Let's talk stupidity: Canadians up in arms because NHL team gets H1N1 vaccinated

[notyoueither]

Was this an article, or a blurb in comments?

[Asher]

Article:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/h1n1-swine-flu/the-daily-h1n1-question/article1349446/

Q: There are six priority groups for vaccination, including people under 65 with chronic medical conditions. My wife and I are both over 65; she suffers from COPD and requires oxygen. She gets the flu shot every year because she is considered high-risk. Can you tell my why she is being sent to the back of the line this time? This seems, at best, arbitrary and bureaucratic and, at worst, flagrant discrimination against seniors.

A: In regular flu seasons, seniors (particularly those with lung diseases like COPD) are the high-risk group. However, there is strong evidence that older people (meaning over 50) have full or partial immunity to swine flu. That is because, between 1918 and 1957, H1N1 viruses circulated commonly so most people developed antibodies that seem to protect them against the current strain of H1N1. In other words, seniors are well down the priority list because they stand to get a lot less benefit from the shot than younger people. It should be noted though that some physicians and public health officials believe that all people with respiratory conditions like COPD and asthma should be vaccinated in priority fashion, regardless of age. This is an area of some controversy. While seniors have a lower risk of contracting H1N1, if they do get infected, disease can be very severe. In fact, despite all the attention paid to the deaths of young people, the over-65 group has the highest mortality rate from H1N1 and virtually all seniors who died had underlying health conditions. Finally, don't forget that, even if they are being told to wait for the H1N1 vaccine, it is recommended that seniors get the seasonal flu vaccine.

[notyoueither]

Meh. Ice floes with 'em. They stopped being good berry gatherers and deer hunters some time ago.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Dude. These are hockey players in CANADA. Of course they move to the head of the line.

[notyoueither]

Not this time, Imran.

Only one of the six NHL teams in Canada went around the que to get their players shots.

There are a lot of pissed off people, even in Calgary, today. Some of them waited in line with young children and were turned away due to the shortage of the vaccine.

This is a PR nightmare for the Flames.

[SlowwHand]

What's H1N1? That thing that was no worries, you fool?

[Guynemer]

I never said it would be "no worries." I said that, by and large, it is no worse (and in most cases, altogether milder) than the regular seasonal flu. And so far, I'm right. So suck it, Tex.

[loinburger]

The real tragedy here are those ****ty article titles. "Get it? Flames taking the heat? Harrrrrrrrr"

[rah]

I'll side with those that say due to the amount of travel they do, they should be given priority. Pro athletes have the higher potential to spread it so helping then not get it should be a priority.

[SpencerH]

Seniors have a built in resistance due to exposure to something similar before we were born, or something like that that I read.

Anyone with underlying health conditions is regarded as at risk (lung diseases, lower immunities, and such I would imagine).

There was a swine flu epidemic in 1957 so one possible explanation why the morbidity for seniors is less than expected is due to the some protective effect of immune 'memory'. Although I havent looked for any data on this subject, based on my experience I doubt that this has been actually tested. So at this point it remains an untested hypothesis. Personally, I think it may be a dangerously false assumption that may result in some seniors either not wanting to be vaccinated or not being vaccinated by their physicians.

Yesterday was the first report I've seen as to the symptomology of those unfortunates who die. Based on that (sparse) information I doubt that immune 'memory' to an antigen encountered 50 years ago explains the 'senior effect'.

[Asher]

Not this time, Imran.

Only one of the six NHL teams in Canada went around the que to get their players shots.

Qualifier: The only good NHL team in Canada got their players shots.

Some of them waited in line with young children and were turned away due to the shortage of the vaccine.

While that's nice and drama-filled, that's not what happened. People were turned away because the queues were too big. Subsequent clinics were cancelled for a week while the province got their **** together in lieu of an UPCOMING shortage of the vaccine (this week), and only AFTER the Flames got their shots did they make it a "high-risk group only" thing like Ontario did from day one.

[Asher]

"Hockey players are not at high risk for swine flu," NDP Leader Brian Mason said in question period. "Some pregnant women and young children now face a greater risk of very serious disease or even death because millionaire hockey players got a vaccine they did not urgently need."

Holy ****, the rhetoric here is off the charts.

[Asher]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/Braid+else+carpet+treatment/2182329/story.html

Can the flu shot flip flops get any more absurd? Apparently so.

Last week the government was encouraging everybody to get vaccinated and bragging about the numbers.

This week the Alberta Health Services board is "investigating" itself for the crime of vaccinating the Calgary Flames.

The Tories' glee in switching focus to an external target was evident Tuesday in Premier Ed Stelmach's declaration:

"Alberta Health Services is investigating. I can't speculate on what happened, but we will have a full report very shortly. If it happened, it shouldn't have."

