My 3 month old brain bleed after DTaP Shot!!!!!! - Page 3

[curlyfry]

From glaxosmithkline (in case it helps to hear it "from the horse's mouth") Bold is mine:

http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_infanrix.pdf

INFANRIX [DTaP] should not be given to infants or children with bleeding disorders such as hemophilia or thrombocytopenia that would contraindicate intramuscular injection, or to children on anticoagulant therapy unless the potential benefit clearly outweighs the risk of administration. If the decision is made to administer INFANRIX in such children, it should be given with caution, with steps taken to avoid the risk of bleeding and hematoma formation following injection.

Even if it was not a pre-existing condition and was caused by the vaccine, I certainly would not continue the series or any other vax based on MT's post and this info.

[Kundalini-Mama]

Megan,

I see that you live in Vermont, as do I. I'm not sure where you are exactly, but I can tell you that all my friends do not vaccinate. I know very few people who actually vax at all.

Can you PM me about where you are about to see if we are in the same area and I can hook you up w/some moms who don't vax and you won't see it as so alternative, and more 'normal'.

Amy

[2Sweeties1Angel]

My son died from the DTP shot. His pediatrician was over-vaccinating ( I didn't know) and gave it to him at his 1 month and 2 month appointments. Each time him and his twin's eyes became bloodshot and he would stop breathing either that night or sometime over the next week. The doctor told me it was a normal reaction and I believed him. Please don't make the same mistake I made.

He would be 5 years old now if he hadn't been killed by a "safe" vaccine.

[Momtezuma Tuatara]

2Sweeties1Angel, it amazes me the number of people who have stories like this whose paediatricians all say the same.

"normal reaction" is a wastebasket term for "I don't want to know, so be quiet."

[dingogirl]

Megan, I just wanted to say I'm very sorry this happened to your daughter. Three of my friends stopped vaccinating their children because they had bad reactions to the vaccines. I'm convinced I made the right decision (re not vaxing.) My daughters have never had any diseases.

I hope your daughter gets the help she needs.

[mama729]

.

[lilyka]

I also wanted to add that my ped at the time tried to pass it off as colic (this child never ever cried. we had to set alarms to remember to feed her) and to this day refuse to acknowledge that she had vaccine reactions. It happened twice exactly the same both times. we knew we had found the right ped when he acklnowledged that was indeed a vaccine reaction and she shouldn't have that shot anymore. he has been very suportive about us not vaccinating any of our children.

[CallMeIshmael]

Your poor daughter! How is she doing?

I hope that you find some answers. I don't think anyone can definitively say that what you're contending with is a vax reaction, but that fact that your daughter is healing from an intracranial bleed and is on anti-seizure medication is reason enough to avoid the next dose of DTaP for awhile.

Strangely, we just had a case of a two month old with a mysterious "brain bleed" at the hospital where I work. We ran every test we could think of and got no definitive answers, only a few strong theories about what must have happened (in this boy's case, vaxes were not to blame -- he hadn't gotten any.) He's doing fine, by the way. Please let me know if I can help you out with any of the medical aspects of your daughter's situation. There are a few things the docs might want to look for, if they haven't already.

Best of luck!

[CallMeIshmael]

Originally Posted by MT's immunologist contact

The baby had a classic arthus reaction at the injection site caused by immune complexes. The CNS bleed is probably a result of the immune complex disorder that was caused by the vaccination. The process is called immune mediated thrombocytopenia. The baby must not get another DPT, or any other parenteral vaccination for at least the next 5 years .

I'm a little confused by this response. An Arthus reaction happens when you've got a high circulating IgG titre to a specific antigen, right? Then, when you inject the antigen, it binds to the pre-existing antibodies and initiates a painful local inflammatory response. It's generally seen when people are on their 4+ booster dose of something (DT is famous for this, from what I recall.)

