My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Get updates on how your baby develops, your body changes, and what you can expect during each week of your pregnancy by signing up to the Mumsnet Pregnancy Newsletters.

Pregnancy

Midwife's advice on SF jag

22 replies

Babybear1 · 19/11/2009 12:11

Hi, am just wondering have any of your midwives come out & said not to have the jag?
Am currently 33 wks, and have a tension headache trying to decide what to do.

Discussed with my midwife at the start of the summer, ever before the jag was avaiable & she said she wouldn't be taking it herself!

All along have been adament that I'm not taking it, but then the BBC news last night got me thinking again. Am just so worried about my unborn baby, but also have the worry of 18mon DD.

My Mum keeps saying about the thalidomide drug in the 60s, and how they claimed that that was safe for pregnant women & she knows lots of Docs who let their wives had it & consequeunces were not good.

So if any of your midwives have said( off the record, of course!) that they don't think you should take can you please let me know.

OP posts:
Report
Pinkjenny · 19/11/2009 12:14

Mine said exactly the same thing. It's difficult.

Report
jaype · 19/11/2009 12:32

Comparing it to Thalidomide is like comparing the Moon to an orange - the drugs work in totally different ways and T was given in early (foetal development) stage pregnancy. It's up to you but please consider the science first.

Report
Babybear1 · 19/11/2009 12:33

Just saying what my mother keeps saying to me that's all....they did say that was safe too!!!!

OP posts:
Report
bigpreggybelly · 19/11/2009 12:40

What's a jag? Is your midwife offering you a free car? How lucky. Which model are you getting? What's the 0-60?

Report
llareggub · 19/11/2009 12:45

I'm not pregnant but my friend is. She had advice from another friend (the old friend of a friend thing!) and she has a medical background and access to the research. She advised my friend to have it. She also said that the jab would protect the baby once born for up to 6 months, which has to be a relief, no?

Report
docket · 19/11/2009 12:54

My midwife told me not to have it. But I wasn't convinced by her arguments (she just ranted basically and some of the stuff she came out with really wasn't evidence-based) and I had the jab on Tuesday. For me the risk of the flu seemed greater than the theoretical risk of the vaccine.

The conflicting advice about certainly isn't helpful!

Report
TakeLovingChances · 19/11/2009 12:59

My midwife asked if I was having it in a casual way as if she was asking about the weather outside.

I said I didn't want to get it (my own personal choice) but I understood why other women would want it.

She nodded and agreed with me and said that it is hard to know for sure what's best.

At no stage in any of my antenatal care have I ever felt that any professional was giving me advice or pointing me in any direction. It seems to be a much bigger issue in the mainland than it does here in Northern Ireland.

Maybe that's just my opinion, but apart from the letter I got to invite me for the jab I've not had anyone say directly to me to a) have it, b) don't have it.

Report
CMOTdibbler · 19/11/2009 13:03

The thing with the SF vaccination is that it is just a variant of the normal seasonal flu vaccine that they change every year in the same way they have produced the SF one. So, theres a lot of data showing that seasonal flu vaccines are safe in pg and no reason to believe that the SF one isn't.

Since thalidomide, things have changed a long way in terms of drug testing, and particularly for those given in pg.

Report
opalfruity · 19/11/2009 13:06

My godmother is a midwife and has practically ordered me to get it (am 22 weeks). She had it herself at the first available opportunity and has said that she's never seen a virus that picks on pregnant women so viciously.

The only problem I have is that my local surgery still haven't asked me to come in yet and when I rang up and asked they basically told me I just have to be patient until they got round to inviting me.

Report
mommymeggie · 19/11/2009 13:23

My GP and I had a long talk about the swine flu jab. He said that he didn't see a lot of cases of swine flu and that he personally thought a lot of it was misdiagnosed. He also said the cases he did see were quite mild and thought it was about the same as the seasonal flu. I asked him straight forward what I should do and didn't want to give me a straight answer b/c he was still unsure about the vaccine himself. He did say to me though " keep in mind that you are priority!"

I then asked my midwife at my next appointment and she said that they had a brief on it but she asked me what the GP said to me. So I told her and then I asked if there were any other pregnant women she knew that were going to have it and she said no.

So with that info to go on, I think I'm going to base my decision on my thoughts alone. I have debated like mad on this issue and its very frightening to think that I have a choice of 1) getting the shot and increase the risk of my baby having complications or 2) not getting the shot and chancing the risk of getting a flu I know nothing about, could be mild or severe. So basically damned if you do and damned if you don't!!

Report
Pinkjenny · 19/11/2009 14:06

I don't understand (and apologies if this is a stupid question) why, if flu is so serious in pregnancy because it is a respiratory condition, why women aren't then routinely offered the seasonal flu jab?

Report
Sella · 19/11/2009 14:16

My midwife basically said that she didn't feel she had been given enough info to give proper advice to pregnant women and that none of the health workers in that practice were having it, not a great advertisement.

I'm 32 weeks and have mild asthma but have decided not to have the jab. The main reason is nobody I know who has had swine flu - including pregnant women - have suffered THAT much.

