image

Should parents have the option not to vaccinate their children?

Vaccine refusal is a “growing public health timebomb”, the head of the NHS has warned.

More than half a million children in the UK were not vaccinated against measles over an eight-year period, new figures show.

The charity Unicef said increasing numbers of youngsters are being left unprotected against measles, which can cause disability and death.

Inaccurate and misleading anti-vaccination messages on social media are thought to be one reason why vaccination rates are plummeting.

Unicef’s analysis shows that an estimated 169 million children around the world missed out on the first dose of the measles vaccine between 2010 and 2017 – an average of 21.1 million a year.

Simon Stevens, chief executive of NHS England, said: “Getting yourself and your children vaccinated against killer diseases is essential to staying healthy, and vaccine rejection is a serious and growing public health timebomb.

“With measles cases almost quadrupling in England in just one year, it is grossly irresponsible for anybody to spread scare stories about vaccines, and social media firms should have a zero tolerance approach towards this dangerous content.”

A list of 10 high-income countries, published by Unicef, shows the US has the highest number of children missing out on their first dose of the vaccine.

Between 2010 and 2017, some 2,593,000 youngsters in the US did not have their first dose of the vaccine.

The second most affected country was France, with 608,000 unvaccinated children over the same time period, followed by the UK, with 527,000.

Other countries including Argentina, Italy, Japan, Canada, Germany and Australia also made the top 10.

Unicef executive director Henrietta Fore said: “The measles virus will always find unvaccinated children.

“If we are serious about averting the spread of this dangerous but preventable disease, we need to vaccinate every child, in rich and poor countries alike.”

In the first three months of 2019, more than 110,000 measles cases were reported worldwide – up almost 300% on the same period the year before.

An estimated 110,000 people, most of them children, died from measles in 2017, a 22% rise on the previous year.

Children need two doses of the vaccine for protection, with the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommending 95% coverage to achieve herd immunity, which offers protection against the disease spreading in the community.

In the UK in 2017, there were 259 measles cases in England, rising to 966 in 2018.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock said the rise in people not vaccinating had to be tackled, and that he was “particularly worried” about the spread of anti-vaccination messages online.

He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that he was meeting social media companies on Monday to “require that they do more to take down lies that are promoted on social media about the impact of vaccinations”.

He said: “Vaccination is safe, it’s very, very important for the public health – for everybody’s health – and we’re going to tackle it.”

Are you concerned about anti-vaccination messages online? Should parents be required to vaccinate their children, or should they have the option to opt out of the vaccinations if they so choose? Share your opinions in the comments below.

Should parents have the option not to vaccinate their children?

1146 people have already voted, what's your opinion? Yes No

What are your views?

We'd love to hear your comments

Not a member?

You need to be a member to interact with Silversurfers. Joining is free and simple to do. Click the button below to join today!

Click here if you have forgotten your password
David89
15th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
Wakefield was the main author who wrote a hypothesis linking MMR to autism in 1990-1995 in the lancet. The national press picked it up and ran with it causing doubt and fear..This has NEVER been proven. what is known is that Wakefield pushed for single-antigen the vaccines.. The Main fact that was never picked up on was that Wakefield had applied for patents for the single vaccines..And would therefore have a financial interest in MMR being replaced.. I have three children and all have been vaccinated. By not vaccinating we are open to infections not only becoming prominent, but mutating. We have a duty of care for the population as whole, and by not doing so is just selfish
thetruth67
6 days ago
0
Thanks for voting!
Many doctors submit hypotheses to medical journals. It was the national press that publicised it and caused doubt and fear. He may have benefited from it financially to replace the MMR vaccine and by the same token the Industry benefits from him not replacing it.
I sincerely hope that your children are all fit and healthy and continue to be so.
To test a product properly, you have to have a group of children from birth that are unvaccinated and a group that are fully vaccinated and follow their progress throughout the years.
How do you know that the MMR vaccine produces antibodies in a given child unless you test. A small percentage of the population do not produce antibodies.
Munsterlander
10th May 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
Freedom of choice matters. However by not vaccinating a child it could be dangerous for the child AND spread the disease. better to vaccinate everyone if they are well enough for it.
John Walsh
10th May 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
These parents who don't vaccinate their kid, should remember that this affects other children too, as when their kid picks up a virus, they can pass it on. Its just selfish and irresponsible not to get your kid vaccinated.
Munsterlander
10th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
Totally agree with you.
thetruth67
6th May 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
I have just visited the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System website and under Event category and All locations during Jan 2018 until Dec 2018 found these stats.
Of 56,555 reported cases - There were 479 deaths, 656 Life threatening and 1320 permanent disability.
The more information you receive the more you are able to make an informed choice.
jeanmark
6th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
Would it not better to use UK data when encouraging people to make an informed choice, it uses the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of adverse event.
thetruth67
6th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
The main article was from UNICEF and quoted statistics worldwide including the UK. I just assumed that this forum encompassed people from other countries. I believe the data is still relevant just not specific to the UK
If you would provide the UK website that gives the data on Vaccine Adverse Events, then I will happily look into it.
jeanmark
6th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
I agree the data remans relevant but it is important to identify what the actual cause of the adverse reaction was, whether it is true adverse reaction that is intrinsic to the vaccine, or another cause such as the way it administered. That is why I believe one should be cautious about quoting statistics without background information.

