# Meningitis B Vaccination



## shane_ctr

What's your thoughts? My little girl is 3 1/2 and we have a newborn on the way so the newborn will have the new injection my wife registered my daughter with some private clinics a few months ago and a clinic has said it now has avaliabilty. Im totally on the fence to this and if i should do it or not? Its such a new vacination.

Any one had this done? thoughts?

:thumb:


----------



## chp

Meningitis B is a terrible disease which can be rapidly fatal in young (or even older) children. Even if it isn't fatal it can result in severe physical or mental disability. 

I don't know about the rest of the UK, but here in Northern Ireland it is now part of the standard immunisation schedule given to all newborns. The decision of course us up to you, but I would have no hesitation in getting my child immunised. 

If a child does get it, it can result in them having quite high temperatures for a day or two, so it is recommended to give them regular paracetamol for a few doses after they are immunised.


----------



## DrEskimo

I don't have anecdotal evidence of the vaccination, as I don't have kids, but I do work in medical research (I'm a medical statistician). A brief look at the evidence for the use of the vaccine seems over whelming in its safety (as you would expect given its now being offered). That's not to say there aren't risk of course, but as above, the risk of the vaccine vs. the risk of your child contracting Men. B is what you need to weight up and assess.

There can be a lot of mis-information when it comes to vaccination, and that study conducted not too long ago reporting a link between the triple MMR and autism is a classic case of very poor research having a devastating impact.

If there is any information, papers or stats you want me to look at and explain to help you make your decision just let me know


----------



## m4rkymark

im the opposite of CHP, we have decided not to get it. the vaccine is quite new and although the consequences can be devastating the risk of catching the disease itself is extremely low.

If you read the JCVI interim report and the final report the vaccine isn't actually that effective and it is classed as reactogenic in their minutes. If you read the novarits report it says there are between 3-4% of kids have an adverse effect (which means more than just a bit of redness or sickness) whereas the chance of contracting the disease is 1:50,000. for me that's too big a difference especially when the JCVI report states the vaccine is not particularly effective.

interim report https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...nt_on_meningococcal_B_vaccination_for_web.pdf

and the final report https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...t_data/file/294245/JCVI_Statement_on_MenB.pdf

The HPA have released their quarterly report into Meningitis numbers (by age group and subtype). No reduction so far in the number of Men B cases in under 1s (see table 2). Of course this is just an indication, and it may improve in due course when more babies have had the full course, but no immediate reduction in cases.

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/503594/hpr0816_IMD.pdf

The same quarter for last year for comparison:

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/407794/hpr0715_imd.pdf


----------



## DrEskimo

m4rkymark said:


> im the opposite of CHP, we have decided not to get it. the vaccine is quite new and although the consequences can be devastating the risk of catching the disease itself is extremely low.
> 
> If you read the JCVI interim report and the final report the vaccine isn't actually that effective and it is classed as reactogenic in their minutes. If you read the novarits report it says there are between 3-4% of kids have an adverse effect (which means more than just a bit of redness or sickness) whereas the chance of contracting the disease is 1:50,000. for me that's too big a difference especially when the JCVI report states the vaccine is not particularly effective.
> 
> interim report https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...nt_on_meningococcal_B_vaccination_for_web.pdf
> 
> and the final report https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...t_data/file/294245/JCVI_Statement_on_MenB.pdf
> 
> The HPA have released their quarterly report into Meningitis numbers (by age group and subtype). No reduction so far in the number of Men B cases in under 1s (see table 2). Of course this is just an indication, and it may improve in due course when more babies have had the full course, but no immediate reduction in cases.
> 
> www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/503594/hpr0816_IMD.pdf
> 
> The same quarter for last year for comparison:
> 
> www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/407794/hpr0715_imd.pdf


"If you read the novarits report it says there are between 3-4% of kids have an adverse effect (which means more than just a bit of redness or sickness) whereas the chance of contracting the disease is 1:50,000."

The two statistics you have used are not comparable. One is a prevalence rate (presuming life time prevalence?) and the other is a proportion. Proportion of what is not exactly clear...

I see the argument you are making though. The efficacy of the vaccine has been questioned and, given the low prevalence of the disease, their is a low risk of your child contracting the disease. This has an impact on the cost-benefit of the use of wide-spread vaccination, but personally speaking, thats not of much interest to me! I want whatever the NHS is offering that can improve the health care of my child, and whether the government are paying over the odds for it is their issue, not mine...! Basically, if you can get it, then get it.

As for Men-B being low-risk, thats a personal decision. You will need to provide a context for the safety profile of the vaccine to get a better understanding of the likely side-effects that could occur, and the chances of this occurring. I confess, I haven't looked into it in detail so it could be as you say, higher than you personally like. My point at the beginning is that you need to ensure you compare apples to apples to help you make this decision.

The overall conclusion appears to be that there is not enough data yet to know the long-term effect of the vaccine on UK wide levels of Men B in this age group. Not particularly helpful for people like OP who are trying to make the decision today...!

Again though, whether this is particularly important to you, the end-user, is questionable. Average statistics and life-time prevalence rates are all important in health care decision making, but surely the only important aspect to you is whether it prevents your particular child contracting a horrible disease? Thats one of the problems with statistics, they are great at estimating group effects, but pretty damn poor in estimating any one individual's risk....


----------



## m4rkymark

No one can estimate an individual risk though that's the thing. From the information available at this time the risk of an adverse affect is greater than the risk of catching the disease. The 1:50000 is the risk of catching the disease in the uk population of kids - I can't find the link right now or remember if it's the docs ive linked to. One of the other risks for me is the UK are the first country to use this vaccine, go down to the statement made by Ben Howlett in the link https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-04-25/debates/16042524000001/MeningitisBVaccine

It must be said I'm not a great believer in vaccines, I don't think that just because they are available everyone should get them. some of the vaccines don't work, some cause issues with your child etc. Etc. It's interesting you mention the MMR vaccine and use the old argument it's not related to autism and maybe it isn't, though there still seems to be a bit of a war raging on about that and I for one don't believe it is as clear cut as is being made out, it can't be denied that children have absolutely been affected by that particular vaccine. I think the thing that annoys me is the medical profession try to play down any of the risk and anyone who tries to say they have been affected by vaccines are shouted down but the govt. does acknowledge people have been affected and that's why they have a fund that pays out to these families. Lots of people have went to their GP and said after getting this vaccine x, y, z happened but its often, but not always, played down and you are told its coincidence. no doubt sometimes it is but I believe there are more issues than are accepted by the medical profession.

