to consider not immunizing ds against swine 'flu?

[deliakate]

And can we do a poll - who is and who isn't and what are the ages of your dcs?

Sorry, Yes I agree.

The reason you have mentioned above is the reason why I am not vaccinating, my ds1 has had the vaccine, but ds2 will not be having the vaccine, as it has not been trialled on children who have existing medical problems so NONE evidence to be shown or even to consider about the pros and cons of the vaccine in regard to a child who already has problems, and considered swine flu is influenza of the chest, it a very hard and difficult decision to ultimately make, when one child had had it.

Even when talking to health professionals (and being told the trial on healthy child had to be done, to get the right results and not scare people not to get it done ) and all you get it NHS protocol on the vaccine, I dont want protocol I want unbiased information from both sides not just one.

Sassybeast, that's key, isn't it? Looking at the risks specific to your own children.

I think in this instance you can be as informed as you like and still not be sure you've done the right or wrong thing, there's just no way of knowing.

Exactly - times like this I actually wish 'I' was the kid and someone else could be in charge of making the decisions!

What I find interesting about the way we interpret the potential risks posed by SF is that it's all relative.

For example, it's quite probable that there's a far higher likelihood of dying in a car accident than dying from SF complications (or even getting SF complications - the numbers are very low and many, many people have had the illness without it being officially registered). Yet how many of us refuse to get into a car because of the risk of death? We all say car travel is broadly safe because the risk of death is low, yet because we're fed all the dramatic headlines about the risk of death from SF, which is also low, we absorb the panic factor more readily than the statistical facts.

Also we may tell ourselves that we have some element of control over what happens to our cars - well, I certainly exerted a great deal of control over SF bugs while pregnant, using no medicines, and banished the bugs from my body, leaving me with the mildest of symptoms.

Ultimately you have to decide for yourself and your family which course of action you're happy to take, and NOT judge those who make the opposite decision (as I have seen on this thread). But it is interesting that we assess similar risks in such different ways, isn't it?

The number of new cases are falling now so the chances of catching it are probably lower than earlier this winter, but a similar virus is likely to be circulating next winter.

So on balance, if DS hadn't yet had the vaccine, I would probably still give it to him.

i find it interesting to note that tamiflu and relenza were stockpiled for SARS and are nearing their best before date.

flock - new cases have fallen due to the cold snap, but it's still possible (probable, even) that they will rise again as the weather warms up, i.e. before next winter.

Will it be the same strain, though, SpeedyGonzalez? I'm not so sure.

I don't believe they will rise much, if at all in the northern hemisphere based on the data I have seen.

misssurrey - who knows? Already some new strains are emerging and making the vaccinations redundant. And also, many of us already have immunity (or a near-immunity, which means once exposed to the first shot of vaccine or to the bug itself our bodies react quickly to destroy the disease) so it could be argued that there are several factors making the vaccine redundant.

flock - what data is that? Are you referring to the current bout of SF, because the whole northern hemisphere is still very much in the throes of the cold snap and will continue to be so for several more months.

gaelicsheep, deafness is a potential known side-effect of the vaccine. I hate to admit it as I'm pro-vaccination and think it will be used as another argument against.

I'm an NHS worker and as I've said before had the vaccine (I'm pregnant) as did my 3 yr old.

One of the consultants at work has lost some of his hearing following the vaccine but as he said it's not all and the loss would have been been alot worse had he contracted swine flu itself. (He'd already lost some hearing following flu about 10 years ago.) He would have the vaccine again knowing what he does now as he feels the benefits still outweigh the risks.

I have access to proprietary northern hemisphere data generated as recently as Monday. Can't say more, sorry.

Oh, my neighbour lost her hearing after a nasty bout of swine flu. So maybe SF also causes loss of hearing in some people....

What exactly is in the vaccine that scares people?

Genuine question.

I will be vaccinated (pregnant), and my kids because I think SF is worse than a vaccine which doesn't even have a live virus in it.

The vaccine is based on the normal flu vaccine and AFAIK there are no long-term problems with that vaccine.

This is from the BBC

What is the evidence it is safe?

There are two vaccines against swine flu - Pandemrix made by GlaxoSmithKline and Celvapan made by Baxter.

The European Medicines Agency, the official regulator that licenses treatments, approved both vaccines after thousands of people, including children, took part in trials.

The regulator concluded the jabs were safe and effective.
The most common side-effects reported during the trial process were minor ones - headaches, joint pain, muscle pain, fever and fatigue.

