Please help!! Rhogam shot still have questions - Page 2

[MsBlack]

Thanks for the byte of that article, Nashville

I think it is pretty well established on this thread (well, established for me anyway) that RhoGAM supresses a mother's own immune response. However, what is still not clear is whether or not the antibodies in RhoGam, itself, will cross the placenta and cause harm to fetal blood cells.

RhoGam is composed in part from rh antibodies harvested from sensitized women. This means, IN THEORY, that those antibodies could attack fetal blood cells themselves, even while they are busy suppressing mom's own creation of antibodies.

Unless those Rhogam antibodies are somehow 'inactivated'--I just don't know. Seems to be a topic for google search, unless someone else on this thread has already saved a link they wouldn't mind sharing--or perhaps knows a good book whose title/author they would kindly share

[nashvillemidwife]

Originally Posted by Wendy HS

The dilemna is that if the mother's and baby's blood does actually mix it is equally likely that the Rhogam antibodies will cross over and attack the baby itself. This happens frequently but isn't discussed by most doctors."

Originally Posted by MsBlack

RhoGam is composed in part from rh antibodies harvested from sensitized women. This means, IN THEORY, that those antibodies could attack fetal blood cells themselves, even while they are busy suppressing mom's own creation of antibodies.

There is a world of difference between the claim that something that we have no proof of could happen in theory, and the Rhogam is "equally likely" to cause harm to the baby (and the paranoid accusation that doctors are purposely hiding this information from the public). It should bring into the question the accuracy and validity of all the claims in that article.

[Wendy HS]

All due respect, " That prenatal Rhogam is a scourge to the public and there's a conspiracy to keep women in the dark about these dangers, what would be the purpose?" MONEY. Many more women now get the shot than before when they were only giving it postnatally. Now all RH - women get the shot before they even know if they are carrying a positive baby. That is double or more the amount of shots the pharm companies and doctors are now getting paid for. With all that said I still believe the doctors are truly out for our best interest, most of them.

[Wendy HS]

I really don't want to argue about who is right and who is wrong on the Rhogam front, I really don't know. All I know is I am trying to make the best informed decision I can and yes I want proof from both sides, not speculation and not just somebodys word for it. I appreciate comments from both sides, that is why I continue to study any information offered up to me and I will study some more. Please lets not get personal about this, it is each person's right to make the best decision for their baby, no one needs to make anyone feel guilty about the decision they choose. I already know the risks of not taking the shot, I am trying to find out the risks of taking the shot, that is why I appreciate each point of view. I can tell you that I do not trust a doctor, nurse, the CDC, FDA or Pharma company just because they say I should. I've done enough research to know that they don't always do what is right. I think most doctors and nurses have the best intentions and only want to help, but they can be mislead too, just like me. I don't trust any studies done by the pharm companies or even the CDC or FDA, sorry. Think about Vioxx, think about all the drugs pulled off the market. All I can say about vaccines is I am very leary of any of them. Therefore I am going to research until I feel confident in my decision. I am aware of the risks of not taking the Rhogam. I understand I can become sensitized during this pregnancy without the shot. I know it lowers the chance a small amount "When a woman receives the postpartum shot within 72 hours of birth, the incidence drops to 1-2% (98-99% will not be sensitized). The prenatal shot at 28 weeks reduces the sensitization rate to 0.1%-0.2% (99.8-99.9% of women will not be sensitized)” These rates came from the Rhogam insert so I suspect that unless they are lying and the rates are wrong that is a pretty slim chance that I will be sensitized during pregnancy, even if I don’t take the Rhogam at 28 weeks. I would also love any info on any women who have taken the shot both times and ended up with problems, either their babies or them. I have heard that some women are sueing due to having health problems from the shot, the article I quoted is also not the only article that I have read that talks about problems with the shot prenatally. Another quote, "My biggest objection to antepartum RhoGam is the fact that the baby can be born direct Coombs positive from the Rhogam injection itself. This is one of the contraindications, although rarely mentioned by the drug companies or physicians. I have seen this scenario, where the baby had to be transfused after delivery because of antepartum Rhogam." I hear a lot about why to take the Rhogam, but I do believe there are reasons/risks as to why not to take it, and I do know that the drug companies have great reasons to cover up or pass over any of the risks, they get a lot of money from vaccines and since starting to give it to women prenatally they make even more so there is a bit of conflict of interest there. I am looking for both sides and the truth on both sides. If these things are not a risk that I have mentioned above then just point me to some information that shows there is no chance or any risks of taking the shot. I am more willing to risk my own health than the health of my baby, that is why I am willing to take the postpartum shot if needed. I know the Rhogam shot has Poly 80 in it which is linked to fertility problems. None of this can probably be proven or unproven, but I am sure going to study and ask God for wisdom in making a wise choice. My thing is weighing the risks and seeing which options holds the least amount of risks and going from there. I really appreciate any comments from either side. The reason I ask about any womens own experience with the shot is because I know that all us RH- mom's are bascially the long term study. We are the guinea pigs so the speak. And if there are reactions or problems with women or babies health later on that can be contributed to the shot I personally would like to know. I know I most likely won't get that info from the drug company that makes the shot and proubably not the doctors either. Please keep the info coming. I am not wanting to convince anyone of my beliefs, I just want as much information as I can get. Thanks so much.