Yes vaccines is the main are good but IMO there needs to be a more balanced approach and less of a we told you so attitude from medics.(im not saying you are in this camp btw  just thinking out loud really)

It is a difficult decision for parents but, I would never tell anyone what to do with their child but I do feel you need to make an informed decision rather than follow the noise. I find the subject of vaccinations interesting and find other viewpoints interesting and that also helps guide your compass as to what you should do. I don't really believe a lot of what we are fed by govt. nor do I believe some of the things big pharma tell us, maybe I'm overly cynical... I'm comfortable with the decisions I've made though.


----------



## nick_mcuk

We have paid privately for the jabs....sorry when it comes to my little fella he will get what ever he needs regardless...

Wasn't cheap but its £500 well spent.

I doubt you will get any of this batch as there were massive shortages and also massive wait lists.

Give it a shot though....we are also going to get him inoculated from chicken pox....for the £200 it costs its saves a lot of hassle.

Given the number of foreign bodies entering our shores stuff like this and TB etc are going to rise...the more you can do to safe guard agains it the better.


----------



## DrEskimo

m4rkymark said:


> No one can estimate an individual risk though that's the thing. From the information available at this time the risk of an adverse affect is greater than the risk of catching the disease. The 1:50000 is the risk of catching the disease in the uk population of kids - I can't find the link right now or remember if it's the docs ive linked to. One of the other risks for me is the UK are the first country to use this vaccine, go down to the statement made by Ben Howlett in the link https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-04-25/debates/16042524000001/MeningitisBVaccine
> 
> It must be said I'm not a great believer in vaccines, I don't think that just because they are available everyone should get them. some of the vaccines don't work, some cause issues with your child etc. Etc. It's interesting you mention the MMR vaccine and use the old argument it's not related to autism and maybe it isn't, though there still seems to be a bit of a war raging on about that and I for one don't believe it is as clear cut as is being made out, it can't be denied that children have absolutely been affected by that particular vaccine. I think the thing that annoys me is the medical profession try to play down any of the risk and anyone who tries to say they have been affected by vaccines are shouted down but the govt. does acknowledge people have been affected and that's why they have a fund that pays out to these families. Lots of people have went to their GP and said after getting this vaccine x, y, z happened but its often, but not always, played down and you are told its coincidence. no doubt sometimes it is but I believe there are more issues than are accepted by the medical profession.
> 
> Yes vaccines is the main are good but IMO there needs to be a more balanced approach and less of a we told you so attitude from medics.(im not saying you are in this camp btw  just thinking out loud really)
> 
> It is a difficult decision for parents but, I would never tell anyone what to do with their child but I do feel you need to make an informed decision rather than follow the noise. I find the subject of vaccinations interesting and find other viewpoints interesting and that also helps guide your compass as to what you should do. I don't really believe a lot of what we are fed by govt. nor do I believe some of the things big pharma tell us, maybe I'm overly cynical... I'm comfortable with the decisions I've made though.


With regards to medics being prescriptive and not working with patients, couldn't agree more. Work with colleagues on several projects about self decision making for things like cancer, where there is a choice and that should be made by the patient with the medic.

However, I do disagree that there needs to be a more balanced debate. Just because there are two sides to the argument doesn't mean both automatically get equal weighting. Classic case being homeopathy care for severe diseases. Yes there are a section of people that believe homeopathy should be used by the NHS, but the evidence is woeful and it does not have anywhere near the evidence base of traditional medicine. Now I don't think it's as bad in the vaccine argument, but there does seem to be a air of 'conspiracy' around it, which seems to be exacerbated by unqualified bloggers and rather questionable research..

I am all for scientific debate. It's the hallmark of science to question and refute the current paradigm, but this needs to be done using rigorous scientific methodology. Of course nothing is proven as fact, which is why research needs to continue, but a raft of RCTs, observational cohorts and other studies conducted by leading professors in the field, prominent statisticians and epidemiologists (one day I like to think I'll be in that camp..) and rigorous peer review prior to publications and by ethical committees is not the same as some bloke in his bedroom reading stories on the internet setting up a blog....they don't deserve equal weighting in the argument. Of course that is an extreme, and perhaps there is a range of good quality research to suggest certain vaccines aren't beneficial, I honestly haven't done enough reading to know. What I have seen does seem to be more anecdotal than evidence though, with mothers going on breakfast shows saying things like "my evidence is my autistic child'.....while I sympathise greatly, it's not evidence!

I agree, it's a very difficult decision to make as a parent, but the anti medic approach can be dangerous. With the MMR example, that unethical and dreadful paper led to many children not being vaccinated and has caused a massive spike in MMR cases. Yes of course it's not a forgone conclusion that there is not a link, without the counter factual it's impossible to ever know, but from what I've seen, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favour for the use of the MMR.

I've only been working in the field for 7 years, but trust me when I tell you that every medic I have worked with goes into research to only benefit their patients. Now your scepticism of pharma is probably more founded, but also trust me when I say that practice has changed immensely, and their ability to bias results is more difficult. It's certainly achievable, but more difficult...!

Anyway, that's my 2ps worth. Sure you probably have, but in case you haven't read it, I highly recommend Ben Goldacre's book Bad Science. Think you would enjoy it


----------



## empsburna

I always assumed the link with MMR and autism was because you had the job around the same age as you can see the signs.

PS, our 6 month old had MenB after quite a lot of deliberation.


----------



## m4rkymark

Dr Eskimo I agree with most of what you say :thumb:


----------



## shane_ctr

nick_mcuk said:


> We have paid privately for the jabs....sorry when it comes to my little fella he will get what ever he needs regardless...
> 
> Wasn't cheap but its £500 well spent.
> 
> I doubt you will get any of this batch as there were massive shortages and also massive wait lists.
> 
> Give it a shot though....we are also going to get him inoculated from chicken pox....for the £200 it costs its saves a lot of hassle.
> 
> Given the number of foreign bodies entering our shores stuff like this and TB etc are going to rise...the more you can do to safe guard agains it the better.


This is the reason for my post, We went on a waiting list at a private clinic in London and today have been told we can get my daughter the jabs this month if we would like £280 all in. Its not the cost thats bothering me its just wanting to really know the facts etc.:thumb:


----------



## DrEskimo

empsburna said:


> I always assumed the link with MMR and autism was because you had the job around the same age as you can see the signs.
> 
> PS, our 6 month old had MenB after quite a lot of deliberation.


Well there is that, but the paper that founded the scare by Wakefield was unethical, fraudulent and completely wrong. It was a case study of 12 children, who had unnecessary and painful tests, did not have ethical approval, and much of the data reported on the children was factually incorrect. No other large-scale, peer-reviewed study has found a link between the two AFAIK.

Are there links between the vaccine and adverse effects, maybe, are those proportional to the risk of contracting MMR or the widespread outbreaks of the MMR in recent years due to the worrying decline in MMR vaccinations...no....

