NHS workers – are you having the swine flu vaccine?

a complete Hollywood style nightmare.

That sounds a little far-fetched, crikey.
It just isn't proving to be that lethal.
so far it doesn't really seem to be any more lethal than 'standard' flu.

Granted if it mutated and suddenly became hyper-lethal then we'd be pretty much screwed. But that goes for any easily spread virus in the population.

It's less about the overall lethality, more about the impact that even a small number of extra cases that require Intensive Care will have.

Consider too that it seems to affect pregnant women severely; nurses are still largely women of child bearing age, and the impact there could be a problem.

Add in the usual rise in respiratory illness seen at this time of year, and suddenly you have a situation where you have a number of extra people requiring intensive care, no beds to put them in, and a threat to the work force required to look after them.

Your right the extra work load is going to be a problem but far from a Hollywood nightmare. HDUs tend to run on a few spare beds do they not so often fill up quickly and as you say this time of you they get buisier with silver heads suffering from seasonal flu. Interesting enough I have a friend who works in an respiratory ward in a hospital specilising in resperatory medcine, last time I seen him he had not seen a single patient with suspected swine flu. His regular patients being very likely the ones to catch it.

It's less about the overall lethality,

Agreed, but that's not what you implied when you said "While you are having this lovely informed debate about the pros and cons, people are actually dying of H1N1 infections. "

People are dying of it.

..and no, actually, HDUs and ITUs don't run on a few spare beds; they are usually full, and therein lies the problem.

H1N1 cases that need critical care need to be accomodated, taking whatever spare capacity may be available.

For example, earlier this week in the North West region, there was one ITU bed available when I phoned.

I'm not scare-mongering, just saying that the line between coping and not coping is a thin one.

…and 'silver heads'? Three of our swine flu cases have been in their 20s…

hagi

I stand by it as the information is there but I wouldn't expect a receptionist or a junior nurse to be able to fully understand and interpret it.

Sorry, I maybe be a humble receptionist but i must be lower than even your expectations as i am missing something from the link you provided? it merely is the authorisation for the medication and shows the conditions of its such and provision. It highlights a clinical trial that ran for one month upto the 15th of October, and highlights further plans for follow up work but it doesn't discuss the trial results, it doesn't provide any information from which to make a useful conclusion. It is basically the application for the drug to gain status as a useable med.

I agree with you completely about the lack of education and information, however i am just unable to share your strong stance when i have yet to see such information that would allow people to make an informed decision.

..and no, actually, HDUs and ITUs don't run on a few spare beds; they are usually full, and therein lies the problem.

I was wanting to say they're usually full but thought I may cause an argument, seems you would have just said yes.

Sorry, I maybe be a humble receptionist but i must be lower than even your expectations as i am missing something from the link you provided?

Sorry it wasn't meant to be the answers to everything, but rather a starting point, but it kind of illustrates my point anyway.

it merely is the authorisation for the medication and shows the conditions of its such and provision

To you maybe, but to me:
1. It tells me that they've gone for EMEA regulation rather than the less strict MHRA approval
2. Its basis is the H5N1 vaccine trialled in 2007, using the same building blocks just with a different viral protein composition – I can't find any evidence of that causing any serious complications
3. It tells me what the adjuvant is in case you are concerned about that (you do know what an adjuvant is don't you?) – in this case squalane (implicated in gulf war syndrome prompting a number of studies all of which conclusively proved no link to any known health issues)
4. They have scheduled a load more follow up tests to ensure that their product isn't harming people

Again, all of this is possibly not relevant as I doubt most people would take the time and effort to read it.

The fact is people who are experts in their field have certified this vaccine. I've yet to hear a credible reason for frontline workers to not take it (assuming they don't suffer allergies etc). Its their choice, but I'd hope they had a justifiable reason as it could cost lives.

Again, all of this is possibly not relevant as I doubt most people would take the time and effort to read it.

The fact is people who are experts in their field have certified this vaccine. I've yet to hear a credible reason for frontline workers to not take it (assuming they don't suffer allergies etc). Its their choice, but I'd hope they had a justifiable reason as it could cost lives.

So where is this information in a handy location that is easy to disseminate?