I'm not seeing how a baby could develop an Arthus reaction to the first dose of the DTaP series, since it would be her first exposure to the offending antigen -- she wouldn't have made any antibodies yet, least of all IgG ones. Perhaps your friend could clarify this for me?

Another thing that confuses me: how would the DTaP-specific antigen-antibody complexes cause a decreased platelet count? I thought ITP was caused by platelet-specific antibodies (then again, I'm not an immunologist). And I just don't see how the docs would have missed thrombocytopenia. Platelet count, PT and PTT would be some of the very first lab tests the docs performed -- and Aurora's mom says her daughter's coags were normal.

Enlighten me?

[Momtezuma Tuatara]

Doctors regularly miss the blindingly obvious. And from the work I've done on cases I know full well to never trust what doctors tell parents. I would never take a doctors word for anything now. They would have to hand all the test results to me, because I've been on far too many cases and been in far too many court rooms when doctors have sworn blue murder this and that, and when handed the actual hospital files have looked around wanting to find a hole to die in. Aurora's mum says the tests were normal. Tell me CallMeIshmael, have you ever seen a baby with an extensive brain bleed resulting in long term seizures, where the coags were normal?

Shouldn't you be enlightening me CallMeIshmael? You are the expert, not me.

However, since it would appear that you don't know your immunology on this matter, perhaps I should.

Why do you think that a babies "first" vaccine is necessarily, immunologically, their first exposure to IgG?

I'm astonished that you would think that.

Surely you know this? If not, why not?

Nelson's Textbook of Pediatrics On Line 2006. 710 Reference Ranges for Laboratory Tests and Procedures John F. Nicholson Michael A. Pesce

The human infant is born with an adult level of maternally derived immunoglobulins G

Immunoglobulin G (IgG)
S Cord blood 636-1606 mg/dL
1 mo 251-906 2.51-9.06
2-4 mo 176-601 1.76-6.01
5-12 mo 172-1069 1.72-10.69
1-5 yr 345-1236 3.45-12.36
6-10 yr 608-1572 6.08-15.72
Adult 639-1349

The prime candidate for An Arthus reaction is actually a baby given the Hepatitis B vaccine AND immunoglobulin at the same time, because its well known and you have just said....., that these two "items" can combine. But that isn't the only way that a baby having the first Hep B vaccine can have such a response as you should know.... :

So bear with me, while we talk some other basic immunology please:

"Vaccination in humans generates broad T Cell Cytokine responses including IL-1, IL-12, IFN- d and TNF- α. In the course of hepatitis B infection (sepsis), immune complexes that consist of HBsAg, anti-HBsAg and complement are formed. These immune complexes cause a variety of diseases" E. Sindern et al. Inflammatory polyradiculoneuropathy with spinal cord involvement and letal outcome after hepatitis B vaccination. Journal of the Neurological Sciences 186 2001 81–85

The symptoms we see representing immune complex disease is caused by the antigen/antibody complex which fixes complement, so the same range of immune complex disease seen with wild type Hepatitis B disease will be seen, with vaccine induced reactions caused by the same trigger. This fact is acknowledged by entries in the manufacturers' package inserts reported in the Physician's Desk Reference (PDR) ( PDR Enerix-B GalaxoSmithKline, and PDR Recombivax HB Merck) as well as in the peer reviewed medical literature.

And I put all those about eight other references up before, in case you missed them.

But before we take this to its logical conclusion, lets refresh your memory on something else you should know well:

Haemolytic anaemia caused by antibodies from the mother when the mother is Rh- and the baby is Rh positive IF the mother's antibodies mix with the babies. Correct? So you use the Coombs test which detects a coating of immunoglobulin or complement on the surface of the red blood cells... i.e. isoimmune haemolytic anemia which results in erythroblastosis fetalis, correct?

