What's Scary About the H1N1 Vaccine?

[Guest guest]

Note: I " goofed " on my previous post of this article. (age does that to a

person. Sorry!)

What the older generation knows about vaccines that we don't

The media has portrayed a lot of controversy lately about the H1N1 vaccination.

On one side of the debate are reputable physicians who feel that the vaccine can

prevent serious illness and save lives, especially for those in high-risk

populations. On the other side of the spectrum are those who argue against use

of the vaccine, claiming that its potential harm is not worth the risk. The

reasons for the latter perspective vary widely, but are based on notions such

as: the FDA rushed approval of the vaccine too quickly, supposedly higher levels

of preservatives in the vaccine, complications of potential side effects,

general mistrust of the government and the pharmaceutical industry, and the

age-old argument against vaccines themselves--misunderstanding about how

vaccines work, and confusion about how introducing a small amount of dead (or

inactivated) bacteria or virus into the immune system can actually prevent a

disease.

Although I think this debate and the suspicion surrounding the H1N1 vaccine

reflect an intriguing distrust of the government agencies responsible for

decisions about health policies, a bias that has spread widely in recent months,

an issue that hasn't been addressed much if at all, is the even more curious

generational difference about the safeness and efficacy of the vaccine.

I, as well my colleagues in the medical profession, have noticed that many older

adults have not been suspicious at all about the H1N1 vaccine. One physician

told me that when he mentions the need for the vaccination to his patients over

the age of 65, they simply and immediately agree.

So why is it that older people would be more trusting of vaccines?

One reason is that people over the age of 65 remember a time when there were no

vaccines. Polio, measles, whooping cough, and mumps were all diseases that

caused grave illness before there were vaccinations. The polio and whooping

cough vaccines were developed in the 1950s, the measles vaccine in 1968. Older

generations remember these illnesses and a time when infectious diseases were

not only more prevalent, but more deadly.

Those of us who are younger than 60 do not remember these times. Yet, we may

recall that in 1976, there was concern that a similar swine flu vaccine was

possibly linked to Guillain-Barre syndrome and that more people contracted this

illness than the flu, which never really affected the population as was feared.

However, the CDC reports that every year an estimated 3,000 to 6,000 Americans

develop Guillain-Barre syndrome, whether or not they've received a vaccination.

Since I am not a physician, I am in no position to recommend or discourage the

H1N1 vaccine or the standard flu vaccine. As with all issues related to personal

health, vaccinations are an individual choice. And as I've discussed before,

there are a myriad of reasons that people choose not to follow Western medical

advice. I do think however, it's worth bearing in mind what the older generation

may be able to teach us: Many people have died of diseases that are prevented

today by vaccines. As is often the case with generational differences, older

people have lived a history of which younger people have no experience. And

although it is a typical human tendency to forget, or deny the lessons to be

learned from the past, when it comes to healthcare, many older people remember a

time when modern medicine was not an enemy, but a source of protection that

prevented death. 

I don't know if the U.S. government's health policies are more or less

trustworthy today than they were 60 years ago, but perhaps the decision makers

in our government do care about our health and well-being, as they too are not

immune from diseases like the H1N1 flu.

In any case, the phenomena of generational differences regarding vaccines is

worth noting. Older people seem to have higher levels of trust in physicians and

modern medicine.  History is a great teacher, and one that we can only learn

from those who have lived through it.

For further reading on the flu and vaccinations, see these New York Times and

CDC articles, as well as Dr. Rob Seigel's PT blog.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/21st-century-aging/200911/whats-scary-about-\

the-h1n1-vaccine

[Guest guest]

I'm "very glad" you didn't delete my post. As a "firm believer in vaccinations to prevent and control disease", I believe the article "What's Scary About the H1N1 Vaccine?" is making an argument "for" the vaccine.My, slightly macho, half brother thinks he doesn't need vaccines. I argue that if people don't want to be vaccinated to protect themselves, they should be vaccinated to "protect others."I'm from the generation the author talks about. One of my aunts had polio, another aunt died in the 1918 pandemic. A child who lived close to us had diphtheria. The librarian in my grade school wore braces and used crutches because of polio. HAD VACCINE BEEN AVAILABLE, AND USED, THESE TRAGEDIES COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED!!!!People who are against vaccine "need to look to the past" and learn the lessons that were learned by those who lived when there were no vaccines. (Below are a few excerpts from the article, I posted, which make an argument "for" vaccination.)What's Scary About the H1N1 Vaccine?"So why is it that older people would be more trusting of vaccines?One reason is that people over the age of 65 remember a time when there were novaccines. Polio, measles, whooping cough, and mumps were all diseases thatcaused grave illness before there were vaccinations. The polio and whoopingcough vaccines were developed in the 1950s, the measles vaccine in 1968. Oldergenerations remember these illnesses and a time when infectious diseases werenot only more prevalent, but more deadly.""Those of us who are younger than 60 do not remember these times. Yet, we mayrecall that in 1976, there was concern that a similar swine flu vaccine waspossibly linked to Guillain-Barre syndrome and that more people contracted thisillness than the flu, which never really affected the population as was feared.However, the CDC reports that every year an estimated 3,000 to 6,000 Americansdevelop Guillain-Barre syndrome, whether or not they've received a vaccination.""I do think however, it's worth bearing in mind what the older generationmay be able to teach us: Many people have died of diseases that are preventedtoday by vaccines. As is often the case with generational differences, olderpeople have lived a history of which younger people have no experience. Andalthough it is a typical human tendency to forget, or deny the lessons to belearned from the past, when it comes to healthcare, many older people remember atime when modern medicine was not an enemy, but a source of protection thatprevented death.""In any case, the phenomena of generational differences regarding vaccines isworth noting. Older people seem to have higher levels of trust in physicians andmodern medicine. History is a great teacher, and one that we can only learnfrom those who have lived through it.">> http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/21st-century-aging/200911/whats-scary-about-the-h1n1-vaccine>

[Guest guest]

Hi , So you receive your posts by email and not by reading them on the web

ingroup and onsite, as I do. Ok. Actually, I typed and posted my reply. Then

later decided that your post was fine and that I did not like my reply and so

deleted my reply. So, I intended that you never see my deleted reply to you.

Wow, I see that you do believe in vaccination! My apologies for not seeing your

point before.

People who refuse vaccination are a danger to their family and friends, and a

danger to everyone that they meet. Their ignorance of vaccination and interest

in pop medicine should not be allowed to endanger others in our society (hence,

the " A Pox on You " article).

Others here have read this before, but I will tell you my pop med fanatic story.

Before I founded this egroup (and others), I spent a lot of time on 's talk

boards with a group of friends involved in fighting pop med ignorance (that was

before they changed the board format).

We were joined one day by a woman who had reason to hate pop medicine far more

than we did: pop medicine killed her child. She wrote that she had been a young

mother with a mentally disabled child who was very hyperactive. Public schools

have a lot of experience with hyperactive children and there is help available

to calm down these children. But this woman was a pop medicine fantic and would

have none of it, so her child was very hyperactice and a discipline problem.

Then one day she left her child in her back yard to play, and her child climbed

a fence that she did not think he could and was hit and killed by a car. And so

she learned what pop medicine is the hard way, I am sorry to say. So yes, I try

to hop on any pop medicine nonsense fast. Yes, I also run a pop medicine group,

tho I am looking for a moderator to run it for me. But that was created to get

the pop medicine fanatics out of this group: we had to do something with them

and that was the best that and I could do. Regards