Vaccine Information

Quite a few people I see express concern about the number of vaccinations their children have in the first two years of life; three lots of diphtheria/whooping cough/tetanus/polio and HIB; the new pneumococcal vaccine, and the new PCV. That’s eighteen lots of vaccine, excluding the MMR.Is this amount necessary? Is there an opportunity to have some and not others? The answers, in my opinion are, respectively; Yes; and possibly. It’s important to consider the thinking behind the need for vaccinations.

The criteria for what to immunise against and how many of each vaccine will be required are; the degree of danger posed by the disease; the availability or development of a vaccine against that disease, which is good enough to provide immunity and safe enough for any potential harm caused to be greatly outweighed by the benefits; and the research before and after the vaccine is introduced which will provide information as to the dosage and number of injections required.Years of work and billions of dollars are expended in research for vaccines. They all have to go through rigorous trials to assess safety and efficacy. It took the inventor of the mumps vaccine (Jeryl Lynn strain) twelve years before he was satisfied, and even then post-marketing surveillance indicated that the vaccine was less effective than they originally hoped. It wasn’t until the MMR had been used for a few year that they appreciated a booster would be needed for that, too.

Despite Dr Wakefield’s concerns, the results of the research he carried out have never been replicated. Are the numbers of injections necessary? Almost certainly. I suppose it would be possible to carry out blood tests to ascertain levels of antibodies, after one or two jabs, but I have my doubts as to the sensitivity of these tests, they are traumatic for young children (the size of the needle for taking blood is rather larger than that for injecting) and all they do is indicate what the immunity level is at the time; they do not predict what it will be like in the future. The logistics of doing this on a large population are not worth considering. Bear in mind, too, that the vaccines administered now are much more refined than they used to be, so that, although the number of jabs has increased, the actual number of antigens injected has decreased so many fewer side effects occur. There is no longer mercury/thiomersal in them (there never has been in live vaccines such as MMR).

Ever since vaccination was invented, there have been anti-immunisation activists. Nowadays, we forget just how unpleasant or serious, possibly fatal, the diseases which are protected against can be. We don’t see them, because the vaccine programmes are effective in eradicating them. It is also important to consider that the companies who manufacture the vaccines do act in your best interests. I sometimes have the impression people think there is a cabal of scientists plotting to over-inject the population to their own financial gain! This is nonsense. I would agree that, on occasion, the Department of Health has been slower to react than it should have been, especially regarding the withdrawal of the Urabe strain of mumps vaccine used in the original MMR, which caused meningitis in some children. But it is easy to make these judgements with the benefit of hindsight.

As far as having them separately is concerned; yes, the measles/mumps/rubella are available. It is very difficult to obtain the others in anything other than combined dosage. Some polio and tetanus is available, but the others are not.To do these vaccines separately, if it were possible, would involve a large number of injections. I certainly don’t recommend leaving children unprotected against the other conditions.Vaccines are given to protect your child against potentially fatal diseases. Grit your teeth, stick to the NHS protocol and have them all.