Using the Hepatitis B vaccine as an example, if the mother has high levels of antibody which are passed on to the baby, and the baby subsequently gets the "first" vaccine, it is possible that something called extramedullary haematopoesis can happen with a hepatitis b antigen/antibody complex, which looks identical to sepsis and erythroblastosis fetalis.

Extramedullary hematopoesis in the newborn liver is commonly seen in hemolytic disease of the newborn (Wagle, S. Hemolytic Disease of Newborn: March 14, 2003 emedicine. http://www.emedicine.com/PED/topic959.htm) and furthermore extramedullary haematopoesis is often seen in infants who die shortly after the Hepatitis B vaccine. (Niu, M.T. et al. Neonatal Deaths After Hepatitis B Vaccine. 1999 Arch Pediart Adolesc Med; 153: 1279-1282 )

In the past it has been thought that serum sickness can only happen on rechallenge, but for some of these babies a first vaccine, of any type can be a rechallenge if they have high levels of maternal IgG for those "items" therefore, on that basis their first vaccine is actually (according to commonsense logic) not their first, is it... it is essentially a rechallange, as proven by the medical literature quoted before, and the admissions by the vaccine manufacturers themselves.

In some of the cases I've been on, CallMeIshmael, we have been fortunate enough to have been able to prove it with samples from before and after.

The biggest problem you will see, if you look at clinical trials, for instance here:

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/

is that these groups, are the very groups that are excluded from vaccine trials at all phase levels, and we only discover these things when having excluded just about every tom dick and harry of interest to real life, the experts then say that the vaccine is "safe" for everyone, incluidng the groups excluded from the trials.

That isn't true. If you want to be true to science, the vaccine is only safe in the very narrow spectrum of people it was trialled on in the first instance, which begs the question as to why these groups weren't part of the trial, and I'll wager you can work out the answer to that. Because they are the very groups they would EXPECT to see problems in.

We discover these cases when the vast array of anomalies show up as vaccine damage cases, and then we have to fight our tails off trying to prove something, WHICH ~~~ had the trials been designed with real life in mind ~~~~ we shouldn't be in the position of having to prove at all.

The pro-vaccine people sit there all smug and say "prove it" when it is they who should be proving why it is even thought to be safe to use vaccines in the very groups they refused entry to any phase trial whatsoever.

And on a personal note CallMeIshmael, if you feel I'm snitty with you for asking me to enlighten you, I am.

I'm snitty, because I feel that you don't really mean "enlighten me" you mean "I don't believe you."

And I say the same to you as I say to any of these so-called provaccine experts in court... it should be YOU who is educating me as to why all these excluded groups suddenly become "safe" and it shouldn't be "me" telling you, how it can happen, when YOU of all people should know and understand the basic immunology of the processes involved. nd why is it that you don't know enough basis immunology 101 that you have to ask me to enlighten you?

Yes, I resent that. I think you should have gone away, done some research, reading and thinking to see whether or not there was actually proof of biological plausibility rather than come here and carefully infer that neither I, nor an immunologist would know what they were talking about.

[Jen123]

Even me , the layperson , knew that a baby is born with maternally derived IgG antibodies.

[CallMeIshmael]

Originally Posted by Momtezuma Tuatara

I'm snitty, because I feel that you don't really mean "enlighten me" you mean "I don't believe you."...I think you should have gone away, done some research, reading and thinking to see whether or not there was actually proof of biological plausibility rather than come here and carefully infer that neither I, nor an immunologist would know what they were talking about.

Wow, you seem to be reading a whole lot into a post that was motivated by a desire for clarification! Your friend provided a very brief explanation that doesn't adhere to the conventional (and probably over-simplified) "rules" about Arthus reactions and ITP -- at least as I learned them. But the field is in a constant state of evolution, so before I make any judgements about plausibility, I need more information. Hence my request for enlightenment.

Onward.

