ChatterBank1 min ago
Why does naomi not trust MMR?
121 Answers
naomi, in a separate thread you said that you don't trust MMR. What follows is not just to show my disagreement with you, but to make a very important point which I'll leave until last. Here goes:
No-one has shown any connection between MMR and autism. One doctor and a small team (who have since deserted him) made that suggestion but produced no evidence. His 'results' were impossible to reproduce, his methods were shown to be deeply flawed and his motives suspect. Not since Piltdown Man was revealed as a hoax has any scientific theory been so comprehensively debunked.
By 2001, 500,000,000 MMR jabs had been given world-wide (heaven knows what the figure is now) with no detectable adverse effects; autism surfaces just as often in children that have not had the jab as in those that have.
In the USA, where they are notoriously neurotic about their health, they have such confidence in it that in some states you may not send your children to school until they have had the jab.
That autism sometimes appears after the jab does not mean that it appears because of it . That is the old post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc fallacy. Since the vaccination takes place early in a child's life it precedes all the other ailments that that child might later suffer from. Do we blame chicken-pox, asthma, leukaemia, migraines etc. on MMR? Of course not. So why autism?
cont'd�
No-one has shown any connection between MMR and autism. One doctor and a small team (who have since deserted him) made that suggestion but produced no evidence. His 'results' were impossible to reproduce, his methods were shown to be deeply flawed and his motives suspect. Not since Piltdown Man was revealed as a hoax has any scientific theory been so comprehensively debunked.
By 2001, 500,000,000 MMR jabs had been given world-wide (heaven knows what the figure is now) with no detectable adverse effects; autism surfaces just as often in children that have not had the jab as in those that have.
In the USA, where they are notoriously neurotic about their health, they have such confidence in it that in some states you may not send your children to school until they have had the jab.
That autism sometimes appears after the jab does not mean that it appears because of it . That is the old post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc fallacy. Since the vaccination takes place early in a child's life it precedes all the other ailments that that child might later suffer from. Do we blame chicken-pox, asthma, leukaemia, migraines etc. on MMR? Of course not. So why autism?
cont'd�
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by chakka35. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Measles is a very dangereous illness tigerlilly. It can cause brain damage and lots of other things and can kill. There used to be lots of deaths before the measles jabs.
Mumps is also quite a dangerous illness and can lead to Meningitis. German Measles in pregnancy can lead to damaged babies. My niece is deaf because of it.
Chicken Pox isn't covered by MMR. (Measles, Mumps, Rubella)
I am not against vaccinations, but I am against a vaccination which perhaps is too much for the immune system of a young baby. Hence I think the option should be there for separate jabs, FREE! But that would cost the government too much!!
Mumps is also quite a dangerous illness and can lead to Meningitis. German Measles in pregnancy can lead to damaged babies. My niece is deaf because of it.
Chicken Pox isn't covered by MMR. (Measles, Mumps, Rubella)
I am not against vaccinations, but I am against a vaccination which perhaps is too much for the immune system of a young baby. Hence I think the option should be there for separate jabs, FREE! But that would cost the government too much!!
I am not anti anything I was just asking thats all.
When my children were younger they had all of them.
I just don't remember back to when I was younger any one dieing of measles.
But obviously they do.
As for mumps I left that out of my answer because I know why they give jabs for that.
But pardon me for asking.
When my children were younger they had all of them.
I just don't remember back to when I was younger any one dieing of measles.
But obviously they do.
As for mumps I left that out of my answer because I know why they give jabs for that.
But pardon me for asking.
No problem Naomi.
I just get annoyed when people think just because your asking you know nothing.
Just because no one I knew didn't die of measles doesn't mean to say that no one did.
It all seems a little fuzzy over the whole MMR thing.
It is up to the parents of the child.
You can't compare the likes of what some mothers like Karen Matthews or baby p's mum do to this issue.
This is not the same thing is it.
Some of the toys I had when I was young and some of the play ground rides and some of the things I did when I was young would have the health and safety running for the hills.
But sometimes you just have to except that you cannot keep your children safe from everything.
But when you can you do.
This was not the case in where Karen Matthews or baby P's mum were concerned.
I just get annoyed when people think just because your asking you know nothing.
