HAVE YOUR SAY: Only 70% of Bournemouth and Poole 5-year-olds have had full MMR vaccine - the second worst in England, figures show

Around a million children and teenagers are to be targeted in a national catch-up vaccination campaign aimed at curbing a rise in measles cases in England.

GP surgeries, schools and community programmes will be used to vaccinate children and young people who have not had either one or two doses of the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine in a £20 million campaign.

New figures from Public Health England show that there were 587 confirmed measles cases in the first three months of this year in England, three times higher than in 2012.

The rise comes in spite of the highest ever national MMR vaccination level being achieved in England with 94% of five-year-olds receiving one dose and 90% receiving two doses according to the latest PHE figures.

According to the latest NHS Immunisation statistics, for 2011-12, in Bournemouth and Poole PCT, 93.4% of five years olds had the first dose but only 70% have had both the first and second doses- the lowest figure in England outside London. Only Lewisham PCT is worse.

Click here to see all the figures

In Dorset, 92.1% have had the first dose but only 80.2% have had both doses. The PCTS reported to the NHS that "IT issues" had affected the quality of the data. The Echo is trying to establish what that means and will update later. 

The leap in the number of confirmed cases can mostly be attributed to the proportion of unprotected 10 to 16-year-olds who missed out on vaccination in the late 1990s and early years of 2000 when fears about the discredited link between autism and the vaccine was widespread, according to public health experts.

Children are offered an MMR vaccine at 12 to 13 months, giving 95% protection and then a second dose at around three-and-a-half-years-old which boosts this protection to 99%.

An estimated one third of a million 10 to 16-year-olds who are unvaccinated will be made a ''first priority'' in the new campaign.

This will be followed by a further estimated third of a million children in this age group who need at least one further MMR jab to give them full protection and another estimated one third of a million children above and below this age group who need at least one further MMR vaccination.

Dr Mary Ramsay, PHE head of immunisation, said there was particular concern about the potential for measles outbreaks in London, the South and East of England where MMR vaccination rates have not been historically as high as other areas in the north of the country.

''We have this legacy of older children who were not vaccinated as toddlers and these young people are now secondary school age,'' she said.

''So they are now at the position where they can spread infection very effectively.''

She added: ''Our concern is that we have a potential for school outbreaks in many areas of the country - probably the areas most likely to be affected would be London and the South and East of the country where we know that the historical coverage was not as high as it was in the northern parts of the country.''

The figures for England follow a measles outbreak in the south west Wales region where the total number of people who have contracted the disease now stands at 886.

Professor David Salisbury, director of immunisation at the Department of Health, said: ''The situation in Swansea, I believe, is a wake-up call for parents - for parents who for whatever reason, quite a few years ago chose not to vaccinate their children and for whom these days vaccines aren't really things that they think about very much.

''But what happened and is continuing to happen in Swansea can happen anywhere in England.

''Whilst this may sound slightly odd, you can of course catch measles but you can't catch up with measles - what I mean is that chasing measles is a forlorn exercise.

''You have to prevent measles and that means we need to get ahead before we have got large numbers of cases and large outbreaks occurring in England.''

He added that measles spreads like ''wildfire''.

''If you think your child has not had one or even two doses of MMR, for goodness sake contact your GP and get it sorted out,'' he said in a direct message to parents.

''I think that the message from Swansea is very clear and it is trivialised at the risk of your children's health.''

He said he was concerned about the situation in London with its densely packed population where there was traditionally a high turnover of residents.

''London to their credit has done a great deal of good work recently and they really have pulled up their immunisation coverage, but that is age-appropriate, that is for their young children,'' he said.

''They did do a catch-up programme but I would be surprised if they got all of the (unprotected youngsters).

''People are densely packed together in London and that is just what measles likes for high levels of transmission, so I worry about London.''

Talking about the risks of measles, he said: ''The risk of measles in terms of complications and death is particularly in the under ones, who we really can best protect by preventing them being exposed and the risk goes up again as you get older.

''The risk now for measles in teenagers and adolescents ... of actually measles being a much more serious illness is staring at us.''

The appeal comes after shamed doctor Andrew Wakefield was struck off the medical register for his discredited research which claimed to find a link between autism and the MMR vaccine.

The study, published in 1998, caused a global scare and uptake levels of the vaccination - which protects against MMR - fell significantly in the years after its publication.