I think my main problem with this debate is that it deflects away from the real issues in evidence based practice and the involvement of pharma. There are really pressing and important issues that need to be addressed with the current practice, but these don't, on the whole, involve vaccinations. Well particularly the the MMR one anyway. 
Unregistered trials, unpublished results and purposefully choosing control arms which are known to show an overwhelming positive effect of a particular drug, which are not representative of current treatment, are all issues that should be reported and contested! These are having very real consequences on what the NHS is paying for and what treatments are the best options for patients.

Anyway, sorry OP this is deflecting away from your question. Unfortunately it's only really a decision you can make based on the information you have. I would certainly discuss it with your GP and hopefully they can give you their impartial advice to help you make your decision.


----------



## shane_ctr

DrEskimo said:


> Well there is that, but the paper that founded the scare by Wakefield was unethical, fraudulent and completely wrong. It was a case study of 12 children, who had unnecessary and painful tests, did not have ethical approval, and much of the data reported on the children was factually incorrect. No other large-scale, peer-reviewed study has found a link between the two AFAIK.
> 
> Are there links between the vaccine and adverse effects, maybe, are those proportional to the risk of contracting MMR or the widespread outbreaks of the MMR in recent years due to the worrying decline in MMR vaccinations...no....
> 
> I think my main problem with this debate is that it deflects away from the real issues in evidence based practice and the involvement of pharma. There are really pressing and important issues that need to be addressed with the current practice, but these don't, on the whole, involve vaccinations. Well particularly the the MMR one anyway.
> Unregistered trials, unpublished results and purposefully choosing control arms which are known to show an overwhelming positive effect of a particular drug, which are not representative of current treatment, are all issues that should be reported and contested! These are having very real consequences on what the NHS is paying for and what treatments are the best options for patients.
> 
> Anyway, sorry OP this is deflecting away from your question. Unfortunately it's only really a decision you can make based on the information you have. I would certainly discuss it with your GP and hopefully they can give you their impartial advice to help you make your decision.


This is the advise my parents gave me. Thank you for all your posts is given me plenty to think about. My wife is 100% set on getting it but i just want to know more about it as for me its such a new vaccination. :thumb:


----------



## Rayaan

DrEskimo said:


> Well there is that, but the paper that founded the scare by Wakefield was unethical, fraudulent and completely wrong. It was a case study of 12 children, who had unnecessary and painful tests, did not have ethical approval, and much of the data reported on the children was factually incorrect. No other large-scale, peer-reviewed study has found a link between the two AFAIK.
> 
> Are there links between the vaccine and adverse effects, maybe, are those proportional to the risk of contracting MMR or the widespread outbreaks of the MMR in recent years due to the worrying decline in MMR vaccinations...no....
> 
> I think my main problem with this debate is that it deflects away from the real issues in evidence based practice and the involvement of pharma. There are really pressing and important issues that need to be addressed with the current practice, but these don't, on the whole, involve vaccinations. Well particularly the the MMR one anyway.
> Unregistered trials, unpublished results and purposefully choosing control arms which are known to show an overwhelming positive effect of a particular drug, which are not representative of current treatment, are all issues that should be reported and contested! These are having very real consequences on what the NHS is paying for and what treatments are the best options for patients.
> 
> Anyway, sorry OP this is deflecting away from your question. Unfortunately it's only really a decision you can make based on the information you have. I would certainly discuss it with your GP and hopefully they can give you their impartial advice to help you make your decision.


That's all well and good but the researcher who initially proved that there is no link between MMR and Autism was employed by the CDC to do so. He recently stated that the CDC told him to fabricate the results.

Anyway, I'm a GP, I have a son who has learning difficulties and epilepsy which started after the initial MMR jab.

I had my doubts about the MMR jab but we decided to give it to our son anyway but of course we have no idea what's true and what's not.

I provide all relevant information to my patients, the pros, cons and benefits to the community etc. After this point I usually say that if they're still doubting it, you can delay the jabs and have them once your child is slightly older and that way, if there is any autism or anything else, it's discovered before the jab and hence, patients won't blame me, themselves (huge psychological implications) or the vaccine.

Some patients choose to take this route and they're usually very happy as its a bit of a compromise for both of us.

Evidence based practice works usually 90% of the time. The problem is thay there's so much variation that some drugs/vaccines or interventions tend to do much better for some people and have no effect on others.


----------



## Titanium Htail

As the dad of three children I would agree this is a very personal decision, some years ago our eldest boys became very unwell, the consultant suggested a possibility of meningitis the very word no parents want to hear, I can remember those words vividly as if it were somebody else we were talking about. My assumption was that he was beyond the age when even the possibility was an option. As mentioned, this was at time when the decision relevant to the MMR divided opinion or subsequent provision, clearly based on the notion that this tainted report was not factually based some decided the benefits as opposed to the risks were too great so no precaution was taken, I work in a school so remember the ongoing debate.

Statistics are not your child, as Nick mentioned who would not do anything but good for your own children including others so collective debate to address some of the concern is always helpful. 


John Tht.


----------



## Dr_T

Rayaan said:


> Anyway, I'm a GP, I have a son who has learning difficulties and epilepsy which started after the initial MMR jab.


as a GP you should also know that the symtoms of autism/learning difficulties appear around the age you get the MMR, nor does having the MMR increase the severity or occorance in familys with children already diagnoses with autism.


----------



## Horatio

Dr_T said:


> as a GP you should also know that the symtoms of autism/learning difficulties appear around the age you get the MMR, nor does having the MMR increase the severity or occorance in familys with children already diagnoses with autism.


I could correct you on that but I wont. The truth is more terrifying than people are willing to accept.

Thats all i have to say.


----------



## DrEskimo

Horatio said:


> I could correct you on that but I wont. The truth is more terrifying than people are willing to accept.
> 
> Thats all i have to say.


Do you have a link to a peer-reviewed article that I could read?


----------



## Horatio

DrEskimo said:


> Do you have a link to a peer-reviewed article that I could read?


Why peer reviewed? Do you know how the process is funded? :driver:


----------



## DrEskimo

Horatio said:


> Why peer reviewed? Do you know how the process is funded? :driver:


I do. I'm a medical statistician and been working in medical research for the NHS, academia and industry for over 6 years...

So do you have any links?


----------



## Horatio

Oh brilliant then. Well, you would know then it does not exist.

Im neither a doctor or have any medical experience or qualifications.


----------



## DrEskimo

Horatio said:


> Oh brilliant then. Well, you would know then it does not exist.
> 
> Im neither a doctor or have any medical experience or qualifications.


Then I have to ask, what is leading you to the conclusion that there is an alternative 'truth' concerning the link between autism and MMR, despite the overwhelming evidence that there is no association...? From rather respected and qualified professors and experts no less...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25898051

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25562790

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24814559

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673699012398

The amount of publications involving research into this link has soared since the publication of Wakefield's paper. Trust me, if there was a link, many research groups will be chomping at the bit to publish their data and become very infamous scientists. This was precisely the motivation of Wakefield. It was just unfortunate that he forgot the science bit...

If after all the data collection and analysis there still remains no peer-reviewed publication that provides evidence of an increased association between autism and the MMR vaccine, its highly likely that's because it does not exist....the hypothesis is rejected until an alternative hypothesis is posed and tested.

If you think the association does exist, then collect your data, analyse it and publish it. Thats how science works. Don't spew a bunch of spurious nonsense on a forum about knowing the 'truth'....

To me it makes about as much sense as writing a bunch of drivel about how aeroplanes fly, that the design of wings are flawed, and I know the 'truth' about aviation....by the way, I have no experience in aviation science and I'm not a qualified engineer....:wall:


----------



## Horatio

DrEskimo said:


> Then I have to ask, what is leading you to the conclusion that there is an alternative 'truth' concerning the link between autism and MMR, despite the overwhelming evidence that there is no association...? From rather respected and qualified professors and experts no less...
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25898051
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25562790
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24814559
> 
> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673699012398
> 
> The amount of publications involving research into this link has soared since the publication of Wakefield's paper. Trust me, if there was a link, many research groups will be chomping at the bit to publish their data and become very infamous scientists. This was precisely the motivation of Wakefield. It was just unfortunate that he forgot the science bit...
> 
> If after all the data collection and analysis there still remains no peer-reviewed publication that provides evidence of an increased association between autism and the MMR vaccine, its highly likely that's because it does not exist....the hypothesis is rejected until an alternative hypothesis is posed and tested.
> 
> If you think the association does exist, then collect your data, analyse it and publish it. Thats how science works. Don't spew a bunch of spurious nonsense on a forum about knowing the 'truth'....
> 
> To me it makes about as much sense as writing a bunch of drivel about how aeroplanes fly, that the design of wings are flawed, and I know the 'truth' about aviation....by the way, I have no experience in aviation science and I'm not a qualified engineer....:wall:


If anyone was so inclined I would give this advice.

1. Go to Pharmacy or Doctor

2. Ask for the Vaccine Information Sheet

3. Read Vaccine Information Sheet

4. Google the ingredients

5. Google adjuvants

If your still undecided....I would choose, perosnally, to give seperate vaccinations.


----------



## DrEskimo

Horatio said:


> If your still undecided....I would choose, perosnally, to give seperate vaccinations.


Based on what?

Unfounded claims about the risk of the triple vaccine and your own opinion, which by your own admission, is unqualified and inexperienced?


----------



## Horatio

DrEskimo said:


> Based on what?
> 
> Unfounded claims about the risk of the triple vaccine and your own opinion, which by your own admission, is unqualified and inexperienced?


What difference does it make if you have separate vaccinations? Doctors do offer this option but you have to pay for the seperate vaccinations.

Like I said, read the Vaccine Information Sheet. :wall:


----------



## DrEskimo

Horatio said:


> What difference does it make if you have separate vaccinations? Doctors do offer this option but you have to pay for the seperate vaccinations.
> 
> Like I said, read the Vaccine Information Sheet. :wall:


I don't know! I don't work in this area of research and I'm not a scientist developing vaccines! I imagine they are numerous and significant, otherwise the single therapy would be offered as an alternative to the triple as part of the NHS (i.e. not having to pay for it).

Moreover, if it makes no difference then why would you personally go for it, despite it being against the recommendation of national health organisations?

I don't have the Vaccine Information Sheet. Why are you so reluctant to present your argument plainly? So far its amounted to cryptic clues about 'truths' and a series of convoluted steps that I need to take to decipher your justifications for doubting the medical literature on the risk of MMR and autism...

You are trying to convince me that I should go against the overwhelming evidence from the scientific literature and so far you have presented absolutely no coherent argument or evidence. In fact all you have done is told me there is no evidence and you are not qualified to draw any meaningful conclusions on the matter!


----------



## Horatio

DrEskimo said:


> In fact all you have done is told me there is no evidence and you are not qualified to draw any meaningful conclusions on the matter!


Well then, where do we start?

Maybe looking at the Vaccine Information Sheet would be a good start.

People would draw their OWN conclusions....but oh-me-oh-my, that would mean people empowering themselves :doublesho and forming opinons on their own research.


----------



## DrEskimo

Horatio said:


> Well then, where do we start?
> 
> Maybe looking at the Vaccine Information Sheet would be a good start.
> 
> People would draw their OWN conclusions....but oh-me-oh-my, that would mean people empowering themselves :doublesho and forming opinons on their own research.


But those opinions have no scientific basis! They are completely misinformed because they do not have any background in the scientific field, have no idea how to conduct proper research and no nothing about statistical analysis and hypothesis testing! Science is not opinion based, its evidence based.

Thats why I and other people in the field have a job! Our careers are dedicated to learning how to conduct proper research and inform the evidence base on the best treatments and advice that should be given in the form of national health guidelines. All we care about is improving patient care. Yes there are issues in evidence based practice, particularly with pharmacy, but it does not involve the association between autism and MMR.

You cannot read national health guidelines based on thousands of hours of research from highly qualified medics, methodologists and scientists, all critically reviewed and published in high quality medical journals and read by thousands of other experts in the field, and then go....nah its all rubbish because I read the Vaccine Information Sheet....you are completely unqualified, have no experience in the field and have no data or evidence to support your wildly inaccurate and misinformed opinions.

Usually I don't bother with this debate with people on arbitrary forums about car cleaning, as the consequences of their misinformed advice is typically benign, but in this case the rates of measles infections have soared and its all because of this misinformation.

The debate shouldn't even exist. It's only because of that wholly irresponsible paper by Wakefield that the link is even being considered. A paper that has been completely debunked and no evidence of a link has been found. Maybe you should ring the World Health Organisation and National Institute for Clinical Excellence and tell them you've read the Vaccine Information Sheet and in your opinion, the guidelines need to be changed....


----------



## Horatio

Im not for OR against, just PRO INFORMATIVE. Like I said above, if it were me I would opt for seperate vaccines for my child.