To you maybe, but to me:
1. It tells me that they've gone for EMEA regulation rather than the less strict MHRA approval

But the point is it a rushed process, it is not the standard long trialed process that is normally used. I know the circumstances do not allow such long testing but that does not mean that just because it is the most stringent available that it is suitable.

2. Its basis is the H5N1 vaccine trialled in 2007, using the same building blocks just with a different viral protein composition – I can't find any evidence of that causing any serious complications

Ok, was this vaccine given en mass?

3. It tells me what the adjuvant is in case you are concerned about that (you do know what an adjuvant is don't you?) – in this case squalane (implicated in gulf war syndrome prompting a number of studies all of which conclusively proved no link to any known health issues)

Theres a lot of debate about that but i fear it is more the people still discussing 9/11 causes that are talking of that…

4. They have scheduled a load more follow up tests to ensure that their product isn't harming people

Thats the point! What if in the next test result they realise that it is harming people and that there is a delay before the symptoms show?? My concern is that there isn't any evidence that one month is a justified test length. Given if it wasn't a pandemic and a new medication was to be introduced the pathway is years upon years, how come a pandemic can slash this time? are corners being cut? Now call me cynical but i have heard rumors that the government do sometimes do deals with companies… and that some contracts are not dealt fairly… Now i haven't read any tabloid hysteria on this, i have just experience to cause me to question. I still see no source of answers! People will have it as its the right thing to do. I am not qualified enough (as you have previously assumed) to make the decision myself and i don't believe the information that is coming in such dribs and drabs from a very unorganised direction and so look to more learned colleagues who also are unsure.

My concern is that there isn't any evidence that one month is a justified test length. Given if it wasn't a pandemic and a new medication was to be introduced the pathway is years upon years, how come a pandemic can slash this time? are corners being cut?

Its a valid question:
1. The manufacturing process of the vaccine is tried and tested
2. It is identical to the H5N1 vaccine except for viral load – while I can't comment on how many people have actually been vaccinated with it, it began clinical trials in April 2005
3. Pandemrix (the H5N1 version) was signed off by the EMEA in 2008 having undergone the standard approval process.

thank you. strange that they put this information so easy at hand….

timdrayton – Member

TJ – you are still yet to provide any reason or proof to not have the vaccine? the fact that you are not likely to meet my wife, aside from this in itself being at least some comfort to her, does not stop you passing it on to people around you and doesnt add to herd immunity does it?

and its a bit selfish really?

Don't you think its a bit paranoid and selfish that you seem to think you have the right to compulsorily medicate me?

its not for me to justify not having it. Its for you to find some justification for your paranoid and hysterical point of view.

I am no more at risk than the general public. Why should I take this medication for something I am unlikely to come into contact with? There is absolutely no advantage to the community at large to me taking it – many other folk would be better in the queue for inoculation.

Your failure to grasp the realities of the situation and your descent into childish name calling show how impoverished your argument is.

Been watching this thread for a while.

If mental health nurses were american ww2 bombers, I would have about 500 syringes stencilled down one side of me, and 500 packs of steri-strips down the other. And probably a little dog with a neckerchief as a mascot or something.

Yet, still I found that the biggest factor in my decision to have it (and yes I will for the first time have a 'non-compulsory' vaccine from work) is that I am really rather scared of having receiving injections…. 😳 😳 😥

Good point dr_Adams But Just look what the first rush jab of swine flue
done to more than some of the American people.

And to be honest we dont have a good track record at the moment
regarding vaccine and taking resposibility for the faliure.
Just look at the classic example of the Jab they gave to our own Army!
And not forgeting the kids vaccine.

This could be YOU!!!

But Just look what the first rush jab of swine flue
done to more than some of the American people.

?? Why what happened in the US?

Just look at the classic example of the Jab they gave to our own Army!

what jab?

And not forgeting the kids vaccine.

Wait, you mean you can be vaccinated against kids? Why did no one tell me? 😀

Seriously, what kids vaccine am I not forgetting?

This could be YOU!!!

Dunno if there's supposed to be a picture there or not, but if there is then it hasn't worked.

I'm confused! 😕

TandemJeremy

Your failure to grasp the realities of the situation and your descent into childish name calling show how impoverished your argument is.

I do have to admit that at times when replying to Hagi i did have to delete and re-write my reply as i did feel some personal comments but i suppose i put that down to feeling so involved and strongly about this issue…

TJ you do love an argument dont you?

