Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel
Taxi, the nature of any prophylactic is that you're going to give it to some people who don't actually need it. That's not scandalous.
Whether or not is scandalous depends on the nature of the disease and the nature of the vaccine. Context.
You want to vaccinate 33 people to prevent one case of tetanus? Go for it . Tetanus is pretty severe (in reality, iirc, you have to vaccinate 200 000 plus people to prevent a case of tetanus).
The flu is not that severe in healthy individuals - having to vax 33 people to prevent one case may be overkill, particularly given the fact that the flu shot is not without side effects. The LAIV (flumist) seems quite reactive:
"Among healthy adults, a significantly increased rate of cough, runny nose, nasal congestion, sore throat, and chills was reported among vaccine recipients. These symptoms were reported in 10%–40% of vaccine recipients, a rate 3%–10% higher than reported for placebo recipients"
Just because a NNT of 33 is good for prophylactic medication in general, does not mean it is good enough with regards to flu shots.
I guess everyone will have to decide for themselves whether they want to risk the flu or the side effects. As long as everyone has the proper numbers on flu severity and vaccine effectiveness and safety, cool.
OT: As an FYI for any lurking vaxxers out there, the CDC also said LAIV carried a significantly increased risk of asthma and reactive airway disease in children up to 59 months. Page 166 - in the sidebar. Sorry, it will not cut and paste. If people are going to vaccinate their children for the flu, they might want to investigate the safety of the two types of flu shots (as I am sure most people here would )
Edited by kathymuggle - 11/10/12 at 2:55pm