How scary is not getting tetanus vacc? Risk info?

I'm overdue for my tetanus booster and I'm avoiding it due to concern about possibly freaking out my immune system and coming out of ITP remission. I'm having a hard time getting a handle on the risks of not vacc'ing for tetanus.

Does anyone know - am I putting anyone else at risk - is tetanus contagious like measles or something like that - if I don't vacc am I potentially affecting the health of others?

What's the real risk of tetanus these days in suburban USA? Do people get it, do they die from it?

My doctor was totally useless when I asked her these questions.

My previous tetanus boosters were all pre-ITP. I usually get a really sore arm and a bit flu-ish.
Erica

You should be concerned about freaking out your immune system. That is exactly what the shots do (very crudely put).

1) If someone is paying attention when they get hurt they will notice that where they got hurt at is not healing/getting infected. A quick trip to the doctor and antibiotics will squelch any infection and potential for tetanus.

2) The reason people get tetanus is because the wound is not kept clean and the bacteria that causes tetanus takes hold. Taking simple measures like cleaning the wound frequently with an antibacterial (especially hydrogen peroxide since germs can't live in the oxygen) will almost always prevent tetanus from taking hold. We've cleansed with H2O2, put neosporin on, and covered with gauze and then cleaned and repeated twice a day and wounds heal quickly with no issue. Homeopathics would work well here as well.

3) No, tetanus is not contagious.

The issue here is personal responsibility. People get infections all the time. But just because someone steps on a rusty nail or whatever does not mean they're going to get tetanus. I wish I could find the link (I will look in a bit) about how they don't even know if the tetanus shot lasts ten years. They just arbitrarily picked that time thinking if someone was going to need it that would be about the time they would (like somehow this stuff only happens every ten years to people?). It also said that they have never been able to confirm that giving a tetanus shot after an incident can prevent tetanus. Why? Because they've never done big enough studies on those that didn't get the shot and those that did to compare the two groups. It is scientifically incorrect to assume that because everyone who got a tetanus shot didn't get tetanus that the shot works.

These don't even touch on the issue of the added chemicals and what they do to the immune system. Really, if you are diligent with wounds and keep them clean, etc. you don't need one. And, if you see an infection starting in a wound, don't wait to go to a doctor. And you don't need a shot even then. What you need is antibiotics. It really is just common sense. Apparently the CDC/FDA assumes no one has any common sense anymore.

I remember when I was a kid it was always said that you'd get tetanus if you cut yourself on something rusty. How odd! Rusty things don't seem like the most bacteria laden...
Erica

You do NOT want tetanus. However, you can probably wait until the next time you step on a nail or close a flipchart on your hand (those events prompted my last 2 tetanus shots).

I've never heard of tetanus being contagious. I think most tetanus these days is caused by non-sterile tools used to cut umbilical cords during third world births. Not sure why I think that.....

Tetanus isn't only 3rd world.

And I do not think someone should wait for an infection to appear before seeking medical attention IF the wound received could be the cause of tetanus - that could be too late. [Do you want to hear about my 2nd great grandfather who died of gangrene a couple days after receiving stab wound, he owned a fish market was attacked] I'm not about to say well they don't even know if getting a tetanus booster will prevent me from getting tetanus so I'm going to take my chances - no, I'll get the darn booster.

And did you know that with a rusty nail, or whatever, rust can come off inside your hand or foot and travel up and to your heart?

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001640/
"Spores of the bacteria C. tetani live in the soil and are found around the world."

"The time between infection and the first sign of symptoms is typically 7 to 21 days. Most cases of tetanus in the United States occur in those who have not been properly vaccinated against the disease."

"Wounds on the head or face seem to be more dangerous than those on other parts of the body."

www.nfid.org/powerof10/section4/tdstats.html

Tetanus is not contagious so don't worry about passing it on.

When I last went for a tetanus booster here in the UK, they said that the guidelines had changed and if you'd had the first course of three injections plus two more boosters then you were deemed to be okay and not to need any more. So they wouldn't give it to me. They said that the idea of giving it every ten years was outdated.

Melinda,
My great grandfather owned a fish market too! He always told us fish was brain food'.
Erica

Just to be clear, I certainly didn't say (or mean to say) that you should wait for the signs of infection. I did mean to say that if you have an event that could possibly cause an infection, and you are not up to date, you should immediately get the booster, as I did when I stepped on a nail and when I closed my hand in a flip chart and broke the skin.

I didn't make it up! This is from emedicinehealth:

In the United States, because of widespread immunization and careful wound care, the total annual number of cases has averaged about 40-50 cases per year since 1995. In developing countries of Africa, Asia, and South America, tetanus is far more common. The annual worldwide incidence is between 500,000-1 million cases. The majority of new cases worldwide are in neonates in Third World countries.

Various opinions going on. I do not get any immunizations and probably never will (not by choice, anyway). My last Tetanus was in 1989 before I was anti-vaccine. My immune system doesn't even like itself; I know it wouldn't like those. ITP isn't what scares me. Guillain–Barré, Transverse Myelitis...I have a feeling those would find me.

tamar wrote: Just to be clear, I certainly didn't say (or mean to say) that you should wait for the signs of infection. I did mean to say that if you have an event that could possibly cause an infection, and you are not up to date, you should immediately get the booster, as I did when I stepped on a nail and when I closed my hand in a flip chart and broke the skin.

Tamar no, I know you didn't say that one should wait for signs of infection someone else did [at least that's what it sounded like to me, I may have misread].

My most recent tetanus boosters were due to injury too - the head of a rusty nail into my palm, that booster didn't bother me at all; not quite 10 years later a rust wire into my hand, that booster did tank my count.

Sandi when hasn't there been various opinions here :ohmy:

Ha - always various opinions~ that's what makes us so interesting!

Hmmmmm.....I think it was 1985 when I had my last tetanus shot. I was in the ER due to rust and pipe scaling blown under pressure into an open wound.
A USA average of 40-50 cases per year? Not exactly an epidemic.

I got a Tetnus shot last year when I burned 3 fingers. It had been quite a while since my last one and as usual, I had no issues with it.

weirdjack wrote: Hmmmmm.....I think it was 1985 when I had my last tetanus shot. I was in the ER due to rust and pipe scaling blown under pressure into an open wound.
A USA average of 40-50 cases per year? Not exactly an epidemic.

Thank you. Exactly! Why on earth are we poisoning people (especially kids!!) for 40-50 cases a year? In all reality, I would love to see if those 40-50 cases were because someone didn't go to the doctor and have an infected wound looked at. It is NOT rocket science. If people would be responsible for their own health. Oh, don't get me started................

I used to be a computer programmer around the time of the year 2000 computer problems scare. A few months after the century turned over, my opthamologist was talking to me because she knew I was a programmer. She said 'you know, I paid someone several thousand dollars to make the year 2000 changes to my office software, and look - nothing happened! What a waste of money!' I asked her if she would have felt she'd gotten her money's worth if instead her computers had crashed?

My point being, the absence of USA tetanus cases may in fact be DUE TO the prevalence of tetanus vaccination?
Erica

patti wrote: Why on earth are we poisoning people (especially kids!!) for 40-50 cases a year? In all reality, I would love to see if those 40-50 cases were because someone didn't go to the doctor and have an infected wound looked at. It is NOT rocket science. If people would be responsible for their own health.

Good point.... If people would be responsible for their own health

You don't know why those people got tetanus yet you are assuming they didn't go to the doctor so they are not responsible. Had they gotten the evil poisonous tetanus booster they wouldn't have been a statistic so they would have been responsible.

eklein wrote:
My point being, the absence of USA tetanus cases may in fact be DUE TO the prevalence of tetanus vaccination?
Erica

I seriously doubt it in light of the fact they don't even know how long or if that vaccine even works. Just my opinion. Really not interested enough to go and research it since my studies of vaccines cover more then just that one.

eklein wrote: My point being, the absence of USA tetanus cases may in fact be DUE TO the prevalence of tetanus vaccination?
Erica

And that is a very good point Erica - things like this and cases of childhood disease that killed/had horrible side effects are at a low because of immunizations. Some are making a return - why? because not as many are getting protected. [and please, no need to jump on the soap box - I am not debating the good and the bad of immunizations, I'm only saying that because of less people being immunized these diseases are making a return].


Interesting your great grandfather owned a fish market too - mine had his on the Missisippi River. I was fortunate enough to find 2 newspaper articles about the stabbing, his death certificate and the coroner's report. This was 1877.

Melinda wrote: Some are making a return - why? because not as many are getting protected. [and please, no need to jump on the soap box - I am not debating the good and the bad of immunizations, I'm only saying that because of less people being immunized these diseases are making a return].

The problem is, this is an untrue statement...........in many cases today some of the diseases are being CAUSED by the vaccine and in the other cases already vaccinated people are getting the disease. If it weren't true, then only the unvaccinated people would be getting the diseases. But they're seeing whole cities of *vaccinated* people getting the diseases. Whooping cough anyone? Polio?

Patti, I don't think you need to be so agressive in making your point (and by that i don't mean your being rude or nasty, but that you keep going on and on and on and on and on and on about it all the time. People have a difference of opinions Patti and you need to respect that someone may have a different opinion to yours, not try to make everyone else come around to your way of thinking all the time. I have a different view about this issue then you do, but do u see me constantly trying to shove it down everyone's throats!! Give it a rest for a while, nobody is gonna win the argument and i have a feeling nobody is gonna change their views, so let it go already!!

patti wrote:

Melinda wrote: Some are making a return - why? because not as many are getting protected.

The problem is, this is an untrue statement...........in many cases today some of the diseases are being CAUSED by the vaccine and in the other cases already vaccinated people are getting the disease. If it weren't true, then only the unvaccinated people would be getting the diseases. But they're seeing whole cities of *vaccinated* people getting the diseases. Whooping cough anyone? Polio?

Geeze, I'm a liar - thank you so much Patti. It sure is nice to know we have someone perfect on this board though, I feel saved!

Man I wish I could count all my cousins, their children, their grandchildren and come up with a number for you because none of them, not one of them, has gotten a disease that was CAUSED by a vaccine. And believe me that is a large number of people - in fact probably enough to be considered a study.

Wow - whole cities getting the disease - that is truly amazing. Could you please tell me what cities those are and when and what disease, and your source. Thank you, thank you so much.

First off, Angel, I wasn't shoving anything down anyone's throat. This thread was started by someone asking opinions about a vax. Second, I only responded to Melinda's statement because it's untrue to state that diseases have only come back because of unvaxed people. That is not shoving anything down anyone's throat. It is challenging a statement. Something that is done to me quite often, I might add.

Melinda, "whole" cities was a typo. What I was trying to say is that breakouts of whooping cough in major cities like San Diego, or measles in WI or MN happened in 85-90% of the vaxed population. There were very few people in those cases that weren't vaxed that actually got it. So if vaccines worked, even IF it was unvaxed people that got the diseases, those that were vaxed should not have gotten them. But they did. And not just a small percentage of those that had been vaxed; but a large percentage of those that got the diseases were vaxed. So your point about not vaxing vs. vaxing and diseases disappearing is not valid.

I've made my point here. Unless I get attacked and it requires a response, I won't bother.

patti,
Rather than only replying if attacked, why don't you reply to polite requests for the source of your facts? What is the source of your statements that "breakouts of whooping cough in major cities like San Diego, or measles in WI or MN happened in 85-90% of the vaxed population"?

I think it is totally reasonable to ask for the source of a statement like that, and I'm asking politely. Please share with us the source of this statement.
thank you.
Erica

Here's some info I found about whooping cough in San Diego. Interesting. Apparently the disease has mutated and the current vaccine may not be as effective against the mutated disease. Or, another opinion is that the vaccine has always been only 85% effective and we just are doing better diagnostics now.

www.10news.com/news/26137516/detail.html

<<According to the numbers, the answer could lie in the vaccines and how effective they truly are. In the first 11 months of the year, nearly 1,000 adults and children have tested positive for whooping cough. More than half of them had been vaccinated.

An extensive data analysis of nine other California counties by the Watchdog Institute revealed a similar trend. Between 44 and 83 percent of those diagnosed had been immunized. To find out why, KPBS traveled to Amsterdam where a group of government scientists had discovered the pertussis bacteria had mutated almost two decades ago.

"So this new mutation had the effect that the bacteria started to produce more pertussis toxin," said Dr. Frits Mooi.

The problem, said Mooi is that the new generation of vaccines, which came out around the same time, was not tested on the mutation. He believes the new strain can overpower the vaccine.

"I believe there's a direct link between the strain and pertussis notifications," said Mooi.

Other leading experts, such as Dr. James Cherry of UCLA, are not buying it.

"Even though these changes have occurred, there is no evidence that's led to increased vaccine failure," said Cherry.

Cherry and state health officials said because the vaccines aren't 100 percent effective -- the vaccine is only effective 85 percent of the time according to the drug companies -- it's not surprising a large amount of people who contract pertussis have been vaccinated.>>

Yikes! :ohmy: I think this solution is simple. If you believe in vaccines, get them. If you don't, don't.

I hope your decision got made, Erica. You've sure heard the pros and cons!