Active discussions

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Pregnancy

Talk about every stage of pregnancy, from early symptoms to preparing for birth.

Original poster

Quick poll - Pg ladies, how pg are you and will you be having the swine flu jab?

718 replies

laurawantsababy · 15/10/2009 18:37

I am 25 weeks pg with dc2 and very confused.

After another death but with conflicting advice about the jab chosen for the UK what are we to do??

I would love you here everyones choice and thoughts on it to help me out.

Thanks

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Set a reminder
waitingwaiting · 20/10/2009 21:15

MonstrousMerryHenry so sorry if I have upset you by posting the news story it certianly wasnt my intention, I just thought that the story basically summed up how serious the swine flu can get which people need to know about, if we never heard the other side of things then how can we make an informed decision? of course we all know that pregnant women have been okay with the swine flu and the odd few havent (as with anyone with swine flu whether they are pregnant or not) which is why the vaccine should be considered seriously, how do we know which group we are going to be in? the ones which are okay or the ones which arent... we dont... I'm just as worried as everyone else. Just trying to help here.....

midnightsun · 20/10/2009 21:17

MonstrousMerryHenry I think almost all official health bodies are unanimous in saying that pregnant women are higher risk for both catching the disease and developing complications. That is why we are in a priority group for vaccines. How else do we explain that 6% of the swine flu deaths in the US were pregnant women whilst they account for only 1% of the population?

I'm all for keeping things in perspective but part of that is acknowledging that swine flu is more dangerous for pregnant women than other healthy adults.

And as I've possibly said before, I'm more interested in official and expert guidelines, advice and research than anecdotal opinions from midwives or GPs, German or otherwise.

But by all means keep sharing it, the more info and viewpoints the better.

pofacedandproud · 20/10/2009 21:21

I can't find any current SF stats for europe actually.

Original poster
laurawantsababy · 20/10/2009 21:29

midnightsun - Thats the drug my friends mum had. At the time they were telling them it was safe.

Swine flu world count Not sure if the link worked earlier. Looks like its updated daily and people can add comments. Someone has put that another Scottish person has died today. Im going to keep an eye on this.

My 16mo dd will not be having any swine flu vaccine. She has just had her MMR today after months of worrying. I was going to ask the nurse about the swine flu jab but dd was screaming so much I just wanted to get out!

OP posts:
midnightsun · 20/10/2009 21:32

pofacedandproud it totally depends if it has been licensed for use in the UK. Ironically it looks like it is actually manufactured in the UK.

This Fox News health blog writer does say that FluMist is a weakened live vaccine and it not recommended by the CDC for pregnant women, who should get the injected inactive vaccine instead.

pofacedandproud · 20/10/2009 21:40

yes it does look like the manufacturing company is uk based. Annoying. But no good in pregnancy. Good for children who hate injections.

MonstrousMerryHenry · 20/10/2009 21:42

I shall post again from the NHS website:

Don't panic: your immune system still functions and the risk of complications is very small. Most pregnant women will only have mild symptoms.

Check for yourself here, para 4

So what are we meant to think?

midnightsun · 20/10/2009 21:44

Yes and apparently much more effective at preventing seasonal flu infection at least (no data on swine flu yet, usual story) in children than injected vaccines. The opposite for adults. Would be nice if they could order that one in to Europe for the kids, hey.

MonstrousMerryHenry · 20/10/2009 21:44

waitingwaiting - your post didn't upset me at all, my point is that if that woman's symptoms were 100% caused by SF and nothing else (and does anyone know this for a fact?), it is highly probable that the chances of reacting that badly are extremely rare (as I said, women on this thread have had it during preg) and so posting that story is unhelpful.

waitingwaiting · 20/10/2009 21:45

Is Gordon Browns office watching this thread????....

MonstrousMerryHenry · 20/10/2009 21:46

pofaced, according to the swine flu count website (not sure where they get their info from), Germany's had loads more cases than us.

MonstrousMerryHenry · 20/10/2009 21:48

well, waiting - I said that just because he posted something about SF, so I thought he had put his team onto this thread. But I read his updated post and he says someone asked him about it, so maybe it was a question on the original webchat.

midnightsun · 20/10/2009 21:52

MonstrousMerryHenry I for one am not disputing that. Of the tens of thousands of confirmed cases in the UK and thousands more unconfirmed ones, just over 100 have resulted in death. The overwhelming majority of people who catch swine flu experience a mild illness no worse than normal flu. Most pregnant people will also only experience flu symptoms that can be treated at home without any danger. But a random number of otherwise fit and healthy pregnant women, more than average for the population, will develop serious complications and even die. We have no way of knowing who the unlucky handful will be.

I don't want to be one of them if I don't have to. And if I get vaccinated, I don't. That's the way the Chief Medical Officer for the Department of Health has worded it too. We don't want to see any more people dying from an illness when it can be prevented through vaccination.

