22 May 2012

Flu Vaccine for 4 year old?

| birder
Join the conversation
27

Does anyone know where I can get a flu vaccination for a 4 year old? I am used to this being offered by the GP, but since Australia does not include the flu jab on the vaccination schedule for children, it is difficult to find someone who will actually do it. My GP won’t. I called ACT Health to ask, and their response was, “We don’t know, maybe try to call around to other GPs.”

This seems a little odd! In both the United States and NZ, flu vaccinations are on the immunisation schedule for children, and you can get them easily (and in NZ, for free).

Any ideas on where we could get this for our 4 year old? Thanks in advance!

Join the conversation

27
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

snoopydoc said :

HenryBG said :

I’m sorry you don’t like the BMJ. What I’ve demonstrated is that clinicians themselves are calling bullshit on flu vaccination.
Doctors have along history of inflicting non-evidenced and dangerous treatment fads on patients (blood-letting, thalidomide, prostate screening) and this flu vaccination scam obviously is yet another example of that.

I actually quite like the BMJ. One of the things we learn as doctors, though, is how to properly evaluate what we find in the medical literature, rather than just reading an article that agrees with our own point of view and saying “See?! These other smart doctors said XYZ! It _must_ be true!”.

What you have pointed out (not demonstrated) is that _some_ clinicians think that on the balance of evidence, influenza vaccination is not a great idea. What you have _not_ demonstrated is whether those clinicians are likely to be _right_ in their assertions.

For example, a large group of doctors recently wrote a letter / petition to the federal parliament, stating that it is a health risk for children to be raised in a same-sex partnership household and therefore same-sex marriage should not be made legal. Something like 150 doctors put their name to this letter. Whilst their motivation is questionable (people often confuse their personal or religious convictions with what they offer as professional opinion, unfortunately), what is very clear upon reviewing what _they_ regard as the “evidence” in favour of their argument, is that the available evidence supports no such argument… and in fact there is good recent evidence that the opposite is in fact true. This is so clearly the case that a _very_ large majority of doctors, including the representative political body, the AMA, have piped up to point out how flawed their arguments and alleged evidence are.

And while we’re clearing up misconceptions, blood-letting is still an effective treatment for a number of conditions, including severe congestive cardiac failure (though it’s not often used for this indication anymore), haemochromatosis and polycythaemia rubra vera (for which it is routinely used). Thalidomide was a drug with unforseen and very unfortunate adverse effects that, once recognised, were acted upon swiftly. Prostate screening (and indeed many screening programs such as mammography, faecal occult blood, etc.) is a subject on which the evidence and opinions are still somewhat divided / up in the air, though some clinicians have strong feelings in either direction. I fail to see how any of these scenarios constitutes a “scam” of any kind.

I do understand the point you were attempting to make, but perhaps you should choose your terminology, and examples, more carefully next time.

HenryBG said :

At, what? $30 a pop each? Plus the millions of doses that have to be thrown away at the end of the season when they hit their expiry date. It all adds up to a windfall for certain people. Over a quarter of a billion $$$ of our healthcare $$$$ wasted on trying to save 14 old people who were on their death beds anyway.
Completely pathetic.

Yeah, damn those evil pharmaceutical corporations… sitting there plotting against us all and swindling us of our money for no good reason… umm… Oh, wait… $30 a pop versus _how much_ in lost productivity due to people taking a week off work? Especially important people like you with important jobs like yours (what do you do again?) who value their time so highly that they refuse to take time off for things like jury duty unless and until the courts decide to properly compensate you for your time?? Do you think a week away from your job is worth less than $30? Or less than $300 if you were say the 1 in 10 people who came down with influenza during a local epidemic? Or $3,000 if you were 1 in 100? …..

HenryBG said :

And did we have to vaccinate 10 million Australians against Polio last year, this year, and every other year?
No. We didn’t.
The difference is
a) polio is incredibly dangerous. Flu is benign.
b) the vaccine against polio actually works. FLu vaccine is just as likely to make you sick than it is to give you any kind of meaningful protection against any kind of genuine risk.

Every single person in Australia gets vaccinated for polio (with a small number of exceptions due to either valid medical reasons, or objections from parents). That’s WHY WE DON’T SEE IT ANYMORE. Maybe upper case letters will help that particular message sink in, as the lengthy explanation in my previous post didn’t seem to make much of an impression. No, we don’t have to vaccinate people every year for polio, because it’s a different sort of virus and IT DOESN’T MUTATE DRAMATICALLY EVERY SEASON LIKE INFLUENZA; another concept explained in detail previously.