There is a huge information gap regarding vaccines. This site lists most vaccine information sheets. This is what you need to ask to see from the doctor.

http://www.immunize.org/packageinserts/pi_diphtheria.asp

Take what you want from this PDF-Vaccine Peer Review 1915-2015

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3mMkPwF1DUPckVEZ2JkMXV2ams/view?pref=2&pli=1

13 Things You Don't Know About Polio. I hear alot of this banded around as proof!!!

1. A pesticide common in the 1800's was called Paris Green. A green liquid because it was a combination of copper and arsenic or lead and arsenic. Some of the most toxic substances known to humankind.
2. This pesticide worked by causing neurological damage in the bugs, causing organ failure.
3. Polio consists of symptoms synonymous with neurological damage, causing organ failure.
4. Heavy metal poisoning from lead, mercury and other similar heavy metals manifest lesions on neurological tissues, meaning the toxin destroys the nerve/communication pathways connecting the brain to the organs in the body. http://bit.ly/1OLcFgG
5. Polio victims present lesions on neurological tissue, that cause the organs to malfunction all around the body. (lungs, heart, nerves that control walking etc)
6. Polio outbreaks hit throughout the summer, only during pesticide spraying times. (not the sunless and damp winter/spring seasons regarding other disease outbreaks)
7. Polio had and has NO ability to spread from infected victims to the uninfected. Polio infected clusters of people in the exact same areas, suddenly and swiftly. http://bit.ly/1P6zShV
8. Parents report finding their children paralyzed in and around apple orchards. One of the most heavily pesticide sprayed crops of the time (with lead arsenate or copper arsenate) were apple orchards.
9. President Roosevelt became paralyzed over night while on his farm in the summer, which contained many crops, including apple orchards. He also swam the day prior in a bay that was heavily polluted by industrial agricultural run off.
10. Dr. Ralph Scobey and Dr. Mortind Biskind testified in front of the U.S Congress in 1951 that the paralysis around the country known as polio was being caused by industrial poisons and that a virus theory was purposely fabricated by the chemical industry and the government to deflect litigation away from both parties. http://bit.ly/1DKDb3v
11. In 1956 the AMA (The American Medical Association) instructed each licensed medical doctor that they could no longer classify polio as polio, or their license to practice would be terminated. Any paralysis was now to be diagnosed as AFP (acute flaccid paralysis) MS, MD, Bell's Palsy, cerebral palsy, ALS (Lou Gehrig's Disease), Guillian-Barre, meningitis etc etc. http://bit.ly/1Ml3rpX This was orchestrated purposely to make the public believe polio was eradicated by the polio vaccine campaign but because the polio vaccine contained toxic ingredients directly linked to paralysis, polio cases (not identified as polio) were skyrocketing...but only in vaccinated areas. http://bit.ly/1WEHYzR
12. The first polio vaccine was worked on by Dr. Jonas Salk and human experiments using this vaccine were conducted purposely on orphans in government/church run institutions because they were vulnerable and didn't require any parental consent signatures, as they had no parents. The vaccine was "declared safe" by "medicine" (as they always are even though that vaccine was killing and paralyzing monkeys in test trials) and that vaccine gave 40,000 orphans polio, permanently paralyzed hundreds and killed at least 10 children. All injuries and deaths under reported of course by the same authorities who orchestrated the atrocity. This was called The Cutter Incident. A focusing on children. A poisoning of children and then the excuses and apologies, regarding how it won't happen again. Is this pattern still occurring today? http://1.usa.gov/1mEozNJ
13. The next "improved" polio vaccine, given to hundreds of millions, carried both the SV 40 cancer virus as well as the AIDS virus. Every step of the way, medicine declaring they know for sure, that this time, they have everything straightened out. Same story then, same story now. The only thing larger than the pile of broken medical and government promises, is the pile of broken and dead bodies. http://bit.ly/1HfHR7W Cancerous tumors, still being pulled out of people today, are riddled with SV40 cancer viruses from the government's "safe and effective" and "approved" polio vaccine. http://bit.ly/1jGvysV


----------



## DrEskimo

Horatio said:


> Im not for OR against, just PRO INFORMATIVE. Like I said above, if it were me I would opt for seperate vaccines for my child.
> 
> There is a huge information gap regarding vaccines. This site lists most vaccine information sheets. This is what you need to ask to see from the doctor.
> 
> http://www.immunize.org/packageinserts/pi_diphtheria.asp
> 
> Take what you want from this PDF-Vaccine Peer Review 1915-2015
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3mMkPwF1DUPckVEZ2JkMXV2ams/view?pref=2&pli=1
> 
> 13 Things You Don't Know About Polio. I hear alot of this banded around as proof!!!
> 
> 1. A pesticide common in the 1800's was called Paris Green. A green liquid because it was a combination of copper and arsenic or lead and arsenic. Some of the most toxic substances known to humankind.
> 2. This pesticide worked by causing neurological damage in the bugs, causing organ failure.
> 3. Polio consists of symptoms synonymous with neurological damage, causing organ failure.
> 4. Heavy metal poisoning from lead, mercury and other similar heavy metals manifest lesions on neurological tissues, meaning the toxin destroys the nerve/communication pathways connecting the brain to the organs in the body. http://bit.ly/1OLcFgG
> 5. Polio victims present lesions on neurological tissue, that cause the organs to malfunction all around the body. (lungs, heart, nerves that control walking etc)
> 6. Polio outbreaks hit throughout the summer, only during pesticide spraying times. (not the sunless and damp winter/spring seasons regarding other disease outbreaks)
> 7. Polio had and has NO ability to spread from infected victims to the uninfected. Polio infected clusters of people in the exact same areas, suddenly and swiftly. http://bit.ly/1P6zShV
> 8. Parents report finding their children paralyzed in and around apple orchards. One of the most heavily pesticide sprayed crops of the time (with lead arsenate or copper arsenate) were apple orchards.
> 9. President Roosevelt became paralyzed over night while on his farm in the summer, which contained many crops, including apple orchards. He also swam the day prior in a bay that was heavily polluted by industrial agricultural run off.
> 10. Dr. Ralph Scobey and Dr. Mortind Biskind testified in front of the U.S Congress in 1951 that the paralysis around the country known as polio was being caused by industrial poisons and that a virus theory was purposely fabricated by the chemical industry and the government to deflect litigation away from both parties. http://bit.ly/1DKDb3v
> 11. In 1956 the AMA (The American Medical Association) instructed each licensed medical doctor that they could no longer classify polio as polio, or their license to practice would be terminated. Any paralysis was now to be diagnosed as AFP (acute flaccid paralysis) MS, MD, Bell's Palsy, cerebral palsy, ALS (Lou Gehrig's Disease), Guillian-Barre, meningitis etc etc. http://bit.ly/1Ml3rpX This was orchestrated purposely to make the public believe polio was eradicated by the polio vaccine campaign but because the polio vaccine contained toxic ingredients directly linked to paralysis, polio cases (not identified as polio) were skyrocketing...but only in vaccinated areas. http://bit.ly/1WEHYzR
> 12. The first polio vaccine was worked on by Dr. Jonas Salk and human experiments using this vaccine were conducted purposely on orphans in government/church run institutions because they were vulnerable and didn't require any parental consent signatures, as they had no parents. The vaccine was "declared safe" by "medicine" (as they always are even though that vaccine was killing and paralyzing monkeys in test trials) and that vaccine gave 40,000 orphans polio, permanently paralyzed hundreds and killed at least 10 children. All injuries and deaths under reported of course by the same authorities who orchestrated the atrocity. This was called The Cutter Incident. A focusing on children. A poisoning of children and then the excuses and apologies, regarding how it won't happen again. Is this pattern still occurring today? http://1.usa.gov/1mEozNJ
> 13. The next "improved" polio vaccine, given to hundreds of millions, carried both the SV 40 cancer virus as well as the AIDS virus. Every step of the way, medicine declaring they know for sure, that this time, they have everything straightened out. Same story then, same story now. The only thing larger than the pile of broken medical and government promises, is the pile of broken and dead bodies. http://bit.ly/1HfHR7W Cancerous tumors, still being pulled out of people today, are riddled with SV40 cancer viruses from the government's "safe and effective" and "approved" polio vaccine. http://bit.ly/1jGvysV


