Hi Guys,
Just wondering everyone's opinion on these. I know the Vit K shot has been around for ages, but think the Hep B is fairly new and I'm not sure on this one.
Thought I'd ask and see what everyone else was doing / thinking.
Thanks
Printable View
Hi Guys,
Just wondering everyone's opinion on these. I know the Vit K shot has been around for ages, but think the Hep B is fairly new and I'm not sure on this one.
Thought I'd ask and see what everyone else was doing / thinking.
Thanks
The Hep B one has been around for a while too, not sure exactly how long though. it isn't a big deal if you choose not to have them done. Some choose not to give so as to not traumatise the baby, others choose not to because they don't see it as necessary in a healthy baby. I did get all of my babies done though, so I am not anti-vaccination, but I am pro-choice for parents who choose to not have them done. You could try picking up a copy of Just a Little Pr1ck which isn't biased at all towards it whereas any info you get from your Dr/hospital etc will be very biased towards it.
Do yourself a favour and check out how and why Hep B is transmitted, then you can make an informed choice about whether your bubs will need it.
Have a bit of look around the forum too, there are a few reasons posted why some do and some don't. I chose not to for any of mine, the kids would not be in a situation that required it.
xoxoxoxo
The birth dose of hep b only lasts 8 weeks- it is not the first in a course of shots. Given that, we declined it as I didn't see my son at risk in the first 8 weeks.
We were going to do the vit k orally simply to avoid needles but he had large bruising and swelling on his head from pushing on my pelvis so we decided to do it by injection as it gives the complete dose and made sure he was covered. We were happy to decide that on a case basis as vit k is mainly only important in traumatic births.
HTH. Do some reading and you can find good info on these to make your own choice.
We decided for the Hep B injection as a "just in case". We knew that our bub wouldn't be in a situation that would pose a risk but we thought, "what would happen if we couldn't control a situation?" Very rare but in the end we decided to. The vit K injection has been said to be more effective as it is absorbed more quickly and totally. Some say that there is no difference. I recommend reading up on this one. We decided for the injection after reading information. all this is just my experience but I hope it helps :-)
We got both the Vit K and Hep B.
The Hep B is the first in a series of vaccinations. We were told that better immunity was developed by getting the vaccination early and that bub would not need boosters later on in life as we've had to have.
I got neither for Tehya or Abbey. Do your research and make an informed decision. Once you've given it you can't go back.
I have had clients from overseas (Singapore, Italy etc) who dont do vitamin K as its not standard in their own countries and dont think its necessary. I think pretty much all of my clients defer hep b to two months or dont have it at all.
We didnt get either.
If you BF, the VitK can be passed through your milk - so lots of Asparagus, cauliflower immediately before and after birth if you are really concerned. The VitK injection is synthetic also, and the other ingredients in teh shot put us off.
As for the HepB we just didnt feel she was at risk.
Google it and do you reasearch. Remember that your doctor will always tell you to do it, so go in armed with information if you refuse to have them done.
GL :)
We had the Vit K shot for her, but our midwife on duty basically told us that they have to offer the hep B shot to everyone, although there are only certain babies that are at risk, (IV drug users etc) so we chose to wait until she was 8 weeks when she had her other immunisations.
Good luck making your decision and as everyone here has said it is a personal choice and one that there is lots of info out there about.
At this stage I'm thinking I'll be going with both of them. I'll probably do a bit more research though before I make my final decision.
One of the midwives said it's necessary in our area due to the high proportion of Hep B affected immigrants in the local population. I didn't question it at the time, but I'm thinking that she's meaning if bubs needs a blood transfusion some contaminated blood could get through the system.... not really sure to be honest. I'll have to ask my OB at the next visit.
For Vitamin K I believe that two studies in the 1990's found that giving Vitamin K to a newborn could increase the chances of childhood cancers. I've also read that this has never been shown in any study done since. Some researchers believe that lack of Vitamin K could be the cause of cancer and that it should be used to fight cancer. It's so hard to make a decision on this stuff when one study says one thing and another says the opposite. I'm pretty sure I'll go ahead with this vaccination though as there's no way to predict if your bubs will have the deficiency and it could be too late when the bleed occurs.
I personally have had every vaccination for my kids. Jazmyne didn't have the Hep B though as it wasn't around then.
The way I see it I'd rather be safe than sorry. I can't see our kids being at any risk of hep B, but you just don't know for sure.