Of the statistics you have quoted there were 479 deaths, 656 life threatening and 1320 permanent disability against 56,555 reported reactions during a one year period, but you have given no indication of how many vaccines were actual given over that period or if they related to a specific vaccine such as measles. That would give some idea of frequency of reactions to all or any vaccine to inform parents who are trying to make the decision.

In the UK it is the job of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to monitor drug adverse reactions.
thetruth67
6th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
When I find that data I will post it. Although the Unicef article is not much different.
It states that about 110,000 people died from the measles but did not state the countries and numbers in those countries and if they were vaccinated or not.
In the article Henrietta Fore states that the measles virus will always find unvaccinated children. It also finds vaccinated children, even double vaccinated.
Matt Hancock states that vaccinations are safe, What is his definition of safe if people are vaccine injured.
I looked at MHRA but did not find Vaccine Events. Perhaps I will go through it more thoroughly .
jeanmark
7th May 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
I think most deaths from measles occur in developing countries where many may not have received the vaccine.

There is a misunderstanding that a vaccines give 100% immunity, it doesn't. What it does do is reduce the chances when exposed to the infection and helps reduce the risk of a severe infection.

I agree how do you define safe? Any medicine, in what ever form, may cause harm to an individual but we still use them. If you look at all adverse reactions that are true reactions to the actual drug, the number would still be small when compared to the number who benefitted from the drug. It will always be a risk/benefit analysis.

The MHRA collects data under the Yellow Card system.
Try The Oxford Vaccine Project although I am sure it will not change your thoughts.
thetruth67
7th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
I agree that the risk/benefit has to be weighed up. The true risk and true benefits have to be outlined first. If they are skewed in any way then it gives a false perception.
I visited the Oxford Vaccine website and found that it had links to the WhO. I wonder who are funding this group. On the list of vaccine ingredients and substances used are foetal cells from aborted foetuses. Some people may take exception to that while others may not.
They also state that aluminium salts are used in the vaccines as an adjuvant and that it is eliminated in due course from the body. On a study I have read that if you ingest aluminium most of it is eliminated through the bowel. Whereas if injected most of it will remain in various organs. One being the brain.
jeanmark
7th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
I believe they were awarded funding by UK Research and Innovation through the UK government's Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund (ISCF) Medicines Manufacturing challenge, and is led by the Jenner Institute. It is based at the Churchill Hospital, Oxford.

As to aluminium, my understanding is that because of the amount of aluminium in the environment you are more likely to ingest it via food and water than you would actually get from receiving vaccines.

I agree there are those that would object to foetal cells from aborted foetuses being used to help research vaccines but there are also those that would support lives being saved as result.
thetruth67
7th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
This is an excerpt from the Conflicts of interest and Publication Policy on Oxford group website.
Some Oxford Vaccine Group staff work on clinical trials which are conducted by the University of Oxford and sponsored and/or funded by vaccine manufacturers. The sponsors and/or funders of this research are always declared in the scientific publications relating to these studies.
As it states, some trials are vaccine manufacturer funded.