So let's be clear on the process of evidence based medicine. Various scientists, professors and medical professionals conduct very high quality research to collate data and test hypotheses. As the evidence is accumulated, these are presented large committees, again made up of extremely prominent scientists, professors, medical professionals and methodologists. They review the evidence and conclude the best methods for improving patient care in any given specialty.

What you seem to be suggesting is that there is a whole other body of evidence that contradicts the guidance given by these prominent national health committees.

Now, why has this been ignored by the committee? There are really only 3 possible explanations;

1) they don't know it exists. They have somehow overlooked all this evidence and are completely incompetent at their jobs. These bloggers and self-proclaimed experts with no scientific background have done something that thousands of highly qualified medics and scientists could not do....

2) they have purposefully ignored it. There is a large conspiracy that only those studies that conform to a pre-determined agenda (most typically quoted as being set by Pharma) are acknowledged and all other evidence is discounted. That would rely on me, someone that works in the field, and thousands of others in the field of medical research, on keeping this dark secret and never whistle blowing....

3) They have considered the evidence, and concluded it is either not sufficient to overrule the guidance or is not of adequate scientific quality to consider.

One of those is a very plausible answer...the other two are wilfully ignorant and misinformed....

NICE has recommended the triple MMR because a large range of high quality, scientifically robust studies have proven that it is safe and the most effective way of protecting children from measles, mumps and rubella. There is no proven link to autism. To go against this advice is irresponsible and misinformed.


----------



## Nanoman

As someone who has two kids and both have fought for their lives in Intensive Care wards my kids get all recommended vaccines. The youngest got Men B vacc as a matter of course, the eldest hasn't had it yet but this post has reminded me he needs it.

There are people who know they know feck all about vaccines, then there are the people who had a quick look at some random, BS spouted by someone with a specific agenda and think they're experts, then there are people with actual knowledge. There's evidence in this thread of all three types of people.

I've done a reasonable amount of research but in reality I know feck all about vaccines.

Unfortunately I do know what it's like to look at both my children lying in a protective perspex box with tubes, wires & needles all over the place, unable to touch or hold them because they need to put all their effort into staying alive long enough to recover and just touching them would make them use energy they can't spare.

The uneducated fools on here who are repeating BS they clearly know very little about should think about that for a moment. By repeating it and claiming to be knowledgable about it you risk someone with even less knowledge believing you and it could lead to more people falling ill needlessly.

I'm all for a good conspiracy theory and if someone with relevant knowledge has *real* evidence I'm doing the wrong thing by vaccinating my kids I'm desperate to know more. I'm quite confident that, regardless of the faults of the government, UN, WHO, big pharma, etc, if there was *real* evidence that vaccines were the wrong thing to do then we wouldn't be doing it.


----------



## Dr_T

Horatio said:


> Why peer reviewed? Do you know how the process is funded? :driver:


without peer review, papers mean nothing. Its why mine are all peer reviewed :wave:


----------



## Dr_T

Horatio said:


> 12. The first polio vaccine was worked on by Dr. Jonas Salk and human experiments using this vaccine were conducted purposely on orphans in government/church run institutions because they were vulnerable and didn't require any parental consent signatures, as they had no parents. The vaccine was "declared safe" by "medicine" (as they always are even though that vaccine was killing and paralyzing monkeys in test trials) and that vaccine gave 40,000 orphans polio, permanently paralyzed hundreds and killed at least 10 children. All injuries and deaths under reported of course by the same authorities who orchestrated the atrocity. This was called The Cutter Incident. A focusing on children. A poisoning of children and then the excuses and apologies, regarding how it won't happen again. Is this pattern still occurring today? http://1.usa.gov/1mEozNJ
> 13. The next "improved" polio vaccine, given to hundreds of millions, carried both the SV 40 cancer virus as well as the AIDS virus. Every step of the way, medicine declaring they know for sure, that this time, they have everything straightened out. Same story then, same story now. The only thing larger than the pile of broken medical and government promises, is the pile of broken and dead bodies. http://bit.ly/1HfHR7W Cancerous tumors, still being pulled out of people today, are riddled with SV40 cancer viruses from the government's "safe and effective" and "approved" polio vaccine. http://bit.ly/1jGvysV


Salk's oral weakened virus vaccination on rare occurance did cause polomylitis however it was rare and not really surprising given the type of vaccine. The same thing can also happen with the flu vaccine, people can become ill but its very rare.

SV40, while present in some of the injected vaccine due to the SV40 monkey kidney cells hasn't had any effect on cancer rates and its not even been proved that SV40 causes cancer in humans. HIV was never found in the vaccine.

If you are going to post "information" then at least post truths not ******. You'll be telling me asparteme causes disease next.


----------



## Nanoman

Dr_T said:


> If you are going to post "information" then at least post truths not ******. You'll be telling me asparteme causes disease next.


Just wait until he starts on how dangerous and addictive dihydrogen monoxide is!

It would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous to spout this nonsense.


----------



## Dr_T

Nanoman said:


> Just wait until he starts on how dangerous and addictive dihydrogen monoxide is!
> 
> It would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous to spout this nonsense.


well it is if you snort it


----------



## Rayaan

Dr_T said:


> as a GP you should also know that the symtoms of autism/learning difficulties appear around the age you get the MMR, nor does having the MMR increase the severity or occorance in familys with children already diagnoses with autism.


I know that the symptoms appear around that age.

However, ive seen cases where symptoms of autism/learning difficulties started within 2/3 days of having an MMR jab. Now I dont know whether its coincidence or not but it certainly does happen.

And yes, that's in children with no family history of autism or learning difficulties and no other predispositions.

I guess you can guess what the parents children blame after that!