Each to their own though.
You could get hepatitis B by
having sex with an infected person without using a condom
sharing drug needles
having a tattoo or body piercing done with dirty tools that were used on someone else
getting pr!cked with a needle that has infected blood on it (health care workers can get hepatitis B this way)
living with someone who has hepatitis B
sharing a toothbrush or razor with an infected person
traveling to countries where hepatitis B is common
An infected woman can give hepatitis B to her baby at birth.
You can NOT get hepatitis B by
shaking hands with an infected person
hugging an infected person
sitting next to an infected person
I thought I'd paste this in as I was trying to remember the reasons I didn't give HepB.
I just cant see the kids being in this situation.
My Dr didn't tell me to do it. He said it was my choice. We chose not to have HepB, had the VitK, he didn't have a problem with that at all. ;) Not all Dr's are the same.:
Remember that your doctor will always tell you to do it, so go in armed with information if you refuse to have them done
Thanks for the info Lulu - very interesting hun.
I gave both last time as i wasn't confident enough not to. This time not giving Hep B as i can't see how bubs will even remotely be at risk, i doubt we'll even leave the house in the first 2 months.
But one thing i wanted to double check is what are the perceived benefits of Vit k?
Mumma B - Vit K is given at birth as a child is born with very little or no VitK. Vit K is responsible for blood clotting primarily. The injection is given to cover the risk of the infant suffering a haemeroging (sp?) disorder that can occur in the first month after birth. It is a very serious occurance, however it is also quite rare. (The stats are available if you look for them)
Vit K is fat soluble, meaning it can be transmitted through breast milk. So it can be passed in some quantity to the child immediately after birth.
Hep B is not offered in the UK unless your baby is at risk, i.e. if one of the people it lives with or its mother have Hep B. Hep B can be sexually transmitted or transmitted by IV drug abuse but once you have it, you have it. So if you took IV drugs or had unprotected sex many years before, even though your lifestyle is no longer risky, if you have Hep B your risk factor remains. In the UK all pregnant women are tested for Hep B and HIV anyway, so you know before the birth if you need to get the vaccine (vaccination at birth prevents the baby getting it from being born to a HepB+ mother). If you decline it at birth it is still a part of the infant vaccination programme anyway. If i were in the position of it being offered at birth i'd opt out until the routine vaccinations began, since that is only 8 weeks later.
Vit K deficiency can cause a catastrophic clotting malfunction which causes the baby to suddenly haemorhage internally. It is very very rare (somewhere around 0.03% i think) but traumatic and injurious births (especially with bruising/wounds) make it more of a danger, because the Vit K in the baby's system is used up at the time of injury and the sudden lack of it (it is available in breastmilk but in small amounts, not the amounts found in the vaccine) causes sudden bleeding. Most babies who suffer the bleeding die, and those who do not frequently suffer severe brain damage from strokes. Some babies who suffer the bleeding DID NOT have a traumatic birth.
There have been exhaustive studies about the risk factors of Vit K. A few (mentioned by satya above) found a casual statistical link between cities where the uptake of Vit K had been high and childhood cancers. More recently (2005 onwards) childhood leukemia has been shown in most cases to have been caused by infection, in much the same way cervical cancer is. The infections which can cause it are more numerous and less diagnosable, but the link was clear to show that cities where large population shifts (such as an influx of foreign labour force) had occured had higher incidences of childhood cancers, indicating that the immune system's response to unfamiliar infections CAN be a reason for the malfunction which makes the body make cancerous blood cells. These cities were also places where VitK uptake was high - proving the original link was correct, but showing the reason for it was more complex.
At the moment the WHO states that the Vit K injection is safe for babies, though many will not strictly need it.
We decided to have the Vit K. I weighed all my vaccination pros against cons. There has been no scientifically-demonstrated negative effect of Vit K so far. The scientifically demonstrated effect of Vit K deficiency is a high risk of death or lasting, serious injury. I do not accept those as a reasonable outcome so i opted to remove the risk (i know this sounds dramatic, but i did the same for varicella - only i don't consider Chicken Pox to be so serious or risky i'd put DD through an extra needle when the vaccine is only 70% effective, so she didn't have it). I chose to have the VitK given at birth. I have friends who gave it orally and it made their baby gag (must taste bad?) and led to some (a few hours only) breast refusal afterwards, and i decided one needle would be better (for US) than 3 chokey doses. Also that i wanted to BF and i didn't want to have any bad associations made with DD's mouth until she was a good feeder.
