Infant Immunisations.
Discussion
I have a little Girl and she has just reached the 8 week check up stage, we went along today to have er weighed and listened to and all is well, The doctor mentioned that we now need to get her immunised either there and then or after Christmas, fair enough.
Except I have a niggling doubt in my mind about the quality and contents of NHS immunisations, I did a little bit of asking among friends and was surprised at the varied responses to my question "what did you do when it came to getting the children immunised ?" Some friends did noting at all, the kids had no injections and have not been any worse for it, they are now 12 and 10 years old and they have had no serious illnesses and are fit and strong, other parents never questioned the doctor and had all the advised innoculations.
A bit of googleing shows that quite a few parents are not happy with the ingredients and preservatives in the standard injections as they can contain Mercury, aluminium and Folmaldehyde, nice...
I really don't want to give the kid injections because the GP says it's ok and thats what we do for everyone, but I don't want to be a paraniod parent either.
I would like to learn more about the subject to make an informed decision.
Anyone else been down this road or can shed light on the subject ?
Except I have a niggling doubt in my mind about the quality and contents of NHS immunisations, I did a little bit of asking among friends and was surprised at the varied responses to my question "what did you do when it came to getting the children immunised ?" Some friends did noting at all, the kids had no injections and have not been any worse for it, they are now 12 and 10 years old and they have had no serious illnesses and are fit and strong, other parents never questioned the doctor and had all the advised innoculations.
A bit of googleing shows that quite a few parents are not happy with the ingredients and preservatives in the standard injections as they can contain Mercury, aluminium and Folmaldehyde, nice...
I really don't want to give the kid injections because the GP says it's ok and thats what we do for everyone, but I don't want to be a paraniod parent either.
I would like to learn more about the subject to make an informed decision.
Anyone else been down this road or can shed light on the subject ?
DO IT.
An immunisation program for children is a significant achievement for a third world or second world country.
Don't be waylayed by lefty leanings towards not getting your child immunised by our magnificent (not sacascm) NHS.
Seriously mate, let your GP make your child as healthy as poss
DO IT.
have I made myself clear
Dr Andrew Wakefield has a lot to answer for !!
Immunisation is one of the few 'proven-beyond-all-doubt' treatments found in modern medicine. Since Jenner the fundamentals of immunisation have remained essentially the same and has benefited the population of the world immeasurably.
The health benefit is without question and immunisation programmes should be encouraged.
Of late recent outbreaks of measles have caused serious consequences (in children)as a result of non-uptake of MMR.
There is also the issue of 'childhood' diseases causing much bigger probs in adulthood. Mumps is the classic case, relatively innocuous in children following immunisation, but can lead to sterility in the adult male and tends to be more severe in the non-immunised adult.
There is an ethical question to be answered...an immunisation programme is only as good as the uptake, so the fewer getting immunised, the weaker the benefit of the programme. For the good of the population should an immunisation programme not be taken up by all ?
Nobody wants to see harm come to their darling childrenn and in my view it comes down to odds..... what are the chances of having an allergic reaction/serious complication from a childhood immunisation ? (remote). what are the chances of little johnny coming into contact with, measles, mumps etc and contracting the disease ? (high...creches/nurseries are like petri dishes !!)
So, when an immunised child comes into contact with disease, they suffer a far milder disease process, in the non-immunised child, the disease process is more severe and prolonged.
So which would you rather do, avoid a remote problem related to the immunisation, or potentially, indirectly, inflict a severe disease on your child (not definite admittedly but more likely than a problem with the immunisation)
Now, it is a free world and as a parent you have the right to decided what is right for your child. Whilst I think it is wrong not to immunise, I would always accept the decision from a parent not to immunise their child. It is my job to ensure informed consent is given by the patient/parent and I can only present the parent/patient with information, it is down to them to make the informed decision.
Immunisation is one of the few 'proven-beyond-all-doubt' treatments found in modern medicine. Since Jenner the fundamentals of immunisation have remained essentially the same and has benefited the population of the world immeasurably.
The health benefit is without question and immunisation programmes should be encouraged.
Of late recent outbreaks of measles have caused serious consequences (in children)as a result of non-uptake of MMR.
There is also the issue of 'childhood' diseases causing much bigger probs in adulthood. Mumps is the classic case, relatively innocuous in children following immunisation, but can lead to sterility in the adult male and tends to be more severe in the non-immunised adult.
There is an ethical question to be answered...an immunisation programme is only as good as the uptake, so the fewer getting immunised, the weaker the benefit of the programme. For the good of the population should an immunisation programme not be taken up by all ?
Nobody wants to see harm come to their darling childrenn and in my view it comes down to odds..... what are the chances of having an allergic reaction/serious complication from a childhood immunisation ? (remote). what are the chances of little johnny coming into contact with, measles, mumps etc and contracting the disease ? (high...creches/nurseries are like petri dishes !!)
So, when an immunised child comes into contact with disease, they suffer a far milder disease process, in the non-immunised child, the disease process is more severe and prolonged.