Don't you think its a bit paranoid and selfish that you seem to think you have the right to compulsorily medicate me?

its not for me to justify not having it. Its for you to find some justification for your paranoid and hysterical point of view.

Paranoid? Hysterical? Please point out where my posting has become paranoid or hysterical, and I will apologise.

Show me where my posts have been factually incorrect or unjustified?

I am not saying we should all stock up with food and build fall out shelters.

I merely point out my particular situation, (well my wifes situation) which is that her prognosis should she get swine flu, would be dire.

This is not my own "paranoid" opinion, that is the opinion of her Immunologist, who is described as the leading immunologist in the UK.

wife + swine flu = bad things happen

so i believe she has the right to expect that the people treating her are following the best practise advice.

I have already said that (in my opinion!!) FRONTLINE NHS staff should be forced to have it, you arent frontline, so I am not advocating taking away your rights.

As someone (who is frontline) has already mentioned, there is precedent for this with enforced Rubella innocolation.

So which is more paranoid, following CDC and NHS advice based on fact and lots of very qualified people, or deciding to go against that advice on the basis of …………….. er nothing so far, other than a general bad feeling……

I am no more at risk than the general public. Why should I take this medication for something I am unlikely to come into contact with? There is absolutely no advantage to the community at large to me taking it – many other folk would be better in the queue for inoculation.

I was saying that the general public should have the Vaccine too, not be forced to as they dont come into contact with at risk groups.

There is obviously no benefit to just you having it (unless a side effect is found to be a reduction in typing ability), but there are obvious benefits to everyone having it?

Reduced mortality being the headline benefit if i remember rightly?

Of course you cant force the general public to have it, but the benefits of mass vaccinations far outweigh the negatives.

I am basing the above statement, on the advice of the CDC, and of the NHS.

What are you basing your argument upon?

What is your argument, anyway? No one has said you must have it, only that you would have to be stupid or know something we dont, not to?

Your failure to grasp the realities of the situation and your descent into childish name calling show how impoverished your argument is.

Name calling, when? where?

Tim – you called me selfish as in the quote from you above. You also say I must be stupid not to want to have it.

There are no compulsory vaccinations in the NHS. All vaccines including this one carry risk. Why should people be forced to have medications with their risks?

What is your possible justification for forcing people to have it? Thats the case you have not made. Yes there is advice that front line NHS staff should have hit – that falls a long way short of your position that all front line staff must be forced to have it or lose their jobs.

Your wife is immunocompromised. However she is far more at risk from other infections than this rare and not serious variant on flu.

The scale and severity of the outbreak of swine flu in no way validates your reaction to it – thats why I call you hysterical and paranoid.

What you have failed to grasp is the right to self determination. To override this should and does require a much more serious risk than swine flu. Now if it where drug resistant TB or bubonic plague?

i didnt realise commenting that your stance on this was selfish, or that your suggested action was stupid constituted name calling? but hey ho

we appear to be on a never ending merry go round which is becoming slightly tedious, so i'll try to make this the last post………….

It is very hard to resist responding just once more though:

All vaccines including this one carry risk.

FFS as has been clearly demonstrated, there are no proven side effects specific to the H1n1 vaccine, I never said there want risk, only that the risk from Swine flu far outweighs that of the vaccine?

Swine flu deaths to date =?

Influenza (of any sort) Vaccine caused deaths =?

What is your possible justification for forcing people to have it? Thats the case you have not made. Yes there is advice that front line NHS staff should have hit – that falls a long way short of your position that all front line staff must be forced to have it or lose their jobs.

because the pros so far outweigh the cons, (i wont repeat them) that forcing people to have it is better than the effects of some misplaced groundless fear.

Frankly I cannot believe people are thinking of not having it, this is what frustrates me?

Your wife is immunocompromised. However she is far more at risk from other infections than this rare and not serious variant on flu.

please dont lecture me on my wifes condition, I assure you i am better informed.

To a point we can minimise risk from other infections in the home, as can health care professionals, the whole point of my argument is that in my opinion refusing the vaccine is adding unnecessary risk of airborne infection when she goes to the hospital.

It is potentially serious for her, as she has no immune response to Pneumonia bugs, she has minimal response to other types of infection.

Who are you to comment on the potential danger to her?

