Flat Earth theory

[Arfur Europe]

Kids getting vaccinated against MMR? Good or bad?

Anybody getting a tetanus shot. Good or bad?

People travelling to Asia/Africa getting typhoid, diphtheria, hepatitis a shots? Good or bad.

Entire population getting vaccinated against meningitis?

Elderly people getting a flu jab.

Of course people with allergies are exempt from all the above.

Mrs R has already answered your question a few times in this thread. Firstly, if vaccines are so effective, then you shouldn't be concerned if she doesn't accept them as you will be already protected.

Secondly, what the hell has it got to do with other people (you included) when it comes to personal medical choice?

I always find it amazing the reaction when someone tries something different in this topic and anything else, and it completely flips the minds of the 'uber conformists'!!

'THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN TOLD, HOW CAN IT BE?... CANNOT COMPUTE... CANNOT COMPUTE...'

[Steve R]

Mrs R has already answered your question a few times in this thread. Firstly, if vaccines are so effective, then you shouldn't be concerned if she doesn't accept them as you will be already protected.

Secondly, what the hell has it got to do with other people (you included) when it comes to personal medical choice?

I always find it amazing the reaction when someone tries something different in this topic and anything else, and it completely flips the minds of the 'uber conformists'!!

'THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN TOLD, HOW CAN IT BE?... CANNOT COMPUTE... CANNOT COMPUTE...'

Hang on guys, here comes another one!

[Mrs Steve R]

I'll have that in f*cking writing all day long!!

Anyone on here.

Mrs R has already answered your question a few times in this thread. Firstly, if vaccines are so effective, then you shouldn't be concerned if she doesn't accept them as you will be already protected.

Secondly, what the hell has it got to do with other people (you included) when it comes to personal medical choice?

I always find it amazing the reaction when someone tries something different in this topic and anything else, and it completely flips the minds of the 'uber conformists'!!

'THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN TOLD, HOW CAN IT BE?... CANNOT COMPUTE... CANNOT COMPUTE...'

Nothing is personal anymore and you don't have much choice either.

[Ainsley Harriott]

Firstly, if vaccines are so effective, then you shouldn't be concerned if she doesn't accept them as you will be already protected.

Immunisation to many diseases wears off over time. Adults are recommended to get booster vaccines for some diseases that they were vaccinated against as a child.

Then there are those whose immune systems are susceptible to the diseases even with vaccines (AIDS sufferers, chemo patients), and babies less than 2 months old (who haven't had their first vaccines yet), who can't be immunised themselves but would benefit greatly from herd immunity.

If EVERYONE was vaccinated against these diseases at around the same time, the diseases would be eradicated virtually overnight, and millions of children wouldn't die of them every year (health systems across the world would also save billions of pounds annually) But not everyone gets vaccinated.

[Kris]

Mrs R has already answered your question a few times in this thread. Firstly, if vaccines are so effective, then you shouldn't be concerned if she doesn't accept them as you will be already protected.

Secondly, what the hell has it got to do with other people (you included) when it comes to personal medical choice?

I always find it amazing the reaction when someone tries something different in this topic and anything else, and it completely flips the minds of the 'uber conformists'!!

'THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN TOLD, HOW CAN IT BE?... CANNOT COMPUTE... CANNOT COMPUTE...'

No, Mrs R hasn't answered any questions. She has been vague (as is her right) on her reasons for not taking vaccines. The only answer she has provided was to the question "Are vaccines good or bad". Her answer was a definitive (um, depends!). When given various scenarios, she didn't answer (as is her right), but she still has plenty of vague things to say about vaccines.

"Firstly, if vaccines are so effective, then you shouldn't be concerned if she doesn't accept them as you will be already protected."

What a selfish attitude to take. Let me tell you why I AM concerned. I have read so many stories of people who, on the basis of Dr Wakefield's and other anti-vaccine people, are beating themselves up over somehow giving their kids autism. I have read even more stories of parents of kids who didn't take the MMR vaccine and whose kids became seriously ill from the effects of measles, mumps or rubella.

