MMR

[moon]

I'm no medicine man but I've followed the MMR debate since the excellent TV program which put the case for the fallibilities of the vaccine and highlighted the efforts of big business to have Dr. Wakefields findings rubbished. I watched the TV debate and it was evident to me that Wakefield knew his onions and that those medical practitioners who refuted his findings thought that the small risk of disease in children, particularly those with autism, as a result of being given the jab was acceptable. I think that many people have rejected the jab as a result of Wakefield's findings and I think that this paltry attack on Wakefield is driven by big business and their cohorts. What do you think ?

[andsome]

Do you recall that Cheesy will not divulge whether his brats have had single or multiple vaccine? He can please himself as dictator, but mere mortals should do as he decrees. This just MORE publicity to make people comply so that MONEY can be saved.

[ranger]

Moon, I have to admit to not knowing much on this debate, but if, as andsome says it saves money, then surely the drug companies would rather you bought 3 seperate treatments at a higher cost and presumably more profit than one at a lower cost, I think if anything it is the Govt and us (the taxpayer) that save money not the drug companies making more money.

I have to agree that there should be further independant studies into MMR and until this whole issue is cleared up, children should be allowed single vaccinations (although there are probably risk associated with these as well) and parents allowed to make a decision without any untold pressure put on them by doctors or health visitors.

I can identify a bit with what parents are going through regards this vaccination, although not MMR I did have issue with the whooping cough vaccination when my son and daughter were born, it just so happened that just before my son was due his vaccination I was reading a article in the Readers Digest i think, where a top specialist in this field was talking about this disease/vaccination and he was saying that a family who has a history of a member having epileptic fits (my wifes brother takes them) should not have this vaccination as with this type of history it brings a high risk of bringing on epileptic fits on the recipient, after a lot of thought and more research, we decided not to take the risk and refused to let them give our son and later our daughter the vaccination, boy did the doctors and health staff not like this, even though we explained our reason they tried to make us feel like bad people/parents, in fact one of them actually said to my wife while they were alone, that we were not fit to have a child if we wouldn't protect them properly and did she not know what we would be putting our child through if they caught whooping cough, although highly pressurised we did stand our ground and fortunately our children never did take this disease or epileptic fits.

[andsome]

That last bit is terrible ranger, nothing more than blackmail of the worst kind.

[don't ask]

ranger - I can empathise with you and your wife. Before the advent of MMR, when my second lad was a baby and it was time for immunisation for measles, I had similar when I would not let the baby clinic nurses inject him with the measles jab because I had seen a report that the measles vaccination was cultivated in egg and my lad was violently allergic to eggs. I could not get anyone of the medical staff at the clinic to understand that I was not going to put him at the risk of being exposed to anything to do with eggs and they told me I was talking nonsense.

My fear stemmed from very severe life-threatening allergic reactions that my hubby had suffered and there were medical grounds to indicate that my baby was at great risk because of inherited things from his Dad and my GP agreed with my decision and shook my hand for sticking to my guns (it was the first time she had ever been nice to me).

The lad's egg allergy has abated to a great degree since he became a man - but his second child also has this allergy (amongst others).

I am very glad that your children are well.

By the way ranger - can I ask? - are you from Scotland by any chance - my above experience happened there (in the west) - was just idly wondering if there was any connection.

d..'. a..

[andsome]

Nice to hear that your doctor had more common sense than Rangers.

[moon]

Moon, I have to admit to not knowing much on this debate, but if, as andsome says it saves money, then surely the drug companies would rather you bought 3 seperate treatments at a higher cost and presumably more profit than one at a lower cost, I think if anything it is the Govt and us (the taxpayer) that save money not the drug companies making more money.

Good question. However, even if the production costs for MMR were lower than for individual treatments there is no legislation to ensure that such savings are passed on to the public. Drug companies can, and do, charge what they like. No doubt a deal has been struck, between drug manufacturers and the government, which allows the government to supply the National Health Service with MMR at a lower cost than providing the NHS with separate shots. Add to that the probability that the manufacturing processes are now scaled to produce MMR, irreversibly so, and you have a situation wherein an awful lot of money is riding on the public's acceptance of MMR. This must be the case because the government ;

1- took away Wakefield's funding into MMR's possible failings

2- blocked legal aid funding for the thousands of parents trying to take the matter of their sick children to court.

