyone they come in contact with. If the option to choose is introduced, then parents must take responsibility for not taking adequate precautions. Society needs to be concerned with the rights of the child, as well as the parent.

As for Tony Blair, no he never did say whether his child had the MMR or single jab course, although he did hint that his child had been immunised. And I'm glad. What Mr Blair, or any politician, chooses to do in their private life (as long as it is not illegal) is no business of mine, and to use his child to win a political argument would have been disgusting.

Our only concern should be with the scientific facts, not with who did what to whom.

Well Keeny - I couldn't put it better myself

I certainly agree with JayJay (Did i just say that )
about Tony Blair. In the current climate surrounding the MMr jab it would be wholey inapproriate for Tony to disclose whether his children have had the jabs or not.

JayJay I agree with your first post, as I have stated I would have my children vaccinated if I was given the choice of the single jabs, and my reasons for not giving them the triple jab are to do with my second son having a fit from a high temperature rather than the scare storys about Autism and Crohns. I also feel that pumping three different virus's into a babys immature immune system is kinda asking for trouble.

On the Tony Blair thing, I'm sorry but I disagree with you, as the Leader of this countrys Government and as a parent if he is backing his Governments policy on the triple jabs he should be open and honest about how his son was vaccinated, if his son had recieved the triple vaccination I'm sure he would have come straight out and said so. As he did when he was caught out breaking policy on sending his children to schools out of their catchment area , in order to ensure they had the best education he could give them , and I totaly respected him for doing so and admiting it. (although I so don't want this to turn into a political debate)

Every parent want's whats best and safe for their children , I wouldn't give my children a loaded gun because of the risk , why should I have to give a jab with possible attached risks. Parents should be given the choice , and not made to feel that they are bad parents because they have made an imformed decision , especially when there are such conflicting reports.

Is there a possibilty with all the vaccines we have today , example they now what to vaccinate for chicken pox, that all we are going to do is breed super bugs for the future???

Keeny - Well said

Sange - I can see why you would be put off giving your other children the jab because one had a serious reaction, but is it not possible that the reaction might have been as bad to individual jabs?

I know when I was a child there was no MMR. The only immunisation I remember was tetanus, polio and diptheria, and that was all done at once although it wasn't one injection. I don't recall there being comments about that. I know I had a measles vaccination. Rubella I nearly missed out on, at the time they gave it to girls at the end of junior school or the start of secondary school - we moved and I missed it, and I actually had to ask the doctor for the jab specially when I was about 20 as I did feel I should have it.

Everything I hear about this seems to suggest that there is no proven link between MMR and the disorders it has been blamed for causing. However, I do feel that given the level of concern about this vaccine perhaps the single jabs should be made available, as long as parents understand that they have to ensure that their children receive all three.

As for Tony Blair, I agree with Jayjay. Yes, Blair has been elected to the most important role in our government, and to some extent the choices he makes - to drive or take the train, maybe - should reflect government policy. However, his children have not been elected to anything and I feel very stongly that they should not be used as pawns in a political game.

Sange, on the Tony Blair issue, I can understand why people feel they have a right to know whether he had his own child immunised with the MMR vaccine. After all, here he is, publicly telling us what we can and can't do, and what is to stop him secretly paying (with tax payer wages) for his own kid to have what he won't let us have?

Thing is, Tony Blair's opinion on this is irrelevant. As long as he is acting on what the vast body of the scientific community are advising, then that is all that matters. And on MMR that is what he is doing.

If a Transport Minister follows scientific advise on Traffic Congestion, but chooses to continue to drive, then as long as they pay the same penalties as us I'm happy.

Personally, all I want from a politician is someone who doesn't try to impose on my life, but takes the necessary actions to ensure a healthy economy, protection from violent or light-fingered elements of society, and provides a health and education system that we can be proud of. What options they choose to follow in their own live I could not care less about.

What school Tony Blair chooses to send his kid to will not change my mind on what school to send my kid to. Whether Tony Blair has his kid take the triple or single MMR injections won't decide for me what is the right course. Scientific information on the dangers are what I am interested in. Nothing else.

Liam is 8 months old, and even so soon I have this playing on my mind, Should I shouldn't I? I have spoke to my health visitor at his 8 month developmental check, and she said as Keeny stated the risks far out-wiegh the scare-mongering around the MMR. In short, Measles can kill. So still I am in dilemma. My doctor, just says, you must have it, subject closed. My other half insists we have it done separatly, privately and in his words 'sod the money' He has this attitude because his dad's new wife's son has autism and as keeny said it was diagnosed around the same time as the jab was given,again I spoke to my health visitor about this and she confirmed that around that time is when it is most likely detected. I not asking for any-one to make the decision for me, because it is 'our and ours alone decision' But I really am very confused with all the conflicting stories