or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Selective & Delayed Vaccination › Question about Hib shot
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Question about Hib shot

post #1 of 43
Thread Starter 
Did you vaccinate for Hib? My son is almost 6 months. He got all the recommended shots at his 2 month appointment, but at his 4 I declined them all until I could research further. Does anyone have information on the risks of this vaccine? How old was your child when you did the Hib vaccine? If I only choose to do one vaccine at his 6 month appointment should that be the one? Please help me decide!
post #2 of 43
I am sure lots of people are going to post and tell you you are "out of the danger zone" at 6 months. But I will tell you that we decided differently. Our new babe will get this vaccine on schedule and our oldest, who will be entering school, will also be getting it, as it was one we passed over at first.

My research has found this to be a very non reactive vaccine. From there, I found it to be very effective. At first we passed over it because we felt we had little risk, but after learning more and with the added angle of our daughter being in school and us wanted to go in and volunteer (with the new babe), we decided to go for it.

The doses needed with this vaccine change with age and brand, so check that out as well.

There is no aluminum or thermerisol in this vaccine.
post #3 of 43
Thread Starter 
Thank you so much for your reply. I am thinking about going ahead with it at his 6 month appointment. I only want to do one shot and I feel like that one is the most important out of all of them for his age. Also, he is coming with me back to work at the end of this month. I teach preschool to 2-6 year olds so that's why I've decided to start back up with vaccines, but delay and be selective about them. If anyone else wants to add more info about Hib please feel free to add. Are there any links about the likeliness of any bad reactions to it?
post #4 of 43
from Dr Sear's Vaccine book:

Quote:
WHAT INGREDIENTS ARE IN THE FINAL VACCINE SOLUTION? The ActHIB brand contains:

• HIB sugar/tetanus toxoid complex

• Sugar water

• Saline solution (salt water)

The PedVaxHIB brand contains:

• HIB sugar/Neisseria protein complex

• Saline solution

• Aluminum-225 micrograms (This makes the vaccine work a little better.) A microgram is 1/1000 of a milligram. (You probably can't picture how much that is. Neither can I.)

The HibTITER brand contains:
• HIB sugar/diphtheria toxoid complex

• Saline solution
so I take back the aluminum thing from above, one brand does have it.

Go with acthib if you can; thats what we got and what the new babe will get (merck's brand was recalled a while back so I didnt want to dabble with that)


More from the book here:
http://www.hachettebookgroupusa.com/...erpt25617.html
post #5 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by hollytheteacher View Post
Thank you so much for your reply. I am thinking about going ahead with it at his 6 month appointment. I only want to do one shot and I feel like that one is the most important out of all of them for his age. Also, he is coming with me back to work at the end of this month. I teach preschool to 2-6 year olds so that's why I've decided to start back up with vaccines, but delay and be selective about them. If anyone else wants to add more info about Hib please feel free to add. Are there any links about the likeliness of any bad reactions to it?
the VAERS site would be helpful for that but also the link above has a good summary.

Here you can view the results for ALL reports of Hib reactions for all years. only a total of 5,000 for the 6 month age group for all years and ALL brands combined.

http://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/dat...3E175C8BF40ABB

(edit, ok they wont let you post data requests, but if you go to the VAERS wonder system and then search for Hib and all years/brands/reactions you can see the numbers. YOu can also fiddle with it and see the types of reactions)
post #6 of 43
Just to add-- another reason people sometimes don't like this vaccine is the idea of serotype replacement. (you can do a search on that here to get lots of threads). but basically its the idea that when you eliminate one serotype, a niche is left and another serotype takes over that niche.
post #7 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by carriebft View Post
only a total of 5,000 for the 6 month age group for all years and ALL brands combined.
ONLY 5000????

Let's look at the numbers for HI for children less than 5 years of age.

2005 - 361
2004 - 331
2003 - 376
2002 - 331

How can you say ONLY 5000??? That's more than 14 times the rate of the disease in ALL kids under 5...let alone just 6 month olds.

