Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday November 27 2017, @08:27PM   Printer-friendly

England's National Health Service is urging parents to get their children vaccinated for the flu ahead of the holiday season to protect grandparents and other vulnerable relatives:

Flu vaccines administered through a nasal spray rather than an injection have been rolled out this autumn for two and three-year-olds, and children in reception class and years one to four in primary school. Children are super-spreaders because of the greater likelihood of them contracting flu at nursery or school, where germs are passed on at a rapid rate. But only 18% of school-age children have had the nasal spray immunisation, according to the latest figures.

Prof Keith Willett, NHS England's medical director for acute care, said: "Flu can be spread more easily by children, especially to vulnerable relatives such as older grandparents, those with heart or lung conditions and pregnant family members. Last year, millions of people missed out on their free vaccination and yet it's one simple, common sense step to help us all stay healthy this winter."

With less than a month until Christmas, the NHS is urging parents to book their children in for the free vaccination to help curb infection over the festive season, when family get-togethers can spread the infection.

Meanwhile, the Daily Mirror (a tabloid) claims that Russian agents are spreading anti-vaccination propaganda in the UK in an effort to destabilize the country:

Russian cyber units are spreading false information about flu and measles jabs in the UK, experts warn. [Ed's Note: The current flu immunisation is applied via a nasal spray - there are no 'jabs' involved.] Vladimir Putin is believed to want to erode trust in US and European governments. The state-sponsored units are spreading the lies on social media to destabilise Britain, it is claimed. The Kremlin has previously been accused of attempting to influence Brexit and Scottish independence. Now, it is feared it is trying to create distrust over flu jabs and the MMR measles vaccine.

[...] Security services are so concerned over the threat to public health and security that Government departments have been ordered to monitor social media and flag up risky articles. Health chiefs have had emerg­ency meetings over the spread "fake news" over vaccination campaigns. [...] We can reveal public health officials are investigating whether an outbreak of measles last week in Liverpool and Leeds was fuelled by parents not vaccinating children due to "false information read on the internet".

Also at BBC. BBC's collection of newspaper covers.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by frojack on Tuesday November 28 2017, @01:49AM (4 children)

    by frojack (1554) on Tuesday November 28 2017, @01:49AM (#602277) Journal

    With 326M people in the US, that's about 4.65M deaths from the flu.

    You messed up here. Do you see your mistake.


    Not all 326 million people are going to catch the flu. So your numbers horked before you even begin your argument.

    Of those that do catch the flu, most only come to the attention of doctors if they have a sufficiently bad case to require medical attention. Of those, is it still reasonable to assume one in 70 will die? I doubt it. So You have a point, but you math was so bad the point was lost in the steam rising from the pile.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=1, Informative=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2, Disagree) by Entropy on Tuesday November 28 2017, @03:36AM (2 children)

    by Entropy (4228) on Tuesday November 28 2017, @03:36AM (#602317)

    That website took pneumonia deaths(from stuff like lung cancer) and then added on flu deaths and made the 1 in 70 statistic. That's like taking deaths from cancer and adding on people that are impaled by pogo sticks.. Then saying your chance of dying from pogo stick impalement is 1 in 70. It's more like 500 deaths per year to Flu. Sure, it happens, but so to pogo stick impalements: It doesn't mean it's something to worry about.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by FatPhil on Tuesday November 28 2017, @06:52AM (1 child)

      by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Tuesday November 28 2017, @06:52AM (#602380) Homepage
      Your 500 is just as bogus. That's probably a "flu was the last thing known" death. Many flu deaths are "flu and then pneumonia" deaths, which are recorded as pneumonia deaths.

      The freaking CDC has pages and pages on such topics, all fully sourced - why do you remain willfully ignorant?
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
      • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 28 2017, @07:32AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 28 2017, @07:32AM (#602394)

        Take my father-in-law for example.................

        The real cause: he lived on fast food with lots of soda and he mostly sat on his fat ass

        That led to: obesity and edema, then being sent home from a hospital with persistent weakness and possibly infection, then hallucination due to infection

        The death certificate: has almost none of that, with the death being listed as a heart failure

        Take my uncle for example.................

        The real cause: buttfucking

        That led to: HIV, AIDS, etc.

        The death certificate: pneumonia

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 28 2017, @08:57AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 28 2017, @08:57AM (#602428)

    Not all 326 million people are going to catch the flu. So your numbers horked before you even begin your argument.

    And not all 326 million people are going to get hit by a terrorist attack. So for the numbers to be comparable, that would mean that only 1 in 45000 people hit by a terrorist attack is going to die from it. In which case, terrorists are doing a really bad job. That's about 1% of a dead person from blowing up a Boing 747.

    Which makes even less sense.

    Which gets us to the last option: That the numbers are not comparable, which weakens the pro-vaxxer argument. I'm not surprised that the anti-vaxxer side seems to be winning, when the pro-vaxxers are giving them all the ammo they need.