Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To not vaccinate my child with BCG?

219 replies

SandyBabyToes · 24/01/2018 12:53

I say this because SIL lives 5 minutes down the road and her area are completely exempt from it Confused

I asked one of my local health professionals why we were in the catchment area for it and he said it was to do with a lot of immigration control, hence the vaccine being offered.

But, we don't go to that side of our town (it's a big town), and we don't mix in that area (it's not a short way away).

And even if we did and that slight chance would be the reason for it, why doesn't SIL's area get offered it when she's literally in spitting distance.

Taking all this into account, I'm not really comfortable with my DC having it. It's not a nice vaccine to have and often leaves a scar

OP posts:
spidey66 · 24/01/2018 15:01

My scar is so unnoticeable I have to look for it. I think it's more noticeable on black or Asian, but I'm very fair.

Even if you're black or Asian, the scar's a ridiculous reason to refuse it.

bonnymnemonic · 24/01/2018 15:02

I live in London and my DD was offered a BCG immediately after birth. I declined. My sister's children were not offered, despite living a couple of miles away in neighbouring borough of London.

I declined due to similar assessment of my DD's risk as Empire provides. The NHS is not offering it because there is a high risk of contracting it in public within areas with higher migration, it's because those with family from high risk countries are more likely to experience prolonged contact with someone who could be carrying the disease, such as when Grandparents visit from overseas for several weeks.

There is also a link to deprivation and poverty. It would be discriminatory for the NHS to decide who is offered the vaccination based on this though (not to mention it could be difficult to identify) so they offer it to all babies born in particular hospitals, in areas with higher levels of migration from certain high risk countries, knowing that for some babies, it is extremely unlikely to be needed, but that it could make a big difference to others.

ReggaetonLente · 24/01/2018 15:05

Except that it will have worn off by then.

Really? When I used to travel for work (international development) I was told i didn't need to have it, as I'd been vaccinated as a teenager. My colleague hadn't, and so had to be vaccinated. Work paid, but I think it would have cost her about £50 out of her own pocket.

How long does it take to wear off?

TheDisillusionedAnarchist · 24/01/2018 15:10

It doesn't protect you from respiratory TB so WHO have declared it pointless for anyone beyond early childhood. So any of us posting here have NO protection fromTB regardless of whether we had BCG or not nor do our children if much older than five.

Efficacy of BCG in studies varies from 0% to around 67% it is at best a very ineffective vaccine. NHS England is a good source of info.

dementedpixie · 24/01/2018 15:10

Googling suggests it lasts 18 years. It isn't as effective in adults

dementedpixie · 24/01/2018 15:12

Sorry 15 years not 18

gobbin · 24/01/2018 15:17

DS had to prove immunity from a range of diseases, including TB, before he could start his Radiography degree. He just needed a tetanus top up as he’d had the TB jab at 13.

ReggaetonLente · 24/01/2018 15:18

Thanks both. I did have it less than 15 years ago, maybe that's why. Surprised at how ineffective it is - will read up more.

EmpireVille · 24/01/2018 15:19

Doesn't really matter if you take offense or not. What you said was offensive - be an adult about it.

This sort of pc treading on eggshells is precisely why it's given to all babies in those boroughs - even the ones who are never going to catch it. They don't want to be seen to discrimate and label people as being from at risk backgrounds so they blanket vaccinate.

The kids with no links to south east Asia who don't live in cramped conditions with poor ventilation with adults who have TB get the vaccine completely needlessly.

Then everyone says how thrilled they are to have been offered it - win win - it's quite absurd. But hey ho, no harm done I suppose.

Just let's be accurate about this and not pretend there is any risk whatsoever of catching this at nursery or on a bloody bus!

RolyRocks · 24/01/2018 15:23

It doesn't protect you from respiratory TB so WHO have declared it pointless for anyone beyond early childhood.

It does, but it is less effective (taken from the NHS England website).

However, to protect against TB meningitis, which the replacement BCG vaccine does (due to the worldwide shortage of the more common BCG), it is a win win scenario to protect babies.

RolyRocks · 24/01/2018 15:26

Just let's be accurate about this

And how are you being accurate? Sources? Evidence? You keep talking about doing your research to the OP but then don't really talk about anything concrete apart from you deciding you didn't want your baby to have a scar/scab and/or this conspiracy theory that the NHS are just trying to be politically correct. Hmm

taskmaster · 24/01/2018 15:26

I'm confident they're not at risk

How very silly of you. You have no idea if they are at risk.

quilpie · 24/01/2018 15:30

I thought they did them on the foot to stop the scars showing?

My postcode didn't offer it, low risk I was told. Whether that was a money thing or what, I don't know.

Is there a website that shows you which regions offer it and which don't. I can't find one which is odd. The nhs info just says "ask your hv".

TheDisillusionedAnarchist · 24/01/2018 15:33

Agreed. I give it to babies but is important to be clear about what it is for. Too many people think it is effective against respiratory TB and have never heard of tubercular meningitis. It is also important to be honest about risk.

As an example my non nursery attending white British child with no relatives visiting from high risk countries nor travelling to high risk countries is very low risk despite living in a high risk London borough. In my circumstances it would be reasonable to decline (we didn't we were just in the cohort who missed out)

EmpireVille · 24/01/2018 15:35

Rolyrocks I have posted copious amounts of evidence and sources. Read the thread.