Arthus reactions and IgG. I was trying to keep things simple last night, so I didn't even get into transplacental antibodies -- but if you are suggesting that this is the sole source of the DTaP-specific IgG, then lets talk about them. From what I understand, Arthus reactions require a very high titre of a specific antibody. That's why, when the reactions do occur, they're almost always seen at the very end of the DTaP series, as alluded to here.

The notion of an Arthus reaction from transplacental antibodies in a neonate (when those antibodies are at their highest) is quite controversial, from what I can tell. There are certainly some pregnant women walking around with high enough titres to generate an Arthus reaction in themselves, I suspect. That titre would be reduced by transplacental transmission. Two months down the road, the transplacental IgG level has dropped precipitously, as your own numbers show (especially considering that the neonatal IgG number is pretty much exclusively mom's, but the 2-month IgG number is a mixture of mom's and baby's). So it's that much harder to imagine that there are many cases where there's enough left to generate a reaction, which is why I was assuming that an Arthus in a two-month old would be coming from endogenous IgG. If you can point me to any published case reports, I'd be grateful. Thanks!

I'm still confused about how a vaccine delivered to a baby with pre-existing transplacental IgG represents a "rechallenge", since the baby's own B-cells are still naive (unless I'm missing something).

Arthus Reaction --> ITP. I'm sorry--I have to admit to complete and utter bafflement with your explanation here. It sounds as if we're talking at cross purposes. I was asking how a localized DTaP-antigen+pre-formed DTaP-specific antibody inflammatory response (i.e., an Arthus rxn) would invoke a systemic attack on platelets that is usually associated with platelet-specifc antibodies (i.e., ITP.) Not sure how extramedullary hematopoiesis enters the picture -- that's something you'd expect in hemoglobinopathies (e.g, thalassemia), sustained hypoxia, or bone marrow failure -- it shouldn't be a response to something that's only affects platelets. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you.

My point, too, was that all this is moot if the baby's platelet count and coags were normal, to which you responded:

Originally Posted by Momtezuma Tuatara

Aurora's mum says the tests were normal. Tell me CallMeIshmael, have you ever seen a baby with an extensive brain bleed resulting in long term seizures, where the coags were normal?

Yes, I have -- the baby I alluded to in my earlier post. Granted, he doesn't seem to be having any more seizures, but he did have a truly massive subdural that kept rebleeding for weeks and weeks. It was a horrible situation. And the bewildering thing was that his platelet counts and coags were normal the whole time. He "acted" like a child with a blood problem, but we could never find any evidence of it with the tests we did. Later on, I talked to a coagulation guy who told me that there can be some subtle forms of coagulopathy that require special testing. That's something I'd suggest Aurora's Mom ask her docs about.

[applejuice]

Originally Posted by suschi

"and to my knowledge the side effects are small"

Yes, yet your child was affected. They want us to believe the side effects are small, but the truth is, they are not "rare", they are just rarely reported.

VERY TRUE!

You may find yourself in jail for shaken baby syndrome. Please please please get this reaction documented, request a copy of your child's records BEFORE you mention anything to the dr about adverse vaccine reaction.

VERY TRUE! The doctor and drug companies will blame you and toss your @$$ in jail before they ever, EVER admit any wrongdoing.

Once you have the records, see if they documented the seizure~ if this is not documented, request them to document it and give you a copy of the corrected record. Once you have this corrected record, ask if they filed a report to VAERS, if not, file one yourself because your child's records should have all the information you need to file, if they tell you they filed one, get the report ID # and verify this information with VAERS so a duplicate report isn't filed.

Extremely good advice. Follow it!

If you think I am being dramatic, I'm not. (see actual case below) This happens way more than we are led to believe, and I cannot believe your dr told you a SEIZURE was NORMAL after a vaccine. If a brain injury is to be expected after a vaccine, then who in their right mind would do this intentionally to an infant????????

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/Unpubl...mer-guzman.pdf

Outstanding post!

You deserve an award, sushi!

: to you!

