Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think 'flu jab for all primary school children is not necessary

71 replies

Enb76 · 23/09/2015 10:39

I am entirely conflicted and am hoping that some answers can get this sorted in my head.

I am not anti-vaccine. My child has had all their vaccinations and I think that herd immunity is really important but... she came home with a letter yesterday saying that all Y2 children are being offered the flu jab. Really, do we need to vaccinate against ordinary 'flu? I have only ever had flu once, and yes, it is completely debilitating and probably quite dangerous for those in 'at risk' groups but for your average healthy 6/7 year old? While I'm not anti-vaccination I am not entirely sure that we need to vaccinate against everything, especially things like flu for which you need a new vaccination every year.

I am conflicted because I think that in general, if you are offered vaccinations for something you should take them because herd immunity is the best protection, on the other hand I think this is an entirely pointless vaccine that neither protects from all influenza strains, nor is completely effective.

OP posts:
MsMarthaMay · 23/09/2015 10:42

It's not just about stopping the kids from getting ill though, it's about stopping it spreading to those who are more vulnerable like the very young, the elderly and those with compromised immune systems.

TattyDevine · 23/09/2015 10:42

You may be right. When I was at school a girl died from flu. She was possibly asthmatic, though I can't remember exactly. We were so shocked though, and if her parents hadn't vaccinated her when they could have of course they would have regretted it.

Whether that's a reason or not...when I get a letter calling them for a vaccine I just go with it. YANBU for pondering this and you may well have a point.

TattyDevine · 23/09/2015 10:44

MsMarthaMay has a good point...if someone is having chemo or very old it just might finish them off, and children are buggers for spreading their germs about. Fingers in noses, talking at you 10cm away from your face where they end up spitting in your eye because they have 3 teeth missing and haven't got used to it etc Grin

Gottagetmoving · 23/09/2015 10:45

I agree with you. For a healthy child I think the vaccine is a waste of time. Personally I believe we have to contract some illnesses and get over them to build a strong immune system, but I suppose it is good if a child has asthma or some other condition which would mean having the flu was very dangerous.
Of course if you don't have it done and then your child is really ill with flu I think you would feel awful. Personally though, I wouldn't have it for my child unless specifically advised to.

Original poster
Enb76 · 23/09/2015 10:45

MsMarthaMay

Absolutely - and they should definitely have the vaccine. I had no such qualms about the Swine flu jab, my daughter had that with no hesitation on my part.

OP posts:
SellFridges · 23/09/2015 10:46

I don't think it's necessarily aimed at stopping them getting flu, it's to stop them passing it around so much iyswim.

ShowOfHands · 23/09/2015 10:49

DS had it last year and iirc, it turned out to be very ineffective indeed.

I did um and aah about it but my decision in the end was based on the fact that he did have a common cold virus as a small child and ended up with double pneumonia. He was very ill and we still don't really know how much effect the scarring on his lungs has on his susceptibility to illness. We also have a family member who is very vulnerable to infection through age and infirmity and one going through chemo so we did opt for the vaccine and will do so again this year.

howabout · 23/09/2015 10:50

Interesting that in the US the vaccine is aimed at vaccinating adults through their employer insurance with the aim of protecting the "vulnerable" being their DC. Also hopefully saves employers a lot of sick days.

I have no idea but I do feel conflicted about the drive to give more and more vaccines to DC when they are of limited effectiveness and benefit to them directly or indeed the wider population.

CPtart · 23/09/2015 10:50

I'm a practice nurse who administers the flu vaccine to all eligible groups. I refuse to vaccinate my healthy school age children, largely to protect vulnerable groups of whom the vast majority are able to have the vaccine themselves but many many (particularly the elderly) refuse.

schokolade · 23/09/2015 10:50

What is the disadvantage of getting the vaccine?

MinecraftWonder · 23/09/2015 10:54

My Doctors had a scheme a while back for all dc between 3 and 5 to have a flu jab - ds2 was offered it, ds1 was a tad too old.

I did consider it, but didn't take ds2 for it. My dc have had all their vaccinations, but I also don't want to give them treatments for the sake of it, especially those that only last a year.

Slightly different but it's the same reason that I declined my consent for the school to paint fluoride stuff on their teeth. Their teeth are beautiful and we look after them well - I don't see why it's necessary (although they were pretty much the only kids in the class to not have it done so i'm clearly in the minority).

Original poster
Enb76 · 23/09/2015 10:54

SellFridges

Yes, children are vectors for disease. I do see that herd immunity is an unequivocal good thing. I'm just conflicted about this jab - this is every year, potentially. The flu virus mutates so quickly that it has to be a new vaccine every year. On balance though, I think I will probably tick the 'yes, immunise my child' box.