Yes, polio can be incredibly dangerous, though you might be interested to note that only a small fraction of people who contract polio actually have any significant long-term damage from it. Wow… that sounds a little bit like…. measles…. or… yes, influenza.

No, influenza is not benign. It causes large costs to the community due to infected people convalescing. It can also kill, directly and by further weakening those with other underlying medical problems and at risk of complications such as bacterial superinfections (bacterial pneumonia occurring on top of the viral pneumonitis of influenza itself).

Tell you what… next time I admit a critically unwell young adult to ICU with life-threatening influenza, I’ll just sit back and relax, because it’s such a benign illness and surely nothing bad could possibly happen…

Damn. Plus 1,000,000 to this guy, I don’t think there’s anything more that can be said by anyone on this one.

HenryBG said :

I’m sorry you don’t like the BMJ. What I’ve demonstrated is that clinicians themselves are calling bullshit on flu vaccination.
Doctors have along history of inflicting non-evidenced and dangerous treatment fads on patients (blood-letting, thalidomide, prostate screening) and this flu vaccination scam obviously is yet another example of that.

I actually quite like the BMJ. One of the things we learn as doctors, though, is how to properly evaluate what we find in the medical literature, rather than just reading an article that agrees with our own point of view and saying “See?! These other smart doctors said XYZ! It _must_ be true!”.

What you have pointed out (not demonstrated) is that _some_ clinicians think that on the balance of evidence, influenza vaccination is not a great idea. What you have _not_ demonstrated is whether those clinicians are likely to be _right_ in their assertions.

For example, a large group of doctors recently wrote a letter / petition to the federal parliament, stating that it is a health risk for children to be raised in a same-sex partnership household and therefore same-sex marriage should not be made legal. Something like 150 doctors put their name to this letter. Whilst their motivation is questionable (people often confuse their personal or religious convictions with what they offer as professional opinion, unfortunately), what is very clear upon reviewing what _they_ regard as the “evidence” in favour of their argument, is that the available evidence supports no such argument… and in fact there is good recent evidence that the opposite is in fact true. This is so clearly the case that a _very_ large majority of doctors, including the representative political body, the AMA, have piped up to point out how flawed their arguments and alleged evidence are.

And while we’re clearing up misconceptions, blood-letting is still an effective treatment for a number of conditions, including severe congestive cardiac failure (though it’s not often used for this indication anymore), haemochromatosis and polycythaemia rubra vera (for which it is routinely used). Thalidomide was a drug with unforseen and very unfortunate adverse effects that, once recognised, were acted upon swiftly. Prostate screening (and indeed many screening programs such as mammography, faecal occult blood, etc.) is a subject on which the evidence and opinions are still somewhat divided / up in the air, though some clinicians have strong feelings in either direction. I fail to see how any of these scenarios constitutes a “scam” of any kind.

I do understand the point you were attempting to make, but perhaps you should choose your terminology, and examples, more carefully next time.

HenryBG said :

At, what? $30 a pop each? Plus the millions of doses that have to be thrown away at the end of the season when they hit their expiry date. It all adds up to a windfall for certain people. Over a quarter of a billion $$$ of our healthcare $$$$ wasted on trying to save 14 old people who were on their death beds anyway.
Completely pathetic.

Yeah, damn those evil pharmaceutical corporations… sitting there plotting against us all and swindling us of our money for no good reason… umm… Oh, wait… $30 a pop versus _how much_ in lost productivity due to people taking a week off work? Especially important people like you with important jobs like yours (what do you do again?) who value their time so highly that they refuse to take time off for things like jury duty unless and until the courts decide to properly compensate you for your time?? Do you think a week away from your job is worth less than $30? Or less than $300 if you were say the 1 in 10 people who came down with influenza during a local epidemic? Or $3,000 if you were 1 in 100? …..

HenryBG said :

And did we have to vaccinate 10 million Australians against Polio last year, this year, and every other year?
No. We didn’t.
The difference is
a) polio is incredibly dangerous. Flu is benign.
b) the vaccine against polio actually works. FLu vaccine is just as likely to make you sick than it is to give you any kind of meaningful protection against any kind of genuine risk.