The aluminium used in Gardasil as an example is Amorphous Aluminium Hydroxyphosphate, and is highly inflammatory. It was mislabelled as Aluminium Hydroxide or Aluminium Phosphate.for years. It has been found problematic.
jeanmark
7th May 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
Well thetruth67, I think we are coming from different directions and will probably not find a middle ground. Having worked in the field of Infectious Disease, Tropical Medicine and HIV for many years, I witnessed the devastation that an infectious disease can cause to an individual and their family. As a result, I am probably less likely to accept that vaccines are more dangerous than the disease it is trying to prevent.
thetruth67
8th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
I like to question things, especially if the government are trying to make vaccines mandatory and taking away exemptions.
I did watch a programme a couple of years back on Tropical Diseases and treatment of patients. It was fascinating.
I would love to see a database graph on patients with tropical diseases, showing age, gender, ethnicity, vaccinated or non vaccinated and did they follow FCO guidelines.
jeanmark
8th May 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
Not something I would have looked at, although the professors I worked with would have. They would also have been involved in advising the government on what was needed based their knowledge and experience.

I do know I could never understand those people who contracted malaria whilst on holiday because they couldn't be bothered to continue, or even start, prophylactic medication to prevent it. Interestingly, many said they had listen to friends who didn't believe in such things, even though an expert had advised it!

It is also worth recognising that many people will not have to check FCO guidelines as they will be local to that area, and not travellers. Even following the guidelines is not a guarantee of being free from risk of contacting certain conditions.
Munsterlander
10th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
Not sure what these statistics relate to?
thetruth67
13th May 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
Some statistics are more relevant than others. You only discover if they have any bearing on the outcome, if you enter them in the first place.
IanW8
14th May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
I have visited the website as you suggested and followed this up by visiting several peer reviewed websites which I have used professionally for many years. I agree the more information you receive can be helpful. Interpreting the information however is also very useful.
thetruth67
14th May 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
People need to use critical thinking more. You need to hear the alternative view points to have a balanced picture. The state and big business love an unquestioning public.
jeanmark
14th May 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
The Oxford Dictionary defines Critical Thinking as "The process of analysing information in an objective way, in order to make a judgement about it".

I have always found that people can find it difficult to make a rational, unbiased analysis, or evaluation of factual evidence when a loved one is involved, particularly when they do not have the expert knowledge and understanding of the the information they trying analyse.
thetruth67
14th May 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
I agree it can be difficult for some people. I believe that if they do a little research by experts of opposing views and weigh it up against the mainstream narrative, before they bring a child into the world, they can make a judgement as best that they can.
My only problem is when people tell you what to do with your own child based on very little research or knowledge.
jeanmark
15th May 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
If we lived in an idea world, then I would agree but we do not. One problem is that not everyone has the capacity to carry out research and truly understand what the issues are to enable them to make an informed choice. That is why we need experts in the actual field to guide us and I do not mean using social media etc to help make such important decisions.

How many parents do you know that have weighed up everything about the future needs of a child before producing one. The majority of parents I know did not really understand the reality of things until the child was actually born, even those who are informed and planned for the event.

I do believe that in general, a parent should decided on what is best for their child. However, what happens when their decision could have an impact on others within the community, in such cases is the individual of more importance.
thetruth67
6 days ago
0
Thanks for voting!
I think that we should stress on the word ' could' .Before making it mandatory we should make sure that it will or has a high probability of impacting the masses adversely. To do that we need independent studies not funded by conflict of interest parties. It is ultra lucrative to promote vaccines, which are increasing every year, and have it mandated so you capture nearly everybody on the planet. When you come at it from that angle, you should question the validity of statements coming from these multi billionaires and their mouthpieces.
jeanmark
6 days ago
0
Thanks for voting!
This debate is not discussing the companies that produce the vaccine but its use in trying to prevent outbreaks. You obviously do not consider there is a link between the reduction in children being vaccinated and an increase in outbreaks of measles. If 50 years of a vaccines success has not convinced you of its value I am not sure what will.
Raindrop
30th Apr 2019
3
Thanks for voting!
Good doctors would never vaccinate a sick child. My granddaughter had a slight cold and couldn`t have her jab until she was better.
Alicia
29th Apr 2019
3
Thanks for voting!
No they should have them.
PearlS5
28th Apr 2019
3
Thanks for voting!
Why everybody keeps pushing mandatory vaccination only for kids when 99% of adults are not up to date with all boosters, measles vaccine included. Every ten years adults should have boosters but yet all atention is on kids but nobody cares about unvaccinated adults who pose exactly the same threat to immunocompromised people. By the way almost 40 percent of measles cases are caused by vaccine strain not wild measles strain, so should all freshly vaccinated kids be banned from public places ?
jeanmark
30th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
As measles is predominately a childhood disease, the emphases for this debate is on children having the vaccine as that is considered to pose the greater risk of any outbreaks.
Biochemical
28th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
Please raise your hand if you're a parent and would sacrifice your child to protect another.

