Q re: rubella shot and pg

[A&G&K&H]

I'm just off to discover what I can with google, but was wondering if anyone
here (Ericka?) could give me some info in a nutshell....
A friend of mine m/c two weeks ago and apparently isn't immune to rubella
(she did have the shot in her teens but obviously needs a booster). She
didn't m/c due to any rubella related complications, but had the booster
shot at the same time as her D&C. She was told she *had* to wait 3 months
before ttc again, but did a bit of research and found that the risk to a new
pg from the booster is only theoretical. I know she wants to ttc again
straight away but just want to try and understand the basics of the risk
(theoretical or otherwise) so that I can support her (whatever her/their
decision).
Actually - I'm a little surprised that she wasn't tested for this for her
first pregnancy (she has an 18 mo daughter) as apparently she wasn't immune
then either *and* she is a teacher and was teaching up until about a month
before giving birth.

Anyone got any info?
Amanda

--
DD 15th August 2002
1 tiny angel Nov 2003
DS 20th August 2004

[elizabeth emerald]

"A&G&K&H" > wrote in message
...
> Actually - I'm a little surprised that she wasn't tested for this for her
> first pregnancy (she has an 18 mo daughter) as apparently she wasn't
> immune
> then either *and* she is a teacher and was teaching up until about a month
> before giving birth.

i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before* you get
pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do either
way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.
--
elizabeth (in australia)
DS - born 20-aug-02

"Old school don't mean I'm better, I'm just getting older" -- Bias B

[Dagny]

"A&G&K&H" > wrote in message
...

> Actually - I'm a little surprised that she wasn't tested for this for her
> first pregnancy (she has an 18 mo daughter) as apparently she wasn't
immune
> then either *and* she is a teacher and was teaching up until about a month
> before giving birth.
>

She very well may have been tested. The immunity from rubella vaccine is
not lifelong, I don't think.

-- Dagny

[Mary W.]

Dagny wrote:
> "A&G&K&H" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
>>Actually - I'm a little surprised that she wasn't tested for this for her
>>first pregnancy (she has an 18 mo daughter) as apparently she wasn't
>
> immune
>
>>then either *and* she is a teacher and was teaching up until about a month
>>before giving birth.
>>
>
>
> She very well may have been tested. The immunity from rubella vaccine is
> not lifelong, I don't think.

I apparently don't keep the immunity. I had a booster after my
miscarriage in 1999, and when checked during pregnancy of DD2
in 2003, I was no longer immune. For the OP, I was told to wait
3 months after my booster, and I did wait. It then took
another 9 months to get pregnant which kind of stunk.

Mary W.

[Ericka Kammerer]

A&G&K&H wrote:


> A friend of mine m/c two weeks ago and apparently isn't immune to rubella
> (she did have the shot in her teens but obviously needs a booster). She
> didn't m/c due to any rubella related complications, but had the booster
> shot at the same time as her D&C. She was told she *had* to wait 3 months
> before ttc again, but did a bit of research and found that the risk to a new
> pg from the booster is only theoretical. I know she wants to ttc again
> straight away but just want to try and understand the basics of the risk
> (theoretical or otherwise) so that I can support her (whatever her/their
> decision).

What I have heard is that the new recommendations from the
ACOG are to wait 1 month after vaccination before trying to conceive.
The vaccine is a live (attenuated) virus, so there is some theoretical
risk, even though I don't think they've found a documented case of
congenital rubella syndrome from vaccination during or within three
months of pregnancy. Apparently, they may have some evidence of
the vaccine virus being transmitting through breastmilk, though.
I suspect the new recommendation is due more to deciding that
the risks of contracting rubella due to not being vaccinated are
worse than the possible risk to the baby of having the vaccine
2 or 3 months before conception. Personally, I'd probably wait
the month, but wouldn't get in a tizzy if I conceived more than
a month but less than three months after the shot.

Best wishes,
Ericka

[Ericka Kammerer]

elizabeth emerald wrote:

> i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before* you get
> pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do either
> way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.

Are you sure? Perhaps it's not routine in Australia, but
in the US it's part of the standard OB panel. Sure, they can't
do anything about it while you're pregnant, but they will recommend
a shot as part of your postpartum care. Some organizations
recommend that you get the shot before you leave the hospital,
though personally I'd be a tad concerned about transmission of
the virus through breastmilk.

Best wishes,
Ericka

[elizabeth emerald]

"Ericka Kammerer" > wrote in message
...
> elizabeth emerald wrote:
>
>> i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before* you
>> get pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do
>> either way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.
>
> Are you sure? Perhaps it's not routine in Australia, but
> in the US it's part of the standard OB panel. Sure, they can't
> do anything about it while you're pregnant, but they will recommend
> a shot as part of your postpartum care. Some organizations
> recommend that you get the shot before you leave the hospital,
> though personally I'd be a tad concerned about transmission of
> the virus through breastmilk.

i'm not sure. i just know about my own experience.
there was a bit of a discussion about rubella in australia on mkb a while
back:
http://tinyurl.com/3how5
--
elizabeth (in australia)
DS - born 20-aug-02

"Old school don't mean I'm better, I'm just getting older" -- Bias B

[Pip]

It was part of my screening in the first trimester and I'm in N.Z

Pip

"elizabeth emerald" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ericka Kammerer" > wrote in message
> ...
> > elizabeth emerald wrote:
> >
> >> i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before*
you
> >> get pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do
> >> either way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.
> >
> > Are you sure? Perhaps it's not routine in Australia, but
> > in the US it's part of the standard OB panel. Sure, they can't
> > do anything about it while you're pregnant, but they will recommend
> > a shot as part of your postpartum care. Some organizations
> > recommend that you get the shot before you leave the hospital,
> > though personally I'd be a tad concerned about transmission of
> > the virus through breastmilk.
>
> i'm not sure. i just know about my own experience.
> there was a bit of a discussion about rubella in australia on mkb a while
> back:
> http://tinyurl.com/3how5
> --
> elizabeth (in australia)
> DS - born 20-aug-02
>
> "Old school don't mean I'm better, I'm just getting older" -- Bias B
>
>

[Child]

"elizabeth emerald" > wrote in message
...
|
| "A&G&K&H" > wrote in message
| ...
| > Actually - I'm a little surprised that she wasn't tested for this for
her
| > first pregnancy (she has an 18 mo daughter) as apparently she wasn't
| > immune
| > then either *and* she is a teacher and was teaching up until about a
month
| > before giving birth.
|
| i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before* you
get
| pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do either
| way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.
| --


I was tested after I got pregnant. But don't know why.

[Anne Rogers]

> i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before* you
> get pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do
> either way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.

really? it's routinely tested for during pregnancy in the UK, though I'm not
sure what they do if you don't have the immunity

[Anne Rogers]

Personally, I'd probably wait
> the month, but wouldn't get in a tizzy if I conceived more than
> a month but less than three months after the shot.
>

I'd also take into account how long it had taken her to get pregnant in the
past, if she gets preg easily I would be more inclined to wait than if it's
taken her time to conceive each time

I _should_ have waited this time, my abdominal wall tear needed more time to
heal, but I went ahead thinking I wouldn't conceive instantly, wrong! If we
ever try to have another I will be more cautious if there is a reason to,
this is the 2nd time I've conceived very quickly.

[Buzzy Bee]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 14:00:14 +1300, "Pip" >
wrote:

>It was part of my screening in the first trimester and I'm in N.Z

Its part of the 16 week bloods in the UK.

Megan
--
Seoras David Montgomery, 7th May 2003, 17 hours. http://seoras.farr-montgomery.com
EDD 11th March 2005 (another boy!)

[Welches]

"Child" > wrote in message
...
>
> "elizabeth emerald" > wrote in message
> ...
> |
> | "A&G&K&H" > wrote in message
> | ...
> | > Actually - I'm a little surprised that she wasn't tested for this for
> her
> | > first pregnancy (she has an 18 mo daughter) as apparently she wasn't
> | > immune
> | > then either *and* she is a teacher and was teaching up until about a
> month
> | > before giving birth.
> |
> | i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before* you
> get
> | pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do
> either
> | way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.
> | --
>
>
> I was tested after I got pregnant. But don't know why.
>
>
So that if you're in contact with rubella they know you might catch it. Also
there are a lot of mild rashes that can be mistaken for rubella hence it's
reassuring to know that you can't catch it.
Debbie

[Welches]

"A&G&K&H" > wrote in message
...
> I'm just off to discover what I can with google, but was wondering if
> anyone
> here (Ericka?) could give me some info in a nutshell....
> A friend of mine m/c two weeks ago and apparently isn't immune to rubella
> (she did have the shot in her teens but obviously needs a booster). She
> didn't m/c due to any rubella related complications, but had the booster
> shot at the same time as her D&C. She was told she *had* to wait 3 months
> before ttc again, but did a bit of research and found that the risk to a
> new
> pg from the booster is only theoretical. I know she wants to ttc again
> straight away but just want to try and understand the basics of the risk
> (theoretical or otherwise) so that I can support her (whatever her/their
> decision).
> Actually - I'm a little surprised that she wasn't tested for this for her
> first pregnancy (she has an 18 mo daughter) as apparently she wasn't
> immune
> then either *and* she is a teacher and was teaching up until about a month
> before giving birth.
>
I would say that if she is not at all immune then it may count as an
original jab rather than a booster.
Debbie

[A&G&K&H]

"Ericka Kammerer" > wrote in message
...
> A&G&K&H wrote:
>
>
> > A friend of mine m/c two weeks ago and apparently isn't immune to
rubella
> > (she did have the shot in her teens but obviously needs a booster). She
> > didn't m/c due to any rubella related complications, but had the booster
> > shot at the same time as her D&C. She was told she *had* to wait 3
months
> > before ttc again, but did a bit of research and found that the risk to a
new
> > pg from the booster is only theoretical. I know she wants to ttc again
> > straight away but just want to try and understand the basics of the risk
> > (theoretical or otherwise) so that I can support her (whatever her/their
> > decision).
>
> What I have heard is that the new recommendations from the
> ACOG are to wait 1 month after vaccination before trying to conceive.
> The vaccine is a live (attenuated) virus, so there is some theoretical
> risk, even though I don't think they've found a documented case of
> congenital rubella syndrome from vaccination during or within three
> months of pregnancy. Apparently, they may have some evidence of
> the vaccine virus being transmitting through breastmilk, though.
> I suspect the new recommendation is due more to deciding that
> the risks of contracting rubella due to not being vaccinated are
> worse than the possible risk to the baby of having the vaccine
> 2 or 3 months before conception. Personally, I'd probably wait
> the month, but wouldn't get in a tizzy if I conceived more than
> a month but less than three months after the shot.
>
> Best wishes,
> Ericka
>

Thanks Ericka - I shall pass this on to her.
Amanda

[A&G&K&H]

"elizabeth emerald" > wrote in message
...
>
> "A&G&K&H" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Actually - I'm a little surprised that she wasn't tested for this for
her
> > first pregnancy (she has an 18 mo daughter) as apparently she wasn't
> > immune
> > then either *and* she is a teacher and was teaching up until about a
month
> > before giving birth.
>
> i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before* you
get
> pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do either
> way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.
> --
Dunno - she was tested this time when she presented to the GP at 5 weeks
(along with a bunch of other stuff) which is when they found out.
They did tell her that she should avoid any sick people for at least the
first 12 weeks and to stay away from crowded shopping centres (how mean!).
I'm just surprised they didn't test last time given that she was in a
profession where you get exposed to lots of lurgies *a lot*.
I was tested both before I got pg with DD and also when I presented to the
GP with DD, but wasn't tested with DS (and I'm assuming this is because of
the test with DD).
Maybe different in Qld?
Amanda

--
DD 15th August 2002
1 tiny angel Nov 2003
DS 20th August 2004

[A&G&K&H]

"elizabeth emerald" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ericka Kammerer" > wrote in message
> ...
> > elizabeth emerald wrote:
> >
> >> i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before*
you
> >> get pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do
> >> either way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.
> >
> > Are you sure? Perhaps it's not routine in Australia, but
> > in the US it's part of the standard OB panel. Sure, they can't
> > do anything about it while you're pregnant, but they will recommend
> > a shot as part of your postpartum care. Some organizations
> > recommend that you get the shot before you leave the hospital,
> > though personally I'd be a tad concerned about transmission of
> > the virus through breastmilk.
>
> i'm not sure. i just know about my own experience.
> there was a bit of a discussion about rubella in australia on mkb a while
> back:
> http://tinyurl.com/3how5
> --
Thanks for that link elizabeth ... I must have been in an advanced state of
*get this baby out of me* back at the start of August as I missed this
discussion. I shall have a trawl through for any bits of useful info for my
friend.
(I saw her yesterday - they are all coping OK).
Amanda

--
DD 15th August 2002
1 tiny angel Nov 2003
DS 20th August 2004

[Cheryl]

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:28:36 +1100, "elizabeth emerald"
> wrote:

>
>"A&G&K&H" > wrote in message
...
>> Actually - I'm a little surprised that she wasn't tested for this for her
>> first pregnancy (she has an 18 mo daughter) as apparently she wasn't
>> immune
>> then either *and* she is a teacher and was teaching up until about a month
>> before giving birth.
>
>i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before* you get
>pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do either
>way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.

I'd be surprised if you weren't. It's part of the blood tests they
sent me for at my booking in appointment at Hornsby. I've had it each
time at around the 10 week mark through all 4 pregnancies because it's
one of those that not everyone holds an immunity to.

--
Cheryl
Mum to Shrimp (11 Mar 99), Thud (4 Oct 00)
Mischief (30 Jul 02)
+ Thumper due Feb 05

[elizabeth emerald]

"Cheryl" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 09:28:36 +1100, "elizabeth emerald"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"A&G&K&H" > wrote in message
...
>>> Actually - I'm a little surprised that she wasn't tested for this for
>>> her
>>> first pregnancy (she has an 18 mo daughter) as apparently she wasn't
>>> immune
>>> then either *and* she is a teacher and was teaching up until about a
>>> month
>>> before giving birth.
>>
>>i was never tested for immunity. i think they only test you *before* you
>>get
>>pregnant because once you are pregnant there is nothing you can do either
>>way. i hadn't seen a dr before i got pregnant.
>
> I'd be surprised if you weren't. It's part of the blood tests they
> sent me for at my booking in appointment at Hornsby. I've had it each
> time at around the 10 week mark through all 4 pregnancies because it's
> one of those that not everyone holds an immunity to.

i never had any blood tests on booking in. i would rember, i have extreme
needle fear.
the only blood test i had was when i had the glucose drink thing later on in
the pregnancy.

i do know i am immmune though, now, as i had blood tests a little while back
for something else.
--
elizabeth (in australia)
DS - born 20-aug-02

"Old school don't mean I'm better, I'm just getting older" -- Bias B

[Cheryl]

On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 12:36:15 +1100, "elizabeth emerald"
> wrote:

>
>"Cheryl" > wrote in message
...

>>
>> I'd be surprised if you weren't. It's part of the blood tests they
>> sent me for at my booking in appointment at Hornsby. I've had it each
>> time at around the 10 week mark through all 4 pregnancies because it's
>> one of those that not everyone holds an immunity to.
>
>i never had any blood tests on booking in. i would rember, i have extreme
>needle fear.

That's weird. It's a standard part of the booking in routine, they
test for STDs, iron levels, rubella status and something else I'm
forgetting. It's been the same for me at 3 hospitals in that area
health service. Maybe your booking in midwife forgot, or maybe she
assumed your GP had done them.


--
Cheryl
Mum to Shrimp (11 Mar 99), Thud (4 Oct 00)
Mischief (30 Jul 02)
+ Thumper due Feb 05

[elizabeth emerald]

"Cheryl" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 12:36:15 +1100, "elizabeth emerald"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Cheryl" > wrote in message
...
>
>>>
>>> I'd be surprised if you weren't. It's part of the blood tests they
>>> sent me for at my booking in appointment at Hornsby. I've had it each
>>> time at around the 10 week mark through all 4 pregnancies because it's
>>> one of those that not everyone holds an immunity to.
>>
>>i never had any blood tests on booking in. i would rember, i have extreme
>>needle fear.
>
> That's weird. It's a standard part of the booking in routine, they
> test for STDs, iron levels, rubella status and something else I'm
> forgetting. It's been the same for me at 3 hospitals in that area
> health service. Maybe your booking in midwife forgot, or maybe she
> assumed your GP had done them.

i think i was a kink in the system. i remember that when i did the booking
in, it was a saturday & there was no-one else around. the midwife said to
make an appt with the dr there which i did, but i guess she thought he would
do them & he thought she had already done them. oops!
--
elizabeth (in australia)
DS - born 20-aug-02

"Old school don't mean I'm better, I'm just getting older" -- Bias B