[nashvillemidwife]

Originally Posted by Wendy HS

All due respect, " That prenatal Rhogam is a scourge to the public and there's a conspiracy to keep women in the dark about these dangers, what would be the purpose?" MONEY.

With all due respect in return, most insurance policies in the U.S. barely cover the cost of any Rhogam shot, and sometimes it's difficult to even break even. The NHS in the UK is a government sponsored health program, yet they have found it cost effective for the government to provide this shot for women. I hear this argument about BigPharma all the time and it just doesn't hold water.

[Wendy HS]

What I am searching for is the truth, not an arguement, so I wont reply anymore to something that ends up being a dead end arguement about the Rhogam shot. Thank you to all who have been so helpful so far. Can anyone give me more information about the quote "My biggest objection to antepartum Rhogam is the fact that the baby can be born direct Coombs positive from the Rhogam injection itself. This is one of the contraindications, although rarely mentioned by the drug company or physicians. I have seen this scenario, where the baby had to be transfused after delivery because of antepartum Rhogam." This was a quote that was an article reprinted from Midwifery Today, just to give whoever credit. I have no idea who wrote the article. I will try to do some research to find out. The quote concerns me if it is true, that would possibly be a risk factor in taking the shot. Again as I stated I ALREADY know the risk factor of not taking it prenatally, so please don't tell me how horrible of a mom I am because I am considering not taking it while I am pregnant.
Does anyone know about the ingredients, about the poly 80 that is in it? I've been told it causes fertility problems and also immunity problems? Does anyone know of any long term studies done on the Rhogam shot? I've also been told by several women that they did what their doctors said and they took all the recommended Rhogam shots and still ended up sensitized. I now understand why this happens. Are there any women who insist that after their baby is born they go ahead and immediately check their own blood to see if they were sensitized during pregnancy and, then shortly after birth to see how much if any fetal cells are in their blood from delivery and give the shot according to that amount. My understanding is the Rhogam is a one size fits all and only covers up to about 30ml of the babys blood mixing. If I choose to do the extra testing it seems I would have a better chance of not getting sensitized if my baby does end up positive, and our blood does end up mixing. If I go this route with my midwife I need to find out exactly what the tests are, when they need to be done to be accurate, and to even find out if my midwife can do them. I will add the quote about the tests incase anyone can tell me more about them..... "So, personally I think that the most intelligent and safe thing to do for all concerned is to conduct these tests before administering RhoGAM: Kleihauer-Betke (for presence of ANY fetal cells); and if KB is positive, then Rosette test (actual/estimated # of fetal cells). If no fetal cells are found, RhoGAM is not needed. But if they are found in mom's bloodstream, then it is very good to have an idea HOW MANY--because this determines the proper dosage of RhoGAM to give. Most care providers do not do any of these tests, just administer a 'standard dose' of RhoGAM to any Rh- woman during pg and following any of above 'events'. With no fetal blood cells present, again, RhoGAM is unnecessary. AND, one 'standard dose' of RhoGAM only 'covers' the 'average amt' of blood mixing (about 30 mls)--but if mom's blood contains MORE THAN 30mls of baby's blood, then she could still create antibodies after the 'standard dose'. So, knowing how much fetal blood is present helps determine how much RhoGAM to give.

there are cases of women who received RhoGAM and still made antibodies--it is understood for at least some of them, that this occurred because they were not given enough RhoGAM. Care providers made an assumption rather than testing her blood thoroughly. It is also likely that RhoGAM simply doesn't work for everyone--nothing does!
So with all that said, I am still on a quest for more info. on making the best decision. As a happy end to this post my 4 year old precious son saw all the smiley faces and wanted me to put this one on the end of this post.

