Question about Hib shot - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 06:28 PM - Thread Starter
 
hollytheteacher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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!

me, dh and 2 boys = our family (oh and a cat...who is also a male...lol)
hollytheteacher is offline  
#2 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 06:43 PM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#3 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 06:47 PM - Thread Starter
 
hollytheteacher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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?

me, dh and 2 boys = our family (oh and a cat...who is also a male...lol)
hollytheteacher is offline  
#4 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 06:48 PM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#5 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 06:51 PM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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)

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#6 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 07:32 PM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#7 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 09:43 PM
 
cloak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

The Most Important Person on earth is a mother...She has built something more magnificent than any cathedral-a dwelling for an immortal soul, the tiny perfection of her baby's bodyâ¦-Cardinal Mindszenty
cloak is offline  
#8 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 09:45 PM
 
cloak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

The Most Important Person on earth is a mother...She has built something more magnificent than any cathedral-a dwelling for an immortal soul, the tiny perfection of her baby's bodyâ¦-Cardinal Mindszenty
cloak is offline  
#9 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 09:56 PM
 
runes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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?
runes is offline  
#10 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 10:13 PM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#11 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 10:17 PM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#12 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 10:24 PM
 
runes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
runes is offline  
#13 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 10:36 PM
 
cloak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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

The Most Important Person on earth is a mother...She has built something more magnificent than any cathedral-a dwelling for an immortal soul, the tiny perfection of her baby's bodyâ¦-Cardinal Mindszenty
cloak is offline  
#14 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 10:39 PM
 
cloak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

The Most Important Person on earth is a mother...She has built something more magnificent than any cathedral-a dwelling for an immortal soul, the tiny perfection of her baby's bodyâ¦-Cardinal Mindszenty
cloak is offline  
#15 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 10:39 PM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#16 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 10:41 PM
 
zinemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: from the fire roads to the interstate
Posts: 6,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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).
zinemama is offline  
#17 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 10:42 PM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#18 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 10:47 PM
 
runes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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!
runes is offline  
#19 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 11:09 PM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#20 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 11:35 PM
 
cloak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.

The Most Important Person on earth is a mother...She has built something more magnificent than any cathedral-a dwelling for an immortal soul, the tiny perfection of her baby's bodyâ¦-Cardinal Mindszenty
cloak is offline  
#21 of 43 Old 02-10-2008, 11:48 PM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
The vaccine does NOTHING to lower your chances of getting Hib.



HIb is an acronym for the term: Hemophilus Influenza - B.

The vaccine reduces the rates of Hemophilus Influenza - B.

My chances of getting Hemophilus Influenza - B are lower because of the vaccine.


Note I am talking about Hemophilus Influenza - B.




So, I have said nothing about over all Hemophilus Influenzae infections of different serotypes. I am simply saying that the vaccine has brought the B numbers down (what HIB stands for), and i got this vaccine for them...or will...to protect against Hemophilus Influenza - B.

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#22 of 43 Old 02-11-2008, 12:04 AM
 
cloak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My bad, you are correct. Take the "b" off the "Hib" in my posts. The logic is still the same. Hib has gone down. HI has stayed the same. No point in getting this vax.

The Most Important Person on earth is a mother...She has built something more magnificent than any cathedral-a dwelling for an immortal soul, the tiny perfection of her baby's bodyâ¦-Cardinal Mindszenty
cloak is offline  
#23 of 43 Old 02-11-2008, 12:07 AM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloak View Post
My bad, you are correct. Take the "b" off the "Hib" in my posts. The logic is still the same. Hib has gone down. HI has stayed the same. No point in getting this vax.
Type B is different than the other types and causes different symptoms and issues. Thus, we can't conclude it is illogical just from saying tpye A is ont he rise because we have ousted B.

What are the effects of A? what is its virulence? What problems does it cause?

Is it better to have less B and risk having more A? (or C, d, e or f?-- i think they end at F)

that's a whole 'nother debate in and of itself. (IMO)


(and, obviously, it is an issue for the OP to look into- serotype replacement)

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#24 of 43 Old 02-11-2008, 12:17 AM
 
attachedmamaof3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,656
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...indexed=google

Quote:
The incidence of Hib meningitis decreased 69% during the 1-year period after initiation of Hib immunization (from 2.62 to 0.81 cases/100,000 person-years; P<.001). In contrast, the incidence for H. influenzae type a meningitis increased 8-fold.

Therefore, Hib immunization contributed to an increased risk for H. influenzae type a meningitis through selection of circulating H. influenzae type a clones
Just one example.
attachedmamaof3 is offline  
#25 of 43 Old 02-11-2008, 12:17 AM
 
delphiniumpansy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 2,783
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Carrie did a good job of outlining information on the vaccine. VAERS is self reported and I don't give that much time. I mean, anyone could report anything so who knows how true or false it really is.

My babies got this one as I think it is an important one to get.

If I were only going to one at 6 mos I would do dtap as pertussis is common and on the rise whereas Hib is not so common anymore. Dtap would be the one I would choose over all the rest for that reason.
delphiniumpansy is offline  
#26 of 43 Old 02-11-2008, 12:26 AM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by delphiniumpansy View Post
Carrie did a good job of outlining information on the vaccine. VAERS is self reported and I don't give that much time. I mean, anyone could report anything so who knows how true or false it really is.

My babies got this one as I think it is an important one to get.

