Mothering Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi All,

I haven't done a lot of research on this yet, but does anyone have good resources to look at? I would be taking it post partum only. But now I am wondering if it's worth it given the fact that there is most likely mercury in it and if not mercury then other harmful perservatives, plus the fact that it's a blood product.. what are the actual chances of being sensitized during the pregnancy anyway? I have taken 2 antibodies tests so far and both negative.

thanks!
lisa
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,710 Posts
Rhogam does not contain mercury.

Chances of sensitization vary from person to person, but once you are sensitized, you are sensitized for life. It can effect this PG, but usually causes problems in subsequent pg's.

I'd do a search here on MDC, there's been a couple of good discussions on this subject lately.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
630 Posts
There is not mercury in Rhogam. The last batch that had any thimerosol in it expired over five years ago now. Long gone.

I am sensitized and there's a reasonable chance I would not be if I had gotten the prenatal dose as well as the postpartum dose I got after my first birth. I do have regrets that I didn't get the prenatal dose, big regrets. I have big regrets now, and my pregnancy is actually going about as well as you could expect it too. I cannot imagine how horrible I would feel right now if it wasn't going so well.

Once you're sensitized things may still go relatively smoothly (or they may decidedly not). But one way or another you're high risk and need to be followed accordingly. Homebirth won't be a realistic option anymore with most midwives and in most locales. Your babies will be at risk of anemia and worse complications that can derive from the process, up to heart failure and beyond. The baby may need transfusions before or after birth. Fortunately good high risk OBs/perinatologists are able to head the process off at the pass most of the time now and most babies survive with few or no long-term consequences. But it does mean a lot of monitoring and possibly, if things go south, a lot of intervention.

Before Rhogam rh- women would frequently have a healthy child, then have many, many heartbreaking miscarriages or other losses. I talked not too long ago with a midwife who has been practicing since before it was commonly given and she had some sad memories to share. I have friends whose moms or grandmothers lost half a dozen pregnancies because of Rh sensitization before Rhogam or other treatments were devised. It's one of the true miracles of modern science and honestly looking at the "skeptical" writings on it I don't see anything that suggests it could be anywhere near as harmful as omitting it would be.

Oh and FTR I had NO known risk factors for my blood to have mixed with this baby. No car wrecks, no falls, no high blood pressure, no signs of placenta problems, no diabetes.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,675 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by daisycullen2003 View Post
But now I am wondering if it's worth it given the fact that there is most likely mercury in it and if not mercury then other harmful perservatives, plus the fact that it's a blood product..
Nope, no preservatives at all. Blood product is the only issue.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
just make sure they check the babies blood if it is rh negative no problem at all if it is positive I would get the shot postpartum. Because while the blood crossing the placenta during pregnancy is very rare it is a very big possibility after birth and you would not want to risk another baby with being sensatized my cousin had this with her third ( no idea why she did not get the shots since she had very medicalized births) and the baby had to have blood transfusion for months after birth to alter the sensativites.
Good luck I have had three boys all rh negative so I have never had to get the postpartum shot.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,710 Posts
My MW said that Rhogam has 'revolutionised' maternal medicine. She's practiced literally all over the world, including volunteer midwifery in third world countries, and I trust her.

Given the fact that I fall a lot in late pregnancy, and the fact that there can be absolutely NO indicators of possible sensitization, I choose to receive the prenatal shot.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
I AGONIZED over this decision, and what finally ended up making up my mind was I looked at:
*what is the worst case scenario if I skip it and get sensitized? (no more home births, very high intervention/very invasive pregnancy, poor outcome for baby)

*what is the worst case scenario from getting the shot? (some theoretical risks from exposure to ingredients, possibly some slight jaundice to the baby from the antibody exposure)

There is no mercury or preservatives as mentioned. It is a blood product, but it is ultra-filtered. I read a book about Anti-D that I borrowed from my midwife, and I remember that it said that there have been a few cases in the past of HIV and Hep infections, but that now it's not a concern anymore because now they do a certain treatment to the final product that would kill those infections if they were present. Maybe someone can clarify that for me, it was a couple months ago I read the book. But I know they said that those diseases were no longer a threat, and that the only threat of contamination was from diseases we may not know about yet and thus don't know how screen for or kill them.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
566 Posts
I got the shot with ds and I'm glad I did as I had a placental abruption and he arrived at 29 weeks. I'd had a shot just a couple of days before which seemed to do the trick. I couldn't stand the thought that I couldn't have more because of the trauma of the first birth. What I learned is - you just never know what is going to happen.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
hi!
thanks all for sharing your experiences. I guess my only question is whether or not it is actually true that there are no preservatives. I did a quick search on these boards and there were people stating that it is not true. I will have to check the dates of those posts because perhaps they were much older. They were stating that midwives/docs had told them there was no longer mercury, but upon further research found that there was.

thanks!
lisa
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,607 Posts
There have been several threads with lots of good info about Rhogam in the vaccine forum, if you're interested in searching for them.

One thing (that I'm sure all of you know already) is to be sure what the baby's father's blood type is. If he's negative too, you do not need Rhogam, because you have no chance of having a baby who is positive. There is only a possibility of problems if the baby is positive and your blood mixes somehow.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top