[MsBlack]

Wendy--

I tell moms that the best thing to do postpartum is ask for those tests you mentioned (KB and sheep's rosette) before getting RhoGam--to see if they need the shot in the first place, and if so, then to know how much Rhogam is called for. I have an informed consent doc that they see prenatally (and have to sign off on) to try to be sure that they really understand the issues. I can see that you have already gathered even more info than I provide to clients--that is great, IMO.

Anyway--the cost of those tests, not covered by many insurance companies, is prohibitive to many families. Yes, the money is involved, unfortunately, on all sides. This is the terrible thing about a profit oriented oriented health care system, IMO....and it is so terribly ironic, having read articles lately about the gigantic costs incurred with end-of-life med care for the elderly or terminally ill (trying to keep people alive as long as possible no matter what the cost, even when death is clearly imminent). Ironic that we will spend millions or more such care, but not far less on things like the KB test and so forth.

But it does sound like you know enough to make good decisions about Rh and Rhogam. There are no guarantees, again--only having enough info to make the best possible decisions--then trusting yourself and life as much as you can.

[Wendy HS]

Thanks Ms Black for your help and encouragement. It is a hard decision and takes a lot of study and prayer. I have definetly learned a lot here and there's so much more to learn, but I do feel more so much more equipped to make a better decision about me and my baby's health. Thanks so much.

[honeybee]

There is a lot of great info here! Thanks!

I am rh negative. I had the rhogam during pg and after birth with ds1. I chose not to have it during pg with ds2 and ds3, who both turned out to be rh-, but had they been positive, I would've gotten the postnatal shot. Now I know I could also ask for the fetal blood tests to see if the shot is necessary after birth.

[Theogirl]

So glad I found this thread. I'm 7 weeks pregnant with baby #3 and trying to make a wise decision. With my first pregnancy, I did take the shot but my son was - as well, so I didn't get the after one. With my second, I decided against the prenatal shot and my daughter turned out to be +. I got tests done and apparently have no antibodies.
So, in summary my understanding is that this baby is okay unless our blood mixes for some reason in time for my body to develop antibodies before it is born. As this will be our last pregnancy, there won't be any future babies to wonder about.
I am planning for a home birth with a midwife, who we'll meet in July. I'll be sure to discuss this with her of course, but I'm curious as to common sense practices to ensure my blood doesn't sensitize. (i.e. no amnio testing, don't get into any car accidents...!)

[owlgirl]

WOW!! Thanks for the lesson! I am O Neg and don't take any shots or meds, just leary. I am faced with the 28 week shot and just found this great info! Thanks!!

[terra-pip]

I've had Rhogam shots every pregnancy and after every birth. My third was born about 3 weeks ago and somehow our blood did mix either in pregnancy or labor. And I had an easy normal pregnancy and an easy normal birth. She was jaundiced quicker than is usually seen in newborns. everything was fine...but what if I had not had my Rhogam shot in pregnancy? What ifs I don't wanna think about. I'm o- and my husband and all three kids are A+. With my first two pregnancies I never tested positive in my titers prenatally. And I didn't this time either. But I had positive coombs after this birth. I see no way to prove one way or the other whether that positive coombs was because of my 28 week rhogam. But having had two previous pregnancies without issue makes me think possibly not. I was okay with all the extra blood tests because imo the risk is there. As rare as an unnoticed bleed is, it happened to me somewhere somehow. And I had no pregnancy complications or placental complications with all three of my births. This last time the placenta was 45 minutes in coming but came intact. I passed a very large clot with my second hours after birth but was fine after that. I don't vaccinate my children either because my first is on the spectrum...but imo rhogam is a whole different thing. I've had 6 shots of rhogam, 3 pregnancies and only one to worry us for a minute. Like I've said...I rather do something to prevent the rare thing that my children are at risk for than to face the rare thing actually occuring.


My advice: take your Rhogam shots! You never know.