Mother's warning on the MMR vaccine

Oct 13, 2009 Full story: Oxford Times 90

A MOTHER who claims her son's autism was worsened by the MMR vaccination has warned parents to think carefully about having the jab.

Full Story
EdSed

Liverpool, UK

#24 Nov 5, 2009
I do not think you are seeing the implications of what I have written.
1. Dr Wakefield did not start the controvercy. His study brought it to the public domain.

2. There are good reasons why people do not and,(in my opinion), should not rely on the British Government (Labour or Tory) to 'protect them' from scientific studies that appear to contradict government advice.

3. The objections to the MMR are not based on the fact that it is proven to be connected to Autism. It is based on the fact that it is not proven to be safe and there are reasonable grounds for believing it is dangerous - with or without mercury or Thimerosol.

4. The objections can be overcome by offering the injections separately over a period of time. This is an affordable option, even if some charge has to be made for it. This government rejects it out of hand.

5. UKGov has a history of backing the wrong scientific opinion, e.g. CJD.

6. The idea that MMR and Autism might be linked is far from 'debunked'. Quite the reverse. The idea that the UKGov is always correct in taking decisions on what is safe and what is not - that is thoroughly de-bunked.

7. You still have not suggested a more likely cause of the rise in autism cases in the UK.(Not that I think the MMR is the only cause, just one possible one).

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#25 Nov 5, 2009
So don't limit yourself to UK research. Plenty other countries that offer more.

What I think the over-all cause of autism is really doesn't matter. So far, no study has found concrete prove to what causes autism and that includes the MMR.

In this article, the mother stated her child already had autism prior to the MMR which that child had not at the recommned age, but at age 3. So, if the child already had autism, how did the MMR cause it?
EdSed

Liverpool, UK

#26 Nov 5, 2009
friend wrote:
So don't limit yourself to UK research. Plenty other countries that offer more.
What I think the over-all cause of autism is really doesn't matter. So far, no study has found concrete prove to what causes autism and that includes the MMR.
In this article, the mother stated her child already had autism prior to the MMR which that child had not at the recommned age, but at age 3. So, if the child already had autism, how did the MMR cause it?
I do not know 'how the MMR caused it'. At least, not specifically that I can explain in one post on Topix. I do not know if the MMR caused it. I am saying that studies such as those of the New Jersey Medical School suggest that the MMR can affect the development of the immune system in ways that are still the subject of research.

You write: So far, no study has found concrete prove [sic] to what causes autism and that includes the MMR.-
That is what I am talking about, see points 2 to 6 above. That does not mean that the MMR definitely causes no cases of autism to occur. I am aware of some foreign research. My links indicated the Japanese and US findings, did they not?
EdSed

Liverpool, UK

#27 Nov 5, 2009
friend wrote:
...
In this article, the mother stated her child already had autism prior to the MMR which that child had not at the recommned age, but at age 3. So, if the child already had autism, how did the MMR cause it?
The article began: "A MOTHER who claims her son’s autism was worsened by the MMR vaccination.."

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#28 Nov 5, 2009
The title of the article is 'Didcot mother warns other mums to be careful with MMR vaccine'.

Well, you can read many accounts where a child's autism worsened by this or that, but does that mean every child would be affected that same way? And most kids don't even get the MMR at age 3. My child's autism worsened and regressed every week end he went to his dad's, should I assume other kids would react the same and warn other parents of that?? Every time we go to the clinic, vaccine or not, my child regresses and his autism get's worse. When a child has autism, they often regress to begin with. You go steps forward, and the child ends up going back and many things can contribute to this.

This mother believes Kaylan was born with the genetic pre-disposition, and any mumber of things could exacerbated the symptoms of autism including contracting the actual measles.

The thing is, no one can base choices and medical outcomes on other people's experiences without having the science to back it and determining who would be most at risk, and if their medical history even compares to others.
EdSed