TheDisillusionedAnarchist · 24/01/2018 15:35

It was NHS England training which convinced me not to pursue BCG vaccination for my son

EmpireVille · 24/01/2018 15:37

taskmaster have you read my posts? I have every idea, thank you. It's not a conspiracy, it's very easy to find out that you are not at risk.

DottyS · 24/01/2018 15:39

I caught it - white and not living in cramped or squalid conditions - no underlying health issues.

So slight flaw to your argument. Oxford is carrying massive research into this subject and it is not as black and white as we would like.

I just take great exception to anyone making ignorant comments on immigration in terms of colour.

EmpireVille · 24/01/2018 15:40

*Just let's be accurate about this

And how are you being accurate? Sources? Evidence? You keep talking about doing your research to the OP but then don't really talk about anything concrete apart from you deciding you didn't want your baby to have a scar/scab and/or this conspiracy theory that the NHS are just trying to be politically correct.*

You need to read my posts. I said the scar/scan was NOT a primary reason to decline.

I have posted entire passages of information from London.gov.uk to explain my decision, lots of concrete stuff for you.

Don't enter into a debate if you're only going to read the OP and then skim a few responses.

EmpireVille · 24/01/2018 15:41

And how are you being accurate? Sources? Evidence? You keep talking about doing your research to the OP but then don't really talk about anything concrete apart from you deciding you didn't want your baby to have a scar/scab and/or this conspiracy theory that the NHS are just trying to be politically correct.

You need to read my posts. I said the scar/scan was NOT a primary reason to decline.

I have posted entire passages of information from London.gov.uk to explain my decision, lots of concrete stuff for you.

Don't enter into a debate if you're only going to read the OP and then skim a few responses.

taskmaster · 24/01/2018 15:42

It's not actually Empire. All you can find out is your statistical risk, which is not at all the same thing.

RolyRocks · 24/01/2018 15:54

I am reading your posts Empire

your wrote:

It's hard to catch TB.

I'm confident they're not at risk.

Sorry, to clarify I mean hard to catch unless you are in very close quarters to someone with it.

Don't bother OP. It's not necessary. Some people adore vaccines and will line up for everything going and that's fine for them. I make my own decisions. Read up on TB and how it spreads. Your children are most likely not at risk.

The majority of people exposed to TB will either fight the bacteria off, or will carry it within their bodies without getting sick and without becoming infectious. This is known as latent TB infection. Most people who get TB have had a prolonged exposure to an infectious person – usually someone in the same household. TB cannot be caught through everyday travel on the bus or Tube, or through spitting.

1.3 The people who are most at risk of developing active TB disease are people whose immune systems have been weakened.....

1.5 There is a clear link between TB and migration.

Shall I tell you why they vaccinate all babies in boroughs with high immigration from India, Pakistan and Somalia? They don't want to stigmatise families from those countries who are living in poverty. TB is considered to be a disease of poverty.

I'm not saying anything outrageous here. Don't take what I'm saying to be in some way racist. It's a simple fact. Cramped conditions and poor health is how TB spreads.

Well, it's a decision for you. When I had my first child we lived in a London borough that offered the vaccination. I turned it down. I felt it was the one vaccine where the decision could be personal and I felt no obligation to vaccinate for herd immunity etc I did the research and felt (still feel) entirely fine about it. Do your research

I recall the other babies in my nct group who did have the vaccine all, without exception, had nasty wounds that took a long time to heal. This would not be my primary reason to refuse it - obviously! But I felt it was a needless thing to do.

^This sort of pc treading on eggshells is precisely why it's given to all babies in those boroughs - even the ones who are never going to catch it. They don't want to be seen to discrimate and label people as being from at risk backgrounds so they blanket vaccinate.

The kids with no links to south east Asia who don't live in cramped conditions with poor ventilation with adults who have TB get the vaccine completely needlessly. Then everyone says how thrilled they are to have been offered it - win win - it's quite absurd. But hey ho, no harm done I suppose. Just let's be accurate about this and not pretend there is any risk whatsoever of catching this at nursery or on a bloody bus!^

So please, where is this detailed evidence-based research that you have done when you were deciding on the vaccine yourself that means the OP should not take up the offer in her NHS primary care trust to have the InterVax brand of vaccine?
All I can see are some opinions of yours, mixed in with a couple of paragraphs taken from a .gov.uk website on catching/spreading of TB. Yes - there is a direct link with migration and TB but why does that negate the possibility of infection with the OP, apart from blatant NIMBYism?

Notonthestairs · 24/01/2018 16:09

Putting aside high risk areas with low risk children and SIL's what are the negatives in having the jab aside from a scar?

meandmytinfoilhat · 24/01/2018 16:39

I got the BCG in secondary school. No scar.

To be honest, if they're offering it then I would take it. They don't even offer to HCPs.

EmpireVille · 24/01/2018 16:46

It's hard to discuss vaccinations because people tend to assume you are criticising them if you disagree and they then passionately argue their corner without anything useful to offer beyond cliches.

I did a lot of research. I'm not going to waste time looking it all up again years after the fact and posting here.

I decided not to have it. I'm totally fine with my choice. We make our own. I'm not aware of any risk to having it needlessly.

Please create an account

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

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread