have an appointment to give DS2 (22wks) BCG. Not convinced...

[bohemianbint]

the leaflet seems to indicate that there are hardly any cases of TG nationally each year, and whilst we do live in a city I'm not sure the risk is that great and we're looking into moving anyway...

I know it's only offered to kids in certain areas, I'm just not that keen - am I way off the mark? DS1 had it, but on reflection I'm not sure DS2 really needs it...

I was offered it for DS on day 1. I refused it. TBH I would still refuse it now, he is 13.5 mo. I remember mine - it took ages to heal and was pustular and unpleasant for a long time - he is not exposed to TB, I can't see the need for it at his age.

but it's your choice - it has to be.

thanks - my instinct is to refuse, but I just wanted to check I wasn't just being reactionary!

My dd had it at about 3 weeks as we were in high TB area. DD2 hasn't had it as we moved. Think I would have it done, dd1 had no side effects and it healed quickly, although it was horrible actually watching it and holding her little arm down for it.

I'd have ds BCG'd as soon as possible if only it were offered round here. TB is VERY nasty and VERY contagious and the drug regime if you are exposed is VERY tough.

Feel quite irritated by the NHS reasoning that because we live in the commuter belt, our children don't need protection. Especially as we are only a few miles from London in one direction and really close to a city in the other with lots of severe poverty and a high proportion of recent immigrants from countries where TB is endemic. Just because my town is relatively affluent doesn't mean people will never ever come into contact with a case of TB!

hmmm. 7000 new cases a year. That's a fair few, isn't it?

Do you know what the age limit for the vaccination is?

Ds1 had it at birth (Essex - not standard then and I had to request it in the hospital). Ds2 had it in the community (London) within first 2 months I think.

Ds3 is now 6 months. I have delayed his routine vaccinations so turned down the BCG appointment when it came through. I was wondering if it is now too late.

I mean - it really is. Just realised that face might look a bit sarky. Not meant to!

IlanaK - I doubt there is any kind of age limit on the BCG as it used to be routinely given at age 14/15.

It's all a conspiracy, they just want to force you to jab your child with a needle for the fun of it.

All mine had it as we are a high-TB inner city area. As vaccines go, it's not too bad.

my ds had it aged 2 weeks as dad is asian
it took forever to heal
was full of pus
had antibotics for it

Why are you against the idea? You are only offered it if you live in an area with higher than usual rates of infection. A quick pinprick that may get sore and pussy (my son's didn't...mine didn't...) - or TB? I find some attitudes to immunisation barmy quite frankly.

not a conspiracy at all. But the bcg jab is not one of the most effective ones, talking to a friend of mine who does research into epidemiology. not one i would have, personally.

I would have it
We live less than 200m from the next borough - they get the vax, we don't

I never said I was against it! I just wanted to explore the issue rather than mindlessly jabbing DS with anything without stopping to question how necessary it is.

Am not sure where we are is that high risk, and as I say, we're moving out of the city anyway.

Ruty - it's not effective?

my kids both had it at birth as my bil got tb, he lives slightly closer to heathrow than us, he had it very mildly but it has affected his health- i was shocked he could catch it

BCG has about 60-70% effectiveness if I remember correctly. Tis not that effective a vacc. But if you spend much time in a high TB area at risk of being coughed/sneezed on, then I'd probably go for it anyway. As edam said, the drug regime for treatment is tough.

bit of info here
bcg

From "The Green Book", NHS immunisation 'bible'.

Studies of the effectiveness of BCG vaccine have given widely varying results,
between countries and between studies, ranging from no protection to 70 to
80% protection in UK schoolchildren (Sutherland and Springett, 1987,
Rodrigues et al., 1991). However, meta-analyses have shown the vaccine to be
70 to 80% effective against the most severe forms of the disease, such as TB
meningitis in children (Rodrigues et al., 1993). It is less effective in preventing
respiratory disease, which is the more common form in adults. Protection has
been shown to last for 10 to 15 years (WHO, 1999). Data on duration of protection
after this time are limited, but protection may wane with time.

Will you be travelling to high risk area's abroad? Both my 2 had the vaccine, DD at 2 days old and DS at 2 months, we live in London not far from Heathrow and quite close to a high risk area (5 miles ish) my main reason for letting them have it was because they will travel to rural Egypt from time to time as well as other higher risk destinations.
It does take time to heal (3-6 months)and they can get a weepy type ulcer for a while (both of mine did) but it didn't bother themat all.

In London most of the inner boroughs and the ones round Heathrow offer it, as tb is increasing. So A had bcg as his first vac - no problem, although 10 weeks later I was scared by the sudden red lump on his arm, but turns out it's common for this to happen up to 6 months after. it's now healed nicely. neither the jab or the lump upset him at all.

my uncle has recently been diagnosed with TB.
He lives in a small village in the cotswolds!

No exotic travel, no known long term contact.
I took my children to my gp and demanded the vaccination just before christmas. i had to fight for it as well.

If you have been offered the choice take it please.