Safety of pertussis vaccination in pregnant women in UK - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 150Likes
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-14-2014, 08:20 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,563
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
Ummm what? It's a completely legitimate way to search pubmed...

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/viewlet/s...d_subject.html
Because authors on pubmed are listed:
last name, first initial. Like this: Offit P

Here is the search I did on Offit P and autism http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=offit+P+autism which turned up six articles. Three of them are free full-text. Interested in discussing the science?
Deborah is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-14-2014, 10:51 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,066
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
Choice is a good thing. I am not aware of any laws forcing pregnant women to vaccinate..... So thank goodness for that.
U.S. and Canadian hospitals have mandatory flu shots without making exceptions for pregnant women. In U.S. hospitals, they're fired for refusing. Some states are looking into similar policies for teachers and child care employees.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 10:55 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,066
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post
What specifically do you find objectionable about what NVIC says about pertussis vaccination during pregnancy?

http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-New...e-.aspx#_edn19

I would greatly appreciate an answer to my question, if not from PSM, (to whom it was directed), then from someone else. Pretty please and thank you.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 10:58 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,066
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
I would be happy to discuss any of Paul Offit's articles which are available free full-text. I think science needs to be read and discussed.
I'm not optimistic that you'll get responses, but start a thread!

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
Old 07-14-2014, 11:42 PM - Thread Starter
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
Because authors on pubmed are listed:
last name, first initial. Like this: Offit P

Here is the search I did on Offit P and autism http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=offit+P+autism which turned up six articles. Three of them are free full-text. Interested in discussing the science?
Wrong again. You don't have to search for it that way.

"The National Library of Medicine began including the full names
of authors in MEDLINE® /PubMed citations to articles published in 2002. Beginning in May 2005 PubMed users were able to search for authors using their full first and last names (referred to here as full name). "

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/techbull...ames.html#fig1

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 07-15-2014, 06:35 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,563
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
Wrong again. You don't have to search for it that way.

"The National Library of Medicine began including the full names
of authors in MEDLINE® /PubMed citations to articles published in 2002. Beginning in May 2005 PubMed users were able to search for authors using their full first and last names (referred to here as full name). "

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/techbull...ames.html#fig1
Tha is carrying dismissing older research WAY too far.

Reminds me of when I was an undergraduate at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. They were in the middle of moving their catalog from cards to an online catalog. Three quarters of the collection was still on cards. If I had gone for your approach to searching, roughly 6 million books would have been left out of my research.
Deborah is online now  
Old 07-15-2014, 02:11 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post
I would greatly appreciate an answer to my question, if not from PSM, (to whom it was directed), then from someone else. Pretty please and thank you.
OK if you insist (which you seem to like doing)….

I think this bit implies no-one cares to do testing (which I disagree with) and just assumes it's safe. Also raises the "toxin" distraction early on (quantities are tiny after all - it's like getting upset over toxins in a glass of water in my opinion):

With these recommendations, the time-honored rule of avoiding any potential toxic exposure that might interfere with the normal development of the fetus has been suspended and replaced with an assumption that vaccination during pregnancy is safe. But what is the scientific evidence documenting that this assumption is a well-informed one?

And wow that's then followed by - a lot of statements casting doubt on the safety and motivations of the vaccination program - statements which are very common here like "vaccinating before the science has been done" (read that a few times on here), etc. etc. Actually makes me wonder if some of you just post directly from NVIC without doing any other reading….

How would you do a clinical trial of vaccines during pregnancy? How long would it take and how many women would you allow to risk complications of flu during pregnancy and passing on pertusiss to their newborns….?