Best of luck with your decision! :)
Bx
Both my girls had Vit K and Hep B at birth.
1 Qu though.....if you delay the Hep B at birth and give it at 8 weeks....when do they get the next doses? (2m, 4m, 6m, 12m)??
DD1 got it at: birth, 2m, 4m, 12m
DD2 got it at: birth, 2m, 4m, and will be getting it at 6m (instead of 12 months as its built into the 6 month shots).
They are only 3 shots if you dont have the birth one.
If you are immunised against HepB as an adult there are only ever 3 shots. Unless of course you don't seroconvert and need a booster.
My daughter had both the hep B and IM vitamin K. My daughter ended up neutropenic at 4 weeks old(she had low neutrophils in her blood, netrophils help fight infections) so she was at high risk of an infection luckily I was breastfeeding and she had that for protection. The paediatrician suggested the neutrophilia was a reaction to the hep B vaccination. This time as we are not in a high risk group and I am immune to hep B, I will not get my new baby immunised until 2 months.
Just my experience and everyones situation is different. Good luck with whatever decision you make.
thanks heaps everyone - has given me some direction and ultimately it is a very individual choice, so will do a bit more reading and see what feel I get.
thanks again - love the wealth of knowledge that is BB!
Thanks Ange....also....if you dont give it at birth (as per the schedule) does that mean your immunistations arent 'up to date' according to medicare/FAO?
I think ill be saying no thanks to both this birth unless the birth isnt so great, then ill agree on Vit K
I don't think the birth one gets lodged on the schedule so it doesn't matter if you don't get it. I recently went to get my son some of the 2 month immunisations and as I was varying from the schedule they got me to sign the co-objecter form- but they got me to do this without even knowing if we had done the birth hep b or not.
Satya - re blood transfusions. I work at Australian Red Cross Blood Service (the source for blood for transfusion in Australia) and the chance of contracting Hepatitis B from a blood transfusion is extremely low. There are a large number of screening tests that are performed on EVERY blood transfusion and blood donors must complete a detailed questionnaire and undergo an interview every time they present to donate. There are many procedures and checkpoints during the production, testing and distribution process that reduce these risks greatly. I doubt that a transfusion risk would be why your doctor recommended the vaccination.....but then again you never know what the doctors are thinking!....
Wow, there's alot to think about. Due to all our allergies, and reading posts I am going to research further, but at this point can safely say we will not be getting Hep B at birth (if we have another baby).xo
PS Just something interesting I learnt last night at a seminar, Japan don't vaccinate their babies until after 2 years ( Ithink it was Japan, sorry if I've got the country wrong) AND they have the lowest infant mortality rate in the world....food for thought for sure ! xo
Have researched it a bit more and here is some info on Vit K:
Administration of Vitamin K to Newborns - from Ronnie Falc?o's Midwife Archives
My wife & I decided against vaccination after much research; a bad experience with our son; and our shock realisation we understood more (a *lot* more) about vaccination than several doctors and nurses. (Some of these we knew personally - and regularly give shots as part of their daily routine.)
I won't even begin to post what we learned here. But you might like to go to a search engine and search for: "Australian Vaccination Network" and look through their site.
May I be so bold as to suggest parents do their research *before* beginning vaccination, not after. Please make sure your choice is an informed one (whatever it is) and not a blind one. That way if/when something goes wrong, you'll be miles ahead of those people unwilling to admit any vaccine could cause any harm.
Vitamin K:
In my mind, the risk of Vitamin K deficiency outweighed the risk that might be caused by the Vitamin K itself. Although I do agree with the notion that ALL babies have low Vitamin K stores, so maybe that is normal and not to be seen as a deficiency. I just didn't want to run the risk or bleeding in the brain. I did choose the oral administration, though as I didn't want her jabbed jsut after birth if it wasn't necessary. Apparently the only reason why most doctors and midwives prefer the needle is because it is a one-off. With the oral dose there is a chance you forget about the boosters and then it's not working. My midwife came for home visits for 6 weeks after birth, so there was no risk of forgetting to go to the doctor for boosters.
