Swine flu...if you pass on the vaccine, at what point will you

[Pretty in Pink]

break out the face masks for public outings?

[Heather in OK]

Don't plan on it. I'm not buying into the media hype.

[fshinkevich]

I don't understand not buying into the "hype". Sure the news organizations love a good story, but the facts are real - there is a pandemic that has the potential to be very dangerous. It is already showing a higher risk of hospitalization and death, and we have not hit flu season yet.

 

http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swineflu/notes/h1n1_second_wave_20090828/en/index.html

 

No reason to panic, but certainly be aware, it's not just hype.

 

Add: As for masks, I don't know. I think I just plan to stock up and stay home if things look like they are getting worse. I guess it wouldn't hurt to have some good ones around just in case.

Edited August 29, 2009 by fshinkevich
Add, and a spelling error haha Im STALKING my grocery store

[Mommyof4ks]

We do that during cold/flu season because of my son's compromised immune system, but if it were not for that we would not be wearing masks. Next year we should be mask free, yay!

[Pink Fairy]

My dh (a ps teacher) and I just today had this email exchange:

 

Dh to admin:

 

Dear D and Admin. Team:

 

CF is a student in my AP Government class (3rd Period). He was absent due to a sickness this week (minus Monday). He returned today (Friday).

C told me that he had Swine Flu (HINI). Is he clear from being contagious if this is true? He does not look that good. --MM

 

Admin to dh:

 

The CDC recommends that people stay home 24 hours after their fever breaks. If he has a fever he should be at home. AP students probably are the worst patients because they don’t want to get behind, but for everyone else’s health: a fever means stay home!

J

 

Dh forwards the above to me along with:

 

fyi

 

Me to dh:

 

AAAAAAAHHHHHHGGGGGGG

 

Dh to me:

 

I Clorox-ed his desk and didn’t breath the entire 50 minutes of class time.

 

Me to dh:

 

Would it be creepy to start wearing a mask, ala Michael Jackson?

 

Dh to me:

 

Monday-Thursday is MJ days with mask. Friday is western day with outlaw bandana.

[fshinkevich]

I read somewhere you were contagious for up to 10 days after fever? Is that false information?

[gingersmom]

I have read/heard that the masks you buy in the drug store are useless as far as protecting you.

 

Apparently hospital staff that wear them are some different kind (ie: much more expensive and actually work).

[Paz]

We are going to live on this for a while:

 

http://www.betterhealthinternational.com/productDetails.asp?prodID=AB1001

[tex-mex]

My dh (a ps teacher) and I just today had this email exchange:

 

Dh to admin:

 

Dear D and Admin. Team:

 

CF is a student in my AP Government class (3rd Period). He was absent due to a sickness this week (minus Monday). He returned today (Friday).

C told me that he had Swine Flu (HINI). Is he clear from being contagious if this is true? He does not look that good. --MM

 

Admin to dh:

 

The CDC recommends that people stay home 24 hours after their fever breaks. If he has a fever he should be at home. AP students probably are the worst patients because they don’t want to get behind, but for everyone else’s health: a fever means stay home!

J

 

Dh forwards the above to me along with:

 

fyi

 

Me to dh:

 

AAAAAAAHHHHHHGGGGGGG

 

Dh to me:

 

I Clorox-ed his desk and didn’t breath the entire 50 minutes of class time.

 

Me to dh:

 

Would it be creepy to start wearing a mask, ala Michael Jackson?

 

Dh to me:

 

Monday-Thursday is MJ days with mask. Friday is western day with outlaw bandana.

 

This is why we homeschool... son and I have comprimised immune systems due to our rare liver disease. When I taught, it really bugged me when sick kids still came to school.

[Word Nerd]

I hadn't planned on using them at all.

 

From the CDC recommendations:

 

"In community and home settings, the use of facemasks and respirators generally are not recommended."

[Mommyof4ks]

I have read/heard that the masks you buy in the drug store are useless as far as protecting you.

 

Apparently hospital staff that wear them are some different kind (ie: much more expensive and actually work).

 

Right. N-95 masks work. The little paper ones don't really do much, but they do make people dive into the aisle at the grocery store when they see you wearing one, so I guess they may work a bit. :D

[Perry]

Right. N-95 masks work. The little paper ones don't really do much, but they do make people dive into the aisle at the grocery store when they see you wearing one, so I guess they may work a bit. :D

:iagree:

 

Drug store masks are useless. N95 masks offer some protection. They're not all that expensive. You can get them at Home Depot or Lowe's.

 

I have a few boxes. I don't have any plans to use them.

[JudyJudyJudy]

If it gets that bad, my son and I, who are high risk, will stay home, and my husband will be as careful as possible when he has to go to the grocery store. His work is done independently, so that won't be an issue.

 

 

This is why we homeschool... son and I have comprimised immune systems due to our rare liver disease. When I taught, it really bugged me when sick kids still came to school.

When I taught school, I stayed sick all the time—even more than I did while working in a hospital.

[Rainbows]

I don't currently have any plans on using them. If our community was hit hard by swine flu, Id maybe consider using one. But since I have 3 kids in public school, I think they would be more likely to bring it home than I would be to pick it up at the grocery store

Edited August 29, 2009 by Rainbows

[swellmomma]

If it gets that bad we will just stay home. I know when I took my medical office training we were tested to see which masks worked best for us. I was one of the ones that the N95 did not work I could still taste the spray so it is a different one I am supposed to use. We were given a card to carry to show in the hospital(if that is where we ended up working) to make sure we got the right fitting mask. Now this was all due to SARS not the flu but I would think the same thing applies. I should dig that card out and see what mask it was I was supposed to use.

[coffeefreak]

I guess the problem I have with the Vaccine is, there's no guarantee it will work, so why bother? We already have outbreaks in our state so it almost seems like a moot point. We'll just avoid going out if it gets that bad. The other thing is, we're all healthy. Should we get the H1N1, we'll be sick (and probably beg for mercy since we're all wimps :D), but we'll get better. I guess that's why I'm not concerned.

 

Dorinda

[Claire in NM]

our immune systems are being compromised. If a healthy person is already sick with the regular flu and then catches H1N1 at the same time, that's when H1N1's effects can be life threatening. It's almost like trying to beat the odds... get the regular flu vaccine and you HOPEFULLY will remain healthy. If not, you are taking chances that you won't get hit by both the regular flu and H1N1 at the same time.

 

Claire in NM

Edited August 29, 2009 by Claire in NM

[Holly IN]

CDC told my boss that it is NOT airborne!! My dh's workplace (Public school) also called the CDC and they told them the same thing.

 

I do not buy into the media hype either. The media is wrong in this case. Passing on the vaccine too!! Too soon!! Reminds me too much of the pig flu back in the 70s.

 

Holly

[Tree House Academy]

We will pass on the vaccine for the time being. It does scare me though. Dh and I were talking last night and really, it is ****ed if you do, ****ed if you don't in this case. If we dont' do the vaccine and my kids get horribly ill from swine flu, then I will blame myself. If they DO get the vaccine and have terrible side effects, again I will blame myself. There really is no EASY decision here. We are very torn. (of course, there are the good options too of "no vaccine, no flu OR vaccine, no ill effects). My worry is that the ill effects of this vaccine won't be seen for years to come and will possibly come on later in life due to the additives. Such a tough call for us.

 

My kids do typically get the yearly "regular" flu vaccine. They will most likely get the yearly vaccine this year as well.

 

I don't see us wearing masks at all. Staying home, yes. Wearing masks, not likely.

[fshinkevich]

CDC told my boss that it is NOT airborne!! My dh's workplace (Public school) also called the CDC and they told them the same thing.

 

I do not buy into the media hype either. The media is wrong in this case. Passing on the vaccine too!! Too soon!! Reminds me too much of the pig flu back in the 70s.

 

Holly

 

It's not airborne, however it spreads rapidly (as we have already seen) and is highly contagious. This is why washing hands and surfaces is so important.

[keptwoman]

Its flu season here right now. I never planned to break out the face masks and haven't needed to. I did have a plan to buy a month of groceries if we needed to isolate ourselves but it just hasn't been necessary.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Colleges here have only recently started, and there are already numerous cases of swine flu (or at least suspected cases since they're testing very few).

[Lovedtodeath]

I guess the problem I have with the Vaccine is, there's no guarantee it will work, so why bother? We already have outbreaks in our state so it almost seems like a moot point. We'll just avoid going out if it gets that bad. The other thing is, we're all healthy. Should we get the H1N1, we'll be sick (and probably beg for mercy since we're all wimps :D), but we'll get better. I guess that's why I'm not concerned.

 

Dorinda

I thought that the main reason for the hype is that young healthy people are dying from this, as opposed to the normal flu in which you are low risk if you are healthy.:001_huh:Someone set me straight?

[hornblower]

It absolutely IS airborne as well as on surfaces.

 

From the CDC -

 

"Spread of this novel influenza A (H1N1) virus is thought to occur in the same way that seasonal flu spreads. Flu viruses are thought to spread mainly from person to person through coughing or sneezing by people with influenza. In addition, people may become infected by touching something with flu viruses on it and then touching their mouth or nose."

 

(this text happens to be from guideliness on care of the homeless http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/guidance/homeless.htm

but the transmission description is applicable in all cases)

 

 

 

CDC official guidelines on masks are here

http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/masks.htm

 

 

 

My own .02:

 

-people who are sick should mask with one of the disposable masks if they need to be out in public. In fact, many drs offices here will give these out to people with ILI who are in waiting rooms. If you're coughing & sneezing, you shouldn't be out & if you have to be, you should be masked.

 

-people at high risk who need to be around someone with an ILI should consider wearing an N95 if they can't stay more than 6 feet away

 

-& of course thorough, frequent handwashing for everyone

[hornblower]

I thought that the main reason for the hype is that young healthy people are dying from this, as opposed to the normal flu in which you are low risk if you are healthy.:001_huh:Someone set me straight?

 

You are correct.

 

Close to half the fatal cases have no underlying conditions.

 

75% of serious cases & 60% of fatalities in the US are in people under 49.

[Peela]

I don't understand not buying into the "hype". Sure the news organizations love a good story, but the facts are real - there is a pandemic that has the potential to be very dangerous. It is already showing a higher risk of hospitalization and death, and we have not hit flu season yet.

.

 

Well here in Australia we are in our flu season and swine flu is the main flu and....not a big deal at all. For most people swine flu is an annoyance, and for people with compromised immune systems, the flu and many other common ailments can cause death. And ocasionally, they cause death in a healthy person. But swine flu is not worse than normal flu here.

The truth is, I have face masks- I bought them a few years ago during the bird flu hysteria. I am not afraid to use them. But so far I dont feel the need at all.

Now, another possible issue is that I believe there is a much higher population of poor and under/badly nourished people in the U.S., due to sheer numbers, and perhaps those people, as in Mexico, are at higher risk of complications, and statistically, that adds up to quite a high percentage and number of people. Hence the "hysteria". But I really wouldn't buy the hype. Stay well, stay healthy, have a healthy attitude, don't panic.

I tihnk they are concerned it may mutate into something worse. But so far it isnt.

[Melissa in Australia]

Well here in Australia we are in our flu season and swine flu is the main flu and....not a big deal at all. For most people swine flu is an annoyance, and for people with compromised immune systems, the flu and many other common ailments can cause death. And ocasionally, they cause death in a healthy person. But swine flu is not worse than normal flu here.

The truth is, I have face masks- I bought them a few years ago during the bird flu hysteria. I am not afraid to use them. But so far I dont feel the need at all.

Now, another possible issue is that I believe there is a much higher population of poor and under/badly nourished people in the U.S., due to sheer numbers, and perhaps those people, as in Mexico, are at higher risk of complications, and statistically, that adds up to quite a high percentage and number of people. Hence the "hysteria". But I really wouldn't buy the hype. Stay well, stay healthy, have a healthy attitude, don't panic.

I tihnk they are concerned it may mutate into something worse. But so far it isnt.

:iagree: but I always thought the higher percentage of poor health in Americans was because of lack of health coverage.

 

 

 

 

Ducking and running for cover before the tomatoes hit me!

[Holly IN]

It's not airborne, however it spreads rapidly (as we have already seen) and is highly contagious. This is why washing hands and surfaces is so important.

 

I agree!!! However not very many people wash their hands which is why this is sad.

 

Holly

[JudyJudyJudy]

:iagree: but I always thought the higher percentage of poor health in Americans was because of lack of health coverage.

 

 

 

 

Ducking and running for cover before the tomatoes hit me!

No need to duck and run since you speak the truth. When my sister was in ICU (intensive care unit) and needed to be transferred to another hospital because the one she was in didn't have adequate specialists or equipment for her illness, none of the other hospitals wanted to take her (we had to really work to find one that would take her). I asked one of the nurses if the hospitals were refusing her because she was uninsured, and she had that look like, "Yes," but answered, "Well, it's hard to say. The large majority of patients we get back here in ICU are uninsured. They put off going to the doctor because they can't afford to go, and then they get in such bad shape that they end up here."

 

It's really a sad situation. Money would be saved if people were able to go to the doctor instead of ending up in ICU because they can't.

[Perry]

CDC told my boss that it is NOT airborne!! My dh's workplace (Public school) also called the CDC and they told them the same thing.

 

I do not buy into the media hype either. The media is wrong in this case. Passing on the vaccine too!! Too soon!! Reminds me too much of the pig flu back in the 70s.

 

Holly

 

Well, technically it may not be "airborne" because in infectious disease speak, airborne implies that it can be spread over a wide area.

 

Instead, it is spread through direct contact and droplets.

 

From Yale:

 

What are the modes of transmission?

An organism may spread from an infected person to an uninfected person by direct or indirect transmission modes.

 

Direct transmission of an organism occurs in the following ways:

 

 

• Direct contact –Spread by direct contact with infected skin, mucus membranes, or body fluids.

• Droplet spread – Spread in droplets produced by sneezing, coughing or talking. An uninfected person can become infected by inhaling the droplets. Droplet spread is considered direct transmission because a spray of droplets can only go a few feet before it falls to the ground.

 

Indirect transmission involves spread via an intermediary:

• Airborne – Spread through the air. An organism spread in this way can be suspended in air. It is similar to a droplet spread organism because an infected person can spread it by coughing, sneezing or talking, and an uninfected person can become infected by inhaling the organism.

However, the droplet spread and airborne transmission are different in a very important way. Droplet spread organisms can only contaminate nearby air while airborne organisms can spread infection over a much wider area.

• Vehicle-borne - Spread from one person to another by an inanimate intermediary. Vehicles include food, water and objects.

• Vector-borne - Spread by animals, most often arthropods. Vector-borne diseases include those spread by ticks and mosquitoes.

 

Examples

Smallpox – droplet spread, direct contact, rarely airborne

Influenza – droplet spread, vehicle-borne

Salmonella – vehicle-borne, direct contact

Tuberculosis – airborne

Cutaneous Anthrax – direct contact

Pneumonic Plague – airborne

 

 

Masks may be useful for things like someone sneezing in your face. But you can probably become infected if the virus comes into contact with the mucous membranes of your eyes, so they're not going to prevent all exposure, just decrease it.

Edited August 29, 2009 by Perry

[coffeefreak]

You are correct.

 

Close to half the fatal cases have no underlying conditions.

 

75% of serious cases & 60% of fatalities in the US are in people under 49.

 

Do you mind sharing where you are getting those statistics? I can't find the details on what you're referencing except the fact that those under 65 are at higher risk. That's because the Swine flu has been through the US before and those over 65 have probably had it or been exposed to it. Every time I've heard of a death, it was someone who had a compromised immune system UNLESS the person was from outside the US. Children under the age of 2 are at risk, but they're always at risk for everything that flies through the air.

 

Here's what they're saying about the vaccine and why I just can't see us bothering with it:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/08/05/swine.flu.deaths/

 

Like Treehouse Academy said, darned if we do, darned if we don't.

 

We never get the flu vaccine and we are all fine. As a matter of fact, we get the flu every 2 or 3 years and come out better than our peers who do get the vaccine. They always seem to get a worse case of the flu than us.

 

Another side to this is, since we homeschool we can afford to get the flu and be out of commission for a week or two. One of the problems with the flu is the loss of productivity and the havoc it brings to a country's economy (I watched a PBS thing on the Spanish pandemic:D) It's one of the reasons there's a chickenpox vaccine now. When my dh and I were both working and only had one child, we would literally barter with each other over who was going to stay home with her when she got sick. It was so hard to take time off for a sick child, knowing that the person who stayed home was probably going to get sick too, and miss more work and income. Now that we're a 2 income society, I feel for and understand the families who are in a panic over how they will deal with it if they can't work because everyone has the flu. I think that's the real drive behind the media hype. I totally understand why everyone wants a vaccine, but I don't think it's going to help.

 

Dodging tomatoes now :D

 

:leaving:

 

Dorinda

[cin]

It's not airborne, however it spreads rapidly (as we have already seen) and is highly contagious. This is why washing hands and surfaces is so important.

 

 

So instead of the MJ mask, we break out the MJ goves :lol:

[hornblower]

Do you mind sharing where you are getting those statistics?

 

Sorry I forgot to put it in first time. These quotes are directly from a CBC story of Aug 21.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/08/21/swine-flu-antivirals.html

 

"At the same time, the presence of underlying medical conditions will not reliably predict all or even most cases of severe illness," the UN health agency said.

"Worldwide, around 40 per cent of severe cases are now occurring in previously healthy children and adults, usually under the age of 50 years.

"Some of these patients experience a sudden and very rapid deterioration in their clinical condition, usually on day five or six following the onset of symptoms."

 

 

further on:

 

Also on Friday, health officials in the U.S. told reporters that swine flu is still spreading widely across the country, with 75 per cent of serious cases and 60 per cent of deaths among people under the age of 49.

A review of fatal cases worldwide associated with the H1N1 pandemic strain concluded at least 49 per cent had underlying disease.

 

 

 

The American stats are in the CDC reports. Current FluView report

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/

From the report for Week 33 -

 

As of August 28, 2009, 8,843 hospitalizations and 556 deaths (15 deaths in individuals 0-4 years, 86 deaths in individuals 5-24 years, 235 deaths in adults 25-49 years, 158 deaths in adults 50-64 years, 50 deaths in adults age 65 and older, and 12 deaths for which age was no reported) associated with 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus have been identified by CDC and state and local public health departments

 

If you do the math 15+86+235 / 556 = 60%

 

 

 

I don't see the underlying conditions report at the moment but similarly, the raw data is all there if you dig through CDC's reports. My own sense of the underlying conditions is that it sometimes seemed like authorities were very eager to find underlying conditions so if anything, those are being over reported. That's just my sense though. The types of underlying conditions reported are diabetes (including non insulin dependent), asthma, being overweight, pregnancy, COPD & other chronic resp problems. If you look at that 2nd quote, the last sentence could have been phrased as "as much as 51% had no underlying conditions". I think it's being deliberately minimized - that's my reading of it.

[cin]

There are outbreaks on the 2 major college campuses here, and they've only been in session for a couple of weeks.

[coffeefreak]

Hornblower - Thanks for the links. You know what I find fascinating at this point? That the CDC is not as concerned as the media about the deaths. As a matter of fact, one of the links in that article led to the CDC website on guidelines as to who should get the vaccine and, you're right, they're not saying my family should be vaccinated because of risk of death. Only families with infants and medical problems.

 

http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/vaccination/acip.htm

 

The groups recommended to receive the novel H1N1 influenza vaccine include:

 

* Pregnant women because they are at higher risk of complications and can potentially provide protection to infants who cannot be vaccinated;

* Household contacts and caregivers for children younger than 6 months of age because younger infants are at higher risk of influenza-related complications and cannot be vaccinated. Vaccination of those in close contact with infants less than 6 months old might help protect infants by “cocooning†them from the virus;

* Healthcare and emergency medical services personnel because infections among healthcare workers have been reported and this can be a potential source of infection for vulnerable patients. Also, increased absenteeism in this population could reduce healthcare system capacity;

* All people from 6 months through 24 years of age

o Children from 6 months through 18 years of age because we have seen many cases of novel H1N1 influenza in children and they are in close contact with each other in school and day care settings, which increases the likelihood of disease spread, and

o Young adults 19 through 24 years of age because we have seen many cases of novel H1N1 influenza in these healthy young adults and they often live, work, and study in close proximity, and they are a frequently mobile population; and,

* Persons aged 25 through 64 years who have health conditions associated with higher risk of medical complications from influenza.

 

I can see your point of view that the CDC is downplaying it, but I guess I see it that the media is hyping it to make good news. I guess only time will tell if the CDC should have hyped it as well.

 

Thanks for the links!

Dorinda

[cin]

Alcohol based sanitizers kill the virus. We'll be buying jugs of that and echinacea over the next few weeks. And the kids will have limited outside activities.

 

We will get the vaccine, but, of course, it's cultured in eggs, to which I am allergic too. DH said get the vaccine and have an epi-pen handy :tongue_smilie:

He is slightly paranoid when it comes to germs. >sigh<

[hornblower]

I don't quite understand what you're saying about the vaccine recommendations. The recommendations include ALL people from 6 mos to 24 years. I guess maybe you're speaking about the rationales listed for vaccinating certain groups....?

 

 

 

The other issue about vaccines & gov't officials is this: the officials have to take into account that there may not be enough for everyone.It seems to me that recommendations are based at least partly on the knowledge that there won't be enough so you need to think of ways to maximize the impact of a vaccination program. You could even argue that if the vaccine is really late or considerably less effective (for instance if it turns out that people actually need two doses) that you might see an effort to 'massage the message' that vaccines are not as necessary for even more people. Because what do you do if you (as a state) tell people they need the vaccine & then can't deliver it?

 

 

Just as total aside - want to go to fantasy land with me?

 

Let's say that the virus increases in severity. Let's say that fatality rates start increasing quickly. Let's say that the vaccine is still close enough to the virus to provide some protection but you need two doses - & even then it's not total protection but appears to offer some. Let's say you hear that in your city, in your neighbourhood, in your family - people are in ICU on ventilators & not expected to recover. Kids from local schools are dying. How does the community react if there's not enough vaccine? What if the state says 'we have vaccine but we need to give it first to health care workers, to police/fire/ambulance & the army'. Sorry, but there's not enough for you...... maybe if you're really rich or have really serious underlying conditions you can get on a waitlist. Otherwise, take your chances..... How will things look? Will people riot? It's the kind of stuff I like to consider.

 

Health care doesn't function in a vacuum - there are politicians & bureaucrats in the pot & for every argument that I hear about how the 'gov't is hyping this to pursue their own agenda', I can make an equally valid argument that the 'gov't is downplaying this because they'll lose control otherwise'. It's an interesting thing to ponder. Well - to me anyway. :D

 

Hornblower - Thanks for the links. You know what I find fascinating at this point? That the CDC is not as concerned as the media about the deaths. As a matter of fact, one of the links in that article led to the CDC website on guidelines as to who should get the vaccine and, you're right, they're not saying my family should be vaccinated because of risk of death. Only families with infants and medical problems.

[hornblower]

Further to my post about vaccine shortages, see this:

 

http://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20090817/NEWS01/908179985

 

"Department of Health and Human Services said only 45 million doses of the new H1N1 vaccine would be on hand in mid-October, instead of the 120 million previously forecast."

 

 

Also Cin - there is at least one company which is creating the vax not in eggs but using a different method. It's mentioned in that same article. I was under the impression that people with severe egg allergy may be able to request that version but I'm not sure about that. Something to ask about when the vax starts rolling out. Or should I say IF it starts rolling out..... ;)

[Pink Fairy]

Hornblower, your fantasy land is a little scary for my taste. Why don't you come over to mine? A few ladies mentioned that they are in the midst of flu season in Australia, and it's not bad. In my fantasy land we'll be traveling a similar path when our flu season hits.

 

Join me, won't you?! It's nice here!

[Perry]

Alcohol based sanitizers kill the virus. We'll be buying jugs of that and echinacea over the next few weeks. And the kids will have limited outside activities.

 

We will get the vaccine, but, of course, it's cultured in eggs, to which I am allergic too. DH said get the vaccine and have an epi-pen handy :tongue_smilie:

He is slightly paranoid when it comes to germs. >sigh<

 

 

Maybe this will make you feel better.

Flu Vaccine Safe for Egg-Allergic Kids

 

Concerns About Serious Adverse Reactions Called Outdated After 2 New Studies

By Charlene Laino

WebMD Health News

Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD

 

March 19, 2008 (Philadelphia) -- The flu vaccine can safely be given to kids who have an egg allergy, two new studies suggest.

Because the flu vaccine contains egg protein, the CDC doesn't recommend it for people with severe allergies to chicken eggs. And most doctors are reluctant to give flu shots to people with milder egg allergies as well.

Their concerns are outdated, says researcher Audrey Park, MD, PhD, an allergist at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.

"Children with egg allergies, even those who have had severe anaphylactic reactions, can safely receive influenza vaccine," she tells WebMD.

The research was presented here at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI).

Building Up Tolerance

 

Egg allergy is very common in childhood, affecting nearly two of every 100 kids, Park says.

She and colleagues studied 45 children, aged 11 months to 9 years, who got the vaccine at their clinic in 2006. All were allergic to eggs; two had had severe anaphylactic reactions after eating them.

As recommended by the American Pediatrics Association, the kids were given skin prick tests to determine if they were allergic to the vaccine.

Children who were not allergic were given a full dose of the flu shot.

Kids who were allergic to the vaccine were injected with three to four smaller, escalating doses until they had received the full dose. The idea is that by starting with small amounts of the allergen and building up, the patient becomes desensitized and tolerance develops, Park explains.

Only Mild Allergic Reactions Observed

 

Park says that two-thirds of the children had no adverse reactions at all.

All but one of the other children had mild reactions at the site of the injection, such as itchiness or redness. One child developed diffuse hives over the whole body.

The second study involved 115 children, aged 9 months to 13 years, with egg allergies who got flu shots. Two-thirds of them also had asthma.

About half got the vaccine as a single dose.

None of the children developed serious allergic reactions, says researcher Simon Hotte, MD, of Montreal Children's Hospital. Six kids had minor reactions at the injection site that quickly went away.

Fewer Than 30% of Kids Vaccinated

 

Park says she hopes the results will persuade more parents to get their kids vaccinated.

Currently, fewer than 30% of children are inoculated, she says.

The flu can kill a child with a chronic health condition like asthma, Park says.

"If your child has egg allergies, ask your primary care physician for a referral to an allergist for skin testing and desensitization, if needed," she says.

Wesley Burkes, MD, chairman of the committee that chose which studies would be highlighted at the meeting and a professor of pediatrics at Duke University, Durham, N.C., says the results are very promising.

"We shouldn't be telling egg-allergic patients -- children or adults -- that they can't take the vaccine," he tells WebMD.

"By doing skin testing or other diagnostic tests when patients come in, we can determine on an individual basis who can tolerate the whole dose at once and who can't. Egg-allergic individuals can safely get the vaccine with appropriate management," he says.

Burkes adds that egg-allergic people should be tested annually, as the amount of egg protein in each year's batch may vary.

[hornblower]

Hornblower, your fantasy land is a little scary for my taste. Why don't you come over to mine? A few ladies mentioned that they are in the midst of flu season in Australia, and it's not bad. In my fantasy land we'll be traveling a similar path when our flu season hits.

 

Join me, won't you?! It's nice here!

 

Well, the thing is, this might not be 'the one'.

 

In fact, I think the evidence suggests it's not.

 

I hang out on the flutrackers website so I'm quite aware of what it's looking like in Aus & NZ. But also how it's going in Chile & Argentina. And South Africa - where half the fatal cases are in pregnant women.

 

My own amateur flu nerd sense is that we'll see pockets of severe illness & pockets where there'll be little sign of it. We're not seeing huge mutations of the virus, though Tamiflu resistance is popping up more frequently in the genetic sequences. I think a lot depends on the health status of the populations, access to antivirals, and the capability of the health system to deal with surges of populations needing critical care.

 

 

Honestly, I'm a cheerful person! BUT I do think a severe flu pandemic IS coming. It's not IF, it's WHEN. And if this was a dry run, I think we're in trouble. Hopefully we'll take from this season & learn from it but I kinda have my doubts.....

[fshinkevich]

Well, the thing is, this might not be 'the one'.

 

In fact, I think the evidence suggests it's not.

 

I hang out on the flutrackers website so I'm quite aware of what it's looking like in Aus & NZ. But also how it's going in Chile & Argentina. And South Africa - where half the fatal cases are in pregnant women.

 

My own amateur flu nerd sense is that we'll see pockets of severe illness & pockets where there'll be little sign of it. We're not seeing huge mutations of the virus, though Tamiflu resistance is popping up more frequently in the genetic sequences. I think a lot depends on the health status of the populations, access to antivirals, and the capability of the health system to deal with surges of populations needing critical care.

 

 

Honestly, I'm a cheerful person! BUT I do think a severe flu pandemic IS coming. It's not IF, it's WHEN. And if this was a dry run, I think we're in trouble. Hopefully we'll take from this season & learn from it but I kinda have my doubts.....

 

But didn't a similar thing happen with the last pandemic? The flu came, it was mild, they thought nothing of it. It came back and they had those "bad pockets" where several hundred people died, but again nothing alarming. Then wham - third wave hits and it was a disaster.

[hornblower]

But didn't a similar thing happen with the last pandemic? The flu came, it was mild, they thought nothing of it. It came back and they had those "bad pockets" where several hundred people died, but again nothing alarming. Then wham - third wave hits and it was a disaster.

 

I think if you're referring to the 1918 it was the 2nd wave that was worse. That's my recollection of the readings I did on it. I agree the 2nd & 3rd wave issue is concerning & the reality is we just don't know how it will play out.

 

My thinking is that there are changes in pandemics due to airtravel aiding in global transmission & therefore I think changing the shapes of the waves. My own suspicion is that we'll see smaller peaks in the waves but a higher level overall, kwim? Certainly the fact that we're seeing continuing flu activity throughout the summer in the Northern Hemisphere is enough to give one pause. There should be NO flu activity so the fact we have it now & it will resume with a greater force in the fall seems to me reason enough for concern.

 

HWVR, the overall severity of this illness still appears low to moderate.

[coffeefreak]

Well, the thing is, this might not be 'the one'.

 

In fact, I think the evidence suggests it's not.

 

I hang out on the flutrackers website so I'm quite aware of what it's looking like in Aus & NZ. But also how it's going in Chile & Argentina. And South Africa - where half the fatal cases are in pregnant women.

 

My own amateur flu nerd sense is that we'll see pockets of severe illness & pockets where there'll be little sign of it. We're not seeing huge mutations of the virus, though Tamiflu resistance is popping up more frequently in the genetic sequences. I think a lot depends on the health status of the populations, access to antivirals, and the capability of the health system to deal with surges of populations needing critical care.

 

 

Honestly, I'm a cheerful person! BUT I do think a severe flu pandemic IS coming. It's not IF, it's WHEN. And if this was a dry run, I think we're in trouble. Hopefully we'll take from this season & learn from it but I kinda have my doubts.....

 

:iagree:

Everything supports it's not if but when. However, since I live in a first world country, I feel a sense of security. Maybe it's a false sense, but it's there nonetheless. If I were pregnant, had an infant, or had sick children, I don't know that I would feel comfortable ANY year during flu season. Actually, our worse flu years were the years I was pregnant and had babies in the house.

 

And yes, I was referring to the rational in the guidelines of the CDC. I also agree with you that for every govt/media hype agenda story, there's the flip side. It could be that the govt is downplaying it so as not to induce mass hysteria. Only history will tell.

 

Blessings!

Dorinda

[Melissa in Australia]

I hang out on the flutrackers website so I'm quite aware of what it's looking like in Aus & NZ. But also how it's going in Chile & Argentina. And South Africa - where half the fatal cases are in pregnant women.

 

My....

 

there have been deaths of pregnant women in Australia as well. And a few that had the baby induced early to save the baby before the mother died. but I am under the impression that this happens to a few women with every flue season.

[Peek a Boo]

 

The American stats are in the CDC reports. Current FluView report

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/

From the report for Week 33 -

 

Quote:

As of August 28, 2009, 8,843 hospitalizations and 556 deaths ... associated with 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus have been identified by CDC and state and local public health departments

 

If you do the math 15+86+235 / 556 = 60%

 

There's gotta be a helluva lot more than 556 deaths in a country with hundreds of MILLIONS of people before i start worrying.

 

way more.

 

36,000 people [thirty six THOUSAND] die of the regular flu/complications every year, and I'm not wearing masks or worrying about our family. [yeah, i probably would if we got mildly sick more than once a year].

 

but 556 dead? vs a usual 36,000???

THAT's what makes it media hype.

[fshinkevich]

There's gotta be a helluva lot more than 556 deaths in a country with hundreds of MILLIONS of people before i start worrying.

 

way more.

 

36,000 people [thirty six THOUSAND] die of the regular flu/complications every year, and I'm not wearing masks or worrying about our family. [yeah, i probably would if we got mildly sick more than once a year].

 

but 556 dead? vs a usual 36,000???

THAT's what makes it media hype.

 

 

But your not looking at the ages. 36k that normally die are 65 and older or ill. That is not the case here. It is attacking young, healthy people.

 

And honestly 36 thousand people is nothing to sneeze at. Influenza often makes the top ten causes of death, thats pretty serious. Esp. if it's one of your family members thats affected.

 

If people don't take this seriously, they are not going to take proper precautions and then its someone pregnant wife or baby that gets seriously ill. Or maybe even their 35 year old father.

[Perry]

There's gotta be a helluva lot more than 556 deaths in a country with hundreds of MILLIONS of people before i start worrying.

 

way more.

 

36,000 people [thirty six THOUSAND] die of the regular flu/complications every year, and I'm not wearing masks or worrying about our family. [yeah, i probably would if we got mildly sick more than once a year].

 

but 556 dead? vs a usual 36,000???

THAT's what makes it media hype.

36,000 mostly elderly people during the typical flu season (winter), when ~10% of the population are infected (probably ~20-40% exposed).

 

vs.

 

~500 deaths, ~80% of those in people under 65, in the SUMMER, when there are usually *no* infections or deaths, when only a tiny fraction of the population has been infected.

 

 

 

 

I don't think it's hype.

Edited August 30, 2009 by Perry

[cillakat]

I read somewhere you were contagious for up to 10 days after fever? Is that false information?

 

7-10 days after onset of symptoms (regardless of fever since new info is showing massive numbers are presenting w/o fever). in some cases, kids may be contagious for 14 days.

 

K

[cillakat]

I have read/heard that the masks you buy in the drug store are useless as far as protecting you.

 

Apparently hospital staff that wear them are some different kind (ie: much more expensive and actually work).

 

 

Masks are helpful if they fit properly. While there are likely spaces around the edges that allow the virus to pass through, most media reports miss the point entirely: it's less about a tight seal and much much more about the fact that when wearing a mask, one is less likely to put hands to nose and mouth. this alone significantly reduces transmission; fit issues aside.

 

katherine