Every single person in Australia gets vaccinated for polio (with a small number of exceptions due to either valid medical reasons, or objections from parents). That’s WHY WE DON’T SEE IT ANYMORE. Maybe upper case letters will help that particular message sink in, as the lengthy explanation in my previous post didn’t seem to make much of an impression. No, we don’t have to vaccinate people every year for polio, because it’s a different sort of virus and IT DOESN’T MUTATE DRAMATICALLY EVERY SEASON LIKE INFLUENZA; another concept explained in detail previously.

Yes, polio can be incredibly dangerous, though you might be interested to note that only a small fraction of people who contract polio actually have any significant long-term damage from it. Wow… that sounds a little bit like…. measles…. or… yes, influenza.

No, influenza is not benign. It causes large costs to the community due to infected people convalescing. It can also kill, directly and by further weakening those with other underlying medical problems and at risk of complications such as bacterial superinfections (bacterial pneumonia occurring on top of the viral pneumonitis of influenza itself).

Tell you what… next time I admit a critically unwell young adult to ICU with life-threatening influenza, I’ll just sit back and relax, because it’s such a benign illness and surely nothing bad could possibly happen…

Wow, what a debate! I’m a scientist myself and having looked at an enormous amount of research, I prefer to give my daughter the flu vaccination, especially given her previous medical history. (I’m not trying to convince anyone here – just stating my position.) I particularly appreciate supamum’s suggestion. The Conder surgery (http://belconnenmedicalcentre.com/lhome.html) does give flu vaccines for preschoolers, and it costs $25. We’re happy to pay it.

justin heywood8:44 pm 27 May 12

snoopydoc @ #22! A wonderful piece. I suspect you know something about this topic.

Another great summary of the issue was podcast no. 20 in the ‘Quackcast’ series (Dr Mark Crislip, an infectious diseases specialist, aka ‘The Pus-Whisperer’).*

On an issue as complex as vaccines, I tend to listen to experts who see the big picture rather than surf the web to find bits of research that support my own ‘gut feeling’ on the matter. You can find ‘a’ study or ‘an’ expert to support almost any point of view.

*http://moremark.squarespace.com/quackcast-list-mp3/

snoopydoc said :

@ HenryBG

Firstly, the ability to surf the internet and ooze confirmation bias by selecting snippets of information that support your favoured argument, does not constitute what you refer to as “proper analysis”.

I’m sorry you don’t like the BMJ. What I’ve demonstrated is that clinicians themselves are calling bullshit on flu vaccination.
Doctors have along history of inflicting non-evidenced and dangerous treatment fads on patients (blood-letting, thalidomide, prostate screening) and this flu vaccination scam obviously is yet another example of that.

snoopydoc said :

Secondly, while your point regarding the relative risk vs benefit has a kernel of validity to it (things become increasingly unfavourable the more millions of people we have to vaccinate to apparently protect or save just a handful), I suspect you are suffering from a form of personal incredulity bias.

A “kernel of validity”? You’re too kind. As far as I can see it’s actually the essence of performing a risk assessment.
Subjecting millions to a risky treatment every year to provide poor protection against a virus which is almost entirely benign doesn’t add up from a risk management perspective.

At, what? $30 a pop each? Plus the millions of doses that have to be thrown away at the end of the season when they hit their expiry date. It all adds up to a windfall for certain people. Over a quarter of a billion $$$ of our healthcare $$$$ wasted on trying to save 14 old people who were on their death beds anyway.
Completely pathetic.

snoopydoc said :

Yes, only 14 people died of influenza in Australia last year. And, interestingly, not a single one died of polio.

And did we have to vaccinate 10 million Australians against Polio last year, this year, and every other year?
No. We didn’t.
The difference is
a) polio is incredibly dangerous. Flu is benign.
b) the vaccine against polio actually works. FLu vaccine is just as likely to make you sick than it is to give you any kind of meaningful protection against any kind of genuine risk.

And the cumulative risk of having to undergo this unnecessary treatment every year should be quite worrying.

sweetlibby said :

There is no where that you can get FREE flu vaccine that I know of in the ACT unless you have a specific medical condition.

Gungahlin Doctors (the one on the corner) has a nurse give free vaccinations, or at least it was free for me and I don’t have any conditions that I know of.

@ HenryBG

You are an argumentative little thing, aren’t you? 🙂

Firstly, the ability to surf the internet and ooze confirmation bias by selecting snippets of information that support your favoured argument, does not constitute what you refer to as “proper analysis”.

Secondly, while your point regarding the relative risk vs benefit has a kernel of validity to it (things become increasingly unfavourable the more millions of people we have to vaccinate to apparently protect or save just a handful), I suspect you are suffering from a form of personal incredulity bias.

Yes, only 14 people died of influenza in Australia last year. And, interestingly, not a single one died of polio. I don’t think even a single Australian child died last year of H.influenzae epiloglottitis, either, now that I think about it.

Why might that be, do you think? Do you also complain about traffic lights, red-light cameras and speed cameras at busy and potentially dangerous intersections? Perhaps, if you did, on the basis that: “There are never any accidents at that intersection!! Clearly we don’t need safety measures like traffic lights, etc., there!! It’s a clear case of urban infrastructure contractors over-servicing!”

You underestimate the risk of harm because you live in a particular place and time where severe harm from these sort of infections is _very rare_. I suspect that what you fail to properly appreciate is the fact that the interventions which have helped keep such bad outcomes in the _very rare_ basket start looking more superfluous and unnecessary the more effective they are.

It’s a bit like the wonderful but unrealistic supposition that in an ideal world the Police service and judiciary would be so effective at preventing and discouraging crime that we would have so _little_ crime that we could just about dispense with having a Police service or criminal courts at all anymore. Take them away and oh… look… crime is happening again.

Influenza vaccines are, as mentioned in other comments, limited in their effectiveness in that they are developed to combat, usually, just one (or perhaps two) strains of the virus. This is because the virus mutates at an impressive rate, and the vaccine programs are aimed at trying to play catch-up and effectively protect against the “current” seasonal strain doing the rounds.

The vaccine is still highly effective against the targeted strain(s), and contributes significantly to reducing the extent of seasonal influenza epidemics (and potential pandemics) in this country. This reduction in transmission and subsequent morbidity (and potential mortality) is especially facilitated by the fact that a very high proportion of healthcare workers, compared to the general population, choose to use the vaccine. Apparent ineffectiveness is often the result of people not realising that the _vast_ majority of viral respiratory tract infections they might acquire, even in “flu season”, is _not_ influenza. Having said that, no vaccine is 100% effective (some people don’t mount an appropriate antibody response, or “seroconvert”). If you have the vaccine, however, you are _far_ more likely to be protected from this season’s ‘flu than not.

In short, you live in a bubble where the horizon of your visible universe does not include the spectre of a truly rampant infectious epidemic of, well, anything, let alone something like pandemic influenza. The current risk may be small, but (a) it’s that way at least partially _because_ of the vaccines, and (b) when you stop protecting against these sort of diseases and a _much_ bigger chunk of the population succumb to and/or pass on the infection, even a small fraction of a very big number becomes much… much… bigger, and much much more scary.

Flick through a history book, or go hang out in sub-Saharan Africa or a nicely crowded part of South-East Asia before jumping back on here to tell us all how rare the serious complications of usually innocuous infectious diseases are, and how improving herd immunity even when the individual personal risk is fairly small is such a bad thing.

I think one flough over the cuckoo nest.

I had the injection last year and it didn’t stop me from getting the flew. Same thing the year before. Save your money.

I havnt been to a doctor for a flue for 15 years or more in fact i dont think I ever had. And guess what Ive spent most if the last 15 years in West Africa exposed to Malaria, Yellow fever, and nastys such as Ebola etc. I think I may have malaria as ive had the symptoms but you get that in the big jobs.

For god’s sake Bluenomi, stuffing up the formatting makes it very hard to untangle.
Here’s my try, but the preview doesn’t tell me if I’ve got the attributions correct:

Bluenomi said :

@ HenryBG, who said

HenryBG said :

Oh, and the risks? In 2010, FLuvax caused febrile convulsions in 1% of recipient children under 5, leaving some dead and others permanently brain damaged. Good one doc.

Febrile convulsions are caused by a spike in temp. They also do no cause brain damage or death and while are very scary for the parents and child do no damage at all. Any harm done to the child will be cause by the underlying condition that cause the temp spike that set off the febrile convulsion. If the fluvax caused convulsions they were either not febrile if they did damage or there was something else that did it.