Measles, described as one of the most infectious diseases known to man, can lead to serious complications, including blindness and even death.

The virus is contained in the millions of tiny droplets that come out of the nose and mouth when an infected person coughs or sneezes.

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:35am Thu 25 Apr 13

The Liberal says...

IMHO immunisation should be made compulsory as it is for the benefit of the community as a whole.
IMHO immunisation should be made compulsory as it is for the benefit of the community as a whole. The Liberal

10:19am Thu 25 Apr 13

BournemouthMum says...

Agree with The Liberal (for once ;) it should be compulsory just as it is in many other First World countries. No immunisation - no school. It's totally irresponsible to put others at risk due to ignorance and stupidity.
Agree with The Liberal (for once ;) it should be compulsory just as it is in many other First World countries. No immunisation - no school. It's totally irresponsible to put others at risk due to ignorance and stupidity. BournemouthMum

10:36am Thu 25 Apr 13

PokesdownMark says...

If any teenagers are reading this, ask your parents if you are vaccinated? Or ask your GP. Death rates from measles are 1 in 800. That's 1250 in one million. Complication rates exceed this.

Also, you can catch and transmit measles for a number of days before you even get symptoms yourself. If you come into contact with a baby or a pregnant woman you can cause the, significant harm without being aware.

Sadly there are some very hard core believers who and totally convinced that vaccinations are a global conspiracy. I really don't know what you can do about that. The louder the authorities shout the more convinced they become.
If any teenagers are reading this, ask your parents if you are vaccinated? Or ask your GP. Death rates from measles are 1 in 800. That's 1250 in one million. Complication rates exceed this. Also, you can catch and transmit measles for a number of days before you even get symptoms yourself. If you come into contact with a baby or a pregnant woman you can cause the, significant harm without being aware. Sadly there are some very hard core believers who and totally convinced that vaccinations are a global conspiracy. I really don't know what you can do about that. The louder the authorities shout the more convinced they become. PokesdownMark

10:38am Thu 25 Apr 13

Teddy 1 says...

From an outside view, I don't understand why the single vaccine isn't available on the nhs if people want it, wouldn't this be a compromise? Ive heard its questionable whether boys really need to have the rubella part, not sure if this is right?
From an outside view, I don't understand why the single vaccine isn't available on the nhs if people want it, wouldn't this be a compromise? Ive heard its questionable whether boys really need to have the rubella part, not sure if this is right? Teddy 1

10:53am Thu 25 Apr 13

anonEmouse says...

The danger of changing the law to allow for compulsory vaccinations, could be a dangerous line to cross, as yes this is for mmr, but what could be made compulsory in the future once the law is changed? I have seen the effects of an mmr go wrong, it cant be proved that the mmr was to blame but seeing this so close to home, I would not risk my children's long term health no matter how small a chance. I have had measles and it is no where near as bad as people are saying, I would rather my children had measles and built natural anti bodies and resistance rather than risk some of the possible long term effects of this immunization. Plus how can anybody trust what a politician says these days.

I would not have my children vaccinated for mmr, quite simply as all this fuss over measles has blown it out of all proportion. Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it.
The danger of changing the law to allow for compulsory vaccinations, could be a dangerous line to cross, as yes this is for mmr, but what could be made compulsory in the future once the law is changed? I have seen the effects of an mmr go wrong, it cant be proved that the mmr was to blame but seeing this so close to home, I would not risk my children's long term health no matter how small a chance. I have had measles and it is no where near as bad as people are saying, I would rather my children had measles and built natural anti bodies and resistance rather than risk some of the possible long term effects of this immunization. Plus how can anybody trust what a politician says these days. I would not have my children vaccinated for mmr, quite simply as all this fuss over measles has blown it out of all proportion. Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it. anonEmouse

10:56am Thu 25 Apr 13

FNS-man says...

Teddy 1 wrote:
From an outside view, I don't understand why the single vaccine isn't available on the nhs if people want it, wouldn't this be a compromise? Ive heard its questionable whether boys really need to have the rubella part, not sure if this is right?
Because it triples the number of times the child has to go to the hospital. Parents would have to go six times, and this is much less likely to happen than going twice. Plus there is no safety risk, so there is no point.