It happened. The Flames had flu shots last Friday, before clinics closed, and being vaccinated changed from public service to civic outrage.

Stelmach himself set the tone when he said last Wednesday: "We're the province that is offering flu vaccines for every Albertan, not just to the high-risk groups."

So the Flames, like nearly everyone else, thought it was fine to be vaccinated.

Their blunder was to have this done in a quiet clinic that was not open to the public for flu shots.

The Flames would have been heroes instead of goats if they'd waited in a public line and signed autographs for the kids.

But the organization was worried about mob scenes. Some of these guys can draw a crowd in a grocery store.

So they went the clinic route, stepping out of the long public queues and into the annals of public relations blunders.

Flames CEO Ken King acknowledges the mistake, but adds that the Flames never would have been vaccinated if they believed one child or pregnant woman was being deprived of a flu shot.

"No, absolutely not," he says. "We would not do that, ever.

"And I have to add that the players didn't ask to be vaccinated. They were following instruction. Our players have zero culpability."

Who's really to blame for this --the team or the government health system?

The Flames could not have done anything without the full and welcoming agreement of Alberta Health Services.

The board controls each dose of vaccine and where it's administered. Not one shot can be released without approval.

Health Services evidently told the Flames that it was perfectly acceptable to be vaccinated, and to get it done at the quiet clinic.

There's already talk that somebody in Health Services has been suspended for that call.

Communications VP Roman Cooney says acknowledges "a serious error in judgment."

But the whole thing makes you wonder; if they'll so readily usher one elite group to the head of the line, who else is getting the red carpet treatment?

The Flames have stepped in a big one, no doubt about it. The image of rich players getting preference could hurt for a long time.

But the cause of this latest mess is Stelmach's problem, not a hockey team's. There's rarely been more vivid proof of the health system's casual disdain for customer relations and the public's intelligence.

On Tuesday, as the new vaccine program was announced, top health doctors said it's ethical and "a no-brainer" to start with women and children.

Just last week, though, it was fine and even ethical for women and children to wait behind thousands in long lines.

The Flames were at least decent enough to reveal a stupid error and apologize. It's a rare thing these days.

[snoopy369]

There was a swine flu epidemic in 1957 so one possible explanation why the morbidity for seniors is less than expected is due to the some protective effect of immune 'memory'. Although I havent looked for any data on this subject, based on my experience I doubt that this has been actually tested. So at this point it remains an untested hypothesis. Personally, I think it may be a dangerously false assumption that may result in some seniors either not wanting to be vaccinated or not being vaccinated by their physicians.

Yesterday was the first report I've seen as to the symptomology of those unfortunates who die. Based on that (sparse) information I doubt that immune 'memory' to an antigen encountered 50 years ago explains the 'senior effect'.

From NYE's post, senior mortality is actually the highest of all age groups, though that's due to complications. IANAD, but based on my fairly thorough understanding of immunology, there's no reason to expect that remaining memory cells from 1957 wouldn't protect them against the H1N1; the response to the classic influenza virus is primarily T-cell mediated, and that's are where effector memory cells are the most useful. The most dangerous response to influenza would be the native immune response, particularly in the respiratory tract; allowing your (particularly) CD4 T-cell response to grow quickly is probably the most effective (and safe!) way to deal with it.

That said, who knows if that level of protection is adequate to counter the fact that seniors are otherwise much more at risk. I wonder if to some extent the issue is a matter of epidemiology; seniors who don't travel frequently and don't work [most seniors] are less likely to help spread the disease, so it's better to push them down the list.

And there might even be a little bit of 'anti-senior bias' here; if it's likely to kill 15-25 year olds as well as 65 year olds, and you have to pick which one is protected... wouldn't even most seniors say the 15-25 year old (in a one-to-one choice)?

[Flubber]

ok

This is an understandable reaction from some folks given that people were slamming any person not in a high risk group that got their shot. But as Asher points out, the information from government was to "come get your shot"-- My wife and children did (my wife would get it anyway as she cares for H1N1 patients (her patient was a H1N1 person her last couple of shifts) and one of my children is under 6 so they would qualify anyway)

I didn't get mine because I was busy at work but it was not portrayed as bad or wrong at the time if I had gotten one. Its only NOW with hindsight that people are saying innoculating some folks was wrong.

There are two elements to this

1. They got the vaccine-- On the day they got it, anyone could of they lined up long enough
2. They did not get it at one of the mass clinics and therefore avoided the wait. I admit that doesn't look good but I know that health care workers, natives and prison inmates got the vaccine at places other than the big clinics so it isn't unheard of ( in an ICU, the nurses wee vaccinating each other during their shifts-- no family members though-- vaccine only for the workers)