boxst

Hello

My wife doesn't want our 1 year old to have the MMR jab, so we are looking for somewhere that splits the vaccination. I know that we will have to pay.

Can anyone recommend somewhere in the South-East (From Tunbridge-Wells up to and including Central London) ?

Thanks!

Steve.

Apparition

Only know of a clinic in North Watford where its costs £250 for the jabs. They are extremely thorough and very professional. My son and daughter-in-law have just taken my grand son for his jabs there. I can fine out more info for you if you like.

Dark

iTrader: (1)

Bear in mind that the single jabs aren't tested or approved for use in the UK and have their own potential side effects.

Mark

Apparition

Just remembered...its the Breakspear Clinic. A renowned centre for the investigation and treatment of allergies etc. I'm sure they are very responsible and would not offer these jabs if there was the remotest risk, and yes, everyone is different and some can have reactions to these things, but then I come out in hives if I take aspirin ! BTW, my grandson was fine, no effects what so ever and happy as a pig in the proverbial !

MattW

But are in a number of developed countries with better health care systems than ours.

GaryK

What the same single jabs that have been used for decades that all of us 30/40/50 somethings had? puzzled

Steve, we had concerns over MMR for our 1 year old daughter and posted on SN and got a barrage of replys and went with it. Mind you if the missus has made up her mind shes made up her mind!

lloydie15

Try a company by the name direct health 2000 08451304595. i've just used them for son's 1st jab very good. £100 for jab this includes £20 registration fee. the Dr advised me there is at least 1 year wait for the mumps jab.

Scooby96

I heard that theres a greater chance of a kid contracting a disease if the jabs are separated as there has to be certain intervals between each one, than having the MMR but each to their own I guess

Geezer

Considering that the person who started all this malarky about MMR has been totally discredited, and the Lancet printed a retraction, I don't undertsand why people are reluctant to do it. Even if there was some truth, the chances of a reaction are probably much less than getting hurt in a trafiic accident, but you don't stop driving your kids around do you?

They have a much higher chance of contracting measles (nasty) mumps (that too) or rubella (pah!) than becoming autistic or whatever it was whilst waiting for the subsequent jabs as they have to be given at a suitable interval, otherwise you might as well have MMR!!!

Geezer

scoobyangel

my boy had his MMR on monday.. had reservations about it as all parents would, but the risk of him getting either measels mumps or rubella in the periods of time between the seperate jabs outways any thing having the single jab did...

anyway.. he had it and.... he is fine, no side affects whatsoever

ajm

I agree entirely. There is no scientific evidence to suggest that MMR is unsafe, in fact the vast majority of evidence points towards it being safe. I can't see how, in the face of such evidence to the contrary, people's minds can be changed by one report utilising some shadey statistics to show a link to autism.

Not being a parent myself I guess it looks more irrational to me.

boomer

... and there is no scientific evidence to suggest that MMR is completely safe either!!

mb

mattstant

two things made me decide to go ahead with it were a retraction from the scientific time which first warned against it, and the fact that autism syptoms apparently occur at exactly the same age as the jabs are prescribed

Sprint Chief

... true, likewise there is no scientific evidence to suggest the single jabs are safe, you can't prove a negative etc. but there IS scientific evidence to show that the triple jab reduces infection risk and there is masses of evidence to show it is better than not having the jab at all!

The logic isn't that hard is it???

boomer

...but there IS scientific evidence to show that the single jab reduces infection risk and there is masses of evidence to show it is better than not having the jab at all!

The logic isn't that hard is it???

mb

Sprint Chief

Hmm, not sure if we're talking at cross purposes here

By "single jabs" I am referring to single vaccines in three jabs

By "triple jab" I am referring to triple vaccines in a single jab

The clue is in the plurality, I thought that made it clear but obviously not to all...

But then we're all amateur epidemiologists on scoobynet aren't we