Liverpool, UK

#29 Nov 5, 2009
friend wrote:
The title of the article is 'Didcot mother warns other mums to be careful with MMR vaccine'.
Well, you can read many accounts where a child's autism worsened by this or that, but does that mean every child would be affected that same way? And most kids don't even get the MMR at age 3. My child's autism worsened and regressed every week end he went to his dad's,..
Agreed.
friend wrote:
should I assume other kids would react the same and warn other parents of that??
No.
friend wrote:
Every time we go to the clinic, vaccine or not, my child regresses and his autism get's worse. When a child has autism, they often regress to begin with. You go steps forward, and the child ends up going back and many things can contribute to this.
This mother believes Kaylan was born with the genetic pre-disposition,and any mumber of things could exacerbated the symptoms of autism including contracting the actual measles.
Agreed. And if he had a pre-disposition to autism..? Did you not read any of my links? The Study in question indicates why he may have been especially at risk from the MMR.
friend wrote:
The thing is, no one can base choices and medical outcomes on other people's experiences without having the science to back it and determining who would be most at risk, and if their medical history even compares to others.
Agreed. That is why I would recommend getting separate, periodic injections and avoiding the MMR. The science is there, but it conflicts with current advice. I repeat again, one should not wait until the MMR is proven to be safe. I prefer to act on the assumption it may be a risk until the concerns are proven false, based on ALL the science available - not just the science that government ministers favour.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#30 Nov 5, 2009
Not sure which link you mean. I looked at all your links, if there's one you want me to pay close attention to, which link is it?

I wouldn't recommend any thing to any one. Separate jabs can have their own risks, let along your jabbing a child with 3 different needles. That along can throw any kid into a meltdown, X 3.

If Wakefield found measles within the intestines of his 12 study participants, one would assume the better answer than 3 separtae jabs would be to avoid the measles vaccine all together. But that's not what he suggested (since he did apply for a measles vaccine patent) and he also never really determined why the mumps and rubella made a difference to the measles portion and he never determined if that mealses in the intestines were from vaccines or natural exposure to measles.

I don't live in the UK but it doesn't seem to matter where you live, the Government within any country is blamed for with holding, and being in cohoots with the Horrible Pharma's.

I personally do not make medical choices on assumptions, nor some one else's experiences. The mealses and my son's autism would be horrible if combined. If I chose not to give him that vaccine, his risk then to being exposed to another who was not vaccinated, contracted mealses and then gave it to my child would increase. The mealses out breaks are all over the place, just not only to the UK. Most kids could fair well if they contracted it at an older age, providing they didn't have other health issues to complicate the matter but exposing infants could be deadly for them, and it has been.
EdSed

Liverpool, UK

#31 Nov 5, 2009
Hmm. I felt sure I read that in one of the links.(Maybe it was one I did not post?) I do apologise. I thought everyone familiar with the debate was aware of the argument that the affect of MMR on the digestive and immune systems might trigger a pre-disposition rather than be the cause itself? That was so obvious to me, I did not realise it was not made clear in the links I posted. Anyway, my apologies and here are some articles (I hope) that make that clear..
From:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4311613.stm
“He said the research did not deal with the suggestion that there is a small group of children who are unusually vulnerable in whom MMR triggers autism - but there was no evidence that this was the case”.
From:
http://health.dailynewscentral.com/content/vi...
“Researchers in the Japanese study reportedly acknowledged that MMR might trigger autism in a very small number of children. Although they found no evidence to support that hypothesis, they were unable to rule it out”.

This article is interesting because it puts the shoe on the other foot..
http://www.ich.ucl.ac.uk/immunisation/mmr_aut...
It asks “is this regimen safe?”, i.e giving the vaccines separately.

The above also makes the point that I do not reject the idea that MMR is safe, nor that it is safer than giving the injections separately. I do object to being told that I cannot consider the risks for myself and must be forced to agree with the scientists in the majority. I wish to consider (as with CJD) that the minority of scientific opinion may be correct.

And the evidence of the majority looks formidable:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_cont...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/155676...
However, in one study,(link above) Dr Fiona Scott and Dr Carol Stott have reportedly said they think the jab, given to children between 12 and 15 months, could be responsible for growing numbers of children apparently exhibiting symptoms of the disorder. The other five, including team leader Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, rejected their view. Such divergence of opinion is not uncommon amongst scientists and I have read a very convincing article (cannot now find it on the Internet) that explained why the Japanese study should not be considered to have disproved the idea that MMR could be linked to autism. The debate is quieter now and I am not saying I am sure that the MMR is not safer than separate injections. The lack of recent research is a problem, but with politicians in this country determined to ‘get their message across’ that is to be expected. What I do say is that I do not trust the UKGov, nor the British Medical Council to always be right.
EdSed

Liverpool, UK

#32 Nov 5, 2009
friend wrote:
..I personally do not make medical choices on assumptions..
This comment seems to imply that I am basing my views on assumptions where you are not? That is not true. I said,“I prefer to act on the assumption it may be a risk until the concerns are proven false, based on ALL the science available - not just the science that government ministers favour”. It would be a misunderstanding to infer from that I am making assumptions where you are not. Neither of us assume the MMR is safe or dangerous. We weigh the risks of MMR against those of separate single injections.

