help with pre-school booster

This seems to be an old thread with a tendency to pop up again, but people will read it, so adding my bit...

I'm an older adult currently waiting for assesment for ASD. I'm old enough that I grew up without an MMR jab, and in fact had mumps and measles as a child (didn't get Rubella, vacinated for that as a teenager...). MMR didn't cause it in me (or in the others in my family I suspect are also undiagnosed aspies). As other people have pointed out, the one study that indicated a link has been totally discredited.  ASD is a developmental disorder: basically all babies are autistic and the differences develop and the gap gets bigger (to a greater or lesser extent) as we age, so that it may become apparent at vacination time. The overall increase in diagnosis is best explained by increased awareness: when I was at school Aspergers didn't exist as a diagnosis: only kids with extreme symptoms were recognised. That's why there's lots of adults like me trying to get assessed now.

I agree it's not ideal that drug companies do testing. On the other hand are they likely to want to risk big compensation bills if they deliberately falsify things?  Maybe they are that stupid in some cases, but I think generally any and every possible side effect will be included in the long list that comes in the packet (I actually read them...)

"The main theme is that non-immunised children are a danger to immunised children - not true - this is an outright lie - how can a child that is supposedly immunised against somethiing - then go and catch it from a child that hasn't been?" (Bennyjetz)

Actually the theory is that there will always be some who are not immunised for unavoidable reasons.  A certain percentage of imunisations will fail to take, leaving those people vulnerable even though they were vacinated (probably what you are talking about). There will also be some who can't be imunised because they've had bad reactions before to imunisations or some of their contents (eg eggs). There are also those who have health conditions that mean their imune systems don't work properly.  The idea is that if there's enough imunised people these individuals will be protected.

I do think it's reasonable to question whether various ingredients for vacinations are needed/a good idea, and whether we should be having less vacinations.  Put it this way: my cats get vacinated every 3 years, as recomended by some authorities, instead of the yearly vaccination usually given.  For some conditions at least it may be possible to get imunity tested (this is possible for some cat diseases I know, and is commonly done before tuberculosis vacination of course). Might be something to look into for those wary of boosters, though I guess it would have to be private and possibly expensive!

This seems to be an old thread with a tendency to pop up again, but people will read it, so adding my bit...

I'm an older adult currently waiting for assesment for ASD. I'm old enough that I grew up without an MMR jab, and in fact had mumps and measles as a child (didn't get Rubella, vacinated for that as a teenager...). MMR didn't cause it in me (or in the others in my family I suspect are also undiagnosed aspies). As other people have pointed out, the one study that indicated a link has been totally discredited.  ASD is a developmental disorder: basically all babies are autistic and the differences develop and the gap gets bigger (to a greater or lesser extent) as we age, so that it may become apparent at vacination time. The overall increase in diagnosis is best explained by increased awareness: when I was at school Aspergers didn't exist as a diagnosis: only kids with extreme symptoms were recognised. That's why there's lots of adults like me trying to get assessed now.

I agree it's not ideal that drug companies do testing. On the other hand are they likely to want to risk big compensation bills if they deliberately falsify things?  Maybe they are that stupid in some cases, but I think generally any and every possible side effect will be included in the long list that comes in the packet (I actually read them...)

"The main theme is that non-immunised children are a danger to immunised children - not true - this is an outright lie - how can a child that is supposedly immunised against somethiing - then go and catch it from a child that hasn't been?" (Bennyjetz)

Actually the theory is that there will always be some who are not immunised for unavoidable reasons.  A certain percentage of imunisations will fail to take, leaving those people vulnerable even though they were vacinated (probably what you are talking about). There will also be some who can't be imunised because they've had bad reactions before to imunisations or some of their contents (eg eggs). There are also those who have health conditions that mean their imune systems don't work properly.  The idea is that if there's enough imunised people these individuals will be protected.

I do think it's reasonable to question whether various ingredients for vacinations are needed/a good idea, and whether we should be having less vacinations.  Put it this way: my cats get vacinated every 3 years, as recomended by some authorities, instead of the yearly vaccination usually given.  For some conditions at least it may be possible to get imunity tested (this is possible for some cat diseases I know, and is commonly done before tuberculosis vacination of course). Might be something to look into for those wary of boosters, though I guess it would have to be private and possibly expensive!