Of course boys need the rubella jab. If they get rubella then they are infectious and could give it to a pregnant woman, leading to a disabled child. So, pretty important I'd say.
[quote][p][bold]Teddy 1[/bold] wrote: From an outside view, I don't understand why the single vaccine isn't available on the nhs if people want it, wouldn't this be a compromise? Ive heard its questionable whether boys really need to have the rubella part, not sure if this is right?[/p][/quote]Because it triples the number of times the child has to go to the hospital. Parents would have to go six times, and this is much less likely to happen than going twice. Plus there is no safety risk, so there is no point. Of course boys need the rubella jab. If they get rubella then they are infectious and could give it to a pregnant woman, leading to a disabled child. So, pretty important I'd say. FNS-man

11:03am Thu 25 Apr 13

Melanie.Read12 says...

I agree. The only way that these vaccines become their most effective, is for them to be applied to all.
The outbreak of measles in South Wales can actually now affect people who have been vaccinated, as the "ring of protection" has been broken, and people are protected by the fact that others have had the vaccine as well as themselves (if that makes sense).
I remember thinking at the time of the now-debunked report linking MMR to autism, that the drop in vaccinations would come back to bite us, and it has.
I had my daughter vaccinated with the MMR at 13 months, in 2011.
I agree. The only way that these vaccines become their most effective, is for them to be applied to all. The outbreak of measles in South Wales can actually now affect people who have been vaccinated, as the "ring of protection" has been broken, and people are protected by the fact that others have had the vaccine as well as themselves (if that makes sense). I remember thinking at the time of the now-debunked report linking MMR to autism, that the drop in vaccinations would come back to bite us, and it has. I had my daughter vaccinated with the MMR at 13 months, in 2011. Melanie.Read12

11:22am Thu 25 Apr 13

phonehome says...

Before the "scare" the immunization rate for MMR was about 90% and measles was almost eradicated in the UK.

We need to get it back up to this figure again. This doesn't mean compulsion.

It does mean about 10% can "opt out" for whatever misguided reasons.

Also there are a few individuals in whom it is unsafe to give immunization because of pre-existing medical conditions.
Before the "scare" the immunization rate for MMR was about 90% and measles was almost eradicated in the UK. We need to get it back up to this figure again. This doesn't mean compulsion. It does mean about 10% can "opt out" for whatever misguided reasons. Also there are a few individuals in whom it is unsafe to give immunization because of pre-existing medical conditions. phonehome

11:24am Thu 25 Apr 13

l'anglais says...

BournemouthMum wrote:
Agree with The Liberal (for once ;) it should be compulsory just as it is in many other First World countries. No immunisation - no school. It's totally irresponsible to put others at risk due to ignorance and stupidity.
Britain was once a First World country, but since Thatcher has gone backwards.
What about Second and Third world countries, do they get the vaccine or do why just apply your Tory I'm alright jack logic?
[quote][p][bold]BournemouthMum[/bold] wrote: Agree with The Liberal (for once ;) it should be compulsory just as it is in many other First World countries. No immunisation - no school. It's totally irresponsible to put others at risk due to ignorance and stupidity.[/p][/quote]Britain was once a First World country, but since Thatcher has gone backwards. What about Second and Third world countries, do they get the vaccine or do why just apply your Tory I'm alright jack logic? l'anglais

11:27am Thu 25 Apr 13

uberbloke says...

"I would not risk my children's long term health no matter how small a chance..."

So, with a definite 1 in a 1000 death rate with measles you've just admitted you're taking a massive chance with your child's long term health. Not only that as you're contributing to the decline in the immunity of the whole community you are not only putting your child at risk but everybody else, increasing the changes of all sorts of nasty complications for people who are pregnant, immuno-suppressed etc.

Oh, whilst we're discussing risk, you might want to try and find out just how dangerous flu actually is...
"I would not risk my children's long term health no matter how small a chance..." So, with a definite 1 in a 1000 death rate with measles you've just admitted you're taking a massive chance with your child's long term health. Not only that as you're contributing to the decline in the immunity of the whole community you are not only putting your child at risk but everybody else, increasing the changes of all sorts of nasty complications for people who are pregnant, immuno-suppressed etc. Oh, whilst we're discussing risk, you might want to try and find out just how dangerous flu actually is... uberbloke

11:50am Thu 25 Apr 13

Duckorange says...