So which would you rather do, avoid a remote problem related to the immunisation, or potentially, indirectly, inflict a severe disease on your child (not definite admittedly but more likely than a problem with the immunisation)
Now, it is a free world and as a parent you have the right to decided what is right for your child. Whilst I think it is wrong not to immunise, I would always accept the decision from a parent not to immunise their child. It is my job to ensure informed consent is given by the patient/parent and I can only present the parent/patient with information, it is down to them to make the informed decision.
Hmmm,
I was hoping this was not going to be a topic that made me out like I might be a borderline lentilist.
For the record I am going to get her immunised.
I am struggling to believe the NHS uses the best available vaccines and they are as fresh as they can be. I know this seems cynical to some but some of the "care" I have recieved at their hands over the years has made me a bit, well, suspicious of their one size fits all approach.
I was hoping this was not going to be a topic that made me out like I might be a borderline lentilist.
For the record I am going to get her immunised.
I am struggling to believe the NHS uses the best available vaccines and they are as fresh as they can be. I know this seems cynical to some but some of the "care" I have recieved at their hands over the years has made me a bit, well, suspicious of their one size fits all approach.
There's a minuscule chance of a negative reaction and a very small one of serious results from not immunising.
Neither is a significant risk in any way, but will that be a consolation if your child is in either of the tiny groups of exceptions? No.
As the risk is bigger by doing nothing, why would you pause.
If you're so paranoid that you don't trust the NHS, pay to have it done privately and get the same drugs for a huge price!
M.
Neither is a significant risk in any way, but will that be a consolation if your child is in either of the tiny groups of exceptions? No.
As the risk is bigger by doing nothing, why would you pause.
If you're so paranoid that you don't trust the NHS, pay to have it done privately and get the same drugs for a huge price!
M.
Lemmonie said:
I cant believe for one second that an immunisation from a private clinic would be any different to the ones the NHS use. In fact seeing as the NHS dish out more immunisations that private clinics one would summise they are using the best.
Indeed. Buy your fish from a shop that sells a lot of fish. It will have hardly touched the fridge shelves before being sold.Buy your fish from a low volume independent shop that very rarely sells fish, and do you really trust they will know what the are selling/buying? And how long has it been on the shelf? And who sells just one fish wholesale?
Now your child needs her fish, yes....
If I was going to have more kids I would have them immunised against chickenpox too as in Germany, Japan and the USA.
My boys caught it at the same time and were aged 2 and 6 months. The older one had a really bad time and we tried every modern and traditional method to reduce the discomfort with little success. Two weeks of very unhappy kids.
You can buy the chickenpox vaccine privately in the UK. As I understand it we don't have it universally because the MMR fiasco hit general immunisation rates and cost.
My boys caught it at the same time and were aged 2 and 6 months. The older one had a really bad time and we tried every modern and traditional method to reduce the discomfort with little success. Two weeks of very unhappy kids.
You can buy the chickenpox vaccine privately in the UK. As I understand it we don't have it universally because the MMR fiasco hit general immunisation rates and cost.
That's probably the most short-sighted and bigotted post I ever read.
To the OP, regardless of your GPs appearance or medical issues, your child does not need to run the risk if measles encephalitis, polio, whooping cough, etc. These are diseases that will materially affect their life forever (and yours).
To the OP, regardless of your GPs appearance or medical issues, your child does not need to run the risk if measles encephalitis, polio, whooping cough, etc. These are diseases that will materially affect their life forever (and yours).
LambdaSensor said:
Lol. Find them yourself mate, I've done my research.
Well that answers that question - you've got SFA in the way of evidence to back up your assertion that they're full of 'sh*t'.Having briefly searched the scientific journal databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, etc) I can find absolutely no articles to support what you're claiming.
Although perhaps you're basing your research on publications such as this? The opening paragraph clearly suggests that this is a well-researched article with no preconceptions or agenda. It becomes more laughable as it progresses - anybody with a 'post GCSE' understanding of pharmacology/immunology is in for a treat...
wiffmaster said:
LambdaSensor said:
Lol. Find them yourself mate, I've done my research.
Well that answers that question - you've got SFA in the way of evidence to back up your assertion that they're full of 'sh*t'.Having briefly searched the scientific journal databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, etc) I can find absolutely no articles to support what you're claiming.
Although perhaps you're basing your research on publications such as this? The opening paragraph clearly suggests that this is a well-researched article with no preconceptions or agenda. It becomes more laughable as it progresses - anybody with a 'post GCSE' understanding of pharmacology/immunology is in for a treat...
60 years ago Gps would advise people to take up smoking because it was an "excellent expectorant" that was the exact line used to my Grandfather when he complained of a tickly cough. Look at the Thalidamide problems in the late 50s.
What I am saying is that anyone with a mind to question had better be prepared to struggle to find out what the hell the risks are if indeed there are any, my GP clammed up pronto when I told him i was going to look into all the innoculations first before consenting, he could offer no advice or opinion other than the strictly adhered to party line of "we advise they are administered" Well I don't like that, I don't see why the information is not available upon request.
The medical profession don't do themselves any favours sometimes, what might be right today may not be right in 10 years.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff