People outside the UK may be unaware (although a similar situation seems to be appearing in the US) that there has, in the last decade, been a growing number of people who believe that immunisation injections, specifically a triple immunisation MMR jab, could cause autism in children. The whole thing began when a few doctors claimed that there could be a link between the jabs and autism.
What followed was study after study after study into this by huge research teams across the world and not a singly one of them found any link. It's complete and utter bollocks. It also later turned out the very same doctors that started it had their research paid for by parents in a court case in which they were trying to prove a link. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6289166.stm
What also followed was sensational newspaper report after sensational newspaper report about how our government were injecting harmful things into kids and were refusing to accept the (mythical) link. The big culprit here was The Daily Mail, hence the over-the-top sensationalist Daily Mail esque title to this thread. The government responded by saying all the factual things like; there absolutely no proof of any danger from this immunisation, the blokes who started it were acting with a complete conflict of interests, if we give out the single immunisation jabs instead of the triple one people won't get all three. If people stop giving their kids immunisations then in a decade or so there will likely be a massive outbreak of these diseases and the lives of both those who were and were not immunised will be at threat.
By last year the number of kids getting immunised fell to 83%. Last year the number of deaths from measles doubled from that of the previous year. The campaigners fighting to have the link recognised are still campaigning.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5118166.stm
a) If you have kids have you / will you get them immunised.
b) By making scare stories out of a non-issue, the newspapers earned large amounts of money. Do they have any responsibility to the thousands of children who will die or suffer as a result of their action?
c) How can we convince people to get their kids immunised? Apparently telling them all of the facts isn't enough.
What followed was study after study after study into this by huge research teams across the world and not a singly one of them found any link. It's complete and utter bollocks. It also later turned out the very same doctors that started it had their research paid for by parents in a court case in which they were trying to prove a link. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6289166.stm
What also followed was sensational newspaper report after sensational newspaper report about how our government were injecting harmful things into kids and were refusing to accept the (mythical) link. The big culprit here was The Daily Mail, hence the over-the-top sensationalist Daily Mail esque title to this thread. The government responded by saying all the factual things like; there absolutely no proof of any danger from this immunisation, the blokes who started it were acting with a complete conflict of interests, if we give out the single immunisation jabs instead of the triple one people won't get all three. If people stop giving their kids immunisations then in a decade or so there will likely be a massive outbreak of these diseases and the lives of both those who were and were not immunised will be at threat.
By last year the number of kids getting immunised fell to 83%. Last year the number of deaths from measles doubled from that of the previous year. The campaigners fighting to have the link recognised are still campaigning.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5118166.stm
a) If you have kids have you / will you get them immunised.
b) By making scare stories out of a non-issue, the newspapers earned large amounts of money. Do they have any responsibility to the thousands of children who will die or suffer as a result of their action?
c) How can we convince people to get their kids immunised? Apparently telling them all of the facts isn't enough.