Would you like to be a member of our research panel? Join here - there's (nearly) always a great incentive offered for your views.
vitamin K injection for baby(64 Posts)
Hi people..what's your views on vitamin K injection I must say since this is my 3rd and with age I've gained experience over the years I've come to learn and understand alot,with that comes a lot of questioning and research..have many of you done this and questioned what there giving your newborn/children.. my decision to have vitamin K is that I will only allow this to be done orally my reason on this is labor in it's self can be very distressing on baby let alone being jabbed with a needle first thing..my views on immunization are a stricked No No....Looking at what goes in to these are completely distressing...some may question my views but I think they are just when it comes to poison and mercury being just one of the components in these...when u ask for a full breakdown of what is being administered to your child...the answer you will get is No....hmmmm reasons for that?...
Please be aware In no way am I saying that's parents choice to do this is wrong or bad just my personal opinion and choice to not allow it...any one share my views?
No i don't. If my child became ill from an illness i could have prevented i would never forgive myself but each to their own.
Sorry, you lost me at a 'stricked No No.'
Afaik there is no mercury in the vit k injection any more.
I also asked for vit k orally due to one study which showed some risk factors for the injection. I believe a subsequent study said this was not replicated in their results, but like you I also think a jab isn't that nice for new babies either.
If you research it there are various options for having it orally too - my DS was given one dose at the hospital but iirc that was just before discharge so not straight after being born and then we were given drops to finish the course iyswim.
Immunisation is in my view generally far less risky than the illnesses it protects against unless individuals fall into specific risk categories.
I've never been refused a breakdown of the ingredients in anything. I'm usually given the information sheet from immunisations.
I have done a lot of research about things that are offered to babies, and I'm happy enough with my choices. They are different choices to the OP, but perhaps my priorities are different.
I've never been refused a breakdown either, nurses and doctors have always gone to great pains to reassure me. The injection simply means your child gets the Vit K in one dose, as many parents forget to get the following 2 sets of drops.
I also think calling the contents of immunisations 'poison' is very odd. Perhaps you should have a quick look at this and it might allay some of your fears. There is also mercury present in the background but the greatest or more toxic form of mercury is that which is found in fish due to bio-accumulation.
If you read above I stated that I'd have vitamin K orally...
To state that my prioritys are different are a tad judgemental my main concern is my children,far to many people just follow suit and ask new questions because it's what's been done for years..me I decided to ask all questions 1st. The fact sheet that you get with the injections is not a full breakdown of what's in them I suggest before you jumping the bandwagon and pointing the bad mother finger at me that a little research in to this first after all your just following suit that the government put into play in the first place (since when did they help us)
I have done a lot of research in to this..even to the point of talking to doctors midwives police solicitors high professional people and there views are the same ( my job allows me to have great knowledge of this)
I personally think the ones that went straight in with the digs and abrupt comments have done no research..I'm sorry but something that you have copied and pasted off of Google is not research in my personal opinion..
As for feeling awful if something happened what about the reversed side the allowing of it god for bid anything did but tthat happened and you could of prevented it?it's the same situation just reversed...
I'm not set to cause an argument but of course this topic will cause a mix of emotions and people jumping the gun before they understand the question in the first place ;)
If you had really spoken to HCP's you would know then that most of them are pro immunisation and Konakion because they deal daily with the consequences of failures to immunise.
And you have a moral responsibility to not infect other children because yours have contracted a communicable disesase. Not immunising means your children are a risk to children who CANNOT be immunised.
When you choose not to immunise you do not just 'protect' your children from the as yet unsure (and very rare) consequences of immunisation. You also place large numbers of other children at risk because your children become potential conduits of disease.
I am afraid you cannot abdicate moral responsibility for this.
If you are making reference to my link to information about common misconceptions about immunisations then that was in response to 'my views on immunization are a stricked No No...' and not simply misreading your earlier point about oral Vit K versus the injected version. This is also not extensive research or 'copied and pasted off of Google' it was simply giving you a link to information from people who have extensively researched this topic.