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
Old 07-15-2014, 02:48 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
How would you do a clinical trial of vaccines during pregnancy? How long would it take and how many women would you allow to risk complications of flu during pregnancy and passing on pertusiss to their newborns….?
so just give the vaccine during pregnancy and hope for the best?

staring to view "science" as a lot of blind faith with a heavy dose of hope - so many seems to embraces this type of thought when it comes to vaccines

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Old 07-15-2014, 05:55 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,066
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
OK if you insist (which you seem to like doing)….
I know. I like it when people pay me the courtesy of responding to my questions. I'm kind of evil that way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
I think this bit implies no-one cares to do testing (which I disagree with) and just assumes it's safe. Also raises the "toxin" distraction early on (quantities are tiny after all - it's like getting upset over toxins in a glass of water in my opinion):

With these recommendations, the time-honored rule of avoiding any potential toxic exposure that might interfere with the normal development of the fetus has been suspended and replaced with an assumption that vaccination during pregnancy is safe. But what is the scientific evidence documenting that this assumption is a well-informed one?

And wow that's then followed by - a lot of statements casting doubt on the safety and motivations of the vaccination program - statements which are very common here like "vaccinating before the science has been done" (read that a few times on here), etc. etc. Actually makes me wonder if some of you just post directly from NVIC without doing any other reading….

How would you do a clinical trial of vaccines during pregnancy? How long would it take and how many women would you allow to risk complications of flu during pregnancy and passing on pertusiss to their newborns….?
When Fisher says that the recommendation for universal vaccination for pregnancy went out before there was sufficient evidence, she's really not lying.

We've discussed this before.
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/committee/downloads/preg-principles-2008.pdf

Quote:
1. "Concerns about vaccination of pregnant women."

1.i. "Lack of data to make evidence-based decisions."
1.i.-1. "No or limited well-controlled trials to establish efficacy of vaccines in pregnant women or their offspring."
1.i.-2. "No or limited post-licensure studies of efficacy or safety."
1.i.-3. "No or limited animal data."
1.C. iii. “Even more limited data on newer vaccine types.”
1.C. iii. 2. “Additives/adjuvants/preservatives (eg, thimerosal). Limited or no safety data on exposure of pregnant women, fetus and newborn to these.”

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
Old 07-16-2014, 12:09 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Ok. So could you respond to my question about how you propose to run clinical trials on pregnant women that you would consider sufficient testing?
prosciencemum is offline  
Old 07-16-2014, 07:16 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,563
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
Actually, at this point it is fairly simple. Do a follow up study comparing the outcomes of the children of women who received various vaccines during pregnancy against the children of women who did not. Match each woman against another woman with similar characteristics. Evaluate every child for health problems of any variety. See if there are any longer term problems. With early intervention, most developmental problems are spotted by age 3, so for the flu vaccine, at least, we could get a picture of whether the vaccines are interfering with normal development.

The fact that no such study has been done or is in the works to be done is very telling, to me.

But the vaccines have been pushed during pregnancy, so the data exists. It should be reviewed.
Deborah is online now  
Old 07-16-2014, 08:37 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Why are you so confident such a study is not planned?

Ongoing safety checks of current vaccinations happen all the time.
prosciencemum is offline  
Old 07-16-2014, 09:47 AM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Life experience and knowledge of how drugs are pushed on women without proper testing are how we know that these studies are probably not planned. See Dieckmann Study. See Thalidomide. See Bendectin. See Paxil. See Efflexor. See Tetracycline. Now we have the flu and DaPT vaccine. The P portion of the vaccine has been known in medical literature to be neurologically toxic since the 1940s.

If these women who are receiving the vaccines in pregnancy are part of a safety trial then a waiver should be signed acknowledging the fact that they are guinea pigs in a drug safety test for these vaccines. If something happens to the baby or mother, what recourse is there? Who is the patient? The dose given is an adult dose in the flu vaccine and contains thimerasol.

Meanwhile, in Tennessee, women are subject to prosecution if they are found to self medicate during pregnancy. Only illicit drugs given during pregnancy are allowed if prescribed by a physician during pregnancy or labor.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/woman-charg...ry?id=24542754

Last edited by applejuice; 07-16-2014 at 11:08 AM.
applejuice is offline  
Old 07-16-2014, 01:21 PM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
And to the OP, were women who miscarried after receiving this oh,-so-very-safe-vaccine-during-pregnancy included in that study? Fourteen days post vaccination is not sufficient to me, a woman and mother, but to the people promoting vaccines, it may be.
applejuice is offline  
Old 07-16-2014, 03:36 PM - Thread Starter
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by applejuice View Post
And to the OP, were women who miscarried after receiving this oh,-so-very-safe-vaccine-during-pregnancy included in that study? Fourteen days post vaccination is not sufficient to me, a woman and mother, but to the people promoting vaccines, it may be.
They didn't just look at the first fourteen days post vaccine. That information is in the very first sentence of the quoted study in my OP...

