Nationwide Shortage In Supply of Swine Flu Vaccine 579
Hugh Pickens writes "The NY Times reports that as the number of swine flu cases grows to levels unprecedented for this time of year, health officials predict a shortfall in the supply of swine flu vaccine. Forty-three children have died from swine flu since August 30 — about the same number that usually die in an entire flu season.' These are very sobering statistics,' says Dr. Anne Schuchat, the director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, 'and unfortunately they are likely to increase.' Projections of the supply of swine flu vaccine have widely varied. During the summer, health officials said 120 million doses would be ready in October but later dropped the estimate to 40 million doses. Now officials expect only 28 million to 30 million doses, adding that the exact number is impossible to predict and could change daily as vaccine manufacturers report that production was behind schedule. 'Vaccine production for influenza is pretty complex,' says Schuchat explaining the delay, 'and the complex process this year is taking a bit longer than we had hoped.' Schuchat warned parents with sick children to be alert for signs that medical attention is required including not eating well, difficulties breathing, and turning blue or gray. A particularly important sign is when children start to get better, then have a relapse, usually a sign that pneumonia is developing, and immediate treatment should be sought."
Do not want (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
A tiny win for individual liberty. [mcknights.com]
I haven't gotten the flu shot except for a few times now and again.
Never got the flu, knock on wood.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
My girlfriend had swine flu earlier this year, she was fine. Just sick for a week then back to her normal self.
My aunt is a nurse at one of the largest hospitals in Winnipeg and she said she has never gotten the flu shot and refuses too. After she's seen all the complications with them over the years she figures she's safer without. I agree with her. Our bodies are designed to fight infections, we need to let our immune system do what it does best, figure out problems for itself. One would think that const
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Insightful)
What would your aunt expect to see at the hospital? All the healthy people who had flu shots with no side effects? Nothing is 100% safe.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
My son seems to have gotten swine flu last weekend, and is recovering fine. He tested positive for type-A influenza, of which H1N1 is a sub-type, and had a mild fever of 102F. He's on Tamiflu now. The doctor thinks it is probably swine flu, even though symptoms are mild. Our local school seems to have a bunch of similar cases, with low-grade fevers. I think I also have it, but my symptoms are even milder.
Is this really the swine flu? If so, it's not bad around here, near Raleigh, NC.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Insightful)
H1N1 does refer to proteins of the viral coat, but there is no inherent reason why we cannot mount an immune response to those proteins.
The flu is either incorrectly refered to as the "Swine Flu" or correctly refered to as the H1N1 flue. It is not refered to as the "Mexican Flu" by anyone other than yourself.
I have no idea what you mean by this:
there is some chance that the mantle of flu would be copied around the much more dangerous virus
But then again, it's obvious that neither do you. If you were capable of packaging the genes for an innocuous flu into the coat of a more virulent flu, it would only increase the chances of infection in the first generation, because the less virulent genes delivered into the infected cell would code for the more mundane viral coat, not the one it had hijacked, becuase it would lack the genes necessary for it's production you moron.
And as to the 1917 flu pandemic, it's not even remotely relevant. Medical science, both prevention as well as treatment of symptoms, has come so far as to make any comparisons nonsensical. For one thing, penecillin wasn't even mass produced until the 1940's. I am aware that the flu is a virus, and not effected by antibiotics, but the flu is also capable of lowering overall immune function such that a significant number of the deaths in the wake of the 1917 flu were as a result of secondary infections resulting from the primary flu infection. Also, the first antiviral drugs were developed in the 1960's so were unavailable in 1917 without a time machine.
Pneumonia is not a disease in and of itself you fuckwit. Pneumonia is an infection of the lungs that can be caused by any number of infectious agents, including bacteria. My wife's aunt has pneumonia and gave the infectious agent to my wife and daughter. They don't have pneumonia because the disease didn't settle in their lungs but in their sinuses. As a result they simply have head colds instead of the more serious pneumonia despite being infected by the same virus.
Please mister FUDster, SHUT THE FUCK UP!
please please stop (Score:5, Informative)
The problem is that no human can develop an immune response to either H1 or N1 (as that would be deadly).
Um, what?
If a virus were to infect a cell, and the mexican flu would infect the same cell, there is some chance that the mantle of flu would be copied around the much more dangerous virus, which would beat any immunity or vaccine we currently have, would react differently to most treatments and be capable of spreading through open air (through coughing).
If such an event were to take place, that event has a good chance of making the 1917 flu pandemic look like a tiny issue. That disease literally blocked the world economy for over 2 months, making millions of victims.
The problem is not the flu in the H1N1 form. The problem is that pneumonia might "be infected" and transform into an H1N1 virus. The problem is, in essence, the evolution that it might cause in other viruses. Cases of gene transfer between viruses are well-studied, and the current consensus is that it's commonplace.
No, actually the PROBLEM is that such drivel got marked "Informative" on slashdot...
Seriously?
I have to say that after college, medical school, graduate school, and over 12 years of virology and immunology research, I've read a lot of stuff (including popular science that was meant to be educational) that was ridiculous. But the above post ranks in my top 5 examples of manic garbage. It's a collection of bits and pieces of something you've overheard, put together somewhat like a neanderthal would try to piece together the space shuttle. It may contain a couple of the correct parts, but the result does not only fail to take off, but is not identifiable as the correct object, no matter from what angle you look at it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Do not want (Score:4, Funny)
"mexican flu (that's the name btw.) No it's not.
I know! Everybody knows that the REAL name is hamthrax. Or is it bacon plague? Pork lung? Damnit, I can't remember now...
Re: (Score:2)
next time you get an ear infection... remember you said this.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a difference in seeking help because of a legitimate issue that absolutely NEEDS attention and blindly going to the doctor "just in-case"
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Insightful)
A nurse (or anyone else working in a health care institution) needs to be immunized, because they have constant contact with the segment of the population who is most at risk from the flu. If a nurse gives your newborn the flu because she didn't get the vaccine and your child dies, there would be hell to pay. Seems like a legitimate issue to me, if not for the nurse/doctor's health but for the health of those they care for.
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Insightful)
Rubbish. Society has a significant interest in what you do with your body, because the results of that action may cause harm to others. If, for example, you have extremely drug-resistant tuberculosis, you can expect public health authorities to hold you in isolation, and if necessary, force treatment upon you.
An individual's ignorance should not be to society's detriment. If their ignorance or lack of compliance will cause harm to others, they may be forced to comply with procedures, even when those procedures cause them discomfort, inconvenience, or possible harm.
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Insightful)
...we need to let our immune system do what it does best, figure out problems for itself. One would think that constant vaccine's, medications, antibiotics, etc just make the immune system lazy.
Yeah, humanity got through Bubonic Plague just fine without a vaccine. And that Polio vaccine some wise guy came up with? Useless. Also, you seem to lack an understanding how vaccines work, as they stimulate the immune system into producing specific antibodies, which is essentially the opposite of making it lazy.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's not go throwing a strawman situation around. We're talking about a strain of influenza.
No, I was talking about an ill-thought-out blanket statement.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ok, so where do you draw the line? None of bubonic plague, polio, smallpox, measles, etc kill in 100% of cases and have widely varying mortality / serious effects rate.
At what mortality point is a vaccine a a good idea? If swine flu has a 5% mortality rate, should it be vaccinated against? What about 5% mortality rate amongst certain demographics--should they be vaccinated? 1%?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Uh, no, if you actually read the article you pointed to, you would know that the standard polio vaccine given in the rest of the world is a shot with a dead virus, but in Nigeria, for cost reasons, they were using an attenuated LIVE virus. That's why the virus mutated. They screwed
Re:Do not want (Score:4, Informative)
"One would think that constant vaccine's, medications, antibiotics, etc just make the immune system lazy."
If you had any clue about how vaccines work you would realize how silly this statement is. A vaccine trains your immune system similar to a runner training for a marathon.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I really don't know why you're being modded down.
Vaccines for diseases with high mortality rates makes sense. Vaccines for the seasonal flu is fixing what ain't broke, which always introduces risk.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Where the fuck do you get your information? I remember a time BEFORE there was a flu vaccine (which, BTW, happens to be pre-2002), and people were not dying by the hundreds of thousands.
Oh, and here's the other problem with your flu vaccine; almost NOBODY dies of the flu, they die of complications, the most common being pneumonia, for which we have treatment.
Oh, and more more thing... total deaths from swine flu are ~4,000 WORLDWIDE. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_flu_pandemic [wikipedia.org]
Re:Do not want (Score:4, Informative)
Here's the problem: You're lying. Nothing you just said is the truth.
First, let's talk about those dead kids. 2/3rds of them had 'high risk' medical conditions [medicalnewstoday.com], "24 of the 36 children".
Next, let's talk about that fatality rate. 477 people. Now, that is, in fact, an order of magnitude LESS than the seasonal flu. In the unlikely event that you were to die this year, the chance it was of swine flu is one quarter of one tenth of one percent.
You're just another hysterical idiot freaking out because the teevee told you to.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you aware that getting the seasonal flu vaccine increased your chances of getting H1N1?
CITATION NEEDED. Not trying to be pedantic, but it strikes me as FUD at first glance. Could be that those who receive the vaccine stop being as cautious thus increasing their chances of contracting a disease they have not actually been vaccinated against.
I do agree with you as to the knee jerk reactionary types on slashdot when it comes to the biological sciences. My understanding of the typical slashdoter is a computer or physical sciences degree and little if any life sciences outside of what they've
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Insightful)
My aunt is a nurse at one of the largest hospitals in Winnipeg and she said she has never gotten the flu shot and refuses too. After she's seen all the complications with them over the years she figures she's safer without.
So your aunt works in health care and refuses to protect herself from becoming a carrier of an easily preventable communicable disease? You mean because she doesn't think she will get sick means she doesn't feel like taking a simple step to ensure she doesn't transmit it to a very young or old patient who would become seriously ill and possibly die? What a bitch!
Sure, the flu isn't highly fatal, but it's not something to ignore. People do die, sometimes unexpectedly, even though it is uncommon. If she doesn't want to take steps to protect other people's health, why the fuck is she a nurse?
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Insightful)
Your Aunt is wrong and she should learn to read studies, understand statistics, and realize she works in a place sick people tend to go to. i.e. sample bias.
"we need to let our immune system do what it does best, figure out problems for itself."
That is exactly what a vaccine does, just without all the nasty sickness and death.
". One would think that constant vaccine's, medications, antibiotics, etc just make the immune system lazy."
One would be wrong. one could read studies. But no, one spouts off nonsense.
Re:Do not want (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Insightful)
*facepalm*
All what complications with the flu shot? Feeling queasy for an afternoon? Mild irritation at the injection site? Ok - don't get it if you're allegic to eggs. You're more likely to die from the flu outright than come down with the only major complication, Guillain-Barré Syndrome.
Vaccines are one of the single greatest success stories of modern medicine. Our body is designed to fight off polio and smallpox too, but wasn't quite up to the task before vaccines.
If you or your aunt thinks getting vaccines is counter productive, you're morons.
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Your girlfriend got lucky, at least a little. One of my coworkers wasn't so lucky. She died from H1N1, and it wasn't pretty. One could argue that it takes bad luck(and pre-existing conditions) to die from the flu, most cases aren't bad, but even if the death rate was .1%, that's still 100 dead out of 100k infections.
2. Being in the hospital predisposes you to see the bad effects. Kinda like how if you work in a prison you'll see more criminals.
3. Vaccines aren't a cure. If you view viruses like terrorists(who all share a family resemblence), a vaccine is like distributing a rap/identification sheet. Your immune system still has to respond to fight the infection, it just gets a leg up. Against a replicating 'enemy', said leg up can be the difference between life and death.
You might have an arguement about the antibiotics, but that's a 'too late, open another front in the war' - the immune system has already been roused.
If anything, antibacterial soap and sanitizing cleaning products would make a better target. But even then, how much is it our immune systems 'getting lazy' and how much is 'people with weak immune systems aren't dying early'?
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite true. There are health care workers who don't wa't to be forced to get the shot. It does't ahve anything to do with the shot, per se.
Personally I think they should be forced to get the shot, just like food workers are 'forced' to take precaution needed for their industry.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know of any regulations forcing food workers to have invasive procedures performed on them in order to work in their industry...?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Not that I'm advocating all health care workers be compelled to get an H1N1 or any other vaccine. But for those who decline, I'm perfectly comfortable advocating that they not be
science, not superstition (Score:5, Insightful)
Well I do find it interesting that all over the news there are many health care workers who don't care to get the shot.
You may find it interesting that there are pharmacists, doctors, and nurses who feel it is their right to decide whether a patient even has the option of a morning-after pill or abortion. Now how do you feel about whether someone who chose to work in the medical field is permitted to inject their own dogma into your medical treatment?
Medical "professionals" and workers are expected to follow medical science, not superstition or personal beliefs and morals- and look out for the interests of their patient, not themselves or their own dogma. They knew that going in the door. Among other things, the first thing you are expected to do as an employee of a hospital is get all your vaccinations up to date.
straw man argument (Score:4, Insightful)
requires throwing ethics and morality out the window and blindly carrying out instructions, even if what you are being asked to do seems horribly wrong.
