Compulsory MMR?

I dont know if I agree or not... I cant make reasoned judgements in my mind.

My daughter has had the MMR and the booster (she is 4.5years) plus all other necessary vaccinations. I fully support the vaccination program, understand why it needs to be done etc...

However, I am going to ask a potentially inflammatory question.. why dont they offer the singles anymore? Give people the choice? I ask out of sincere lack of knowledge on this area, rather than trying to provoke rows.

My (niaive) take on it is even if they have the jabs as three singles, they are still protected? Right? or wrong? I know that there is a delay in getting the final jabs, thus extending out the risk period etc... but what are the other reasons?

I know that there are licensing issues with the singles.... but why not get them licensed? And still offer a choice?

I did lots of reading about MMR but I just dont "get" why they dont offer a choice?

Why not?

The singles aren't licensed in the UK. You need to have gaps between each jab, more jabs means more chance of forgetting to get them done, time between jabs is longer that the child isn't protected, and neither are those around them. More doctors appointments used to get all the jabs in. Plus I'm not sure the mumps jab (in particular) is as effective as the mumps component of the MMR (I think it's the mumps bit - but I'm sure someone can confirm).

But that just isn't true - as I said above, I think it's generally only Yellow Fever where people actually want to see a certificate, and that's generally only if you're been to sub-Saharan Africa. It's only a very small number of countries that would ever want to see any evidence of vaccinations (I've never been to one and I've travelled quite a bit in Asia and Africa).

Sorry, that was in response to Hecate's post.

St Knickerless, they don't offer the singles because there is a perfectly good vaccination already, the cost to the taxpayer would be immense and totally unnecessary.

Also, the single vaccinations are not licensed for use in this country, there is also doubt over the efficacy of the mumps single.

I would go doolallytap if the government were to fund single vaccinations!

View quoted message

Because they are less effective, and require more doses to achieve immunity so children are left susceptible for longer and lots of parents never came back for the repeat vaccinations. And because there's evidence IIRC that the mumps single vaccine is ineffective anyway.

The NHS is set up to offer the best possible treatment available where possible - offering the single vaccines does not fit that. And if the govt did re-introduce the vaccinations then it would be playing into the hands of everyone who is anti-MMR, it would be seen as admitting that there's a problem with MMR.

The Guardian debate is more entertaining and less loon filled than HYS -

What is exactly in the MMR jab, does anybody know the exact ingredients? I've read that there is dead animal tissue and animal blood. I wouldn't inject anything unless I could see EXACTLY how it's made and what went in it. Do you know precisely what's in your food and how it's made? Apparently there's dead animal tissue and animal blood in burgers. It's a fucking disgrace!!

View quoted message

PMSL

Sorry but ?

View quoted message

If they are less effective, when MMR was first introduced was there a decrease in the number of people suffering with these diseases? (Pre MMR scare I mean?)

I didnt know that about the mumps single vacc - why is that? (If anyone could explain that in scientific laymans terms that would be great LOL) Is there something in the other vaccs that makes it active? (completely clueless!)

View quoted message

But as Ms Scarlett says, travel isn't really a necessity in the same way that education is.

I think that making it compulsory doesn't actually address the underlying issues. It's a brute force approach that just stands to alienate people who (rightly or wrongly) have concerns about i. You all know I'm passionately in favour of the MMR but I think that compulsory vaccination would be a step backwards.

View quoted message

Thinking about it I don't really think I've made my point in the right way. I was more thinking that people will go away and have any vaccine quite happily - I'm sure everyone doesn't research into each vaccine. And yet people are unwilling to give their children a vaccine that is safe to give!

I would be very interested to see of those children whose parents chose not to have the MMR - how many have been abroad to somewhere that required vaccines

I am a bit on the fence with this one. I do think, though, that a distinction needs to be drawn between "compulsory" - ie, failure to comply is criminalised - and saying that your child cannot access state schooling without being vaccinated. The latter actually strikes me as entirely reasonable, given that your unvaccinated child is putting other children at risk; the former would be problematic I think.

View quoted message

I think so to the first - MMR is a world-wide vaccination and has been used to control disease effectively in many countries.

MMR isn't the three single vaccinations given in one go, it's a completely different beastie.

When I saw this I just knew there would be a techy anti-compulsion and often anti-MMR debate on mumsnet (on which I have the very occasional lurk). And lo there was:

/talk/in_the_news/766327-Compulsory-vaccines

View quoted message

"In orer to finance the single jab dh and I are both wearing broken shoes- DH has a 2 inch hole in his, mine are causing probable plantar fascitis (sp). it's worth it, but why should the options force already vulnerable famillies into poverty?"

There. Are. No. Words. ?

I also liked this: "If they push for compulsory vaccination then my DH and I will leave the country and take our dog, three children and taxes with us. DH will also have to fire his 30 odd staff and the £xxxxxxx in taxes that his company generates. Perhaps that is the fall out the Govt are pushing for. " Don't let the door hit your arse on the way out

View quoted message

I wonder where they'll go. Australia? Oh, hold on, compulsory MMR there. America? No, home of Big Pharma. How about... Zimbabwe? No compulsory jabs there afaik.

View quoted message

they could come to Switzerland. No compulsory MMR here either. Their kids could go to the Steiner school that was in the news last month. Less than a third of the children there have been vaccinated. They had a mass measles outbreak recently, and a number of them ended up hospitalised.

View quoted message

The irony being that millions of African and Asian parents walk 100s of miles in bare feet or broken shoes to get their children vaccinated because they know the reality is no vaccination, dead child.