Thank you.
Lionel
28th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
The answer is clearly NO!

Given medics have made rigorous checks on each child for allegories and other contras potentially affecting the outcome of such vaccination, then it must go ahead. It is for the good of the population as a whole.

Normally, with anything state sponsored I'd be very sceptical. However, where the life of a child, and other children it may come into contact with, is jeopardised then preventative action must be taken.

Very sadly such apps as Facebook etc., lead to much disinformation on which young parents so often base their judgement. So many young people have set aside any ability for rational thinking and just follow the herd. That being the case, some decisions must be taken over their heads.
Biochemical
28th Apr 2019
3
Thanks for voting!
Lionel, are you aware there are doctors who vaccinate children who are sick or on antibiotics?

Are you aware that doctors do "catch up" vaccinations in combinations never tested for safety?

Are you aware the whole schedule as it is in the US has never been tested for safety and health outcomes?

Are you aware that vaccines are never tested against an inert placebo and that the post vaccination safety period vary from 48 hours to 6 weeks?

Are you aware that aluminum has never been tested for safety in humans? I've asked the European Medicine Agency "based on what biological study has the safety of injectable aluminum in humans been established?"

They got back to me confirming they have no safety study and that the safety profile of aluminum is assumed based on the fact that it has been used for decades.

I'm happy to send you a copy of this correspondence if you wish or you can ask them yourself.

Do you honestly think that anyone has a right to force untested substances on anyone else's child?
Lionel
28th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
They're serious allegations. You would be more credible if you posted sources and a brief biography so we know who we're taking to. So many trolls sign up for a single issue and disappear. You wouldn't be one of those would you?
sparklingsilver
28th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
Do parents have a right to decide vaccination, in my view they most certainly do. In 1947, a perfectly health baby boy was inoculated and within days developed a rash that turned into a life-long skin disease for which there was and is no known cure. From that fateful day forward his family have never allowed another child to be vaccinated, three generations, and never will. Children that should perhaps be considered venerable, those from families with known allergic histories: eczema, asthma, hay-fever and migraine.
jeanmark
2nd May 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
I'm not sure what vaccine that child received in 1947 (possibly diphtheria or whooping Cough) but the first licensed vaccine to prevent measles didn't become available until 1963, with an improved measles vaccine introduced in 1968. The MMR vaccine was introduced in 1988.