Based on trial data, we can expect that a large proportion of young children will develop fevers and influenza-like symptoms after receiving influenza vaccines (e.g. for the Glaxo vaccine, fever in 43% of children under 3 years (7) and, for the 15?g dose of monovalent CSL H1N1 influenza vaccine, fever in 35.4% (8). This is a higher proportion of children than those likely to develop symptomatic influenza each year. Thus, we reiterate our view that the current evidence suggests that influenza vaccines in young children without risk factors are likely to do more harm than good

http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c2994?tab=responses

Passive surveillance will always grossly underestimate adverse reaction rates.

And in light of a poor evidence base of largely inadequately powered studies to assess the safety and efficacy of influenza vaccines overall, and particularly in children, we argued that problems like those witnessed in Australia do not seem particularly surprising.

We agree with Durrheim (5) that a passive adverse event surveillance system detected signals that eventually led to the suspension of influenza vaccine in children. But the signal was especially strong in this case, and begs the question of what signals we might be missing. Consider Lopert and Nolan’s (4) use of passive surveillance system data to state that monovalent H1N1 vaccine has a low harms profile. […] Rather than demonstrating adequate safety, their example demonstrates the gross inadequacy of the Australian passive surveillance system to find the true numbers of adverse reactions, even when they are as simple to measure as a high fever.

In summary: flu vaccination does little good. It carries high risks. Those risks are not actively measured and are actively swept under the carpet. On balance, flu vaccination appears to be a completely rubbish way for the government to be spending taxpayers’ money.

PLUS, this patently crappy vaccine is just so crap that it provides reinforcement for the irrational behaviours of the kind of loons who send their unvaccinated children to Orana and believe in “homeopathic alternatives” to vaccination.
IN FACT, a “homeopathic alternative” to flu vaccine WILL BE SUPERIOR to the real thing in the exact same way that homeopathic hospitals proved immensely superior to conventional medical hospitals during the British Cholera epidemics: at least they do no harm.

Bluenomi said :

HenryBG said :

snoopydoc said :

@ HenryBG, who said

HenryBG said :

Oh, and the risks? In 2010, FLuvax caused febrile convulsions in 1% of recipient children under 5, leaving some dead and others permanently brain damaged. Good one doc.
.

Febrile convulsions are caused by a spike in temp. They also do no cause brain damage or death and while are very scary for the parents and child do no damage at all. Any harm done to the child will be cause by the underlying condition that cause the temp spike that set off the febrile convulsion. If the fluvax caused convulsions they were either not febrile if they did damage or there was something else that did it.

Based on trial data, we can expect that a large proportion of young children will develop fevers and influenza-like symptoms after receiving influenza vaccines (e.g. for the Glaxo vaccine, fever in 43% of children under 3 years (7) and, for the 15?g dose of monovalent CSL H1N1 influenza vaccine, fever in 35.4% (8). This is a higher proportion of children than those likely to develop symptomatic influenza each year. Thus, we reiterate our view that the current evidence suggests that influenza vaccines in young children without risk factors are likely to do more harm than good

http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c2994?tab=responses

Passive surveillance will always grossly underestimate adverse reaction rates.

And in light of a poor evidence base of largely inadequately powered studies to assess the safety and efficacy of influenza vaccines overall, and particularly in children, we argued that problems like those witnessed in Australia do not seem particularly surprising.

We agree with Durrheim (5) that a passive adverse event surveillance system detected signals that eventually led to the suspension of influenza vaccine in children. But the signal was especially strong in this case, and begs the question of what signals we might be missing. Consider Lopert and Nolan’s (4) use of passive surveillance system data to state that monovalent H1N1 vaccine has a low harms profile. […] Rather than demonstrating adequate safety, their example demonstrates the gross inadequacy of the Australian passive surveillance system to find the true numbers of adverse reactions, even when they are as simple to measure as a high fever.

In summary: flu vaccination does little good. It carries high risks. Those risks are not actively measured and are actively swept under the carpet. On balance, flu vaccination appears to be a completely rubbish way for the government to be spending taxpayers’ money.

PLUS, this patently crappy vaccine is just so crap that it provides reinforcement for the irrational behaviours of the kind of loons who send their unvaccinated children to Orana and believe in “homeopathic alternatives” to vaccination.
IN FACT, a “homeopathic alternative” to flu vaccine WILL BE SUPERIOR to the real thing in the exact same way that homeopathic hospitals proved immensely superior to conventional medical hospitals during the British Cholera epidemics: at least they do no harm.

HenryBG said :

snoopydoc said :

@ HenryBG, who said

HenryBG said :

Oh, and the risks? In 2010, FLuvax caused febrile convulsions in 1% of recipient children under 5, leaving some dead and others permanently brain damaged. Good one doc.
.

