And it's not a result of a "bad match":"Overall, just shy of 45 to 50 per cent," said Dr. Danuta Skowronski of the BC Centre for Disease Control, who presented the data to the Global Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness meeting at the World Health Organization last week.
"That's lower than we would like to see, but it's an improvement over the previous year, because it couldn't be worse, frankly."
Skowronski said the vaccine was well-matched, but overall, the protection was disappointing.
So, is it still worth getting something with 45% effectiveness?Scientists also once again observed the paradox that previous vaccination against the flu seemed to lower protection.
The so-called "Canadian problem" was first identified by Skowronski's team during the H1N1 pandemic.
So far, scientists have not been able to explain why people who get the shot with no prior vaccine exposure seem to have better protection than people who get the shot year after year.
I guess that it means the rest of us non-elderly, non-immunocompromised, non-chronic condition folks can take that as a resounding endorsement (not).As for a recommendation about whether people should still get the flu shot if it's only working half the time, Dr. Skowronski said it is strongly recommended for elderly people and for those who are immunocompromised.