One of the diseases that we will hardly control fully is the whooping cough, and to show a button: last year five babies died in Spain from this disease and the cases are not only not decreasing, but They are increasing.
Now we learn of a new recent case, happened in Castellón and confirmed this Thursday, of one month old baby That failed to overcome the disease. In the deaths of last year, the need to vaccinate women during pregnancy was stressed in order to reduce cases, but in this case the mother had been vaccinated. Does this mean that the vaccine does not work? Is it a pharmaceutical fraud?
What is whooping cough?
The whooping cough It is a respiratory disease that is a simple cold, initially it seems that the child has mucus and cough. However, as the days go by, the cough not only does not disappear but it happens in accesses of irremediable coughs that cause respiratory distress and can end up vomiting.
It is a contagious disease caused by bacteria Bordetella pertussis that it is spread by respiratory, for the respiratory droplets exhaled when breathing and speaking and for the contact by the hands.
It is very annoying in the elderly, but it is more annoying in children, who are the ones who suffer most from it. In them it is especially dangerous and can cause respiratory failure and cyanosis (bluish skin due to lack of oxygen), hospital admission being necessary on some occasions and becoming mortal in others.
A one month old baby is very small
If it is dangerous in children, imagine a one-month-old baby, who barely has mechanisms to compensate for respiratory distress. Well even though the mother was vaccinated during pregnancy and although he was being fed with breastfeeding, the little one became infected and once he entered the hospital with the symptoms, he could only resist two more days, as we read on ABC.
Does this mean that the vaccine does not work?
Yes and no. Whooping cough vaccine It is one of the worst vaccines that exist As for the immunization it produces: it does not protect as much as it would like and it does so for a very short time (it is estimated that the protection lasts about 5 to 12 years, from which it follows that most adults are actually unprotected ).
This means that even when a child is vaccinated at 2, 4 and 6 months, he can take whooping cough, because the protection is relatively low. Imagine a one-month-old baby who has not even been vaccinated and who only has the defenses that her mother has been able to pass during pregnancy, because she was vaccinated.
"Already, but the mother had been vaccinated," you will tell me. And you are absolutely right, but we are in them. The best strategy to protect a newborn baby is to vaccinate the woman during pregnancy (it is more effective than to do it after birth), since it has been seen that cases of whooping cough decrease by up to 33%, hospitalizations up to 38% and deaths up to 39%.
But this strategy is improvable, because the call could be made nest vaccination, which is what is called the vaccination of people around the baby: the mother in pregnancy, the father, the siblings, the grandparents, the health staff, the nursery staff and the staff of the reception centers. If this is not possible, at least the vaccination of direct relatives, which could reduce cases by up to 45%, hospitalizations about 50% and deaths by 51%.
The problem? That vaccinating so many people is an immense expense for any national health system, and more in the times that we are, and given this situation it was decided in Spain to carry out the strategy with better cost-effectiveness: the vaccination of the pregnant woman, which has an effectiveness of 91%.
And why do I say "yes and no"?
To the question, "does this mean that the vaccine does not work?" I said "yes and no". The "no" I have already answered, now it remains to answer the "yes". We can't say it doesn't work, obviously, but yes it is a very improvable vaccine that laboratories have left unattended. We have been with her for many years, it is known that its usefulness is very limited and despite that a better vaccine has not appeared. The health authorities of the different governments should be putting a lot of pressure on the laboratories, and more now that there are more cases, to investigate and find a more effective vaccine against pertussis, because in the meantime we will continue to be unprotected and leaving the little ones, the babies, in danger.
Is it then a pharmaceutical fraud?
Everyone who draws their own conclusions, as I have been seeing on social networks for two days, but the most logical thing is to say no, that vaccinating pregnant women is not a fraud. We have just said that the effectiveness of the vaccine is 91%, and this means that it is much better to vaccinate pregnant women than not, but we must be aware that in 9% of cases, the vaccine will not protect to the baby.
And this comes that neither painted to explain a reality that many people seem to be unclear: vaccines are not 100% effective. They are a partial solution to a problem, they are an aid for us and our babies, to avoid viruses and life-threatening bacteria in some cases, but they do not work the same in all people. Some babies do not cause side effects and others do. For most they are completely safe, and for a potentially dangerous minority. It gives many almost perfect protection and others don't. And despite that, they are still useful because In most cases, not vaccinating anyone would be much more dangerous than vaccinating.. So if pregnant women are now beginning to doubt what is better, there is nothing left to say: this does not change anything, vaccinating you during pregnancy is still the best way of trying to protect your baby.
Photos | iStock
In Babies and more | Did anyone ask you if you were vaccinated during pregnancy? They make a heartbreaking video of the last days of your baby with whooping cough to raise awareness about vaccination, Better prevent ... What vaccines should I get in pregnancy?
