Reply With Quote
I don't know. I think I draw the like when one of my favorite animals gets it:
Ferret gets swine flu from its owner, a first
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5404829.shtml
CBS News Exclusive: Study Of State Results Finds H1N1 Not As Prevalent As Feared
By Sharyl Attkisson
- Font size
- Share
- 34 Comments
Play CBS Video Video CDC Quiet On Swine Flu Stats After repeated attempts made by CBS News asking the CDC to provide state-by-state data of swine flu testing before they halted individual testing and tracking, Dr. Thomas Frieden, CDC Director was asked directly at a recent news conference.
Previous slide Next slide
Photo (iStockphoto)
Photo (iStockphoto)
- 0
- 1
Interactive Swine Flu's Impact The latest numbers, photos and information to keep you safe.
(CBS) If you've been diagnosed "probable" or "presumed" 2009 H1N1 or "swine flu" in recent months, you may be surprised to know this: odds are you didn’t have H1N1 flu.
In fact, you probably didn’t have flu at all. That's according to state-by-state test results obtained in a three-month-long CBS News investigation.
The ramifications of this finding are important. According to the Center for Disease Control, CDC, and Britain's National Health Service, once you have H1N1 flu, you're immune from future outbreaks of the same virus. Those who think they've had H1N1 flu -- but haven't -- might mistakenly presume they're immune. As a result, they might skip taking a vaccine that could help them, and expose themselves to others with H1N1 flu under the mistaken belief they won't catch it. Parents might not keep sick children home from school, mistakenly believing they've already had H1N1 flu.
Why the uncertainty about who has and who hasn't had H1N1 flu?
CBSNews.com report on H1N1
In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?
Some public health officials privately disagreed with the decision to stop testing and counting, telling CBS News that continued tracking of this new and possibly changing virus was important because H1N1 has a different epidemiology, affects younger people more than seasonal flu and has been shown to have a higher case fatality rate than other flu virus strains.
CBS News learned that the decision to stop counting H1N1 flu cases was made so hastily that states weren't given the opportunity to provide input. Instead, on July 24, the Council for State and Territorial Epidemiologists, CSTE, issued the following notice to state public health officials on behalf of the CDC:
"Attached are the Q&As that will be posted on the CDC website tomorrow explaining why CDC is no longer reporting case counts for novel H1N1. CDC would have liked to have run these by you for input but unfortunately there was not enough time before these needed to be posted (emphasis added)."
On Aug. 4, CBS News asked the CDC for e-mail communications to states and other do ents regarding the guidance and its rationale. When CDC did not provide us with the do ents, such as state-by-state numbers prior to halting testing and tracking, we filed a Freedom of Information request with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). More than two months later, the request has not been fulfilled.
Watch CBS News Videos Online
Video above: A CBS News producer asks the director of the CDC, Dr. Thomas Frieden, for this information at a press conference on Sept. 19.
We asked all 50 states for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico.
(CBS)
It’s unknown what patients who tested negative for flu were actually afflicted with since the illness was not otherwise determined. Health experts say it’s assumed the patients had some sort of cold or upper respiratory infection that is just not influenza.
With most cases diagnosed solely on symptoms and risk factors, the H1N1 flu epidemic may seem worse than it is. For example, on Sept. 22, this alarming headline came from Georgetown University in Washington D.C.: "H1N1 Flu Infects Over 250 Georgetown Students."
H1N1 flu can be deadly and an outbreak of 250 students would be an especially troubling cluster. However, the number of sick students came not from lab-confirmed tests but from "estimates" made by counting "students who went to the Student Health Center with flu symptoms, students who called the H1N1 hotline or the Health Center's doctor-on-call, and students who went to the hospital's emergency room."
Without lab testing, it's impossible to know how many of the students actually had H1N1 flu. But the statistical trend indicates it was likely much fewer than 250.
CDC continues to monitor flu in general and H1N1 through "sentinels," which basically act as spot-checks to detect trends around the nation. But at least one state, California, has found value in tracking H1N1 flu in greater detail.
"What we are doing is much more detailed and expensive than what CDC wants," said Dr. Bela Matyas, California's Acting Chief of Emergency Preparedness and Response. "We're gathering data better to answer how severe is the illness. With CDC's fallback position, there are so many uncertainties with who's being counted, it's hard to know how much we're seeing is due to H1N1 flu rather than a mix of influenza diseases generally. We can tell that apart but they can't."
After our conversation with Dr. Matyas, public affairs officials with the California Department of Public Health emphasized to CBS News that they support CDC policy to stop counting individual cases, maintaining that the state has the resources to gather more specific testing data than the CDC.
Because of the uncertainties, the CDC advises even those who were told they had H1N1 to get vaccinated unless they had lab confirmation. "Persons who are uncertain about how they were diagnosed should get the 2009 H1N1 vaccine."
That's unwelcome news for a Marietta, Georgia mom whose two children were diagnosed with "probable" H1N1 flu over the summer. She hoped that would mean they wouldn't need the hastily developed H1N1 flu vaccine. However, since their cases were never confirmed with lab tests, the CDC advises they get the vaccine. "I wish they had tested and that I knew for sure whether they had it. I'm not anxious to give them an experimental vaccine if they don't need it."
Speaking to CBS' "60 Minutes," CDC Director Dr. Frieden said he has confidence that the vaccine will be safe and effective: "We're confident it will be effective we have every reason to believe that it will be safe."
However, the CDC recommendation for those who had "probable" or "presumed" H1N1 flu to go ahead and get vaccinated anyway means the relatively small proportion of those who actually did have H1N1 flu will be getting the vaccine unnecessarily. This exposes them to rare but significant side effects, such as paralysis from Guillain-Barre syndrome.
