Swine Flu Vaccination + general swine flu chat thread

tallaght01

The U.S Department of Defence have announced the H1N1 2009 vaccination will be mandatory for all uniformed members.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=55698

Defense Department to Start H1N1 Flu Vaccinations The link is to the US Defence dept site, so it's not a quack website.

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 1, 2009 – All military personnel will be vaccinated against the H1N1 flu virus, and the vaccine will be available to all military family members who want it, a Defense Department health affairs official said today.
The H1N1 vaccination program will begin in early October, said Army Lt. Col. (Dr.) Wayne Hachey, director of preventive medicine for Defense Department health affairs.

The vaccine, which has been licensed by the Food and Drug Administration, will be mandatory for uniformed personnel, the colonel said. “What we want to do is target those people who are at highest risk for transmission,” he said.

What do people think about this? I'm uneasy about it. I'm happy enough with some mandatory vaccinations, like HepB for med school entrants etc. But I'm not so sure about this.

I do have an open mind about it, though. I guess it's a national security issue. If 20% of their troops are laid out with influenza, then it's bad news for their armed forces.

This post isn't an invitation for the conspiracy theories punters to come on here and post an hour of youtube videos about the secret plot to introduce mandatory vaccinations for the general population.

What do people think about the medical ethics of this. if you were the doc or the nurse doing vaccinations, would you e happy doing mandatory vaccines?

PhysiologyRocks

I'd be almost okay with it. I'm not a big fan of the lack of free will, but in the end of the day, it will do some good.

I'd personally rather endure a little injection than the flu.

A Neurotic

Is there a risk associated with the vaccine? Why would anyone be unwilling to take it?

tallaght01

The vaccine is very likely to be very safe, but all vaccines have a side effect risk. In a population the size of the army, you're likely to see some side effects.

But there's a general ethical stance within medicine that giving someone a medication against their will is a HUGE deal. That's why it doesn't sit easily with me.

PhysiologyRocks

tallaght01 wrote: »

But there's a general ethical stance within medicine that giving someone a medication against their will is a HUGE deal. That's why it doesn't sit easily with me.

I suppose it's easy for me to be okay with it. I won't actually have to give it to anyone. You, most likely will.

From my point of view, it's only theoretical. I imagine it'd be much more difficult to actually do.

wheresthebeef

I assume what they mean by mandatory is that it will be some form of an offence to refuse to give consent to have the vaccine. However, if the person does not give an informed consent i.e of their own free will without coercion, then the nurse or doctor performing the procedure is guilty of the offence of battery in the least, and possibly assault.

Irish Nurses have completed phase 1 of the training course for Pandemrix and Celvapan administration under patient group directive. Next phase is treatment of anaphylaxis using epinephrine. Last phase is the supply and administration of Tamiflu and Relenza under same patient group directive. If anyone wants to see the HSE Draft Medication Protocol authorising Nurses to administer these vaccines and medications, under protocol;

<Drindy> Please PM wheresthebeef for further details (no e-mail addresses on the forum to protect from all spamming)

allsaintssue

wheresthebeef wrote: »

However, if the person does not give an informed consent i.e of their own free will without coercion, then the nurse or doctor performing the procedure is guilty of the offence of battery in the least, and possibly assault.

<Drindy> Please PM wheresthebeef for further details (no e-mail addresses on the forum to protect from all spamming)

I get where you are coming from but in all fairness we are talking about something that can and has killed people, particuarly already vunreable people.
By enforcing the vaccine it may take away someones right to choose but it is for the greater good. I think people who refuse to take it without any genuine reason are being selfish and putting the most vunreable people in the community at risk.

norrie rugger

allsaintssue wrote: »

I get where you are coming from but in all fairness we are talking about something that can and has killed people, particuarly already vunreable people.
By enforcing the vaccine it may take away someones right to choose but it is for the greater good. I think people who refuse to take it without any genuine reason are being selfish and putting the most vunreable people in the community at risk.