HepB:
I decided against it. I know that me and DH are negative (I was tested for it when I first became pregnant). And as I wasn't planning on letting my newborn have sex or take intravenous blood, I didn't think she needed it. I actually discussed this with a few health professionals and they agreed that it wasn't necessary as DD was at low risk. If you don't have the dose at birth, you don't have to "catch up" you get enough doses of the vaccine, the birth one is additional, not part of HepB vaccination schedule. Apparently it is just to make sure they don't go home unprotected. Or as I have heard some health professionals say: to cover the baby in case of a needle stick injury at birth. I was furious when I heard that. So really, it is to cover their A#*% in case of an accident. It is absolutely ludicrous as a vaccine isn't effective immediately anyway. So if there was a needlestick injury just after birth, she'd still run the risk of contracting HepB.
I'm still undecided about the Varicella vaccination. But I have chosen to go with the recommended vaccination schedule so far (apart from the birth dose of HepB, of course). It is a very personal decision, but I think it should be a personal decision and it should be an informed one. So discussions like this are very healthy.
Does anyone else think it is morally very questionable to bribe parents to vaccinate their children by paying an immunisation allowance if you're up-to-date? Or by bribing doctors by paying them a "bonus" if their immunisation quota is over a certain percentage?
GregMonarche, thanks for the resource. And I just wanted to say, I admire how carefully you worded your post.
Sasa
Thanks... :)
When our second son was born, one nurse there asked about our a "no vaccinations" note on my wife's forms. Then she asked did we realise there was an oral version? We said, "Well... We guess that would be ok." (Since directly into the bloodstream is the more dangerous concern.) She left the room, re-entered, and a short time later another nurse walked in and up to son #2 who was lying in a plastic crib at the other side of the room. Less than a minute later, the second nurse "briskly" walked over to her and they muttered with their backs to us. Son #2 was in front of them, so out of view. I wasn't paying a lot of attention because I was more concerned about my wife, her having just given birth.
It was only recently (years later) that we pulled out 2nd son's "blue book" - and realised it states he received Vit K *injection*. Man alive, you've got to watch everything people do and defend your decisions at every step. You never know when someone is, or is not, listening to your wishes.
Since then we've learned the oral version is unnecessarily many times an adult dose - and unless the birth was stressful for bub, the risk of bleeding is virtually non-existant. If they reduced it to a more sensible potentancy, there would probably be less objection to it. But I guess it's easier to flood bub with an excessive dose (which they don't even check afterwards), than it is to give a lower dose and do a routine check a short time later to see if more is needed.
Some also suggest going along with nature by not cutting the cord until it stops pulsing - that the last "bit of goodness" may begin Vit K production. (Back when our 2nd son was born, they used to cut and the placenta and rush it off immediately - saying they kept it for DW for a short time - in case there were a problem. Something to do with bleeding as I recall. They also asked permission - once it was not needed by DW - that it go towards other medical purposes. "Packed with red blood cells" or similar was the reason they gave.) So I think the "don't-cut-the-cord"/"go-along-with-nature" idea has merit.
Then there is the fact that breast feeding soon after birth, colonises bub's gut with the correct flora to produce their own Vit K. Oh - and I remember reading, and being told by a nurse... If Vit K really is needed, it works fairly quickly once given. So you have to wonder why giving it blanket-style to an entire population - and in an excessive dose - is pushed so hard.
With "Immunisation (I really don't like using that word) Allowance", you can still claim it without vaccinating by getting a Conscientious Objection form from medicare, having it signed by your doctor, and then returning it to medicare (or perhaps it was Centrelink). But most folks wouldn't be aware of that. So yes, some call it a bribe - that reminds the forgetful - or swings the fence-sitters amongst us.
My local council gave me this form and organised it for me when I went there to get my son some of the shots but not all and was varying from the schedule. I've got to give them credit- they made it very easy and never made me feel I am doing the wrong thing.:
Both my kids were given Vit K and Hep B at birth, the biggest mistake I ever made!!!
We have a strong family history of allergies.I didn't realise this would be a factor when they were immunised. They both had severe jaundice and spent many days underlights. I kept getting their regular immunisations and my oldest developed serious gut issues, malabsorbtion and food intollerences. My youngest has anaphylactic allergies and chemical sensitivities as well as all the gut issues. We finally went to a specialist who told us they were allergic to the preservatives in the vaccines and this had caused damage to their guts and immune system.I am going to investigate homeopathic immunisation for my next one. If you have an allergy history think about it very carefully before proceeding.
Regards
Lisa B.