[2Sweeties1Angel]

You may find yourself in jail for shaken baby syndrome. Please please please get this reaction documented, request a copy of your child's records BEFORE you mention anything to the dr about adverse vaccine reaction.

VERY TRUE! The doctor and drug companies will blame you and toss your @$$ in jail before they ever, EVER admit any wrongdoing.

I cannot even begin to stress how true that is. I've been there. Accused of shaken baby syndrome, but never officially arrested because my lawyer wouldn't allow it. If I'd demanded the records and found a new Ped I probably never would have been in that situation and my son might still be alive.

[Gitti]

CMI

I don't think anyone can definitively say that what you're contending with is a vax reaction,

Wouldn't you give the benefit of the doubt to the mother who knows her child?

I don't think anyone can definitively say this is NOT a vax reaction.

Strangely, we just had a case of a two month old with a mysterious "brain bleed" at the hospital where I work. We ran every test we could think of and got no definitive answers, only a few strong theories about what must have happened (in this boy's case, vaxes were not to blame -- he hadn't gotten any.)

What a coincidence!

[Momtezuma Tuatara]

Originally Posted by CallMeIshmael

Wow, you seem to be reading a whole lot into a post that was motivated by a desire for clarification! Your friend provided a very brief explanation that doesn't adhere to the conventional (and probably over-simplified) "rules" about Arthus reactions and ITP -- at least as I learned them. But the field is in a constant state of evolution, so before I make any judgements about plausibility, I need more information. Hence my request for enlightenment.

Onward.

Arthus reactions and IgG. I was trying to keep things simple last night, so I didn't even get into transplacental antibodies -- but if you are suggesting that this is the sole source of the DTaP-specific IgG, then lets talk about them.

Simple = grossly inaccurate. You know as I know, that haematology is never simple, and you can't make it simple

From what I understand, Arthus reactions require a very high titre of a specific antibody. That's why, when the reactions do occur, they're almost always seen at the very end of the DTaP series, as alluded to here.

So CallMeIshmael, if a mother, who is pregnant has just had clinical pertussis, and also has very high levels of antibodies to that DT booster she had just before she got pregnant, AND....

given that even at two months a neonate's level of IgG's can be half that of an adult... do you possible think that the mother's overload of very high IgG's from during pregnancy and just before, that she dumped into the baby, just might qualify as enough IgG to make that first shot of DTap, not be a first shot, but have the equivalent power to "make" the first Dtap the equivalent of a booster shot? = Arthus ??? Why do you think endogenous?

The notion of an Arthus reaction in a neonate (when transplacental IgG is at its highest) is quite controversial, from what I can tell.

It is, if the only thing that matters, inside the reductionist thinking that is current dogma , tells you that the mother's IgG input is irrelevant to the equation... where is your science here?

There are certainly some pregnant women walking around with high enough titres to generate an Arthus reaction in themselves, I suspect.

So do you think they wouldn't donate that IgG overload to their babies, and if they are going to continue to vaccinate pregnant women with gay abandon (and I mean the word "gay" in its proper sense not PC multilated) then expect far more arthus reactions courtesy of elevated titres via cord blood....

That titre would be reduced by transplacental transmission. Two months down the road, the transplacental IgG level has dropped precipitously, as your own numbers show (especially considering that the neonatal IgG number is pretty much exclusively mom's, but the 2-month IgG number is a mixture of mom's and baby's).

How much a titre is reduced by depends what is there to begin with, right? If a mother has a huge overload to several specific antigens, what then?

Several years after my rubella shot, just before I got pregnant with my first child, a test showed I had immunity. What the doctor didn't tell me was that I had sky high levels of antibodies, such that should have been a red flag to a moron. But no, he just thought that meant I had "good" protection. Imagine his surprise then, when 8 weeks into my pregnancy I came down with clinical rubella confirmed by two blood tests a month apart!

Why do you assume that "average" has any relevance to specific people or specific cases? You're arguing like the doctor who says "This reaction is only one in 17,000, so it can't happen to you.