You'll see the same attitude in the case of GM food.

[andsome]

It all boils down to Cheesy's dictatorship. One law for him and his brats, and another for us mere subjects.

[ranger]

don't ask,

yes I'm from the West of Scotland, the Maryhill district of Glasgow to be exact

[andsome]

don't ask,

yes I'm from the West of Scotland, the Maryhill district of Glasgow to be exact

Glasgow? Isn't that a village not too far from Edinburgh?

[ranger]

1-  took away Wakefield's funding into MMR's possible failings

2-  blocked legal aid funding for the thousands of parents trying to take the matter of their sick children to court.

You'll see the same attitude in the case of GM food.

Moon, I have to say that I think that if there is a risk with the MMR jab then it should be researched properley to see what the risk is and then parents can make a educated decision with all the facts before deciding wether their child should have/have not the MMR jab, I find it shocking that the Govt have stopped the funding for the research into this and find it a little shortsighted, surely if the Govt want people to give their children the MMR vaccination the best way is to look into these allegations and prove to people it is safe to use this vaccination (that's if it is proved to be safe)

[ranger]

andsome, you trying to wind me up, the only good thing that comes from Edinburgh

is the M8 to glasgow :D

[andsome]

andsome, you trying to wind me up,

YES, it's a hobby of mine

[don't ask]

Hi ranger - watch out for that andsome bloke - he is a real wind-up merchant! :lol:

Hubby's family was originally from Maryhill district :) I am the product of an Aberdonian and a Braw Lad from Galashiels who spent most of her childhood in Edinburgh and the rest of it other places (Paisley - Kilbarchan - Northern Ireland ) :lol: We lived near Airdrie at the time of the 'incident' though.

d..'. a..

[andsome]

Hubby's family was originally from Maryhill district  :) I am the product of an Aberdonian and a Braw Lad from Galashiels who spent most of her childhood in Edinburgh and the rest of it other places (Paisley - Kilbarchan - Northern Ireland )  :lol:  We lived near Airdrie at the time of the 'incident' though.

d..'. a..

NEVER MIND, can't get much worse than that can it?

[moon]

(that's if it is proved to be safe)

Aha !

[-pops-]

It seems some people responding here have been, or are being, bullied by their medical advisers.

Don't put up with it. If your doctor will not do as you wish, within reason, go elsewhere. Forcing medication on to people counts in law as assault and/or administering a noxious substance - with penalties we all know.

Medical practitioner bullies should belong to the pre NHS days - pre-1945 when the likes of Sir Lancelot Spratt reigned supreme. Fortunately, times have changed but some medics attitudes haven't. The ones that haven't changed should be forced out of practice. A doctor with no patients has a very hard time of things and that should cause him to reflect on his/her philosophy. In the worst cases, it is always possible to report an erring medic to the Family Practitioner Committee of your local Health Authority or, ultimately the General Medical Council.

The important thing is: don't stand in awe of the medical profession. They are just human beings like the rest of us. If you disagree with any treatments offered say so, it is your right to do that. Ask for a fuller explanation, ask about alternatives but don't consume medication of any kind if you do not want to or have no faith in what it might, or might not, do. Even in modern medicine the placebo effect still has a very large part to play in whether a treatment works or not.

My son is a consultant gynaecologist and, as far as he's concerned, the prime object of his medical practices are his patients and their return to better health. The only way that this can be achieved is with their co-operation, not by bullying them or subjecting them to tirades of abuse if they are unsure of what a particular situation or treatment means. I believe all his hospital colleagues are are similar mind.

[ranger]

Hi ranger - watch out for that andsome bloke - he is a real wind-up merchant!  :lol:

yes, he is, if I wasn't brought up to repect my elders (ugly and andsome ones), I would give him a right earbashing so to speak :D

Moon, apologies, we seem to have hijacked your thread a bit

[andsome]

It seems some people responding here have been, or are being, bullied by their medical advisers.

Don't put up with it. If your doctor will not do as you wish, within reason, go elsewhere. Forcing medication on to people counts in law as assault and/or administering a noxious substance - with penalties we all know.