This article is interesting – and more up to date:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8268302.stm
Quote: "It also suggests that, among adults, rates of autism remain broadly constant across age groups.” And “The latest findings, based on nearly 7,500 adults, suggests that prevalence of autism spectrum disorder remains broadly level across all age bands.”
Does that mean that there was always roughly the same proportion of people with autism as 30, 40, or 50 years ago? Or does it mean that most of the older generation with autism developed it in later life? Tim Staughan said,“..despite popular perceptions, rates of autism are not increasing,.” This suggests to me that he thinks there has always been roughly the same proportion of people with autism in the UK population?

Opposing this idea is the anecdotal evidence which should not be dismissed simply because it is unscientific. Almost everyone I discuss this with points out how common autism is nowadays compared with decades ago. That there has been a huge increase in cases of autism also seems to be backed by some scientific studies.

This, from the article is also apparently untrue:“Concern over the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine was sparked by a paper published in The Lancet in 1998 by Dr Andrew Wakefield...This research has since been discredited.”
The basic findings of his research, as far as I know, have never been discredited. He has retracted some of his findings, but almost any report would suffer that given such critical scrutiny. Any basically unsound report would have been demolished. It was a very limited report. It is only the inference that his research proves that the MMR is dangerous that is discredited, but that was never the merit in his study. The attacks on him have been personal. Indeed, there is the report I indicated that suggest that his experiment has been replicated, although I would prefer to read that this has been stated per se by the New Jersey Hospital. Even if his findings had been discredited, that does not mean that the MMR is not dangerous.

I do not see why these “latest autism figures should dispel any fears about the MMR jab being linked to the condition”, unless one is pre-disposed to that view.

I keep an open mind, but am still currently more inclined to the view that separate single injections are a safer option.
EdSed

Liverpool, UK

#33 Jan 28, 2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield
http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/01/the-genera...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jan/28...
http://www.gmc-uk.org/concerns/complaints_and...
Leaving the GMC to take all health decisions regarding our children is to run risks.
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/337/no...
I find that the GMC have failed in their duty to protect the children’s interests in the UK. They have shown a callous disregard for the opinions of others and thereby put at risk the safety of our children. The risk seems unnecessary and pointless.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1...

It appears that the GMC work on the principle that ‘the majority are always right’. A better principle would be ‘the minority are sometimes right’ and it would be safer to give the jabs separately, or at least offer the alternative at an affordable price to those of us who do not trust the GMC’s opinions on everything for very good reasons.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#34 Jan 28, 2010
Try
Wakefield and autism: the story that will not go away
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8481583.stm
Or
Doctor who sparked MMR controversy 'abused his position of trust'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/...
Mr Giblets

Worcester, UK

#35 Jan 28, 2010
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>
?
<quoted text>
Who only looked at 'the Wakefield case'? I thought we had moved on from Dr Wakefield? And am I 'no one'? Many people, including scientists, were concerned about the possible connection between Autism and the MMR. The study is important because it points to part of a possible mechanism connecting MMR and autism.
You haven't answered my question about what might be causing the increase in autism, by the way. Any thoughts, if you are so certain that the effects of the MMR on the developing immune system cannot possibly have a connection?
there is probably no increase at all in autism. It is just being recognised for what it is. The milder variant Aspergers Syndrome was diagnosed as schizophrenia and the people with it often labeled as psychopaths. It was not even officially recognised here until less than 20 years ago. But people were autistic long before MMR vaccines were ever used. The whole stupid scare has caused suffering for thousands of kids.
james

Bethesda, MD

#36 Jan 28, 2010
This hearing was a circus. The outcome of the hearing was evident from day one. GMC is a puppet nothing else. This just to show you how strong the vaccine autism connection is. They did all this to refute A.W study and discredit him to dissipate the fear of vaccine.