TBH its fine if parents don't give their children a vaccine once in a while - herd immunity will take over. As long as EVERYONE is refusing vaccines and the herd immunity threshold is compromised.

As an example:

Herd immunity threshold = 1-1/reproductive rate.

The herd immunity threshold is the percentage you need to stop any spread but because the vaccine is not fully effective i.e. not 100% efficacy you have to introduce that.

You get vaccine coverage = herd immunity threshold/efficacy of the vaccine

So the independent measles vaccine I believe has 95% efficacy

Vaccine coverage = (1-1/12)/0.95 = 0.97 = 97% of the population need vaccinating.

When you start giving boosters and what not, the efficacy almost becomes 100% and then you get (1-1/12)/1 = 0.91. Therefore 9% dont need vaccinating to maintain herd immunity.

Dr Eskimo can probably looks at the maths and let me know if Ive bodged up but you get the idea of how people will still be protected even if they arent vaccinated as long as the herd immunity threshold isnt breached.


----------



## DrT

Well I'm hoping herd immunity works as I've never had a measles jag lol


----------



## Nanoman

This post is so moronic...


Horatio said:


> Im not for OR against, just PRO INFORMATIVE. Like I said above, if it were me I would opt for seperate vaccines for my child.
> 
> There is a huge information gap regarding vaccines. This site lists most vaccine information sheets. This is what you need to ask to see from the doctor.
> 
> http://www.immunize.org/packageinserts/pi_diphtheria.asp
> 
> Take what you want from this PDF-Vaccine Peer Review 1915-2015
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3mMkPwF1DUPckVEZ2JkMXV2ams/view?pref=2&pli=1
> 
> 13 Things You Don't Know About Polio. I hear alot of this banded around as proof!!!
> 
> 1. A pesticide common in the 1800's was called Paris Green. A green liquid because it was a combination of copper and arsenic or lead and arsenic. Some of the most toxic substances known to humankind.
> 2. This pesticide worked by causing neurological damage in the bugs, causing organ failure.
> 3. Polio consists of symptoms synonymous with neurological damage, causing organ failure.
> 4. Heavy metal poisoning from lead, mercury and other similar heavy metals manifest lesions on neurological tissues, meaning the toxin destroys the nerve/communication pathways connecting the brain to the organs in the body. http://bit.ly/1OLcFgG
> 5. Polio victims present lesions on neurological tissue, that cause the organs to malfunction all around the body. (lungs, heart, nerves that control walking etc)
> 6. Polio outbreaks hit throughout the summer, only during pesticide spraying times. (not the sunless and damp winter/spring seasons regarding other disease outbreaks)
> 7. Polio had and has NO ability to spread from infected victims to the uninfected. Polio infected clusters of people in the exact same areas, suddenly and swiftly. http://bit.ly/1P6zShV
> 8. Parents report finding their children paralyzed in and around apple orchards. One of the most heavily pesticide sprayed crops of the time (with lead arsenate or copper arsenate) were apple orchards.
> 9. President Roosevelt became paralyzed over night while on his farm in the summer, which contained many crops, including apple orchards. He also swam the day prior in a bay that was heavily polluted by industrial agricultural run off.
> 10. Dr. Ralph Scobey and Dr. Mortind Biskind testified in front of the U.S Congress in 1951 that the paralysis around the country known as polio was being caused by industrial poisons and that a virus theory was purposely fabricated by the chemical industry and the government to deflect litigation away from both parties. http://bit.ly/1DKDb3v
> 11. In 1956 the AMA (The American Medical Association) instructed each licensed medical doctor that they could no longer classify polio as polio, or their license to practice would be terminated. Any paralysis was now to be diagnosed as AFP (acute flaccid paralysis) MS, MD, Bell's Palsy, cerebral palsy, ALS (Lou Gehrig's Disease), Guillian-Barre, meningitis etc etc. http://bit.ly/1Ml3rpX This was orchestrated purposely to make the public believe polio was eradicated by the polio vaccine campaign but because the polio vaccine contained toxic ingredients directly linked to paralysis, polio cases (not identified as polio) were skyrocketing...but only in vaccinated areas. http://bit.ly/1WEHYzR
> 12. The first polio vaccine was worked on by Dr. Jonas Salk and human experiments using this vaccine were conducted purposely on orphans in government/church run institutions because they were vulnerable and didn't require any parental consent signatures, as they had no parents. The vaccine was "declared safe" by "medicine" (as they always are even though that vaccine was killing and paralyzing monkeys in test trials) and that vaccine gave 40,000 orphans polio, permanently paralyzed hundreds and killed at least 10 children. All injuries and deaths under reported of course by the same authorities who orchestrated the atrocity. This was called The Cutter Incident. A focusing on children. A poisoning of children and then the excuses and apologies, regarding how it won't happen again. Is this pattern still occurring today? http://1.usa.gov/1mEozNJ
> 13. The next "improved" polio vaccine, given to hundreds of millions, carried both the SV 40 cancer virus as well as the AIDS virus. Every step of the way, medicine declaring they know for sure, that this time, they have everything straightened out. Same story then, same story now. The only thing larger than the pile of broken medical and government promises, is the pile of broken and dead bodies. http://bit.ly/1HfHR7W Cancerous tumors, still being pulled out of people today, are riddled with SV40 cancer viruses from the government's "safe and effective" and "approved" polio vaccine. http://bit.ly/1jGvysV


You say you're not for or against, you're just pro-informative but 90% of your post is BS quotes from 'Dr' Suzanne Humphries, one of the most discredited idiotic anti-vaxxers out there. Are you really prepared say to your kid "I'm sorry you're permanently/horrifically disabled but daddy read a random share on facebook which seemed convincing".


----------



## DrEskimo

Rayaan said:


> I know that the symptoms appear around that age.
> 
> However, ive seen cases where symptoms of autism/learning difficulties started within 2/3 days of having an MMR jab. Now I dont know whether its coincidence or not but it certainly does happen.
> 
> And yes, that's in children with no family history of autism or learning difficulties and no other predispositions.
> 
> I guess you can guess what the parents children blame after that!
> 
> TBH its fine if parents don't give their children a vaccine once in a while - herd immunity will take over. As long as EVERYONE is refusing vaccines and the herd immunity threshold is compromised.
> 
> As an example:
> 
> Herd immunity threshold = 1-1/reproductive rate.
> 
> The herd immunity threshold is the percentage you need to stop any spread but because the vaccine is not fully effective i.e. not 100% efficacy you have to introduce that.
> 
> You get vaccine coverage = herd immunity threshold/efficacy of the vaccine
> 
> So the independent measles vaccine I believe has 95% efficacy
> 
> Vaccine coverage = (1-1/12)/0.95 = 0.97 = 97% of the population need vaccinating.
> 
> When you start giving boosters and what not, the efficacy almost becomes 100% and then you get (1-1/12)/1 = 0.91. Therefore 9% dont need vaccinating to maintain herd immunity.
> 
> Dr Eskimo can probably looks at the maths and let me know if Ive bodged up but you get the idea of how people will still be protected even if they arent vaccinated as long as the herd immunity threshold isnt breached.


