Difference between revisions of "Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination"

From Testiwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Pandemrix should not be used because of narcolepsy risk)
m (→‎Darm exercise 4: improvement, evaluation, further discussion info added)
Line 12: Line 12:
 
* When each group has done their own part, there will be a general discussion about all argumentations by the groups. All argumentations will be merged onto this page based on the discussion.
 
* When each group has done their own part, there will be a general discussion about all argumentations by the groups. All argumentations will be merged onto this page based on the discussion.
 
* Think: How many readers do you need to make this extra effort of collecting, organising and synthesising information and opinions a worthwhile activity of social learning?
 
* Think: How many readers do you need to make this extra effort of collecting, organising and synthesising information and opinions a worthwhile activity of social learning?
 +
 +
 +
The group specific pages can be improved until Monday (4.4.) evening.
 +
Evaluation of the exercise will be based on the contents of the group pages as of Monday evening.
 +
The argumentation by different groups will be compiled on this page and discussed more on the lecture on Thursday 7.4.
  
 
== Pandemrix should not be used because of narcolepsy risk ==
 
== Pandemrix should not be used because of narcolepsy risk ==

Revision as of 05:33, 2 April 2011

Darm exercise 4

Tasks:

  • Make pairs and select one group A-E (D and E have Finnish material).
  • Look at page Discussion for theoretical and practical advice. Also page op_fi:Keskustelun jälkijäsentäminen may be useful.
  • Look at the two or three links on your group's page.
  • Read the texts and try to identify arguments about the use of Pandemrix. Note that arguments can be (and most are) indirect arguments.
  • Rewrite the arguments in such a way that they can be understood outside the original context.
  • Place the arguments into a hierarchical tree of attacking and defending arguments pointing toward the main statement about Pandemrix use.
  • You can also make up your own arguments, or if you have extra time, read additional material (see end of the page).
  • When each group has done their own part, there will be a general discussion about all argumentations by the groups. All argumentations will be merged onto this page based on the discussion.
  • Think: How many readers do you need to make this extra effort of collecting, organising and synthesising information and opinions a worthwhile activity of social learning?


The group specific pages can be improved until Monday (4.4.) evening.
Evaluation of the exercise will be based on the contents of the group pages as of Monday evening.
The argumentation by different groups will be compiled on this page and discussed more on the lecture on Thursday 7.4.

Pandemrix should not be used because of narcolepsy risk

How to read discussions

Statements: Pandemrix should not be used any more anywhere because its narcolepsy risk is too high.

Resolution: Resolution not yet found.

(A stable resolution, when found, should be updated to the main page.)

Argumentation:

⇤B10 : All data compiled to date indicate that pandemic vaccines including Pandemrix match the excellent safety profile of seasonal influenza vaccines, which have been used for more than 60 years. --Oluyemitoyinbo 11:12, 1 April 2011 (EEST)

⇤B11 : Adjuvanted vaccines commonly provide a stronger immune response than unadjuvanted vaccines and also provide a broader immune response allowing for some potential drift of the influenza virus (Pandemrix is an adjuvanted vaccine). --Oluyemitoyinbo 11:12, 1 April 2011 (EEST)

⇤B12 : The number of cases of side effects of H1N1 vaccines (including Pandemrix) is in line with normal background rates on a population basis, as reported in a recent study European Medicines Agency --Oluyemitoyinbo 11:12, 1 April 2011 (EEST)

⇤A1 : According to EMA, data received so far is still insufficient to establish a causal relationship between Pandemrix and narcolepsy. One possible explanation for the results is that Pandemrix could interact with unknown local environmental and/or genetic factor in contributing to the increased risk of narcolepsy among the vaccinated population aged 4 to 19 years in Finland --Jacob Attipoe 11:18, 1 April 2011 (EEST)

⇤A2 : The overall annual incidence of narcolepsy remained consistent with prevaccination scenarios --Jacob Attipoe 11:22, 1 April 2011 (EEST)

←A1 Even though a nine fold increase in narcolepsy was found in vaccinated population, the occurrence of narcolepsy was still very rare with this apparent increase. A number of different reasons may account for the observed rise in the incidence of narcolepsy namely: A (H1N1) infection, vaccination, combined effect of infection and vaccination, or some other factor entirely. Infections have been documented as causing narcolepsy. --Jacob Attipoe 11:18, 1 April 2011 (EEST)

⇤A1 : No similar increase in incidence of narcolepsy is reported in other Nordic countries. Canada has extensively used this type of vaccine with no evidence of increased risk for narcolepsy --Jacob Attipoe 11:18, 1 April 2011 (EEST)

←A2 : as there is presently no swine flu epidemic in Finland, there is no immediate need for swine flu vaccination --Jacob Attipoe 11:18, 1 April 2011 (EEST)


⇤1 : Despite risks, Pandemrix is an effective vaccine and has clearly net positive effects in countries where emergency treatment is poorly available for severe swine flu cases. --Jouni 23:05, 31 March 2011 (EEST)

←2 : The reputation of Pandemrix is globally so poor that it is impossible to use it any more. --Jouni 23:05, 31 March 2011 (EEST)

←3 In Finland, THL decided to stop the use of Pandemrix. --Jouni 23:05, 31 March 2011 (EEST), [1]
⇤E6 : The vaccination used last year will most likely protect also against the possible swine flu epidemic of this year, although the virus has changed a bit. --Sallamari Tynkkynen 10:57, 1 April 2011 (EEST) [2]
←E7 : Vaccination is a very good method of preventing swine flu infections. --Sallamari Tynkkynen 10:59, 1 April 2011 (EEST) [3]
←E8 : WHO recommended that H1N1 virus strain be included in the seasonal flu vaccines for the 2009/2010 season, because H1N1 is still in circulation, but behaving like a seasonal flu virus. --Anna Kokkonen 11:10, 1 April 2011 (EEST) [4]
←E9 : The information supplied on the safety and effectiveness of three of the pandemic-influenza vaccines was considered complete enough for the Agency's Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use to recommend their use outside a pandemic situation. --Anna Kokkonen 11:10, 1 April 2011 (EEST) [5]

⇤E4 : The side effects of Pandemrix have been accentuated, although the benefits are much more significant. --Sallamari Tynkkynen 10:50, 1 April 2011 (EEST) [6]

⇤E5 : Nursing staff in hospitals should be vaccinated; it is their responsibility as medical professionals. --Sallamari Tynkkynen 10:54, 1 April 2011 (EEST) [7]

--D1 : The decision to use Pandemrix was probably led by panic and other choices should be considered at this point --Carmen Gil 11:25, 1 April 2011 (EEST)

←D2 : Finland used a vaccination with additives, against the recommendation of WHO --Carmen Gil 11:25, 1 April 2011 (EEST)
←D3 : Additives can cause flu-like symptoms, increasing the public's opinion against vaccination --Carmen Gil 11:25, 1 April 2011 (EEST)

⇤D4 : Pandemrix has a lower Hg content than other vaccines (2.5 vs 25 µg), which could cause other neurological problems in children --Carmen Gil 11:25, 1 April 2011 (EEST)


Discussion groups:


Additional material:

Retrieved from "http://www.opasnet.org/testiwiki/index.php?title=Talk:Assessment_of_the_health_impacts_of_H1N1_vaccination&oldid=19834"