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 07-16-2014, 06:08 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,563
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
It is YEARS since flu vaccine was first recommended during pregnancy. Find a study that looks at long-term outcomes and does the type of comparison I described.
Deborah is online now  
Old 07-16-2014, 07:36 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,066
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
Why are you so confident such a study is not planned?

Ongoing safety checks of current vaccinations happen all the time.
BEFORE the recommendations and requirements go out. Not after, when women's bodies get objectified into the status of lab rats.

That's what we've been trying to hammer home in this thread.

I back what Deborah said on research, by the way. I'd also like to see more longitudinal data.

The objection to the latter may be that we're facing a public health emergency and, to quote a popular meme, "Ain't nobody got time for that."

But there are other solutions, including the development of a better vaccine and a resounding public health message about hand-washing and staying home when symptomatic EVEN if vaccinated.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
Old 07-17-2014, 12:33 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Turquesa - I get that you were asking for that. My response was to ask you how you would go about running clinical trials on pregnant women.

As you are so find of pointing out questions you feel I (and others) ignore I'll point out again that you've ignored that question.
prosciencemum is offline  
Old 07-17-2014, 04:42 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
Turquesa - I get that you were asking for that. My response was to ask you how you would go about running clinical trials on pregnant women. You must have missed Deborah's post? #71?

As you are so find of pointing out questions you feel I (and others) ignore I'll point out again that you've ignored that question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
Why are you so confident such a study is not planned?

Ongoing safety checks of current vaccinations happen all the time.
Yet you can't show one for what is being asked here.

You are confident that the vaccine should be given even without knowing or showing evidence of a study like others have asked about! Got it! That's so scientific - assume it's just OK!

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Old 07-17-2014, 08:47 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,563
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
If a study will be tricky or ethically tough, then the best solution is to just give as many people as possible the product, avoid monitoring for long-term problems and (not you), mock people who ask questions or turn down the product.

That is weird, IMO.
Deborah is online now  
Old 07-17-2014, 09:35 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
I see no evidence for avoidance of long term monitoring.
prosciencemum is offline  
Old 07-17-2014, 09:41 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,563
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
I see no evidence for avoidance of long term monitoring.
Can you find any study looking at the long-term outcomes in children who received vaccines in the womb? The only one I know of was conducted back in the 60s or early 70s and looked specifically for an increase in cancer.

As I think I said earlier in this thread, I personally know of two women who received thimerosal containing vaccines while pregnant and both had children with developmental problems. If this is just a fluke or coincidence, it should be easy to demonstrate by conducting the monitoring and it should be easy to find out that such monitoring is taking place. Why? Because women would have to be enrolled and they would have to be informed that the health of their children would be checked at various points during their childhoods.

Where is the study?
Deborah is online now  
Old 07-17-2014, 10:05 AM
 
samaxtics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 666
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
Where is the study?
It's in the queue right next to the study of health outcomes for vaccinated vs never vaccinated children.

samaxtics is online now  
Old 07-17-2014, 10:21 AM - Thread Starter
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
Can you find any study looking at the long-term outcomes in children who received vaccines in the womb? The only one I know of was conducted back in the 60s or early 70s and looked specifically for an increase in cancer.

As I think I said earlier in this thread, I personally know of two women who received thimerosal containing vaccines while pregnant and both had children with developmental problems. If this is just a fluke or coincidence, it should be easy to demonstrate by conducting the monitoring and it should be easy to find out that such monitoring is taking place. Why? Because women would have to be enrolled and they would have to be informed that the health of their children would be checked at various points during their childhoods.

