Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So I'm reading this article and I see it as children between 6 months and 10 years old should no longer be receiving a H1N1 vaccination under the section "Single dose recommended" as of yesterday. Anyone seeing something other than this? To me it says shots should begin at age 10 and that they need to do more studying on how the vaccinations work with a child's immune system, then it goes on to say that SAGE has recommended it for everyone (of course). I'm not sure if WHO is trying to escape the blame for something here or whats going on but thats not comforting for anyone who received a vaccination in that age group. Furthermore where in the hell did SAGE come from? Strategic Advisory Group of Experts sounds like the most phony crap I've ever heard.
I believe that you misread the article. That section states that it is unknown if young children will need more than one dose. Not that they should not be vaccinated.
The current recommendation is two subsequent vaccines. The second serving as a booster. Young children do not produce antibodies as well as older children and adults, hence a booster.
I've read several studies that indicate that many young children are actually fully protected after just one dose. This would be great news. However, the recommendation is still two shots/nasal (in addition to the seasonal flu), with the booster following a few weeks later.
No one is shirking responsibility....
Last edited by NCInMyMind; 10-31-2009 at 12:46 PM..
Reason: clarification
SAGE recommended the use of a single dose of vaccine in adults and adolescents, beginning at the age of 10 years, provided such use is consistent with indications from regulatory authorities.
Data on immunogenicity in children older than 6 months and younger than 10 years are limited and more studies are needed.
It is read as: starting at age 10, ONLY ONE DOSE is required for a protective immune response. And, that there are not enough studies YET on the immunogenicity of those under 10 regarding H1N1 to be certain if this demographic will require one OR two doses.
You are stuck on two sentences and not considering the context of the entire section. One or two does for a protective response?
Pretty straight forward if you ask me, and you did.
Last edited by NCInMyMind; 10-31-2009 at 01:22 PM..
No he's not. He is implying that it states they aren't sure if its for one dose or two. No where in that section of the article is two doses mentioned. It says that more studies are needed for one dose on children ages 6 months to ten years.
Again you are stuck on two sentences and not considering the context of the section. The "question" of one or TWO doses is implicit in the wording of the header, "Single dose recommended."
The article is stating that scientists do not yet know if one or two doses will be required for the younger demographic. The article is NOT stating that it not recommended to vaccinate this demographic.
We can go in circles, but until you read the article more carefully, you will continue to misread it.
Mod cut: TOS violation This is not a discussion about any topic in particular, but rather a case of someone who has simply misread an article.
Last edited by Viralmd; 10-31-2009 at 02:04 PM..
Reason: no comment on moderator actions
We can go in circles, but until you read the article more carefully, you will continue to misread it.
If the moderator agrees, I believe that this thread should be closed. This is not a discussion about any topic in particular, but rather a case of someone who has simply misread an article.
You're implying something false. It clearly does not state one dose or two and hence you are misreading the article. Mod cut: TOS violation
Last edited by Viralmd; 10-31-2009 at 02:06 PM..
Reason: Discussing moderation.
I did report it. There is no victor as this was not a discussion/debate. You misread an article and I politely tried to correct your understanding of it.
You have misread the article and it is as simple as that. I however did not misread the article, and thus have not stated anything false.
Mod cut: not necessary
--Happy Halloween!!
Last edited by Viralmd; 10-31-2009 at 02:03 PM..
Reason: no comment on moderator actions
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