That is not hyping it up and I also don't think that linking to unpleasant stories about people who have suffered dramatically with swine flu is hyping either. It's unpleasant but it's real. It's not going to happen to many of us, most of us, almost all of us will think it was a bit of a mountain out of a molehill when we don't get swine flu or don't get seriously ill from it. But why should we shrug our shoulders and accept that another 100 people die, including a few pregnant mums and unborn children - when they don't need to?

midnightsun · 20/10/2009 21:53

not disputing your reference to the NHS "don't panic, it's mild" advice, I mean. A few posts popped up between your post I was replying to and my reply.

MonstrousMerryHenry · 20/10/2009 21:59

Midnight, without clear information detailing why this woman reacted in such an extreme (it doesn't sound at all like a normal bodily response to any flu, does it?), it is hyping it up. If anyone has the details about why her body did that I would like to read it.

MonstrousMerryHenry · 20/10/2009 22:00

laurawants - it was thumbwitch who moved to Oz, she's usually on here late at night and works in health so would be good to ask.

midnightsun · 20/10/2009 22:06

It's not the only swine flu story I've read along those lines though. Nobody knows why healthy bodies (particularly healthy lungs) react so extremely to swine flu. That's why it's scary.

I agree there are lots of horror stories, but the press don't report positive and negative cases in proportion with what the outcome was - there just are more freaky sad stories available to us so the swine flu scaredycats like me can certainly get it a bit out of perspective.

Health based things like this don't usually get near the national media radar so it's hard to put it in any context.

"I had swine flu but managed fine with a few days on the sofa with my duvet and some hot Ribena - and so did my unborn baby" doesn't quite make the same circulation figures. It's our responsibility to weigh up the anecdotes with the statistics in that case.

MonstrousMerryHenry · 20/10/2009 22:10

That's exactly my point, midnight - perhaps we're closer to agreement than we realised! We need to keep a balanced perspective, which is why I keep referring back to the MNers on this thread who've had it in preg and survived. The 'deaths' column on the swine flu count website pales into insignificance when compared to the number of people who have had it. And don't misunderstand me - I have had my fair share of sad losses of loved ones so I would most certainly never underestimate the significance of each individual death. But focusing on the deaths and the freaky stories is not going to help me to make an informed decision.

I am actually avoiding the media on the SF issue (even though I work in media!) as I would rather rely on more balanced research.

waitingwaiting · 20/10/2009 22:21

If no one had died from swine flu then I would not even consider having the jab, however it is the news about the deaths which for me personally has helped me make a decision about having the swine flu jab, if I had only heard the news about those people who have recovered then I'd stay well clear... hence the reason why hearing both sides of the coin is important personally to me, maybe useful to others as well, lets hope so.
Actually, this debate has been really useful as before it even started I was totally unsure about the jab, however now feel I've made up my mind to have it but I only wish that the Celvapan one was being offered as well, as I'd feel so much happier with that one.
Thanks all for your thoughts and ideas on this subject...

MonstrousMerryHenry · 20/10/2009 22:35

Just reading the stats on that website...I noticed that in the Solomon Islands, the SF death rate is 1 in 3 people!!! In Sudan it's 1 in 5!

So then you start thinking "well, they're poor countries, probably have a low standard of health care, etc etc" - at least, I did.

But then if you pay close attention you notice that only 3 people have actually been reported in Solomon as having SF (5 people in Sudan), and there's been 1 death in the whole of each of those countries. So they're doing far better than we are, so far.

I am finding it impossible to trust any of the information I'm reading about this whole matter.

midnightsun · 20/10/2009 22:53

Some countries are much better at tracking and reporting health information as well, worth bearing in mond. In a country that is figuratively speaking on its knees, like Sudan, I wouldn't expect swine flu reporting to be accurate or even a priority.

midnightsun · 20/10/2009 22:54

mind not mond. time for bed.

MonstrousMerryHenry · 20/10/2009 22:56

Yes that's true - though the first point I was making was about how we read the information we're given.

Night night.

midnightsun · 20/10/2009 23:00

I know what you mean about trusting the info. Well, as an optimist I think about it more in terms of how to interpret the info more than whether to trust it (although accept that accuracy and trustworthiness is a valid issue...)

A person who has decided to be for or against the vaccine can back up their argument intelligently and convincingly with a wealth of facts, stats and good points both from online and 'real world' sources.

If only swine flu was an electronic virus.

MonstrousMerryHenry · 20/10/2009 23:03

God, if swine flu were just electronic I'd stick to pen and paper for the next 6 months. Would make life so much easier. At the moment I'm interpreting the info for myself by saying: if the 3rd trimester is thought to be the worst, and I'll be in the 3rd tri from February, how does that affect the likelihood of my contracting SF, bearing in mind the seasonal variations?

And then my mind explodes .

Hey, weren't you off to bed a minute ago?

Swipe left for the next trending thread