Whooping Cough Vaccine

geeksauce

Anyone any thoughts on the Whooping Cough Vaccine, Pro's and Con's etc.

I for one am leaning towards getting it for the little one but just wanted a few other opinions.

pwurple

Got it for mine, asked GP about it, she wrote a prescription, I paid for it and she did the jabs. No side-effects, some protection achieved hopefully. Several years later my eldest has gone through 3 outbreaks of chickenpox at her creche without picking it up. Other families have had to take weeks off work looking after non-sleeping itchy children running temperatures.

I'm a fan of prevention in general.

We also are in contact with some families with immuno-suppressed children, so I would be wary of passing something onto them.

ps, it cost me 125 euro. Money well spent in my eyes, as a week off work would cost me far more than that, but if people can't afford it....

Rose35

Sorry, am I missing something here, is it not given in the 6 in 1 vaccines babies get aged 2,4 and 6 months ???

geeksauce

pwurple wrote: »

Got it for mine, asked GP about it, she wrote a prescription, I paid for it and she did the jabs. No side-effects, some protection achieved hopefully. Several years later my eldest has gone through 3 outbreaks of chickenpox at her creche without picking it up. Other families have had to take weeks off work looking after non-sleeping itchy children running temperatures.

I'm a fan of prevention in general.

We also are in contact with some families with immuno-suppressed children, so I would be wary of passing something onto them.

ps, it cost me 125 euro. Money well spent in my eyes, as a week off work would cost me far more than that, but if people can't afford it....

Thanks for that I was thinking it would be better getting it than not, the possible ramifications of them contracting the whooping cough would be far more sever than any side effects of the jabs.

pwurple

Sorry!! For some reason I misread that as chicken pox!

Yeah, whooping cough is free, and included in the schedule.

geeksauce

Rose35 wrote: »

Sorry, am I missing something here, is it not given in the 6 in 1 vaccines babies get aged 2,4 and 6 months ???

Maybe you are right, the way I was told about it, it seemed like a completely separate vaccine.

cyning

Whooping cough is definitely in the 6 in 1 jab all babies get...

http://www.immunisation.ie/en/Downloads/6in1downloads/PDFFile_15360_en.pdf

geeksauce

cyning wrote: »

Whooping cough is definitely in the 6 in 1 jab all babies get...

http://www.immunisation.ie/en/Downloads/6in1downloads/PDFFile_15360_en.pdf

That sorts that then, someone just mentioned to me earlier about the whooping cough jab which made me think it was separate from the 6 in 1.

lazygal

The whooping cough vaccine is recommended for pregnant women - is that what you mean op? I got it during my first pregnacy. It gives baby immunity in utero.

geeksauce

lazygal wrote: »

The whooping cough vaccine is recommended for pregnant women - is that what you mean op? I got it during my first pregnacy. It gives baby immunity in utero.

No my wife is expecting and someone asked me today are we going to get the whooping cough vaccine for the child. The way they phrased it made it seem as if this was a separate vaccine to the 6 in 1.

hypergirl

What age do you need to be for chicken pox vaccine?

hypergirl

What age do you need to be for chicken pox vaccine?

Paddy Cow

geeksauce wrote: »

Thanks for that I was thinking it would be better getting it than not, the possible ramifications of them contracting the whooping cough would be far more sever than any side effects of the jabs.

I got whopping cough when I was six. I got it around March/April and didn't return to school until the following September. It is an awful illness.

indigo twist

hypergirl wrote: »

What age do you need to be for chicken pox vaccine?

It needs to be given after all of the other vaccines - i.e. from around 13 months onwards.

It's expensive, but I'm considering it for my son (if he doesn't catch it before then - he's now nine months old, and it's in his creche at the moment unfortunately. )

sari

Yeah whooping cough used to be called 100 day cough. It's also important to remember that not all cases of WC have that whoop sound. There is actually quite a high number of whooping cough cases that go undiagnosed as they don't have that whoop, I think it's due to the fact the vaccine provides some immunity for the person who got it but that it doesn't prevent the spread or provide herd immunity like other vaccines might

Jerrica

indigo twist wrote: »

It needs to be given after all of the other vaccines - i.e. from around 13 months onwards.

It's expensive, but I'm considering it for my son (if he doesn't catch it before then - he's now nine months old, and it's in his creche at the moment unfortunately. )

I'm the same, very strongly considering getting the chicken pox vaccine. I always thought it was quite a benign virus but it can have some really nasty side effects. I think the vaccine itself is €100 and then you'll have the GP consultation fee on top of that.

indigo twist

Yeah, I always thought it was just a childhood rite of passage, but why put them through it if it's avoidable? I remember a few years back babysitting for a toddler for a couple of weeks when he had it, as his parents couldn't get off work - poor little thing was SO miserable with it, it seems really painful.

sari

I think the chicken pox vaccine is a bad idea. The rate of serious side effects from chicken pox is very low, they are there but they are rare when you get it as a child compare that to getting it as an adult and the side effects are much much worse and much more common. No vaccine gives lifelong immunity so the risk of getting it as an adult is quite high and that is far more dangerous than getting it as a child. You also can't forget that vaccines also come with side effects some quite severe.
Unless there is some medical reason to vaccinate against I wouldn't take the risk

newtoboards

I got the whopping cough vaccine while pregnant to offer protection to unborn baby in the first 8 weeks after birth before they could get the 6 in 1

pwurple

sari wrote: »

I think the chicken pox vaccine is a bad idea. The rate of serious side effects from chicken pox is very low, they are there but they are rare when you get it as a child compare that to getting it as an adult and the side effects are much much worse and much more common. No vaccine gives lifelong immunity so the risk of getting it as an adult is quite high and that is far more dangerous than getting it as a child. You also can't forget that vaccines also come with side effects some quite severe.
Unless there is some medical reason to vaccinate against I wouldn't take the risk

The vaccine doesn't wear off. It reduces risk of adult chickenpox exactly the same way getting the disease does.

It's a fully tested vaccine, deemed safe here and elsewhere. It has been on the free schedule in other countries for ages, and has been recommended for here also. It's been included in the MMR jab in other countries as MMRV since 2005. (V is for varicella, which is chickenpox). The reason it's not free here is cost to the exchequer. None other. Same reason our anomoly scans were dropped in hospitals... Etc.

Pablodreamsofnew

geeksauce wrote: »

Anyone any thoughts on the Whooping Cough Vaccine, Pro's and Con's etc.

I for one am leaning towards getting it for the little one but just wanted a few other opinions.

I think you should get it for your little one. We stayed indoors most of the time until our son was 8wks and get the injection. We were very nervous because people we know child died from whopping cough at 6wks so for us it was a no brainer. Just on a side note, the reason the little angel got the whopping cough was because two kids came to school with whopping cough because their mother didn't believe in vaccination and unfortunately the baby was there picking up his older brother with his mother at the time.

It's a really nasty cough! I hope you decide to get it.

sari

Pwurple the vaccine information sheet for cp vaccine states that efficacy data only gives immunity for 9 years. Maybe go and look at this info in medicines.ie

All vaccines have side effects that you need to consider and weigh up pros and cons.

pwurple

sari wrote: »

Pwurple the vaccine information sheet for cp vaccine states that efficacy data only gives immunity for 9 years. Maybe go and look at this info in medicines.ie

All vaccines have side effects that you need to consider and weigh up pros and cons.

Are you reading the wrong data sheets? Varicella vaccine single dose efficacy is 10-20 years, but with the booster unknown length... As in it has not worn off yet for the orignal recipients. That is the norm with most live vaccines, they tend to give very long lasting immunity.

sari

Where are you getting that info?
See section 5.1 http://www.medicines.ie/medicine/9511/SPC/VARIVAX/

Drdoc

Granted I only took a very quick look at the spc as my toddler was screaming but is it not that the studies were only for 7-9 years, not that the vaccine isn't effective after 9 years?

Silverbling

You can only make the choice yourself, my son was so allergic to the suspension the vaccine is in the doctors decided it was safer not to give it to him.

2 years ago when he was 13 my son got whooping cough, I can't tell you how horrific it is, 2 years later we are still dealing with the consequences, he had a lung biopsy last year and will be on medication for life due to the damage.

He is now back playing football and having a life, but is still on a nebuliser if he gets a cold and barks like a sea lion instead of coughing.We have been through 2 years of pure hell and it is ongoing, his medication costs €55 a month plus the meds & doctors fees.

I am not trying to sway you one way or the other, my son was just unlucky he caught it but please do not think it is just a normal childhood disease it is very very nasty and is on the increase in Europe

sari

Drdoc wrote: »

Granted I only took a very quick look at the spc as my toddler was screaming but is it not that the studies were only for 7-9 years, not that the vaccine isn't effective after 9 years?

That is how efficacy of vaccine is determined, through trails and clinical data. The information shows that there is no data to show that the cp vaccine provides any immunity past 9 years. Considering how dangerous cp is in older children or adults I see that as a huge risk to be taking with the health of my child unless there is a medical
reason a child needs it

Ocean Blue

sari wrote: »

That is how efficacy of vaccine is determined, through trails and clinical data. The information shows that there is no data to show that the cp vaccine provides any immunity past 9 years. Considering how dangerous cp is in older children or adults I see that as a huge risk to be taking with the health of my child unless there is a medical
reason a child needs it

Except that's not what you said. You said that data shows it 'only gives immunity for 9 years'. Nowhere in the SPC does it say that.
Anyway when it comes to vaccines a lot of the evidence for safety and efficacy in kids, pregnant women etc. is not due to controlled studies at all, it's from having observed effects in large groups of recipients. So conclusions are often drawn that don't exactly match the scientific data (or lack thereof).

sari

There is only data to show it gives some immunity for 9 years, the spc states this. If you want to focus on my wording rather than the facts which are available to us thats fine.
Its funny because if you use post trial information to point out possible negatives of vaccines its written off as being unreliable information as it doesn't come from a controlled trail but if you want to point out possible positives of vaccines its totally acceptable to use this uncontrolled information. That doesn't make sense to me, post trial data is either reliable or unreliable and you must apply this to possible positives and negatives, you cannot pick and choose.
I totally agree that the vaccines we have on our vaccine schedule are 100% needed, apart from hep b, but I do not agree with the CP vaccine in healthy children. The risk of serious side effects from contracting CP as an adolescent or adult are just to high especially when there is no data to say this gives any immunity past 9 years. When more research has been done to provide information on long term efficacy then I will read this and may change my view on this vaccine.
The truth is serious side effects, both short and long term, from contracting CP as a child are quite low but the occurrence of serious side effects, short and longterm, from contracting it as an adolescent or adult is much higher than as a child.

Ocean Blue

sari wrote: »

There is only data to show it gives some immunity for 9 years, the spc states this. If you want to focus on my wording rather than the facts which are available to us thats fine.
Its funny because if you use post trial information to point out possible negatives of vaccines its written off as being unreliable information as it doesn't come from a controlled trail but if you want to point out possible positives of vaccines its totally acceptable to use this uncontrolled information. That doesn't make sense to me, post trial data is either reliable or unreliable and you must apply this to possible positives and negatives, you cannot pick and choose.
I totally agree that the vaccines we have on our vaccine schedule are 100% needed, apart from hep b, but I do not agree with the CP vaccine in healthy children. The risk of serious side effects from contracting CP as an adolescent or adult are just to high especially when there is no data to say this gives any immunity past 9 years. When more research has been done to provide information on long term efficacy then I will read this and may change my view on this vaccine.
The truth is serious side effects, both short and long term, from contracting CP as a child are quite low but the occurrence of serious side effects, short and longterm, from contracting it as an adolescent or adult is much higher than as a child.

I'm not arguing about agreeing or disagreeing with the CP vaccine. But there are lots of people on here who won't know how to interpret an SPC or even understand the language. So I don't think it's appropriate for you to claim it says something it doesn't. It's just very misleading.

amen

Ocean Blue wrote: »

I'm not arguing about agreeing or disagreeing with the CP vaccine. But there are lots of people on here who won't know how to interpret an SPC or even understand the language. So I don't think it's appropriate for you to claim it says something it doesn't. It's just very misleading.

should people not state their professional qualifications when discussing an SPC sheet ?