It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Concerns about whooping cough vaccine during pregnancy! Help!

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 08:03 AM
reply to post by Logos23

I was basically forced under various drugs to get this vaccine the day after I had my son.

I was completely out of it and they came in and stuck me. I asked what it was and they said the whopping cough vaccine. Now I don't ever remember saying that i wanted it, they mentioned it to me WHILE ON DRUGS of course!! Clearly I wasn't able to make any decisions let alone know where I was at that time.

I was not happy. I did not want it. I seem to be fine from having it, no side effects so far but the point is I didn't really want it but they came in during a time when my defenses were down 100%. I had just had a C section and was on various pain meds and still couldn't feel my lower half!

I refused all vaccines while pregnant and they still try and convince me the flu vaccine is a good idea even though I have told them many times I will not get one, ever.

I am not telling you what to do just giving my experience with this shot....which I basically didn't have a choice with.

posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 08:13 AM
Ok seeing as I dont think I can get the articals to you anyway other way these are the things I found.

Australian Nursing Journal, 2013 May; 20 (10): 49-51. (journal article - pictorial) ISSN: 1320-3185

BMC Public Health. 2013, Vol. 13 Issue 1, p1-9. 9p. 5 Donnan, Ellen J.1,2 et al

Billingsley M, BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) [BMJ], ISSN: 1756-1833, 2012 Sep 28; Vol. 345, pp. e6594; PMID: 23045350 Pregnant women in UK are offered whooping cough vaccine to protect newborns.

Oakley, Simon; Kilcoyne, Adrian; Smith, Janette. Primary Health Care. Sep2013, Vol. 23 Issue 7, p28-33. 6p.
Management of pertussis among pregnant women.

Dyson, Simon. Journal of Clinical Nursing. Mar1995, Vol. 4 Issue 2, p125-131. 7p. DOI: 10.1111/1365-2702.ep11545869. Whooping-cough vaccination: historical, social and political controversies

You can most likley get them orderd from your local libery if they are any good. Or you can buy them online.

Just dont take advice from anyone on here unless they can show you a Medical Degree or a degree that cover immunology .

posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 08:20 AM



reply to post by Logos23

Hi my instinct says DON'T LET HER, but common sense says I am not an immunologist or neonatal practitioner. Ok I got all that off my chest, I'll share info from this article in the Encyclopedia Britannica:

If they are not concerned for her immunity, according to this, they should not be concerned for the baby's:

After a newborn has received its supply of maternal antibodies, it is as fully protected as its mother.

Source:Encyclopedia Britannica

That's just one source, but a good one. The truth is out there-- you will help her make the right decision.

Thankfully medicine isn't driven by instinct but by tried and tested scientific method.

I would also suggest that if you're going to give "information" include ALL of the relevant information and don't cherry-pick. In the article you cited you neglected to quote probably THE most important part of it which is this:

"As important as the passively transferred maternal antibodies are, their effects are only temporary. The maternal antibodies in the blood become diluted as the animal grows; moreover, they gradually succumb to normal metabolic breakdown. Because the active development of acquired immunity is a slow and gradual process, young mammals actually become more susceptible to infection during their early stages of growth than they are immediately after birth."

Hence the rationale for vaccination.

Did that paragraph just slip you by?
Did you think it wasn't very important?
Or did you just ignore it completely for a reason?

I know which answer my money's on.

Yes OP, the truth is indeed out there but there are some people who wish to hide it from you.

You can decide for yourself the most important points, as can the OP, which is why I posted a link. What I found to be the most important part is that the passive transfer in utero followed by breast feeding provides full immunity to whatever the mother is immune to. This is nature at its finest. Did you miss the part about the vaccine agents passing the placental barrier?

And btw, I tend to believe that medicine is driven by neither instinct nor loyalty to the scientific method, but rather greed.

I only wish to share what strikes me as the most important points, as do you. I accept you believe differently. Perhaps together our posts provide a more rounded take. Still, OP, these are our OPINIONS and neither I nor Logos23 would bid you stake a newborn's life on what we type here. That much Logos23 and I can agree on I am sure!

No, the important part in respect to vaccination is that the immunity which is transferred from the mother is transient hence the requirement for pre or neonatal vaccinations.
The immunity also depends upon what the mother is immune to in the first place doesn't it? If she has limited immunity or compromised immunity how will that help the baby?
As for the vaccine/placental barrier, read up on safe vaccines and those which aren't recommended during pregnancy.

My knowledge on vaccines is not a belief nor an opinion, it is based solely upon verifiable and reproducible evidence.
That's where we differ. I'm happy for what I know to alter based upon the current evidence.
The fact that you believe that medicine is driven by greed tells me a lot (it's also a massive kick in the face to those of us who have worked our bollocks off making other people's lives better, thank you for that).
It's fine for you to have your own opinions and beliefs however you can't have your own facts.

