Who's getting the H1N1 shot?

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by HOOT

I would really be curious on what percentage of people that got their shots so far actually fall into high risk. As far as I can tell there seems to be a ton of people who know they aren't high risk yet still got it.

Can I blame people like them for the deaths of people? Similar how so many here want to blame the people not getting the shot for the deaths of others.

Those people were following the instructions given to them by the co-ordinators of the program. Alberta was the only province to RECOMMEND rather than ENFORCE a "high risk = top priority" policy and even then that recommendation was lacklustre. However a newspaper here in Ontario said that clinics "would not be turning people away from the 'high risk only' clinics, but wished that only high risk people would come". Apparently people were showing up at the high risk only clinics and demanding a vaccination. Some would lie about being in a high risk group; others just say that they didn't care and were going to get their vaccine now. These clinics don't have a huge security staff to start throwing every third person out so they agreed that they won't turn people away rather than have confrontations. *THOSE* people who are *NOT* following the policies set and jumping the queue ahead of people who could reasonably die due to pre-existing health conditions, should be given their share of the blame.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Can I blame people like them for the deaths of people? Similar how so many here want to blame the people not getting the shot for the deaths of others.

Or how about people who get the vaccine and think they're invincible, and then take unnecessary risks and still get infected and infect people?

As has been mentioned, there have been no clinical trials yet to determine how effective the vaccine is. It could be 50/50 for all we know (some vaccines are like that). It could give a false sense of security and many people could let their guard down.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Those people were following the instructions given to them by the co-ordinators of the program.

And? Would you do anything and everything these people say? People should be doing their own due diligence and I think it is petty clear that a lot of those people knew it was for high risk only and still stood in line for the shot because they are selfish. 100 times more selfish than the people not wanting to get the shot.

Since day one I have known it was for high risk people first because my aunt was one of them. You can't tell me I was the only one.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

As has been mentioned, there have been no clinical trials yet to determine how effective the vaccine is. It could be 50/50 for all we know (some vaccines are like that). It could give a false sense of security and many people could let their guard down.

You might want to read this....

The highest-level advisory body to WHO on immunization and vaccination policy, an advisory group comprised of experts from around the world, has reviewed the results of clinical trials involving several thousand people and more than several hundred thousand who have been vaccinated in "real field" operations organized by 14 countries.

"All the reports received today following vaccination either in clinical trial or live vaccination campaign have showed the safety profile of these pandemic vaccines is good and is very similar to the ones which are known for seasonal influenza," Dr. Marie-Paule Kieny, director of WHO's Initiative for Vaccine Research told reporters during a briefing Friday from Geneva.

"Nothing special in terms of adverse events has been noted," Kieny said.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/...871/story.html

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Are long-term smokers a priority group?
You'd think they'd be pretty high risk.

If they have underlying medical conditions such as emphezima(sp?), asthma, etc. then yes. Just like everyone else.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Dion

You might want to read this....



http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/...871/story.html

That doesn't address the issue I mentioned.... The vaccine could still be safe but not more than 50% effective. There have been no clinical trials that use 2 groups of people - a vaccinated group and a placebo group, to determine how effective the vaccine is.

The artcle doesn't mention anything about proven effectiveness (except for in the title). Pretty sloppy journalism actually.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

That doesn't address the issue I mentioned.... The vaccine could still be safe but not more than 50% effective. There have been no clinical trials that use 2 groups of people - a vaccinated group and a placebo group, to determine how effective the vaccine is.

You realize that the only way this would work is to give all the participants the H1N1 virus, right?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

That doesn't address the issue I mentioned.... The vaccine could still be safe but not more than 50% effective. There have been no clinical trials that use 2 groups of people - a vaccinated group and a placebo group, to determine how effective the vaccine is.

The artcle doesn't mention anything about proven effectiveness (except for in the title). Pretty sloppy journalism actually.

Do you really think they'd approve a vaccine if they didn't think it would be successful in preventing the H1N1 virus?

[metallicat]

Get this one - one of the loony religious nuts I used to work with (this guy is an extremist), says not to get the H1N1 shot, because he thinks it COULD be a microchip being implanted by the government. The mark of the beast if you will.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

Get this one - one of the loony religious nuts I used to work with (this guy is an extremist), says not to get the H1N1 shot, because he thinks it COULD be a microchip being implanted by the government. The mark of the beast if you will.

Everyone knows that RFID is the mark of the beast.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Shazam

You realize that the only way this would work is to give all the participants the H1N1 virus, right?

That's not what they do when they test vaccines.

What they do is, they give one group the vaccine and one a placebo. Then they let them go about their daily lives and check to see if the 2 groups have different numbers of cases. You don't need to give them the virus, you just have to monitor to see if there is a difference in the amount of cases in each group.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Dion

Do you really think they'd approve a vaccine if they didn't think it would be successful in preventing the H1N1 virus?

Yes, because many vaccines are not 100% effective at preventing disease. I'm sure it has some effectiveness, but how we don't know yet. Many people don't realize this and it could give them a false sense of security.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

That's not what they do when they test vaccines.

What they do is, they give one group the vaccine and one a placebo. Then they let them go about their daily lives and check to see if the 2 groups have different numbers of cases. You don't need to give them the virus, you just have to monitor to see if there is a difference in the amount of cases in each group.

This is still unethical, right?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

Get this one - one of the loony religious nuts I used to work with (this guy is an extremist), says not to get the H1N1 shot, because he thinks it COULD be a microchip being implanted by the government. The mark of the beast if you will.

I heard a different conspiracy theory from a pro-vaccine person. She seems to think that there was some kind of virus experiment that escaped from a research facility, and that governments are using Swine Flu as a cover to vaccinate against that.

I also heard one where people believe that the vaccine is a veiled forced steralization in order to cut the global population down without a major war.

In short, there are tonnes of loonies out there. It's quite funny actually.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Shazam

This is still unethical, right?

No. People volunteer for it. It's the way clinical trials are done for all kinds of vaccines and medicines... and they are currently doing them for the H1N1 vaccine. Results won't be ready until sometime in 2010 though.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Yes, because many vaccines are not 100% effective at preventing disease. I'm sure it has some effectiveness, but how we don't know yet. Many people don't realize this and it could give them a false sense of security.

Found something on the testing of the vaccine....

He said interim results on vaccine in healthy children ages 6 months to 17 years confirm early results reported on Sep 21. The new findings show that children younger than 10 who receive a second 15-microgram (mcg) dose of pandemic H1N1 vaccine have significant immune response improvement.

The new data were obtained 8 to 10 days after the second vaccine dose, compared with the first findings, which were obtained 21 days after the first dose.

In the youngest children (6 to 35 months), 100% had a robust immune response after the second dose compared with only 25% after the first dose. In those ages 3 through 9, 94% had a robust immune response after the second dose, compared with 55% after the first dose.

Immune responses were comparable in those receiving two 15-mcg doses and in those who got two 30-mcg doses, suggesting that the smaller dose is enough to elicit a strong immune response, according to an NIH press release today.

"Our guidelines seem to fit quite nicely with the science," Fauci said at the news conference. "We would like to get children as fully protected as we can."

In a subgroup of 50 pregnant women participating in an NIH clinical trial, a preliminary analysis of blood drawn 21 days after vaccination showed the vaccine was likely protective in 23 of 25 women (92%) who received a single 15-mcg dose and that it was likely protective in 24 of 25 (96%) who received a single 30-mcg dose.

"For pregnant women, who are among the most vulnerable to serious health problems from 2009 H1N1 infection, these initial results are very reassuring," Fauci said.

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/con...accine-jw.html

[Jonrox]

Originally Posted by Rerun

The impact of large numbers of people being admitted to hospitals because of serious flu symptons, could be catastrophic to our health care system. If you think lineups are long in hospital Emergency departments now, wait till you have hundreds of people with serious flu symptoms clogging the hospital Emergency departments.

Don't forget the impact of large numbers of people cramming into hospital and doctor waiting rooms, panicked because all of the fear-mongering has convinced them that the tickle in their throat or slight fever is H1N1 and they're going to die. This is the impact that is going to be most crushing on our healthcare system.

I have yet to read an article in any paper with the headline, "Thousands upon thousands with H1N1 recover after staying home for a week". Sensationalism sells papers... fear sells papers... death sells papers. What the media has done has been irresponsible and incredibly biased. In addition, their reporting/fear-mongering has led to a large number of low-risk people feeling like they need to get shots ahead of the high-risk people.

It's the flu!! We've probably all had it at some point in our lives. We all had a chance of dying from it - in fact, we had the same chance of dying from it that we do if we get H1N1. It's not the Black Plague. There are too many people that I talk to that think there's a good chance they're going to die if they don't get the shot and it's simply not true.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Dion

Blame Dr. Andre Corriveau who said it was his decision to initially open clinics to all Albertans last Monday. Also the federal govt for giving out much the same message.

Sorry, but I don't buy that. Liepert and his Tory bros are making Corriveau take the fall in an effort to save their sad political behinds in my opinion. Corriveau doesn't rely on the electorate for his job, Liepert and company do. Liepert has told so many lies on this already that I don't buy anything that comes out of his mouth.

Liepert claims that the gov't stated very clearly right from the start that it was supposed to be high risk people only at first. Well, I never heard that until the proverbial dung started to hit the fan towards the end of the week. At the beginning Stelmach was going around saying come one, come all ... Alberta is vaccinating everyone. Only when things started to breakdown after the first couple days did Liepert start yammering about vaccinating high risk people only. And then he lashed out at the media, the public and now Corriveau for being to blame for all the problems. Sorry Ron, this one lands in your lap. Be a man and own it.

I don't buy that Corriveau and other top health advisors would have suggested opening things up to everyone knowing the supply chain was inadequate. My line of work provides me with connections to top emergency response personnel across Canada. There are emergency plans in place at both the federal and provincial levels to deal with all types of emergencies, and most especially for a flu pandemic. A flu pandemic has been anticipated for years, and plans are in place. The plans were ignored though. How do I know this? A good friend of mine was on the federal team that wrote a comprehensive national response plan for pretty much any kind of disaster/emergency you can think of. Biological emergencies is my friend's special field of expertise so the pandemic portion of the plan was the part she was most involved with. This plan included coordination of efforts and resources at both the national and provincial level. While I have not read the plan because I'm not privy to it, based on my informal discussions with my friend I can pretty much guarantee the Alberta government broke from the plan. My hunch is that Stelmach is so desperate to score some political goodwill that he figured he'd be the hero and shoot everybody up with the flu vaccine, when other provinces weren't. His upcoming leadership review probably doubled the pressure for him to score some political goodwill.

One other thing ... Drumheller is a small community so I know some of the local health care people who are responsible for administrating the program here. None of the people I've spoken to received any directives about vaccinating the high risk part of the population only. Liepert is just a liar, that's all. It's no coincidence his surname starts with "Lie".

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I also heard one where people believe that the vaccine is a veiled forced steralization in order to cut the global population down without a major war.

I've heard the population control thing as well, but it isn't through sterilization -- the vaccine actually strengthens the virus and anyone who gets vaccinated becomes a carrier of an airborne disease that will just plain-old kill people.

They use fancy words like "attenuated" and "Bilderberg Group" to back it up.

[KTown]

I just read the following provided from CDC in the United States, probably the most reliable source.

"CDC researchers estimated this week that as many as 5.7 million people in the United States have been infected so far, with at least 1,300 deaths"

Those odds aren't very high even for people with asthma. You would have to assume that 1 in 10 of those people are high risk if not more. So Assuming all deaths from high risk thats 1300 into 570,000

Why the canadian media is making a huge deal out of this is crazy. Yes high risk people should get it, but the use of high risk makes it sound like every high risk
person is going to die.

I would also consider people with obesity to be high risk because they have trouble breathing, don't eat healthy and usually don't have good blood pressure. Not sure why they are not considered to be high risk.