A very low rate of vaccination in pregnancy is the result of the scaremongers. Many pregnant women are scared of medications and such during pregnancy however pregnant women are particularly susceptible to complications of Flu in pregnancy.
This report of the CDC on Flu vaccine shows low rates of vaccination improved much with physician recommendation.
I was alarmed to read this because OB GYNS and their patients who are pregnant should know that pregnancy increased rates of progression to a very serious complication–influenza pneumonia.
Pregnant women should avoid the live virus nasal vaccine, but they should be vaccinated.
The report below shows, in a pretty robust study with reasonable end points, there is no difference in birth defect rates, however a relative risk for still births in non vaccinated mother/baby cases is 1. 5, less than good evidence for causation, but still troubling.
My experience is that anxiety and fear about medical conditions and medical treatments rises during pregnancy, but the warnings on medications are a product in many cases of the precautionary principle. The vast majority of medications are not contraindicated in pregnancy. There are books that people like me carry around in their pockets that warn of the drugs that have shown evidence of negative effects in pregnancy and lactation. Pharmacies have computer software that warns of medications contraindicated in pregnancy.
http://acsh.org/2013/12/flu-vaccine-averts-millions-illnesses-pregnant-women-still-reluctant-cost-babies/
One thing this article and the CDC don’t mention is that pregnancy is an independent risk for influenza pneumonia, which increases morbidity and mortality.
thanks.
I knew when I put the post up that there would be an anti flu vaccine push back. that doesn’t change the fact that benefits accrue to kids, pregnant women and the elderly. Middle aged healthy people are not so often severely effected by the flu.
Tamiflu is only a mitigator, and amantidine resistant viruses have made amantidine less favored.
The efficacy of flu vax is variable from year to year, based on the strains picked for the vax.
The injectable dead viri flu vax is still somewhat effective, so, for at risk populations, and healthcare providers, it is worth it with little down side.
The nasal live virus is thought to be more effective and also restricted in use because it is live. For example I am required to get flu vax for my job as a military physician, but I get the injection not the mist because I am old.
Swine flu vax was pushed because it was believed to be the cause of the terrible flu pandemic of the late 19 teens.
H1N1 was the new name of the virus in the late 90s to avoid the swine flu moniker.
The swine flu vax was notorious because of the problems with the roll out, and because of the association with Guillian Barre, a terrible ascending neuropathy that is sometimes deadly, always temporarily and sometimes permanently debillitating.
John, I like most of the stuff you post. This one I am not so sure of. For me, it is less about the possible side effects of the vaccine as it of efficacy. I remember reading about a few studies on the use of the vaccine(s) and a common thread is that there seems to be little benefit.
Anecdotally I know that the few times I have had the vaccine, I have gotten sick. For the last 5 years or so I have passed on vaccination and seem to fair much better than those that do. Maybe its the anti-placebo effect, I don’t know. Possibly my own experience has jaded my view. My personal position is that I don’t put ANYTHING into my body that is of questionable benefit. I am 53 and take no medications of any kind (maintenance type, ie statins, blood pressure, etc) and I am the only one I know who does.