Flu vaccine

[Topaz]

The Feds came out and said if you get sick from the vaccine of the swine flu, you can't sue the companies that make it! Does that make Canadians really secure, that the companies know what they are going and the vaccine is safe??? Or is it that they know something that WE don't? http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/09/30/...ine-canada.html

[M.Dancer]

Contracts between governments and vaccine manufacturers usually include an indemnity clause that exempts companies if there are problems with a vaccine, Canada's chief public health officer, Dr. David Butler-Jones, told reporters Wednesday.

You can still sue....but the award would come from Ottawa.

[Topaz]

You can still sue....but the award would come from Ottawa.

In other words ..you'd be suing yourself!

[M.Dancer]

In other words ..you'd be suing yourself!

If you could only have been Arar's legal counsel

[Sir Bandelot]

The way I see it, they have less risk of being sued so they don't need to worry as much about quality control, testing and clinical trials. They can put the product to market faster. That gives the pharmaceutical companies an advantage to make more profit, while the risk is carried by the government. IE the taxpayer will cover it, not the big pharma corporations. They just take the money and run. What a sweet deal

[GostHacked]

The way I see it, they have less risk of being sued so they don't need to worry as much about quality control, testing and clinical trials. They can put the product to market faster. That gives the pharmaceutical companies an advantage to make more profit, while the risk is carried by the government. IE the taxpayer will cover it, not the big pharma corporations. They just take the money and run. What a sweet deal

100% agreed. There was a huge rush to get a vaccine out for this new strain. Does that mean quality control was rushed as well? Yes indeed, they do go hand in hand.

[Guest American Woman]

No one is being forced to have the vaccine, so I can understand why the company can't be sued since everyone knows (or should know or be told) that there's always a certain "risk" involved with getting any vaccination. This is why I haven't made up my mind whether I'm going to have it or not.

But if the vaccine is going to do any good, it has to be out in time to do what it's supposed to do --prevent H1N1; so if the virus is already out there in full force by the time the vaccine becomes available, it wouldn't do much good. So really, the pharmaceutical companies are under a certain amount of pressure to get the vaccine out in time for flu season.

[Sir Bandelot]

No one is being forced to have the vaccine.

I would not doubt for one second, that if a serious pandemic did break out that would change. Forced vaccinations, especially for the young whose parents don't want to vaccinate. Then in effect we are all property of the state- not just your goods, or your wealth or your land... but your hide.

[Wilber]

I would not doubt for one second, that if a serious pandemic did break out that would change. Forced vaccinations, especially for the young whose parents don't want to vaccinate. Then in effect we are all property of the state- not just your goods, or your wealth or your land... but your hide.

It's an interesting conundrum. Does the right to infect over rule the right not to be vaccinated. A big reason I get annual flue vaccinations is to protect me from those who won't.

[Mr.Canada]

Sometimes I get the flu vaccine and sometimes I don't and to be honest I've not noticed a difference but then again I'm not one that gets sick very often.

I have been thinking about getting both vaccines this year however. I don't put myself in a position that would make it easy for me to catch a flu off of someone else but I don't want to take a chance.

I am thinking of waiting a bit to see if the people who are receiving it are having any adverse effects from it. This non sue policy has me a bit nervous. Makes me think that perhaps they're rushing it without properly testing to make sure it's safe.

They'll most likely vaccinate people who live in the poor areas first. Sad but this is what they do with experimental medicines.

[Bryan]

No one is being forced to have the vaccine

That depends on your definition of "force". Many people, my wife included, have mandatory vaccination policies at work.

Sure, they don't strap her down and physically force her, she does have a choice: she can quit her job.

[Guest American Woman]

I would not doubt for one second, that if a serious pandemic did break out that would change. Forced vaccinations, especially for the young whose parents don't want to vaccinate. Then in effect we are all property of the state- not just your goods, or your wealth or your land... but your hide.

You may very well be right about that. I didn't realize the government, in both of our countries, had the right to "force" vaccinations on anyone/everyone if a state of emergency were to be declared.

That depends on your definition of "force". Many people, my wife included, have mandatory vaccination policies at work.

Sure, they don't strap her down and physically force her, she does have a choice: she can quit her job.

That certainly fits my definition of "force," but at the same time, I think it's illegal. From what I've read, one can only be "forced" to have a vaccination if the government declares a state of emergency, and I don't see where that's happened regarding the H1N1 virus.

[kimmy]

Personally, I'm tired of all the hype about H1N1.

What I have read is that it's no more dangerous than a typical seasonal flu. The flu kills thousands of people every year, but only the most frail people are in any danger. For the vast majority of people it is little more than a minor inconvenience. Why is H1N1 so much more worrying to people?

I never bother getting a flu shot, and I won't bother getting an H1N1 shot either. I think the news coverage of this story ("holy crap, it's a global pandemic!") has given people a distorted view and caused people to lose perspective of the actual risks, which for most people are minuscule at most.

-k

[capricorn]

I think the news coverage of this story ("holy crap, it's a global pandemic!") has given people a distorted view and caused people to lose perspective of the actual risks, which for most people are minuscule at most.

-k

I read reports that if you had a seasonal flu shot last year and you get a H1N1 shot, you may be at greater risk of catching H1N1. Well, how comforting. What's a person to do? Perhaps no vaccination is the safest option.

[GostHacked]

I read reports that if you had a seasonal flu shot last year and you get a H1N1 shot, you may be at greater risk of catching H1N1. Well, how comforting. What's a person to do? Perhaps no vaccination is the safest option.

It sometimes is. Your body has ways of dealing with most viruses and illnesses (aside from terminal illnesses). I have not had a flu shot in over 15 years. The only time I felt that sick was due to a weeklong drinking binge on my vacation to Vancouver this year (could have been da yellow fever never know)

[Guest American Woman]

I read reports that if you had a seasonal flu shot last year and you get a H1N1 shot, you may be at greater risk of catching H1N1. Well, how comforting. What's a person to do? Perhaps no vaccination is the safest option.

Where did you read that? I attended a seminar on H1N1 for work last week, led by someone from the CDC, and the higher risk groups were all addressed-- and those who had a flu shot last year were not among the 'higher risk' groups.

[capricorn]

Preliminary research suggests the seasonal flu shot may put people at greater risk for getting swine flu, CBC News has learned.

"This is some evidence that has been floated. It hasn't been validated yet, it's very preliminary," cautioned Dr. Don Low, microbiologist-in-chief at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto.

"This is obviously important data to help guide policy decisions. How can we best protect people against influenza?"

It's important to validate the information, which has not been peer reviewed, to make sure it's not just a fluke, and that the observation is confirmed elsewhere such as in the Southern Hemisphere, which just completed its seasonal flu season, or in the U.S. and UK.

Four Canadian studies involved about 2,000 people, health officials told CBC News. Researchers found people who had received the seasonal flu vaccine in the past were more likely to get sick with the H1N1 virus.

Researchers know that, theoretically, when people are exposed to bacteria or a virus, it can stimulate the immune system to create antibodies that facilitate the entry of another strain of the virus or disease. Dengue fever is one example, Low said.

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/09/23/...1-seasonal.html

This topic has been making the rounds on talk shows. I have yet to see clear information on vaccinations.

[Bryan]

That certainly fits my definition of "force," but at the same time, I think it's illegal. From what I've read, one can only be "forced" to have a vaccination if the government declares a state of emergency, and I don't see where that's happened regarding the H1N1 virus.

In my wife's case, she works for the government, and annual flu shots are always been mandatory in her department. No, she's not in health care either.

[Guest American Woman]

In my wife's case, she works for the government, and annual flu shots are always been mandatory in her department. No, she's not in health care either.

Since she works for the government, I suppose she really has no choice even if it isn't legal to require the vaccinations.

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/09/23/...1-seasonal.html

This topic has been making the rounds on talk shows. I have yet to see clear information on vaccinations.

Thanks for the link; I couldn't find any information on it myself. I wish I had known about it before my seminar so I could have questioned the CDC about it specifically/directly.

As I said, nothing was said about it, and we covered all the 'higher risk' groups, so perhaps it's not something the U.S. sees a concern with.

[segnosaur]

The Feds came out and said if you get sick from the vaccine of the swine flu, you can't sue the companies that make it! Does that make Canadians really secure, that the companies know what they are going and the vaccine is safe??? Or is it that they know something that WE don't? http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/09/30/...ine-canada.html

Don't really think its such a big deal...

Whenever any vaccination is given, there is a very small probability of some adverse reaction. (This can happen regardless of how well the vaccine is manufactured.) For example, anyone with an alergy to eggs or egg products should not take the flu vaccine because they use eggs in the incubation process.

So, I suspect that vaccine manufacturers want to avoid a case where someone has a bad reaction and sues, not because they made a mistake in manufacturing the vaccine, but because the individual had a bad reaction due to some unique aspect of their biology.

[segnosaur]

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/09/23/...1-seasonal.html

Preliminary research suggests the seasonal flu shot may put people at greater risk for getting swine flu, CBC News has learned.

...

It's important to validate the information, which has not been peer reviewed, to make sure it's not just a fluke, and that the observation is confirmed elsewhere such as in the Southern Hemisphere, which just completed its seasonal flu season, or in the U.S. and UK.

Ok, keep in mind that, as the article states, the studies suggesting that the seasonal flu shot may make you more suseptable to H1N1 have not, as yet, been 'peer reviewed' or published. This means that other scietists have not had a chance to review the studies and make sure there were no mistakes.

Secondly, those results seem to contradict research done elsewhere... For example, from: http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianp...xrXRQvzljFetL0g

...scientists elsewhere have looked for a similar effect but have failed to see it. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control has said it finds no evidence of this and Kieny said British and Australian researchers have also drawn a blank when they searched their data.

Lastly, its possible that this refers to the chance of catching a mild case of the flu; the same studies may suggest that your chance of catching a severe case of swine flu actually decreases with the seasonal flu immunization.

From the above article:

...The link, if real, is to mild disease. One person who has seen the study says it seems to suggest that those who got a seasonal flu shot were less likely to develop severe disease if they became infected than those who hadn't received the shot.

[Oleg Bach]

I liked it better when they called it the Swine flu. Now they have made it sound more important and deadly by refering to it as the H1N1 - which has the effect of some scarey sci-fi story about something that was made to clear planets of those pesky humans.

Personally I believe that disease man engineered or mutated fluke of nature is not a great concern...I kind of like the challenge of surviving disaster...a strong attitude and high spirit will be very helpful if you are stricken - I just worry about our young people who do not have strong survival skills or an enhanced spiritual life...they might not make it if things go bad. What are we to do then - breed with 50 year old woman to repopulate? Does not sound like a scenerio that hold much promise...

[segnosaur]

Personally, I'm tired of all the hype about H1N1.

What I have read is that it's no more dangerous than a typical seasonal flu. The flu kills thousands of people every year....

While it IS true that there is a tendency for people to panic over things like H1N1, SARS, and other diseases, that does not mean the risk is non-existant.

H1N1 is a little worse than seasonal flu.... its slightly easier to transmit. (Initial reports suggested it had a slightly higher morality rate, but I believe those numbers have been revised.) Not quite as bad as ebola, but the fact that it can kill people, and a vaccination is so easy to get should make the decsion a no-brainer.

... but only the most frail people are in any danger. For the vast majority of people it is little more than a minor inconvenience.

Well, first of all, some people you know, actually care about senior citizens and other "frail" people. So while I might find H1N1 to be a "minor convenience", there is a chance that I could transmit the disease to someone who is at higher risk of dying. The more people that get vaccinated, the better the "herd immunity". Granted, there's no LEGAL requirement to get vaccinated, but since there's pretty much no risk to you, why would you not want to take action that could potentially save other lives?

Secondly, your suggestion that its only a "minor inconvenience" to the rest of us glosses over some rather significant issues. In fact, some forms of the flu (for example, the Spanish flu) actually affected younger people more than the elderly, and the current H1N1 flu has been affecting chidren and otherwise healthy adults.

From: http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/10/12/...nals-study.html

"Our data suggest that severe disease and mortality in the current outbreak is concentrated in relatively healthy adolescents and adults between the ages of 10 and 60 years," the study's authors wrote.

I never bother getting a flu shot, and I won't bother getting an H1N1 shot either. I think the news coverage of this story ("holy crap, it's a global pandemic!") has given people a distorted view and caused people to lose perspective of the actual risks, which for most people are minuscule at most.

Yes, the 'risk' of any one individual dying from H1N1 (or even any other flu) is pretty small. But the cost and the risk to getting the vaccine is also very small. So, why not take a few minutes out of your day to get vaccinated? Why not do everything you can to try to avoid sickness and even a small chance of death, when it takes so little effort to do so?

[Oleg Bach]

None of the medical experts seem sure of the effectiveness or safety of these new vacines. During media briefings they look confused and attempt to justify the use of these products on mass..frankly politicans don't know who the insidiously clever and devate men are that are their masters - and I don't belief that the medical profession is anymore aware of who motivates this shit...It could be a plot to harm the population - stranger things have happened...and as usual they were only following orders.

[segnosaur]

None of the medical experts seem sure of the effectiveness or safety of these new vacines. During media briefings they look confused and attempt to justify the use of these products on mass.

The fact that a medical expert may not necessarily be a good speaker does not mean that they are unsure of the safety and effectiveness of new vaccinnes.

Perhaps the reason they look confused when asked about these things is because anyone who knows the science should realize that using the vaccines is the best thing to do, and most 'questions' are pretty much irrelevant.

We can be pretty sure the vaccines are virtually 100% safe (outside a small number of people who might have an alergic reaction.) Yes, there are no guarantees as to the effectiveness, given the mutation rate of the influenza virus. You may get vaccinated and still catch the flu, or the vaccination may actually keep you from getting sick. But all told, you will have a better chance at survival if you take the vaccine than if you don't.

It could be a plot to harm the population - stranger things have happened...and as usual they were only following orders.

Which, of course, makes no sense, given the fact that developing these vaccines takes thousands of man-hours by hundreds of scientists, and the use and effectiveness of these vaccines is published in journals that are reviewed by, and ultimately read by, thousands of people. To assume that all these people are somehow in on some grand conspiricy, with not one persion coming forward and saying "I was coerced..." puts that particular insinuation on the same level as moon-hoax believers and holocaust deniers.