The Flu Vaccine, Get it or don’t get it?: SEPARATING FACT FROM FICTION

If you were born in the early 1950s, you were born into a world where approximately 50 million people suffered from smallpox. Thirty years later, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced the global eradication of smallpox, the last natural case of the disease occurring in Somalia in 1977. The WHO’s global vaccination campaign had succeeded in making smallpox the first and only disease to be extinguished through vaccination.

Since this achievement, information on vaccination has spread at unprecedented rates. Social media, online forums and blogs have unlocked access to health information to people outside the medical community, and parents are better equipped than ever before to make informed decisions about their children’s health. With myriad sources to choose from, however, it can be difficult to separate fact from fiction.

Vaccines Weighing the risks

Vaccines trick the immune system by introducing altered pathogens into the body, which spark the production of antibodies that stand guard against future invasions of the active virus. In Alberta, vaccines are free and accessible at public health clinics, doctors’ offices and some workplaces and pharmacies.

Vaccines come in several forms. A live vaccine, such as the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine, contains a virus that has been weakened so it does not cause illness. A dead vaccine, such as the polio vaccine, contains a virus that has been killed completely. A conjugate vaccine, such as the influenza vaccine, contains only portions of a pathogen that are chemically bound to a protein; the combination instigates a more powerful immune reaction.

Side effects of vaccines most commonly include fever and redness or swelling to the injection site—these effects occur in no more than ten percent of vaccines. Anaphylaxis, a potentially life-threatening allergic reaction, occurs in one to ten cases per million doses of administered vaccine.

The Canadian government monitors adverse reactions to vaccines through the Canadian Adverse Events Following Immunization Surveillance System (CAEFISS), which receives more than ninety percent of its reports from provincial and territorial public health officials. CAEFISS data is regularly analyzed to generate more information about who is at risk for developing adverse reactions to vaccination.

For most parents, putting their child at any risk can invoke anxiety and fear. When speaking with parents who are apprehensive about the side effects of vaccines, physicians will often present potential adverse reactions alongside the risks of not vaccinating. For instance, while the Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine may cause a fever higher than 101 degrees Fahrenheit in five percent of cases, the actual virus leads to meningitis fifty to sixty-five percent of the time. Every year, influenza is responsible for a number of deaths in Canada.

It’s important to note that family doctors are not infectious disease specialists by training, and more parents are looking outside their relationship with their family practitioner to educate themselves about vaccinations through independent research. Recent controversy about the suggested link between autism and the MMR vaccine has triggered fear among parents on social media, online forums and blogs. Much of this fear has migrated beyond the MMR vaccine to include fear of other vaccines, such as the flu vaccine.

While organic—as opposed to institutional—online spaces are vital community touch points for questioning parents, these communities are also open channels for information that has not been tested against the scientific method. Considering the source has never been more important in parental decision-making.

The modern vaccine controversy
From research study
to social media

In 1998, The Lancet published a research study by British doctor Andrew Wakefield that supported the relationship between the MMR vaccine, intestinal inflammation and the development of autism. Wakefield’s article described twelve children with neurodevelopmental delay (eight with autism) who suffered from intestinal issues and developed autism within one month of receiving the MMR vaccine. The results were highly publicized in the media and in burgeoning online communities.

The study, however, had several major flaws. At the time of the study, ninety percent of children in England had received the MMR vaccine, which is usually administered around the time when most children with autism begin to show signs of the condition. Wakefield’s study failed to show a causal relationship—when one variable causes a change in another variable—between MMR and autism because the study did not control for autistic children who had not been vaccinated.

In 2010, The Lancet retracted the paper after new information revealed that Wakefield had been paid by a law board to find evidence to support a link between vaccinations and autism for a litigation case. Wakefield has since been barred from practising medicine in Great Britain.

While several studies have refuted the link between vaccinations and autism, Wakefield’s study remains a catalyst for the modern anti-vaccination movement. The organization Generation Rescue (of Jenny McCarthy fame) and Facebook groups such as the “National Vaccine Information Center” are heavily supported by concerned parents reluctant to trust government websites and pharmaceutical companies.

Many parent-driven anti-vaccination spaces are established with the well-meaning goal to expedite information to parents while creating a sense of community. Group moderators, who are often not health practitioners, generate content that has not been reviewed by medical professionals, while community members are permitted to freely comment and post their own sources. While such grassroots content models are good options for the gathering of like-minded people, those same models risk becoming echo chambers that breed collective fear among concerned parents.

There’s no question that every form of medical intervention comes with some degree of risk, however small. If your child were to suffer injury from vaccination, compensation may be available—but only if you live in Quebec.

Compensation for vaccine injury

Quebec is the only province in Canada with a vaccine injury compensation program, established in 1988. Since its inception, the program has paid $3.6 million in compensation for 35 accepted cases.

While instances of vaccine injury remain rare, a 2011 report published in the Munk School Briefings urged the federal government to adopt a national vaccine injury compensation strategy on the basis that vaccination in Canada is strongly encouraged and even mandatory in some cases. The report suggests a no-fault model that would serve to remove the onerous judicial task of finding fault, which has caused the dismissal of such cases in the past. Canada is the only G8 country besides Russia that does not have a vaccine injury compensation plan.

While other provinces such as Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan have considered a plan similar to Quebec’s, the program has not been considered in Alberta.

Conducting smart research

Smart research begins with credible sources. Credible health information is generated through exhaustive scientific research that begins with a hypothesis and is rigorously tested through experiments controlled for numerous variables. Organizations like the World Health Organization, the Public Health Agency of Canada and Alberta Health Services rely on evidence-based research when shaping health policies, procedures and best practices.

The best ways to conduct research are to insist on corroboration and authoritative evidence from accredited bodies. Accredited bodies like journals, universities and medical professional organizations have the institutional horsepower to acquire, review and distribute up-to-date information that has passed peer-review processes.

If you have questions or concerns about the annual flu vaccine, you may contact Alberta Health Services (AHS) to help navigate the maze of information available. AHS leverages the expertise of epidemiologists, infectious disease physicians and the World Health Organization (WHO) to deliver up-to-date information on annual vaccines. The WHO also sends recommendations to Canada’s Public Health Agency on those influenza strains that should be targeted in the annual flu vaccine.

When you know you have conducted exhaustive research and reached out to your community for support, you can feel confident you’re making the most informed decisions about your own health and the health of your family. Have your say. t8n

Get the Facts
Trusted Sources

World Health Organization
www.who.int/topics/immunization/en

Public Health Agency of Canada

www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/im/index-eng.php

The College of Family Physicians Canada
www.cfpc.ca

Alberta Health Services
www.health.alberta.ca/health-info/immunization.html

The History of Vaccines: A Project of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia
www.historyofvaccines.org

Information on vaccination has never been more abundant. Now parents are faced with separating fact from fiction.

 
Parents are better equipped than ever before to make informed decisions about their children’s health.

Sidebar:

Questions about Eligibility & Immunization Schedules?

For 24/7 Health Advice, contact Health Link Alberta at 1-866-408-5465

For a St. Albert Immunization Clinic -Schedule, visit the Alberta Health
Services website.

www.albertahealthservices.ca/influenza