Seriously, if you're not giving your children the MMR vaccine because of the former Dr Wakefield's thoroughly debunked autism study, then you are a moron.
Seriously, if you're not giving your children the MMR vaccine because of the former Dr Wakefield's thoroughly debunked autism study, then you are a moron. Duckorange

12:47pm Thu 25 Apr 13

woby_tide says...

"I have seen the effects of an mmr go wrong, it cant be proved that the mmr was to blame "

So which is it? You haven't seen an MMR "go wrong" or you have? Or are you Andrew Wakefield and decided the two must have been linked?

"I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu."

Yet all 3 illnesses have mortality rates(the measles one reduced by a large amount since vaccination). Shockingly I can't believe they haven't taken into account your anecdotal evidence of your families whilst deciding how best to immunise the population
"I have seen the effects of an mmr go wrong, it cant be proved that the mmr was to blame " So which is it? You haven't seen an MMR "go wrong" or you have? Or are you Andrew Wakefield and decided the two must have been linked? "I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu." Yet all 3 illnesses have mortality rates(the measles one reduced by a large amount since vaccination). Shockingly I can't believe they haven't taken into account your anecdotal evidence of your families whilst deciding how best to immunise the population woby_tide

1:12pm Thu 25 Apr 13

Time_Traveller says...

The Liberal wrote:
IMHO immunisation should be made compulsory as it is for the benefit of the community as a whole.
Whilst I agree with your comments, it will never work in practise.

When vaccinations were first bought in during the late Victorian era, it was compulsory to have your child vaccinated and parents were fined if they did not comply with the regulations or could not produce the certificate if vaccination for their child on starting school - however, it was costing too much for the government to administrate it, hence why they did away with making it compulsory.

Personally, I think lazy selfish parents use the whipped up and out of proportion media frenzy as an excuse not to bother getting their children vaccinated ..... and it is the children who suffer if they get this disease, not the parents.
[quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: IMHO immunisation should be made compulsory as it is for the benefit of the community as a whole.[/p][/quote]Whilst I agree with your comments, it will never work in practise. When vaccinations were first bought in during the late Victorian era, it was compulsory to have your child vaccinated and parents were fined if they did not comply with the regulations or could not produce the certificate if vaccination for their child on starting school - however, it was costing too much for the government to administrate it, hence why they did away with making it compulsory. Personally, I think lazy selfish parents use the whipped up and out of proportion media frenzy as an excuse not to bother getting their children vaccinated ..... and it is the children who suffer if they get this disease, not the parents. Time_Traveller

1:41pm Thu 25 Apr 13

snowy123 says...

"Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it."

What a total load of claptrap. If Measles is a totally harmless disease then why was a vaccination developed in the first place ?
Perhaps you should ask some of the older generation who had children or brothers and sisters who died or were blinded by this disease and see if they think it is a minor illness !!!!

This disease could of been almost eradicated by now if it wasn't for people like you.
"Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it." What a total load of claptrap. If Measles is a totally harmless disease then why was a vaccination developed in the first place ? Perhaps you should ask some of the older generation who had children or brothers and sisters who died or were blinded by this disease and see if they think it is a minor illness !!!! This disease could of been almost eradicated by now if it wasn't for people like you. snowy123

2:17pm Thu 25 Apr 13

PokesdownMark says...

anonEmouse, you must see that your child's risk from not being vaccinated is very real and significant. There is likely to be a wave of infections and you must not look to the past to judge the risk, you must look to the future. The risk to unvaccinated people is currently increasing and increasing fast.
Yes you had measles and were fine. But does this make you totally sure that your child will have your same experience? Because it should not. It should not.
This isn't about believing politicians. This is simple, well understood, totally proven and multi-decade old science. Please please please discuss with your GP.
anonEmouse, you must see that your child's risk from not being vaccinated is very real and significant. There is likely to be a wave of infections and you must not look to the past to judge the risk, you must look to the future. The risk to unvaccinated people is currently increasing and increasing fast. Yes you had measles and were fine. But does this make you totally sure that your child will have your same experience? Because it should not. It should not. This isn't about believing politicians. This is simple, well understood, totally proven and multi-decade old science. Please please please discuss with your GP. PokesdownMark

4:18pm Thu 25 Apr 13

hadvar says...

anonEmouse wrote:
The danger of changing the law to allow for compulsory vaccinations, could be a dangerous line to cross, as yes this is for mmr, but what could be made compulsory in the future once the law is changed? I have seen the effects of an mmr go wrong, it cant be proved that the mmr was to blame but seeing this so close to home, I would not risk my children's long term health no matter how small a chance. I have had measles and it is no where near as bad as people are saying, I would rather my children had measles and built natural anti bodies and resistance rather than risk some of the possible long term effects of this immunization. Plus how can anybody trust what a politician says these days.

