Would you get a vaccine if it could potentially kill you?

[civvver]

This is not a hypothetical. Actual situation, my daughter is allergic to eggs. She's had reactions where we administered an epipen and took her to the ER, though it's really hard to say if her life was ever in danger. She had hives all over and was throwing up a lot, but never went into full blown anaphylactic shock where she couldn't breathe. She just had her annual blood test and her reactionary level to eggs has gone down but she's still allergic.

Now her allergist is suggesting that we give her a flu shot which is egg based. She did not have one last year. She is 2 years, 4 months. The allergist wants to administer the vaccine partially and gauge her reaction and then give her the rest if she does well. They did a skin prick test for the vaccine and she did react.

So what would you do? Her pediatrician and the allergist are saying it's going to be a very bad flu season and that risk is worse than the risk of an allergic reaction to the shot and it will be in an office attached to a hospital with an ER if things go horribly.

I know my decision, I was just wondering what others would do.

Personally I do not see either of these as being very threatening. I haven't found hard stats on how many people died of flu in our state last year, and I know it's one of the most dangerous common diseases, but it's still not common to die from it. I saw one stat that attributed 80,000 US deaths to complications from flu, but even still that's like 0.02% for the total population. Compared to traffic deaths which are in the millions, it's not much at all. But I also don't think she'll die from a reaction either, especially if we have benedryl or steroids on hand for an emergency. So I think we'll do it, just cus both drs are recommending it and I usually go with what they say.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You're right. This isn't a hypothetical. People are administered vaccines that have negligible, but non-zero, probabilities of killing them every day. The situation you find yourself in involves a somewhat further from zero probability, so it raises the question further towards conscious awareness, but the question is always there.

This question is normally so far below conscious awareness that the decision you made happens without any pause. People generally do just go with what the doctors say.

 

[MaryKB]

I'm really sorry you're facing this dilemma civver, I hope whatever choice you make your daughter is okay.

Something I'd suggest to remember is influenza is far more dangerous for young children than adults, and complications such as pneumonia can be very terrifying, so her age really is a factor I'd worry about. If I was in your place, I fear how if my daughter did end up with pneumonia and she had to be admitted to intensive care, I'd feel absolutely horrible for not getting her vaccine and I'd be terrified out of my mind, even if she recovers. She could be in the hospital for weeks, a few years ago my coworker had pneumonia and he was in the hospital for a long time, and he was an adult not a young child.

My personal decision would most likely be based on my doctor's recommendation, I'd never presume I know more than he or she does. And if I was concerned, my company participates in a program called "teladoc" where I can get free second opinions, so if I was really worried I'd try calling that for more advice. From what you're saying, to me it looks like your doctors are really working very hard to take every precaution they can for her safety.

Please take care.

 

[Synobun]

I'd get a second opinion.

 

[civvver]

I'd get a second opinion.

I did, I got the allergist's opinion and the pediatricians.

 

[civvver]

You're right. This isn't a hypothetical. People are administered vaccines that have negligible, but non-zero, probabilities of killing them every day. The situation you find yourself in involves a somewhat further from zero probability, so it raises the question further towards conscious awareness, but the question is always there.

This question is normally so far below conscious awareness that the decision you made happens without any pause. People generally do just go with what the doctors say.

For me generally doing anything where there's much risk I always go back to driving and traffic accidents. Driving is by far the most dangerous thing healthy and young people do on a daily basis yet we don't give it a second thought. But people will freak out when someone suggests taking a medicine with some side affects or before flying.

 

[EnglishEdward]

It would appear that the advice is from:

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vaccine/egg-allergies.htm

Persons who report having had reactions to egg involving symptoms other than hives, such as angioedema, respiratory distress, lightheadedness, or recurrent emesis; or who required epinephrine or another emergency medical intervention, may similarly receive any licensed and recommended flu vaccine (i.e., any form of IIV or RIV) that is otherwise appropriate for the recipient’s age and health status. The selected vaccine should be administered in an inpatient or outpatient medical setting (including, but not necessarily limited to hospitals, clinics, health departments, and physician offices). Vaccine administration should be supervised by a health care provider who is able to recognize and manage severe allergic conditions.

I saw one stat that attributed 80,000 US deaths to complications from flu, but even still that's like 0.02% for the total population.

I suspect that most of those were old and feeble or had cancer or AIDS etc and were dying soon anyway.

the allergist are saying it's going to be a very bad flu season and that risk is worse than the risk of an allergic reaction to the shot

Yes, but is that an overall risk for all patients, or specific to your age group and those not suffering from cancer or AIDs etc.

I don't know, I'd be tempted to ask them to provide details of the respective risks of:
(i) death by flue for that age group and
(ii) death by allergic reaction for those known to be allergic to eggs for that age group;

and suggest they develop a vaccine that is not contaminated by egg protein.

Please note I have NO medical qualifications.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

For me generally doing anything where there's much risk I always go back to driving and traffic accidents. Driving is by far the most dangerous thing healthy and young people do on a daily basis yet we don't give it a second thought. But people will freak out when someone suggests taking a medicine with some side affects or before flying.

Not unreasonable at all. You are using driving as the 'marker' for negligible, which does make for interestingly strange behaviors to be observed. You understand your marker, and you recognize that your marker is in widespread use as most people are apparently driving without a second thought to the risk so they seem to agree that it is a valid marker for negligible. Then these same people freak out at a lesser risk, which is obviously even deeper into the realm of negligible. I also find that hilarious.

