Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any medical concerns we suggest you consult your GP.

Don't take Pandemrix, only Celvapan....if you can get it!

(162 Posts)
mommymeggie Mon 09-Nov-09 15:48:24

First off, I'm not a medical advisor but I do A LOT of research b/f I make any big, rash decisions on anything! I am 7 months pregnant and have a 18 month old at home. That being said, I have been very skeptical on the whole swine flu vaccine and how it is important to pregnant women. I find it very disturbing how our medical advisors can issue these vaccines without giving us the facts behind them. What I mean is, everytime I ask questions, they seem to not know the answers but then turn around to ensure me that this shot is SAFE. Well, thats just not good enough for me!! So I listen to every brodcast, google everything possible, read every magazine and newspaper article until I'm blue in the face.....and still, nothing explains WHY this shot is so safe for pregnant women? So I've come across links in the US stating that doctors are only giving preservative free, pre-syringed shots to pregnant women as they say is the safest bet to the fetus's health. Preservative free means mercury free from the preservative Thimerosal. Thimerosal has 25mg of mercury. Basically, if you are advised to not eat fish and other things with high mercury, why would you inject yourself with a mercury perservative? Also Thimerosal has become illegal in the state of California, and soon to be other states following suit, b/c it leads to autism in children. Vaccines with mercury have been considered to contribute not only to autism but also learning disabilities, Alzheimer?s disease, and other neurological conditions, yet many clinics still use thimerosal because of the gradual phasing out of mercury products. (http://www.thimerosal-autism-symptoms.com/) Now, the other problem is the adjuvant Squalene. Squalene is an oily substance produced by your liver ? introducing squalene into the body via a ?vaccine? (which contains foreign substances to activate the immune system) can lead the body to consider ALL squalene bad. This can and does result in auto-immune diseases such as lupus, arthritis, and MS. Also Squalene (MF 59) was added to the anthrax vaccine. This vaccine caused tens of thousands of U.S. Iraq Desert Storm soldiers to suffer permanent neurological damage called ?Gulf War Illness.? Squalene (MF 59) enzyme is not approved for human consumption but waived for use in the H1N1 vaccine. (http://www.novaccine.com/vaccine-ingredients/results.asp?sc=27) The UK government bought two h1n1 vaccines.....the first one is the American company GlaxoSmithKline, who produce Pandemrix....the other is also American, Baxter, who produce Celvapan, a preservative free shot that doesn't contain any of the above. But funny enough, the government spent loads on Pandemrix b/c it was already made and happens to be cheaper to the Celvapan. And you can only receive the Celvapan if you have an egg allergy or suffer from certain medical problems that basically doesn't apply to pregnant women!

So bottom line is, I hope this gave you all a little insight on what they are trying to push into our bodies. I am not completely against the vaccines but I want to be able to have the choice of which one I want to protect me. Shame on the government for not giving us the true details of this vaccine and trying to use scare tactics to push us to have the shot. I am like every one of you out there who is nervous about having the shot but nervous about not getting one. I don't want to not be protected if it gets out of hand come flu season soon. But I think if they are saying pregnant women are priority, TOP Priority, then they should give the safest shot for us and our unborn child's wellbeing. And because of this lack of caring, I prob won't be receiving the h1n1 shot come this winter b/c I will NOT take Pandemrix!! Celvapan or nothing.

Musukebba Mon 09-Nov-09 17:57:24

Well I'm sorry you have come to that conclusion because it is based on poor evidence.

Apart from the factual mistakes about where squalene comes from, and that it is an "enzyme" hmm; the evidence about Gulf War syndrome is definitely not accepted as anything other than a likely laboratory artefact and only reported in a single paper. No-one can repeat the experiments and even some of the candidly anti-vaccination MNers here have suspicions about that particular association. However it is probably very exciting to spread round the internet as if something incredibly important has been discovered.

Re thiomersal: all US vaccines have had it removed because it is considered a theoretical risk: there is no evidence of an effect on neurological development and that's why it isn't contraindicated in the UK.

There are several benefits to having the GSK vaccine: one being that you get immunity within 14 days of being vaccinated with the single dose, whereas Celvapan takes 2 doses 3 weeks apart. The GSK vaccine has very good safety data based on the seasonal influenza vaccine and the earlier H5N1 vaccines.

