Many people throw around the CDC quote that 24,00 - 36,000 people die every year from the flu, which by the way was the same statistic used they used from 2003 - 2009. For starters that number is completely inaccurate.
bold because I can't get out of the quote box: This needs a legit source. Why should I take your word that it's inaccurate? And I want to know if you can even begin to make a case that the supposed number of fetal deaths from one year of the vaccine even begins to rival the aggregate number of deaths of non-fetal people from the flu over the years.
Their lack in ability to produce accurate information that has been proven true is why I choose not to follow the "herd" on this particular vaccine. This is my opinion, criticize away, but I am not trying to change your mind or belittle your beliefs I am simply defending mine and others like me. If you want to debate this and try to change someones opinion on the matter provide more research to back what you say. I have quoted many different sources and have given links to most of them.
In all your verbiage, I found just one link. That is poor source-citing for even a freshman-level research paper, let alone a scientific discussion, not to mention your source argued exactly the opposite of what you were claiming.
DD born 10/10/07 * DS born 11/25/11 * #3 due 3/9/2015
Many people throw around the CDC quote that 24,00 - 36,000 people die every year from the flu, which by the way was the same statistic used they used from 2003 - 2009. For starters that number is completely inaccurate.
bold because I can't get out of the quote box: This needs a legit source. Why should I take your word that it's inaccurate? And I want to know if you can even begin to make a case that the supposed number of fetal deaths from one year of the vaccine even begins to rival the aggregate number of deaths of non-fetal people from the flu over the years.
Their lack in ability to produce accurate information that has been proven true is why I choose not to follow the "herd" on this particular vaccine. This is my opinion, criticize away, but I am not trying to change your mind or belittle your beliefs I am simply defending mine and others like me. If you want to debate this and try to change someones opinion on the matter provide more research to back what you say. I have quoted many different sources and have given links to most of them.
In all your verbiage, I found just one link. That is poor source-citing for even a freshman-level research paper, let alone a scientific discussion, not to mention your source argued exactly the opposite of what you were claiming.
My very first post had 2 links in it.
Oh, my bad. Three links, wow. You disappeared for several days after writing that post without responding to anything anyone said about either of those links. Why don't you respond to them before going off on something else?
DD born 10/10/07 * DS born 11/25/11 * #3 due 3/9/2015
I take back what I said about fully trusting any website followed by .org. What the hell sources is that tin foil wearing all natural health site using?
You do realize people will actually click on these bogus links you keep providing right?
Natural News is a joke and is not written by medical professionals. It's written by fake doctors and people who received online medical degrees. And huffington post? As a resource for science and medicine?! I don't think so.
Furthermore, scientific articles are difficult to interpret (obviously) and based on your misinterpretations and belief in fake news, I think maybe you need some help. Instead of perpetuating fake news and life threatening misconceptions, maybe you should realize you don't know what you're talking about. And stop hiding behind the "it's my belief" crap. You are wrong and your beliefs are selfish and endanger others.
Many people throw around the CDC quote that 24,00 - 36,000 people die every year from the flu, which by the way was the same statistic used they used from 2003 - 2009. For starters that number is completely inaccurate.
bold because I can't get out of the quote box: This needs a legit source. Why should I take your word that it's inaccurate? And I want to know if you can even begin to make a case that the supposed number of fetal deaths from one year of the vaccine even begins to rival the aggregate number of deaths of non-fetal people from the flu over the years.
Their lack in ability to produce accurate information that has been proven true is why I choose not to follow the "herd" on this particular vaccine. This is my opinion, criticize away, but I am not trying to change your mind or belittle your beliefs I am simply defending mine and others like me. If you want to debate this and try to change someones opinion on the matter provide more research to back what you say. I have quoted many different sources and have given links to most of them.
In all your verbiage, I found just one link. That is poor source-citing for even a freshman-level research paper, let alone a scientific discussion, not to mention your source argued exactly the opposite of what you were claiming.
My very first post had 2 links in it.
Even in all the links I have used they were heavily scrutinized. One site was even from the World Health Organizations website and people still asked for accurate sources. I doesn't matter what source I choose to post...I could have the bama man in an interview claiming it is all a fake and no one would believe me. That is why last big post had none and the one before only had one. If you would like my sources for my last source I will provide them without a problem. Here is an absolutely wonderful post by non other than the Huffington
1. We repeatedly pointed out that you fundamentally misunderstood the WHO source, so I don't know why you keep bringing that up because it just makes you look more foolish.
2. My political leanings are irrelevant to a scientific discussion, but they are not what you think they are.
3. See other responses re: "the Huffington."
DD born 10/10/07 * DS born 11/25/11 * #3 due 3/9/2015
The Huffington Post is not always a reliable source and I understand that but that particular article related to legit other sources I have posted. You need more? Fine will find more and take the next few posts to answer more of the questions from my older posts. I just felt more under attack than under question.
Oh, okay, if the only people who are dying from the flu (although you simultaneously believe practically nobody is dying) are elderly people, that's fine, because people over 65 are just, like, my parents, so I guess they're disposable. As I've mentioned before, precisely the reason I get the flu vaccine every year, pregnant or not, is to help protect them and other people who are immunocompromised.
But what I was talking about was actually your conflation of the flu vaccine used to prevent the flu with antivirals used to treat the flu. It would make sense that if you wanted to reduce the use of antivirals in flu treatment, then you should take measures to prevent the flu in the first place, which means giving people the vaccine. That is clearly what the WHO source is saying. And also, since you didn't understand that I guess I shouldn't expect you to understand the very link you cited when it says right there in black and white that pregnant women are at higher risk for the flu and that they recommend we get the flu vaccine, which was what the OP was about in the first place. That is my last attempt to try to help you understand why I think it was foolish of you to cite the WHO link when it says exactly the opposite of what you're trying to argue. If you don't get it, you just don't get it, and maybe you still think you're right, but perhaps you ought to give up trying to convince me or anyone else, because you are doing a terrible job.
The rest of your sources, as @Smash1215 and others pointed out, are not real scientific sources, so if you're just going to continue in that vein you're wasting your time. I mean, yeah, you're under attack, but you voluntarily barged into this thread in the first place, called us sheeple, and told us to shut up, then cited sources that were either questionable or which you interpreted questionably. What kind of response did you expect, exactly?
DD born 10/10/07 * DS born 11/25/11 * #3 due 3/9/2015
Interesting article with some interesting comments. May not help you make a decision but it is interesting to hear what some people have to say. I, myself, am not getting one.
Yeah that looks like a real reliable source you've got there.
Interesting article with some interesting comments. May not help you make a decision but it is interesting to hear what some people have to say. I, myself, am not getting one.
Yeah that looks like a real reliable source you've got there.
I never claimed it reliable.
So... you used it to prove the reason why you're not getting a flu shot but don't consider it reliable? Say what?
Interesting article with some interesting comments. May not help you make a decision but it is interesting to hear what some people have to say. I, myself, am not getting one.
Yeah that looks like a real reliable source you've got there.
For me it's about personal risk. I work in an office with only 4 other people. I have a separate office, run an air purifier, and as the only woman have my own bathroom. I mostly am at home when not at work. I wash my hands and do things to support my immune system (healthy diet, herbal teas, zinc, vitamin c, etc.) and my midwives do not recommend the flu vaccine for pregnant women unless there are heightened risk factors (teacher, nurse, gets sick often, etc.) I've never had the flu that I know of, unless it just seemed like a cold and I got over it on my own.
I'm not getting the flu shot, and I have never gotten the flu shot. My husband usually doesn't get one either but this year we are taking extra precautions since he is working in a large office and he is going to get the nasal spray sometime soon.
If I start to show any signs of a cold, I will go to my doctor at the first signs. I'm not going to dumb and wait a week or two until it gets bad. Too much is at risk when there is someone else relying on my immune system too.
Does this mean you're going to wear a mask during flu season when you are at the grocery store or the gas station or anywhere out?
Otherwise healthy patients with influenza shed the virus for 24 to 48 hours (ARE CONTAGIOUS) before they show any clinical symptoms. So all those people around you everywhere in everyday life? Potentially contagious to you.
THIS IS ALSO NOT A NEW IDEA! Everyone's accredited providers should be giving the same EVIDENCE BASED RECOMMENDATION. Vaccination with influenza vaccine has been recommended for pregnant women since the 1960s. Since 2004, the US Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has recommended that all women who are pregnant or will be pregnant during influenza season receive inactivated vaccine (NOT THE NASAL SPRAY), regardless of trimester.
In addition to protecting mama, influenza vaccination during pregnancy provides protection to her infant for up to six months after birth.
There are multiple studies backing up the efficacy and safety of the influenza vaccine in pregnancy, therefore explaining the recommendation of ACOG (The American College of OB/Gyns), The British/Royal college of OB/Gyns, and the American Board of Certified Midwives that pregnant women receive the vaccine for the protection of themselves and their babies.
Here are a few:
Zaman K, et al. Effectiveness of maternal influenza immunization in mothers and infants. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(15):1555.
Madhi SA et al for the Maternal Flu Trial (Matflu) Team. Influenza vaccination of pregnant women and protection of their infants. N Engl J Med. 2014 Sep;371(10):918-31.
BFP #1: It's a GIRL! DD born October, 2012 BFP #2: m/c at 7w, February, 2014 BFP #3: It's a BOY! Please be our rainbow! Due February, 2015 *everyone always welcome*
For me it's about personal risk. I work in an office with only 4 other people. I have a separate office, run an air purifier, and as the only woman have my own bathroom. I mostly am at home when not at work. I wash my hands and do things to support my immune system (healthy diet, herbal teas, zinc, vitamin c, etc.) and my midwives do not recommend the flu vaccine for pregnant women unless there are heightened risk factors (teacher, nurse, gets sick often, etc.) I've never had the flu that I know of, unless it just seemed like a cold and I got over it on my own.
I'm not getting the flu shot, and I have never gotten the flu shot. My husband usually doesn't get one either but this year we are taking extra precautions since he is working in a large office and he is going to get the nasal spray sometime soon.
If I start to show any signs of a cold, I will go to my doctor at the first signs. I'm not going to dumb and wait a week or two until it gets bad. Too much is at risk when there is someone else relying on my immune system too.
This is silly logic. I worked in a small real estate/ bond office. There were a total of four employees including myself. There were three of us working one day. In the time it took me to drive up the block to pick up my lunch order. My sick boss came in, sat at my desk, used my phone and computer and gave me the flu. What followed were the worst 7 days of my life.
THE! FUCKING! WORST!
It only takes one person. Unless you're an office of one, you run the risk of getting the flu.
I never got the flu shot before I was pregnant and never did when I was. Not because I didn't want to, I literally forgot to ask at every appointment and just didn't think about it. Now that I have my daughter, I got the flu shot for the first time ever, my husband had his and she also got hers at 6 months. Why not just get it? I would recommend it to every pregnant woman
So I have NEVER gotten a flu shot...however my OB talked me into it at my 14 week appointment. His selling point was that after I have my baby, and begin nursing, that immunization will be passed onto the baby. I felt that was reason enough to get the flu shot....knowing that my baby who won't have any immunizations for 8 weeks of their life, will have a little something from for a while.
***SIGGY WARNING***
me: 28 - all test normal DH: 33 - SA normal *unexplained*
TTC since September 2011 2011-Oct.2013 - trying off and on, ob/gyn, no meds November 2013-December-EOD, ob/gyn, no meds January 2014- ob/gyn ordered Clomid (50 mg) unmonitored, EOD-BFN February-Clomid 50 mg. unmontiored, EOD - BFN March-Switched to RE April- 100 mg Clomid/Ovidrel-BFN May - 100 mg Clomid/Ovidrel-BFN June-*BREAK/Switch RE* July- 5 mg Femara/Ovidrel + IUI #1- BFN August- 5 mg Femara/Ovidrel + IUI #2 - BFP!!!!
"Antiviral drugs are available for treatment, however influenza viruses can develop resistance to the drugs.
So now, you who take this vaccine are at greater risk of causing this virus to build an immunity to the vaccine. Thus, creating a greater, stronger, potentially more deadly virus. This country is constantly over vaccinating creating extremely deadly super viruses such as, CRE and MRSA. These superbugs are born in hospitals and clinics and are extremely deadly. CRE has a 50% mortality rate. As apposed to the flu's 5-10% in adults and 20-30% in elderly 65 and above. As reported by WHO.
_______________________________
Vaccine =/= antiviral drug.
MRSA is not the result of vaccinations. What vaccine do you think caused that one? Polio? MMR?
Good God. Get your shit straight.
Thank you for that lovely insight. I am well aware of MRSA not being a vaccine induced superbug. Never the less it is a superbug that originated from the confines of our lovely places of medical treatment. And I am not sure where you got that I said polio was a super bug created by over vaccination.
Vaccines cause viruses, over time, to genetically mutate. Thus, leaving vaccinated peoples unvaccinated to the mutated strain. This happened in America in 2006 and 2010 with the mumps. The specific genotype that is vaccinated for the mumps is type A. The one that infected so many was of a mutated strain, genotype G. The outbreak was, for the most part, kept hush hush by the CDC.
Good god. I have my shit straight.
If need be I can make you a wonderful list of every website link to every drug induced superbug, cover up, lie, horror stories of vaccinations. I have an arsenal at my disposal. For every Fox, ABC, CNN, CDC, and presidential report I can find a dozen more supporting my stance on the medical field.
I feel like you would benefit from a basic microbiology course. You would learn that that's not how any of this works.
OP, please get the flu shot. If not for you, then for your child. My 16 month old son was diagnosed with bone marrow failure at 3.5 months old. He literally could die from the flu because he has no immune system. I thank god I got the flu shot when I was pregnant because it gave him some protection last winter.
Your entire view on everything in your life will change when you have a child. If, as a newborn, your child gets the flu, or pertussis, you will never forgive yourself for not getting the vaccine. That's what happens when you're a mom-you feel personally responsible for every ounce of suffering your child goes through, because watching your kid in pain is the worst thing in the world.
Thanks to the moms that have provided all the great science based links in this thread. Herd immunity is very very real for my family. Thank you to those who recognize how important vaccinating is for those who are unable to protect themselves.
I have a severe neomycin allergy which is an ingredient in the flu shot so I can't get one, but even if I could I would probably pass. Even the preservative-free ones still contain aluminum and this year's shot missed the mark so to me it wouldn't be worth the potential risks for a shot that probably won't actually protect you from the flu.
I have a severe neomycin allergy which is an ingredient in the flu shot so I can't get one, but even if I could I would probably pass. Even the preservative-free ones still contain aluminum and this year's shot missed the mark so to me it wouldn't be worth the potential risks for a shot that probably won't actually protect you from the flu.
Umm, no it didn't "miss the mark" it's still at least 50% effective which is a 50% higher chance of protection than not getting it.
I swear people don't read those articles when they come out, only the headlines. Also not sure why this needed to be bumped for this oh so wise contribution
Umm, no it didn't "miss the mark" it's still at least 50% effective which is a 50% higher chance of protection than not getting it.
I swear people don't read those articles when they come out, only the headlines. Also not sure why this needed to be bumped for this oh so wise contribution
Do you actually understand what 50% effective means? It does NOT mean that 50% of people who get the flu shot will be protected from the flu. Those statistics are based on "relative risk" which means that, for example, if they studied 200 people, half of whom got the flu shot, and 2 people in the non-flu shot group got the flu and only 1 person in the flu shot group got the flu then it was "50% effective" based on the relative risk of getting the flu in the first place even though it only prevented one instance of the flu and basically only 1% of people who got the shot saw any actual benefit from it. So really we don't know how many people might actually benefit from the shot unless they share the actual numbers from the efficacy study. Just to clarify because I think when a lot of people hear 50% effective they think it means you're actually cutting your risk in half and you're not.
Gosh, excuse me for responding to a post that was on the front page of the section without carefully paying attention to when it was originally posted. Maybe in the future you should post an expiration date or mods should lock the thread so people know at what point they are no longer welcome to comment on a topic that's still relevant.
I was not deliberately bumping a specific post. I saw a thread on the first page and I commented on it. For all the bitchy pushback that happens when somebody starts a post with a caveat that they don't want to hear certain responses you people sure think it's ok to tell certain people not to respond to someone else's post if you don't like what they have to say. And sorry, I base my decisions on facts and statistics even if you don't like them. I don't have an agenda. People can vaccinate if they want and I don't get offended but the question was what are YOU doing and that's the question I answered.
(Who's bumping now? lol) Also AFwifelife, I can't see a thing you post unless someone else quotes you because I have you ignored for being horrid on another thread.
Every time I see a crazy anti vaxxer post I wonder if that person has ever drank diet soda. Or eaten any food that wasn't fully prepared from raw ingredients by their own hand. It drives me crazy thinking that there are people out there that think flu shots are poison but then go to Starbucks for some fancy coffee drink made with chemical flavor syrup. Ridiculous.
Umm, no it didn't "miss the mark" it's still at least 50% effective which is a 50% higher chance of protection than not getting it.
I swear people don't read those articles when they come out, only the headlines. Also not sure why this needed to be bumped for this oh so wise contribution
Do you actually understand what 50% effective means? It does NOT mean that 50% of people who get the flu shot will be protected from the flu. Those statistics are based on "relative risk" which means that, for example, if they studied 200 people, half of whom got the flu shot, and 2 people in the non-flu shot group got the flu and only 1 person in the flu shot group got the flu then it was "50% effective" based on the relative risk of getting the flu in the first place even though it only prevented one instance of the flu and basically only 1% of people who got the shot saw any actual benefit from it. So really we don't know how many people might actually benefit from the shot unless they share the actual numbers from the efficacy study. Just to clarify because I think when a lot of people hear 50% effective they think it means you're actually cutting your risk in half and you're not.
Well, actually, to be more accurate, the fact is that more than 50% of the strains of influenza identified to date this year are not included in the current flu vaccine. So, if a person is exposed to a strain that is not included in the vaccine, then obviously the protection offered by the vaccine would be minimal. Meanwhile, if the individual is exposed to one of the strains of influenza included in the vaccine, they would have some degree of protection. So the vaccine effectiveness would depend on which influenza strain you happen to encounter, which of course, you would have no way of knowing.
The most important measures you can take to avoid infection would be to practice good hand hygiene (including carrying hand sanitizer), avoid extremely crowded locations, avoid sick contacts, avoid touching your face excessively.
TTC #1 12/2009 BFP #1 1/2010, M/C 6 weeks BFP #2 6/2010, DD lost to congenital heart disease, we are heartbroken.
TTC #2 4/2011, diagnosed MTHFR, FVL Four natural cycles BFN; Clomid IUI BFN; Follistim IUI BFN; 1/2012 IVF #1 BFN 4/2012 FET BFP #3 5/2012 7w1d u/s: anembryonic demise; M/C @ 8w. 6/2012 found Stage II/III endo on laparoscopy, removed w/ laser. 8/2012 IVF #2 epic fail: no viable embryos.
Vacation, break, second opinions, on to new RE. 1/2013 Surprise chemical pregnancy BFP #4 (break cycle), IVF #3 postponed. 2/2013 TI w/ hormonal support, prednisone, aspirin, Lovenox, acupuncture gave us a miracle BFP #5! Heartbeat on U/S at 6w1d! Baby,please stay!!
Our miracle baby boy arrived 10/2013! We are so in love!!
10/2014 Surprise BFP #6
Our second daughter arrived in May 2015! We are so grateful!
Never had a flu shot and I don't think I've ever had a case of the flu when I was little that didn't pass within a few days and haven't had it since and I'm 42. Dr Sears Vaccine Book (and this is not all I've read nor will it be my last source of info) but prior to 2010 flu vax was not considered safe for pregnant women as it was labeled as a class C risk category and even now it's only a B category. Why? Because there are not enough actual human studies to prove its safety. And if you read the actual PI on a flu vaccine it says "it is also not known whether the flu vaccine can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman". It is a valid opinion that animal research alone is not enough to verify the safety of the flu vax for pregnant women. I'm not an anti vaxxer per se but the flu vax especially, is questionable and seems to be the least effective. And if you're a family that eats a lot of GMO laden foods, which can cause leaky gut, then that's when some real problems can arise from the toxins from the vaccines leaking into your brain and other organs to cause real damage. If I get a bfp I won't be running to get a flu vaccine. My choice. My decision. And people shouldn't be berating other people on here for their choices.
Me 42, DH 33, TTC for about a year naturally (but no protection for 4 yrs). Together 6 yrs, married June 2014. CD 3, FSH of 15, E2 67, AMH 0.43, LH 6.2, normal HSG test DH good count but low volume, 87% motility, 1% morphology IUI#1 - Nov 2014, 100 mg clomid and HCG, 2 large follies 20 & 16mm (7 follies total). BFN IVF# 1 Jan 2014, 225 Gonal F, 225 Menopur, Ganirelix, 4R/3M/1F w/ICSI - PUPO!
Never had a flu shot and I don't think I've ever had a case of the flu when I was little that didn't pass within a few days and haven't had it since and I'm 42. Dr Sears Vaccine Book (and this is not all I've read nor will it be my last source of info) but prior to 2010 flu vax was not considered safe for pregnant women as it was labeled as a class C risk category and even now it's only a B category. Why? Because there are not enough actual human studies to prove its safety. And if you read the actual PI on a flu vaccine it says "it is also not known whether the flu vaccine can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman". It is a valid opinion that animal research alone is not enough to verify the safety of the flu vax for pregnant women. I'm not an anti vaxxer per se but the flu vax especially, is questionable and seems to be the least effective. And if you're a family that eats a lot of GMO laden foods, which can cause leaky gut, then that's when some real problems can arise from the toxins from the vaccines leaking into your brain and other organs to cause real damage. If I get a bfp I won't be running to get a flu vaccine. My choice. My decision. And people shouldn't be berating other people on here for their choices.
Do you take prenatal vitamins? Because those are also category B. Yet I'm almost certain you would take those without thinking twice about it. Weird.
Also category B: Zofran and just about every other common prescription morning sickness medication. The more you know...The stupider anti-vaxxers sound.
@delujm0 I actually take food based prenatal vitamins, not synthetics that would be classified as such. @ettoile you should do some more research on GMO foods and get back to me on what you find about leaky gut. Is it so surprising that foods (i.e. corn etc with bt toxins built right in) could cause detrimental harm to your gut that would allow things that shouldn't pass through the gut to find it's way to other organs? Why do you think this country has become so sick in the past 10 years? It's not a coincidence. Anyhoo I'm getting off topic. I would pass on the flu vaccine for reasons simply that there is not enough research to its safety to a fetus, and the research that's out there that actually proves how little it actually protects you. @redheadbaker, I can recommend some new movies for you if you need some better come backs.
Me 42, DH 33, TTC for about a year naturally (but no protection for 4 yrs). Together 6 yrs, married June 2014. CD 3, FSH of 15, E2 67, AMH 0.43, LH 6.2, normal HSG test DH good count but low volume, 87% motility, 1% morphology IUI#1 - Nov 2014, 100 mg clomid and HCG, 2 large follies 20 & 16mm (7 follies total). BFN IVF# 1 Jan 2014, 225 Gonal F, 225 Menopur, Ganirelix, 4R/3M/1F w/ICSI - PUPO!
So... I got a flu shot about a week ago. My arm hurt like a bitch for a few days, so that sucked. Obviously, I have nothing of value to add to this thread...
Re: Flu Shot and Pregnancy??
In all your verbiage, I found just one link. That is poor source-citing for even a freshman-level research paper, let alone a scientific discussion, not to mention your source argued exactly the opposite of what you were claiming.
You do realize people will actually click on these bogus links you keep providing right?
Furthermore, scientific articles are difficult to interpret (obviously) and based on your misinterpretations and belief in fake news, I think maybe you need some help. Instead of perpetuating fake news and life threatening misconceptions, maybe you should realize you don't know what you're talking about. And stop hiding behind the "it's my belief" crap. You are wrong and your beliefs are selfish and endanger others.
1. We repeatedly pointed out that you fundamentally misunderstood the WHO source, so I don't know why you keep bringing that up because it just makes you look more foolish.
2. My political leanings are irrelevant to a scientific discussion, but they are not what you think they are.
3. See other responses re: "the Huffington."
But what I was talking about was actually your conflation of the flu vaccine used to prevent the flu with antivirals used to treat the flu. It would make sense that if you wanted to reduce the use of antivirals in flu treatment, then you should take measures to prevent the flu in the first place, which means giving people the vaccine. That is clearly what the WHO source is saying. And also, since you didn't understand that I guess I shouldn't expect you to understand the very link you cited when it says right there in black and white that pregnant women are at higher risk for the flu and that they recommend we get the flu vaccine, which was what the OP was about in the first place. That is my last attempt to try to help you understand why I think it was foolish of you to cite the WHO link when it says exactly the opposite of what you're trying to argue. If you don't get it, you just don't get it, and maybe you still think you're right, but perhaps you ought to give up trying to convince me or anyone else, because you are doing a terrible job.
The rest of your sources, as @Smash1215 and others pointed out, are not real scientific sources, so if you're just going to continue in that vein you're wasting your time. I mean, yeah, you're under attack, but you voluntarily barged into this thread in the first place, called us sheeple, and told us to shut up, then cited sources that were either questionable or which you interpreted questionably. What kind of response did you expect, exactly?
Than why post it? Because you can? [-(
Does this mean you're going to wear a mask during flu season when you are at the grocery store or the gas station or anywhere out?
Otherwise healthy patients with influenza shed the virus for 24 to 48 hours (ARE CONTAGIOUS) before they show any clinical symptoms. So all those people around you everywhere in everyday life? Potentially contagious to you.
THIS IS ALSO NOT A NEW IDEA! Everyone's accredited providers should be giving the same EVIDENCE BASED RECOMMENDATION. Vaccination with influenza vaccine has been recommended for pregnant women since the 1960s. Since 2004, the US Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has recommended that all women who are pregnant or will be pregnant during influenza season receive inactivated vaccine (NOT THE NASAL SPRAY), regardless of trimester.
In addition to protecting mama, influenza vaccination during pregnancy provides protection to her infant for up to six months after birth.
There are multiple studies backing up the efficacy and safety of the influenza vaccine in pregnancy, therefore explaining the recommendation of ACOG (The American College of OB/Gyns), The British/Royal college of OB/Gyns, and the American Board of Certified Midwives that pregnant women receive the vaccine for the protection of themselves and their babies.
BFP #2: m/c at 7w, February, 2014
BFP #3: It's a BOY! Please be our rainbow! Due February, 2015
*everyone always welcome*
***SIGGY WARNING***
me: 28 - all test normal
DH: 33 - SA normal
*unexplained*
TTC since September 2011
2011-Oct.2013 - trying off and on, ob/gyn, no meds
November 2013-December-EOD, ob/gyn, no meds
January 2014- ob/gyn ordered Clomid (50 mg) unmonitored, EOD-BFN
February-Clomid 50 mg. unmontiored, EOD - BFN
March-Switched to RE
April- 100 mg Clomid/Ovidrel-BFN
May - 100 mg Clomid/Ovidrel-BFN
June-*BREAK/Switch RE*
July- 5 mg Femara/Ovidrel + IUI #1- BFN
August- 5 mg Femara/Ovidrel + IUI #2 - BFP!!!!
EDD: May 7th, 2015: Team PINK
LFAF Summer 2016 Awards:
I feel like you would benefit from a basic microbiology course. You would learn that that's not how any of this works.
Your entire view on everything in your life will change when you have a child. If, as a newborn, your child gets the flu, or pertussis, you will never forgive yourself for not getting the vaccine. That's what happens when you're a mom-you feel personally responsible for every ounce of suffering your child goes through, because watching your kid in pain is the worst thing in the world.
Thanks to the moms that have provided all the great science based links in this thread. Herd immunity is very very real for my family. Thank you to those who recognize how important vaccinating is for those who are unable to protect themselves.
I swear people don't read those articles when they come out, only the headlines. Also not sure why this needed to be bumped for this oh so wise contribution
+1 for Anti-Vax Island.
LFAF Summer 2016 Awards:
BFP #1 1/2010, M/C 6 weeks
BFP #2 6/2010, DD lost to congenital heart disease, we are heartbroken.
TTC #2 4/2011, diagnosed MTHFR, FVL
Four natural cycles BFN; Clomid IUI BFN; Follistim IUI BFN;
1/2012 IVF #1 BFN
4/2012 FET BFP #3
5/2012 7w1d u/s: anembryonic demise; M/C @ 8w.
6/2012 found Stage II/III endo on laparoscopy, removed w/ laser.
8/2012 IVF #2 epic fail: no viable embryos.
Vacation, break, second opinions, on to new RE.
1/2013 Surprise chemical pregnancy BFP #4 (break cycle), IVF #3 postponed.
2/2013 TI w/ hormonal support, prednisone, aspirin, Lovenox, acupuncture gave us a miracle BFP #5!
Heartbeat on U/S at 6w1d! Baby,please stay!!
CD 3, FSH of 15, E2 67, AMH 0.43, LH 6.2, normal HSG test
DH good count but low volume, 87% motility, 1% morphology
IUI#1 - Nov 2014, 100 mg clomid and HCG, 2 large follies 20 & 16mm (7 follies total). BFN
IVF# 1 Jan 2014, 225 Gonal F, 225 Menopur, Ganirelix, 4R/3M/1F w/ICSI - PUPO!
Also category B: Zofran and just about every other common prescription morning sickness medication. The more you know...The stupider anti-vaxxers sound.
CD 3, FSH of 15, E2 67, AMH 0.43, LH 6.2, normal HSG test
DH good count but low volume, 87% motility, 1% morphology
IUI#1 - Nov 2014, 100 mg clomid and HCG, 2 large follies 20 & 16mm (7 follies total). BFN
IVF# 1 Jan 2014, 225 Gonal F, 225 Menopur, Ganirelix, 4R/3M/1F w/ICSI - PUPO!