The trial and approval process has been quick - the first trials started during the summer.

But this fast-tracking is not unusual for flu, as it happens for the seasonal version every year.

What people are scared of is the unknown mainly. The immediate side effects of getting the vaccine itself (defness, guilliane barre syndrome, seizures, bout of the flu) and the potential future side effects (who knows what these could be? As it has not been tested over a lengthy period, so we just don't know what the effects could be)

I think that the risk of getting SF no outweighs the slight risk of future complications - I know some people won't agree with me but wouldn't you rather give you child a life now?

My nephew had SF before xmas and before the vaccines were available for under 5's - he had it really badly and was hospitalised - since then he's had every illness doing the rounds, most recently chicken pox which has now turned into pneumonia I found out this afternoon. He is 2. Maybe if he'd had the vaccine he wouldn't have caught SF and then his immune system might have been able to deal with these other things better.

IMO we takes risks every day by what we eat and use so I don't understand why this is any different.

DS1 (3) and D2 (10 months) will not be having it. Swine flu is milder than seasonal flu and we don't normally vaccinate against that. Yes, swine flu has been putting children in hospital but so does seasonal flu and tbh, if you look at the figures for hospitalisations in comparison to the total number of cases, it really is a very very small percentage and an even smaller fatality rate - 0.02% iirc so 99.98% of people who catch swine flu make a full recovery - hardly terrifying statistics

A bit too much hype and scaremongering over the whole thing imo - not sure why everyone is still stressing about it now that we're coming out of flu season and the case numbers just keep falling...

Upandrunning and maxybrown - I have not "bought the T-shirt" as you so crudely put it. I am merely trying to balance the argument by injecting a little common sense and perspective amidst the Chinese whispers.

I accept that deafness is a known rare side effect of the vaccine. But there are many other causes of deafness as well and it is almost impossible to prove cause and effect in these cases.

Hardly anyone has answered my repeated questions about what exactly they think the long term risks are. Nobody has answered my question about their views on the new pneumococcal disease vaccine. The reason? People have no reasoned answers to give IMO.

Well said gaelicsheep.

Obviously this is a very personal decision and everyone must make the decision they think is right for their family - but I get thoroughly pissed off by the constant inference on these threads that if you do something that is recommended by health professionals then you are obviously not trying hard enough / don't care enough to research your own thesis.

Thanks fruitstick.

I am also getting increasingly pissed off by this thread and others like it. I have spent hours and hours researching this issue - as a pregnant woman and a mother I am no less concerned about this than anyone else, and I resent any inference otherwise. However, I also do my highly qualifed and hard-working GP the courtesy of listening to her professional advice.

I seriously pity the GPs and other health professionals who have to work in this country. I didn't realise until now that there were so many qualifed yet non-practising clinicians and immunologists in the UK.

I got the figures from the NHS website - I find it very strange that they'll admit themselves that it's a milder pandemic than previous ones have been and that it is much less lethal than expected - even less than seasonal flu and then there is still this push to get vaccinated. Perhaps because there's a huge pile of vaccines that will be wasted otherwise? Perhaps because there was a big push back in March 2009 to get more people vaccinated against flu? Well it's clearly worked!

upandrunning: You might be interested in the article I just found in New Scientist here which also trots out the patronising coincidence argument.

I couldn't read past "the anti-vaccine brigade".

What an offensive way to refer to people who were not anti-vaccine at all until their child was vaccine damaged.

Don't worry I've read plenty of other crap along the same lines.

But you also infer that non vaccinators have NOT made an informed choice. The thing is, no mater what happens that "coincidence line" is the one that is always given, so that also comes across as "crude", it works both ways. And for the parents that have been told that when their child is dead/damaged after vaccine is devestating. Some have managed to be given compensation from the vaccine damaged pot policy (yes there is one) wher it has been confirmed that these children suffered under the vaccines. I have done thorough research into vaccines for my son, I have been to see the man in charge of vaccines in my area, discussed it with nurses, doctors etc. It was not made lightly. I do not laugh at your decisions in the slightest, I was just stating my experience that is all. I would never laugh in the face of others decisions, only you can make an informed choice foy YOUR children, as only I can for mine.

As stated before there are many religious reasons why people do not vaccinate also, because of content and how they are made. Those too are a very personal decision.

I do not usually comment on threads like this. People always need hard hats, but I am 100% happy with MY personal decision.