Flu jab-to have or not

[Koba88]

I'm currently 31 weeks pregnant and have been advised to have my flu jab next week at my doctors surgery. To my recollection I have never had flu and usually get one cold per winter, when I asked my midwife what she would advise she said 'well it is what the NHS do advise so I have to go from that standpoint and advise you'. My friend is 32 weeks and was very ill after having her jab. I have no clue what to do! If I get sick and have to take time off work there are threats of me being performance managed as I was off for a while at start of pregnancy with HG.....

If you're recommending that pregnant women take a non water soluble vitamin like vitamin A then you're truly an idiot. I don't normally resort to rudeness, but that's incredibly stupid advice that can cause real damage to foetuses.

At least overdosing on vitamin c will just lead to more fortified pee. But not any increased immunity against the flu. Too many idiots walking around confusing a cold and fever with the flu. Not sure how to help you other than urge you to be better informed and stop being so easily taken in by snake oil nonsense.

Where in my response did I say that?? Nowhere! So why be so rude?! Everyone wants a quick fix don't they - nobody wants to look after themselves through the correct diet! I am saying that if you ensure you eat a proper diet with the correct amount of vitamin C, A etc then your immune system will be strong. It's not rocket science.

Everyone wants to carry on eating crap and use a vaccine as a quick fix. It's a pretty sad state of affairs. Flu is not a risk to healthy individuals who look after themselves, that is my point.

@AccrualIntentions - they do recommend vitamin D very strongly in fact, and there have been various campaigns promoting its use. They also provide free vitamin drops for youngsters which contain A, C and D (only available if you're on benefits). Providing everyone with vitamin D would be incredibly costly, possibly more costly than the vaccine? I don't know.

They probably also foresee the pitfalls, in that they'd spend out a fortune providing vitamin d to every household and it would sit largely unused on kitchen countertops - people forget and hardly anybody in this country prioritises their health.

It amazes me the sheer number of negative comments about government decisions made by member of mumsnet, yet find any discussion on vaccines and the argument is always 'why would the government...?!' So you think they're pretty shit regarding every other policy/aspect of life but they couldn't possibly be mistaken over vaccines and / or flu strategy could they?!

Not interested in any further interaction especially as all you can fire back is rudeness. I have never once suggested the original poster not get vaccinated - I'm not so full of my own self importance that I think it's my decision to make! It is her decision and her decision only! I only suggested she do thorough and proper research.

Everyone wants to carry on eating crap and use a vaccine as a quick fix. It's a pretty sad state of affairs. Flu is not a risk to healthy individuals who look after themselves, that is my point.

Except when it is.

And pregnant women are naturally more at risk because their immune systems are lower because they are pregnant.

I don't know anyone who sees vaccinations as a "quick fix" to outrun a bad diet. What a load of shit. Worst anti-vax argument I've ever heard, and that's some going.

@AccrualIntentions - they do recommend vitamin D very strongly in fact, and there have been various campaigns promoting its use. They also provide free vitamin drops for youngsters

But not to prevent flu or in any way replace the flu vaccination. The current vitamin D campaigns are more about rickets. Peddling the myth that the reason for the NHS campaigns about vitamin D is because it prevents flu is dangerously misleading.

Upsidedown

Look up Cytokine storm with reference to certsin strains of flu. Young healthy people were disproportionately affected in pandemics caused by swine flu and H5n1. There two very young and healthy young people killed by swine in my area.

Flu is not a risk to healthy individuals who look after themselves,

Then why did it kill mainly adults, many of them fit young men, in 1918-1919?

@bruffin - young, but honestly healthy? I don't know any young kids or teens who eat the 9 portions of fruit and veg that's recommended in most countries and who don't eat processed food daily. It's not mainstream in this country to eat well.

The vaccine has very low effectivity. I don't think any reputable scientist would argue that fact. People need to look at other options.

I'll answer my own question.
Because fit young people have strong immune systems which actually killed them, rather than the virus. So old and young people with weaker responses didn't effectively destroy their bodies fighting off a viral attack.

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101205202526.htm

I don't think we're going to get through to upsidedown - every fact is countered with some made-up magical thinking. Can't help those who won't help themselves.

I keep getting responses targeted at me but nobody wants to talk about the effectiveness of the vaccine? 3% last year. 3%. What's the point then? What's the point in injecting yourself with something potentially damaging?

Upside
One was a dancer and the other was very sporty , both early 20s.

Personally no.
I had a flu jab in early pregnancy and later miscarried. Not saying at all that the two are linked but for me personally I would never have it whilst pregnant.

It wasnt only 3% effective last year.

I keep getting responses targeted at me but nobody wants to talk about the effectiveness of the vaccine? 3% last year. 3%. What's the point then? What's the point in injecting yourself with something potentially damaging?

And where did you get your 3% rubbish figure from upsidedown?

Here are the actual figures from Public Health England for last year's flu vaccine in pdf. The overall effectiveness across adults (18-64) and flu types was 41%.

In children it reduced the risk of flu by 66%.

The figures are explained here in layman's terms.

Anecdotal I know but I have virtually no immune system and therefore catch everything going
Jab this year - not even a red arm (unlike last year), slightly sore arm. That's it, no runny nose or anything

I had a flu and pneumonia jab yesterday. I wish I hadn't bothered now as my arm is sore, I have a bruise, there's tingling in my fingers, I've had a temperature and was dripping with sweat last night, and I feel nauseous 😟

I'm supposed to be going to a ball tomorrow with Dhs work. I'll have to wear something to cover up my arm if I do go as it's swollen too.

I read once that arguing with anti vaxxers is like playing chess with a pigeon as in no matter what you do the anti vaxxer is just going to knock over the pieces, shit over the board and claim they won......

I am saying that if you ensure you eat a proper diet with the correct amount of vitamin C, A etc then your immune system will be strong. It's not rocket science.

Really? I do and mines shot to shit as I've hypothyroidism.

I got it in both pregnancies - benefits far outweigh risks IMO. Sore arm for a few days and felt a bit rough but better than getting full blown flu

@ZaphodBeeblerox - I'm in the US. I was quoting US figure of 3% last year. Far too time consuming to link whilst I'm on my phone.

I find it unfathomable that you're telling somebody to inject themselves whilst pregnant with very questionable ingredients which have some well accepted and potentially serious side effects (read he vaccine insert!) based on a 41% effectiveness. It's laughable. I'd want at least 90% to even consider. I'd take my chances with the flu, which in most cases is not serious, thanks.

Yeah no amount of vitamins is going to boost my immune system even if I ate perfectly. I take heavy drugs instead

Haha! I knew I was only only matter of time before someone trotted out 'read the vaccine insert'...

www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/09/13/researchers-find-hint-of-a-link-between-flu-vaccine-and-miscarriage/?utm_term=.33681d32d823

"The CDC is participating in an ongoing study investigating pregnant women who received the flu vaccine during three more recent flu seasons, starting in 2012-2013. Results are expected late next year or 2019."

It wasnt 3% in the US last year either.

Yeah, CDC figures are regularly in the 40% range.

Also that means of people who are exposed to flu 40% don't catch it, and that means they don't pass it on. Also of those who do catch it their symptoms are much milder than unvaccinated folks. A 40% viral effectiveness rate actually makes a much larger difference in terms of overall influenza mortality.

But there's no arguing with a fool who'd rather read half-baked rubbish. If reading about what influenza can do, what epidemics have done during previous outbreaks, or reading actual scientific papers can't help you see sense then a bunch of strangers on the internet clearly aren't going to succeed.