Young 'should get flu jab first'

[Guest guest]

Now why did my mind think of it being better for the government to

get microchips into young people first?

 

Jo

 

Vaccines are likely to be in short supply

The young should be prioritised for vaccination over the elderly, ill

and disabled in the event of a flu pandemic, US researchers suggest.

The team says with stocks of bird flu vaccine likely to be limited,

society faces a " fundamental ethical dilemma " about who should get

the jabs first.

 

Health staff and the old are set to be priority groups.

 

But the report in Science argues the young have a right to live

through all life's stages and should be a priority.

 

It says the primary issues to " decrease health impacts " including

illness and death.

 

Society faces a fundamental ethical dilemma. Who should get the

vaccine first?

 

Ezekial Emanuel

Lead author

 

A second goal was to limit impacts on society.

 

But the researchers, led by Ezekiel Emanuel of the National

Institutes of Health, say an alternative ethical framework should be

considered.

 

Vaccines protecting against any new form of the H5N1 strain of bird

flu which can pass easily between humans will be limited in supply,

they say.

 

And it is likely that no more than 10% of the US population will be

inoculated against the disease in the first year.

 

Experience of the three major flu pandemics have given mixed messages

about who is most likely to be at risk, with differing experiences in

each.

 

The report says: " With limited vaccine supply, uncertainty over who

will be at highest risk of infection and complications, and questions

about which historic pandemic experience is most applicable, society

faces a fundamental ethical dilemma. Who should get the vaccine

first? "

 

'Grow old'

 

They say a range of principles have guided rationing of medicines or

vaccines in the past including " save the most likely to recover "

and " save the most lives " .

 

The team say they disagree with the latter, which they argue

underlines the policy of giving vaccines to those at highest risk

before the well and young.

 

Instead they argue that each person having an opportunity to live

through all stages of life is more appropriate.

 

They continue: " There is great value to being able to pass through

each life stage - to be a child, a young adult and to then develop a

career and family, and to grow old. "

 

They add: " Death seems more tragic when a child or young adult dies

than an elderly person - not because the lives of older people are

less valuable but because the younger person has not had the

opportunity to live and develop through all stages of life. "

 

'Essential services'

 

The team concludes that a global pandemic would make all the issues

about sharing vaccines and working with other countries even more

pertinent.

 

A spokeswoman for the Department of Health said it had not drawn up

priorities for vaccination yet but that its decisions would be

informed by emerging evidence.

 

They would also be guided by World Health Organization principles

aimed at protecting healthcare workers most at risk and those needed

to keep essential services running.

 

They would also aim to prevent serious illness in the most vulnerable

groups, reduce the spread of infection by immunising those in closed

communities and children.

 

A spokeswoman added: " The UK National Influenza Pandemic Committee

(UKNIPC) will make final decisions regarding priority groups and

priority order. "

[Guest guest]

heres the original nyt article

on kids getting tracked.

 

http://tinyurl.com/6etrq

 

that was in 2004, i imagine that more places might be doing this?

 

 

Now why did my mind think of it being better for the government to

> get microchips into young people first?

>

> Jo

>