The scale and severity of the outbreak of swine flu in no way validates your reaction to it – thats why I call you hysterical and paranoid.

My reaction? I beg to differ, surely it is pure logic?

CDC and NHS suggest that vaccination will save lives and is safe, they single out an area of staff (frontline workers) with increased potential impact, and offer them a currently scarce and potentially life saving vaccination.

Without evidence these people refuse it, potentially endangering lives?

yes I would sack them, and employ people more well adjusted to care for others.

The scale and severity of the outbreak: its not dropping em in the streets, but i'll stick with the advice of the CDC and NHS thanks.

My reaction may sound panicky to you but Lauras consultant has voiced real concern over this issue, so whilst it is not a particular danger to you or indeed other healthy people, it is to her.

The "forcing people to have it" issue was really secondary to the "why wouldnt they want it" question?

you have seized on that point like a little angry nhs terrier, drop it and satisfactorily explain why a sane person wouldnt want the vaccine, which i think 4 pages ago was the original question.

You simply do not grasp the point.

My reaction? I beg to differ, surely it is pure logic?

With little objective evidence that vaccination of all healthcare workers will make any difference?

You are over reacting to this threat because of your circumstances. Swine flu is not a major serious epidemic

I did not lecture you on your wifes condition. It is a simple fact tho that there are more serious and more easily caught healthcare acquired infections and other infections out there. Is your wife particularly susceptible to flu viruses?

What yuo fail to understand is the limited usefulness of these immunisations and the small odds of infection. I simply see it as an expensive waste of time to inoculate people who are not high risk when there is no benefit from doing so.

You really need to calm down and have a real objective look at this. Many healthcare professionals have real doubts about the wisdom and effectiveness of this inoculation campaign.

….they single out an area of staff (frontline workers)…

I think TJ's about as far from frontline as you can be and still claim to be a healthcare worker 😆

…expensive waste of time to inoculate people who are not high risk when there is no benefit from doing so.

Arguably, given that the low R0 number of H1N1 has already been mention, then a potential benefit would be a first step towards Herd Immunity. Though we'd need to get a lot more vaccine out to the general public too.

because the pros so far outweigh the cons, (i wont repeat them) that forcing people to have it is better than the effects of some misplaced groundless fear.

You really think so? My right to self determination means so little to you? The evidence that inoculating healthcare workers will make a difference to infection rates is far from strong

Without evidence these people refuse it, potentially endangering lives?

yes I would sack them, and employ people more well adjusted to care for others.

How offensive is that. You – an amateur should have the right to decide that people should be given medication under threat of losing their jobs?

Nobody in the Dept of Health thinks that – they are not even pushing the vaccine that hard FFS.

why did i click refresh? why? why?

because I am caught in tandemjeremys evil web of argumentivity (is that a word?)

I am perfectly calm by the way 🙂 see i have a smily face!

oh well its better than watching paul o grady….

TJ please forget about the forced vaccination thing, its ok, calm down, I really think you are getting far too wound up about this particular point…

What yuo fail to understand is the limited usefulness of these immunisations and the small odds of infection. I simply see it as an expensive waste of time to inoculate people who are not high risk when there is no benefit from doing so.

Then for gods sake educate me? Please elaborate what you know that the CDC doesnt?

Benefits as already mentioned so, very many times

herd immunity as mentioned above, (and by others including me on page 1 or 2)

protection from infection/ possible complication

minimising potential impact from absences from work on the NHS and other industry….

Negatives

potential for mild sniffles

mild localised egg intolerance

anything else?

I am sorry – I simply don't know how to explain it better.

Vaccination of healthcare workers is being done with little evidence that it will do any good, the vaccines are not anywhere close to !00% effective, for me at least they are very unpleasant to have ( a couple of days of fever resulting in time off work), the benefits of vaccinating all healthcare staff is marginal an unproven at best, I am not at increased risk of being a vector for transmission or of side effects – the checkout staff in sainsburys are more likely vectors for example – want to compulsorily vaccinate them?

This is not evidence led medicine – its tabloid led.

TJ: out of interest, how do you feel about vaccines in general?

For instance, the measles vaccine isn't 100% effective either (few vaccines are) and it can have unpleasant side effects too (as can most vaccines). Have you had that?