It also uses up vaccine, which is said to be in short supply. The CDC was hoping to have shipped 40 million doses by the end of October, but only about 30 million doses will be available this month.
The CDC did not response to questions from CBS News for this report.
I don't know. I think I draw the like when one of my favorite animals gets it:
Ferret gets swine flu from its owner, a first
the today show had their "medical expert" on this morning and she was spewing numbers out like they were tied into some sort of factual evidence and i thought "here we go again" with the media's irresonsibility about such matters. but the media is not alone in this as the CDC seems to be a willing abettor this time.
This hyping up needs to stop. When the real epidemic happens no one is going to listen after 6 years of endless "killer diseases" on the front pages that did nothing.
I agree.
I wonder which of Obama's friends make a profit making the immunization?
not just that..it makes me wonder how the CDC will react when there is actually a real "epidemic" .
of course this is the same CDC that started up the notion of a "gay flu" when the AIDS epidemic first arrived on the scene.
Well, ever since they removed the compe ion from vaccine suppliers, we have had a shortage. Good question, what will happen if we do ever have a real pandemic?
I'm not buying what they are selling.
"They"?
Are you going to backup your claim here, or are you just content with libel?
I've never believed in swine flu.
I'm sure it's regular flu.
The pharmaceutical industry is manipulating us to make more $$$$$$
Yes, the government. Before added regulations and laws. I don't remember all the facts, but for years now, we have had shortages because of the government control.
Hey, don't make this a global warming thread!
LOL... Why not?
Isn't Global Warming over-hyped also?
Excessive demand due to government/media hype might be related to the shortage of this year's vaccine.
BTW, if you ever find occasion to refresh your memory, a link would be much appreciated.
As stated, your post is hearsay.
I believe h1n1 is or will be moderately prevalent. True, most will be fine, but plenty of people are going to die. Getting vaccinated isn't a big deal. People shouldn't be weirdos; there's no secret agenda behind flu shots.
In this case it is easily considered hearsay, but remember, I volunteered that. I do not intentionally mislead, but on a rare exception. If you recall, I PM'd you on a topic that deviated slightly from what I said to see how others would react. I did the same with LnGrrrR recently. My integrity is important to me, so I try to state facts and opinions as such. I do recall some interesting reports on the topic years back when we had our first flue shot shortage. It's not important enough for me to look up. My memory has been known to be wrong at times. I don't know about you, but I'm only human. If you have a better answer, then go for it.
...
Maybe in the future you'll be more understanding of posters who don't bother to back up what they say.
Nah.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/...ne-cover_x.htmWorldwide, about a dozen or so companies make flu vaccine. Only two make flu shots for the United States: Aventis and Chiron. A third, MedImmune, makes FluMist, a nasal-spray vaccine that is licensed only for healthy people ages 5 to 49. About 3 million doses of FluMist will be produced this year
Flu vaccine makers produce only as much as they think they can sell. If they sold out every year, they'd build more plants and make more vaccine. But so far that hasn't happened. Even though more vaccine is produced every year and more people are immunized, fewer than half of those for whom flu shots are recommended get them. Only 36% of health care workers — the first line of defense in an outbreak — are immunized each year.
This year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that 100 million doses of vaccine would be available. In October, when the British government suspended Chiron's license because of contamination at its plant in England, the expected supply was reduced by about 48 million doses.
Aventis Pasteur planned to produce nearly 55 million doses and says it will be able to squeeze out 2.6 million more by mid-January, but that is all it can do. The plant is going full steam, and because flu vaccine is made by growing virus in chicken eggs, it takes about six months to produce each year.
Every year, millions of doses of vaccine are discarded. Last year, flu struck early in many parts of the country, sparking a run on vaccine and causing flu-shot makers to sell out, but MedImmune still wound up tossing about 4 million doses of FluMist, the nasal-spray vaccine.
"On average, we destroy 15% of the vaccine we make every year," says Len Lavenda of Aventis. "We have to make a decision about how much vaccine to produce long before we know how much vaccine will be administered."
One of the biggest customers for flu vaccine is the government's Vaccines for Children program, which negotiates lower prices because of its buying power. This year, about 5 million doses were bought for the program. A shot might cost a doctor $8.50, but the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention pays $6.80 for the same dose.
This is both good and bad, says Mark Pauly, chair of the Health Care Systems Department at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. "They did what we want them to do. They bargained hard and got a discount. But the consequence is that this is a product that manufacturers are not particularly interested in supplying," Pauly says. "It's possible to pay too little for a pharmaceutical product, as well as too much."
Klaus Stohr of the World Health Organization says experts at a recent conference agreed that a single international licensing standard would allow companies to make vaccines for all countries and allow easier importation of vaccines in times of need. The WHO has formed a working group involving the FDA and others to discuss a uniform regulatory approach.
Other options to entice vaccine makers include tax credits for building or enlarging factories, liability protection and government subsidies that would pay a bonus to companies for every flu shot that finds its way to a citizen. That would encourage companies to market vaccines, something they don't now do.
Another suggestion being heard more often is the idea of guaranteeing the purchase of vaccine so companies can make extra doses without having to absorb the cost of what they still have in inventory at the end of the flu season.
Another way to encourage manufacturers to enter the flu vaccine business, experts say, is to provide funding for research and clinical trials to test new vaccines and drugs. One way to judge high-level concern about flu, especially pandemic flu, can be seen in the increase in federal funding. The budget for flu research at the National Ins utes of Health is projected to increase by 200% from 2001 to 2005.
That money will be spent in part on basic research into the flu virus itself, how it mutates and reproduces, and what makes one strain more dangerous than another, says Anthony Fauci, director of the National Ins ute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
