Letter: Children and MMR
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: I strongly support your leading article (11 June) on the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, calling for the availability of single vaccines. I am medically qualified and a parent of a child with Crohn's disease. The cause of Crohn's disease (a chronic inflammatory bowel disease which has no current cure) is unknown. There are probably genetically susceptible individuals in whom an environmental trigger or triggers start the disease. There has been a dramatic increase in the incidence of this disease in children in the last 20 years (about fivefold).
My son first developed symptoms of the disease about eight weeks after an MMR booster at age 13. His great-uncle also suffered from the disease most of his life. Had I known then what I now know of the uncertainties surrounding the cause of the disease I would not have agreed to the combined vaccine for my child. For a male who has already had mumps and to whom rubella can pose no possible threat, how can it be justified to expose him deliberately to these viral antigens? Single measles vaccine may well be justified because of the severity of that disease.
I am well aware it is impossible to prove a negative, and I simply accept we do not know if there is an association with MMR vaccine.
It may be convenient from a public health perspective only to offer triple MMR vaccine but is this ethical if it may not be in the best interests of certain children, such as those with a family history of an inflammatory bowel disease?
The one-size-fits-all policy of the Department of Health may make economic sense but if it is not in some children's best interests then it is ethically dubious and it cannot be right not to have the single vaccines available.
NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments