Who's getting the H1N1 shot?

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by GGG

They estimate that 400 people will die in Calgary of H1N1 (not sure what level of vaccination that assumes) Now lets assume that the vaccine is 70% effective. So if you have a 1 in 2500 chance of dying vs say 1 in 10,000 if you get the vaccine. What is that worth to you?

To me I am willing to take this Risk/Benefit even with unknown side effects.

How do you know it is going to 70% effective? What happens a month from now if they realize the shot did nothing and could actually have more side effects than benefits?

Just IMO they seem to have rushed this shot out and I find it odd that some countries haven't approved this same shot. If the chances of catching it are 4X greater without the shot. Why haven't they done that?

What if those side effects are worse than the flu itself? What if it starts to hurt people? Should those people clog up our health care system because their risk/benefit analyst was off?

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by HOOT

How do you know it is going to 70% effective? What happens a month from now if they realize the shot did nothing and could actually have more side effects than benefits?

Just IMO they seem to have rushed this shot out and I find it odd that some countries haven't approved this same shot. If the chances of catching it are 4X greater without the shot. Why haven't they done that?

What if those side effects are worse than the flu itself? What if it starts to hurt people? Should those people clog up our health care system because their risk/benefit analyst was off?

Actually the initial testing indicates more like 90% effective, which is about what you'd expect when it's targeted at a specific strain. Obviously this is based on antibody responses - they can't actually see how it affects the incidence of flu in the population until several months from now, short of deliberately exposing vaccinated and unvaccinated people to a potentially lethal flu virus (obviously highly unethical and not going to happen).

The amount of testing done on the shot was consistent with other flu vaccines (can't make people happy though - half the population is complaining that it wasn't here in September, the other half wants it tested for years first). The monitoring program for the vaccine is also very extensive, and if any problems do come up things would be shut down in a hurry (but there's no reason to expect any problems - this isn't a totally new vaccine, just a flu vaccine for a new strain of the flu that appeared too late to make it into the seasonal vaccine).

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by Bagor

On that note .....



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5404829.shtml

I was present today at a presentation by the head of the Alberta provincial lab and the Provincial Medical Officer. The stats presented above are misleading as they are from a time period where the H1N1 flu prevalence dipped down but the provincial lab is now finding that the H1N1 flu is escalating at the previously predicted pace (meaning very quickly). As for safety and testing, flu vaccines are not tested in the same way as childhood vaccines as a new one has to be produced on a yearly basis (in this case 2 new ones), therefore, limiting the available time for studies. By definition vaccinations are extremely effective and this has been shown time and time again. In addition, the Provincial lab reported that luckily, this strain has NOT been mutating to any significant degree and therefore they expect a very good match. Furthermore, the mechanism of vaccine production is the same and therefore, the virtually non-existant side effect profile is the same for each annual vaccination.

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I've been to the doctor once in the past 11 years. Vaccination or not, if I get sick, I think I have the right to go.

Please don't go to a doctor if you get mild symptoms. Alberta Health Services has been trying to get the word out that people need to be managed symptomatically at home. Unless your symptoms are significant or you are high risk, the doctor's office is likely the worst place to go.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by joe_mullen

I was present today at a presentation by the head of the Alberta provincial lab and the Provincial Medical Officer. The stats presented above are misleading as they are from a time period where the H1N1 flu prevalence dipped down but the provincial lab is now finding that the H1N1 flu is escalating at the previously predicted pace (meaning very quickly). As for safety and testing, flu vaccines are not tested in the same way as childhood vaccines as a new one has to be produced on a yearly basis (in this case 2 new ones), therefore, limiting the available time for studies. By definition vaccinations are extremely effective and this has been shown time and time again. In addition, the Provincial lab reported that luckily, this strain has NOT been mutating to any significant degree and therefore they expect a very good match. Furthermore, the mechanism of vaccine production is the same and therefore, the virtually non-existant side effect profile is the same for each annual vaccination.

What are they basing their figures on? i.e. What % of people that submit with flu-like symptons are actually being tested for H1N1?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I've been to the doctor once in the past 11 years. Vaccination or not, if I get sick, I think I have the right to go.

Going to your doctor is a bit different than rushing off to emerg and causing greater wait times.

[Knut]

Just got back from waiting 4hrs for a needle.

No issues so far. Other than I was so hungry I ended up eating some KFC...... Blech

Everyone needs to personally weight the risks and benefits of getting the shot.

For myself..... I see 15 to 20 people a day. Some of them immune-compromised, some pregnant, and many kids. I want to minimize the risk of passing something onto them.

On a more selfish note. A week off work is costly to myself and it sucks to have to reschedule an entire week of patients.

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by Bagor

What are they basing their figures on? i.e. What % of people that submit with flu-like symptons are actually being tested for H1N1?

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.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Dion

Going to your doctor is a bit different than rushing off to emerg and causing greater wait times.

What is the difference between someone getting sick because they didn't get the shot and someone falling off their roof?

Both knew the risks going in both are causing more wait times.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by HOOT

However you could say that about a lot of things. People know the dangers (or science) of smoking, drinking, not using sunscreen, not putting on their seat belts, etc. You could go on forever but they are fine to use the health care system even though they knew the risks.

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.

How small are the risks of getting the shot? And how big or small are the risks of not getting it?

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.

Personally I don't plan on getting it, however that could change, and if I got sick I am going to use the resources that are available to me to get better. It is me who will be sick and in pain, not anyone here.

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.

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by Bagor

What are they basing their figures on? i.e. What % of people that submit with flu-like symptons are actually being tested for H1N1?

Only a small percentage of people are actually tested for the specific strain of influenza. People who are hospitalized with flu-like symptoms are tested; I believe there is also some more general surveillance testing to monitor the prevalence of different strains in the population, but I'm not positive about that. The latest Canadian data (Oct. 11 to 17) indicated that 16.9% of people tested were positive for influenza (which is higher than normal), of which all but 1 positive test was influenza A (the other was influenza B), and 99.9% of the influenza A cases were 2009 pandemic H1N1 (data from Public Health Agency of Canada). This could either mean that almost all of the influenza going around is 2009 H1N1, or that it's basically the only one that is hospitalizing people.

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by Ashartus

Only a small percentage of people are actually tested for the specific strain of influenza. People who are hospitalized with flu-like symptoms are tested; I believe there is also some more general surveillance testing to monitor the prevalence of different strains in the population, but I'm not positive about that. The latest Canadian data (Oct. 11 to 17) indicated that 16.9% of people tested were positive for influenza (which is higher than normal), of which all but 1 positive test was influenza A (the other was influenza B), and 99.9% of the influenza A cases were 2009 pandemic H1N1 (data from Public Health Agency of Canada). This could either mean that almost all of the influenza going around is 2009 H1N1, or that it's basically the only one that is hospitalizing people.

I believe the Tarrant Viral Watch performs the general surveillance in Alberta, with similar programs across the country.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Dion

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.

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

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?

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

[Cain]

Originally Posted by HOOT

What is the difference between someone getting sick because they didn't get the shot and someone falling off their roof?

Both knew the risks going in both are causing more wait times.

Really?

Someone accidentally falling off the roof doesn't draw a great comparison as you don't "accidentally" catch the flu. When there is a clear way to reduce your chance of actually contracting the flu which isn't all that bothersome and you deliberately avoid it, I do think that you are more at fault than some poor sap that slips and falls.

Of course you can make another analogy or clarify this one to suit your case, but the point stands that the vaccine is there to reduce the likelihood of you needing to go to the hospital and cause a wait time and is freely available to you.

[Cain]

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?

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?

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

And of course if people choose not to take the shot and get sick, yes they should go seek help. This does not however take anything away from the fact that they are probably guilty of being selfish. Hospitals already treat many people every day that abuse the system and if they were morally judged would be found lacking.

The sentiment remains though, that if you can get the shot, you probably should. Otherwise you are putting other peoples safety at risk in one way or another.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Cain

Really?

Someone accidentally falling off the roof doesn't draw a great comparison as you don't "accidentally" catch the flu. When there is a clear way to reduce your chance of actually contracting the flu which isn't all that bothersome and you deliberately avoid it, I do think that you are more at fault than some poor sap that slips and falls.

Of course you can make another analogy or clarify this one to suit your case, but the point stands that the vaccine is there to reduce the likelihood of you needing to go to the hospital and cause a wait time and is freely available to you.

Why didn't that person use a tie-down which would have stopped them from falling? He knew the risk, there are ways to possibly prevent him from falling but he didn't take them. No emergency room for you!

[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.

[Cain]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Why didn't that person use a tie-down which would have stopped them from falling? He knew the risk, there are ways to possibly prevent him from falling but he didn't take them. No emergency room for you!

As I said, you can change your analogy to suit anything, and I agree...most things are preventable. I also said that if someone were to get the flu and had deliberately avoided getting vaccinated that they should seek help and be entitled to it.

Bottom line is though, this is something you can decrease your risk for. You should use a tie down, and you should get a flu shot. Problem solved!

[Cain]

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'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.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Cain

As I said, you can change your analogy to suit anything, and I agree...most things are preventable. I also said that if someone were to get the flu and had deliberately avoided getting vaccinated that they should seek help and be entitled to it.

Bottom line is though, this is something you can decrease your risk for. You should use a tie down, and you should get a flu shot. Problem solved!

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.