What's the straight dope on getting other vaccines along with your flu shot?

The etiology of brachial plexus neuropathy, a rare but potentially serious disorder, is not well understood, but it has been seen in association with infections, trauma and without any likely cause. In a minority of instances it follows vaccination - in a number of these cases it’s been obvious the shot was given improperly, with the needle penetrating through the deltoid muscle into the joint capsule.
Cases don’t have a demonstrated connection with any systemic immune reaction or proven link to a particular vaccine.

As for “stretching out” the vaccine schedule, none of the alternate schedules floating around out there have ever been shown to be safer than the recommended ones. “Stretching” or “spacing” vaccines merely increases the risk of contracting vaccine-preventable diseases.

That said, if you have a history of marked arm soreness and briefly experiencing the blahs after flu shots, it’d be reasonable to wait awhile before getting Shingrix, which is more effective than the old shingles shot but in some folks* induces a 24-48 hr. case of the crud (mostly fatigue). Still incomparably better than shingles itself.

*I’ve had both types of shingles vaccine. Shingrix (first dose) gave me a mildly sore arm and the blahs for a day, not enough to miss work. The second shot had minimally noticeable effects.

Last year my doctor told me to get the flu and shingles shots at least a week apart, so that if I had a severe allergic reaction I would know which one I was allergic to, which knowledge might prove to be of life and death importance later. I suspect part of the reasoning was that one’s second allergic reaction might be much worse than the first, so a repeat performance that could have been avoided could be a real tragedy.

I’m the other kind … where the shot was given in the right arm but the neuritis occurred in the left … less than 24 hours after the injection.

Causality has been accepted with the DPT vaccine. They don’t know why some people get it and others don’t.

Do those studies actually exist (what a nightmare they would be to conduct) ? If so, what do they show ?

Given how many people have either chosen alternate schedules or ended up in one via happenstance, it probably wouldn’t be that hard to gather a bunch of data on this.

The trickiest part is going to be the same thing that plagues many such studies of behavior: people who go their own way when it comes to some medical advice often do so with lots of it (for a variety of reasons), so it’s hard to tell if the outcome you’re measuring is due to the specific choice you’re measuring.

This seems like the best case for not getting multiple vaccinations at the same time, but I still think it’s pretty suspect. I expect that the additional trip to the doctor’s office is going to increase your risk of death due to car crash much more than avoiding possible future allergic reaction ambiguity is.

The problem with really any focus on the safety of vaccines is not that they are 100% safe, it’s that they’re so much safer than most things that we do (on net) that any behavior change is likely going to make you worse off.

Like, the additional danger of waiting a few weeks for a vaccine is that you might catch that disease in the few weeks you’re waiting. That’s likely orders of magnitude more likely and worse than whatever incredibly unlikely thing you’re trying to avoid by delaying the vaccine is.

You’ve defined the equation, alright.

The obvious problem is having just about any idea whatsoever about what the odds are of each happening to you.

But the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting Database is full of critical adverse effects requiring hospitalization or causing death.

As a rate, they’re infrequent. As a rate, so are the instances of the diseases against which we’re vaccinating, as is the rate of those diseases resulting in hospitalization and death.

It’s complicated and unknowable, making it a bit scary – particularly for well-meaning parents on all sides of such issues.

But my second adverse event – brachial plexus neuropathy – was debilitating and painful for months.

My next adverse event – a rare reaction to an anticonvulsant – was terminal (DRESS Syndrome >> Non-tropical Eosinophilic Endomyocardial Fibrosis).

You want to be lucky … not unlucky :wink:

About a month ago I got the flu shot and shingles vaccine at the same time at a pharmacy and the pharmacist said it was not an issue. No ill effects followed.

When I have a question about drug interactions or side effects, I always ask the pharmacist. They have a wider and deeper knowledge of the subject than most doctors.

Sure, obviously if you are the one struck by lighting that is a bummer. But part of the problem is that due to the societal salience of vaccines as a social issue, we spend way more of our time thinking about them than their risk merits.

I have also had an adverse reaction to medication that put me into the hospital and which kills some people. But while I’ve talked to a lot of parents who agonize over vaccine schedules, I’ve yet to meet one who didn’t just give their kid (or take, themselves) the prescribed dose of whatever antibiotic their doctor prescribed.

Similarly, you don’t see people agonizing over whether to take Tylenol or Advil even though Tylenol is far more dangerous than vaccines are. Or any of thousands of non-medical decisions that we make that are more salient than this one.

I got the pneumonia one (for the first time) along with my flu shot about a week ago. Except for a mildly sore arm for a few days there were no side effects whatsoever.

I haven’t seen any evidence definitively linking brachial plexus neuropathy to any particular vaccine, including DT. It’s been described in association with a number of different vaccines, but as previously noted, vaccine associations are considerably less common than than others*, and we’re talking about a very uncommon malady to begin with.

The idea that it’s inadvisable to give multiple vaccines at once because of the risk of an allergic or other reaction thus untraceable to a specific shot, runs counter to expert recommendations.

For instance, I see experts consider it safe to give Shingrix (RZV and influenza vaccine) on the same visit.

“Can I give our long-term care residents RZV, injectable influenza, and pneumococcal vaccines on the same day?”

“Yes. CDC’s General Best Practice Guidelines for Immunization advise that non-live vaccines, such as RZV, can be administered concomitantly, at different anatomic sites, with any other live or non-live vaccine. They should be given as separate injections, not combined in the same syringe.”

http://immunize.org/askexperts/experts_zos.asp

If it was risky to give multiple vaccines on the same visit, children would be obliged to make many more visits to the pediatrician with their parents, with greater trauma to the kids and cost - and combination vaccines wouldn’t be approved. But that’s not the case. Administering several vaccines simultaneously is safe and does not compromise immunity to any individual vaccine. This makes sense, seeing that we’re constantly being bombarded with multiple foreign antigens (via respiratory and G.I. routes, as well as the occasional ones that get in via scrapes, cuts and other trauma), and our immune systems routinely handle such stimulation effectively.

VAERS is a passive reporting system to which anyone can and does contribute - health care providers, patients, lawyers, you name it. It’s a starting point for garnering data on potential vaccine side effects, but only a small proportion are ever convincingly linked with vaccination. Much is made by the antivaccine contingent (for example) about cases of postural orthostatic hypotension syndrome, infertility and even death reported after HPV vaccination, but good evidence (including clinical studies) refutes any such link. If I was a meanie I’d bring up some of the most notorious cases where reports appeared in VAERS where it was flamingly obvious that there was no connection to a vaccine (one such deemed it significant that a young woman fell down a well and died a couple weeks after her HPV shot), but I won’t :). The incident where a wiseass reported that a vaccine turned him into the Incredible Hulk never made it into VAERS, but if the guy had insisted to the VAERS people that it be included, they would have been obligated to include it in the database.

As for the lack of studies showing an advantage to “stretching out” the vaccine schedule, it’s the obligation of those promoting such alternate schedules to show that they have any safety advantage and don’t cause harm through delaying immunity to dangerous diseases. The most strident advocates of such schedules (for instance, pediatricians Paul Thomas and Bob Sears) have been promoting them for years on safety grounds, yet to my knowledge have never bothered to publish data from their practices.**

**Thomas and Sears, not coincidentally, are among the most well-known of antivax M.D.s; Thomas advises delaying or avoiding most childhood vaccines, and Sears has been investigated by his medical board (and sanctioned in one case) for granting improper childhood vaccine exemptions.

More on what may or may not cause brachial neuritis:

"The exact cause of brachial neuritis is unknown, but the condition has been linked to many antecedent events or illnesses, as follows:

  • Viral infection (particularly of the upper respiratory tract)

  • Bacterial infection (eg, pneumonia, diphtheria, typhoid)

  • Parasitic infestation

  • Surgery [6]

  • Trauma (not related to shoulder)

  • Vaccinations e.g. influenza, tetanus toxoids, pertussis, DPT, smallpox, swine flu

  • Childbirth

  • Miscellaneous medical investigative procedures (eg, [lumbar puncture], administration of radiologic dye)

  • Systemic illness (eg, polyarteritis nodosa, lymphoma, systemic lupus erythematosus, temporal arteritis, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome

You’re pretty much repeating what my nurse practitioner said. I was surprised that this came up as a thing to do for this year’s physical. I imagine that my clinic tweaked their protocols for old farts like me.

The risk of at least one type of known (if rare) reaction can be reduced by increasing the time between vaccinations (emphasis added):

Localized Arthus reactions have been reported to be common at the site of injection of some vaccines and occur when reimmunization is performed in the presence of high levels of circulating IgG antibody (Facktor et al., 1973). They are characterized by pain, swelling, induration, and edema beginning several hours after immunization and usually reaching a peak 12 to 36 hours after immunization. They are self-limited, resolving over the course of a few days. Their frequency and severity can be lessened by spacing immunizations more widely, as has been recommended for tetanus-diphtheria toxoid booster injections.

I suspect … were I willing to look further … I’d find any number of similar references, from highly reputable sources, where the delay was suggested for different vaccines, different reactions, and different populations.

I’m not sure the recommendation about Tylenol, aspirin, and Ibuprofen has been thoroughly vetted with numerous different vaccines or combinations of vaccines.

I won’t be calling for licensure reviews of practitioners who give that advice, though.

But that’s just me.

I’m not giving medical advice. I’m presenting a possible option that might be worth considering for people concerned about the risks of vaccines. It’s a hypothesis with logical consistency and support in the literature.

Deciding whether to accept, refuse, or delay any vaccine or combination of vaccines should include understanding the individual’s own risks in each scenario under consideration.

Good luck with that :wink:

You’re really digging deep, aren’t you?

Arthus reactions (a type of delayed hypersensitivity response) are so rare that a recent review that involved searching three major research databases including PubMed, found a grand total of 30 cases reported up through early 2019, most of those in children under the age of six who’d received frequent multiple injections of the same vaccine. Moreover, the authors say the type of papers reviewed (including case reports) make it questionable how many of that scant number reflect actual Arthus cases.

The relevance of this phenomenon to the OP’s question is doubtful, and certainly not a justification for spacing out vaccines in general.

I trust my doctor(s) and the nurses in the practice I go to, to have been trained to know this stuff so that I don’t have to (no point keeping a dog and barking yourself). FWIW, when I asked for the flu jab at the time of my annual review a couple of years ago, they gave me the shingles one at the same time, and the next year it was the DTP booster. I’m lucky enough not to get adverse reactions, so maybe I can afford to assume the professionals know their job.

No. I’m not digging deep.

I’m suggesting the possibility that – because the good side of vaccinations and (at least some of) the bad side of vaccinations are both understood to arise from the impacts of those vaccinations on the immune system – that the idea of spacing out the vaccine schedule or disassembling the components of – for example – the DPT vaccine may have other benefits not yet fully understood.

Let’s chat about that for a second:

Is it safe to assume that there’s some sort of continuum at play here ? Meaning: why not compress the vaccination schedule and reduce the number of injections and decrease the risk of contracting the diseases for which we’re vaccinating ?

Was some sort of “dose-dependent” relationship between number of components, spacing, and adverse reactions established ? Has that been revisited as the number of require/recommended vaccines has increased ? Was a sweet spot established ? Should it be revisited ?

Certainly a fair point, but … at the risk of stating what most people here already know … the limitations of the Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial are at play here.

Because of a nearly infinite number of confounding variables, the RCCT struggles to do anything more than tell you whether the treated group did better than the untreated group to a degree that is statistically unlikely to be coincidence.

It’s the best we have … today … but it’s very weak sauce when extrapolated to the individual level.

Decades ago, my brother was a Blackjack dealer at a casino … and he was good. He could basically tell you the odds of the next card being the one you needed.

And those were odds. You were rather silly to bet the grocery money on that.

RCCTs – often contradicted each time the next one is performed, and – themselves – aggregated (ie, meta-studies) to try to blunt some of the profound effects of confounding variables – are the odds of the next card being the one you need.

When I enlisted in the military, one of the first things they did was to give everyone shots. We would walk into a trailer with our sleeves rolled up and walk down the middle and receive injections on both sides (about six of them IIRC). After “walking the gauntlet”, we received an oral polio vaccine to drink and were mostly covered for domestic diseases.

This is why we have experts constructing and approving vaccine schedules - based on factors including disease risk and optimal time for administering a vaccine, validated by extensive clinical experience and periodic assessments by independent bodies like the Institute of Medicine.

We could make decisions based on uninformed speculation and unverifiable anecdotes, but that option is generally unattractive to those with intact critical thinking capacity.

Likewise, “we can’t trust any science because science was wuz wrong before!” is a poor philosophy on which to base health care decisions.