I think you need to take your own circumstances into consideration, do you have any health problems, asthma, diabetes etc? Do you work somewhere that you put you at greater risk, a hospital, nursery etc?

At the end of the day it is a really personal choice. I don't think there has been any evidence that the jab is a risk. However I'm offered the seasonal flu jab every year as an asthmatic and turn it down as well.

At the end of the day you could tear your hair out for the next 7 weeks worrying about this and not come into any contact with the virus. There are so many more important things to think about in your last stages of pregnancy, it sounds to me like you have no intention of taking it, so why not be happy with that decision and look forward to your baby coming.

My only other advice would be to stay as healthy as you possibly can in the mean time, make sure you eat well and wash your hands well and lots!

Report
trixgus · 19/11/2009 14:33

This is the some information about the swine flu vaccine that has been circulated to medical professionals. I think it addresses many concerns in a clear and concise fashion. Remember many health care professionals will have an opinion, but that opinion may not be evidence based. Read the facts, and make the right decision for yourself.

Pregnancy and the swine flu vaccine

Pregnant women are subjected to a barrage of advice and information. It can be difficult
and frustrating to try and wade through complex advice. Swine flu is a respiratory
disease caused by a new strain of flu virus. The seasonal flu vaccines that are already
available don?t protect against swine flu, so a new flu vaccine has been developed.
It?s important that we give clear advice for pregnant women.

Make it your decision. Make it informed.

Q. Why are pregnant women in one of the priority at-risk groups for vaccination?

Evidence shows that pregnant women are at increased risk of severe disease and flu-related
hospital admissions. The risk increases with how advanced the pregnancy is, with women in the
third trimester (last three months of pregnancy) particularly at risk.
7-10% of all hospital admissions for swine flu are pregnant women in their second or third
trimester of pregnancy, according to World Health Organisation (WHO) data. Pregnant
women are also ten times more likely to need care in an intensive care unit compared with the
general population.

Q. Is the vaccine safe for pregnant women?

Yes. Both vaccines have been licensed for use in pregnant women. Licensed vaccines, including
flu vaccines, are held to a very high standard of safety ? they simply would not be licensed if
they were unsafe.
European regulators have considered the safety record of seasonal flu vaccines and the nature
of the adjuvants that were incorporated in the pandemic vaccines. Extensive research has also
been carried out into the use of adjuvants and there is no evidence that they are associated
with any risks in pregnancy. (Adjuvants are additional agents that are added to vaccines to
make the more effective ? see below for more information) The seasonal flu vaccine has been
given to millions of pregnant women at all stages of their pregnancy and has an excellent
safety record, with no reported safety concerns. This is why in the UK, and many other
countries, vaccination against seasonal flu is recommended for pregnant women, whatever the
stage of the pregnancy.

Q Why is thiomersal present in the vaccine and is there any risk from it?

Pandemrix contains five micrograms of thiomersal (a mercury-containing compound) as a
preservative. This is added to prevent the vaccine becoming contaminated by bacteria during
preparation, storage and use. There are now numerous studies from many countries done in
different ways that all come to the same conclusion: that we cannot identify harm from
thiomersal in vaccines. Indeed, the US courts threw out thiomersal as a cause of autism. One of
the most compelling pieces of evidence was that when thiomersal was taken out of US
childhood vaccines, autism rates continued to rise. The minute quantities of thiomersal in
vaccines have been shown not to be harmful.

Q What is an adjuvant?
An adjuvant is a compound that can be added to a vaccine to enhance the immune response to
the vaccine. The use of an adjuvant can also reduce the amount of antigen (an antigen is the
active substance that causes your immune system to produce antibodies) that is needed to
produce a satisfactory immune response, which in turn, makes the vaccine safer.
People understandably want to know what is in the adjuvant; it contains a fish oil (squalene)
and vitamin E - both naturally occurring products that we have in our bodies. There is also a
substance called Polysorbate 80 that is a food additive and is in many medicines.

Q The use of adjuvanted vaccines in pregnant women has raised concerns; why are
pregnant women advised to take Pandremix? Why can?t we choose?

If choice is neutral there is no reason why people cannot choose what they want. However,
when the choice is not neutral we have to advise people to have what we believe to be the
best protection. We know that in healthy adults one dose of Pandemrix protects almost
everybody with very high levels of antibodies. With Celvapan, the proportion of people who
will be protected after one dose is considerably fewer. For this reason, the European
Commission still recommends two doses of Celvapan. At a time when H1N1 viruses are
circulating it has to be better for everybody to be protected after one dose than fewer and
with lower antibodies.
Pregnant women are advised to receive the adjuvanted vaccine Pandemrix as this vaccine
appears to give adequate levels of antibodies after a single dose which provides protection
more rapidly than would be offered by Celvapan. As pregnant women are at increased risk
of severe disease and hospitalisation, it is vital that they are protected as soon as possible
from swine flu infection.

Q Have the vaccines been tested on pregnant women?