Listen folks: Vaccine do cause autism that is the mani reason why they were so fast to refute the study from day one. So what if they doctor pulled blood samples in his house. However the results of his research are true and stand further researches today. Bottomline MMR-autism link are strong by interfering immune system causing brain inflammation which induces abnormal connectivity. Before your MMR, DTaP shot, investigate and see thousands of parents stories. This will never ever go away. Only fear of vaccine remains. Not part of anti vaccine group or anything but this is very fishy.
Raymond

Bethesda, MD

#37 Jan 28, 2010
You people live in a la la land. Come down to earth and hear parents stories pertaining to abnormal reaction to vaccines and then regression to autism. The reason these stroies are true is that if investigated two shots are most significantly reported : MMR and DTaP. But for people like you it is just a coincidence.

Friend: Your son is Asperger. He has no regression, it is genetically abnormally brain wired. That is why His behavior is unstable. As in comparison with other kids who regressed after vaccines is that they lost speech. Do not compare apple to oranges.
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed.
<quoted text>
No.
<quoted text>
Agreed. And if he had a pre-disposition to autism..? Did you not read any of my links? The Study in question indicates why he may have been especially at risk from the MMR.
<quoted text>
Agreed. That is why I would recommend getting separate, periodic injections and avoiding the MMR. The science is there, but it conflicts with current advice. I repeat again, one should not wait until the MMR is proven to be safe. I prefer to act on the assumption it may be a risk until the concerns are proven false, based on ALL the science available - not just the science that government ministers favour.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#38 Jan 28, 2010
Sorry Raymond (now located in White Plains, NY) my child does not have asperger's. I'm not sure which is worse, a child which never progressed or a child which regressed. You tell me. You also know nothing about my child's behavior and at the same time I still question or participating in an autism topic at all when you have no child with autism.
Autism is autism no matter when it became apparent to the parent. You considering it apples to oranges just continues that great divide which serves no functional purpose to the child with autism or to the parents seeking help for that child.

What Wakefield did was Conduct the study, create the scare, provide the fix (seperate jabs)then attepmt to patent/ release his own single measle vaccine. Wakefield clearly had an agenda going on, and it wasn't to the benefit of the autism community or children and vaccines, since the man produced his very own vaccine. The reason why Wakefield's agenda failed was he created the vaccine fear, making it then impossible to patent a vaccine no one would want. Anyone who based vaccine choice on one study of 12 children, all having autism, conducted by a man which captured on video laughing about fainting children during blood draws at a birthday party is a man who should be found guilty and a man who has no business working with children.
The man was finally exposed for who he is.
EdSed

Liverpool, UK

#39 Jan 31, 2010
friend wrote:
Try
Wakefield and autism: the story that will not go away
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8481583.stm
Or
Doctor who sparked MMR controversy 'abused his position of trust'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/...
From your first link:
"Urgent further research is needed to determine whether MMR may give rise to this complication in a small number of people," Dr Wakefield said at the time."
"May" is what Dr Wakefield says. I and many others agree that this line of research was interesting and needs to be pursued. I repeat, one needs to focus on the science, which is not discredited as it was never sufficiently pursued. Dr Wakefield's results appear to have been independently repeated. You seem to just ignore my earlier posts and repeat what has already been posted?

The danger that many perceive in the MMR is potentially avoided by spacing the 3 jabs. That would seem a reasonable precaution. I hold the GMC's approach responsible for the drop in vaccinations against measles, not Dr Wakefield or his research. It seems that everyone who disagrees with them potentially becomes their target.

As your link pointed out, Mr Blair makes no comment on whether he trusts the jabs for his own child. He is not alone. Any public figure or professional person risks being attacked on a personal level by people like the GMC, as they have demonstrated.

One reason people believe the GMC is because people say things like "There is no scientific professional who will tell you there is a causal link between the MMR and autism". That is true. That is not what Dr Wakefield insists either. He says he believes there may be a link and the risks should not be run. I agree,a s they are not necessary.

There does seem to be a huge increase in autism both statistically and anecdotally. When I was young I did not meet anyone with a condition like asperger's or autism, whatever name it might have been given. Now we come across cases all the time and there seems little public concern and UKGov express little concern about the matter other than to avoid the MMR for their own children.
EdSed

Liverpool, UK

#40 Jan 31, 2010
friend wrote:
...
What Wakefield did was Conduct the study, create the scare, provide the fix (seperate jabs)then attepmt to patent/ release his own single measle vaccine. Wakefield clearly had an agenda going on,...
What is clear to you (Dr Wakefield's agenda) is not all there is to this. He may have a personal interest in a change of policy. That does not mean he is wrong and the GMC are right. Dr Wakefield has only been convicted by opinions like the GMC and some who happen to agree with them. Dr Wakefield did not "create the scare" in me as my concerns about the MMR have been around since it was introduced.

