Reasons for Flu Vaccine Reluctancy - page 2

by Kimberly111-13

11,060 Views | 51 Comments

Hello, Iím a pre-nursing student who has a few questions about influenza vaccination for a class assignment. What are the reasons for reluctancy of receiving the influenza vaccination by nurses and nurse assistants? ... Read More


  1. 0
    Quote from Wingnut09
    It is my understanding that the 1976 vaccine was live virus, but the injection form of the current H1N1 vaccine is not live virus. [However, the H1N1 flumist is live virus, therefore, it is not receommended for those at high risk-such as preexisting conditions, asthma, etc.]

    This H1N1 vaccine is produced in the same way that the seasonal flu vaccine is produced and would have been included in the seasonal flu vaccine had the virus been identified early enough.
    Wingnut,
    Thank you. I remembered that the '77 vaccine was dead virus, but so far I cannot find a credible source for either fact.
    Annual vaccines ideally have two strains, rarely 3 and this H1N1 would likely have been a separate vaccine anyway.
    Actually, they are being made simultaneously and would have been combined if it was possible. Thanks for your response.
  2. 0
    Quote from Wingnut09
    It is my understanding that the 1976 vaccine was live virus, but the injection form of the current H1N1 vaccine is not live virus. [However, the H1N1 flumist is live virus, therefore, it is not receommended for those at high risk-such as preexisting conditions, asthma, etc.]

    This H1N1 vaccine is produced in the same way that the seasonal flu vaccine is produced and would have been included in the seasonal flu vaccine had the virus been identified early enough.
    I found it! In the paper, "The Swine Flu Affair" 1978 by:

    Richard E. Neustadt, Professor of Government
    John F. Kennedy School of Government
    Harvard University
    and
    Harvey V. Fineberg, M.D.
    Assistant Professor of Health Services
    School of Public Health
    Harvard University
    and
    Joseph A. Califano, Jr.,
    Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
    Published by the U.S. Department of
    Health, Education, and Welfare

    .......it was a dead vaccine after all.

    I also found the stat that said the GBS risk was 7 times higher in vaccinated vs unvaccinated.

    But I still can't find any information citing DIFFERRENCES between that 1977 vaccine and the current one.
  3. 0
    The CDC has quite a bit of info about the risks of Guillane Barre from the 1976 vaccine.
  4. 0
    Right Wingnut - So, what is the difference between that vaccine and this one? I'm not able to find the differences! Maybe there is none.
  5. 2
    As I understand it, the difference is in the development of vaccine now vs. 33 years ago-much more extensive attenuation, viruses are different.

    According to the state of NY Dept of Health:

    "The type of H1N1 that existed in the 1970's is not the same as the H1N1 that is currently circulating in the population. The vaccine that was created in the 1970's was made in a different way than the current H1N1 vaccine."
    http://www.health.state.ny.us/diseas...htm#comparison

    If you are concerned, I would contact the CDC. Further, in most cases, vaccination is a choice not mandatory.
    tewdles and indigo girl like this.
  6. 0
    Thank you for that link.

    The GBS incidences are much different than the ones reported by the authoritative sources of the time. And how is it "different?"

    It just didn't answer the questions and raised more. Why are they reporting different statistics?

    I think I will give up on this and decide not to decide. For now, I will not get the vaccine.

    Thank you again.
  7. 2
    Quote from Pfiesty
    Right Wingnut - So, what is the difference between that vaccine and this one? I'm not able to find the differences! Maybe there is none.
    1)The most obvious difference is that each vaccine was targeting a completely different
    virus.

    2)The 1976 swine virus died out, never to reappear.

    3)The 1976 virus never caused even an epidemic much less a pandemic. What happened at Ft. Dix is best described as an outbreak of a novel virus. Over 30 years later, we have another novel virus but it is not the same virus. This one has gone on to cause a pandemic targeting otherwise healthy pregnant women, kids, teens, and young adults as well as people with prior exisiting conditions.

    4)The 2009 novel virus has spread more rapidly than any other pandemic in history.
    tewdles and Wingnut09 like this.
  8. 1
    This is a 2006 article from Emerging Infectious Diseases. Not sure if it answers any of your questions Pfiesty, but it is interesting.

    http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Reflec...am-a0141048444
    indigo girl likes this.
  9. 0
    " 3)The 1976 virus never caused even an epidemic much less a pandemic. What happened at Ft. Dix is best described as an outbreak of a novel virus. Over 30 years later, we have another novel virus but it is not the same virus. This one has gone on to cause a pandemic targeting otherwise healthy pregnant women, kids, teens, and young adults as well as people with prior exisiting conditions. "

    Indigo girl, I agree that the main issue is that this is an actually pandemic and that the individuals getting vaccinated must consider the real risk of illness vs. the vaccine risks. All vaccines have some inherent risk, but the H1N1 vaccine thus far, both here and in the southern hemisphere, have minimal S/E.

    But again, this is a personal choice.
  10. 0
    Quote from Wingnut09
    This is a 2006 article from Emerging Infectious Diseases. Not sure if it answers any of your questions Pfiesty, but it is interesting.

    http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Reflec...am-a0141048444
    Thank you Wingnut. Yes, I read that one in my research. I read the book, The Swine Flu Affair from the Harvard School of Public Health. So, my concerns are great.

    And there is still a lack of information now in 2009 about how this vaccine is similar or different from the last one.


Top