Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

How do you make sense of this?

" ACOG supports the recommendations and findings of the federal Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which found that there is no evidence showing that thimerosal is a danger to the health of the pregnant woman or her fetus. "

How do you reconcile the above statement with the statement below?

"Some people should not get the flu vaccine without first talking with their physician including"......"six month old babies."

So unlike alcohol, where no amount is safe because we don't want to be doing experiments on pregnant women to find out how much is too much....we promote the use of drugs/poison/viruses in pregnant women so they might not get the flue??? Oh yea, because pregnant women should be protected from throwing up right?

Be careful to avoid fish that has mercury in it if your pregnant, but be sure to get your flue vaccine!

Seriously, how does one reconcile all this double speak?

Answer Question
 
Butterflybabies

Asked by Butterflybabies at 3:39 PM on Feb. 5, 2009 in Kids' Health

Level 1 (0 Credits)
Answers (9)
  • thats always been my point!!! lol.
    MomNbabyGirl009

    Answer by MomNbabyGirl009 at 3:41 PM on Feb. 5, 2009

  • it doesn't say they don't recommend it because of thimerosal. the statements are only related because they are both referring to flu shots.

    teri4lance

    Answer by teri4lance at 3:41 PM on Feb. 5, 2009

  • okay but if you think about it, you shouldnt even come into contact with thermosal yet its okay to get a flu shot? doesnt make sense
    MomNbabyGirl009

    Answer by MomNbabyGirl009 at 3:48 PM on Feb. 5, 2009

  • I was always led to believe pregnancy was the more dangerous time to introduce possible harm to the baby....... not when they were six months old. How do you make sense of it?

    Butterflybabies

    Answer by Butterflybabies at 3:50 PM on Feb. 5, 2009

  • Honestly, my biggest beef with the "not proven unsafe" argument is that I don't freggin' care if it hasn't been proven unsafe, I want to see proven safe, then we'll talk.  Maybe.  I also hate that thimerosal is the only ingrediant in the forefront of this controversy.  Thimerosal and autism are only a couple issues on a LOOOOONG list of concerns with this and other vaccines, yes these are the only ones I ever see discussed.


    I've NEVER seen "proven safe."

    jellyphish

    Answer by jellyphish at 6:38 PM on Feb. 5, 2009

  • "proven safe" has all sorts of legal consequences that most companies won't accept.
    teri4lance

    Answer by teri4lance at 7:14 PM on Feb. 5, 2009

  • I totally agree. Just BS. Cant eat tuna but line up for the flu shot if you are PG and then at 6 months the baby will get another flu shot......Since ingredients pass through the placenta that means babies are really getting even MORE than on the already heavy schedule.
    Loa1002

    Answer by Loa1002 at 9:53 AM on Feb. 6, 2009

  • Doesn't make sense to me either!
    But didn't the FDA just say that it's ok to eat fish while pregnant? They only did that because they were contradicting themselves saying to get a flu shot while pregnant.
    Autumn22

    Answer by Autumn22 at 4:49 PM on Feb. 6, 2009

  • Oh, but didn't you see the article where they say it's okay for pregnant women to eat tuna now? (Of course, now that I finally have a use for that article I can't find the link). They actually made that statement to help them look good saying that the Flu shot is ok.

    I make a habit of not trusting "them".
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:41 AM on Feb. 12, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.