It seems the GMC have an agenda too and a far more dangerous one - there must be no open dissent. Anyone know what research the GMC are supporting into understanding the increase in autism?
mr Giblets

Gloucester, UK

#41 Jan 31, 2010
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>
What is clear to you (Dr Wakefield's agenda) is not all there is to this. He may have a personal interest in a change of policy. That does not mean he is wrong and the GMC are right. Dr Wakefield has only been convicted by opinions like the GMC and some who happen to agree with them. Dr Wakefield did not "create the scare" in me as my concerns about the MMR have been around since it was introduced.
It seems the GMC have an agenda too and a far more dangerous one - there must be no open dissent. Anyone know what research the GMC are supporting into understanding the increase in autism?
Autism is not a disease, it is a condition of the sensory and perceptive brain, and of those sections which handle relationships and awareness of others. there is a lot of research going on. Please ask - "what caused it BEFORE MMR was ever used?"
mr Giblets

Gloucester, UK

#42 Jan 31, 2010
EdSed wrote:
<quoted text>
From your first link:
"Urgent further research is needed to determine whether MMR may give rise to this complication in a small number of people," Dr Wakefield said at the time."
"May" is what Dr Wakefield says. I and many others agree that this line of research was interesting and needs to be pursued. I repeat, one needs to focus on the science, which is not discredited as it was never sufficiently pursued. Dr Wakefield's results appear to have been independently repeated. You seem to just ignore my earlier posts and repeat what has already been posted?
The danger that many perceive in the MMR is potentially avoided by spacing the 3 jabs. That would seem a reasonable precaution. I hold the GMC's approach responsible for the drop in vaccinations against measles, not Dr Wakefield or his research. It seems that everyone who disagrees with them potentially becomes their target.
As your link pointed out, Mr Blair makes no comment on whether he trusts the jabs for his own child. He is not alone. Any public figure or professional person risks being attacked on a personal level by people like the GMC, as they have demonstrated.
One reason people believe the GMC is because people say things like "There is no scientific professional who will tell you there is a causal link between the MMR and autism". That is true. That is not what Dr Wakefield insists either. He says he believes there may be a link and the risks should not be run. I agree,a s they are not necessary.
There does seem to be a huge increase in autism both statistically and anecdotally. When I was young I did not meet anyone with a condition like asperger's or autism, whatever name it might have been given. Now we come across cases all the time and there seems little public concern and UKGov express little concern about the matter other than to avoid the MMR for their own children.
when you were a child these conditions were not known to exist, so got labelled as other disorders.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#43 Jan 31, 2010
Wakefield having an agenda to change policy? Like what, allowing for funding to be a conflict of interest? Taking blood from fainting kids and paying them afterwards? Only having a lame study of 12 children who already had GI issues? To do painful dangerous tests on children, one being sent to the ER after Wakefield boo boo'd the procedure? Yea, we sure need to change policy alright.

Vaccine concern and side effects have always been around, ask my 70 some year old mother. However, Wakefield is coined for the true autism vaccine scare, over a flawed study. Period. Wakefield is also responsible for the rise in mealses cases and for those children who died from it.

I never heard of autism until my child was born. General population doesn't 'see' what they don't want to see, and proof of that is on-going awareness to the public of autism. Unless you strolled mental institutuions or the special schools these children were sent to, you never would had seen any with autism, ever. We're of the generation of which we don't hide our kids.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Mumps Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The flu vaccine is imperfect, but please get it... Dec 20 APV 1
For Once the Anti-Vaxxers Aren't (Entirely) to ... Dec 18 Vaccine Caused 6
Should state mandate immunizations? New require... (May '11) Dec 16 Yobbie 9,583
High Rate of Vaccination Opt-Outs Raises Concer... Dec 2 Vaccines Cause Au... 21
Another study finds vaccines don't cause autism Nov 28 Josh 19
A List of 28 Studies from Around the World that... (Dec '13) Nov '14 DR WILLIAM THOMPSON 3
[Opinions] Vaccinations: A beneficial dose Oct '14 Vaccines Maim Kill 1
More from around the web