I would not have my children vaccinated for mmr, quite simply as all this fuss over measles has blown it out of all proportion. Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it.
anonEmouse,

You're trolling right? You are trolling aren't you? Please tell me you are trolling?
[quote][p][bold]anonEmouse[/bold] wrote: The danger of changing the law to allow for compulsory vaccinations, could be a dangerous line to cross, as yes this is for mmr, but what could be made compulsory in the future once the law is changed? I have seen the effects of an mmr go wrong, it cant be proved that the mmr was to blame but seeing this so close to home, I would not risk my children's long term health no matter how small a chance. I have had measles and it is no where near as bad as people are saying, I would rather my children had measles and built natural anti bodies and resistance rather than risk some of the possible long term effects of this immunization. Plus how can anybody trust what a politician says these days. I would not have my children vaccinated for mmr, quite simply as all this fuss over measles has blown it out of all proportion. Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it.[/p][/quote]anonEmouse, You're trolling right? You are trolling aren't you? Please tell me you are trolling? hadvar

4:19pm Thu 25 Apr 13

Adrian XX says...

Much as I am not anti-MMR, I don't easily trust what government health advisers say. The government got us involved in a war because someone in a taxi told an official that Iraq has WMDs: who is to say it will not lie through it's teeth about health issues?

One example of desperate lying by governments is the promotion of the flu vaccine. While there is evidence for the efficacy of MMR, there is almost none for flu vaccines and the most vulnerable groups (e.g. over 65s) get no benefit from it at all. You can find this information published in The Lancet - PMID 22032844 if you wish to look it up. This is not one study, but a large analysis of 17 randomised controlled trials and 14 observational studies.
Much as I am not anti-MMR, I don't easily trust what government health advisers say. The government got us involved in a war because someone in a taxi told an official that Iraq has WMDs: who is to say it will not lie through it's teeth about health issues? One example of desperate lying by governments is the promotion of the flu vaccine. While there is evidence for the efficacy of MMR, there is almost none for flu vaccines and the most vulnerable groups (e.g. over 65s) get no benefit from it at all. You can find this information published in The Lancet - PMID 22032844 if you wish to look it up. This is not one study, but a large analysis of 17 randomised controlled trials and 14 observational studies. Adrian XX

4:58pm Thu 25 Apr 13

keith milton says...

vaccines are slow kill,

part of the depopulation agenda,

but the sheep won't listen,

god help this hell forsaken hell hole of a planet.
vaccines are slow kill, part of the depopulation agenda, but the sheep won't listen, god help this hell forsaken hell hole of a planet. keith milton

6:45pm Thu 25 Apr 13

PokesdownMark says...

Adrian XX wrote:
Much as I am not anti-MMR, I don't easily trust what government health advisers say. The government got us involved in a war because someone in a taxi told an official that Iraq has WMDs: who is to say it will not lie through it's teeth about health issues?

