[teacozy]

<p>I know I have read that the flu vaccine is no different than a placebo in children under two but was wondering what you guys think about this study?  It came out fairly recently and saw it linked on a blog. </p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22032844" target="_blank">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22032844</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<h4 style="color:rgb(0,0,0);float:left;margin-right:.25em;">INTERPRETATION: <span style="font-size:13px;">Evidence for protection in adults aged 65 years or older is lacking. LAIVs consistently show highest efficacy in young children (aged 6 months to 7 years). " </span></h4>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I was just curious what you guys think about this?  </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I haven't made my son's flu appointment yet and he's only 18 months so if it really is no different than a placebo under two then I probably won't. </p>

 

[erigeron]

<p>Anyone have full-text access? The abstract says there weren't trials that fit their criteria that demonstrate efficacy (which I think they might define in terms of virological analysis) of TIV in children. That doesn't mean there aren't trials that demonstrate efficacy that don't happen to meet their criteria, and we'd have to know what their criteria were to figure out how useful the excluded trials are. Then it's not totally clear how they define effectiveness, and I can't tell what the breakdown was on TIV versus LAIV because they lump it all together in this abstract. TIV is the shot and LAIV is the spray. Since your kid is under two you can't get the spray anyway. I'm not sure what to think about this in your case given the information in the abstract. I'd need to have the actual article. </p>

 

[cwill]

You can get the full text online somewhere. I'm on my phone tonight but if I remember tomorrow, I will try to find it. I thought when I read it that their inclusion criteria were very strict. But my field is used to messy data so I'm often baffled by medical studies.

 

[cwill]

<p>Here's the full text.  <a href="http://www.nogracias.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Lancet-Infect-Dis-MA-AC-Vacuna.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.nogracias.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Lancet-Infect-Dis-MA-AC-Vacuna.pdf</a></p>

 

[erigeron]

<p>Thanks, <span class="huddler-mention">@cwill. I mean t</span>o go through that with a fine-tooth comb and write it up for this group, but haven't gotten to it yet... It looks like the FluMist is pretty decently effective in kids and they just don't have any data one way or the other that meets their inclusion criteria regarding the shot. I have just discovered that our doc (family practice, not a pediatrician) doesn't stock the mist at all. Now I have to figure out if I want to try to track it down, or just get the shot, or do neither. Bleh. It never occurred to me they wouldn't have it, or I would have started researching it earlier. </p>

 

[cwill]

<p>FWIW, so far this year flu activity has been really low nationwide.  Not to say that won't change and won't change suddenly, but we haven't had a single confirmed case in my state so far this year.  I want the FluMist for DS too, but he's not quite old enough.  I was going to take him in before his 2 year appointment just for the shot, but it doesn't seem all that urgent given activity level.</p>

 

[erigeron]

<p>I would probably skip it tbh if I weren't pregnant and her baby sibling weren't due during flu season. Also she is going to be going to day care more and is more likely to pick something up and bring it home. And also we have friends with a preemie baby who we see fairly often. Said baby has been vaccinated, I assume her parents have, and my husband and I have... but I know it's not 100% and I'd like to cover all of our bases. It seems like overall my daughter is more likely to get it and also has more vulnerable people she could give it to, versus last year. I called the urgent care and they claim their formulation of FluMist is only good in kids 3+. I don't think that's right but I didn't see any point in arguing. And if I did take her there I would have to take her twice because they are supposed to get immunized twice the first year that they get it, and that's two urgent care copays, which I'd rather avoid. Next I'm going to try the children's hospital. </p>

 

[cwill]

<p>Can't you get it at work?  Obviously not, but is it because of her age or something else?</p>

 

[erigeron]

<p>Pharmacists can't vaccinate kids under 14 in my state. (Which I am okay with, I don't actually want to vaccinate kids anyway, but it does add a level of complication.) And we don't have FluMist at most of our stores anyway. <img alt=":irked" src="http://files.mothering.com/images/smilies/irked.gif" style=""> So unless I can convince some store that does have it to dispense it to me so I can take it to her doc's office and have them administer it, I'm SOL on that score. I now have a call in to her doctor's office to find out if a. there's any chance they can order FluMist next year even though they can't this year and b. if they can make sure to have the rotovirus vaccine in stock when our new baby is in need of it. If the answer to both is no, I'm probably going to switch the kids over to a pediatrician. This doctor is family practice, not peds, and this is the first time that not having a primary care doctor that specializes in meeting children's needs has been a problem for us. (Actually, the second time, the first time being when we couldn't get the rotovirus vaccine for our daughter when she was a baby because they kept not being able to get it in for some reason.) If they don't stock the vaccines we need for our kids, we need to go somewhere else. Which is too bad because I like this doc otherwise but I really want to be able to get everything in one place. </p>