My young cousin, not vaccinated, contracted encephalitis after suffering from Mumps.

"Secondly, what the hell has it got to do with other people (you included) when it comes to personal medical choice?"

Measles, for example, kills millions every year. There are kids who are unprotected because their parents/guardians have been mis-educated, mis-informed, or just think it's a great thing to not "conform". Parents worldwide are making the choice "Do I give my kids autism, or let them have measles for a couple of weeks" and are choosing the latter. I admit that this does "flip" my mind, purely because the REAL choice is "Do I let my kids have a vaccine that prevents measles (a potentially deadly disease), or do I not give them the vaccine and risk them getting measles (a potentially deadly disease".

So, I am sorry, but I do COMPUTE. Yes, people are well within their rights to make choices about their own bodies. But, those choices often come off the back of poor studies (of TWELVE people in Dr Wakefield's damaging paper).

Of course, you can live in a town of 10,000 people. Of those 9,999 have been vaccinated against all diseases. You haven't. But you get the external benefit of everybody else having been vaccinated. Until you take a trip to another town where, of 10,000 people, only 100 have been vaccinated. And, yikes, you're in the middle of a Rubella outbreak and (in the case of a pregnant woman) your unborn child is now in danger of being still-born.

Smallpox (eradicated). Polio - 350,000 cases in 1988. 74 in 2015.

That we are still getting measles outbreaks

https://www.cdc.gov/measles/cases-outbreaks.html

is largely due to the fact that so many people are non-conforming and being wiser than us "uber conformists" by not getting themselves, nor their offspring, vaccinated.

[Arfur Europe]

No, Mrs R hasn't answered any questions. She has been vague (as is her right) on her reasons for not taking vaccines. The only answer she has provided was to the question "Are vaccines good or bad". Her answer was a definitive (um, depends!). When given various scenarios, she didn't answer (as is her right), but she still has plenty of vague things to say about vaccines.

"Firstly, if vaccines are so effective, then you shouldn't be concerned if she doesn't accept them as you will be already protected."

What a selfish attitude to take. Let me tell you why I AM concerned. I have read so many stories of people who, on the basis of Dr Wakefield's and other anti-vaccine people, are beating themselves up over somehow giving their kids autism. I have read even more stories of parents of kids who didn't take the MMR vaccine and whose kids became seriously ill from the effects of measles, mumps or rubella.

My young cousin, not vaccinated, contracted encephalitis after suffering from Mumps.

"Secondly, what the hell has it got to do with other people (you included) when it comes to personal medical choice?"

Measles, for example, kills millions every year. There are kids who are unprotected because their parents/guardians have been mis-educated, mis-informed, or just think it's a great thing to not "conform". Parents worldwide are making the choice "Do I give my kids autism, or let them have measles for a couple of weeks" and are choosing the latter. I admit that this does "flip" my mind, purely because the REAL choice is "Do I let my kids have a vaccine that prevents measles (a potentially deadly disease), or do I not give them the vaccine and risk them getting measles (a potentially deadly disease".

So, I am sorry, but I do COMPUTE. Yes, people are well within their rights to make choices about their own bodies. But, those choices often come off the back of poor studies (of TWELVE people in Dr Wakefield's damaging paper).

Of course, you can live in a town of 10,000 people. Of those 9,999 have been vaccinated against all diseases. You haven't. But you get the external benefit of everybody else having been vaccinated. Until you take a trip to another town where, of 10,000 people, only 100 have been vaccinated. And, yikes, you're in the middle of a Rubella outbreak and (in the case of a pregnant woman) your unborn child is now in danger of being still-born.

Smallpox (eradicated). Polio - 350,000 cases in 1988. 74 in 2015.

That we are still getting measles outbreaks

https://www.cdc.gov/measles/cases-outbreaks.html

is largely due to the fact that so many people are non-conforming and being wiser than us "uber conformists" by not getting themselves, nor their offspring, vaccinated.