That's a nice straw-man; we're talking about medical professionalism in the context of patient care, not building bioweapons, rootkits, or anything else you cited. And yes, except in cases where the patient is unable to make decisions in an informed capacity and they do not have a pre-existing decision/order, their wishes are more important than whether something 'seems horribly wrong' to you. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Self-Determination_Act [wikipedia.org]. And yes, if an 18 year old woman shows up at your pharmacy asking for a morning-after pill, it's not your right to lecture her about YOUR morals and religious beliefs. She's got her own.
How fucking funny that someone who just argued for the right for a healthcare worker to make decisions that affect the health of others, can't recognize the right for a patient to make decisions that only affect themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nobody is being held at gun point and having needles forced into their arms. If your job responsibilities conflict that strongly with your ethics and morality, then quit and go find a new career.
Why should an employer have to change their job description to match whatever arbitrary limits an employee decides their morals have put on their work? A pharmacist refusing, for any personal reason, to fill a legitimate subscription provided by a doctor is a bad pharmacist and should go find a career that doesn't c
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Insightful)
What? That's insane and selfish.
A) Without the vaccine you can develop pretty serious health issues.
B) You will then spread it to others. H1N1 is contagious 3 days before symptoms show up. So you will spread it to someone else, possible someone less healthy then you.
C) the that are vaccinated the smaller the impact of the disease.
Really, two pokes and 5 minutes is better the H1N1.
Re: (Score:2)
A) Without the vaccine you can develop pretty serious health issues.
Severe health issues can happen - the question is, what are the chances of it happening?
B) You will then spread it to others.
Again, even if I had it, there is only a probability of it being spread to others. Has anyone figured this number out?
What? That's insane and selfish.
Putting your interests above others is not insane. We're not talking about a plague here, so please stop fearmongering.
Re: (Score:2)
B) You will then spread it to others.
Again, even if I had it, there is only a probability of it being spread to others. Has anyone figured this number out?
Yes they have..... try searching for a few minutes, its not hard to get the numbers....
Besides that, the fact that it is spreading over the world like crazy should give you a bit of a hint that it is indeed very easy to spread it to others.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
What? That's insane and selfish.
A) Without the vaccine you can develop pretty serious health issues.
B) You will then spread it to others. H1N1 is contagious 3 days before symptoms show up. So you will spread it to someone else, possible someone less healthy then you.
C) the that are vaccinated the smaller the impact of the disease.
Really, two pokes and 5 minutes is better the H1N1.
dude, wake up. really. the kill ratio of swine flu turned out to be no more serious than any regular flu. and the doctors aren't even sure that the current vaccine is effective against all the variations of the disease. blind trust into the word "vaccine" is misleading. especially if the illness isn't so severe.
malaria kills 1000 times more people per year than swineflu. why aren't you vaccinated against that one ? (and no, there is no iron garden that would defend you from getting it anywhere in the world
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Does everyone around here have shit-for-brains? Jesus
Swine flu might not be so deadly, but it's a hell of a lot more virulent. If 1% die from each, but 70% get swine flu vs. 30% normal flu, what happens in absolute terms?
Second, there should be absolutely no debate, and absolutely no compromise that anybody in health-care should be getting their vaccines. What's so hard about this? "Boo hoo, I don't want a vaccine because of x,y,z pointless and unsubstantiated reasons" does not stand up to "you being sick w
Re: (Score:2)
The loss of liberty is worse than any disease.
Which liberty are you losing, exactly? It was my understanding that this vaccine is voluntary.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So you're arguing for the right to get diseases and the right to transmit them to others? I don't think that's how rights work...
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Based on what I've heard from people who actually had the swine flu, I'd rather have the disease than the vaccine.
I hope I get the swine flu. [thebestpag...iverse.net]
For those of you who don't understand the basic concept of immunology, please -- hands off the mod button.
Hold on a fucking second there (Score:2, Flamebait)
That may be the dumbest thing I've ever seen on Slashdot ever. Seriously. Wow. Let's break it down line by line.
You quote someone who has absolutely no clue. "I'd like the flu please! If I get an immunity to swine flu I want to suffer through the illness rather than get a shot. I want to work for it and maybe die! Or at the very least spread it around some so others can share in my joy."
Then, you use Maddox as a reference.
Finally, you wrap up by saying that you need to have a "basic concept of
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I hope you get the swine flu, too. In fact, I'm betting on the long shot that you happen to be one of those who will turn out to be particularly sensitive to it, and will remove yourself from the gene pool.
Me? I'm getting the vaccine, provided it's available in my area before I actually get the flu. It may not be life threatening to me, but I'm self employed and a typical flu recovery cycle would cost me $8000.
BTW - the linked site author clearly does not understand immunology, or he would realize that as a
43 healthy children? Or 43 total children? (Score:4, Interesting)
It makes a difference. All forms of influenza are devastating to an ill child. We must assume that some ill children have been exposed to H1N1 by now. So, which is the case:
1) All 43 were ill
2) None of th 43 were ill
3) Some portion of the 43 were ill
Also bear in mind that this is only about twice (possibly trending towards three times) as deadly as using school-buses:
"Approximately 27 school aged children die in school bus accidents every year." http://www.onlinelawyersource.com/personal_injury/bus/statistics.html [onlinelawyersource.com]
The 1918 pandemic was certainly something that we do not wish to see repeated. However, it was deadlier than this situation on the order of millions of times more.
Please stop scaring people. Please?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Where's the profit in that?
As an experiment, the New York Times once ran the headline "Everything Is Fine, Nothing To Worry About" on their front page. For some reason that day's sales were way lower than either the Daily News or the New York Post, whose front pages both predicted imminent doom.
Go figure.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As an experiment, the New York Times once ran the headline "Everything Is Fine, Nothing To Worry About" on their front page. For some reason that day's sales were way lower than either the Daily News or the New York Post, whose front pages both predicted imminent doom.
[citation needed]
Re:43 healthy children? Or 43 total children? (Score:4, Informative)
Look at the distribution of deaths. Most flu deaths occur during the winter, when people generally have weaker immune systems and spend more time crowded together indoors making transmission easier. Lots of people have been claiming that the mortality rate for swine flu is lower than for other seasonal flus, but they have been comparing swine flu statistics in the middle of the summer to other flu statistics from the winter. If you look at the weekly reports of flu deaths over the last few years from the CDC [cdc.gov], you will see no children dying in the summer, and up to around 12 dying a week in the middle of the winter, with around one a week over the milder parts of winter. Compare that with this year, and you see a spike of 3-8 per week in a period that has had zero for the previous three years.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most flu deaths occur during the winter,
Known to be true.
when people generally have weaker immune systems and spend more time crowded together indoors making transmission easier.
Never been tested, completely surmised, and vulnerable to selection bias.
When I look at the numbers I see no children dying outside of the flu season. Summer not withstanding. Because of the outbreak, H1N1 got off to a weird season start. But Australasia's winter didn't kill any more or less than our summer. This seems to cast the 'cold = flu' thing in serious doubt, at least with H1N1.
Of course, if you were reading Slashdot yesterday, you saw already how the science isn't being done to
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously you compare the number of deaths annually of one cause (OK there are 180 school days usually...) with the number of deaths in a 47 day period for another cause. And keep a straight face?
Re: (Score:2)
I sure can. Look at Australia's numbers about their own flu season. This H1N1 thing will absolutely not be year-round. Flu is seasonal. And the season started in June.
Notice how I extrapolated the number up to three times to account for an unknown end to the H1N1 season.
Can you overlook these considerations with a straight face, or are you still stuck on 'month year'?
Re: (Score:2)
You said : "Also bear in mind that this is only about twice (possibly trending towards three times) as deadly as using school-buses:"
And gave 27 as the number from school-buses.
Flu season usually peaks in November and plateaus through April. That's 151 days (11/1 through 4/1), At 43 people 47 days that's 138 children, which is five times your school bus number.
And that's assuming the second half of October sees no deaths, and that it has peaked early this year.
Note: I'm not saying it is in the end of world.
Re:43 healthy children? Or 43 total children? (Score:4, Insightful)
You just simply can't compare raw event numbers when estimating relative risk. Your statement about "twice as deadly" is very likely not true, and certainly not justified from the data you reference. You fail to take into account any sort of denominator when just using the raw events. What if only 27 kids rode school busses each year? What if 2 million did? What if only 43 kids were exposed to H1N1, and they all died? What if everyone was exposed to H1N1, and 43 died? You need to take into account the population, not just events. After all, every(?) child who died last year used toothpaste.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be pedantic. I made a casual analysis, just as the original 43 was. I did it to draw a parallel between the two data points.
Just because both values are unknown (exposures to flu and buses) does not mean they are impossible to compare.
To even bring this up as some kind of a rebuttal leads me to believe that you are suggesting that more children encounter buses than swine flu. That's not supported by the data, due to the way urban environments deal with busing. In fact, I think the final analysis w
Same News Cycle Every Year (Score:2, Insightful)
1) Summer: This flu is the WORST flu we've seen in years. Better get a vaccine!
2) October: We're running out of flu vaccine!
3) November-January: Oops, soorry, it turns out the flu vaccine we were using? It didn't do much against the flu outbreak that happened
4) ?
5) Profit
Re:Same News Cycle Every Year (Score:5, Interesting)
Instead of doing a flu shot a few years back I got a pneumonia vaccine. Usually it is the pneumonia that kills you when you get the flu. It doesn't protect you against all forms of pneumonia, but as an added side affect if I get hospitalized for some other reason my chance of getting a secondary pneumonia infection is reduced.
The other bonus is you get one or two shots in your lifetime instead of having to get a shot every year. I guess I'm a bit more trusting of a vaccine that doesn't seem to revolve around a yearly profit cycle.
Re:Same News Cycle Every Year (Score:5, Informative)
[Citation Needed]. Do you have any quarterly/annual reports to back that up?
The reason this country has gone from 20+ flu vaccine manufacturers a decade ago to 2 today is because it's so unprofitable. It's possible the companies will make a profit on it this year because of the virulence of H1N1, but claiming some sort of profit motive for annual fly vaccine is, from my understanding, wildly innaccurate.
Re:Same News Cycle Every Year (Score:4, Insightful)
I think he was referring to the profit made from selling newspapers hyping the flu situation.
i.e. scary headlines sells us more papers.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason this country has gone from 20+ flu vaccine manufacturers a decade ago to 2 today is because it's so unprofitable.
Not sure about that: [chicagotribune.com]
A half-dozen U.S. companies are producing seasonal flu vaccines this year, double the number from five years ago. In the late 1990s, the number of seasonal flu vaccine-makers dwindled to just two because excess capacity caused prices to fall to the $2-a-dose range. Today, seasonal flu dosages list for about $15 each at wholesale prices.
PREPA [wikipedia.org] was passed in 2005 and
this time of year? (Score:2)
The NY Times reports that as the number of swine flu cases grows to levels unprecedented for this time of year
As compared to............... say, the 1976 levels for this time of year? 1918?
Re: (Score:2)
pregnant wife + fear (Score:4, Insightful)
Think of the children (Score:2)
Schuchat warned parents with sick children to be alert for signs that medical attention is required including [...] turning blue or gray
Would any parent not recognize on their own that there's a problem when their kid is blue or gray? Please tell me people don't need to be told this...
Good. (Score:2)
Good. I don't want that vaccine, and won't take it - I would recommend that everyone research the vaccine and it's ingredients, because there is something that just in't kosher here.
Remember to keep the faith (Score:4, Funny)
The shortage of resources is reason we have a duty to keep deriding the vaccination program. We need to ensure that those people who think they know better than all the medically trained scientists do not get vaccinated. That way there will be enough of the Swine Flu vaccine for the worthwhile members of society.
It would be unethical to prevent stupid people from being vaccinated, but there is nothing wrong with sowing the seeds of discontent so that they voluntarily abstain. And when the more deadly strain of H1N1 wipes out a third of the population....
Well, nobody will care that much. It is the "B" Ark [bbc.co.uk] theory of trimming the fat of society. "Ah yes, the goat"
PS. Thanks to all the other posters for the fine work they are doing towards our goal. It must be hard to keep a straight face while writing some of those messages!
swine flu cases grows to levels unprecedented (Score:2)
Isn't this the first year? So by definition, any activity is unprecedented.
I've been following the public health debate over this, and having known people with the swine flu, I have to say it is mostly hype. Mostly.
The true efficacy of the vaccine is not known, because they will not do placebo-controlled trials. They cite "ethics" for this, however they can do placebo-controlled HIV vaccination tests. In the grand scheme of things, I think the ethics justify placebo-controlled Flu trials far more than HIV p
And now a few facts (Score:3, Informative)
Google Flu Trends. [google.org] The season is just starting. Have a look at how it matches to the last several years at their peaks.
It's an influenza vaccine. The only difference between it and any seasonal one is the virus it's made with; all the rest are the same process (g
You can have mine (Score:2)
Here, you can have mine. I don't want it. I'm not going to get it and neither are my wife or kids.
We eat well, exercise, and get enough sleep and none of us has compromised immune systems. We've gotten the flu once or twice before and it wasn't a big deal. From all reports Swine Flu is no more virulent than any other flu variant.
I'm also not afraid of liquids on airplanes. And my kids are allowed to walk in town without a leash. Even if white vans have been spotted in the area.
I have a pocketknife, and so d
Symptoms (Score:4, Funny)
Schuchat warned parents with sick children to be alert for signs that medical attention is required including ... turning blue or gray.
No shit. You mean that's not normal?
Guess I'd better get the little ones to the hospital.
And maybe stop nicknaming them "Grant" and "Lee."
oh noes! SHORTAGE (Score:3, Funny)
Johnny Carson was joking about a toilet paper shortage on NBC's Tonight Show, and Johnny's simple joke about shortage indeed created a very real toilet paper shortage that lasted three weeks. fact [baypaper.com]
If a comedian can have that much impact, one can only imagine what would happen if a more reliable source like New York Times went around announcing there was a shortage.
Not fear of death, it's not wanting to get sick (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not getting a flu shot because I think I'm going to die from it...
I'm getting a flu shot because I don't want to be sick as a dog from this thing and miss a week of work.
The $30 I spend (via insurance) on a flu shot every year pays for itself in that I'm not freaking the fuck out about catching up on work, not having to spend time I'm not at work laying in bed feeling miserable, and not having to shell out $15 a box (and show my ID thanks to meth makers) for pills that'll make me feel slightly less miserable.
I used to not get flu shots, and I got sick as a dog at least once a winter with whatever was going around. I now get flu shots and for the last 3 winters I haven't been sick with anything more than the sniffles, and I work in an office that seems to have plagues running through it at least once a quarter.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Another reason to get a flu shot: So you don't transmit it to someone else who then dies.
Risk Categories (Score:5, Insightful)
Our health provider is "limiting" the vaccine to certain risk groups. These include pregnant ladies, children under a certain age, people with asthma or other chronic airway issues, and so forth. In other words, the specific groups they want to get vaccinated for flu every year.
A few comments about this virus and why vaccination is important:
H1N1 is a combination not seen for at least thirty+ years. Therefore, much of the population has never been exposed to the "surface codes" H1 or N1, which means they don't have partial immunity. This worries medical professionals, since that increases the virulence and the spread if this flu mutates into a deadlier form. (Generally, the flu shifts a few points. This is a major antigen shift.)
Vaccines do not have a 100% success rate. Some people's immune systems don't respond, so while they've been vaccinated, they don't have immunity and are still at risk. However, if the percentage of immunes is high enough, the particular disease never has a chance to get to those who are vulnerable. This is why anti-vaccination efforts are anti-social: your un-vaccinated kid can give my infant or elderly grandmother whooping cough or measles. (There have been a number of immune-compromised people in my family, and my parents watched family members and friends die from diseases that are now vaccine-preventable.)
Vaccines in general cover a larger number of diseases BUT have fewer "triggers" in them. For example, the original vaccine, smallpox, basically had to give you the whole disease to get your immune system going. Now we can separate out a few key proteins or antigens that are specific to the disease, rather than the hundreds that comprise it.
The upshot is, if you are in a risk category, get vaccinated. If you're not, practice good hygiene and wash your hands a lot, eat well, and get plenty of rest. And de-stress! Stressed people get sick easier.
The CDC Swine Flu Website (Score:5, Informative)
The CDC's 2009 H1N1 Flu (Swine Flu) [cdc.gov] site is handsomely designed and rich in resources for all ages and interests.
The geek will find public health spreadsheet simulations for Windows and Excel here: H1N1 Flu (Swine Flu): Preparedness Tools for Professionals [cdc.gov]
Interesting stuff, no specialist knowledge or skills required.
Social networking and mobile resources, widgets, buttons and badages: Social Media - Novel H1N1 Flu (Swine Flu [cdc.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
"Year" != period between August 30th and Oct 20th
Re:False Statements (Score:5, Informative)
From the CDC Website: ( http://www.cdc.gov/FLU/about/qa/0607season.htm#children [cdc.gov] )
During the 2003-04 Season, 153 flu-associated deaths in children were reported to CDC.
During the 2004-05 Season, 47 deaths in children were reported to CDC.
During the 2005-06 Season, 46 deaths in children were reported to CDC.
As of August 6, 2007, 68 deaths in children occurring during the 2006-07 season have been reported to CDC.
Misdirection (Score:2)
The measurement isn't wrong, it's the thing being measured. The elderly do much worse from complications of flu (few really die of flu, it's pneumonia developed from flu) and the recent Canada study has shown that 32-year old healthy first-nations women are the most at-risk in the population, on average.
This story appears to be misdirection.
Re: (Score:2)
But "flu" isn't one of the diseases with mandatory tests and reporting to CSC, so these numbers only reflect a small subset of deaths.
I.e. likely when the cause of death was not clear, an autopsy was performed, influenza determined to be the cause (as opposed to ebola or inhaling cynoacrylates), and the doctor voluntarily reporting this to the CSC.
You are wrong (Score:2)
on average 92 children die every year. 42 children dying outside the normal 'flu season' is a big deal.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Your statement is blatantly false. As the most minor of checks would show you.
Children don't due from flu in the hundreds each year.
So show us your stats source, or did you just make it up because you are an uninformed idiot?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Forty-three children have died from swine flu since August 30 — about the same number that usually die in an entire flu season."
That statement is blatantly false. Over 35,000 people die in the US from the flu every year. Hundreds, if not thousands, of children die from the flu every year.
What did you expect, this article is in the NYT?
Re: (Score:2)
"The NY Times reports that as the number of swine flu cases grows to levels unprecedented for this time of year, health officials predict a shortfall in the supply of swine flu vaccine
this implies that they have swine flu stats for many years, enough to imply that the levels are outside of normal....
If I have to choose between balloon boy hoaxes or swine flu as the "look at the monkey" diversion story to keep us off the ACTA scent or health care.
Apples and oranges (Score:4, Insightful)
The 35K/year number is excess deaths due to influenza, and is derived by fancy statistics from the time series of deaths in medical categories (i.e. gunshot wounds don't get figured in.) You can read more on how difficult this process is at Effect Measure [scienceblogs.com].
The "number of children" statistic, on the other hand, is confirmed 2009 H1N1 novel influenza diagnoses on the death certificate. No inference required, they are kids with confirmed infections which led directly to their deaths.
Both statements are true, in context. Please be a little less generous with the F-word.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Which nation? (Score:4, Funny)
I know. I was driving down the highway at 110km/h, with the cold 5 degree centigrade wind rushing through my hair, so I could get a litre of pop, and then I flipped my fiat because the speed limit was 50km/h! I survived, thank God. Speed limits are a great idea. God save the Queen.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Do you seriously believe that if we had socialized medicine that hundreds of millions of vaccine doses would suddenly appear and 'save' everyone? The conclusion does not follow. Government is not the solution; government is the problem. Get rid of the FDA and take a billion dollars out of the cost of every new medicine produced.
So you want people to die, die, die, so you can get socialized medicine. That's sick.
Re: (Score:2)
"So you want people to die, die, die, so you can get socialized medicine. That's sick."
You mean, like PNAC wanted people to die, die, die so that they could advance their conservative agenda?
I would assume you're not a student of history.
The great motivator for most national advances is when people die, die die.
Your solution is worse than mine.
Get rid of the FDA, and we'd probably have millions dead each year due to tainted food and drugs.
We'd be eating Chinese-made cardboard food laced with lead and anti-f
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
or ... PANIC and Irrational fear!!! Support your senator's vote for health care reform!
So that the people trying to incite panic and irrational fear so they can give you flu vaccines can simply entirely tell you what health care you can and cannot have. Yeah. Sounds like a great idea.
I'm not sure if this is the point you were making or not. :)
Holy Strawman Argument, Batman! (Score:2)
I don't think people are arguing that you should get vaccinated for the flu because it will protect you from the grim reaper. But good job debunking that one. Now we no longer have the false hope that the H1N1 vaccine was really a panacea for all disease and death.
5 links to the same story about one person who came down with a rare disorder 10 days after getting a flu shot. Say it with me: "coincidence is not causality".
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/64730177.html [philly.com]
http://www.foodconsumer.org/n [foodconsumer.org]
Re: (Score:2)
What are you complaining about, just go get the vaccine and get your family vaccinated.
You need to be concerned about yourself and not what other people "do" or "don't do"
In short, "mind your own frakking business."
Re:Influenza Vaccines are Ineffective at Best (Score:4, Informative)
I'm most familiar with the question of vaccinations being related to autism, as the father of two autistic children. Let it be said, my autistic twins were clearly "different" from my other two kids before they got any vaccines. And every study that's looked at the question has failed to find a link. But that doesn't stop fear-mongers from you from spreading their dung.
I promise you, the Flu's more dangerous than the vaccine.
Don't be an ass. (Score:3, Interesting)
First, government is responsible: the CDC is in charge of this operation.
Second, A deliberate decision was made to ship the stuff as fast as it was made rather than stockpiling it and coordinating distribution in order to get it out as fast as possible. It was expected that this would result in "shortages and lines". Better that than everybody waiting another month.
Third, given the leadtime they had (controlled by the virus, not the humans) they have done a remarkable job getting a significant amount of v
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I have a friend that didn't get their kid circumsized (which is usually done in the first when the boy is only a few days old) because they wanted to leave this decision up to the child. Note that the boy has already had quite a few urinary infections due to this.
Then he's doing something wrong. There's no modern hygenic benefit.