Government wrong giving children - nasal spray flu vaccine?
Nov 3, 2020 12:18:12 GMT
Post by Admin on Nov 3, 2020 12:18:12 GMT
Is the government wrong about giving children the nasal spray flu vaccine?
Luisa Dillner
Sun 5 Oct 2014
Last modified on Mon 21 May 2018
www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/oct/05/government-wrong-nasal-spray-vaccine
I’m a big fan of vaccines and feel anxious questioning any of them. But the BMJ (where I work) has published papers questioning the quality of evidence for the benefits of the influenza vaccine, and whether industry-funded trials have reported “over-optimistic” results.
I ask Tom Jefferson, the lead author of the Cochrane Review on Vaccines for Preventing Influenza in Healthy Children, which looked at findings from 75 studies, if I should give my four-and-a-half-year-old the nasal vaccine spray.
“No,” he says, because the trials show a reporting bias on the harms of the live attenuated influenza vaccine (the form of vaccine delivered nasally). “Influenza vaccines are about marketing and not science,” he says.
“We have few trials, and masses of very poor quality observational evidence. We have presented evidence of considerable reporting bias, which governments continue to ignore. The science is missing and so making an informed decision is very difficult.”
Jefferson also believes that the evidence of harm may be under reported because of a lack of standardised safety-outcome data. The Cochrane review does say that vaccination can protect children from influenza but there is not conclusive evidence that vaccinations reduce hospitalisations and deaths in children.
This does not mean vaccinations won’t reduce these risks and you may feel it’s worth vaccinating your child in the hope they will. But it’s worth knowing that the studies supporting this public health initiative are not nearly as good as they should be.
www.bmj.com/content/338/bmj.b354
www.bmj.com/press-releases/2013/05/16/expert-questions-us-public-health-agency-advice-influenza-vaccines
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004879.pub4/abstract;jsessionid=40672407B21A867544E3CE0778C49E4C.f03t02
Luisa Dillner
Sun 5 Oct 2014
Last modified on Mon 21 May 2018
www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/oct/05/government-wrong-nasal-spray-vaccine
I’m a big fan of vaccines and feel anxious questioning any of them. But the BMJ (where I work) has published papers questioning the quality of evidence for the benefits of the influenza vaccine, and whether industry-funded trials have reported “over-optimistic” results.
I ask Tom Jefferson, the lead author of the Cochrane Review on Vaccines for Preventing Influenza in Healthy Children, which looked at findings from 75 studies, if I should give my four-and-a-half-year-old the nasal vaccine spray.
“No,” he says, because the trials show a reporting bias on the harms of the live attenuated influenza vaccine (the form of vaccine delivered nasally). “Influenza vaccines are about marketing and not science,” he says.
“We have few trials, and masses of very poor quality observational evidence. We have presented evidence of considerable reporting bias, which governments continue to ignore. The science is missing and so making an informed decision is very difficult.”
Jefferson also believes that the evidence of harm may be under reported because of a lack of standardised safety-outcome data. The Cochrane review does say that vaccination can protect children from influenza but there is not conclusive evidence that vaccinations reduce hospitalisations and deaths in children.
This does not mean vaccinations won’t reduce these risks and you may feel it’s worth vaccinating your child in the hope they will. But it’s worth knowing that the studies supporting this public health initiative are not nearly as good as they should be.
www.bmj.com/content/338/bmj.b354
www.bmj.com/press-releases/2013/05/16/expert-questions-us-public-health-agency-advice-influenza-vaccines
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004879.pub4/abstract;jsessionid=40672407B21A867544E3CE0778C49E4C.f03t02