That's true. I would like to see the actual study.
I wasn't implying that you can get a subclinical case of pertussis from the pertussis vaccine. You can get a subclinical case by being exposed to pertussis and having been immunized against it. Someone without symptoms is unlikely to take proper precautions with a newborn. Having an obvious illness (actual pertussis symptoms) would cause someone to be more cautious around a newborn.
Can't. There are only "educated" guesses. But they are guesses made by educated scientists, so is that good enough for you?
I'd say this is true after lots of research on my part (and I don't vax so I am not saying this from a pro-vaccine standpoint.) The reason is because the pertussis vaccine is an antitoxin. Even though a vaccinated adult can still get pertussis the antitoxin neutralizes the toxin the bacteria is making when it is dying---and that is what causes the cough. So, a parent who has even a reduced cough is less likely to spread the bacteria to their baby by droplet form---which is how it is spread by coughing.
Our state (WA) is now doing a free Tdap clinic for all adults in contact with infants. And honestly, even though I don't vaccinate my child, I think that is a good thing. I still think cocooning makes logical sense. It frustrates me that the article does not say WHY the researchers came to the conclusion it is ineffective. I plan to implement cocooning when I have my new baby in a few months because it seems a better option than the alternatives 1,) Vaccinate an infant and 2.) Do nothing.
Again, that's not what the article stated. The article stated that the strategy was clinically ineffective.
How do you know that? The committee was given information from 2 pharmaceutical manufacturers; I assume (and yes, I know that is dangerous) that the information was based on studies. They may or may not have been controlled conditions - we have no way of knowing based on the article.
I still don't see anything in that article that tells me anything more than "It didn't work so we discontinued the policy". I wish there was a link to the actual findings of the investigative committee. Even if a random committee in Australia found for some unspecified reason cocooning didn't work on a public health scale, it still makes sense to this mama.
Now seriously, I am not arguing that cocooning makes sense on a pro-vax standpoint here. Let me be clear. I don't vaccinate my daughter at this point in her life. I have thought about it (especially recently) and still don't see a favorable risk/benefit ratio. But I am not against vaccination full stop. I just question the safety, especially in children. That said, when I weigh the pros and cons of cocooning vs not cocooning it still seems like the sensible option for me and also for others. I don't worry much about my DH getting a vaccine reaction since he is full grown with no history of health issues. (As a matter of fact I just got him to get Tdap since we will be doing cocooning--I am immune myself from actually having pertussis 4 years ago, I got my titer checked.) I also don't see any reason for the rest of our adult immediate family (grandparents) to get the Tdap before coming to visit the newborn. If the alternative is to do nothing, why not be proactive (for consenting adults who are willing and happy to get Tdap to get it)? And I am speaking for my own family here, but I do see it as a microcosim of a whole. I don't see why cocooning should be discouraged on this forum and elsewhere?
Even if my version of cocooning is not totally without holes (since my toddler is un-vaxxed) it seems sensible to try as hard as I can to prevent adults from getting pertussis and bringing it into the home. The CDC MMWR from 2008 says that computer models showed a newborn has a 38% less chance of catching pertussis if both parents are vaxxed. And the numbers go up to 75% if all family members coming in contact with the new baby are vaxxed with Tdap.
Where it gets murky is that I don't necessarily agree with kids getting vax pushed on them by the state. So the part of cocooning that our state (WA) is currently implementing with doing boosters in middle and high schools kind of freaks me out. I mean, parents do have a right to decline the vax for their kids in this state, but it seems too much like forced vaccination in that case. However, I am all for a consenting adult (or older child) willingly walking into a pharmacy or Dr. office and requesting a booster because of cocooning...
Cutting a link and pasting it into an MDC post is hardly as painstaking as figuring out the APA format. And no, on a conversation as pivotal as vaccinations, I will not take a "FWIW" approach to unsupported statements. Most doctors already expect me to do that, thank you very much. Anyway, go ahead and leave out the supporting evidence, if you so choose, but don't expect your statements to be taken seriously without it. In these discussions, I expect facts and data. But that's just me. I'm a woman of high standards.