Alot of horrors have been unleashed in the "Greater Good"

allsaintssue

I agree, but I don't think a mass vaccination scheme is exactly in the league of eugenics programmes

PhysiologyRocks

Also, I know quite a few people who wanted to refuse it, because they didn't understand why they should take it.

A relative of mine's attitude was "well, why would I need that?".

People need to be better informed.

A Neurotic

Was in the company of 5 middle aged women last night while they were discussing the vaccine. The general consensus was "not for me, that thing hasn't been tested". I'm annoyed with myself for not pressing the point :mad:

wheresthebeef

allsaintssue wrote: »

I get where you are coming from but in all fairness we are talking about something that can and has killed people, particuarly already vunreable people.
By enforcing the vaccine it may take away someones right to choose but it is for the greater good. I think people who refuse to take it without any genuine reason are being selfish and putting the most vunreable people in the community at risk.

Unfortunately, no matter what the persons reason, we have no right to force treatment upon someone who does not want it. The concept of consent is clear on this, we don't neccesarily have to understand a persons reason for choosing not to take the vaccine, as long as they have capacity, it is their choice. And to be honest, I have no problem with this. All we can do as health care professionals is clearly and concisely educate people and provide them with the risks of taking/not taking the vaccine and allow them to make an informed choice. Most people will choose to have the vaccine. Some will not, and that is their fundamental right. As a professional, I certainly won't be comprising my principles by carrying out an assault or battery on someone. Each person has to assess the impact that their decision may have on others, and ultimately be responsible for the consequences of that decision.

tallaght01

The problem is A) most countries DO have legislative powers to force treatment on people who don't want to be treated and This is unlikely to be forced on anyone. It's just going to be a case of "take it or leave the army" I'd imagine. Except there are legal processes involved in leaving a lot of armies, which take time.

So, it's all likely to be legal. The armed forces have several mandatory vaccines, and lots of schools in the states won't take unvaccinated kids.

So, I think it's important to differentiate between mandatory vaccination and physically jabbing a person who's begging you not to.

charlieroot

For anyone interested, here's an article analysing swine flu from a hacker's point of view. Makes for very interesting reading for anyone with a computing background.

http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=353

whatawaster

Will unvaccinated doctors, nurses and other staff be allowed to work in hospitals or will it be mandatory for them? Should it be a case of get the vaccination or don't come in to work?
Do you think it's reasonable for patients, especially those in high-risk groups, to expect that all staff in contact with them are protected?

Dr Galen

From Breakingnews.ie

Quarter of population could be affected by first wave of swine flu
Print PrintEmail+ Email+Email+ Share+
The country’s chief medical officer has said he expects that a quarter of the population will be affected in the first wave of the swine flu outbreak this winter.
08/09/2009 - 16:06:25
The country’s chief medical officer has said he expects that a quarter of the population will be affected in the first wave of the swine flu outbreak this winter.

Dr Tony Holohan confirmed this afternoon that between 30 and 40 cases of flu are now being reported per 100,000 of population.

He said almost eight million doses of swine flu vaccine had now been acquired, and that the first of these would be administered next month.

“About 25% of the population could become affected in a first wave,” Dr Holohan told the Oireachtas Health Committee.

“Up to 10% of the workforce may be absent from work during that time, and perhaps between 1% and 2% of cases might require treatment in hospital.”

Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/quarter-of-population-could-be-affected-by-first-wave-of-swine-flu-425607.html#ixzz0QXSJpAQC

seems to me like the HSE is preparing for worst case scenarios, which I find reassuring. At least the possible threats aren't being taken lightly.

Doing the maths though, if 25% of the population, lets say thats 4 million, are affected, that makes about a million.

Of that million, he's saying that 1-2% of cases MIGHT need hospital treatment. If we go conservatively on this and say 1%, then it follows that 1% of 1million = 10,000 people. Do we really have the capacity to deal with that sort of thing? Sure most people will recover and do alright, but even at the low end of things, that could be pretty dramatic to the health service

squidgey

The actual figure is closer to 4% that require hospital treatment

Dr Galen

have a source backing that up squidgey?

the figures that the HSE are using there are very much projections, while so far you may be right with the 4% figure, that may not carry through to the 1st wave proper of the illness.

TirNaNog.

what % would the death rate be out of 1 million?

DARK-KNIGHT

TirNaNog. wrote: »

what % would the death rate be out of 1 million?

i think it was 0.1% so out of 1 million thats 1000 possible deaths but that would be extreme wouldnt it?

also i think i read 0.1% THINK before im ridiculed lol

tallaght01

We've been seeing 0.5% hospitalised, and o.1% dying.

That's pretty much in line with most countries.

allsaintssue

Attended a mandatory talk today about swine flu and couldn't believe the amount of people in my class who are refusing to get the vaccine, claiming not to know enough about it.. doesnt say much if even the health care proffesionals don't trust the vaccine...

The_Conductor

allsaintssue wrote: »

Attended a mandatory talk today about swine flu and couldn't believe the amount of people in my class who are refusing to get the vaccine, claiming not to know enough about it.. doesnt say much if even the health care proffesionals don't trust the vaccine...

Wonderful, and these are the people who are supposed to be convincing the rest of the populace......

We could always focus on the shrill demands of the INTO that teachers *must* be vaccinated immediately- whether they understand what they're saying or not- when they are so 'in your face' about how necessary it is for their members- it makes one hell of a good sales pitch to everyone else?

nesf

allsaintssue wrote: »

Attended a mandatory talk today about swine flu and couldn't believe the amount of people in my class who are refusing to get the vaccine, claiming not to know enough about it.. doesnt say much if even the health care proffesionals don't trust the vaccine...

Never underestimate the capacity for smart people to believe stupid things. Seriously, if you turn out to be a GP you're going to see an awful lot of it.

nesf

New Scientist article on the subject: Don't be fooled: swine flu still poses a deadly threat

tallaght01

We're getting only about 40% of health care professionals wanting it. The problem is the public think this means they know something we're not telling them. The reality is that it reflects a large population of healthcare workers who are misinformed about swine flu and the vaccine. You'd be amazed how many healthcare professionals get info on stuff they don't deal with in the same media as the general population.

KarenWatson

whatawaster wrote: »

Will unvaccinated doctors, nurses and other staff be allowed to work in hospitals or will it be mandatory for them? Should it be a case of get the vaccination or don't come in to work?

Big question over personal rights here. I personally believe that people should not be coerced into taking this vacination.

tallaght01

KarenWatson wrote: »

Big question over personal rights here. I personally believe that people should not be coerced into taking this vacination.

Why? You're a doc (or your other thread suggests you are). We need to be giving people our honest opinions.

Is it an issue about never forcing people to get vaccines to work in health? Because we all have to get HepB vaccines.

Or do you think the vaccine is unsafe? If so, why?

Do you think swine flu isn't dangerous enough to warrant a vaccine?

I'm not by any means saying you're wrong, but I think we need to explain the "why" to patients, so they don't think healthcare worker opposition is to do with vaccine risk.

KarenWatson

tallaght01 wrote: »

Why? You're a doc (or your other thread suggests you are). We need to be giving people our honest opinions. .

tallaght01 wrote: »

Or do you think the vaccine is unsafe? If so, why?.

No vaccine is 100% safe, as todays article in the Irish Times will tell you.

tallaght01 wrote: »

Do you think swine flu isn't dangerous enough to warrant a vaccine?.

tallaght01 wrote: »

I'm not by any means saying you're wrong, but I think we need to explain the "why" to patients, so they don't think healthcare worker opposition is to do with vaccine risk.

My original post was in relation to the mandatory vaccination of all medical workers. Now this is obvious coercion. If you have a family to support, in reality what choice do workers have should they not want the vaccine?

This "mandatory" element has serious implications which should not be brushed over.

tallaght01

well, eh, I'm glad you clarified all of that.......:o