Unfortunately it is difficult to properly 'research' the field because you will not have free access to all the relevant scientific and medical literature to help balance a judgement. To be honest you also need some scientific training in order to ask the right questions and be self-critical about what might be influencing you. So I appreciate the difficulty of having to trust healthcare professionals who may advise the government, but if we have to act quickly and safely to stop pregnant women dying from this infection then it would be helpful to try and get rid of the notion that we have a government that sets out to knowingly and deliberately harm its population.

GoldenGreen Mon 09-Nov-09 18:02:21

Have you really done a lot of research? because everything I have read in the last two weeks says the Gulf War syndrome link is simply untrue.

Beachcomber Mon 09-Nov-09 18:28:15

I don't have time to elaborate just now but I think the use of squalene is not a good idea.

Of course there is little published science to examine this issue and of course the US government states that there is no link with GWS. [No shit sherlock emoticon]

However the fact remains that the FDA did detect small amounts of squalene in some lots of vaccines soldiers were given (there is a published document on this from the FDA themselves) and the fact is that a study has detected high levels of squalene anti bodies in veterans with GWS. The same study detected no anti bodies in veterans who are not sick. Will post a couple of links late when I have time.

Repeated tests have shown that squalene injections can provoke auto immune disease in animals such as lupus and arthritis.

Those who state that squalene contaminated vaccines have no link with GWS unfortunately also have nothing better to say than that they do not know what GWS is or what causes it.

I fail to see how it is scientifically honest, logical or ethical to close off research in an area which shows some promise in understanding a previously unheard of condition whilst not only maintaining that that area is irrelevant but, even worse, failing to have any other biologicaly plausible avenue to follow.

So we don't know what is wrong with GWS suffers yet we seem to be able to categorically state what is not wrong with them.

Now where did I hear that before?

Very odd how the US government was falling over itself to assure everybody that they wouldn't dream of putting squalene in vaccines and now, a few years later, squalene adjuvanated vaccines are just dandy for pregnant women (even though this particular vaccine hasn't been tested on them).

Beachcomber Mon 09-Nov-09 18:29:54

GWS sufferers.

GoldenGreen Mon 09-Nov-09 18:31:53

thanks Beachcomber. Would like to see the links when you get a chance.

Elibean Mon 09-Nov-09 18:50:19

Also a bit tricky for those of us (most of us) who have no choice between the two. Both my dds, and dh, have just been vaccinated with Pandremix - they needed the vaccine, they are in 'at risk' groups, but there was no choice of which.

Now, I shall worry.

Elibean Mon 09-Nov-09 18:51:16

Not that I'm advocating holding back information so as not to cause worry, of course, just frustrating at this point.

Beachcomber Mon 09-Nov-09 18:56:16

Will do, am doing (supposed to be anyway!) dinner/bed/bath with my kids.

It seems a bit bleedin' obvious to me that if you do really need to vaccinate pregnant women (and that's a whole other debate) you would do it with the safest, least reactive, least adjuvanated vaccine possible to induce protection.

The idea that mercury was removed from most vaccines becuase of a 'theoretical risk' is NOT scientific.

Mercury was introduced into vaccines on the basis of virtually zero science to testify to its safety.

Anyone who thinks manufacturers are kind enough to go to the bother of removing it on the basis of a hippy dippy idea that it might, but most probably doesn't, cause harm is deluding themselves.

Mercury was removed because it finally dawned on people that it was utter madness to have it in vaccines and after a major study by the US government clearly showed that utter madness. That a huge amount bit of ass covering went on by claiming that they took if out as a precaution is only human.

As I've said before, they are struggling to get out vaccines even to those in the at risk group quickly before they get flu. Adjuvanted, multi-dose vials are by far the fastest way to get the vaccine out to those at risk.

Musukebba Mon 09-Nov-09 20:29:49

Beach: you and I plus some other MNers here have debated this before and my understanding was you also thought the paper showing a Western blot analysis of anti-squalene antibodies was somewhat less than convincing. Nobody in this thread has suggested that research in this area is "closed off"; just that any evidence has to be repeatable by other labs and indeed extended to suggest a mechanism. Don't forget you can buy squalene capsules derived from shark-oil as a health food and come in capsules of about 1 gram. It's fish oil rich in Omega-3; the same stuff held out to be a panacea for many of society's current ills.