Well, if 7 million people got that vaccine, and that reaction is 1 in 17,000 people how many might that be across seven million.

Are they all going to be told its impossible?

Here is an example.

The text book says that the average person should have between 1.0 - 3.0 IgA, so are you assuming everyone will?

I don't. I'm lucky to get up to 0.6.

And the average text book says the average person has 0.5 - 2.5 IgM.

I'm lucky to every be below 5.6.

You can never talk averages, when you are talking specific cases. and that principle applies here.

so lets get back to specifics....

You said this

originally quoted by CallMeIshmael

An Arthus reaction happens when you've got a high circulating IgG titre to a specific antigen, right? Then, when you inject the antigen, it binds to the pre-existing antibodies and initiates a painful local inflammatory response. It's generally seen when people are on their 4+ booster dose of something (DT is famous for this, from what I recall.)

I'm not seeing how a baby could develop an Arthus reaction to the first dose of the DTaP series, since it would be her first exposure to the offending antigen -- she wouldn't have made any antibodies yet, least of all IgG ones.

What you forgot is this. The baby may not have made any IgG, but if she has them from her mother,~~~~ if her mother passed them to her ~~~~ under those circumstances the antigen, which is the first vaccine, can combine with the mother's IgG antibodies sitting there waiting (from mother's prior exposure) resulting in the very antigen/antibody complex required for an arthus.

OKAY????

The fact that the baby has not yet started to make her own IgG is irrelevant. The IgG needed to create the complex is sitting waiting, by virtue of the mother.

Do you understand that yet?

So it's that much harder to imagine that there are many cases where there's enough left to generate a reaction, which is why I was assuming that an Arthus in a two-month old would be coming from endogenous IgG.

I repeat....

In a two month old the arthus can come from parental IgG+first vaccine=antibody/antigen complex= arthus/sepsis/extramedullary haematopoesis ~ all have similar and sometimes identical presentation...

and what's more its in the medical literature... and what's more, I put all those references up way before hand.

Read them.

I'm still confused about how a vaccine delivered to a baby with pre-existing transplacental IgG represents a "rechallenge", since the baby's own B-cells are still naive (unless I'm missing something).

Why are you confused. See above. How much more clearly can I spell it out.

Arthus Reaction --> ITP. I'm sorry--I have to admit to complete and utter bafflement with your explanation here.

That...

is...

not....

my

fault

It sounds as if we're talking at cross purposes.

Perhaps when you understand the basics of antigen/antibody complexes and the variant situations in which they occur, you might not be talking at a total goose chase tangent to me.

I was asking how a localized DTaP-antigen+pre-formed DTaP-specific antibody inflammatory response (i.e., an Arthus rxn) would invoke a systemic attack on platelets that is usually associated with platelet-specifc antibodies (i.e., ITP.)

do you understand now?...

Not sure how extramedullary hematopoiesis enters the picture

Go and read the eight references that were put up about it before. Extramedullary haematopoisis is one of the most common findings in babies who die after hep B vaccination, or did you miss that bit?

-- that's something you'd expect in hemoglobinopathies (e.g, thalassemia), sustained hypoxia, or bone marrow failure -- it shouldn't be a response to something that's only affects platelets. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you.

The reason you don't understand extramedullary haematopoisis in this situation is you haven't read the references I put up before, and you don't understand the biomechanics involved. There is enough information here for you to understand if you want to.

My point, too, was that all this is moot if the baby's platelet count and coags were normal, to which you responded:
Yes, I have -- the baby I alluded to in my earlier post. Granted, he doesn't seem to be having any more seizures, but he did have a truly massive subdural that kept rebleeding for weeks and weeks. It was a horrible situation. And the bewildering thing was that his platelet counts and coags were normal the whole time. He "acted" like a child with a blood problem, but we could never find any evidence of it with the tests we did. Later on, I talked to a coagulation guy who told me that there can be some subtle forms of coagulopathy that require special testing. That's something I'd suggest Aurora's Mom ask her docs about.