Febrile convulsions are caused by a spike in temp. They also do no cause brain damage or death and while are very scary for the parents and child do no damage at all. Any harm done to the child will be cause by the underlying condition that cause the temp spike that set off the febrile convulsion. If the fluvax caused convulsions they were either not febrile if they did damage or there was something else that did it.

dvaey said :

We’re not talking a vaccine for polio or smallpox or some other terrible debilitating life-changing disease.. we’re talking about an injection which contains antibodies for 2 or 3 strains of a bug of which thousands of strains exist.

+1

Caractacus Potts said :

Usually, my response to comments like numbers 1, 6 and 11 is a shrug, and the the sort of smug self satisfaction that comes with the knowledge that in the long run evolution sorts these sort of numpties out.

Smugness born of gullibility and an inability to do proper analysis.

Spending several hundred million dollars per year and making tens of thousands sick in order to perhaps save half a dozen lives which are close to their term anyway is piss-poor use of medical intervention.

As the above poster pointed out: this isn’t smallpox, and this vaccine is highly ineffective.

sweetlibby said :

There is no where that you can get FREE flu vaccine that I know of in the ACT unless you have a specific medical condition.

Theres this medical condition called ‘influenza’ which gives your body the antibodies for free. Not just that, but the antibodies that your body produces have more chance of working than a shot-in-the-dark injection.

We’re not talking a vaccine for polio or smallpox or some other terrible debilitating life-changing disease.. we’re talking about an injection which contains antibodies for 2 or 3 strains of a bug of which thousands of strains exist.

Caractacus Potts10:50 pm 22 May 12

Usually, my response to comments like numbers 1, 6 and 11 is a shrug, and the the sort of smug self satisfaction that comes with the knowledge that in the long run evolution sorts these sort of numpties out.

However, in the case of vaccination the existence of these sorts of opinions is harmful for the community – particularly infants and the elderly. Kindly put your tinfoil hats on and bugger off – there’s a good fellow.

snoopydoc said :

@ HenryBG, who said

HenryBG said :

There are virtually no health benefits to getting a flu vaccination. Classic case of medical over-servicing.

Would you like to tell that to the 14 people who died of influenza in Australia in 2011?

The risk of death (~1.5-2.0 per 100,000 population per year) is admittedly low, but the risk of significant morbidity is quite a bit higher, and the costs of even small epidemics can be quite high. All of these adverse outcomes can be reduced by a higher rate of vaccination.

In the first 9 months of 2011, there were 25,092 laboratory-confirmed cases of influenza in Australia, with 235 of those in the ACT. Some 13% of those requiring admission to hospital ended up in ICU.

The potential for opportunistic preventive / primary health care intervention by the GP who sees kids for vaccination should also not be underestimated.

How many people would you need to vaccinate in order to save 50% of that 14 people?
10 million? 15 million? more?

And what do you vaccinate them with? Apparently the flu vaccine confers a fairly unimpressive probability of immunity against 1 strain (out of many), meaning it often doesn’t work and even when it does, it has to be repeated annually or it is ineffective.

So, 10 million vaccines, administered every single year, to, maybe perhaps cross our fingers, save a handful of lives.

Oh, and the risks? In 2010, FLuvax caused febrile convulsions in 1% of recipient children under 5, leaving some dead and others permanently brain damaged. Good one doc.

The “normal” rate of adverse reaction is apparently 0.1%, so 10,000 people have to suffer to provide a pretty poor coverage against something that the vast majority of people have no trouble shaking off in 1 or two days anyway.

If your risk assessment leads you to think getting these shots is a good idea….well, I reckon you’re using more of a faith-based method that I do.

screaming banshee10:05 pm 22 May 12

snoopydoc said :

@ HenryBG, who said

HenryBG said :

There are virtually no health benefits to getting a flu vaccination. Classic case of medical over-servicing.

In the first 9 months of 2011, there were 25,092 laboratory-confirmed cases of influenza in Australia, with 235 of those in the ACT. Some 13% of those requiring admission to hospital ended up in ICU.

Care to supply the missing figure of how many of those 235 laboratory confirmed cases in the act required admission from which to determine the 13% that ended up in icu.

While you’re at it perhaps you can tell us how many of the 14 dead were apparently otherwise healthy 4 year olds

@ HenryBG, who said

HenryBG said :

There are virtually no health benefits to getting a flu vaccination. Classic case of medical over-servicing.