BTW there is an alternative and biologically plausible explanation for Gulf War Syndrome - which anyway is a very loosely defined collection of symptoms and signs, and by no means accepted as a distinct entity yet - and that is that these personnel received very large doses of organo-phosphate systemic insecticides that are known to cause very similar kinds of effects in animals and humans.

Squalene is used as an adjuvant (called MF59) in Novartis seasonal influenza vaccines, which have been licenced and used in Europe for over ten years. The GSK adjuvant AS03 is pretty much the same thing and as I said has a very good safety record from the trials of H5N1 vaccine. The follow-up was for 6 months and extended to include autoimmune conditions that were well-defined and plausibly attributable.

Vaccines are never trialled on pregnant women for very obvious reasons. The Baxter one hasn't either, and has its theoretical risks also. So what do you do when faced with an infection where there is a definite higher mortality in pregnancy? Use the one which has more relevant safety data which includes women vaccinated at a time when they didn't know they were pregnant. A register is kept of these cases - none of which has shown any effect on the baby - and goes forward to inform the conclusion that the risk of swine flu in late pregnancy far outweigh the risk of the vaccine.

To the OP: one thing that would be extremely helpful in this debate, is the realisation that there are no "facts"; only events which have a probability attached.

Musukebba Mon 09-Nov-09 20:39:05

Elibean - hi don't worry... a sizeable proportion (1000+) of our hospital has been done and the most they've had is a sore arm! Better to have had it than the risk of SF.

Hi OYBBK: sorry for not replying before... and I can't find the thread! Did yours manage to get it yet?

Elibean Mon 09-Nov-09 20:58:12

Hello Musu smile

From that, I assume anything bad would have happened already? They were jabbed a couple of weeks ago, all fine...and as dh's asthma has kicked off today in reaction to a very slight cold, I'm glad he's done tbh.

Elibean Mon 09-Nov-09 20:58:35

'course, he's not pg afaik....

dd is booked in for next week. Hooray! I am very pleased, crossing all my fingers and toes that she remains germ free til then.

dh is going to phone about his tomorrow but I know that there are significantly more people in the at risk groups than there are doses of vaccine locally. I think that children are being done first. Not so worried about him as he tends to be more of an allergic asthmatic than a viral induced one (plus he is older!)

OP, irresponsible alarmist post hmm.

Other than that: biscuit

Beachcomber Mon 09-Nov-09 21:41:48

The study done into GWS and squalene anti bodies discovered that soldiers who had not been to the Gulf but who had GWS also showed high anti bodies to squalene.

Musukebba if you are aware of anything which documents that nondeployed veterans were exposed to organo phosphates I would be interested to see it. Thanks.

Abstract of the study from Pubmed

Additional study also from Pubmed

Interesting article from the lab which developed the test for squalene anti bodies

From above;

"The article published in February 2000 looked at 1990-1991-era patients instead of AVIP participants. This article included a blinded study which showed that anti squalene antibodies were found in 36 of 38 GWS patients who had been deployed to the Persian Gulf theater, in all 6 of the 6 GWS patients who had not been deployed to the Persian Gulf theater, and in none of the 12 control subjects who had been deployed but were not ill."

It just seems to me that there was the promising beginnings of a scientific avenue into GWS and it wasn't followed up. Indeed it was forcefully denied and thrown aside by the DoD in the US.

I'm not saying that squalene containing flu vaccines will have the same effect. No doubt a combination of factors will one day explain GWS. I'm just saying I think until this buried matter has been dug up and properly examined by impartial individuals, we would do well to be cautious of squalene adjuvants. Remember these things were illegal until not so very long ago.

I'm not convinced that we are in such a state of emergency that warrants throwing caution to the wind and pumping out vaccines as quickly as possible by any means possible.

I don't know much about the other squalene containing flu vaccines, I'll have a look.

Beachcomber Mon 09-Nov-09 21:54:09

Also squalene as an injected adjuvant in a vaccine and squalene in an edible fish oil are not the same thing at all in terms of how the body reacts and it is disingeneous to suggest otherwise.

Often people come up with this kind of argument with regards to mercury too.

