Person: “I don’t get the flu vaccine. Look, this years flu outbreak was a strain that wasn’t even in the vaccine!”
Me: “Isn’t that what we should expect? If 90 million people get vaccinated in America, then we have a pretty big barrier to the spread of the strains in the vaccine–especially if the vaccinations are concentrated in high-risk populations. So we really should expect outbreaks to be from unvaccinated strains; but, not because scientists chose the wrong strains, it’s because when 1/4 of the population is vaccinated it becomes much less likely for vaccinated strains to snowball into epidemics.”
Question: Am I way off base, or does this make sense, or what?
Seems entirely reasonable to me. A contagious disease will spread if each sufferer infects on average more than one other person and will fizzle if that is less than 1. If 1/4 of the population is vaccinated against some strain, then it has to much more infectious to spread. It must be the case that each infected person would have infected more that 1.33 other persons in order for it to spread. Of course, this assumes 100% efficacy, which is false, but the principle is the same.
Say, here’s another General Question[sup]TM[/sup] about the vaccine:
Does the vaccine have any proven effectiveness against the Fujian strain (the strain which is wreaking havoc)?
I keep hearing references to partial effectiveness. What the devil does that mean? Having received the vaccine, am I somewhat less likely to get the Fujian strain? Or does partial effectiveness mean that if I get it, the symptoms will be less severe?
What gives?
(And why have the media under-reported the fact that the vaccine isn’t designed to fight the Fujian strain?)
I got the vaccine in October, and I currently have the flu now. While I’ve felt sorta crappy for about three days, it really only knocked me out of commission for one day. Definitely not the worst flu I’ve ever had, and doesn’t live up to all the media hype. I’d like to think the vaccine was at least partially responsible for the relative mildness of the symptoms. I only had a fever for a few hours, and that was only about 101F, I feel really tired and somewhat achey, and I have a really bad cough which seems to be subsiding a little bit.
This says that there is research which shows that the current vaccine does not exactly match the Fujian strain but that the vaccine shows some effectiveness in preventing the Fujian strain. It’s a press release as opposed to a scientific site but it matches up with what I’ve read in numerous other sources so I’m thinking it’s reasonaby accurate as far as it goes.
I suspect people would disagree about what is the right level of attention for the media to give to the story. I thought the news has been out there so it doesn’t seem underreported to me, but I’m just one person.
I don’t think the media have much stake in it, but I do know that from a public health perspective, we wouldn’t want vast numbers of people to avoid the vaccine because they think it won’t work. First of all, as is being discussed, the shot might provide some protection from the Fujian strain. Second, there is more than just one kind of flu you might catch. You can still be protected (fully or partially) from other kinds.
I think many public health officials believe we undervaccinate for flu in this country. They have some set of goals for 2012, where a much higher percentage of high-risk groups are vaccinated. As I understand it they are particularly frustrated by the number of health care workers who do not seek the vaccine.
Perversely, when the word gets out (like it did this year, for one reason or another) that people should get the thing, it does no good if the manufacturers can’t meet demand. Last year they ended up destroying 12 million unusued doses, so they made fewer this year. Then demand was higher than last year after all. Whoops.
I think the way the story has been reported is misleading. The typical “flu story” will start with a report of the flu raging through the Western states. Then the report will switch to the long lines waiting for flu vaccines. No mention of the fact that the Fujian strain is the one causing problems in the West, or that the shot wasn’t designed for the Fujian strain. In fact, no mention of different strains at all.
To me this is misleading reporting. People run out to get the flu vaccine thinking it will protect them, when in fact it may not. Result: vaccine shortage, and not enough vaccine for those who might especially need it (the very old and the very young).
Seems to me the fact that the vaccine wasn’t designed for the strain that is causing problems is pretty big news. Haven’t seen any headlines or big TV stories on that, though.
Yes, most health care officials think we undervaccinate. They are right, I suppose, and we should all be vaccinated. My suspicion is that (in furtherance of this agenda) health officials are de-emphasizing the fact that the vaccine wasn’t made with the Fujian strain in mind.
The thinking might be, “Well, it’s good for people to get vaccinated, so why tell them that this vaccine might not protect them. Let them believe that the ‘flu shot’ will prevent them from getting the flu that is making the rounds. Hey, if the Fujian strain can scare folks into getting vaccinated, the world’s a better place for it.”
I suspect that some health officials might even be quietly happy about the vaccine shortage this has caused, inasmuch as it will call attention to the need to expand and improve the vaccination system.
The goals are noble, I think, but I guess I am bothered that the ignorance of the public at large might be used as a tool in the campaign. It offends my inner Cecil, I suppose.