To MMR or not?

This may be a GD, or even an IMHO, but I’m primarily looking for factual answers, so here goes:

In a few months, BabyWarrior is required by law(I think) to have her MMR vaccination (that’s a combined jab for Measles, Mumps & Rubella). Recently, there has been a lot of fuss about MMR causing (among other things) Autism. The government says this is nonsense, but there seems to be a growing body of doctors and parents who say their child was perfectly fine until MMR, but then started showing signs of Autism.
There is an option: Have the 3 shots separately. This is not currently accepted by the National Health Service, but it is possible to find Private (ie I have to pay them) doctors who will do it.
Oh, if you haven’t guessed, I’m talking about UK Law/Health/Doctors here - English specifically, in case it’s different in Scotland etc

So, on to the questions:

  1. Is it actually illegal not to have MMR? Has anyone been brought to trial for not having it?
  2. Where can I find studies supporting either view?
  3. Is the 3-shot method as effective as the single-shot?

I should point out that I will definitely have her vaccinated - some parents have apparently opted to do nothing at all, but I don’t consider that to be an option - the question is only between single and 3-shot.

As well as factual answers, I would welcome opinions too! (or should I post a separate thread in IMHO for that?)

[Opinion, based on information currently available]
Simply not vaccinating is in no way reducing the overall risk to the child; the risks of contacting one of the diseases is (reportedly) far higher than the (supposed) risk of complications from the MMR (I say ‘supposed’ because all of the anti-MMR argument seems to be based on statistics and anecdote; AFAIK nobody has discovered a causal link or even proposed a respectable theory of a likely mechanism by which autism could result).

I’m sure I would feel different if I had any reason to believe that my children had been adversely affected by their MMR vaccination, but it remains true that the view that there is no detectable risk is rigorously supported by extensive research, whereas the contrary view is supported largely by anecdote and loud voices.

I’ll be happy to change that view if somebody shows me some properly-conducted research, but it seems that anyone who does the research finds there is no evidence and is then branded a turncoat.
[/OBOICA]

This being the case, it is understandable that the medical profession don’t want to incur extra expense by separating the jabs, however, I suppose they must take into consideration the psychological state of the patient and kin and the likely outcome; if you are truly wracked by doubts and fears on the issue, perhaps your doctor would find it preferrable to submit to the patient’s wishes than prescribe them valium for their nerves or risk them refusing the treatment.

Sorry, I tried to render that last sentence impersonal in order to make it sound less accusatory, but I failed. I meant no offence.

What part of my paragraph suggests I’m considering NOT having the vaccination? As I say it’s between the combined or the individual shots.

I’m aware that the medical profession wants to save money (who doesn’t) but given that a lot of parents are worried about this, I fail to see why the individual shots are forbidden - I have heard of doctors being threatened with being struck off for giving them… surely as a parent I have the right to choose?

Anyway, it’s good to hear that your kids don’t seem affected. A couple of friends have reported that their kids were extremely distressed for a few weeks afterwards

Also, I should point out that I am happy to pay any extra costs, should I go for the more expensive option

I didn’t mean to suggest that you were considering refusing the treatment; I was merely trying to flesh out the context of the issue. Sorry. :slight_smile:

The information I have is MMR does not cause Autism per se, but somehow triggers a genetic defect.

You’ll have to find a UK law expert on what is allowed in the UK. In the US, I know some people who have filed for exemptions - you can file an exemption based on religious or philosophical grounds.

For info generally supporting vaccinations (including studies on both sides), I like Medscape. You have to register, but it is free, and there is a lot of valuable content (including the Cochrane Medical Abstracts, which are ‘evidence-based medicine’ reviews of existing research).

I also tend to check the CDC website: Here’s their link on [ulr=“http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/”]vaccine safety.

I’ve also scanned the vaccine safety website of Johns Hopkins University - good content there, too.

Here’s some more comprehensive commentary about separating the vaccines. I don’t know if the arguements all hold water, but they are at least all in one place.

For ‘con’ info, I’m not sure where to look - I tend to check the medscape site for both ‘pro’ and ‘con’ content, but they are a medical site, so could be biased.

On a personal note: I don’t know the facts behind it, but my pediatrician does not recommend splitting ‘mixed’ vaccines into their component parts. What he recommends is splitting the DOSE in two, and gives the half-doses two weeks apart. This is what he does for kids who have a reaction to the vaccine at an earlier vaccination (all subsequent doses are divided in half). In his experience (so he told me) the split-into-components version has just as much adverse event for the specific vaccine as does the whole dose (say, they react to the Pertussis part of the DTaP - if you give the P part full-volume but by itself, the kid STILL reacts just as poorly to the whole dose of P - either way, they’re getting enough to make them react, because it is the same quantity). He sees no difference in degree of reaction from the combined or the split - kids generally react in a non-additive sense, in his opinion. That is, the worst reaction they get is to one of the components, and that masks (rather than adds to) the milder reactions they get to the other components. If there is an increased reaction to the combined, it isn’t highly visible to him (of course, this is all anecdotal rather than scientific - he admits that, too).

However, again, in his experience, if you do a partial dose, it is more likely to be below the threshold of reaction, and then you give the other partial dose, and again, below the reaction threshold. 1/2DTaP means 1/2 of all the components, both times.

This is what we did for my son Brendan, who had a moderate adverse reaction to his second dose of DTaP (moderate in the clinical sense, not the personal - he had a moderate fever for three days, and had the high-pitched screaming for three+ hours straight, not immediately after the dose). We split the DTaP across two visits (two weeks apart), and he had almost no reaction at all (slight red mark around the site). It did mean an extra stick, but I nursed him while he got poked, and he just stopped nursing for a moment, then started again. No crying. (PHEW!) Extra PHEW for no reaction to the split dose.

Anecdotal, so not factual, but you might want to bring it up with your pediatrician. In our case, it being a small office, they labeled and retained the same vaccine vial (refrigerated) so we only paid for one vaccination. If they had needed to use two vials to get two half-doses, then we’d have had to pay for two vaccinations (cost was per vial dose, not ‘per shot’).

HTH. It is a hard question to answer. Best of luck making your decision.

:rolleyes: Preview is your friend…

The MRC’s report is available here. The short of it is, further research hasn’t shown any link at all between MMR and autism.

Personally, I’m unsure what to think about the original findings. Had they stopped to conduct a wider study before publishing the findings, it would have avoided a lot of unnecessary worry. OTOH, who would want to be kept in the dark if there was a possibility it was true.

Thanks for the link to the page on separating vaccines, hedra. I had a post all typed up, and then saw that all my questions were answered there.