The reason I posted the link was that I felt that this was yet another attempt at hysteria by those who are against vaccination, or at the very least, will be used that way. As I said, I received it from someone (a neurologist) who is afraid it may trigger another spate of anti-vaccination propaganda. That's why my only comment was "sigh..." It just seemed vaguely relevant. But, if you don't think so, feel free to delete. Or better yet, educate me (as you did and for which I thank you). Carol
Carol L. DeVolder, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Chair, Department of Psychology St. Ambrose University 518 West Locust Street Davenport, Iowa 52803 Phone: 563-333-6482 e-mail: devoldercar...@sau.edu web: http://web.sau.edu/psychology/psychfaculty/cdevolder.htm The contents of this message are confidential and may not be shared with anyone without permission of the sender. -----Original Message----- From: Mike Palij [mailto:m...@nyu.edu] Sent: Sat 8/29/2009 9:38 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Cc: Mike Palij Subject: [tips] re: [tips] Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) and "Swine Flu" (H1N1) Connection On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 05:37:46 -0700, Carol L DeVolder wrote: >I don't know anything about the readership of the Mail, but someone >brought this to my attention, http://tinyurl.com/nd63yl > >Sigh... I'm not exactly sure what the point is of the Mail news article or even posting the link here. Allow me to make a few points: (1) The article was last updated on August 15, 2009 or about 2 weeks ago. In internet time terms, his is historical information. (2) Is the point of the article to point out that there was a link between the 1976 swine flu vaccine and the development of GBS (why is the 1976 info in bold black characters larger than the rest of the text?)? If so, again, this is not "news" since this result has been extensively reported upon. A search of www.pubmed.gov will provide more definitive background. (3) If I may, instead of relying on popular media accounts or things that people may send through email, it might be useful to examine the relevant sources of information that might underlie the second-hand info we receive. For example, the Mail article is essentially about the Vaccine Safety Monitoring program that CDC conducts and specific information about the H1N1 vaccine has available for a while (as well as lots of other information that it receives from sources worldwide). The webpage for the vaccine is accessible at: http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/vaccination/safety_planning.htm Quoting from the website: |Background | |The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the |Food and Drug Administration (FDA) closely monitor the safety |of influenza and other vaccines used in the United States. Licensed |2009 H1N1 monovalent vaccines will be produced using the same |manufacturing process as seasonal influenza vaccines. All seasonal |influenza vaccines licensed in the United States are produced in eggs |and they do not contain adjuvants.[1] When seasonal influenza |vaccines are administered according to licensed indication and usage |information they are safe; however vaccines, like any medical product, |carry some risks. It is anticipated that the safety profile of licensed |2009 H1N1 monovalent vaccines will be similar to seasonal influenza |vaccines; serious adverse events after vaccination are uncommon.[2] | |Adverse events following immunization may be coincidental or causally |related to the vaccine. The following are objectives of the 2009 H1N1 |monovalent vaccine safety monitoring response: | + Timely identification of clinically significant adverse events following |receipt of 2009 HINI monovalent vaccine | + Rapid evaluation of serious adverse events identified after 2009 H1N1 |monovalent vaccine to determine the public health importance | + Evaluation of the risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) associated |with the 2009 H1N1 monovalent vaccine[3] Regarding footnote [3]: |[3] In 1976, a type of influenza vaccine was associated with Guillain-Barré |Syndrome (GBS). Since then, influenza vaccines have not been clearly |linked to GBS. However, if there is a risk of GBS from seasonal influenza |vaccines, it would be no more than approximately 1 additional case per |million persons vaccinated. There is a presentation on the "Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System" (VAERS), including how to access the data obtained from their website: | |VAERS data without identifiers may be accessed through the CDC |Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (WONDER) |public database or for download at (http://vaers.hhs.gov/scripts/data.cfm ) |within about 6 weeks after CDC receives the VAERS report. There is a component oriented towards monintoring GBS: | |CDC will perform active Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) case-finding |through the Emerging Infections Programs (EIP). EIP is a population-based |network of CDC and 10 state health departments (CA, CO, CT, GA, |MD, MN, NM, NY, OR, TN), working in collaboration with local health |departments, public health laboratories, clinical laboratories, infection |control practitioners, healthcare providers, academic institutions, and other |federal agencies. CDC has also established collaboration with the |American Academy of Neurology to enhance VAERS reporting of |neurological events, including GBS. The provisional case definition for GBS |from the Brighton Collaboration will be used. I presume that many of us go over the different sources of information that a person can use to help evaluate a claim in pursuit of critically thinking about an issue. The H1N1 epidemic is no different in this regard. We can access the information provided by professionals, such as the CDC, departments of health, and relevant professional societies. We also have access to the scientific medical literature through www.pubmed.gov and, if out institutions have made appropriate arrangement, to electronic versions of the journal articles. As a general practice, we should be skeptical about what read, either in the popular or professional literatures, and seek out relevant valid sources of information that will allow us to identify which claims or statements have empirical support or represent reasonable inferences/conclusions and which do not. We wouldn't ask anything less of our students, we shouldn't ask anything less of ourselves. -Mike Palij New York University m...@nyu.edu --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
<<winmail.dat>>
