ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
10 babies dead from whooping cough, pregnancy women to be vaccinated(45 Posts)
Story here. Nearly 5000 cases of whooping cough this year and 10 little babies have died (I think they were pre-jab age, ie under 12 weeks).
My ds is 13 weeks and has had two sets of jabs so hopefully he'll be ok, but I live in a city with a low rate of vaccination uptake so he could be more at risk than others.
I wonder if any pregnant women will accept the whooping cough vaccination or if there'll be a whole "but it hasn't been tested!" thing? As far as I know it's the same vaccine given to babies and children so should be perfectly safe?
Do these outbreaks occur because of low vac uptake or is it just one of those things?
It's such a tough choice. I'm terrified by the thought of our baby getting whooping cough, but then I'm also terrified at the thought of how the vaccine could affect a baby that is not fully developed. It has never been trialed on pregnant women - just because there are no known risks, doesn't mean there are no risks. Also, the vaccine they are using is not the one given to 2 month old babies, but the one that is given as a booster, which is not supposed to be given to under 3s. Does anyone know why that is? I'm so terrified of this choice. I haven't taken as much as a paracetamol throughout my pregnancy and have already decided against the flu jab. But this is different. I just want to make an informed decision. In Scotland less than 0.02% of babies have had it this year, so that has to be weighed up against the unknown risks of the vaccine. Somehow you have to make a choice.
Lovetolerance. The reason that the vaccine given to pregnant women is the same as the one given to 3 year olds is that it is a much lower dose than the one given to 8 week olds. It's the same basic ingredients, just in lower quantities as when it's given to 3 year olds it's a booster rather than the full vaccine.
I also believe that the vaccine has been given to pregnant women in other countries for many years. Personally I'd take the vaccine. I've had whooping cough and was so, so ill with it. That was as an older child, was off school for months.
I had whooping cough when I was around two years old- does that still mean I need to be vaccinated? I'm in my first trimester.
Yes you should be. Immunity both natural and from childhood vaccinations can wear off.
Oh and I'm living proof. I've actually had it twice, though second time not as bad.
Its been given to pregnant women in other countries for years.
And ten dead babies is not scaremongering. Spouting shit about vaccines is scaremongering, and bloody irresponsible too.
Justbreath - you are extremely lucky that your 5 week old baby was not seriously ill with wc. Most babies that young who contract it are very seriously ill and usually hospitalized with complications. I think the other posters here have said it - fair enough if that was your experience - but irresponsible to make out wc is just an annoying cough and to suggest that vaccination is unnecessary. 11 babies have died so far this year in the uk alone - all under 12 weeks of age. My 6 week prem twin girls caught wc off me shortly after birth - I caught it on antenatal ward - yes I was vax as a child - but immunity wanes. I was v seriously ill - wc & a c section not a good mix! My girls nearly died - one suffered a stroke. We went through 2 months of Hell. I would give my right arm to go back in time and have the wc vax during pregnancy & not to go through the nightmare we endured.
I had wc when I was 6 months old. I obviously have no memory of it but according to my mother it was a very mild illness for me and I recovered quickly, without any lasting effects. However, being 37 weeks pregnant, on Tuesday I was first in my surgery to get the vaccine. Just because the illness was very mild for me doesn't mean that it would be for my son if he got it. And even if it was mild for him he'd be contagious and could infect someone who could have a more severe case. As far as I'm concerned we live in a society not our own personal bubbles and so we have a duty to do what's best for everyone as much as we can. So I got the vaccine because as nerve wracking a decision as it was, I think it was the right thing to do.
GoSakuramachi, it's not irresponsible to give your opinion about anything. It's irresponsible to take someone's opinion or advice on face value, instead of weighing up the facts and coming to your own decision. Do the research and make your own choice. No one opinion should inform that and people should be free to express their views.
it is when it is based on misinformation. Take your own advice and do some research, since you post was full of errors.
Spreading lies is irresponsible.
Am not sure why I post on vaccination related threads but some of the views are a little odd. Where on earth does all that rubbish about antibiotics weakening the immune system down generations come from?
I think I saw that WC immunity lasts in the region of 15-20 years, with the immunity from vaccination being at the lower end, so a lot of PG mums will be due a boost. If nothing else it will reduce the risk they subsequently get infected and pass on the actual disease, which is a real risk as we seem to be coming into a high point in WC cases.
We can generally be confident that any fever or ill-effects from vaccination will be far less severe than the effects of catching the disease.
GoSakuramachi - you're funny
A friend actually told me that two of her elderly friends have also died from it and that in future they r going to offer the vaccine to older people too because people are living longer the vaccine isn't made to last that long and the effects of the vaccine wear off so the elderly will be offered a booster??!
Could this be part the reason why there seems to be a lot about at the moment?
"just because there are no known risks, doesn't mean there are no risks."
I bet you don't eat turnips either. You never know, do you?
But we can be sure that the effects of catching the disease are likely to be far worse than the
imaginary effects of taking the vaccine
I just don't feel I can be so glib when I'm talking about the well being of my unborn child. I don't really understand why people become aggressive/sarcastic on these forums, when some mothers are obviously really concerned about what to do. In my mind, people who really consider the choice and do some research are far wiser than those who blindly follow the latest medical advice, even if the outcome is the same. I don't think there is anything wrong with reading all research into possible side effects and experiences of others who have had similar vaccines during pregnancy. If the outcome of that reassures you and you have the vaccine, so be it. The evaluation of risk has to also include likelihood, i.e if I lived in a city/region of the country where there was an outbreak I would take whatever "imaginary" risk I perceived there to be. However, if I'm somewhere where there have been zero cases, then I obviously think harder about whether it is worth it.
I am 38 weeks and have had it - had to fight for it though as gp surgery behind the information released by DOH. However think they have caught up now as saw sign with notices for clinics for pregnant women.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.