OP posts:
TheBunnyOfDoom · 23/09/2015 11:04

Flu is horrendous, I wouldn't want to put my six year old through it when I could prevent it. I get it only protects against a certain strain, but protecting agains that is better than nothing.

I'm probably a bit bias because a friend of mine died of flu when we were 14. She didn't have any underlying illness, she just got really, really sick and developed pneumonia and died as a result. It was horrible and I would want to do anything possible to prevent my child getting flu after seeing that.

Original poster
Enb76 · 23/09/2015 11:05

However (see how conflicted I am), maybe I'll tick 'no' after all. I'm sort of a bit cross, because I do see this as unnecessary. I feel tricked into this because on the whole I'm so pro-vaccination that it would leave a bitter taste in my mouth to say no but I'm not sure it's the right thing to do. Not that the vaccine is unsafe, I'm sure it isn't, but I feel tricked that by being generally pro-vaccine I have to be pro- all vaccines and we are vaccinating against more and more things.

OP posts:
schokolade · 23/09/2015 11:10

Why is that bad though? The more things we can vaccinate against the better...

LisbethSalandersLaptop · 23/09/2015 11:10

I do not think this is about stopping children from getting ill, it is about Big Pharma and making huge amounts of money. A bit like the experimental HPV vaccine they are pushing on our daughters.
Why don't schools just concentrate on teaching?

Original poster
Enb76 · 23/09/2015 11:16

The more things we can vaccinate against the better...

The problem with that is that virus' like to survive too, so they mutate and it's a battle to keep up with the rate of change, we see it especially in influenza. Like antibiotics, if they had been used less often then the rate at which bacteria became immune to them would have been less rapid. We don't know the unintended consequences of trying to vaccinate against everything, I pretty sure that there will be some. Of course, the future may be entirely benign in this regard but I don't know.

OP posts:
OddBoots · 23/09/2015 11:16

The schools aren't pushing any vaccines, it is the health service using the school has the most cost efficient way to vaccinate people of a particular age.

It was thought that last year's flu jab wasn't very effective but the more recent studies show that while it wasn't as good as previous years it still did a good job.

I have just had my flu jab and was told at the time that this year's jab contains swine flu too as the studies show that to be on the rise, I am not sure if children who had the jab a few years back will still be covered for that now but it's something worth checking before you decide yes or no.

TheBunnyOfDoom · 23/09/2015 11:20

Schools aren't pushing anything, it's just the easiest way for children to get it done.

LisbethSalandersLaptop · 23/09/2015 11:22

yes well IMO it all experiemental anyway. If I wanted my children to be guinea pigs I would have bought them a hutch and bale of hay.

LisbethSalandersLaptop · 23/09/2015 11:22

"experimental obvs

AuntieStella · 23/09/2015 11:22

I thought last year's flu jab was very effective against the strains that were in it, but it wasn't a good vaccine because the predictions of which would be the dominant strains were wrong. And that was unusual because usually they get it right.

Some strains of flu do kill the young and healthy. Or give a long and miserable illness (the time I had full on flu it took three weeks). My DC have never been the right age to qualify for the NHS programmes, and I haven't bought the jab for them privately. But if they were offered it on NHS, I'd say yes.

ChunkyPickle · 23/09/2015 11:23

Personally I don't bother with flu vaccines - I've never had the flu, even when all around me are dropping like flies (the one time I thought I had it, it turned out to be Glandular Fever instead) - plus it's only their guess at what will be the most widespread strain by the time flu season comes round.

However, my kids have the nasal spray, and my DP has a jab normally - just because I don't think it'll do any harm, and may well help. If I found myself in Boots while DP was getting his done, I might pay my tenner and get it too, but I wouldn't go out of my way to.

Bottlecap · 23/09/2015 11:26

The more things we can vaccinate against the better...

The problem with that is that virus' like to survive too, so they mutate and it's a battle to keep up with the rate of change, we see it especially in influenza. Like antibiotics, if they had been used less often then the rate at which bacteria became immune to them would have been less rapid. We don't know the unintended consequences of trying to vaccinate against everything, I pretty sure that there will be some. Of course, the future may be entirely benign in this regard but I don't know.

I believe that the opposite is true - the more widespread a virus, the more it mutates. Vaccines slow the rate of mutation.

Happy to be corrected.

TheOddity · 23/09/2015 11:29

I do agree that the NHS should be doing a lot more to ensure all vulnerable groups are protected with the vaccination before giving it to healthy children. Only thing I am wondering is I guess babies are one of the most vulnerable groups and actually I was thinking to maybe take my three year old out of school for a few weeks once my second one is born for this reason.

Swipe left for the next trending thread