Just trying to figure if you're generally against mass vaccination or just H1N1?

This is not evidence led medicine – its tabloid led.

Aren't the tabloids the ones hinting that the vaccine isn't safe?

Graham – not a huge fan of vaccinations in general – they have their place but I do feel we over vaccinate our population. Its a whole 'nother question tho. I am vaccinated for some stuff but not others. Some I have natural immunity so don't need vaccination. Some I am prepared to accept the risks. My decision based on evidence.

The media have made more of the swine flu epidemic than the risks really are and the government are reacting ( to some extent) to teh percieved risk rather than the actual ones

Some I am prepared to accept the risks

But you also understand that many vaccines require a certain take up rate within the population to be effective. So that by refusing some vaccines and "accepting the risks" you are potentially making that decision for all of us?

Doesn't that rather turn your "right to self determination" argument on its head? 🙂

(a hypothetical Devil's Advocate point to think about, rather than a deadly serious assertion BTW. I do agree that you have the right to choose what goes into your body)

A greater good for the greater number argument – makes for an interesting philosophical debate.

I am not sure that I am missing any vaccinations where this would be an issue – Measles and Mumps I have natural immunity having caught them as a kid, Rubbella I am vaccinated for. ( Interestingly only offered as children to females of my generation. TB vaccinated for.

Not enough people are being vaccinated with eh swine flu vaccine to get herd immunity From what I know

God TJ, can't believe your nonsense spouting has suckered me in again 😉

Vaccination of healthcare workers is being done with little evidence that it will do any good, the vaccines are not anywhere close to !00% effective

If you actually look, you'll see from the clinical trials that the seroprotection rate after 2 doses is pretty close to 100% – which is irrelevant because if enough people get the vaccine it doesn't need to be.

I'm sure you know better than the CDC and people who have made their careers studying epidemiology so I'll not point out the fact that most of what you say sounds 'Tabloid led' rather than 'evidence led'.

During the last flu panic (H5N1) the DOH did the same thing and ordered massive stocks of vaccine to be produced – they didn't start a mass vaccination program that time though did they? So maybe they looked at the evidence being produced by the WHO and looked at what every other country in the world is doing as well?

Not enough people are being vaccinated with eh swine flu vaccine to get herd immunity From what I know

Its easy to make a vaccine (the principles are very basic and well understood), however, its not so easy to make enough of it! The recommended approach is start with at-risk groups, then those most in contact with at-risk groups, then get to the rest once you've got enough to go around.

But I'm sure you knew all this and you're not just trolling are you 😉

Graham S
when they had given the swine Flu jab a few years back in America
One person became disabled in around Six hours, some people had serious
side effects and some woman that was pregnant had deformed babys
This was on a Panorama program, early this year just after they had
came up with this vaccine

Regarding the jab they gave our Army is the one in the Gulf war
and the Americans gave to there Army but the Americans gave them
compensation where we have not in any way owned up to it.

Regarding the Jab for children I was refering to the MMR Jab.
Again complications and again will not take the blame

So will not become a Mass Guinea pig on this one.

Again complications and again will not take the blame

If you mean Autism then your behind a bit as it was proven there was no link and the initial report had altered figures.

I'm now curious about Hagi he has only posted in here and has never revealed his profession or interest in this?

Tim – your concerns for your wife are justified but to suggest any front line staff refusing to be sacked is way over the top and chances are illegal.

when they had given the swine Flu jab a few years back in America
One person became disabled in around Six hours, some people had serious
side effects and some woman that was pregnant had deformed babys

What swine flu jab were they giving in the US "a few years back" given that the current pandemic was only identified in Mexico in April this year?

Are you talking about the 1976 outbreak, where 48,161,019 Americans were immunised and 25 people were killed as a result of Guillain-Barré Syndrome? (which is a known, 0.7 in a million side effect of vaccination).

Regarding the jab they gave our Army is the one in the Gulf war
and the Americans gave to there Army but the Americans gave them
compensation where we have not in any way owned up to it.

The cause of Guld War Syndrome is currently unknown. There are several possible factors including simultaneous exposure to nerve gas inhibitors, pesticides, oil well fires, chemical weapons, depleted uranium and possibly some components of the anthrax vaccine (though several studies have concluded there is no link).

Regarding the Jab for children I was refering to the MMR Jab.
Again complications and again will not take the blame

Really? What complications? Where?