Just because no one I knew didn't die of measles doesn't mean to say that no one did.
It all seems a little fuzzy over the whole MMR thing.
It is up to the parents of the child.
You can't compare the likes of what some mothers like Karen Matthews or baby p's mum do to this issue.
This is not the same thing is it.
Some of the toys I had when I was young and some of the play ground rides and some of the things I did when I was young would have the health and safety running for the hills.
But sometimes you just have to except that you cannot keep your children safe from everything.
But when you can you do.
This was not the case in where Karen Matthews or baby P's mum were concerned.
Phew! Seeing the number of posts I thought it would take all day to answer. But some of them are irrelevant to the MMR issue and there was much repetition. A few individual answers before I make my last general comments:
flip_flop, well done for having the honesty to admit that you are being irrational. I love the defiance of it!
Octavius, I will ignore the routine personal dig in your first post.. I am so used to it now that I would feel bereft if you didn�t grace me with it.
There is no point in giving me a quotation unless you also give the source. Please tell me the author and where I will find it.
You are not careful enough with your words when you talk about parents choosing what is best for their children. What you mean is parents choosing what they think is best for their children. But when it is pointed out that their choice is not best for their children, should they not take some notice? Are they right to close their ears to those who tell them that single jabs are both pointless and inadequate?
They have the right to choose, yes, but, for their children�s sake, should they not check around a bit before doing so?
LoftyLottie, your obvious prejudice makes it difficult to argue with you. I am sorry about your mother�s deterioration after the flu jab but, as I have said before and will certainly say again before I�ve finished, the fact that B happens after A does not mean that B happened because of A. Above all that testing that has been done of flu jabs and the millions who get it every year without harm you place the gossip of one nurse.
Lonnie, sorry also about your daughter but are you going to put down every ailment she has in future to the MMR jab? Do you really not see how unreasonable that is?
cont�d�
flip_flop, well done for having the honesty to admit that you are being irrational. I love the defiance of it!
Octavius, I will ignore the routine personal dig in your first post.. I am so used to it now that I would feel bereft if you didn�t grace me with it.
There is no point in giving me a quotation unless you also give the source. Please tell me the author and where I will find it.
You are not careful enough with your words when you talk about parents choosing what is best for their children. What you mean is parents choosing what they think is best for their children. But when it is pointed out that their choice is not best for their children, should they not take some notice? Are they right to close their ears to those who tell them that single jabs are both pointless and inadequate?
They have the right to choose, yes, but, for their children�s sake, should they not check around a bit before doing so?
LoftyLottie, your obvious prejudice makes it difficult to argue with you. I am sorry about your mother�s deterioration after the flu jab but, as I have said before and will certainly say again before I�ve finished, the fact that B happens after A does not mean that B happened because of A. Above all that testing that has been done of flu jabs and the millions who get it every year without harm you place the gossip of one nurse.
Lonnie, sorry also about your daughter but are you going to put down every ailment she has in future to the MMR jab? Do you really not see how unreasonable that is?
cont�d�
�cont�d
Crisgal, thanks for your support but I don�t think he�s been struck off yet. Cost is the least important reason for not offering single jabs on the NHS: pointlessness and inadequate protection are the main reasons.
naomi � well, you did warn me that nothing would change your mind and you�ve certainly proved that, not responding to any of the cogent points made. If I can be frivolous for a moment I�d say that you�d had the FR jab, making you immune to Fact and Reason. So unlike you.
Summing up:There is no evidence that MMR causes autism. The �evidence� produced by Andrew Wakefield (yes, why shouldn�t I name and shame the wretched man) amounted to no more than the feelings of the parents of his (carefully-selected) child patients who �believed� (as do naomi, lonnie and others) that the autism was caused by MMR purely because they followed each other. The logical fallacy there should be self-evident but, astonishingly, it isn�t, even when it has been pointed out.
Why the fellow should have made such an astounding claim based on nothing was a bit of a mystery, but then we discovered that he was being paid to find adversely against MMR by parents who were planning a court case. His methods and results have all been discredited. We can leave Wakefield to be dealt with by the BMC but his legacy is far more difficult to be rid of.
cont�d �
Crisgal, thanks for your support but I don�t think he�s been struck off yet. Cost is the least important reason for not offering single jabs on the NHS: pointlessness and inadequate protection are the main reasons.
naomi � well, you did warn me that nothing would change your mind and you�ve certainly proved that, not responding to any of the cogent points made. If I can be frivolous for a moment I�d say that you�d had the FR jab, making you immune to Fact and Reason. So unlike you.