Medical practitioner bullies should belong to the pre NHS days - pre-1945 when the likes of Sir Lancelot Spratt reigned supreme. Fortunately, times have changed but some medics attitudes haven't. The ones that haven't changed should be forced out of practice. A doctor with no patients has a very hard time of things and that should cause him to reflect on his/her philosophy. In the worst cases, it is always possible to report an erring medic to the Family Practitioner Committee of your local Health Authority or, ultimately the General Medical Council.

The important thing is: don't stand in awe of the medical profession. They are just human beings like the rest of us. If you disagree with any treatments offered say so, it is your right to do that. Ask for a fuller explanation, ask about alternatives but don't consume medication of any kind if you do not want to or have no faith in what it might,  or might not, do. Even in modern medicine the placebo effect still has a very large part to play in whether a treatment works or not.

My son is a consultant gynaecologist and, as far as he's concerned, the prime object of his medical practices are his patients and their return to better health. The only way that this can be achieved is with their co-operation, not by bullying them or subjecting them to tirades of abuse if they are unsure of what a particular situation or treatment means. I believe all his hospital colleagues are are similar mind.

Well said pops, couldn't agree more. My daughter was asked by one doctor to find another practise because she questioned his over offing of anti biotics.

[andsome]

Hi ranger - watch out for that andsome bloke - he is a real wind-up merchant!  :lol:

yes, he is, if I wasn't brought up to repect my elders (ugly and andsome ones), I would give him a right earbashing so to speak :D

Moon, apologies, we seem to have hijacked your thread a bit

YES, my apologies also to Moon. I just can't resist winding up people who wear frocks, sorry.

[ranger]

YES, my apologies also to Moon.  I just can't resist winding up people who wear frocks, sorry.

it's better than dancing around a pole playing with ribbons and wearing a white suit with bells on them :)

[moon]

Frock ? Ain't that some medieval peasant outfit ? :D

It's extremely difficult to change your GP. The Medical Council forbids a practise from starting up in an area that already has a surgery. You are stuck with the lot you've got .

[-pops-]

If you are dissatisfied with your GP, complain the FPC of your local Health Authority. It is very rare to live in an area where there is no choice of medical help available and can get assistance from the FPC in finding another.

A doctor who you cannot get on with is unlikely to be of much use to you for many reasons and it is in the interest of everyone, not least yourself, to be registered with someone who at least you have confidence with. This fact is known to the authorities and to the medicos themselves - who do sometimes even suggest that a particular patient moves to another practitioner because of incompatibilities. This helps all concerned.

I live in a rural area and the nearest health centre is a couple of miles away BUT there is a choice of fourteen general practitioners. They all serve the same geographical area, which is widespread but, at least no-one is stuck with a doctor they don't get on with. Town and city dwellers should have things easier than this, even.

[andsome]

If you are dissatisfied with your GP, complain the FPC of your local Health Authority. It is very rare to live in an area where there is no choice of medical help available and can get assistance from the FPC in finding another.

A doctor who you cannot get on with is unlikely to be of much use to you for many reasons and it is in the interest of everyone, not least yourself, to be registered with someone who at least you have confidence with. This fact is known to the authorities and to the medicos themselves - who do sometimes even suggest that a particular patient moves to another practitioner because of incompatibilities. This helps all concerned.

I live in a rural area and the nearest health centre is a couple of miles away BUT there is a choice of fourteen general practitioners. They all serve the same geographical area, which is widespread but, at least no-one is stuck with a doctor they don't get on with. Town and city dwellers should have things easier than this, even.

More sound common sense.

[moon]

Figure this. My local GP practise currently serves two villages, this one and the neighbouring one, each of 4,500 people. They have a surgery in each. To cut costs they intend to close both existing surgeries, sell the buildings and erect a new, larger, surgery in my village to serve both villages. This means that 4,500 people from the neighbouring village will have to travel here when they are sick.

That makes for 4, 500 very angry people.

Could another GP practise buy the surgery in their village and set up business ? No. The Medical Council forbids it. A surgery 'to serve the area' already exists so no new doctors are allowed to set up. Competition is not permitted. You are stuck with the lot you've got , grasping unsympathetic capitalists as they may be.

Edit;...and, to stay on topic, if you were to go to this surgery and ask that your kids be given the mumps, measles and rubella jabs separately you'd be told to eff off.

Edit 2. Latest.

Government's top doctor agrees with government. :D