I remember only too well, the huge lengths that our esteemed and thoroughly honourable Prime Minister of the time, Tony Bliar went to hide the truth over his child's MMR vaccination

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...s-MMR-jab.html

There should be no reason whatsoever for him to keep schtum over that, especially as he was espousing the benefits of it.

With any concern over something like this, no matter how slight, the obvious thing would be to separate the jabs again as were available during our childhoods.

I remember this saga went on for years, and I now see that while out of the limelight he then advised that his son had the MMR after all. I have no faith in that statement whatsoever, having learnt what we have about Bliar since.

As for Mrs R's stance, it is entirely her own decision, and she's not at liberty to explain why to anyone on here or anyone else.

[Kris]

I remember only too well, the huge lengths that our esteemed and thoroughly honourable Prime Minister of the time, Tony Bliar went to hide the truth over his child's MMR vaccination

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...s-MMR-jab.html

There should be no reason whatsoever for him to keep schtum over that, especially as he was espousing the benefits of it.

With any concern over something like this, no matter how slight, the obvious thing would be to separate the jabs again as were available during our childhoods.

I remember this saga went on for years, and I now see that while out of the limelight he then advised that his son had the MMR after all. I have no faith in that statement whatsoever, having learnt what we have about Bliar since.

As for Mrs R's stance, it is entirely her own decision, and she's not at liberty to explain why to anyone on here or anyone else.

How the eff has this gone onto a rant about Blair?

As for the comment about "with any concern over something like this". There is NO concern in the scientific community. Even the person who came up with the ridiculous study admits he's talking out of his arse. But, if you WERE concerned about it, the option is still there for you to take the vaccines separately - however, you have to pay for it and in a backstreet clinic (probably run by pseudo-scientists and homeopathy freaks).

The NHS explain why they don't offer three separate vaccines as follows :-

Can the MMR vaccination be given as three separate injections?

No, not on the NHS. The MMR vaccine consists of a combination of three individual vaccines against measles, mumps and rubella in a single shot.
The NHS does not recommend single measles, mumps or rubella vaccines, as there is no evidence to support their use or to suggest that they are safer than MMR. Having single vaccines could also put your child at risk of catching measles, mumps or rubella in the time between the doses of each of the vaccines.
Some private clinics in the UK offer single vaccines against measles, mumps and rubella, but the NHS does not keep a list of them because clinics that offer these privately are unlicensed, which means there are no checks on their safety and effectiveness.
No country in the world recommends MMR and then offers parents a choice of having single vaccines instead. Every independent expert group around the world (including the World Health Organization) supports the use of MMR, and none support the use of single vaccines.

I suppose it is possible that all these medical agencies are wrong, and if you have evidence to show them they are wrong, they will sit and listen.

[Arfur Europe]

You seem incredibly angry about the possibility of people choosing the separate jabs. Can you expand?

[Kris]

You seem incredibly angry about the possibility of people choosing the separate jabs. Can you expand?

I am not incredibly angry at all, and I'm not really sure that mis-interpreting me, or judging my mood from some typed up words is particularly wise. It certainly adds nothing to the debate. So far, from the anti-vaxxers, I have been accused of being very angry, freaking out and having post post tristesse. Maybe, sticking to the facts is something you anti-vaxxers are keen to avoid. I wonder why?

I am merely stating that people far more qualified than you or I have deemed it unnecessary to split the MMR. The reasons were in my post. What's there to be angry about?

[Mrs Steve R]

I am not incredibly angry at all, and I'm not really sure that mis-interpreting me, or judging my mood from some typed up words is particularly wise. It certainly adds nothing to the debate. So far, from the anti-vaxxers, I have been accused of being very angry, freaking out and having post post tristesse. Maybe, sticking to the facts is something you anti-vaxxers are keen to avoid. I wonder why?

I am merely stating that people far more qualified than you or I have deemed it unnecessary to split the MMR. The reasons were in my post. What's there to be angry about?

"post post tristesse" was a dig at me not you.