Who's getting the H1N1 shot?

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

A friend of my younger brother is dead, believed to be H1N1 related.

Not sure how that affects my viewpoint on the vaccine yet. If it was universally seen as safe, I'd have no problems with it. However, the fact is, many knowledgeable doctors and agencies have reservations about the vaccine.

I'd consider myself low risk anyway, so I wouldn't get the vaccine right away anyways.

I work in the medical field (got to skip the line for the vaccine ), and I have yet to encounter any medical agency or medical doctor of significant authority that has reservations regarding the vaccine. The medical community is in complete agreement (to my knowledge) as to the safety and need for this vaccination. I would be interested to hear what specific agencies or physicians disagree.

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by HOOT

I'm not trying to tell people not to get it but no one should be able to tell me I am not entitled to hospital service because I didn't get a shot. It is like telling AIDs pateients they can't get treatment if they had unprotected sex, cancer patients they can't get treatment if they smoked, didn't use sunscreen through their life, etc.

Personally right now I am not interested in this shot. I am going to take a risk (which is only my risk) to see where things go from here. Maybe if I am effected by it more personally I will get the shot but until than it is just another panic over something that will solve itself. If people died that is bad news but that is the cost of doing business like anything you do in life.

I agree, no one can force people to take a vaccine, but to claim that it is "only my risk" is inaccurate. This is a "public" health concern. Individuals not getting vaccinated increase the risk of spread. This is what the herd effect is all about.

[Cain]

And that is your choice, nobody will hold a gun to your head. It isn't necessarily only your risk as you state though. It is also a risk for everyone you encounter, including friends and family, people you care about.

I hate shots, but I have a pregnant sister and play hockey regularly where I might be exposed. I think that it is worth my time to possibly protect those that I love. I guess all I'm trying to say is...it isn't only your safety you should be worried about. As for this all being hype, perhaps, but I do live closely tuned into the medical world (I am not in it, but it is all around me) and a lot of people whose opinions I vastly respect are concerned.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Well this shot isn't 100% effect so how do we know they still wouldn't end up in the hospital?

Would it not be better to get the shot amd minimise the risk?

All I'm trying to say is that in life people take risks every day and because of that they shouldn't be banned from going to the emergency room else why is it there?

I'd like to see people made more accountable for the health. Of course that's never going to happen and our health system will continue to struggle with people complaining about cuts and wait times.

Sure people should take better care of themselves but they don't and I am trying to understand why this should be any different.

You have a problem with making people responsible for poor choices in regards to health?

[KTown]

I originally said no, My wife and kid got theres I will most likely get mine to make them happy, I do have minor asthma but its never been triggered where i needed the puffer, or go to the hospital, I've also never missed anything because of asthma so I think I am low risk.

However I've got a flu right now so I probably should wait till it subsides. I'll most likely go Monday. And no I doubt its the h1n1 flu because I have a sore throat with body aches. No cough, no fever.

I would actually be curious as to know an estimate of how many people have h1n1 vs the regular flu at the moment.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Cain

And that is your choice, nobody will hold a gun to your head. It isn't necessarily only your risk as you state though. It is also a risk for everyone you encounter, including friends and family, people you care about.

Don't forget the costs to employers due to employees being off work sick and the sick benefits being paid out.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by joe_mullen

I work in the medical field (got to skip the line for the vaccine ), and I have yet to encounter any medical agency or medical doctor of significant authority that has reservations regarding the vaccine. The medical community is in complete agreement (to my knowledge) as to the safety and need for this vaccination. I would be interested to hear what specific agencies or physicians disagree.

Agencies have been mentioned in this thread.

Doctor's names, I'm obviously not going to say, but my wife's doctor certainly had reservations. Other doctors have been mentioned in this thread as well.

That the medical community is in complete agreement is certainly false.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by joe_mullen

There is a province wide program called the Tarrant Viral Watch that has designated physicans throughout the province that are swabbing all patients with influenza-like illness. This allows them to track actual increases in H1N1 and other virus subtype prevalance rates as they also swab patients regularly outside the flu season. Therefore, they actually get to see if there is an increase in any particular flu strain from the norm. Other physicians swabs are not taken into account as they vary widely with patient/media concern regarding the virus. Based on viral watch data, the H1N1 flu rates are increasing quickly. Hope that helps.

Thanks for that.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that e.g. like the report in my quote that said that "H1N1 affects over 250 Georgetown students" there's IMO a bit of a tendency for people to assume that because their neighbour or whomever came down with something that it's H1N1 and there might be a bit of a hysteria element out there.
A few questions (if you happen to know the answers):

1. Why are other physicians' swabs disregarded? Do the physicians that are part of the viral watch have different criteria before deciding to swab a patient? I don't get the bold part.

2. Any idea what % of patients that are presenting with symptons are actually testing +ve? Is this different from other physicians?

3. It's pretty much a given that that incidences will increase as is the norm for any given flu season. How do the overall numbers and rate of increase compare with past seasons?

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

A friend of my younger brother is dead, believed to be H1N1 related.

Not sure how that affects my viewpoint on the vaccine yet. If it was universally seen as safe, I'd have no problems with it. However, the fact is, many knowledgeable doctors and agencies have reservations about the vaccine.

I'd consider myself low risk anyway, so I wouldn't get the vaccine right away anyways.

I'm sorry to hear that.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Agencies have been mentioned in this thread.

Doctor's names, I'm obviously not going to say, but my wife's doctor certainly had reservations. Other doctors have been mentioned in this thread as well.

That the medical community is in complete agreement is certainly false.

What are they saying?

No names just curious what their concerns are.

I will be the first to say this thread is changing my mind a bit on wanting to get it because some people are bringing up some quality points however I am still reserved and want to hear all angles. I will not be rushing to get this shot tomorrow but as more information comes out I may re-think my position.

I understand it could be too late by then but that is a risk I am willing to make until I am comfortable.

[Cain]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Agencies have been mentioned in this thread.

Doctor's names, I'm obviously not going to say, but my wife's doctor certainly had reservations. Other doctors have been mentioned in this thread as well.

That the medical community is in complete agreement is certainly false.

I don't think you need something to be unanimous for it to be overwhelmingly one sided.

Everyone has an opinion, and there will always be naysayers...for everything that can be possibly debated, and probably even what cannot.

[macker]

Originally Posted by joe_mullen

I work in the medical field (got to skip the line for the vaccine ), and I have yet to encounter any medical agency or medical doctor of significant authority that has reservations regarding the vaccine. The medical community is in complete agreement (to my knowledge) as to the safety and need for this vaccination. I would be interested to hear what specific agencies or physicians disagree.

This is exactly what my Mom who is a home care nurse was telling me tonight. Every physician she has talked to is completely behind the vaccine. It's one of those things that you will never have all of the info and answers you want and can be pulled back and forth on it with every bit of info you read up on. I wouldn't be surprised if there are people in line who wait a few hours and get to the front of the line and then simply walk away. Anyways there was another lady in Calgary that died from H1N1 today that I haven't even heard reported on the news yet. About 4-5 people have died from it since Friday.

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Thanks for that.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that e.g. like the report in my quote that said that "H1N1 affects over 250 Georgetown students" there's IMO a bit of a tendency for people to assume that because their neighbour or whomever came down with something that it's H1N1 and there might be a bit of a hysteria element out there.
A few questions (if you happen to know the answers):

1. Why are other physicians' swabs disregarded? Do the physicians that are part of the viral watch have different criteria before deciding to swab a patient? I don't get the bold part.

2. Any idea what % of patients that are presenting with symptons are actually testing +ve? Is this different from other physicians?

3. It's pretty much a given that that incidences will increase as is the norm for any given flu season. How do the overall numbers and rate of increase compare with past seasons?

1. nasopharyngeal swabs are rarely indicated, and since most influenza-like illnesses are self-limiting, positive swabs do not usually change management. therefore they are rarely done by the average physician. however, during time of media hype (west nile, H1N1, etc.), many patients request swabs, therefore, these swabs skew the data as they are not compared to the norm in that particular physicians population (hopefully that makes sense). in general, most physicians only swab when patients ask for it (strong correlation with media). however, surveillance physicians swab throughout the year, therefore, rates can be compared to standard rates for throughout the years.

2. i think this was partly addressed in another post (not by myself). guidelines now do not advise swabbing by average physicians as nearly all influenza a has been H1N1. furthermore, swabbing does not really confer any advantage in management in the vast majority of the population as treatment is purely symptomatic (except in specialized cases requiring antivirals)

3. i don't have a specific number (too lazy to look it up right now) but influenza rates are grossly abnormal for this time of year. the seasonal flu peaks in a few months, and is rarely this widespread. in addition, the presentation so far correlates very well with previous H1N1 pandemics (last being in 1968 i believe)

[Finner]

My girlfriend and I waited in line for just over an hour today for the shot here in Edmonton. A friend's fiancee (age 22ish) died suddenly from the flu on Monday. Didn't hear yet if it was confirmed he had H1N1 or not, but that was enough to sway our decision.

I can see how some people may not feel it is urgent to get the shot yet, but am worried that this virus could possibly spread more and change into something worse. Of course that might not happen, it could though, and it seems to make sense to do whatever we can to stop it now by vaccinating as many as possible.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Dion

Yet we have a public health system that is struggling to stay a float. Everybody thinks it's free so they go about life thinking the system will save them when they make bad health choices in thier lives. Too me that's part of the problem right there. Getting people to take better care of thier health would go along ways to making public health care more sustainable.



A healthy 13 year old boy dieing from the H1N1 tells me it's worth the risk of any side effects that may come up.



Imagine others like yourself choosing not to get the shot and getting sick. Some will get lucky with having to stay home and rest while others will develop more serious problems and land in the hospital. A hospital stay that could have been avoided.

I'm curious as to where exactly your line is at Dion for assuming that people who are ill due to lifestyle choices will stay at home.

I'm willing to guess that alcohol related incidents, obesity related diseases, smoking related diseases will all be a greater financial and manpower drain on the healthcare system within the next year than this flu (not counting the actual cost of the vacccines). These are all lifestyle choices related diseases that I have no issues with as part of a healthcare for all program despite the patients indulging in activities against the advice of Health Canada.

Why should individuals that choose to wait until more data is available on a subject matter that has not got 100% medical backing not to mention differentiating approvals from governments be treated any different?

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by joe_mullen

1. nasopharyngeal swabs are rarely indicated, and since most influenza-like illnesses are self-limiting, positive swabs do not usually change management. therefore they are rarely done by the average physician. however, during time of media hype (west nile, H1N1, etc.), many patients request swabs, therefore, these swabs skew the data as they are not compared to the norm in that particular physicians population (hopefully that makes sense). in general, most physicians only swab when patients ask for it (strong correlation with media). however, surveillance physicians swab throughout the year, therefore, rates can be compared to standard rates for throughout the years.

2. i think this was partly addressed in another post (not by myself). guidelines now do not advise swabbing by average physicians as nearly all influenza a has been H1N1. furthermore, swabbing does not really confer any advantage in management in the vast majority of the population as treatment is purely symptomatic (except in specialized cases requiring antivirals)

3. i don't have a specific number (too lazy to look it up right now) but influenza rates are grossly abnormal for this time of year. the seasonal flu peaks in a few months, and is rarely this widespread. in addition, the presentation so far correlates very well with previous H1N1 pandemics (last being in 1968 i believe)

So you seem quite knowledgable about the whole situation... is the H1N1 risk worth pre-empting the regular vaccination schedule for children? I'm now worrying about H1N1 and meningitis for my kid... it sucks!

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Agencies have been mentioned in this thread.

Doctor's names, I'm obviously not going to say, but my wife's doctor certainly had reservations. Other doctors have been mentioned in this thread as well.

That the medical community is in complete agreement is certainly false.

Every major medical agency in this country, including Health Canada, CMA, CCFP, etc, is in complete agreement with the vaccination effort. Again, I am unaware of any national or provincial body in Canada that has reservations regarding this. Vaccination is likely the most important facet of public health, this cannot be understated.

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by Bagor

I'm curious as to where exactly your line is at Dion for assuming that people who are ill due to lifestyle choices will stay at home.

I'm willing to guess that alcohol related incidents, obesity related diseases, smoking related diseases will all be a greater financial and manpower drain on the healthcare system within the next year than this flu (not counting the actual cost of the vacccines). These are all lifestyle choices related diseases that I have no issues with as part of a healthcare for all program despite the patients indulging in activities against the advice of Health Canada.

Why should individuals that choose to wait until more data is available on a subject matter that has not got 100% medical backing not to mention differentiating approvals from governments be treated any different?

Don't mean to be picky, but vaccines actually confer a net cost savings. They are the most predictable aspect of preventative medicine. Obviously the above stated examples (obesity, etc.) lead to great financial strain on the medical system.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Cain

I'd argue that very few things are seen as universally safe. Everything has an inherent risk.

In this case, I think that most authorities agree that the risks present in the vaccine are vastly outweighed by the risks you encounter without it. Everything comes with pros and cons, but there is usually one side that is larger.

So ... what exactly is the problem/concern with the US?

Given that the adjuvant vaccine would significantly address their shortages and it's been declared a national emergency surely you would think there would be a process in place for fast-tracking its approval?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Bagor

I'm willing to guess that alcohol related incidents, obesity related diseases, smoking related diseases will all be a greater financial and manpower drain on the healthcare system within the next year than this flu (not counting the actual cost of the vacccines). These are all lifestyle choices related diseases that I have no issues with as part of a healthcare for all program despite the patients indulging in activities against the advice of Health Canada.

Can I assume you have no problems with cuts to health care and long waiting times in emerg?

Why should individuals that choose to wait until more data is available on a subject matter that has not got 100% medical backing not to mention differentiating approvals from governments be treated any different?

Waiting could prove to be fatal.