And that is exactly why I never believe "average" coagulation tests. I'd have them handed to me, go over them, and perhaps ask... "so why didn't you do this one?" So, you are now admitting that your laboratory doesn't do full coagulation screening????

And why didn't the coagulation guy sit down and work all that through with this baby? If that was my child, your coag guy would be getting a grilling.

You are right. If he was behaving as if he had a coagulation disorder he had one. That your lab didn't pick it up isn't the child's fault, and doesn't mean he didn't have one. You can only say that the head haematologist in your laboratory wasn't on the job enough, or astute enough to figure out which test should have been done, and therefore your tests were inadequate to provide any diagnosis whatsoever.

Which in my book, is a serious strike against both your coag guy and your lab.

[hotmom]

Please stop vaccinating until you research research research. It's the best thing you can do for her "system". It seems your child did have a reaction to the DTaP, since I don't believe in "coincidences" right after vaccinations.

You can always vax later. You can never un-vax (I said it for you Angela ) Don't feel the need to follow your Dr's schedule.

Yes, I ditto that ^^ entirely.

I am sure the moms here can point you in the right direction. Please read everything you can, then decide what you are doing.
My dd hada reaction to her FOURTH Dtap shot. I hae no idea what the first three did to her but I can imagine. And I have no idea what the other vax's filled with dangerous preservatives http://www.vaccination.inoz.com/ingredie.html did to her. i do know that my daughter changed a shortly after her obvious reaction. She has learning disabilities, anxiety disorders and sensory issues. She is 5 years old.
The quality of her future life and independence will forever be changed. Please do not give her any more, of any kind.

[applejuice]

2Sweeties1Angel,

s to you!

How awful...pm me the name of your lawyer, please!

He/she must be a gem.

[AurorasMommy]

WOW, you all are amazing woman, and have really helped me along with this process of knowing that NOT VAXING IS OK!

Aurora will not be getting ANYMORE VAX's EVER AGAIN! Her father and I ordered a list of books to help us feel more comfortable, and I found more mommies from VT that I can connect with and talk to! WHICH IS GREAT!

I am so glad that I have done research and I know now what I didnt know, which is a decision that is going to save my daughters life! I feel so bad about even giving her the shots in the first place, but I was so nieve! I had all my shots and so didnt my 5 sisters! We all were fine, so I never thought twice about the vaccinations for Aurora! WHAT A FOOL I AM! Its hard not to blame myself, which in time hopefully I can come to terms that I made a decision and that I am lucky to have my daughter here and nothing worse happened! I would never let anyone give her another VAX over my dead body!

Thank you all for your input and advice, its really helped steer me in the right direction. Today I am going to Aurora's appointment and requesting all of her documents, and I am also going to call the hospital where she was at and get all the MRI ULTRASOUNDS XRAYS AND NOTES from there as well. Then I am going to report to the VAERS!

CALLMEISHMAEL~ That is so weird there is a baby with the same thing! I just met another woman where her 11 wk old had the same thing happen, and because of the bleed she is very developmentally slow!!!!! She is a lucky little girl like Aurora to still be here.

I also printed off a list of the tests which should of been done and I am going to give them to her doc!!!

I want to say thanks again, I have found the right people and board to be at, and you all opened my eyes! I can say from just this week of doing research, I am no longer scared!!! Someone asked me if I was afraid of catching the dieases?? No Im not.... but I will admit the WC does scare me for Aurora only because she is 4 months old! But thats next on the list: Educate myself about WC!!!!

Thanks,
Megan & Aurora

[alegna]

and

Don't blame yourself- what's done is done. When you know better you do better. Also, something to consider, you and your sisters had MANY FEWER vaccines than are given today.

good luck with your research,

-Angela