In a study published in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, U.S researchers found that unborn children benefit from their mothers getting their flu vaccination. The study population was obtained from the Navajo and White Mountain Apache Indian Reservations- whose children are more prone to experience severe upper respiratory infections than the general population. Over three flu seasons, it was found that babies whose mother had been vaccinated were 41% less likely to get the flu, and were 39% less likely to be hospitalized for flu-like illness. The most important finding to back up these statistics, was that those babies had higher levels of flu antibodies at birth at 2 to 3 months, compared with babies whose mothers did not get a flu shot.
As we have learned in class, this time period of 2 to 3 months occurrs during the time that is critical when babies start to make their own IgG at 3 months (mom's is declining), and when babies begin to be most vulnerable to illness. Now pregnant mom's know they can protect themselves from the flu, as well as their child. A two for one!
That's a very nice study. Can you give us the reference?
ReplyDeleteAdelita, that’s a very interesting study. Other studies also have shown the importance of flu shot in pregnant women. So it seems that flu shot is necessary for pregnant women. Because flu shot not only protects pregnant women from getting the flu but it also prevents them from getting flu complications such as pneumonia, and other respiratory distress and it may even prevent miscarriage or premature labor.
ReplyDeleteI wonder, what if the pregnant woman is allergic to eggs, is there any alternative to flu shot? What about the thimerosal in vaccines that contain methylmercury, will it be harmful to mom or the baby? If anyone has any input please share it, I would like to know.
GhizalN7630's points are well taken. But note, this from FDA: "The various mercury guidelines are based on epidemiological and laboratory studies of methyl mercury, whereas thimerosal is a derivative of ethyl mercury." Ethyl mercury has a very different toxicity profile from the more toxic methyl mercury.
ReplyDeleteIf a woman has a history of egg allergy, it is easy and safe to skin test with both egg extract and the vaccine. Most often people will be egg positive but vaccine negative (tiny egg dose in the vaccine) and so it's safe to immunize. If positive to the vaccine on skin test, it is still possible to give the vaccine, but the practitioner must be experienced in how it's done.
So do you think there are other vaccinations out there that would be beneficial for a pregnant woman to get - not necessarily for their benefit, but for the benefit of their child during its first months of life?
ReplyDeleteI think Kelly's question above really relates to the type of antibody produced in response to a vaccine. As I recall, only IgG can cross the placental barrier from mother to baby as it is relatively small, so I have to wonder if all vaccines produce a strong IgG response. Upon initial exposure to an antigen, IgM is produced, but this is too large to cross the placental barrier.
ReplyDeleteAdelita, this sounds like a very interesting study. It is fascinating to see how much impact a mother's health has on her child. I would like to read more about the study if you would please post the reference? Also, this ties into an article discussed a few weeks ago in class about a pregnant woman's oral hygiene. If the mother has exceptional oral hygiene this could be reflected on the health of the child in a positive way and vice versa.
ReplyDeleteHi everyone I have the citation here. Good stuff!
ReplyDeleteMaternal Influenza Vaccination and Effect on Influenza Virus Infection in Young Infants
Angelia A. Eick, PhD; Timothy M. Uyeki, MD, MPH, MPP; Alexander Klimov, PhD; Henrietta Hall, MS; Raymond Reid, MD; Mathuram Santosham, MD; Katherine L. O’Brien, MD, MPH
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. Published online October 4, 2010. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.192
http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/archpediatrics.2010.192v2
I found overall that this was a nice study, and relevant to women world wide, even more for women who may not have access to the best health care.
ReplyDeleteThe CDC recommends that a pregnant woman should consider Hep B and Tetanus among others. They have all that information on their site. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/preg-guide.htm
Adelita,
ReplyDeleteThis study is very interesting! I wonder if there has been an study to find out if mother’s who receive the flu-shot close to birth or after birth if the infants have the same passive immunity from breast milk as they might get if the mother had received the flu-shot or other vaccines earlier during the pregnancy. Breast milk provides passive immunity of IgA which is the antibody to protect against bacterial infections so it probably would not provide a lot of protection against the flu but perhaps against bacterial infections. As you stated it makes sense that the infant has a higher level of flu antibodies from birth to rough 2 or 3 months of age. IgG antibody is the only antibody that can pass the placenta because it is small and therefore really helps explain why the child will have a lower change of having the flu because he has gained passive immunity from the flu do to the flu-shot to the mother. Her IgG antibodies being able to pass the placenta can help protect her child from the flu and the child might be better protected against the flu as IgG lasts until the child is 2 to 3 months old which is when they start being able to make their own IgG antibodies. I do think that this is a great way for mother’s to try and help their infants have a better chance of survival in this germ filled world, especially if they are giving birth during flu season.