Consuming a chemical is not the same as being injected with it. If it were then why aren't we being vaccinated with pills and not injections?

saltyseadog Mon 09-Nov-09 21:56:35

Ditto PacificDogwood

biscuit

mommymeggie Tue 10-Nov-09 00:46:04

Thimerosal is a dangerous and scientifically documented neurotoxin that has never been tested using modern safety standards. (2003 Congressional Report Mercury in Medicine) All manufactures inserts for the swine flu vaccine state, “Safety and effectiveness of Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine have not been established in pregnant women and nursing mothers.” This particular lot of swine flu vaccines does not contain the adjuvant squalene; however, several pharmaceutical companies are currently manufacturing H1N1 vaccine with the adjuvant and these may be released later this flu season. Rats injected with squalene develop the animal version of rheumatoid arthritis (adjuvant arthritis) and multiple sclerosis (experimental allergic encephalomyelitis or EAE. Injecting squalene into mice induces autoantibodies (antibodies against self) that are specific to systemic lupus erythematosus. There are over medical 30 studies that show these links. All seasonal influenza vaccines are classified by the FDA as a Category C, including all swine flu vaccines. Category C means Animal studies have shown an adverse effect and there are no adequate and well-controlled studies in pregnant women or no animal studies have been conducted and there are no adequate and well-controlled studies in pregnant women. "In 1976 the U.S. recommended nationwide vaccination against a suspected swine flu, with less than successful results, to say the least. Under orders from President Gerald Ford, a vaccine was rushed into production and administered to 45 million Americans, at a cost of $135 million. But within weeks, people started developing Guillain-Barré syndrome, a paralyzing immune-system disorder that can result from the vaccine. Some experts estimated the risk of Guillain-Barré as being seven times higher in those who were immunized vs. those who were not. After the immunization program was terminated nine months after it began, government officials paid $90 million in damages to patients who were injured by the vaccine. And the widely feared swine flu epidemic never emerged,“ Time Magazine April 29, 2009. The FDA released on October 1, 2009, the lot of H1N1 vaccines. Manufactures include sanofi pasteur, CSL Limted, GlaxoSmithKline, MedImmune and Novaritis. Some of the H1N1 vaccines contain as much as 25 mcg’s of mercury per dose. The specific brands that do not contain thimerosal are the MedImmune, LLC, intranasal spray, CSL Limted’s .5 ml single dose pre-filled syringe, and sanofi pasteur’s .25 ml, .50 ml, and the single dose .5 ml syringes. (Manufactures insert details as shown on the FDA’s website, www.fda.gov) Contradictions to receive the Influenza A (H1N1) vaccine include hypersensitivity to eggs, egg proteins, gelatin and concomitant aspirin therapy in children and adolescents. Immunocompromised persons should carefully way out the benefits and risks of the H1N1 vaccine according to the manufactures inserts. Studies show that fetus being exposed to thimerosal run a risk of mitochondrial dysfunction, degeneration and death. (D.A. Geier, P.G. King and M.R. Geier, Toxicological & Environmental Chemistry, Vol. 91, No.4, June 2009, 732-749) "Exposure to high levels of metallic, inorganic, or organic mercury can permanently damage the brain, kidneys, and developing fetus," (Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry states, ToxFAQ for Mercury, April 1999). FDA toxicologist, Dr. Mike Bolger, stated that "Methyl mercury easily crosses the placenta, and the mercury concentration rises to 30 percent higher in fetal red blood cells than in those of the mother. (FDA Consumer, September 1994). The adverse health effects of mercury on unborn children were observed in cases of accidental poisonings and in studies of individuals who ate large amounts of seafood, a common source of mercury.” A 50 pound child receiving two flu vaccines this season could be potentially receiving 20 times the EPA’s limit for ingested methyl-mercury if you are vaccinating with mercury containing vaccines. The EPA’s recommended maximum daily consumption of methyl-mercury from fish is 0.1mcg/kg/day to prevent health effects in the woman. As of September 18th, 2009, the FDA’s website lists the following vaccines as still containing full amounts of thimerosal (typically either 25mcg/.5ml dose or 12.5mcg/.25ml dose): • DT (Diphtheria/Tetanus) from Sanofi Pasteur • TT (Tetanus Toxoid) from Sanofi Pasteur • JE-VAX (Japanese Encephalitis) from Research Foundation for Microbial Diseases of Osaka University • Menomune (Meningitis) from Sanofi Pasteur in the multi-dose vials A recent primate study published in NeuroToxicology shows significant harm from a single dose of mercury containing vaccine to newborns. A research team led by scientists from the University of Pittsburgh and Thoughtful House conducted a primate study which showed significant damage to newborns receiving at birth the hepatitis B vaccine that included an ethyl mercury preservative. It caused significant delays in the development of several survival reflexes in male rhesus macaque monkeys. (NeuroToxicology, 2 October 2009, Laura Hewitson, Lisa A. Houser, Carol Stott, Gene Sackett, Jaime L. Tomko, David Atwood, Lisa Blue, E. Railey White and Andrew J. Wakefield) The new swine influenza is mild for most people even though a small number have developed complications and died. Yes, pregnant women are more at risk of getting this flu. I would suggest getting your Vitamin D levels tested and increase your Vitamin D intake to help protect you from the swine flu. Of the 28 women who died of complications relating to the swine flu we have no other information about their health. Where they immune compromised? Did they have other related illnesses? These facts haven't been released. The swine flu vaccine has been tested for only a few weeks on a few thousand healthy children and adults, including very few pregnant women. We don't know how safe it really is for pregnant women or children and adults with chronic illness even though they are being specially targeted for vaccination by government health officials. There is very little information about how safe it is to combine the swine flu vaccine with other vaccines, including seasonal influenza vaccine. Find out the facts, educate yourself and make an informed decision.

