Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 7 July 2000
- Published on: 28 June 2000
- Published on: 26 June 2000
- Published on: 6 June 2000
- Published on: 6 June 2000
- Published on: 6 June 2000
- Published on: 7 July 2000Recommendations or guidelines regarding MMR vaccination in children allergic to egg should be clearShow More
Dear Editor
I thank doctors Lakshman and Finn for their kind reply, and recognise that my use of the word "hospital" has given rise to a misunderstanding. My letter was based on the analysis the authors have made, not in the ADC article,[1] but in their eLetter to BMJ.[2]
They wrote:
(1) immunisation with any vaccine in any child always carries a risk of potentially fatal anaphylaxis...Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 28 June 2000Re: Controversy about MMR vaccinations in children with or without egg allergyShow More
Dear Editor
Professor Cantani's[1] experience is very similar to what we found in our review[2] - that egg allergic children do not appear to be at any greater risk to severe allergic reactions with MMR vaccine.
In our review, we do not advocate hospitalisation of children with egg allergy for MMR immunisation; on the contrary we suggest that all children (including children with egg allergy) can be immu...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 26 June 2000Controversy about MMR vaccinations in children with or without egg allergyShow More
Dear Editor,
According to our studies 1803 children allergic to egg have been safely received the MMR vaccine. Systemic reactions were present only in 0.1% of cases and untoward reactions only in 1.7% cases (p = 0.0001).[1] No child vaccinated by us has manifested immediate reactions.[1] According to Sampson et al[2] the MMR vaccine is safe in such children, evaluating on the basis of confidence intervals (95%) t...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 6 June 2000Re: MMR vaccine in children allergic to eggShow More
Dr Riordan ask which expert opinion to follow. The answer surely lies in reading the papers carefully, seeking out any key references quoted and deciding for oneself who has provided the best evidence. This should be the case for all guidelines, but we know that they are often absorbed undigested, which is one reason why ADC erects fairly firm barriers to their publication. Lakshman and Finn's paper was commissioned b...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 6 June 2000Re: MMR vaccine in children allergic to eggShow More
Dear Editor:
We note Riordan's response to our editorial on the issue of MMR vaccine and allergy[1] and the recommendations put forward by Khakoo and Lack[2] on this topic. While we agree that conflicting advice creates confusion, we cannot agree with his proposed "pragmatic approach". This amounts to a pointless waste of time and resources - greater than that proposed by anyone else to date - which will simply...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 6 June 2000MMR vaccine in children allergic to eggShow More
Dear Editor
Two reviews of MMR vaccine and egg allergy have recently been published. [1, 2] One appears in the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health's own journal (Archives of Diseases in Childhood),[1] the other has been endorsed by the Committee on Infection and Immunisation of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health.[2] The two articles differ in their recommendations of which children should be g...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.