H1N1...know this.

[Alicia64]

It's funny to me that with these major issues we either get the chicken littles or the major under reactors. (What would the equivalent fairytale be for under reacting?)

 

With H1N1 I've certainly had my over reacting moments, but each time I've read Perry's posts I get back into a reasonable mind frame.

 

I just want to say that I heart Perry and good science and I'm backing her if she runs for president.

 

Alley

[mommyrooch]

I consider it safe enough for my family, and we'll get it as soon as it's available. There are some risks, but I believe the risks of the flu are far greater than the risk of the vaccine. Except for the strain change, this vaccine is prepared exactly the same way as the seasonal flu vaccine they've been manufacturing for years. Since this strain is quite a bit different than the seasonal flu, there was a theoretical risk that it could cause unforeseen side effects, but that didn't show up in any of the safety trials, so I'm comfortable with it.

 

 

OTOH, the risk of dying from the flu is very, very small, especially if you have no risk factors. So if you decide not to vaccinate, you're likely to be fine. I personally am not willing to take even that small risk when I believe the vaccine to be extremely safe.

 

 

If I had risk factors, I would be much more inclined to have the vaccine, because the benefit-risk ratio is even higher.

 

:iagree: This is why my family has already received the H1N1 vaccine as well as the seasonal flu vaccine.

[yslek]

But not all strains of H1N1 are the "swine flu", right? I ask because the seasonal flu shot package insert lists "H1N1" as one of the strains. Dh said that it is not the same H1N1 virus widely circulating right now, and won't protect against it, hence the need for a separate swine flu vax.

[Perry]

I am wondering, since my 16 yo has the flu, her pediatrician told me that she was contagious 3 days prior to onset of symptoms. And 7 days forward.

 

But then he said that if we were going to get it, would happen this week. My daughter has been sick since Thursday, and PTL no one else has come down with it "yet". But I am expecting to since we have all been around her.

 

Is it inevitable then that we will all get it? I have an 11 yo and my 19 yo, hubby and me.

 

Oh, and when I asked about the Flu shot, he did say that many have recieved it and are still coming down with the Flu.

 

And what about this Tamiflu stuff? If I start getting sypmtoms, should I call my Dr and get it, or ride it out? I have not heard to many good thing about Tamiflu either. And since I am a smoker, and hubby too(please no lectures), I worry about my lung condition, like my daughter and her asthma. I have already been exposed, like the whole house has so not sure if there is anyway to stop it now.

 

What do you think?

Most likely you are only contagious for about 24 hours before symptoms start, and then are at your most contagious for the first few days after developing symptoms. How long someone is contagious depends on their age and health. Kids and people with compromised immune systems can shed virus for weeks, although most are probably contagious for a week or less. You shed less virus as time goes on and as symptoms subside, so are less contagious.

 

It is definitely not inevitable that you'll get it.

 

It's true that lots of people with the flu shot will still get sick for several reasons. First, the vaccine is not 100% effective- probably more like 60-90%, depending on age and health. It's much lower than that in elderly people, but they aren't in a risk group and probably haven't been vaccinated yet. Also, it takes a couple weeks for your body to build up immunity, so if you get the vaccine and then get exposed a few days later, you aren't protected. In addition, kids need two doses to get full immunity, so they won't be fully protected for 4-6 weeks after the first vaccine.

 

But even if you only get partial immunity from the vaccine and then get infected, symptoms are likely to be milder with fewer complications.

 

I think you should talk to your doctor about the Tamiflu. I don't feel qualified to give you information about that. Wash your hands a lot, and try to stay away from your daughter while she's coughing and sneezing.

 

My son had it last week, and got quite sick. My 2 girls had very mild symptoms, and I don't know if they had it or not. I think they might have just wanted a couple days off. :) Dh had Flumist (he's a doctor so was first to be offered it) although I think he might have had flu last month. Whatever he had, nobody here got it from him.

 

I haven't got sick yet. I did wear a mask on several occasions when I had to be really near ds. He has night terrors and hallucinations when he has fevers, and I often have to lie down with him and calm him down in the middle of the night. He was coughing and hacking horribly directly in my face, so either I had asymptomatic infection or the mask worked.

[wulfbourne]

Well, yes, it's the flu. So was the 1918 pandemic. If you go to the CDC site, there are several graphs that explain the hospitalization and death rate of this flu compared to the seasonal flu. it's alarming how many children compared to the rest of the population have died thus far.

 

Yes, it's the flu, but a strain that is particularly harmful to children.

 

I wouldn't compare the 1918 pandemic to today.

 

http://1918.pandemicflu.gov/

 

Sanitation, the state of medicine, standard of living were all MUCH different.

[Perry]

But not all strains of H1N1 are the "swine flu", right? I ask because the seasonal flu shot package insert lists "H1N1" as one of the strains. Dh said that it is not the same H1N1 virus widely circulating right now, and won't protect against it, hence the need for a separate swine flu vax.

Right. They are related, but distantly.

[Perry]

:lol:

 

Luckily, you aren't in any danger of that happening.

[EthiopianFood]

I consider it safe enough for my family, and we'll get it as soon as it's available. There are some risks, but I believe the risks of the flu are far greater than the risk of the vaccine. Except for the strain change, this vaccine is prepared exactly the same way as the seasonal flu vaccine they've been manufacturing for years. Since this strain is quite a bit different than the seasonal flu, there was a theoretical risk that it could cause unforeseen side effects, but that didn't show up in any of the safety trials, so I'm comfortable with it.

 

The EXACT same ingredients? How long has the flu vaccine been tested on children, especially infants (or 21 month olds :tongue_smilie:)? What about pregnant women? My concern is that there will be something that shows up long into the future. Will dd get the vaccine, then end up more likely to have a child with a birth defect later on? Etc. etc.

[Perry]

The EXACT same ingredients? How long has the flu vaccine been tested on children, especially infants (or 21 month olds :tongue_smilie:)? What about pregnant women? My concern is that there will be something that shows up long into the future. Will dd get the vaccine, then end up more likely to have a child with a birth defect later on? Etc. etc.

I can't say EXACT same ingredients without looking at every package insert, but in general, yes the ingredients are the same. They may change some minor buffer salt from one year to the next, for example, but they are essentially the same. I don't know how long ago they started the safety trials, but many thousands of infants, children and pregnant women have been vaccinated without any major problems. Here's an example of a study.

 

There isn't any known reason that the vaccine should cause long term effects or birth defects. It is just simulating the response to a natural infection, without the symptoms of disease. The vaccine just contains little pieces of the inactivated virus. I posted a few days ago on vaccine ingredients. I'll try to find it and link it.

[Perry]

Vaccine ingredients

[KidsHappen]

I did have influenza a (tested positive) in college and was sure I was going to die. It was the worst illness I have ever had.

 

I have had the flu twice as an adult, 15 years ago and 13 years ago, and both times I went to the doctor crying. The only other thing that ever sent me to the doctor crying was kidney stones. I am a pretty tough old broad but the flu laid me flat and fast. I have never met anyone who thought maybe, possibly they might have/had the flu who actually had it. If you have had the flu, you will Know you have had it.

[EthiopianFood]

Vaccine ingredients

 

Thanks so much for the links. Why are people saying there is formaldehyde (sp?) in the vaccine?

 

I have heard that vaccines produce an immunity that wears off more easily than natural immunity. Do you know anything about this? Also, if this virus mutates, will the current vaccine work to any extent on the new strain? How long do they expect this whole thing to go on?

[KidsHappen]

From a biological and epidemiological perspective, this isn't true at all. The regular yearly seasonal flu changes gradually, in a mechanism known as antigenic drift. Mutations accumulate, and over time, your body doesn't recognize the strain anymore.

 

This is my understanding of the flu as it has been explained to me by more than one doctor. The flu mutates slowly over time. If you get the flu, you still carry some immunity to subsequent strains of the flu until it has mutated so much that you know longer have immunity to any of the components (for lack of a better word) of the current strain. So having the flu provides some degree of protection for a few years.

 

The H1N1 is a novel strain meaning that even if you had the regular flu this year, you still have no immunity to H1N1. My brother had both the regular flu and H1N1 this year and two cases of pneumonia and he is an immune compromised individual. He is out of the hospital now and as far as I know doing fine. No one else in his immediate family came down with either strain of the flu.

 

ETA: This is one of the things that is really concerning me. None of my children have ever had the flu, I don't remember my hubby having the flu in the entire time we have been together (19 years) and I haven't had the flu in 13 years. We probably have no immunity to any strain of the flu so the odds are not in our favor. Eventually we are probably going to get the flu. I would really hate having to deal with two different strains in a bad year.

Edited October 27, 2009 by KidsHappen

[EthiopianFood]

Okay, here:

8.1 Pregnancy

 

 

Pregnancy Category C: Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine or AFLURIA. It is also not known whether these vaccines can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.

8.3 Nursing Mothers

 

 

Neither Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine nor AFLURIA has been evaluated in nursing mothers. It is not known whether Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine or AFLURIA is excreted in human milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine is administered to a nursing woman.

8.4 Pediatric Use

 

 

Neither Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine nor AFLURIA has been evaluated in children. Safety and effectiveness in the pediatric population have not been established.

 

So....?

[yslek]

Okay, here:

8.1 Pregnancy

 

 

Pregnancy Category C: Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine or AFLURIA. It is also not known whether these vaccines can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.

8.3 Nursing Mothers

 

 

Neither Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine nor AFLURIA has been evaluated in nursing mothers. It is not known whether Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine or AFLURIA is excreted in human milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine is administered to a nursing woman.

8.4 Pediatric Use

 

 

Neither Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine nor AFLURIA has been evaluated in children. Safety and effectiveness in the pediatric population have not been established.

 

So....?

 

I'm sure Perry has a better answer than I do on this (:D), but here's my understanding: Since each vaccine is unique (in that it has new strains each year) they can't have studied that particular vax on the above populations, so have to issue the warnings.

[ELaurie]

Here's a link. He lists the ingredients for each of the different vaccine manufactures.

[Perry]

Okay, here:

8.1 Pregnancy

 

 

Pregnancy Category C: Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine or AFLURIA. It is also not known whether these vaccines can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.

8.3 Nursing Mothers

 

 

Neither Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine nor AFLURIA has been evaluated in nursing mothers. It is not known whether Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine or AFLURIA is excreted in human milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine is administered to a nursing woman.

8.4 Pediatric Use

 

 

Neither Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine nor AFLURIA has been evaluated in children. Safety and effectiveness in the pediatric population have not been established.

 

So....?

Here is a table that lists the vaccine brands and the groups for which they are licensed. Afluria (CSL) can only be given to those 18 and older and isn't licensed for use in pregnancy/nursing.

 

Only sanofi is given to kids under 4 (except flumist can be given to kids 2+)

 

It's not that the others are dangerous, they just haven't done the safety trials in those age groups.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I nearly quit this thread several pages back, but then I got engrossed in reading your thoughtful, patient and backed up explanations.

 

Perry, thank you for taking the time to do this.

[lovetobehome]

This is a quote from part of an article on Mercola's web site that I thought pertained. Entire article is here http://products.mercola.com/swine-flu-article/20091027.htm

Contains links to support the info:

 

One Thousand Deaths from Swine Flu?!

Oh really? Well I am from Chicago and I want to see the evidence. If you read Obama's declaration, you will find a complete absence of documentation to support his assertion that 1000 have died from H1N1 in the US. Nada, nothing no links, no references anywhere in the document to back up his assertion.

In fact, if you go to the definitive collector and holder of the US data, you will find that there is NO evidence to back this claim.

The CDC's own web site readily admits that since August 30, 2009 they are no longer testing for H1N1. They don't even recommend it any more. They are substituting a clinical definition for blood testing that will positively confirm that the "suspected" cases of H1N1 influenza are actually H1N1 influenza.

They've even coined what appears to be a whole new term: "ILI," which stands for "influenza-like illness."

The CDC H1N1 flu site reads:

 

 

"...

tracking of 2009 H1N1 hospitalizations and deaths will not be the same after August 30, 2009.

 

In an effort to add additional structure to the national 2009 H1N1 reporting, new case definitions for influenza-associated hospitalizations and deaths were implemented on August 30, 2009.

 

The new definitions allow states to report to CDC hospitalizations and deaths (either confirmed OR probable) resulting from all types of influenza, not just those from 2009 H1N1 flu.

 

 

 

1. Influenza and pneumonia syndrome hospitalizations and deaths may be an overestimate of actual number of flu-related hospitalizations and deaths
   , but CDC believes influenza and pneumonia syndromic reports are likely to be a more sensitive measure of flu-associated hospitalizations and deaths than laboratory confirmed reports during this pandemic.
   
   
    
   
   
   However,
   the syndromic reports of all hospitalizations and deaths recorded as either influenza or pneumonia will mean that the case counts are less specific than before and will include cases that are not related to influenza infection."
   
   

 

 

Folks, make no mistake about it. Health officials and media WILL trumpet these numbers as being H1N1 "swine flu deaths" even though, as you can CLEARLY read on the CDC's site, they admit that they will now include hospitalizations and deaths that are not even RELATED to the common influenza infection, let alone H1N1.

 

Well, no wonder the flu appears to be spreading when they are now including mere "symptoms of flu," which the CBS investigation found were NOT EVEN INFLUENZA RELATED in the overwhelming majority of cases!

 

 

[MeanestMomInMidwest]

This website has a vested interest in discounting traditional medical advice. The website exists to sell mercola products. All information on here (although some may contain a bit of truth) is designed to channel the consumer/viewer into purchasing products sold by Mercola.

 

 

Here are some criteria for evaluating a website:

 

 

 

Criteria

 

 

 

Questions

 

 

Accuracy

Is contact information provided for the author?

Is the author qualified to write the document?

Can the purpose of the document be determined?

Authority

Are credentials listed for the author?

Can the publishing institution be determined?

Are credentials listed for the publisher?

Objectivity

Is the information presented in detail?

Is the information free from personal opinion and bias?

Is the information designed to inform, and not to sell product?

Currency

Is the webpage updated regularly?

Are all links provided live and up-to-date?

Is information on the page less than five years old?

Coverage

Can the page be viewed without using special software?

Are text and images balanced?

Is information cited correctly?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:

McMillin, P. (1998). Five criteria for evaluating web pages. Olin and Uris Libraries, Cornell University. Retrieved January 27, 2009, from http://www.library.cornell.edu/olinuris/ref/research/webcrit.html

[LNC]

From a biological and epidemiological perspective, this isn't true at all. The regular yearly seasonal flu changes gradually, in a mechanism known as antigenic drift. Mutations accumulate, and over time, your body doesn't recognize the strain anymore.

 

The current H1N1 isn't a result of antigenic drift. Instead, it's an example of antigenic shift, meaning it's a very different strain than what was circulating before.

 

Definition of a pandemic:

Pandemic Influenza definition and the World Health Organization (WHO) pandemic phases:

Generally, pandemics occur when a virus jumps the species barrier, usually from birds or pigs.

 

We've had 3 previous pandemics in the last hundred years. They don't necessarily have to be severe, but they are usually worse than seasonal flu because no one has any immunity.

 

 

Whoever told you this does not understand the nature of influenza.

 

Thanks Perry. I had to keep reading the thread to see if you posted!

[herbalgirl]

Thank you for your levelheadedness. If only everyone else would be the same!!

[Earth Angel_79]

:001_wub: PERRY --Thank you for the even-keel advice. I'm still leaning towards not vaccinating in favor of "holing up" for the winter, but I really appreciate the numbers and facts.

[Tree House Academy]

:001_wub: PERRY --Thank you for the even-keel advice. I'm still leaning towards not vaccinating in favor of "holing up" for the winter, but I really appreciate the numbers and facts.

 

 

Us too :iagree: but Perry's informaiton has been amazingly valuable!

[jazzyfizzle]

Thank you Perry, for your post. :001_smile:

[Perry]

Thanks so much for the links. Why are people saying there is formaldehyde (sp?) in the vaccine?

 

I have heard that vaccines produce an immunity that wears off more easily than natural immunity. Do you know anything about this? Also, if this virus mutates, will the current vaccine work to any extent on the new strain? How long do they expect this whole thing to go on?

It looks like the sanofi vaccine is the only one that contains formaldehyde. There are different methods of inactivating the virus (you can't really kill a virus, since it's not alive to begin with) and one way is to use formaldehyde. After it's inactivated, it's washed and filtered several times, but a trace of formaldehyde may remain. The amount is minuscule compared to the amount you are exposed to on a daily basis by cigarette smoke, particle board, etc.

 

It is true that in general you will have a better immune response to a natural infection than a vaccine. And as far as vaccines go, you have a better immune response to a live virus vaccine than a killed or inactivated vaccine. This is because if you are exposed naturally, you have a higher viral (or bacterial) load and your body makes more antibody if you have higher numbers of microbes.

 

It probably isn't important with flu though, because the virus is continually undergoing mutations and generally has changed enough so that your immune system wouldn't recognize it, even if you have plenty of antibodies. The antibodies no longer "match" the virus.

 

 

A comment about terms, so the next bit makes sense: Subtype refers to the Hs and Ns. So H1N1 is a different subtype than H3N2, for instance. But the subtype virus undergoes gradual changes from year to year, and when it does this, we call them new strains, even though the subtype itself hasn't changed. For instance here is a phylogenetic tree of a sample of H3N2 viruses. The closer they are on the tree, the more related to each other.

 

 

When a new subtype enters the population, like the novel H1N1 has, it usually replaces what was circulating before. For instance, swine H1N1 (the old one) jumped into humans in 1918 and caused the Spanish Influenza. The illness was very serious for a year or two, then it lost virulence as it mutated. It continued to circulate, changing from year to year, until 1957, when suddenly an H2N2 appeared, jumping from birds into humans. At that time, the H1N1 went extinct, and was replaced by pandemic H2N2. That subtype circulated until it was replaced in 1968 by H3N2, which also jumped from birds to humans. There was an exception in 1977, when an H1N1 re-emerged but did NOT replace the H3N2. We've been having two subtypes co-circulating since then. The graphic below shows how when a new subtype appears, the old one disappears.

 

It's hard to say what will happen. My guess is that the new H1N1 will take over and the previous subtypes ("seasonal") will disappear. But other possibilities are that all 3 will circulate, or just one of the others will go extinct. I do believe H1N1 is here to stay, and will become seasonal, changing gradually from year to year. The only way this H1N1 will disappear is if a new pandemic strain jumps species (if it follows the pattern we've observed for the past 100+ years.) That would be bad. Whether it mutates to a more virulent, or less virulent form remains to be seen and I don't think there is any way to predict which way it will go. Historically, flu strains get less virulent after a pandemic, although the 1918 started out mild and became much worse during the second wave. After that it became less virulent.

 

It doesn't HAVE to work this way. Flu is very unpredictable, and although we see patterns, it continues to do surprising things.

 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2009 by Perry

[LizzyBee]

I have had the flu twice as an adult, 15 years ago and 13 years ago, and both times I went to the doctor crying. The only other thing that ever sent me to the doctor crying was kidney stones. I am a pretty tough old broad but the flu laid me flat and fast. I have never met anyone who thought maybe, possibly they might have/had the flu who actually had it. If you have had the flu, you will Know you have had it.

 

OTOH, the various strains of the flu have varying symptoms and degrees of severity. I had the flu 2 years ago, but I didn't go to the dr soon enough to get tamiflu because I didn't think I was sick enough to have the flu, based on comments posted on these boards. I only missed one day of work, although I continued to feel horrible for 2 weeks. Last year, my middle dd had Type A flu and she only felt bad for a few days. My youngest sister had Type A flu this spring, and she went to work (not knowing she had the flu), went to the dr., picked up her tamiflu prescription, then went home and called me to chat while she started laundry.

 

When I was in high school, I did have the "I've been hit by a truck and all I can do is lie in bed and moan" kind of flu, so I know what that's like. But the flu is not always like that.

[KrissiK]

My kids' pediatrician doesn't even have the vaccination yet and she didn't seem too concerned when I asked about it last week. My husband swears he was vaccinated for the swine flu back in the 70's when he was a kid. I'd never even heard of it. I don't know what to think of it all.

[Tree House Academy]

My kids' pediatrician doesn't even have the vaccination yet and she didn't seem too concerned when I asked about it last week. My husband swears he was vaccinated for the swine flu back in the 70's when he was a kid. I'd never even heard of it. I don't know what to think of it all.

 

Your dh being vaccinated in the 70's for swine flu will NOT protect him from this one. First of all, it was not the same strain. The vaccine would also not be effective this long later, and finally, a lot of the batches in the 70's turned out to be completely useless. My dad got a batch that was essentially water or something. Oops...they messed up. Anyway, just wanted to throw that out there in hopes your dh realizes that being vaccinated with a flu shot in the 70's does NOT protect him this year against this flu.

[dancer67]

Perry

 

Thank you for your response. I have been enjoying reading your posts, and have been learning alot. Thank you.:001_smile:

[Perry]

The vaccine would also not be effective this long later,

Actually, we looked at this in a study I was involved in, and we were surprised to find that people who had the swine flu vaccine in 1976 still had protective antibodies 30 years later. I don't know if it would give any cross-protection for the current H1N1, but it was an interesting and unexpected finding.

[LibraryLover]

Thank you for this! Very interesting! I decided a couple of weeks ago, and told my ds to go ahead and get the vax when it comes to his campus health center. (He's in that risk category).

 

It looks like the sanofi vaccine is the only one that contains formaldehyde. There are different methods of inactivating the virus (you can't really kill a virus, since it's not alive to begin with) and one way is to use formaldehyde. After it's inactivated, it's washed and filtered several times, but a trace of formaldehyde may remain. The amount is minuscule compared to the amount you are exposed to on a daily basis by cigarette smoke, particle board, etc.

 

It is true that in general you will have a better immune response to a natural infection than a vaccine. And as far as vaccines go, you have a better immune response to a live virus vaccine than a killed or inactivated vaccine. This is because if you are exposed naturally, you have a higher viral (or bacterial) load and your body makes more antibody if you have higher numbers of microbes.

 

It probably isn't important with flu though, because the virus is continually undergoing mutations and generally has changed enough so that your immune system wouldn't recognize it, even if you have plenty of antibodies. The antibodies no longer "match" the virus.

 

 

A comment about terms, so the next bit makes sense: Subtype refers to the Hs and Ns. So H1N1 is a different subtype than H3N2, for instance. But the subtype changes from year to year, and when it does this, we call them new strains.

 

When a new subtype enters the population, like the novel H1N1 has, it usually replaces what was circulating before. For instance, swine H1N1 (the old one) jumped into humans in 1918 and caused the Spanish Influenza. The illness was very serious for a year or two, then it lost virulence as it mutated. It continued to circulate, changing from year to year, until 1957, when suddenly an H2N2 appeared, jumping from birds into humans. At that time, the H1N1 went extinct, and was replaced by pandemic H2N2. That subtype circulated until it was replaced in 1968 by H3N2, which also jumped from birds to humans. There was an exception in 1977, when an H1N1 re-emerged but did NOT replace the H3N2. We've been having two subtypes co-circulating since then. The graphic below shows how when a new subtype appears, the old one disappears.

 

It's hard to say what will happen. My guess is that the new H1N1 will take over and the previous subtypes ("seasonal") will disappear. But other possibilities are that all 3 will circulate, or just one of the others will go extinct. I do believe H1N1 is here to stay, and will become seasonal, changing gradually from year to year. The only way this H1N1 will disappear is if a new pandemic strain jumps species (if it follows the pattern we've observed for the past 100+ years.) That would be bad. Whether it mutates to a more virulent, or less virulent form remains to be seen and I don't think there is any way to predict which way it will go. Historically, flu strains get less virulent after a pandemic, although the 1918 started out mild and became much worse during the second wave. After that it became less virulent.

 

It doesn't HAVE to work this way. Flu is very unpredictable, and although we see patterns, it continues to do surprising things.

 

 

 

Edited October 28, 2009 by LibraryLover

[dancer67]

Perry

 

What do you think of this??

 

http://products.mercola.com/swine-flu-article/20091027.htm

[Perry]

Perry

 

What do you think of this??

 

http://products.mercola.com/swine-flu-article/20091027.htm

I think it's full of misinformation. I'm not going to go through it it point by point, because it's futile. I just read an article on Effect Measure where he compares trying to address articles like these to playing Whac-a-Mole. That's exactly what it feels like.

 

 

I think it's proactive to declare a public health emergency. It's much better to do it and not need it than to wait too long and have gridlock.

 

I've commented on the CBS investigation elsewhere.

[dancer67]

Thanks Perry. I didn't really know what to make of this. There is so much stuff floating around, you just don't know anymore.

 

Thanks for your help and opinions:001_smile:

 

ETA: How safe do you think Tamiflu is? And where do you get that, at the Dr's office or is it a script?

Edited October 27, 2009 by dancer67

[Lovedtodeath]

Vaccine ingredients

 

Okay, so I got an email that said there is blood in the vaccine along with petroleum by-products that can cause horrible side effects and made a decision for my family based on that. It is wrong?

 

I appreciate you comments and yes, 90% of the people who get swine flu will have cases just like yours...it will be a rough week and they will get better. 10% however, are ending up in hospitals, and of the total population, another percentage (that is yet to be determined) is dying. No one knows WHY one child will become terribly sick over another child who caught the same virus...even if neither have underlying conditions. That is the part that scares me a bit. I look at my kids and know that I couldn't not bear to lose them if they happened to be in that minute percentage who will die from this year's flu. :( I want to NOT be afraid, but I am.

 

I consider it safe enough for my family, and we'll get it as soon as it's available. There are some risks, but I believe the risks of the flu are far greater than the risk of the vaccine. Except for the strain change, this vaccine is prepared exactly the same way as the seasonal flu vaccine they've been manufacturing for years. Since this strain is quite a bit different than the seasonal flu, there was a theoretical risk that it could cause unforeseen side effects, but that didn't show up in any of the safety trials, so I'm comfortable with it.

 

 

OTOH, the risk of dying from the flu is very, very small, especially if you have no risk factors. So if you decide not to vaccinate, you're likely to be fine. I personally am not willing to take even that small risk when I believe the vaccine to be extremely safe.

 

If I had risk factors, I would be much more inclined to have the vaccine, because the benefit-risk ratio is even higher.

[Lovedtodeath]

Quote from Perry:

 

None of the current H1N1 vaccines use fetal cell lines or human embryonic tissue. They are grown in the fluid of chick embryos (eggs).

 

From CSL Limited package insert:

 

 

Quote:

Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine, for intramuscular injection, is a sterile, clear, colorless to slightly opalescent suspension with some sediment that resuspends upon shaking to form a homogeneous suspension. Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine is prepared from influenza virus propagated in the allantoic fluid of embryonated chicken eggs. Following harvest, the virus is purified in a sucrose density gradient using a continuous flow zonal centrifuge. The purified virus is inactivated with beta-propiolactone, and the virus particles are disrupted using sodium taurodeoxycholate to produce a “split virion”. The disrupted virus is further purified and suspended in a phosphate buffered isotonic solution.

 

Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine is formulated to contain 15 mcg HA per 0.5 mL dose of influenza A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)v-like virus. These are the actual viral particles that are in the vaccine. They are the main component, and are what causes the immune system to make antibodies.

 

The single-dose formulation is preservative-free; thimerosal, a mercury derivative, is not used in the manufacturing process for this formulation. The multi-dose formulation contains thimerosal, added as a preservative; each 0.5 mL dose contains 24.5 mcg of mercury.

Thimerosal is a preservative, and helps prevent the growth of biological contaminants. It isn't necessary in the single dose vaccine because once it's opened, it's all used up. In the multidose vial, once it's opened, there is the possibility of contamination.

 

A single 0.5 mL dose of Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine contains sodium chloride (4.1 mg), monobasic sodium phosphate (80 mcg), dibasic sodium phosphate (300 mcg), monobasic potassium phosphate (20 mcg), potassium chloride (20 mcg), and calcium chloride (1.5 mcg).

 

These are all salts and buffers that are needed to keep the pH and chemical environment suitable. I'm not a chemist, maybe someone else can elaborate.

 

The following aren't added to the vaccine; they may be present in trace amounts because they're needed for growing up the virus in the chicken eggs.

 

From the manufacturing process, each dose may also contain residual amounts of sodium taurodeoxycholate (≤ 10 ppm) (a detergent used to purify the viurs), ovalbumin (egg protein)(≤ 1 mcg), neomycin sulfate (≤ 0.2 picograms [pg]), polymyxin B (≤ 0.03 pg) (neomycin and polymyxin are antibiotics and are used in the propogation of virus, so the eggs don't become contaminated with bacteria and infected), and beta-propiolactone (don't know exactly what it is but it's used to inactivate the virus) (< 25 nanograms).

[Perry]

Okay, so I got an email that said there is blood in the vaccine along with petroleum by-products that can cause horrible side effects and made a decision for my family based on that. It is wrong?

 

I don't know why there would be blood. It certainly isn't added to the vaccine. The virus is grown up in chicken embryos, so it might come into contact with some blood, but the virus is washed and purified so shouldn't be contaminated with any blood.

I don't know anything about petroleum byproducts. It's possible, but why don't they just say the name of the ingredient? They want you to think there is gasoline in there or something. I'm guessing they are referring to nonylphenol ethoxylate in Novartis' vaccine. I don't know if it's a petroleum byproduct or not, but I can't find any other candidates. It's a detergent, used for cleaning the inactivated virus.

 

Does your email have any references? Sources? Evidence? Sounds like fear mongering to me.

[Carpe Diem]

I've been reading on some message boards about people who asked their neurologists and were told to avoid the H1N1 as it will stimulate an already out of whack immune system to cause a worsening in the disease. While other patients were told to get the shot but not the mist.

 

What are your thoughts?

 

Thanks for your time.

[Perry]

I've been reading on some message boards about people who asked their neurologists and were told to avoid the H1N1 as it will stimulate an already out of whack immune system to cause a worsening in the disease. While other patients were told to get the shot but not the mist.

 

What are your thoughts?

 

Thanks for your time.

I haven't heard this, but I think people should take the advice of their physicians.

 

I'm wondering, though, are they similarly concerned about the immune response they will have when they are infected with influenza? Because that's going to be a much bigger immune response.

[MistyJ]

I've been reading on some message boards about people who asked their neurologists and were told to avoid the H1N1 as it will stimulate an already out of whack immune system to cause a worsening in the disease. While other patients were told to get the shot but not the mist.

 

What are your thoughts?

 

Thanks for your time.

 

My son's neurologist (he spent the last year with optic neuritis) told me to follow the recommendation of the MS society, which is vaccine, not mist. He may or may not have MS, but the illness he did have is auto-immune, and a precursor to MS.

[MistyJ]

My daughter, 9, is suspected of having RA but it is not yet confirmed. She received the vaccine (not mist) last week, at age 9 years 9.5 months. The nurse said she would not need the booster, "since she's 10 years old."

 

Is this accurate?

[MBM]

Perry, if you got a dollar for every vaccine question you answer, you could be quite wealthy by next spring. Thanks for offering the info.

[Colleen]

Thanks for your post, Emily.

[Lovedtodeath]

I don't know why there would be blood. It certainly isn't added to the vaccine. The virus is grown up in chicken embryos, so it might come into contact with some blood, but the virus is washed and purified so shouldn't be contaminated with any blood.

 

I don't know anything about petroleum byproducts. It's possible, but why don't they just say the name of the ingredient? They want you to think there is gasoline in there or something. I'm guessing they are referring to nonylphenol ethoxylate in Novartis' vaccine. I don't know if it's a petroleum byproduct or not, but I can't find any other candidates. It's a detergent, used for cleaning the inactivated virus.

 

Does your email have any references? Sources? Evidence? Sounds like fear mongering to me.

Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 12:27 AM

The email was before the vaccine was in use. It was in the process of production, so likely to be wrong in the case of the actual vaccine that they are using. I have the links and the ingredient listed below:

http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/dr-russell-blaylock-vaccine-may-be-more-dangerous-than-swine-flu/

 

 

What's The Danger of Swine Flu Vaccinations? (excerpt from Rense.com)

By Dr. Anders Bruun Laursen ".there is another important consideration: the role of squalene.

The average quantity of squalene injected into the US soldiers abroad and at home in the anthrax vaccine during and after the Gulf War was 34.2 micrograms per billion micrograms of water. According to one study, this was the cause of the Gulf War syndrome in 25% of 697.000 US personnel at home and abroad. You can find this table of FDA analyses from the Gulf War lots on The Military Vaccine Resource Directory website

a.. AVA 020 - 11 ppb squalene (parts per billion)

b.. AVA 030 - 10 ppb squalene

c.. AVA 038 - 27 ppb squalene

d.. AVA 043 - 40 ppb squalene

e.. AVA 047 - 83 ppb squalene

These values were confirmed by Prof. R. F. Garry before the House of Representatives. Prof Garry was the man to discover the connection between the Gulf War syndrome and squalene.

According to his findings, the Gulf War syndrome was caused by squalene, which was banned by a Federal Court Judge in 2004 from the Pentagon's use.

As seen on p. 6 of this EMEA document, the Pandremix vaccine contains 10,68 mg of squalene per 0,5 ml. This corresponds to 2.136.0000 microgrammes pr. billion microgrammes of water, i.e. one million times more squalene per dose. There is any reason to believe that this will make people sick to a much higher extent than in 1990/91. This appears murderous to me."

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=newsHighlights&newsId=46

Then, in looking for some confirmation on Novartis putting gp 120 (an HIV/AIDS protein) in their vaccines, I found the following.

The Vaccine May Be More Dangerous Than Swine Flu By Dr Russell Blaylock

http://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/dr-russell-bl.

vaccine-may-be-more-dangerous-than-swine-flu/

".Novartis, the second contender, also has an agreement with WHO for a pandemic vaccine. Novartis appears to have won the contract, since their vaccine is near completion. What is terrifying is that these pandemic vaccines contain ingredients, called immune adjuvants that a number of studies have shown cause devastating autoimmune disorders, including rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis and lupus.

Animal studies using this adjuvant have found them to be deadly. A study using 14 guinea pigs found that when they were injected with the special adjuvant, only one animal survived. A repeat of the study found the same deadly outcome.

So, what is this deadly ingredient? It is called squalene, a type of oil. The Chiron company, maker of the deadly anthrax vaccine, makes an adjuvant called MF-59 which contains two main ingredients of concern-squalene and gp120. A number of studies have shown that squalene can trigger all of the above-mentioned autoimmune diseases when injected.

Edited October 29, 2009 by Lovedtodeath

[HockeyMom]

It is true that in general you will have a better immune response to a natural infection than a vaccine. And as far as vaccines go, you have a better immune response to a live virus vaccine than a killed or inactivated vaccine. This is because if you are exposed naturally, you have a higher viral (or bacterial) load and your body makes more antibody if you have higher numbers of microbes

 

... It probably isn't important with flu though, because the virus is continually undergoing mutations and generally has changed enough so that your immune system wouldn't recognize it, even if you have plenty of antibodies. The antibodies no longer "match" the virus ...

 

... A comment about terms, so the next bit makes sense: Subtype refers to the Hs and Ns. So H1N1 is a different subtype than H3N2, for instance. But the subtype virus undergoes gradual changes from year to year, and when it does this, we call them new strains, even though the subtype itself hasn't changed. For instance here is a phylogenetic tree of a sample of H3N2 viruses. The closer they are on the tree, the more related to each other ...

 

... When a new subtype enters the population, like the novel H1N1 has, it usually replaces what was circulating before. For instance, swine H1N1 (the old one) jumped into humans in 1918 and caused the Spanish Influenza. The illness was very serious for a year or two, then it lost virulence as it mutated. It continued to circulate, changing from year to year, until 1957, when suddenly an H2N2 appeared, jumping from birds into humans. At that time, the H1N1 went extinct, and was replaced by pandemic H2N2. That subtype circulated until it was replaced in 1968 by H3N2, which also jumped from birds to humans. There was an exception in 1977, when an H1N1 re-emerged but did NOT replace the H3N2. We've been having two subtypes co-circulating since then ...

 

Given the explanation you provided above, is there some justification for receiving flu shots (whether it be for novel H1N1 or otherwise) on an annual basis? Here’s my thinking:

While each of us may naturally catch some of the various flu strains that mutate and circulate during our lifetimes, yearly vaccines give our bodies the opportunity to at least “see†a variety of mutated flu’ bugs that we didn’t catch. Whatever stockpile of antibodies our bodies are able to produce from natural exposure and that coming from a vial, we might stand a better chance of at least partial immunity to morphed flu’ bugs that we catch at a later date.

 

Perry, bearing in mind I was a financial analyst in my previous life, am I way out in left field with my train of thoughts?

 

I hope you haven’t already addressed this in a previous thread - I could have missed it in my searches. If so, please accept my apology as I’m sure you are growing weary of educating us neophytes.

 

One last bit: THANK-YOU for taking the time to address all our concerns or questions regarding ILI. Your thoughtful responses are very much appreciated.

[MistyJ]

Perry, I feel inclined to send you a fruit basket, I am so grateful for your posts.

Edited October 30, 2009 by MistyJ

[Perry]

 

Given the explanation you provided above, is there some justification for receiving flu shots (whether it be for novel H1N1 or otherwise) on an annual basis? Here’s my thinking:

While each of us may naturally catch some of the various flu strains that mutate and circulate during our lifetimes, yearly vaccines give our bodies the opportunity to at least “see†a variety of mutated flu’ bugs that we didn’t catch. Whatever stockpile of antibodies our bodies are able to produce from natural exposure and that coming from a vial, we might stand a better chance of at least partial immunity to morphed flu’ bugs that we catch at a later date.

 

Perry, bearing in mind I was a financial analyst in my previous life, am I way out in left field with my train of thoughts?

 

I hope you haven’t already addressed this in a previous thread - I could have missed it in my searches. If so, please accept my apology as I’m sure you are growing weary of educating us neophytes.

 

One last bit: THANK-YOU for taking the time to address all our concerns or questions regarding ILI. Your thoughtful responses are very much appreciated.

 

You definitely aren't out in left field. You do get some degree of cross protection from existing antibodies when you are infected with a new strain of flu. The more closely the strains are related, the better protection you will have. If they are distantly related, you probably won't have any protection at all. For instance, lots of antibodies to an H1N1 won't give you any protection to an H3N2, because they are too different.

 

But even two strains that are both called H1N1 may be too dissimilar to give cross protection. So you can't assume that just because you've had an H1N1 in the past it will help with future H1N1s. It might, or it might not. It depends on the genetic structure of the viruses.

 

There is also some evidence that having antibodies to some influenza strains "primes" the system, so when your body encounters a new strain (whether naturally or by vaccination) production of new antibodies is sped up. This probably also depends to some degree on how closely the strains are related.

[Lovedtodeath]

So is the whole squaline thing completely bogus? I see no squaline or MF-59 in the ingredients. I will be glad to edit it out. I really posted that so that I could get total 100% clarification. I am not trying to fear monger against the vaccine. Really... oh and lovetobehome is a different board member, not me ;)

 

Perhaps it was in a batch that was being made, but that formulation was not chosen, and is not being used for the vaccine?

 

So are all of the ingredients in the Swine Flu/H1N1 vaccine definitely exactly the same as the ingredients in the annual flu vaccine?

 

A single 0.5 mL dose of Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccine contains sodium chloride (4.1 mg), monobasic sodium phosphate (80 mcg), dibasic sodium phosphate (300 mcg), monobasic potassium phosphate (20 mcg), potassium chloride (20 mcg), and calcium chloride (1.5 mcg).

 

These are all salts and buffers that are needed to keep the pH and chemical environment suitable. I'm not a chemist, maybe someone else can elaborate.

 

The following aren't added to the vaccine; they may be present in trace amounts because they're needed for growing up the virus in the chicken eggs.

 

From the manufacturing process, each dose may also contain residual amounts of sodium taurodeoxycholate (≤ 10 ppm) (a detergent used to purify the viurs), ovalbumin (egg protein)(≤ 1 mcg), neomycin sulfate (≤ 0.2 picograms [pg]), polymyxin B (≤ 0.03 pg) (neomycin and polymyxin are antibiotics and are used in the propogation of virus, so the eggs don't become contaminated with bacteria and infected), and beta-propiolactone (don't know exactly what it is but it's used to inactivate the virus) (< 25 nanograms).

Edited October 28, 2009 by Lovedtodeath

[EthiopianFood]

Lovedtodeath, this was posted earlier in the thread, and I found it very helpful. It listed the ingredients by manufacturer, as they are apparently quite different.

 

Here's a link. He lists the ingredients for each of the different vaccine manufactures.