Now let's look at all HI for the entire US population.

2005 - 2304
2004 - 2085
2003 - 2013
2002 - 1743
2001 - 1597
2000 - 1398
1999 - 1309
1998 - 1194
1997 - 1162
1996 - 1170
1995 - 1180
1994 - 1174
1993 - 1419
1992 - 1412
1991 - 2764

Again, ONLY 5000? I'm just speechless that you would even say that.
post #8 of 43
And before anyone goes saying that the numbers are low because of the vaccine, those numbers are for ALL serotypes of HI. Not just the type B in the vaccine.
post #9 of 43
ONLY 5000 reports?

and it stands to be mentioned that there were over 14,000 reports for the birth-6 month age group and over 12,000 reports in the 1-2 year old age group.

that's a LOT of children having adverse reactions, especially since only a fraction of events are even reported.



have a look at the mmwr. 29 cases of hi serotype b in the entirety of last year, reported in children under the age of 5 years. note that this is the number of cases.



ONLY 29. but to use the word ONLY to qualify 5000?



have we REALLY become a society that has become so numb to be able to say such a thing and accept it?
post #10 of 43
5,000 for all years (thats all reporting years, not years of age-- as in, as far back as they have collected them), all brands, and all reactions (from fever on) is a very low number. Call me crazy. I am not saying it is not a number or that these are not reactions (though as we know, many could very well be temporal association). I'm not dismissing them, I am just telling it like it is. This vaccine is very nonreactive. 5,000 reports for all years, all brands, and all 'reactions is not a lot-- considering esp if you look at the inserts and see the percentages on fever and fussiness.

And please don't paint me like I don't care. thanks very much.
post #11 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloak View Post
And before anyone goes saying that the numbers are low because of the vaccine, those numbers are for ALL serotypes of Hib. Not just the type B in the vaccine.
HIb numbers dropped drastically after the introduction of the vaccine. Yes, I do blelieve the Hib numbers are so low because of this vaccine.


Edit:

To try to and get this back to the OP and not me: the risk of Hib in the USA is very low (again, see that link on the Dr Sears Book I posted above, he goes through that) According to the CDC the risk is only 1.3 in 100,000.

Everyone has to do their own risk assessment for their own family. I feel like I type this over and over again. But that number might be important in your personal assessment.
post #12 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by carriebft View Post
5,000 for all years (thats all reporting years, not years of age-- as in, as far back as they have collected them), all brands, and all reactions (from fever on) is a very low number. Call me crazy. I am not saying it is not a number or that these are not reactions (though as we know, many could very well be temporal association). I'm not dismissing them, I am just telling it like it is. This vaccine is very nonreactive. 5,000 reports for all years, all brands, and all 'reactions is not a lot-- considering esp if you look at the inserts and see the percentages on fever and fussiness.

And please don't paint me like I don't care. thanks very much.
5000 in all years, all brands and all reactions for 6-12 month olds.

as i said before, there were over 14000 reports for the birth to 6 month olds and over 12000 reports for 1-2 year olds.

i guess we just do math differently. 30,000 plus reports = nonreactive? not in my book.

and for the record i was not commenting on you specifically, as is clear in my previous post.
post #13 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by carriebft View Post
HIb numbers dropped drastically after the introduction of the vaccine. Yes, I do blelieve the Hib numbers are so low because of this vaccine.
No they didn't. Did you look at the numbers? No one knows what pre-vaccine era numbers were because it wasn't notifiable until the vaccine came out. Since the vaccine came out, HI numbers have been steady. Sure it obliterated type b, but what's the point of that when other serotypes come in to take its place?

