Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I understand that this year they are offering the seasonal flu jab to all pregnant women even if you are not in an 'at risk' category.


I am slightly reluctant to have this as the advice has always been not to have the seasonal flu jab if you are pregnant. I do recall though that last year pregnant women were advised to get the swine flu jab (which is now included in the seasonal flu jab) as the complications from swine flu in pregnancy e.g. pneumonia, were considered quite dangerous. This makes me think I probably should have it.


Any thoughts?

I had it - to be honest I didn't give much throught to it, as I normally have one through work anyway. I thought the previous position was that the flu jab was only offered to particularly at risk groups, but if you were particularly at risk and pregnant they'd still reccommend you have it. I didn't think the previous advice was that you shouldn't have the jab if you were pregnant. But that's just my rather hazy recollection....


Hope this helps!

My consultant told me to get the swine flu jab if they offered it, but I didn't realise they were offering it and haven't had it - am due in a few weeks so hopefully a moot point. He did mention that pregnant women tend to become more ill with swine flu so I'm not sure if this is the same with seasonal flu (although am currently hacking and coughing thanks to my two school aged children). Sorry not to be more helpful. As above, I would contact your GP/nurse and ask them.

Hi Vickster,


In the past the seasonal flu vaccine was only offered to pregnant women who had an underlying health condition. It wasn't offered to all pregnant women simply because it wasn't necessary - if they were otherwise healthy they would generally recover without any complications. This year the have combined the 'swine flu' and seasonal flu strains into a single vaccine and it is because of the swine flu component that they are recommending pregnant women to have it. If you had the single swine flu (H1N1) vaccine last year then you don't need to have the combined one this year.


From the pandemic last summer it was shown that pregnant women were more vulnerable to developing severe respiratory complications from swine flu. The vaccine does not contain any live viruses and can't cause flu and has shown to have little side effects.


Kirsten X

Thanks everyone for the advice. Having done a bit more research, it appears that it takes 4 - 6 weeks to become fully effective, by which time, fingers crossed, I won't be pregnant anymore! Having said that, the idea of a bad bout of flu and a new baby fills me with horror, particularly as I have currently got underlying respiratory issues, so I think I am going to get it done. There is also some suggestion that it gives your baby a degree of immunity, which if true, can be no bad thing.

Hi Vickster, just to add I had it when I was pregnant, I was only 8 weeks at the time, but have asthma and know from experience how horribly ill I get with flu!


There was a really big study done a a couple of years ago which found that it was best for all pregnant women over 12 weeks to have the jab and anyone with underlying medical issues should have it even if pre-12 weeks. Prior to the study they didn't give it to pregnant woman as they didn't think it was really needed but not because there was any suggestion of negative effects. So I think you're right to get it, flu and a new born would be hideous!


Hope the little is here soon and you both avoid the flu!


K

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I have sympathy with any voter, anyone, who having witnessed the last 14 years and then Labour in the last year and wonders just how can things be this bad  unless a) they voted for brexit b) voted Tory after 2010 c) is thinking of voting reform  because anyone who thinks reform won’t make things a thousand times worse after voting for the previous?  It is they who are the problem.  They are the reason the country is in the doldrums with an embarrassingly-timid Labour government  Specifically Chris mason - a not very bright right leaning stooge - large part of why bbc news has become grok-level slop  
    • In what way? Maybe it just felt more intelligent and considered coming directly after Question Time, which was a barely watchable bun fight.
    • Yes, all this. Totally Sephiroth. The electorate wants to see transformation overnight. That's not possible. But what is possible is leading with the right comms strategy, which isn't cutting through. As I've said before, messaging matters more now than policy, that's the only way to bring the electorate with you. And I worry that that's how Reform's going to get into power.  And the media LOVES Reform. 
    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...