One example of desperate lying by governments is the promotion of the flu vaccine. While there is evidence for the efficacy of MMR, there is almost none for flu vaccines and the most vulnerable groups (e.g. over 65s) get no benefit from it at all. You can find this information published in The Lancet - PMID 22032844 if you wish to look it up. This is not one study, but a large analysis of 17 randomised controlled trials and 14 observational studies.
Thanks for posting a source. I wish more people did that. As you say that study was about other studies. I'm not an expert, firstly, but it appeared to me to be about the data analysis used in other studies. So it was about the degree of reliability of those studies. Perhaps using more modern standards of proof? I don't know? BUT the main negative point about seasons when the vaccine is less effective is because thats what flu is like. The predominant strain varies year to year and the vaccine cannot protect against newly emerging strains. To me, this isn't a reason to not take the vaccine at all. Just to say that it is better than nothing, if you are in a risk group.
[quote][p][bold]Adrian XX[/bold] wrote: Much as I am not anti-MMR, I don't easily trust what government health advisers say. The government got us involved in a war because someone in a taxi told an official that Iraq has WMDs: who is to say it will not lie through it's teeth about health issues? One example of desperate lying by governments is the promotion of the flu vaccine. While there is evidence for the efficacy of MMR, there is almost none for flu vaccines and the most vulnerable groups (e.g. over 65s) get no benefit from it at all. You can find this information published in The Lancet - PMID 22032844 if you wish to look it up. This is not one study, but a large analysis of 17 randomised controlled trials and 14 observational studies.[/p][/quote]Thanks for posting a source. I wish more people did that. As you say that study was about other studies. I'm not an expert, firstly, but it appeared to me to be about the data analysis used in other studies. So it was about the degree of reliability of those studies. Perhaps using more modern standards of proof? I don't know? BUT the main negative point about seasons when the vaccine is less effective is because thats what flu is like. The predominant strain varies year to year and the vaccine cannot protect against newly emerging strains. To me, this isn't a reason to not take the vaccine at all. Just to say that it is better than nothing, if you are in a risk group. PokesdownMark

7:04pm Thu 25 Apr 13

Turtlebay says...

snowy123 wrote:
"Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it."

What a total load of claptrap. If Measles is a totally harmless disease then why was a vaccination developed in the first place ?
Perhaps you should ask some of the older generation who had children or brothers and sisters who died or were blinded by this disease and see if they think it is a minor illness !!!!

This disease could of been almost eradicated by now if it wasn't for people like you.
WRONG!

I too had measles as a child along with most of the other boys in our boarding school of approx 500 pupils. Not one died nor had any after effects.

Many people are believing the propaganda the government puts out about MMR.
Wise up and do your own research rather than believing in the liars.
[quote][p][bold]snowy123[/bold] wrote: "Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it." What a total load of claptrap. If Measles is a totally harmless disease then why was a vaccination developed in the first place ? Perhaps you should ask some of the older generation who had children or brothers and sisters who died or were blinded by this disease and see if they think it is a minor illness !!!! This disease could of been almost eradicated by now if it wasn't for people like you.[/p][/quote]WRONG! I too had measles as a child along with most of the other boys in our boarding school of approx 500 pupils. Not one died nor had any after effects. Many people are believing the propaganda the government puts out about MMR. Wise up and do your own research rather than believing in the liars. Turtlebay

7:27am Fri 26 Apr 13

The Liberal says...

Turtlebay wrote:
snowy123 wrote:
"Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it."

What a total load of claptrap. If Measles is a totally harmless disease then why was a vaccination developed in the first place ?
Perhaps you should ask some of the older generation who had children or brothers and sisters who died or were blinded by this disease and see if they think it is a minor illness !!!!

This disease could of been almost eradicated by now if it wasn't for people like you.
WRONG!

I too had measles as a child along with most of the other boys in our boarding school of approx 500 pupils. Not one died nor had any after effects.

Many people are believing the propaganda the government puts out about MMR.
Wise up and do your own research rather than believing in the liars.
Lucky you. I suppose you would like to return the good old days of the 1950s, when there was an annual average death rate of 135 in England & Wales? (Source: Public Health England)
[quote][p][bold]Turtlebay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]snowy123[/bold] wrote: "Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it." What a total load of claptrap. If Measles is a totally harmless disease then why was a vaccination developed in the first place ? Perhaps you should ask some of the older generation who had children or brothers and sisters who died or were blinded by this disease and see if they think it is a minor illness !!!! This disease could of been almost eradicated by now if it wasn't for people like you.[/p][/quote]WRONG! I too had measles as a child along with most of the other boys in our boarding school of approx 500 pupils. Not one died nor had any after effects. Many people are believing the propaganda the government puts out about MMR. Wise up and do your own research rather than believing in the liars.[/p][/quote]Lucky you. I suppose you would like to return the good old days of the 1950s, when there was an annual average death rate of 135 in England & Wales? (Source: Public Health England) The Liberal

7:28am Fri 26 Apr 13

The Liberal says...

The Liberal wrote:
Turtlebay wrote:
snowy123 wrote:
"Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it."

What a total load of claptrap. If Measles is a totally harmless disease then why was a vaccination developed in the first place ?
Perhaps you should ask some of the older generation who had children or brothers and sisters who died or were blinded by this disease and see if they think it is a minor illness !!!!