I fail to see how the view of a police officer or solicitor is necessarily an informed view about medicine. Simply being a high professional does not qualify someone to understand medicine or science.
Regarding the comments about government putting into play, it is government cooperation that has nearly eradicated, worldwide, polio. Of course the topic of immunisations will cause emotions to run high, you only have to read the immunisation board on here to see that. This is because not all children can have all immunisations and we rely on herd immunity, this is not selfish it is merely factual. Nor is it about sacrificing the children who can have the jabs/drops as they have been rigorously tested, far more so than in the past (as on such threads people can never seem to help making ref to thalidomide). Of course there will always be children who unfortunately suffer an adverse reaction, but evidence has shown these reactions to be less significant in the vast majority than the legacy of contracting some of the diseases being vaccinated against.
Is www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/datasheet/k/Konakiontabinjoralsoln.pdfthis the information that you think is lying to you?
I think if you're going to scaremonger about a sensitive topic that a lot of parents are unsure about due to bad press and bad research you should be able to back up your statements with fact and help people make an informed choice rather than put doubt in their minds with rumour and suspicion.
I also feel if you had seen a child die of measles potentially unnecessarily but never seen a proven adverse reaction to immunisations you may think a little differently.
Exactly * Mignonette* children who suffer from HIV or leukaemia for example rely on those who can have the immunisations to do so. It is not selfish, it is as Mignonette says, we have a moral duty as responsible citizens.
I don't agree either and it isn't due to a lack of research/ignorance on my part.
As Migonette says you are not just placing your own child at risk of illness but also other members of society who have a compromised immune system. The point is we are trying to create herd immunity to protect the few who simply can't have the immunisations.
I assume when doing your research you've looked up the symptoms and long term consequences associated with some of these 'childhood illnesses'?
If your baby vomits for whatever reason shortly after the vit k is given they won't get the effective dose. Your healthcare provider won't give the dose again.
If you are going to give vit k then the injection is the most effective way, pretty sure it doesn't hurt the baby, there's a whole lot of new and uncomfortable things going on for it after birth.
Not sure what the 'poison' thing is all about - most drugs would be poisonous in the wrong dosage.
If you've done a lot of research, spoken to all the professionals & are happy with your choice, why exactly do you want the views of a bunch of random strangers? Or are you just looking for a bun fight?
Carrots are poisonous if you eat enough of them. As pinkbell says, all dr7ugs are toxic in the wrong does. Funny how vaccination opposers don't refuse all drugs. God forbid your children become seriously unwell but if they did are you going to refuse antibiotics, antivirals, chemotherapy, blood thinners, painkillers? All of them can be toxic too. And you face the same dilemma of administration that you do with vaccination.
Your child will be offered many many preventative health care interventions over time. Many may have miniscule risk attached in balance with the very real risks of not acting. But the greatest risk of not acting is to the beloved children of other people.
Vit K doesn't give any herd immunity. It just corrects a deficiency that occasionally kills newborns. I gave consent for DS to have it because I would never forgive myself if he'd died from something preventable.
The study that showed a link to leukaemia was very small, they did a larger study and it was found that there wasn't actually a link, it was just a statistical anomaly.
Yes Konakion is different but I agree such a small preventable measure.
To be honest there are far more everyday environmental toxins that may or may not trigger leukemia in a person. Konakion seems harmless in comparison.
Vitamin K supplementation, whether injectable or oral, is unrelated to immunisation, herd immunity etc.
Either route is effective. If you opt for oral, then you need to give three doses. If your baby is sick, then yes you can get a fresh prescription for the additional dose/s required to complete the course.
OP, pretty sure Vitamin K isn't an immunisation. It's, well, a vitamin.
The research shows that giving it orally is less effective, therefore more chance of your baby getting hemorrhagic disease of the newborn. Though I accept that's only something like a 1:20,000 risk.
Op: are you intending to refuse the heel prick test as well (as your main reason appears to be disinclination for needles on a newborn)?
MinesA, sorry that was me responding (about herd-immunity and vulnerable children) to another part of the OP's post about immunising and not wanting to immunise.
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.