Anyone here not vaccinate their kids with MMR?

[threaded]

Of course there is a risk with any external product you may take - that's part of human variation. I would hope that people have some idea of the comparatively larger risks of not immunising though.
Although there is an increasingly larger segment of society that are too stupid to make the distinction.
That's what happens in a post-modernist society - the revenge of people who were not very clever at school.

You didn't ask about not immunising, but about the MMR.

Try staying focused scatter brain.

[BrilloPad]

You didn't ask about not immunising, but about the MMR.

Try staying focused scatter brain.

He cant as he is too busy thinking up "insults".

HTH

[ASB]

Of course there is a risk with any external product you may take - that's part of human variation. I would hope that people have some idea of the comparatively larger risks of not immunising though.
Although there is an increasingly larger segment of society that are too stupid to make the distinction.

You previously stated:-

"Because there are some cretins who've convinced themselves its dangeorus. (sic)"

I entirely agree for the vast majority of people the risk of non vaccination far exceeds the risk of vaccination (though tell that to the parents who's daughter died recently from the 2nd cervical cancer jab). The fact is it is dangerous - as someone who has a neurological disease which causes significant immune problems my kids were were having there second MMR at the point I was being diagnosed. There was, at the time, a belief they could have an inherited form of my disease, unfortunately it is not detectable at that age.

We did, however, ensure they had the jab. It was not an easy decision though - I accept my circumstances were somewhat different to all bar about 500 of the population, but considering those circumstances does not make me a cretin.

[bandit_legs]

... and if not, why not?

i thought this was CUK forum am i mistaken or have i mistakenly joined up to Mothering.net?

[moorfield]

The MMR science (published by that F-Wit in The Lancet years ago) is bollux.

The risk of mummies killing their poor little dahlings driving at even 50mph are thousands and thousands of times greater than not immunising against MMR, but they don't give that
a second thought when they are steaming off in their 4x4s.

[sasguru]

You didn't ask about not immunising, but about the MMR.

Try staying focused scatter brain.

Sorry if I'm too fast/making links you're too thick to understand.

Do keep up at the back

[sasguru]

The MMR science (published by that F-Wit in The Lancet years ago) is bollux.

The risk of mummies killing their poor little dahlings driving at even 50mph are thousands and thousands of times greater than not immunising against MMR, but they don't give that
a second thought when they are steaming off in their 4x4s.

Quite. Finally a voice of reason.

[SueEllen]

The MMR science (published by that F-Wit in The Lancet years ago) is bollux

Agreed.

The guy did "case studies" not a proper study, but unfortunately some journalists think that case studies on small numbers of people are relevant when looking at the general population.

It doesn't help though that he repeated his assertions in his "case studies" because it made him money.

[ASB]

The MMR science (published by that F-Wit in The Lancet years ago) is bollux.

The risk of mummies killing their poor little dahlings driving at even 50mph are thousands and thousands of times greater than not immunising against MMR, but they don't give that
a second thought when they are steaming off in their 4x4s.

I think the case is still ongoing at the GMC? But, yes, Wakefields co-authors (bar one I think) retracted when it became apparent that some of his research funding was coming from a bunch of trial lawyers.

[sasguru]

He cant as he is too busy thinking up "insults".

HTH

Your impact on this thread is similar to a pekinese farting in a hurricane.

HTH