I can not seem to find any current information.

Current information would be VERY helpful for people.

I see updates on these states for children adults , but not pregnant women.

The numbers and stats may have changed alot, or not, but how would we know?

Yes, and babies younger than 6 months can not get the vaccine and would have no “protection”

We really do not know the efficacy of flu vaccine in pregnancy but we do know that there is less efficacy in
patients that have compromised immunity.
That is including older people, who’s “compromised immunity” is nature ( a function of aging )
just like pregnancy is a “natural ” state of decreased immunity.

When the chickenpox vaccine was introduced it was to prevent 50 deaths a year . Considering virtually every child got chicken pox that’s 50 deaths verses 3 to 4 million cases
a year.

It was already well known that adults were much more likely to have serious complications from chickenpox than children and it was not known how long immunity would last from the vaccine.

It would have made sense to just vaccinate children after a certain age if they never got chickenpox rather than universal vaccination at 1 year of age.

A few years later we need to give a booster dose and we still do not know how long immunity lasts but we do know more adults are getting chickenpox and more adults and children are getting shingles which is a much more serious problem.

I am not saying this is the same as influenza, I am saying that there can be benefits to individuals and populations from some large scale infections.

The lay public was not aware that chicken pox in adults was a problem or could become one, nor were they aware of the association with shingles, but people in health care DID know and this information was not provided to the public.

They did not know there was a benefit of having chicken pox. Well, maybe some did when they tried to have “chicken pox” parties, and when they did they were casts as people that were putting their children in danger and as “miss educated ” parents .

The very point of this article, I agree, is that sometime choices have to be made with limited information.

My point is that there is more information that is not being provided and some information that is being provided incorrectly.

This makes the situation very confusing for people and also creates mistrust.

The author states that

” 1 out of every 25 pregnant women who contracted H1N1 died of it. By any standard, that is an appalling death rate.”

This is may have been a mistake in wording on her part but it is a big mistake and changes the entire message.

We do NOT KNOW how many people have gotten this flu, but best guess is many millions.

We DO know there are about 3 to 4 million pregnant women in the USA and so far 28 have died, which really changes the perception.

We alo know that research for flu vaccine has not been done on pregnant women or their babies, and that there is a study not yet completed being done of a few pregnant woman and this is basically to try to test to see how large a dose they may need if it it will require more than one dose.

We DO know:
Neither Fluzone vaccine nor Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine have been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility.

Pregnancy Category C: Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine or Fluzone vaccine. It is also not known whether these vaccines can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.

So the question is What IS Clearly Needed?

We also know flu vaccine, in general , does not
reduced the number of cases, deaths, complications

This is an excellent article for “lay people” back by very good science ,

http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/09/24/why-the-h1n1-virus-is-not-a-major-threat/
http://medicalconsumers.org/2009/09/24/why-the-h1n1-virus-is-not-a-major-threat/

For the record, I am an RN that worked for many years in
a high risk labor and delivery setting at a major University
Hospital in New York.

People may need to make quick choices but rather than trying to coerce them with selective information , let’s give them all the information we do have and let them make informed choices.

Addressing a comment in Marcy R.N.s, I don’t believe there are any benefits to a woman getting the flu while pregnant. She will gain immunity that will passed to the baby prenatally and through breast milk, but that immunity is passive through antibodies, not through the child’s own cellular memory. Meaning the baby can’t produce it’s own antibodies to the virus, and has no immunity. After the baby stops nursing, he/she is on its own. So, I don’t think there will be that benefit. Also, an active seasonal flu infection (vs. an inactivated flu vaccine) has been shown to be a risk factor for schizophrenia and autism in the child. I don’t believe that any potential benefit from the flu infection would offset the risks from the vaccine.

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/biologicsbloodvaccines/vaccines/approvedproducts/ucm182404.pdf

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/biologicsbloodvaccines/vaccines/approvedproducts/ucm182406.pdf

I’d tend to agree, 0.0007% wouldn’t be enough for me to try an untested
drug.”

In addition, I have searched and can not find any new updated
information on the number of deaths in pregnant women from confirmed
H1N1 since this last report of 28 deaths from April till the end of
August.

What about the last 8 weeks?

I would think since all deaths and reported sickness has increased that
that same percentage should be the same?

They have reported the number of child deaths, ages of deaths, etc. but
no new info on pregnant woman ( in the US at least )

Maybe I just can not find it, but I do find it very odd.

Without that information and without really knowing how many people
have actually gotten this virus ( it is assumed millions already ), we
can not say what the “percentages “are.

We can only say what the percentages are of pregnant women verses “other
people” who have died, which is not the same thing.

Also we talk of the risks of getting this flu verses benefit/risk of
vaccine, but no one is considering that there is also a benefit to
GETTING the flu.

If you do get the flu your child will also get your antibodies to
protect it, and it seems like you will also get some good immunity in
the future as being demonstrated by older people that were exposed
many years ago.

There may well be benefits we are not aware of.

And frankly we really do NOT know the Benefits or risks for the
vaccine.

Even the regular flu vaccine is not very effective is it is usually
less so in the very people it looks to protect.

And even in all these years there has never been any long term studies
on the safety in pregnancy and infants and children ” down the road”.

The head of the CDC and other ‘s keep saying it is safe and effect

Please read the Cochrane reviews on this subject.

http://www.cochrane.org/influenza/index.html

http://www.cochrane.org/influenza/reviews.html

In a nutshell :

Some public-health officials have described flu vaccines as “highly effective,”
but the internationally recognized Cochrane Collaboration (which accepts no
money from the pharmaceutical industry)
did a systematic review of all high-quality randomized trials
(25 in all) studying influenza vaccination.
They concluded that “the evidence does not support universal
immunization of healthy adults

And remember that anyone can read those reports which are very convincing.

I am not against the vaccine per say but I am against giving out poor
information.

In addition, the fact that this vaccine is protected from lawsuits to
the Pharm companies gives less credibility to the CDC saying that this
vaccine is no different than the “normal flu vaccine”.

If so, why no liability?

I believe that is more of a political reason, but it still creates a
credibility issue if if there is no liability for either MD’s , the
health care workers giving the vaccine or the drug company.

In fact, there would be more liability
if they were to advise against it.

Do you see what I mean?

People really do need to have good information to make informed choices
and I believe so much of the confusion is being caused by people that
think we have to DO SOMETHING.

The CDC reports that between 5% and 20% of people every year are infected with the seasonal flu. Assuming that H1N1 is equally contagious, then between 200,000 and 800,000 pregnant women will be infected this fall, agreed? .05*4,000,000 = 200,000 and .20*4,000,000 = 800,000. And holding the same mortality rate, which should remain constant assuming no additional mutations in the virus, of 1/25, we would have between 8,000 and 32,000 deaths in this population.

That would bring us to a 0.2-0.8% (8000/4 million and 32,000/4 million) expected mortality rate at the end of the flu season. To me, that is a large number, especially for a largely preventable infection. Are there potential complications to the vaccine? Of course. Nothing that works is free of side effects; everything has unintended consequences. I would also never force it upon a pregnant woman, but I would certainly recommend it.

I’d tend to agree, 0.0007% wouldn’t be enough for me to try an untested drug.

Obviously once that death toll starts climbing it will be a far more important statistic… but it would have to climb at least 100x its current value before the risk would be anything BUT trivial.

Keep in mind, that there is a chance you wont get the flu, so you’re looking at a chance within a chance, if there is a 1 in 1 billion chance that I will die 100% of the time it’s still a ridiculously small chance..