Looks alright to me mate. Although as with any statistics, it makes rather large assumptions about the population it is based on that might not be true. Many people argue that the large heterogeneity of the population renders these simplistic thresholds inappropriate. Good paper from an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene about it here:

http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/7/911.full

As for you my good friend Dr T...I am afraid you are what is termed a 'free-loader'...!

"People are in effect performing complex cost-benefit analyses, based on imperfect assumptions (for example a failure to appreciate the complex relationship between age and clinical severity of infections), when deciding whether or not to have themselves or their children vaccinated. It is not surprising that a sustained low incidence of infection, caused in large part by successful vaccination programs, makes the maintenance of high vaccination levels difficult, especially in the face of questioning or negative media attention."

A rather poignant extract given the general topic of this thread....of course I am not suggesting those are your motivations Dr T 

...bloody structural biologists coming over here, stealing out immunity....:lol:


----------



## Horatio

Documentry Vaxxed released this year. CDC whistle blower DR William Thompson talks frankly about results purposely altered regarding vaccine safety.

Google Vaccine Lawsuit


----------



## Nanoman

Horatio said:


> Documentry Vaxxed released this year. CDC whistle blower DR William Thompson talks frankly about results purposely altered regarding vaccine safety.
> 
> Google Vaccine Lawsuit
> 
> Vaxxed - MUST SEE - Full Forbidden Documentary - YouTube


It's funny how you ignore every question asked of you then resurrect the thread with more anti vaccine BS. Here's what a quick google came up with https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2...thompson-documents-theres-no-whistle-to-blow/

Like I said I have sat with both my babies fighting for their lives in a Perspex box hoping they'll stay alive long enough to get better. Uneducated anti vaccine BS spouters like you need to have a long hard think about kids who are dying, losing limbs, etc because of what you're doing.

Unvaccinated kids also put kids who can't be vaccinated for actual medical reasons at risk of horrific consequences.

Stop being a ***.


----------



## DrEskimo

Horatio said:


> Documentry Vaxxed released this year. CDC whistle blower DR William Thompson talks frankly about results purposely altered regarding vaccine safety.
> 
> Google Vaccine Lawsuit
> 
> Vaxxed - MUST SEE - Full Forbidden Documentary - YouTube


You are not listening to anyone, so I don't know why I am bothering but I'll try one last time....

There ARE problems with pharmacy companies and medical research. There were plenty of reports of ghost writing, unregistered trials and manipulation of data. This is a very real concern. This has been subject to a LOT of scrutiny over the last couple of decades. At the moment there is a massive push to make all companies register every trial ever conducted so that protocol and results are known. This is massively important when it comes to secondary data analysis (mainly meta-analysis, which is considered the gold standard of evidence based medicine, although I don't subscribe to simplistic hierarchies of study design), which is a powerful way to determine the overall efficacy of any treatments.

What you are completely unaware of, is that much of the research comes from various sources. Often independent academics, or even private companies, who obtain data from national datasets. For example, I now work for a company that outsource the statistical analyses from various pharmacy companies to conduct studies using real world observational data. This is routine clinical data collected from GP surgeries around the UK. There is no way I or anyone in my company would manipulate this data. It is available to everyone, and the protocols we develop are extremely detailed and allow anyone to recreate any analysis we do. This is the hallmark of any good science. We are extremely concerned with doing proper science and using proper statistical methods. I have dedicated my career to doing good research and pride myself on helping patients and furthering the evidence base to help patients. I am not in the minority I can assure you...

Now, a lot of the data regarding the link between MMR and autism, and indeed many vaccine studies, come from this sort of data as well as primary data collected as part of randomised controlled trials. The point I am trying to make is that there are many different researchers from many different institutions all using various study designs to investigate these research questions. If there was a substantial link, it would be reported in peer-reviewed journals. As it stands, there is over whelming support that there is no link.

My question still remains, if there was a link between MMR and autism, why has no peer-reviewed paper found it...? You cant seriously be suggesting that everyone is manipulating the data in the same way to reach the same conclusions and we are all in on the conspiracy.....?! How could that be at all plausible given what I have explained about how research is conducted across the entire world?

and once again, blogs, and youtube videos are not credible sources of scientific information....

As Nanoman eloquently put it.....pack it in.....


----------



## graham1970

Thankyou sir,and keep up the good work

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk


----------



## Guitarjon

My lad has got them. The way vaccines are given to babies is terrible though. Last lot my lad had were 4 needles all stuck in his leg at the same time. Can't imagine that's nice for anybody, never mind a baby!


----------



## LeadFarmer

I often travel abroad with my job and the number of vaccinations I've had this year is unbelievable, Yellow Fever, cholera, rabies.....the list goes on. I wonder just how healthy it can be to have so many?


----------



## Dr_T

LeadFarmer said:


> I often travel abroad with my job and the number of vaccinations I've had this year is unbelievable, Yellow Fever, cholera, rabies.....the list goes on. I wonder just how healthy it can be to have so many?


you get bombarded with antigens every day and your body reacts without you knowing about it while some you do (hayfever, small snivels etc)


----------



## Natalie

As someone who has to take immunosuppressive drugs, I am very grateful that I can be vaccinated against things and when other people choose to vaccinate themselves and their children.

Sent from my LG-D855 using Tapatalk


----------



## ollienoclue

My father in law is a retired Doctor, and he wasn't just a run of the mill GP I can assure you. The real deal who worked in paediatrics in a big way, particularly in the private sector.

If you asked him about childhood vaccinations, folic acid supplements or any of the above, he would encourage it without hesitation, as he has to work with all the medical problems that very young children have to deal with as a result.

As a result, our daughter, who is 16 months and just had her one in each limb jab collection has had every vaccination offered and my wife was very careful with her diet during pregnancy, too.

I was given MMR and the like as a child, too.

These diseases are very nasty and often bring terrible complications. I have had all the travel vaccines as well.

Interestingly we did get 48 hours of fever in our daughter after the 4 jabs last week but she is right as rain now.

The MMR/Autism thing is total BS and my father in law would tell you as such- all three of his children, including my wife, have had all the vaccines that were considered standard back in the 60's and 70's.

The wife of one of our good friends is also a GP down in Devon, their 6 month old infant has been jabbed as well so make what you will of that.

I believe with the increase in migration and refugee movements in Europe, the childhood TB vaccination will be resumed before long as well.


----------

