Avv821, nice to know that it is not just my computer being a pain! I still haven't been able to get the computer with my folder of articles to work (yes, extremely annoying, and yes, I probably should be more conscientious about backing-up my data because that might have saved me the annoyance), but in general I remember that many of the things I looked at were from the CDC's page on whooping cough (https://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/pregnant/research.html
). One of the referenced pieces looked at the safety of DTaP in pregnancy in the UK - I'm fairly positive it was this one - http://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g4219
- and it had a study size around 20,000 if I recall correctly. There was also one that I saw multiple people citing about the immune responses in infants whose mothers had received TDaP antepartum, and that one stuck out to me partially because the authors noted that they were studying it because as of 2013 the immune responses in infants whose moms had been vaccinated during pregnancy was unknown. If I'm not mistaken, ACIP has been pushing TDaP since earlier than 2013, so that was slightly concerning to me that these authors could state that prior to their work the effect of a TDaP dose during pregnancy on the infant was unknown! I'm pretty positive the link to that article is https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23799518
, and it had a much lower study size - under 100 if I remember correctly. I found another piece from 2012 about Pertussis re-emergence (I think this one http://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.co...71-2334-13-151
) interesting partially because, while older, it contained lots of references to follow-up on, but also because it had a graph showing what was standard vaccination policy re: pertussis in a number of countries (I always like to see if the US is similar to other areas or doing its own thing). It also included a section on cost-effectiveness, if I remember correctly, which also reminded me that cost plays into all vaccination recommendation decisions as well. The National Vaccine Information Center has a page on pertussis going though what is in the different versions of DTaP and TDaP and possible issues, etc (http://www.nvic.org/vaccines-and-dis...ing-cough.aspx
) that is interesting to read, although I think some would argue that NVIC is not the most unbiased source (regardless of bias or not, their page still has tons of info). Sorry I can't be more specific - I don't have time right now to re-open things to make sure that I'm remembering things correctly and honestly, I'm almost at the point whereby I'm just fed up with it.
As for what I have decided, so far I haven't had the vaccination, but I still have a few weeks before I'm completely out of time to get it, so I theoretically could change my mind (kind of doubtful though). At my latest appointment I noticed that they had added a new, bigger poster pushing the TDaP vaccination than they had up at my previous appointment. It had a picture of an infant who had died of pertussis at 3 or 4 months and talked about how the infant's parents have made it their mission to better educate the public about pertussis and try to prevent another tragedy such as their's. I read it and thought that maybe I'm an idiot to be questioning this, but at the same time, even with such a sad story as that, there is so much that we don't know about TDaP and the poster also was making the assumption that if this mom just had been vaccinated during pregnancy, her kid would still be alive, and unfortunately we don't know that either. I think we all can agree that we all want what is best for our children - I just wish that there could be a bit more transparency about the benefits and risks of vaccinations rather than having the medical community present it in such binary terms - i.e., "you can be a good parent and have a living child by being vaccinated" vs the "you can be a bad parent and have a dead child by not being vaccinated" approach.