This disease could of been almost eradicated by now if it wasn't for people like you.
WRONG!

I too had measles as a child along with most of the other boys in our boarding school of approx 500 pupils. Not one died nor had any after effects.

Many people are believing the propaganda the government puts out about MMR.
Wise up and do your own research rather than believing in the liars.
Lucky you. I suppose you would like to return the good old days of the 1950s, when there was an annual average death rate of 135 in England & Wales? (Source: Public Health England)
That's for measles by the way.
[quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Turtlebay[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]snowy123[/bold] wrote: "Yes measles can be dangerous but it is in no way as dangerous as people are saying. I had measles, my Sister had measles, my parents had measles, there have been no lasting effects and we are all fine. its really no worse than chicken pox or a really bad flu. These people saying how bad it is makes me wonder if they have ever experienced it." What a total load of claptrap. If Measles is a totally harmless disease then why was a vaccination developed in the first place ? Perhaps you should ask some of the older generation who had children or brothers and sisters who died or were blinded by this disease and see if they think it is a minor illness !!!! This disease could of been almost eradicated by now if it wasn't for people like you.[/p][/quote]WRONG! I too had measles as a child along with most of the other boys in our boarding school of approx 500 pupils. Not one died nor had any after effects. Many people are believing the propaganda the government puts out about MMR. Wise up and do your own research rather than believing in the liars.[/p][/quote]Lucky you. I suppose you would like to return the good old days of the 1950s, when there was an annual average death rate of 135 in England & Wales? (Source: Public Health England)[/p][/quote]That's for measles by the way. The Liberal

12:59pm Fri 26 Apr 13

Adrian XX says...

PokesdownMark wrote:
Adrian XX wrote:
Much as I am not anti-MMR, I don't easily trust what government health advisers say. The government got us involved in a war because someone in a taxi told an official that Iraq has WMDs: who is to say it will not lie through it's teeth about health issues?

One example of desperate lying by governments is the promotion of the flu vaccine. While there is evidence for the efficacy of MMR, there is almost none for flu vaccines and the most vulnerable groups (e.g. over 65s) get no benefit from it at all. You can find this information published in The Lancet - PMID 22032844 if you wish to look it up. This is not one study, but a large analysis of 17 randomised controlled trials and 14 observational studies.
Thanks for posting a source. I wish more people did that. As you say that study was about other studies. I'm not an expert, firstly, but it appeared to me to be about the data analysis used in other studies. So it was about the degree of reliability of those studies. Perhaps using more modern standards of proof? I don't know? BUT the main negative point about seasons when the vaccine is less effective is because thats what flu is like. The predominant strain varies year to year and the vaccine cannot protect against newly emerging strains. To me, this isn't a reason to not take the vaccine at all. Just to say that it is better than nothing, if you are in a risk group.
If there isn't any evidence for its efficacy in the over 65s, then we have to ask how much money the NHS is spending on it. There are other areas of health care where money could be better spent.
[quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Adrian XX[/bold] wrote: Much as I am not anti-MMR, I don't easily trust what government health advisers say. The government got us involved in a war because someone in a taxi told an official that Iraq has WMDs: who is to say it will not lie through it's teeth about health issues? One example of desperate lying by governments is the promotion of the flu vaccine. While there is evidence for the efficacy of MMR, there is almost none for flu vaccines and the most vulnerable groups (e.g. over 65s) get no benefit from it at all. You can find this information published in The Lancet - PMID 22032844 if you wish to look it up. This is not one study, but a large analysis of 17 randomised controlled trials and 14 observational studies.[/p][/quote]Thanks for posting a source. I wish more people did that. As you say that study was about other studies. I'm not an expert, firstly, but it appeared to me to be about the data analysis used in other studies. So it was about the degree of reliability of those studies. Perhaps using more modern standards of proof? I don't know? BUT the main negative point about seasons when the vaccine is less effective is because thats what flu is like. The predominant strain varies year to year and the vaccine cannot protect against newly emerging strains. To me, this isn't a reason to not take the vaccine at all. Just to say that it is better than nothing, if you are in a risk group.[/p][/quote]If there isn't any evidence for its efficacy in the over 65s, then we have to ask how much money the NHS is spending on it. There are other areas of health care where money could be better spent. Adrian XX

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree