I don’t think this is really an issue. If someone is buying the vaccine, the companies will make more of it. I think something like 140 million doses were made for the U.S. market this year and the U.S. is not the only country that orders flu vaccines.
I don’t think that would be a big deal. So maybe the plan would take a year to implement. If the U.S. starts ordering more shots, more companies will start making the vaccine or the current vaccine makers will expand their manufacturing. There are money and civil liberties issues with this idea but I don’t think making the vaccine is the problem.
Companies are working on faster ways to make vaccines that don’t involve chicken eggs. This method may ultimately go the way of the dinosaur.
No, saving a life is saving a life. I’m saying the costs and considerations of reducing flu deaths and traffic accident deaths are very different. As has been noted, a lot of people would say your civil liberties are being violated if the government requires you to get a shot. They’d say you have a right to decide what goes into your body. Not as many people will feel that way about new standards for cars.
The monetary cost isn’t the only issue, but it would be very interesting to see some figures on this. I’m not sure how easy it will be to find them.
That’s not at all what I was saying since it’s obviously not true. But I am saying it’s a general answer to your question. As a society, we consider the issues and the costs differently (nevermind that different regulatory agencies and groups get involved in each decision). That’s why deaths might be accepted in one instance but not another. Like I said earlier, though, the government is not going to keep imposing new regulations on cars until deaths from accidents reach zero. Nobody thinks that’s possible.
I haven’t made any comments on what we should or shouldn’t do. I’m trying to talk about the issues that go into making these kinds of decisions. And I’m not saying the raw dollars are the only issue. What would the other effects of the proposals be? How would people’s lives and rights and jobs be affected? What might we have to stop doing if we spend billions or trillions on these things?
[QUOTE=shiftless]
I don’t follow the studies but it is my understanding that flu shot are just a mix of whatever viruses the manufacturers think might be around this season. They are not meant as a cure-all.
[/quote]
Your understanding is basically correct, although “think” makes it sound like people are just guessing when they’re actually working based on trends and guided by historical data about how the viruses mutates and such. But yes, the vaccine has to be formulated months in advance. Some years it’s a very good match for the seasonal flu and other years it’s not as good. If technological advances allow for the vaccine to be made faster, that would hopefully make for better matches.
All true. Some people do get the flu after getting the shot and that’s something that has to be considered as well, since assuming the vaccine is perfect would be unrealistic.
I agree, although for a different reason: even a good vaccine has side effects, and the side effects of a seatbelt are pretty much nil. That being said, I’m not very sympathetic to arguments against mandatory vaccinations (although I don’t like the idea of tying it to voting) or against seatbelt laws.
I think you are spot on about the issues that should be considered, and it’s not as simple as mathmetical formula…I just wonder if there is someone or group or committee in our government that does consider and attempt to weigh those types of isses. It’s not apparent to me that there is.
Most of the people who die from the flu are people who can be pre-identified as being high risk. From a cost-benefit standpoint, you focus your efforts on these people, and folks who have a lot of contact with them. Adults in good health are not particularly at risk for death from the flu, so there is much less value in pushing vaccinations on them. The “herd immunity” effect is limited because the virus mutates, and we have to constantly vaccinate in order to maintain even partial immunity.
Similarly, people who are at the most risk of dying in a car accident get special seats and 5 point seat belts, whereas everyone else gets to use the 3 point belts.
You have that luxury - the government does not. They choose battles they can win, in the main - if it’s very difficult to enforce, they may choose an education campaign to get people to do it voluntarily instead of a regulation that requires it. Like, say, the ones they have around adult vaccination.
Good points. Extra penalties for those people that are employed by or are vendors to hospitals, schools, day cares, retirement communities, nursing homes, etc. that don’t get the vaccine.
I have that luxury because this thread is not about the implementation of a nationwide vaccine program…it’s about why regulators don’t apply consistent thinking in regard to their mandates and regulations.
And my statement is that they do apply more consistent thinking than you are attributing to them - it’s just that they have to consider a wider range of issues than you’re interested in discussing. It’s perfectly reasonable to regulate more heavily in an area where enforcement is easy than an area where enforcement is hard. It’s really another aspect of that whole cost-benefit ratio, if costs of enforcement will be rather high in some areas and lower in others.
But we have state mandated vaccines for other types of illnesses, we just get creative on how they are applied and enforced. Not by fines. You don’t get vaccinated, you don’t get to attend school.
Unless your parents send the school a short letter that says they’re opposed to vaccinations, in which case you attend school and don’t get vaccinated. And for the record I think that’s a stupid exemption that should be eliminated.
Yes, went there right after I said don’t follow the studies. This is an awesome site that I would recommend to anyone talking obut vaccines. And also to anyone talking about cutting federal budgets. Some government programs (maybe not many, but some) we would all miss.