View quoted message

? I'm still waiting for all those that promised to leave if the government increased the top rate of tax to go.

The only complaints I've seen lately have been from professional footballers, most of those in the financial sector are too busy thanking their stars that they still have a job.

But if we could get rid of this new bunch of dullards as well it would be a double blessing.

Question.... In those countries where the vacs are compulsory, is it a case of compulsory MMR or compulsory be vacc'ed against all three, by whatever route?

I am very much in the "immunise if you want to use a state school" camp, for all of the reasons others have listed. I'm not entirely comfortable with a parent's choice being removed but in this case, all children involved are at risk of harm. I know parents currently have the right to refuse medical treatment for their children but this can be overruled by a court, no? So it wouldn't be the first time such a right was questioned in the effort to do the right thing by the child.

Somebody asked how this would work for parents who aren't coping, who haven't sorted immunisations before school for various emotional reasons. Could it not be given in school for those kids, the way TB used to be? Better late than never, I imagine (or does it not work that way? Would it have to be the booster?).

That mumsnet thread is precicely the reason that vaccination should be required before your child enters state education/nursery. The majority of people on that thread obviously have no real understanding of the issue, let alone the science behind it and are singularly unqualified to make a rational decision on whether or not to vaccinate. Just being a parent is not qualification enough - this issue is far too important to be made solely so caught up in hysterical emotion and with so little understanding. And with the requirement for near-complete levels of immunisation for herd immunity, a wishy-washy, opt-in, single jabs if you fancy approach does not cut it.

We need to get through to people that if you want to err on the side of caution, then you need to vaccinate. There is a time and a place for government intervension - mass vaccination with a well proven and safe vaccine is one of them.

*Disclaimer - I know that parents' views have to be listened to and that the majority of parents are not loons?

View quoted message

AFAIK the UK is the only country in the world that has a problem with MMR so I don't think it's really an issue. I have a recollection that in the US you have to have had the jabs they say, not necessarily have immunity to the illnesses they say, because someone who went over there and had had a different vaccination for the same illness had to have a different jab.

Where is it compulsary to have vaccinations to travel there? I've never been asked for them, I got them because I don't fancy yellow fever/ hep c, not becuase I had to. Furthermore it would be laughably simple to get documents to say I've had it, rendering the cumpulsion useless

My last set of holiday jabs, I was given a peice of lined card with the name of the jab and date written by the nurse- then lines of blank spaces to record any future jabs. Thats going to convince a country which sees it as important enough to make it compulsary? Do they exist? do they transalate it into their language?

Other than "force the stupids" is there really a good reason why the individual vaccinations cannot continue to be offered on the NHS until such times as confidence in the MMR vaccine is restored?

View quoted message

The single vaccines are not currently funded by the NHS AFAIK - why should the NHS fund a clinically substandard alternative? Why not just say to seriously ill people, sure, you can have some wonder drug or lifesaving surgery, but just in case, here's a bucket of leeches and a drill for a bit of treppaning?

Good link at the Health Protection Agency here:

http://www.hpa.org.uk/webw/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1195733844552?p=1204100449566

View quoted message

When I was in Ghana it was necessary to prove immunity to yellow fever with a specific certificate. I believe it's the same for many other countries.

"Their language" is English (well, officially speaking) so no need for translations.

View quoted message

Sorry for slow reply - been at work. I assumed by precedent you meant that one vax being compulsory would lead to others becoming compulsory - I was pointing out that despite some vaccinations being compulsory historically, this didn't then lead to a mass of compulsory vaccination.

I can't think of any equivalent to vaccination in terms of public health measures - so I'm not entirely sure I know what you mean by 'other healthcare being made compulsory' - maybe you could give me an example of something you're worried might become compulsory?

It is I guess compulsory here in Aus- never really thought about it as such.

Apparently if you are on benefits, they will be stopped unless your child has all vaccines within xx of due date (think about 2 months).

And you cannot enrol your child in school without an up-to-date vaccination cert. But to an extent it is a carrot- we get a payment each time our child gets a jab.

I wonder the demographics of people missing the MMR? People who research and conclude not safe/people who vaguely assume it is not/people who don't care and don't understand/people who are against vaccination of any sort. That might help sway my opinion of whether making it compulsory is a good thing....well that and being forced to read Ben Elton's book "Blind Faith" which shows the future when vaccines are not given....

View quoted message

Very well said Zebra.

It makes me so goddam angry, we have free (at the point of need) vaccinations here, we're so lucky and yet all some people can do is whinge about it. Bastards.

As for that post on mumsnet - what a pile of arse. I know we all make "sacrifices" for our children, but I can't stand these bloody sackcloth and ashes types.

As for the point re depriving children of education - is it really bad to say I actually don't give a shit? If the parents of these children don't care about the health of other people enough to get the goddam vaccine, why the hell should I give a fuck about whether their kids get to go to school or not? All I care about is the health and education of my own children and children close to me, not the children of the anti-vaccination morons. All they need to do to ensure they can is give a perfectly safe vaccine to them. As HeidiHole said I've had enough of pandering to the stoopids.

I don't really see how trying to educate/get people onside will help. It strikes me that the more discredited Wakefield's research gets, the lower the uptake gets.

I just can't stand these selfish parents. When I was having a browse abotu MMR before Matthew had his I found a forum somewhere, and someone actually had the bloody cheek to post on it "you don't need to get it done, everyone else gets it so your kid gets the herd immunity from them anyway". I was bloody furious.

Don't hold back Roobard, tell us what you really think.?

I've also read the Ben Elton book and it is a really worrying picture of how things would be without vaccinations.