And......

For all the Health Care Professionals that are recommending the swine flu and the seasonal flu vaccine:
It is a fact that the swine flu proposes a higher threat to pregnant women. Nobody wants anyone to die from this flu. Nobody wants any pregnant woman to die nor have their unborn child hurt by this disease. However, how do we know the swine flu shot won't hurt these unborn babies? Publish the studies that show it is safe if you believe this to be the case. SHOW US THE SCIENCE! Your words and your status are not enough. We have heard this before and we want to see the facts.

How in the world could you recommend an vaccine that manufacture's inserts state the safety hasn't been proven? Since when did your word get to ride above their warnings? Are you going to be there for the women when they miscarry or their child is born damaged b/c of this vaccine?

I rest my case!!

mommymeggie Tue 10-Nov-09 01:51:29

Oh, and by the way....

Musukebba.....you seem like a complete tool! How in the world can you say TRUST the healthcare advisors? Do we really need to go there? They are that much up in the air as we are. I understand by your statement "in my hospital" that you are a healthcare professional but with all do respect, that means sqwat! I have spoken to numerous persons in the heathcare profession, and they all seem questionable themselves as to what information they should give to a pregnant woman other than we are priority. In fact, one of my midwives asked me what I knew about it. Sad really! But that just shows how little info is circulating around and how fast the government, the World, is pushing this thing.

As for the poor evidence on my conclusion, your right, it is difficult to properly 'research' the field because I will not have free access to all the relevant scientific and medical literature to help balance a judgement. But guess what?! There are people out there that do! And that is where I get my information from. And I don't need scientific training in order to ask the right questions. Its called common sense. I personally think by your comments that you are miss informed on a lot of issues and need to go back to your medical textbooks and study a bit more. I'm sure you have access, right?!

Might I add, thanks to Beachcomber for the post on additional facts to squalene.

Beachcomber Tue 10-Nov-09 08:05:15

Mommymeggie can I suggest a coupla things to you?

Could you try to break your text up a bit with paragraphs and so on as it would make it a lot easier to read and take in information. Also if you quote from a document it is generally a good idea to link to it as well as reference it.

I understand that you care a lot about this but try not to get personal with other posters. You may not agree with Musukebba but that doesn't justify calling her names.

In fact very often I don't agree with Musukebba but if you check out some of her posts you will see that she is very well informed and has lots of interesting points to make.

Otherwise you will put people off from exchanging with you. Vaccination is a difficult, contentious and emotive topic.

I agree with you with regards to mercury. It doesn't need to be in vaccines and it has no place in vaccines for children and preganant women. If grown adults are happy with it in their vaccines after having informed themselves then that is their look out.

TheFoosa Tue 10-Nov-09 08:10:38

Musukebba I think I love you, the first reasoned post on vaccinations I have ever read on MN

here, have i biscuit

Beachcomber Tue 10-Nov-09 08:11:09

BTW Musukebba I don't remeber exchanging with you before about squalene on MN. Could you link to the thread if you can remember what is was please? Cheers.

My memory gets worse with each child I have, must be the anti-D. grin.

(I'm joking but I do sometimes wonder.)

TheFoosa Tue 10-Nov-09 08:11:20

have A biscuit <this is why I don't post alot illiterate fool>

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now