Hello.
I'm going to give you a very condensed "scoop" on pertussis statistics.
First of all:
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ull/115/5/1422
Quote:
| Studies of prolonged cough illnesses in adolescents and adults reveal that 13% to 20% are a result of B pertussis infection. Serologic studies suggest that the rate of B pertussis infection in adolescents and adults is 2.0% per year. The rate of cough illnesses (pertussis) caused by B pertussis infection in adolescents and adults is between 370 and 1500 per 100 000 population. These data suggest that there are between 800 000 and 3.3 million cases per year in the United States. |
Pertussis has always been and will continue to be completely endemic in the US until a better vax for this disease is created. Getting a shot, or two, or three, or four WILL "lessen" the severity of the symptoms, but this vax essentially does not prevent "catching pertussis" or preventing the disease. It just helps the victim have a milder case. Which is nothing to sneeze at, since pertussis is miserable.
One study that looked at antibodies found that adults catch mild cases of pertussis every 3-5 years or so, and probably not coincidentally, most studies that look at children, both in vaxed and unvaxed communities and individual kids, find the average age of catching it to be around age three to five.
I am a selective/delay vaxer who chose not to vax my little baby for pertussis, and my opinion is that choosing to do or not do this vax can both be reasonable decisions. There is a case to be made for getting the vax (it makes you have milder symptoms for a miserable illness, and in the case of newborns, probably saves lives sometimes)...and there's a case for not getting the vax (the never-vaxed probably clear the bacteria more quickly, involving this complicated phenomenon called "original antigenic sin" and a bacterial toxin, ACT. I'll look up references if anyone cares.)
Anyway, "everyone" catches at least a mild case of whooping cough every several years. It's sort of like a bacterial version of influenza like that. Most people only catch a "really bad case" once or twice in their lives.
There are 10 or 20 deaths a year from pertussis in the US:
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pin...ses&deaths.pdf
And almost all of those are in tiny, very unfortunate newborns. Out of 300 million people and millions of pertussis cases a year. ( and yes, even in countries that don't vax anyone, almost all of the deaths come from newborns...again , I'll dig up references if anyone cares. But NO...it's not that newborns only die because they're too young to be vaxed. Newborns die from pertussis because pertussis is just horrible for newborns. Tiny babies can't cough effectively, they just choke. Hence my position that vaxing small babies for pertussis is totally reasonable.).
To the OP, your husband needs to refute your information, not just discount CDC links because you were directed there from here. He's being really lazy. Many, many of of us on this vax forum vax selectively and/or delay, and have come to this decision after developing a comprehensive understanding of the scientific literature.
Pertussis happens to be THE hardest and most complicated disease/vaccine to understand out of all of them, imo.
It's an extremely common and unavoidable and extremely miserable disease, the epidemiliogy is pudding and the biology is vague. And the vax is only "kinda" effective. And the old whole-cell vax was horribly reactive in terms of long-tern neurological issues (although I think the new acellular vax is far safer, if not "almost completely safe").
Anyway, I understand and respect the decision to vax or not to vax with pertussis.