These days guidelines are strict on those children that should be excluded from being vaccinated because of some underlying problem or a family history of certain allergies.
Raindrop
28th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
If all children had been vaccinated there would not be a measles epidemic. I think one of the main reasons people are not having their children vaccinated today is the cruel way the jabs are being administered. They give two at a time, one in each leg and then the last time my granddaughter had hers at one year old she was going to be given four, which meant two in each leg at the same appointment. My daughter refused this and made two appointments for these four injections. It is traumatic for the child and the parent watching this. If the babies could have their injections as before one at a time as years ago I`m sure many more parents would comply.
JinxB
28th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
I think that any parent who endangers their children and deliberately puts them at risk should face sanctions, not only are they putting that child at risk in the future but risking spreading a disease which could be removed from the world, if people had behaved like this with smallpox that would still be endemic but because of timely vaccination it was eradicated.
AnneS62
27th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
Children should be vaccinated . Too many parents think they know best. Or others can’t be bothered. They are putting their children at risk.
MarilynS44
27th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
People should have the option to revert to the single type vaccinations, irrespective of what the "know it all's" "say" about the safety of the combined jabs. There was little or no problem from those then!!!
It would solve the no vaccinations at all situation, it's a no brainer conclusion!
jeanmark
27th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
Parents do have a choice but some are refusing the single vaccine as well.
JinxB
28th Apr 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
Those know it all's as you put it are not endangering children like the luddites who produce false evidence to malign vaccination are, vaccination has been tested rigorously in many countries and by the WHO and found to be safe, the delays caused between single vaccinations put children at risk, why do you promote a procedure which puts children at risk from horrible diseases.
jeanmark
30th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
JinxB, there are some children that have to have single vaccines for a number of reasons. However, for those that can receive MMR but who's parent object, surely a single vaccine is better, posing a lower risk to vulnerable children than no vaccination.
ecarg
27th Apr 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
Jeanmark
This information regarding Roald Dalh's .daughter Olivia should be used as an illustration to parents of the deadly consequences of refusing to vaccinate their children.
Having German Meales early in my first pregnancy luckily with no ill effects on the baby , and not having had the vaccine at secondary school I went on to ensure my children got all their jags.
The positive message needs to be published through social media and I think the experience of Roald Dalh would be a good way to do it.
annie24
27th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
In my opinion, not having your children vaccinated is not only ignorant but also a form of neglect/abuse. The suggested link between vaccinations and autism has long-since been debunked. DNA research into autism indicates that autistic spectrum disorders are genetic. It is time to get tough on parents who don't have their children vaccinated.
macilroy
26th Apr 2019
-2
Thanks for voting!
When Non Vaccinated come in contact with others, they put everyone at risk !
thetruth67
27th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
Then it proves that the vaccine is not that effective.
IanY18
28th Apr 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
If 2 people go to the dr's and only one receives the live MMR vaccine these exposing themself to the viruses, and one person does not receive a vaccine, how is it that the person who has not been exposed will speed the virus?
JacquelineG47
28th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
I honestly will never understand comments that say unvaccinated children put the vaccinated at risk .what's the risk if vaccines work. I would be more worried of the one carrying a live virus than the one that's not. So who really is the one spreading illness.
jeanmark
29th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
JacquelineG47, it is the other way round. If a child does not have the vaccine but is able to, there is an increased risk to a child unable to receive vaccine. As to vaccines with live virus, the virus is a much weaker strain and thus is not a risk to healthy people. The more people vaccinated the less likelihood there is of large outbreaks.
jeanmark
26th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
Roald Dahl on Measles: "Olivia, my eldest daughter, caught measles when she was seven years old. As the illness took its usual course I can remember reading to her often in bed and not feeling particularly alarmed about it. Then one morning, when she was well on the road to recovery, I was sitting on her bed showing her how to fashion little animals out of coloured pipe-cleaners, and when it came to her turn to make one herself, I noticed that her fingers and her mind were not working together and she couldn’t do anything.