Would you like to tell that to the 14 people who died of influenza in Australia in 2011?

The risk of death (~1.5-2.0 per 100,000 population per year) is admittedly low, but the risk of significant morbidity is quite a bit higher, and the costs of even small epidemics can be quite high. All of these adverse outcomes can be reduced by a higher rate of vaccination.

In the first 9 months of 2011, there were 25,092 laboratory-confirmed cases of influenza in Australia, with 235 of those in the ACT. Some 13% of those requiring admission to hospital ended up in ICU.

The potential for opportunistic preventive / primary health care intervention by the GP who sees kids for vaccination should also not be underestimated.

The doctors surgery above Big W at gungahlin has a nurse who will do them. The only place I know of in Gungahlin where you don’t have to pay for a drs visit as well. $35 adults, $20 kids. There is no where that you can get FREE flu vaccine that I know of in the ACT unless you have a specific medical condition. Ring around and ask the prices are your best option. Also they are not able to give Fluvax to kids anymore due to some side effects last year. There are other brands of the vaccine they can use.

HenryBG said :

There are virtually no health benefits to getting a flu vaccination. Classic case of medical over-servicing.

I’m not picking this comment of yours in particular over any of the other comments (on seemingly every topic) you’ve made today, but I have to say, you’re on fire today HanryBG!
I’m not sure if RA has endured such a barrage of my-way-or-the-highway rants in all my time at this site!
Bravo! You should get some sort of award you all your ‘community service’ here – educating the simple citizens of Canberra with your wise words! 🙂

P.S I assume you’re on hols from your work schedule that makes no time for jury duty, as you seem to have been posting during the workday quite a lot of late? Or are you a shift worker? Hahahaha! Keep it up mate! Your posts are the best!

Call your GP and ask if they use ‘Fluvax’ before booking in.

Fluvax is doing much much more than ‘causing fevers’, with an ACT infant being placed in intensive care in late April this year after Fluvax caused febrile convulsions.

Google Natasha Bita’s coverage in the Australian to gain an impression of the scope of the Fluvax problem. (For ACT infant story search ‘Child in intensive care as 57 kids get Fluvax’ and for wider, Walkley Award winning coverage, search ‘Virus in the system’).

It is unfortunate that we hold our restaurants to a higher standard,publishing their violations on the front door, but we don’t take any measures to protect the community from GPs that inject infants with a banned and potentially fatal compound.

By all means get your children vaccinated, but just make sure Fluvax stays far, far away from them.

There are virtually no health benefits to getting a flu vaccination. Classic case of medical over-servicing.

Birder,
My son is 5 he has had the flu vaccine for the last 2 years as he suffers quite nasty asthma, The belconnen medical centre (bottom floor, on the outside of the mall, near post office boxes) will give children the flu vaccine & for south siders Conder surgery at Lanyon (near dominos) will also give it there as they are owned and run by the same people.

Inappropriate1:08 pm 22 May 12

GPs might be a little hesitant after Fluvax was causing fever in kids. As such, Fluvax is not authorized for kids under 5, and the TGA cautions against its use in 5-9 yr olds.

Currently only Influvac, Vaxigrip, Agrippal and Fluarix are approved for kids from 6 months old.

I’d try calling pharmacies and see if they know which GPs are handing them scripts for the aforementioned vaccines for infants.

Sorry for another follow-up, but I’ve figured out why it’s so hard to find a flu vaccine for a child. That’s because for some ridiculous reason, the Australian government decided to use Fluvax for their flu vaccinations, despite the fact that it’s banned for children under 5. (It caused brain damage and other problems in children a few years ago.) Fluvax also has worse side effects for adults.

So if the doctors are only stocking Fluvax, that is why no one will provide a flu vaccination for my 4 year old. Absolutely crazy!

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/health/flu-shots-with-side-effects-on-offer-again/story-fn59nokw-1226272233348

Katietonia, I’m not sure how to interpret your response. The Australian medical establishment supports young children being vaccinated for the flu. “Current Australian immunisation guidelines recommend annual influenza vaccination for anyone who wishes to protect themselves against influenza, which includes children aged six months and older.” From http://health.act.gov.au/alerts/influenza-in-the-act/flu-vaccinations/seasonal-flu-vaccination-in-children-aged-less-than-5-years

So the odd thing is that they recommend it but it’s hard to find anyone who will offer it.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.