2005 - 2304
2004 - 2085
2003 - 2013
2002 - 1743
2001 - 1597
2000 - 1398
1999 - 1309
1998 - 1194
1997 - 1162
1996 - 1170
1995 - 1180
1994 - 1174
1993 - 1419
1992 - 1412
1991 - 2764
post #14 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidspiration View Post
5000 in all years, all brands and all reactions for 6-12 month olds.

as i said before, there were over 14000 reports for the birth to 6 month olds and over 12000 reports for 1-2 year olds.

i guess we just do math differently. 30,000 plus reports = nonreactive? not in my book.
And when you add up HI cases from 1991, when the vaccine came out, to 2005 you get 23,942 cases. So there are more reports of reactions then there are cases of HI in all those years.
post #15 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidspiration View Post
5000 in all years, all brands and all reactions for 6-12 month olds.

as i said before, there were over 14000 reports for the birth to 6 month olds and over 12000 reports for 1-2 year olds.

i guess we just do math differently. 30,000 plus reports = nonreactive? not in my book.

and for the record i was not commenting on you specifically, as is clear in my previous post.
Vaccines cause fever and local swelling in many...they cause nonsevere issues with some children...see inserts for this. this number for Hib is very low for a vaccine. Whether or not it is low enough to make people like it or low enough to cross the threshold of nonreactive for everyone's mind...I suppose that is a matter of opinion in a way. But I don't think there is any way one could look at the numbers, esp when you cut it down to not severe reactions, and say this is a very reactive vaccine.

Note that when I am talking here about reactions and this vaccine being non reactive, I am very much talking about severe reactions, the same way Dr Sears is in that link. There are not many reported for this vaccine, esp when you compare it to others.
post #16 of 43
I chose to delay the Hib until 1 year. At that point a child only needs one shot, not a series of three. This is the only vaccine I have chosen so far (ds is now 5).
post #17 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloak View Post
No they didn't. Did you look at the numbers? No one knows what pre-vaccine era numbers were because it wasn't notifiable until the vaccine came out. Since the vaccine came out, Hib numbers have been steady. Sure it obliterated type b, but what's the point of that when other serotypes come in to take its place?

2005 - 2304
2004 - 2085
2003 - 2013
2002 - 1743
2001 - 1597
2000 - 1398
1999 - 1309
1998 - 1194
1997 - 1162
1996 - 1170
1995 - 1180
1994 - 1174
1993 - 1419
1992 - 1412
1991 - 2764


since my posts said HIB ( Haemophilus influenzae type b) number have dropped drastically since the introduction of the vaccine, it would seem that i was talking about Haemophilus influenzae type b. I am not sure how to make that more clear?


Quote:
During 1980-1990, incidence was 40-100/100,000 children < 5 years old in the United States. Due to routine use of the Hib conjugate vaccine since 1990, the incidence of invasive Hib disease has decreased to 1.3/100,000 children. However, Hib remains a major cause of lower respiratory tract infections in infants and children in developing countries where vaccine is not widely used.
Quote:
Since licensure of conjugate vaccines for infants (1990) and children (1987), rates of disease among children <5 years old have declined by more than 95% in the United States, while rates for adults have remained stable. However, rates of disease among Alaskan natives remain higher than elsewhere in the United States.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/disea...fluserob_t.htm
post #18 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloak View Post
And when you add up Hib cases from 1991, when the vaccine came out, to 2005 you get 23,942 cases. So there are more reports of reactions then there are cases of Hib in all those years.
VASTLY more reactions than cases of Hib.

because the 30,000 that i was talking about was only for children from birth to age TWO!
post #19 of 43
Well, I'm gonna take a bow out of this thread, I have said my peace and I don't want to get the thread closed as S/D forum isn't suppose to host debate.

OP if you need some more info, drop me a PM and I can give you some more stuff I gathered here when we decided to get this vaccination.
post #20 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by carriebft View Post
since my posts said HIB ( Haemophilus influenzae type b) number have dropped drastically since the introduction of the vaccine, it would seem that i was talking about Haemophilus influenzae type b. I am not sure how to make that more clear?
I KNOW type b has gone down but all the other types have gone up so your chances of getting HI are the same as they were pre-vax. The vaccine does NOTHING to lower your chances of getting HI.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Selective & Delayed Vaccination
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Selective & Delayed Vaccination › Question about Hib shot