Where is the study?
I did about 2 minutes of research and found this:

"Prenatal and Infant Exposure to Thimerosal From Vaccines and Immunoglobulins and Risk of Autism"

http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...126/4/656.long

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 07-17-2014, 02:50 PM
 
samaxtics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 666
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
I did about 2 minutes of research and found this:

"Prenatal and Infant Exposure to Thimerosal From Vaccines and Immunoglobulins and Risk of Autism"

http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...126/4/656.long
Isn't that the study where they found thimerosal has a protective effect against autism?
Maybe shoot for 2.5 minutes next time.
samaxtics is online now  
Old 07-17-2014, 10:03 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,563
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
From the study: "Maternal receipt of flu vaccine during pregnancy was infrequently recorded in medical charts (2 receipts) and primarily came from maternal report (36 receipts). We defined postnatal exposure as micrograms of ethylmercury divided by the weight of the child (in kilograms) at the time of administration of each TCI. Exposures were summed over the time periods of interest. Prenatal exposure was defined as the cumulative ethylmercury amount (in micrograms) of all TCIs received by the mother during her pregnancy with the child."

Sounds like there were 36 mothers in the study who had received thimerosal containing vaccines during pregnancy. Or am I misreading something?
Deborah is online now  
Old 07-17-2014, 11:26 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,066
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
Turquesa - I get that you were asking for that. My response was to ask you how you would go about running clinical trials on pregnant women.

As you are so find of pointing out questions you feel I (and others) ignore I'll point out again that you've ignored that question.
Ack! Take a deep breath. I thought I had already answered with the need for rigorous follow-up of post-natal outcomes. Clinical trials on pregnant women are already being performed post-recommendation. Just one example is this study with an unimpressively tiny sample size: http://health.usnews.com/health-news...ems-safe-study

What difference would it make pre-recommendation? Either way, it's nothing new.

If you understand the full concept of post-marketing surveillance, you'll realize that pregnant women, with scarcely their knowledge or informed consent, are already participating in the trial.

Have I answered your question? Yet?

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
Old 07-17-2014, 11:52 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Not exactly no. I know post recommendation studies are ongoing and continue to monitor the effects of these recommendations for pregnant women.

I though up thread you or others were saying that's not good enough and the studies need doing first.
prosciencemum is offline  
Old 07-18-2014, 06:11 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,226
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
let's backtrack:

What safety studies were the initial recommendation to vaccinate women in pregnancy for pertussis based on?

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...


Last edited by kathymuggle; 07-18-2014 at 06:54 AM.
kathymuggle is online now  
Old 07-18-2014, 06:54 AM
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,666
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
let's backtrack:

What safety studies were the initial recommendation to vaccinate women in pregnancy for pertussis based on?
I'd like to know too...I didn't see any coming out when the recommendation came out to vaccinate pregnant women...to me , it seemed more like a russian roullette game they're playing, and 'let's wait and see on the outcome.' Now 'they' seem to be extracting data which coincides with their beliefs, use biased studies to promote a medical procedure without any evidence of safety for the fetus. Where are the long term nonbiased studies of these fetuses who were routinely subjected to multiple vaccines while in utero?
This study used a very small control group, which does not represent the USA population as a whole, imo.
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00707148
it was biased to begin with.
Quote:
However, the ACIP conclusion is that administration of Tdap after 20 weeks’ gestation is preferred in order to minimize the risk of uncommon adverse events and the possibility that any spurious association between Tdap-related adverse events and another illness might appear causative.2
http://www.cfp.ca/content/59/5/497.full
Quote:
The importance of vaccinating during each pregnancy is emphasized by the case of a 40-day-old baby who died from pertussis; the baby’s mother had received a postpartum Tdap dose 2 years earlier, but she developed a cough illness a week before delivery.11
again, we don't know the outcome of vaccinating pregnant women every two years with DTaP...will some women have a toxic buildup that transfers to her fetus resulting in brain damage or birth defects? Will her offspring have problems with their children?? Too many unanswered questions...
emmy526 is online now  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not 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