There is too much crap on the internet about vaccines and too many people who outright lie about them for their personal gain.

People should always have the choice whether to vaccinate or not but this choice should be based upon the true available evidence. Not lies, misinformation and bull made up by people with an agenda.

posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 10:41 PM


reply to post by Microbiologist

Actually, you are WRONG.

For example, the area in California that was hardest hit in 2010 had a study done that showed 80% of those infected with whooping cough were CURRENT on the whooping cough vaccine. So to say that parents not wanting to vaccinate their kids are responsible for the recent whooping cough outbreak is gross misstatement.

I am sick of people saying this. I got whooping cough a year and a half ago. Guess what? I had just had a TDAP less than a year before. People getting the vaccine thought they were immune, so even when they became symptomatic they kept exposing others and spreading it, because they didn't think they could get it!

There are finally studies emerging that indicate a new strain is out there that the current vaccine doesn't work against. DUH...I knew this over a year ago, because it was very obvious to me here in Washington State.

new strain

I just get sick of the propaganda. If the vaccine isn't working, than giving people a false sense of security is not doing anyone any good. They need to admit to the problem...the booster is NOT working.

I'm afraid he isn't wrong at all.
The tenet of herd immunity is probably even more relevant in this case.

You wrote "So to say that parents not wanting to vaccinate their kids are responsible for the recent whooping cough outbreak is gross misstatement."
Did you actually read what you wrote?
Do you understand what you're saying?
Who do you think propagates disease, vaccinated or unvaccinated?
If you believe it's the former I suggest you go back to school.

And the vaccine still works, especially in those who really need the extra protection.

Of course I understand what I am saying and I meant exactly what I said.

I can tell you from personal experience, and from professional articles that I read at the time but are seemingly impossible to find now, that during our outbreak here in Skagit County WA, the majority of the people who got the whooping cough were CURRENT on their vaccines. It was NOT because of people being un-vaccinated that we had an outbreak. It was not because of irresponsible parents hiding their kids from the needle that caused the outbreak.

Both myself and my daughter were current on the booster. My husband and son were not. Guess who got pertussis? Both my daughter and I...meanwhile, my friend and her SIX kids that have NEVER had ANY vaccines, were all camping with us for two days in closed quarters while I was symptomatic (but thought it was just a cold).....didn't get it. Not one of them.

My OWN experience immediately made me suspicious that the booster was not affective, or that the current strain had muted. It was obvious. Finally....months later, I read two separate reports confirming that the outbreak was most common among those CURRENT on the TDAP. Its a no brainer. A little research will reveal that there is a KNOWN mutation, that renders the current booster pretty much useless.

I have worked in the medical field for years, I am not an idiot. No need to speak to me like I am just because I have a different opinion than you.

The reason why the CDC and the pharmaceutical agencies that make BILLIONS of dollars off the vaccine won't talk about this is because....well, they are making BILLIONS off it.

It is a HUGE disservice to the public and gives a false sense of security which then leads to a further spreading of the disease (like with me).

posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 11:13 PM
reply to post by westcoast

No vaccine is going to be 100% effective. No vaccine takes in 100% of people. There are always going to be some people that do not end up with immunity (or only a very weak immunity) even when fully up-to-date on their vaccines.

When a population has high rates of vaccination, the people for whom the vaccination doesn't 'work' end up being 'covered' as a result of herd immunity, just as are infants, the immunocompromised, and those who are otherwise unable to be vaccinated for medical or religious reasons.

As I'm sure you're aware, herd immunity works because once a certain percentage of the population is unable to contract a disease, the likelihood of an infected person spreading it to others goes down to the point that significant outbreaks are unable to occur and any cases are usually limited to a few individuals with significant contact.

The problems begin when you have large numbers of people refusing to vaccinate themselves and their children, especially because these ideas tend to circulate in certain circles and lead to clusters of people who probably have a fair amount of contact being unvaccinated or undervaccinated. This creates clusters of population where herd immunity begins to fail and essentially become ticking timebombs. Most of these clusters end up being fine because the herd immunity of the surrounding communities, but every once-in-a-while a case of disease enters the cluster and creates an outbreak. Not only do many of the unvaccinated end up getting sick, but so do some of the people for whom the vaccine didn't work and some of those who are unable to be vaccinated (in the case of whooping cough, infants end up being the unfortunate victim far too often).

I do not disagree with you that 80% of the people getting sick in an outbreak may well be vaccinated, numbers somewhere around those are to be expected. What you need to look at, however, are the RATES of infection in each group. If you look at those numbers, you'd likely find that the rate of infection in the unvaccinated population is many, many times that of the vaccinated population.

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in