My usual amusement with vaccine questions is that people who accept the car marker of negligibility, and in fact will use the car marker to justify scoffing at someone who points out that the risks in vaccination are non-zero, will often act as if the risks of non-vaccination are absolutely not negligible even though they also lie well below the same car marker. It's hilarious when people are unconsciously using the car marker, then freak out over something below it, but it is doubly hilarious when they are actually pointing at the car marker while they are doing it.

 

[Hrothbern]

Depending on the kind of vaccin, it is either a no brainer to the benefit of the child (or receiver), or it is the dilemma between individual health interests and the public health interests.

If everyone around me is vaccinated against measles, I can take the decision not to vaccinate myself, because the chance that I get infected is close to zero.
From Dutch public health perspective we need a vaccination rate of >95% to be on the safe side.
This allows for some people not to be vaccinated for assumed risk on individual response and for religious reasons.

That minimum vaccination rate depends ofc on the kind of disease and the likelyhood of getting infected.
Some people living in our bible belt where complete rural villages were not vaccinated, "survived" because of their isolated location. But in todays touristic world a famous rural village like Staphorst is more exposed to infection than several decades ago.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I am also highly amused when people freely substitute infection rate for mortality rate, and vice versa.

 

[EnglishEdward]

I did, I got the allergist's opinion and the pediatricians.

Just seen this. I'd merely say that you should make sure you are there yourself to observe.
Whatever you are promised, there's always a risk of other crisises distracting the medics.

Depending on the kind of vaccin, it is either a no brainer to the benefit of the child (or receiver), or it is the dilemma between individual health interests and the public health interests.

If everyone around me is vaccinated against measles, I can take the decision not to vaccinate myself, because the chance that I get infected is close to zero.
From Dutch public health perspective we need a vaccination rate of >95% to be on the safe side.
This allows for some people not to be vaccinated for assumed risk on individual response and for religious reasons.

That minimum vaccination rate depends ofc on the kind of disease and the likelyhood of getting infected.
Some people living in our bible belt where complete rural villages were not vaccinated, "survived" because of their isolated location. But in todays touristic world a famous rural village like Staphorst is more exposed to infection than several decades ago.

I agree with what you say. But I think that herd immunity is more significant to measles and chicken pox etc than to flu for the
simple reason that most people in the west are given vaccines for the former while for flu most healthy working age adults are not.

 

[Synobun]

I did, I got the allergist's opinion and the pediatricians.

I more so meant two allergists, but that works too I suppose.

Mostly what made me think of a second opinion is that they did a skin prick test and there was a reaction. I assumed that they did a prick test of the vaccine substance (I don't know if this is even possible, I have no experience) and not just egg protein.

My answer doesn't make sense with the latter but does with the former. If it was a normal prick test then I'd just go with doctor recommendation.

 

[Zelig]

The recombinant flu vaccine is egg-free.

Her pediatrician and the allergist are saying it's going to be a very bad flu season

I dunno where they're getting that info, everything I've seen points to this season being relatively mild, especially compared to last season.

I probably got the flu last year, and it was extremely unpleasant.

 

[Yeekim]

So I think we'll do it, just cus both drs are recommending it and I usually go with what they say.

Smart choice.

 

[Hrothbern]

I agree with what you say. But I think that herd immunity is more significant to measles and chicken pox etc than to flu for the
simple reason that most people in the west are given vaccines for the former while for flu most healthy working age adults are not.

Yes
I think flu is nearing the treshold for getting in the public vaccination program (if your country can pay it ofc).
Currently we have here annually 4 million flu vaccinations every year on a population of 17 million.
Since I became 60, I get every year the letter inviting me.
My guess is that full flu vaccination, with every year the update of the cocktail with the latest strains will pay off from reduction of sickness leave and increased education and labour productivity and general well-being, and ofc boosted to some degree by the herd immunity effect.

On the urgent list for better research for me is vaccinations against the HPV virus, who defends by going dormant. A dozen types or so are straightforward (also cervical) cancer inducing, the others not good as well.

 

[Zelig]

On the urgent list for better research for me is vaccinations against the HPV virus, who defends by going dormant. A dozen types or so are straightforward (also cervical) cancer inducing, the others not good as well.

If you're over 60, you're probably going to have a hell of a time convincing a GP that you need this. I'd expect to pay out of pocket.

 

[Hrothbern]

If you're over 60, you're probably going to have a hell of a time convincing a GP that you need this. I'd expect to pay out of pocket.

It's free for the target group like elderly people etc.
it is also outside the daily activities of a GP, that would only cause avoidable cost.
I get my letter with the invitation with an appointment. Join there the cue for the nurse, just like at primary school, get the injection, and out again. Mass production.

 

[Zelig]

It's free for the target group like elderly people etc.
it is also outside the daily activities of a GP, that would only cause avoidable cost.
I get my letter with the invitation with an appointment. Join there the cue for the nurse, just like at primary school, get the injection, and out again. Mass production.

For the HPV vaccine?

 

[Hrothbern]

For the HPV vaccine?

Ahhh,
No, for the flu vaccination.

For HPV girls at 12 years old are vaccinated against two types of HPV covering most of the cancer risk.
And yes... these vaccinations are also free in my country.

 

[Zelig]

Yeah, I mean, HPV vaccines are free here normally, but not if you're a 60+ man.