Summing up:There is no evidence that MMR causes autism. The �evidence� produced by Andrew Wakefield (yes, why shouldn�t I name and shame the wretched man) amounted to no more than the feelings of the parents of his (carefully-selected) child patients who �believed� (as do naomi, lonnie and others) that the autism was caused by MMR purely because they followed each other. The logical fallacy there should be self-evident but, astonishingly, it isn�t, even when it has been pointed out.
Why the fellow should have made such an astounding claim based on nothing was a bit of a mystery, but then we discovered that he was being paid to find adversely against MMR by parents who were planning a court case. His methods and results have all been discredited. We can leave Wakefield to be dealt with by the BMC but his legacy is far more difficult to be rid of.
cont�d �
�cont�d
In a free country parents are perfectly entitled to spend good money at private clinics (which are happy to exploit them) to obtain single jabs for their children. But it is not unreasonable to point out that (a) they are wasting their money, (b) the protection they are giving their children is inadequate compared to that which they could get free on the NHS, and (c) during the long periods when their children are either unprotected or only partially protected they are a menace to others, giving those diseases bodies to inhabit and from which to spread. So it isn�t just a matter for those parents: other people are affected as well.
And there�s the nub. Before this hysteria we had about 95% take-up of MMR, giving herd protection. Measles, mumps and rubella were almost extinct in this country. Now we have a thousand children with measles, and already one has died. That is an utter disgrace in a country which is supposed to be civilised and advanced. I am sorry to see that the deep shame I feel about this is not shared by some ABers.
I rest the case for the defence and, contrary to normal practice, invite the prosecution to produce theirs.
Give the court the evidence that links MMR with autism and that says that single jabs are �safer�.
I�ll leave the site for a day or two, then return for the cross-examination.
In a free country parents are perfectly entitled to spend good money at private clinics (which are happy to exploit them) to obtain single jabs for their children. But it is not unreasonable to point out that (a) they are wasting their money, (b) the protection they are giving their children is inadequate compared to that which they could get free on the NHS, and (c) during the long periods when their children are either unprotected or only partially protected they are a menace to others, giving those diseases bodies to inhabit and from which to spread. So it isn�t just a matter for those parents: other people are affected as well.
And there�s the nub. Before this hysteria we had about 95% take-up of MMR, giving herd protection. Measles, mumps and rubella were almost extinct in this country. Now we have a thousand children with measles, and already one has died. That is an utter disgrace in a country which is supposed to be civilised and advanced. I am sorry to see that the deep shame I feel about this is not shared by some ABers.
I rest the case for the defence and, contrary to normal practice, invite the prosecution to produce theirs.
Give the court the evidence that links MMR with autism and that says that single jabs are �safer�.
I�ll leave the site for a day or two, then return for the cross-examination.
Chakka,
Thats am extremely well thought out response, and you should be congratulated for it, but regarding my daughter, as i said, we can't prove or disprove her condition was caused by the MMR,
We, (her parents), believe it was the cause, because as I said earlier, there was nothing wrong with her before the jab, and almost straight afterwards, she was reacting, but its a one off, for life condition, she gets illnesses same as any other 'normal' person, so NO, I don't, and can't blame these on the MMR, except that her immune system operates on lower scale, but of course, that may or may not be a result of the jab we don't know, and we never looked for a reason.
Thats am extremely well thought out response, and you should be congratulated for it, but regarding my daughter, as i said, we can't prove or disprove her condition was caused by the MMR,
We, (her parents), believe it was the cause, because as I said earlier, there was nothing wrong with her before the jab, and almost straight afterwards, she was reacting, but its a one off, for life condition, she gets illnesses same as any other 'normal' person, so NO, I don't, and can't blame these on the MMR, except that her immune system operates on lower scale, but of course, that may or may not be a result of the jab we don't know, and we never looked for a reason.
Latest Posts
News2 mins ago
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Family & Relationships13 mins ago
ChatterBank31 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.