Women who are already pregnant are generally not enrolled into clinical trials.
The safety of giving a particular vaccine to pregnant women is assessed from what is already
known about the ingredients in the vaccine and the results of testing that is carried out to see if
the vaccine poses any risk during pregnancy. However, non-pregnant women who are enrolled
into vaccine clinical trials sometimes become pregnant shortly after vaccination or are given
vaccine before they know they are pregnant. These women are followed up and the outcome
of the pregnancy is documented.
Women who were, or became pregnant, during the clinical trials of the swine flu vaccine were
carefully monitored and there was no evidence of any specific risk to the mother or their
unborn child due to the vaccine.

Q Can the swine flu vaccine cause flu?

No. The flu vaccine cannot give you flu as it does not contain a live virus. Some people may
experience mild flu-like symptoms (like fever, headache and muscle aches) for up to 48 hours
after immunisation as their immune system responds to the vaccine, but this is not flu.

Q
Are there any other side effects?

All vaccinations can produce side effects such as redness, soreness and swelling at the site of
the injection. The vast majority of these side effects are not serious.

Report
itwascertainlyasurprise · 19/11/2009 14:57

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

bumpsoon · 19/11/2009 16:05

Pinkjenny - swine flu actually attacks the lungs (alveoli) in a way that normal flu doesnt ,this is why people need ITU treatment .

Report
Pinkjenny · 19/11/2009 16:31

Ah, I see.

Report
mommymeggie · 20/11/2009 00:56

Pinkjenny-

Just found this link about making the seasonal flu jab annual for pregnant women. Here is the link

www.channel4.com/news/articles/society/health/flu+jab+for+pregnant+women+likely/2473572

Report
anonymous85 · 20/11/2009 01:44

My midwife said, TBH she can't really say or give her opinion on it - it hasn't been around for that long to say. But she did tell me of 2 pregnant women who contracted the swine flu and didn't go into much detail. From her way of saying it all, was like she was hessitant to give me the go ahead. I personally don't like trying something out that hasn't that tested for a long period of time that could somehow impact our baby. Too many uncertainties.

Report
mama2moo · 20/11/2009 09:20

Mine did. I said 'I guess you are advising all pg women to have the sf jab' she said 'no, Im not'. I was shocked.

She told me she isnt going to have it and hasnt found enough evidence that its safe.

So, I started going on about why not have Celvapan - She didnt know what I was talking about. Seems I knew more then her.

Also, she didnt know that pg women can have the seasonal flu jab. Not taking her advice.

Report
DorotheaPlenticlew · 20/11/2009 09:43

I don't really think the "remember Thalidomide" argument stands up as a reason not to accept this vaccine. Obviously Thalidomide was a harsh and terrible lesson for the medical profession, and as a result of that and other developments, standards and methods of judging drug safety have changed a great deal in the forty or so years that have passed since then. It's not like the medical professionals recommending the current SF jabs are also still claiming Thalidomide was safe

I was initially very concerned about whether to have the SF vaccine, so I read a lot about it, and rang my GP to discuss it too. He said that it was my choice, but that he would definitely recommend any pregnant family and friends of his to have it (he is the father of two very young DCs, not an old-school avuncular type).

In the end I went ahead, as I couldn't see a clear reason not to protect my baby and myself from the effects of SF. I have a two-year-old as well, who occasionally brings home infections from nursery, so the worry of him getting SF is also a factor; and DP has asthma, so I had visions of us all passing it to one another and someone ending up seriously ill.

Since having the vaccine I've had my booking appt with my midwife, and she mentioned that she and all her colleagues have had it. She didn't indicate any doubt that it was a reasonable thing to do.

Having read around the subject somewhat, I can't really see why so many people are definitely set against the vaccine. I know it's a personal choice, but there seems to be no really convincing case for the vaccine being more dangerous than the effects of the (sometimes fatal) flu. OK, there is also no proof it won't harm a baby; but that's partly because you can't prove a negative. And it's the case with so many things in pregnancy there is no proof that an occasional glass of wine is safe either, yet many of us feel that is an acceptable risk. (I am not really comparing wine with a vaccine I just mean that in this as in everything, the typical human attitude to risk in isolation is pretty inconsistent.)

Report
Skegness · 20/11/2009 09:54

I don't envy you guys the decision. I'm now 3.5 months postnatal and was v worried about catching swine flu before I had my baby. I thought this New Scientist snippet was interesting, though.

Report
TakeLovingChances · 21/11/2009 17:56

I think the NewScientist article is interesting, as is the one following it on the link.

As I've said on MN before, my own personal choice is to not have the jab. But I am not going to pass judgement on anyone else who does decide to take it.

The thing which swayed me was: once the jab is in the body that's it, it's in. No one knows 100% if it'd have a bad effect or no effect other than to protect from SF.

However, although SF is rife, there is no 100% chance that I or anyone else will catch it.

So, I'm just going to take my chances and try to avoid the SF bug and stay as healthy as I can.

I'm not going to wrap myself up in a bubble and stay indoors all winter, as some people seem to be suggesting, I plan to live my life as I normally do.

Report

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.