If I were only going to one at 6 mos I would do dtap as pertussis is common and on the rise whereas Hib is not so common anymore. Dtap would be the one I would choose over all the rest for that reason.
I do agree with this. If you are ONLY looking to get one vaccine at 6 months and only one (and do want the DTaP at some point) that would probably be a better bet (as in, there's more of a chance your babe would be exposed to the disease the vaccine is meant to help prevent/lessen severity of- in the case of DTaP)


BUt, of course, it would also depend on your risk assessment between Hib and pertussis as well as how you feel about those diseases.

"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#27 of 43 Old 02-11-2008, 12:48 AM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by carriebft View Post
Type B is different than the other types and causes different symptoms and issues. Thus, we can't conclude it is illogical just from saying tpye A is ont he rise because we have ousted B.

What are the effects of A? what is its virulence? What problems does it cause?

Is it better to have less B and risk having more A? (or C, d, e or f?-- i think they end at F)

that's a whole 'nother debate in and of itself. (IMO)


(and, obviously, it is an issue for the OP to look into- serotype replacement)
Just in case anyone cares...

HiA is almost identicle to HiB, except it doesn't do epiglotittis. HiF is a lot more rare, but it does cause epiglotittis. (but not often, because of it's rareness...it doesn't appear to be a good colonizer, I guess).

Most of the increase in "invasive Hi disease" has been with the nontypeable strains. They cause pneumonia and meningitis (and the "lesser" forms of disease not considered "invasive", like ear infections).

What it's looking like to me is that there will always be a dominant colonizer, and the factors that make a bacteria a great colonizer also has the "side effect" of things going too far sometimes, resulting in invasive disease.
For example, in our nose and throat, there's a constant turn-over of cells, and a "good colonizer" has the ability to dig in deep into that tissue to keep from getting shed off .
BUT...while 99.9% of the time that's not a problem, that .1% of the time "being able to dig in deep into the local mucosa" results in bacteremia when everything goes just wrong, which will sometimes turn into meningitis.
Causing invasive disease doesn't benefit the bacteria at all...it's just a side effect of being THE great colonizer.
But any time you remove one dominant species, the selective pressure is on for something else to learn all the same old tricks.

Net benefit to snipering them off one serotype at a time via vaccines = zero.

It's evolution in action and it happens amazingly fast for these little boogers.
mamakay is offline  
#28 of 43 Old 02-11-2008, 02:01 AM
 
rredhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Antioch, CA
Posts: 469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This is really interesting. The Hib is the only shot we've done. We started at 7 months, and spaced them 2-3 months apart (so 7, 9, 12). I chose it because of the information in the book What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Children's Vaccines" and because it was the only disease that we felt was a real threat to children under 2 years.
I wouldn't do DTaP because it's a multi-vax, it's highly reactive, and the pertussis part is only 59-80% effective. (I recently researched this for a friend. If you want the link to the %, I'll find that.)

~ Robyn

Mom to Jackson, b. January 2006

and Cassandra, b. October 2011

 

weadopted.gif novaxnocirc.gif

http://chittisterchildren.wordpress.com

rredhead is offline  
#29 of 43 Old 02-11-2008, 10:17 PM
 
jamamo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by attachedmamaof3 View Post
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...indexed=google

The incidence of Hib meningitis decreased 69% during the 1-year period after initiation of Hib immunization (from 2.62 to 0.81 cases/100,000 person-years; P<.001). In contrast, the incidence for H. influenzae type a meningitis increased 8-fold.

Therefore, Hib immunization contributed to an increased risk for H. influenzae type a meningitis through selection of circulating H. influenzae type a clones

Just one example.
But, it's important to look at some of the fine print also. This is the part you left out of your quote: "In contrast, the incidence for H. influenzae type a meningitis increased 8-fold (from 0.02 to 0.16 cases/100,000 person-years; P=.008). ....The risk attributable to serotype replacement is small in comparison to the large reduction in Hib meningitis due to immunization."

You have to look at the statistics. Hib meningitis decreased from 2.62 to 0.81 per 100,000. Hia meningitis increased from 0.02 to 0.16 per 100,000. So, yes, Hia increased, but it's still 5 times less common than Hib. And, even after the 8 fold increase, it's still 16 times less common than Hib was before vaccination began. Adding it all together, there was still a net reduction in Hi meningitis from these 2 strains.

I think it is something to keep an eye on, and serotype replacement is important. But, IMO, it's not a reason to say the vaccine is worthless.

It's kind of like smoking. Quitting smoking will greatly reduce your risk of lung cancer, but it might cause you to gain weight which increases risk for diabetes. Should we say quitting smoking is worthless then? I think most people would say no.
jamamo is offline  
#30 of 43 Old 02-11-2008, 10:24 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Adding it all together, there was still a net reduction in Hi meningitis from these 2 strains.
That's just Hia, though. It's NTHi that's really exploded. When you looks at all Hi, we're back to where we were in 1991, basically. No real net reduction.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17516405

Quote:
In addition to the proportional increase in cases of non-type b Haemophilus influenzae disease in the post-H. influenzae type b vaccine era, the incidence of invasive H. influenzae disease was found to be approaching the rates of H. influenzae type b disease that were documented in the prevaccine period. Fifty-six percent of invasive disease now occurs in individuals aged >10 years.
And then there are inter-species competitions, as well...s. pneumo and h. influenzae compete for space,for example. So to see the whole picture of what all has happened, you need to follow specific health-realted endpoints, like "bacterial meningitis".
mamakay is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off