'Are you feeling all right?' I asked her.
'I feel all sleepy,' she said.
In an hour, she was unconscious. In twelve hours she was dead.
The measles had turned into a terrible thing called measles encephalitis and there was nothing the doctors could do to save her. That was...in 1962, but even now, if a child with measles happens to develop the same deadly reaction from measles as Olivia did, there would still be nothing the doctors could do to help her. On the other hand, there is today something that parents can do to make sure that this sort of tragedy does not happen to a child of theirs. They can insist that their child is immunised against measles.
...I dedicated two of my books to Olivia, the first was ‘James and the Giant Peach’. That was when she was still alive. The second was ‘The BFG’, dedicated to her memory after she had died from measles. You will see her name at the beginning of each of these books. And I know how happy she would be if only she could know that her death had helped to save a good deal of illness and death among other children."
Roald Dahl, 1986
thetruth67
26th Apr 2019
-1
Thanks for voting!
Vaccinating is an invasive procedure so every person should have the right to refuse.
Both sides of the argument should be listened to. I would like to see on TV a panel of experts that include for and against. Then make up your mind.
Visit Dr. Sherri Tenpenny website and get any alternative view.
jeanmark
26th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
Yes, they have the right to refuse, but do they have the right to increase measles risk to another child who is unable to be vaccinated because of an underlying problem?
thetruth67
26th Apr 2019
3
Thanks for voting!
I don't believe that it does. If you visit the website of the Dr I mentioned you will be enlightened. She has 30,000 hours of research into vaccinations and the effects.
jeanmark
26th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
I do believe there is a correlation between the drop in take-up of the measles vaccine and the increase in the numbers contracting the disease, and I wouldn't rely on one persons view, that is what started the problem. Experts across the world support the need for vaccines, they can't all be wrong. I have worked with experts in the field, most having 30-40 years experience and I never met one who didn't believe in vaccinating against certain diseases. There will always be some individuals who do not benefit from a vaccine, but I believe the number who do benefit make the benefits greater than the risks.
thetruth67
27th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
I believe that we are not getting all the facts. We need alternative views from experts.
If you can encourage one or more of the experts that you know, to challenge Dr Tenpenny on YouTube or a mainstream media outlet, that would be great.
jeanmark
27th Apr 2019
-1
Thanks for voting!
Surely facts are more likely to be accurate when coming from experts. Facts are facts and the measles vaccine has been in use for 50 years with well documented success, so what alternative views would you except? Do you also question other vaccine efficacy or only that relating to measles?
thetruth67
27th Apr 2019
3
Thanks for voting!
It depends on who is providing the facts. Data and statistics and studies can be skewed to favour a certain outcome. When billions of dollars are involved, this can easily be achieved. The government and big organisations are pushing for the mandatory vaccinations. They are trying to shut down opposing views. That should be a concern for people. I am skeptical of the efficacy of the vaccines in general and not specific to MMR. In 2017 Merck had thousands of people file lawsuits regarding the shingles vaccine Zostavax.
jeanmark
27th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
I agree that research data can be skewed, Andrew Wakefield started the controversy with the measles vaccine following his paper. I also agree it is important to ensure any research is independent of financial gain or other influences and the results can always be replicated by other, independent researches. However, vaccines have been in use for many years and have proven to be successful for many diseases, for example think smallpox and polio. If 50 years of using a specific vaccine for a specific disease accompanied by a decrease in outbreaks of that disease, is not sufficient for you to consider the vaccine effective, I don't feel anyone will convince you of the need for their use.
thetruth67
27th Apr 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
Sometimes the eradication or big reduction in the reported cases of a disease is attributed to the efficacy of the vaccine. There have been graphs showing the introduction of better housing, cleaner water and access to better food correlated to the reduction of certain diseases in the vaccinated/ non-vaccinated population.
There has also been the renaming of some diseases over the years which would in effect alter the statistics and show a massive reduction in those cases. Some studies have been scrapped because problems occurred with the test subjects that was unfavourable and studies using a shorter time frame before any problems surfaced, were used.
I am not intransigent, just skeptical. I thank you for your respectful communications and hope that you can take the time to visit a fairly recent short YouTube video of Dr. Sherri Tenpenny discussing the Measles vaccine epidemic.
jeanmark
27th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
In respect for your communications I will watch but I'm not sure it will necessarily change my way of thinking but will give it a try,