There was a possible link with Autism suggested in the conclusions of one study of 12 children, the lead author of which not only received £55,000 from lawyers trying to sue vaccine makers, but also held a patent on a rival vaccine and currently faces 11 charges of professional misconduct by the GMC.

10 of the original 12 authors have retracted this conclusion after it was discovered that the figures were altered and many, many subsequent studies of far larger sample groups of vaccinated children have found absolutely no link with autism.

Graham S LOL Percentages typical of a goverment T-wat!

These are Peoples Lives and of loved ones and family members
If this Vaccine is safe or any other vaccine/drug come to that.
Then there should be no more than a mild head ache or of similar.
Not say several deaths or any deaths nore deffects or
deformed or anything else comes to that.
So if you think your Death rate is only a statistic and very happy
with that!
Then I really do hope that you or a member of your family
fall down and die from it and see you defend and stand by your waste full
percentage of Human Life.

The cause of the Gulf Syndrome IS known and thats why the American
goverment paid up has there troops was in the same place and exposed with the same atmosphere and given the same drug. Funny that!

Again you talk about percentages as just numbers
These little percentages are Human beings so your talking Crap
A Death is not a side effect, A deformed or disfigured person
or persons is not a side effect.
This is clearly the markings of a failed vaccine/drug.

If these failed dugs/vaccines are side effects why did these
companys pay out.

Graham S LOL Percentages typical of a goverment T-wat!

I have nothing to do with the government.

If this Vaccine is safe or any other vaccine/drug come to that.
Then there should be no more than a mild head ache or of similar.
Not say several deaths or any deaths nore deffects or
deformed or anything else comes to that.

Fair enough, but if you want to only use drugs that are 100% safe and have no known side-effects worse than a headache then I'm afraid you will have to reject practically all known medicine. Even paracetamol kills people.

In the less black-and-white world of reality, it comes down to a balance of risks. So a 0.7 in a million risk of death might be considered reasonable if it prevents an infection that kills 1 in 100. That's just the nature of medicine. Sorry if that offends you.

I really do hope that you or a member of your family
fall down and die from it and see you defend and stand by your waste full
percentage of Human Life.

Well that's not very nice now is it? 😐

The cause of the Gulf Syndrome IS known

It is? Oh that's great news. What did they decide it was in the end?
Or do you just mean the US congressional panel report that reckoned it was probably a combination of anti-nerve gas agents and pesticides, but wanted a fund of 60 million dollars annually to continue research?

Like Drac I can get the vaccine in approximately 10 days time.

However, as I have been in close contact (thanks NHS Direct :evil:) with at least 20 people probably suffering from flu/swine flu over the past couple of months, isn't it a case of shutting the gate after the horse has bolted ?

The biggest joke was that an A+E Department, in a hospital which shall remain nameless, was sending suspected swine-flu suffers out of the waiting room in A+E to stand in the corridor and wait for a taxi or lift home. The corridor just happened to be the main route into the hospital for patients arriving by ambulance and they were standing directly outside 'resus'. Genius 😯

Same here Woody introduced to now at least half a dozen times, most recent being just last night. So far not had caught it but going to have the vaccine anyway.

Grantway is now classed as the most pathetic person on this forum and should really be ashamed at his comment towards GrahamS.

How Drac Now hes been totaled has one of hes calculated ALL OK
Percentages he goes all human.

Congratulations on bringing up MMR, it was only a matter of time…

And back to the OP
I kind of thought that the vaccine for healthcare workers as potential vectors was only a part of the story, the other side of it is to reduce possible sickness absence should H1N1 cause an influx of inpatients during the usual winter pressures period.

Thanks Drac.

How Drac Now hes been totaled has one of hes calculated ALL OK
Percentages he goes all human.

I keep re-reading this sentence, but I've got no idea what it means?

As I said, I'm sorry if looking at the numbers behind the relative risks upsets you.

No one is claiming that a person dying from an adverse reaction to some drug is anything short of a terrible tragedy for those involved.

But you do have to have a little bit of cold perspective and decide if the benefits outweigh the risks (which is one of the central themes of this thread).

Don't forget that an "adverse reaction" to peanuts kills around 10 people every year in the UK, but we don't generally consider them to be unsafe.