I have a great deal of respect and confidence in the experts who taught me so much and work tirelessly to try to tackle the devastation caused by many infectious disease, all have open minds. I also have an understand of how social changes contributed to changes to certain disease patterns.
Felix1
26th Apr 2019
7
Thanks for voting!
Proof is in the pudding, measles epidemic at moment.
jeanmark
26th Apr 2019
9
Thanks for voting!
Does a parent have the right to make a decision not to have their child vaccinated? If yes, do they have the right to allow another child to die as a result, if that child is unable to be vaccinated because of an underlying condition.

Vaccination isn't just about protecting an individual, it is about protecting all in society.
jeanmark
26th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
Does a parent have the right to make a decision not to have their child vaccinated? If yes, do they have the right to allow another child to died as a result, if that child is unable to be vaccinated because of an underlying condition.

Vaccination isn't just about protecting an individual, it is about protecting all in society.
Wilf
26th Apr 2019
6
Thanks for voting!
I think all kids should be immunized unless they have a condition which would make them ill with it. There seems to be a lot of "fake news" about immunization!
ecarg
25th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
Yes parents should make informed decisions in every regard to their children's health and wellbeing.
However scaremongering on social media is having a negative influence and the wider population has an increased risk because less children are being immunized.
MrsPat
25th Apr 2019
4
Thanks for voting!
Yes of course they should as they make decisions for all other aspects of their children's lives.
jeanmark
26th Apr 2019
5
Thanks for voting!
But Mrs Pat, do they have the right to make that decision when it can be fatal for the child of a parent who doesn't have a choice? What about the rights of the parent with a child who is unable to be vaccinated because of some underlying cause?
MrsPat
26th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
Jean I think if the child has a condition that could affect it the NHS should be aware and in that case of course they should not be vaccinated.
jeanmark
26th Apr 2019
2
Thanks for voting!
Mrs Pat, I may have not made my point clear. There are children who are unable to be vaccinated for a number of reasons that are outside of the control of the parent and the NHS. The problem arises when a healthy child is not vaccination because of their parents beliefs, as a result that action puts other more vulnerable children at increased risk, is that fair or right?
AndjelkaG
29th Apr 2019
1
Thanks for voting!
My son was allergic to one of the ingredients in the MMR vaccine and therefore didn't receive it when it was due. Eight months later he contracted measles, in all likelihood from a recently vaccinated child in his playgroup. Do I wish those other parents hadn't let their children receive the vaccine just so that my son would be spared the risk of contracting the disease? No.
It was their choice.
This whole debate is burying certain truths, namely that exposure to a disease doesn't guarantee someone will contract it; susceptibility to disease depends on do much more than mere exposure. When I was 7 I got chicken pox but neither of my two sisters caught it from me. One of my sisters contracted measles-neither I nor my other sister caught it from her.
Vaccination is no guarantee of protection. Most cases in the recent mumps outbreak in the UK were in vaccinated individuals!
Let people decide for themselves and let's hope that more objective and unbiased information becomes available to help us.
jeanmark
1st May 2019
0
Thanks for voting!
AndjelkaG, I agree that exposure to an infection, particularly in a family setting, does not necessarily mean you will automatically develop the disease, but you may develop a degree of immunity. However, outbreaks of childhood infections do occur and those who have not been vaccinated are at greater risk of developing the infection, but at greater risk are those children unable to be vaccinated because of an underlying disorder and not just immunocompromised children and adults. I am sorry your son developed the infection as vaccines contain a very weak strain of the virus and are rarely infectious to others.

It is true that vaccination is no guarantee of total protection, but it does usually meant the infection is less severe, otherwise why bother with any vaccination. This debate appears to focus on the single child rather than looking at the wider picture of the community, but it is a everyone within that community that can suffer as a result of any outbreak.

Community Terms & Conditions

Content standards

These content standards apply to any and all material which you contribute to our site (contributions), and to any interactive services associated with it.

You must comply with the spirit of the following standards as well as the letter. The standards apply to each part of any contribution as well as to its whole.

Contributions must:

be accurate (where they state facts); be genuinely held (where they state opinions); and comply with applicable law in the UK and in any country from which they are posted.

Contributions must not:

contain any material which is defamatory of any person; or contain any material which is obscene, offensive, hateful or inflammatory; or promote sexually explicit material; or promote violence; promote discrimination based on race, sex, religion, nationality, disability, sexual orientation or age; or infringe any copyright, database right or trade mark of any other person; or be likely to deceive any person; or be made in breach of any legal duty owed to a third party, such as a contractual duty or a duty of confidence; or promote any illegal activity; or be threatening, abuse or invade another’s privacy, or cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety; or be likely to harass, upset, embarrass, alarm or annoy any other person; or be used to impersonate any person, or to misrepresent your identity or affiliation with any person; or give the impression that they emanate from us, if this is not the case; or advocate, promote or assist any unlawful act such as (by way of example only) copyright infringement or computer misuse.

Nurturing a safe environment

Our Silversurfers community is designed to foster friendships, based on trust, honesty, integrity and loyalty and is underpinned by these values.

We don't tolerate swearing, and reserve the right to remove any posts which we feel may offend others... let's keep it friendly!