Last weekend I received a number of messages asking if I’d seen a new report from CTV. I hadn’t – I’d been away for a much-needed break for a couple days – and I’m glad that it was brought to my attention. If there’s one thing I know about medical science, it’s that there’s always something new we can learn and ways to improve, and if they’re concerned that this may be an issue then I’m glad they’re looking into it and seeing what what changes can be made.
This article addresses a study by Danuta Skowronski, an epidemiologist at the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control. Her study of three consecutive flu seasons suggests that those who were vaccinated each year may have reduced immunity to new strains of the flu, though she advises caution in making decisions based on this study. The study raises interesting questions about the best way to fight the flu on a year to year basis. As we know, influenza is an unstable virus, meaning that it changes very quickly and our vaccinations are not effective from one year to the next because each strain can look so different just in that short time. For example, we could see H1N1 (an A strain, which causes pandemics) every year and every year it can present in a different way, and that’s why it’s such a challenge each season for scientists to create a vaccine that’s a good match. They watch the global patterns to see how the most concerning strains (in terms of severity and prevalence) are presenting, and they work to create a vaccine against those strains that looks as much like the virus as possible.
And it’s not perfect, and we need a lot more work and research to keep getting closer and closer to a stronger defense against the flu. If you’ve read this study and you have questions, don’t worry – I did, too. So I asked and read, and the people I spoke with echoed the lead researcher in this study. This is one study and while it might give us some insight, it is by no means a reason to stop getting the shot. This study looks at just a snapshot in time and not the bigger picture. I do hope that they continue this (and all) research into the efficacy of the flu shot and keep working to find ways to make it as effective as possible.
As it stands, the evidence in favour of a high participation in flu vaccinations continues to be overwhelming. There are a lot of questions about how we can make this program better, and this is another one of those questions, but it’s premature to suggest that annual flu shots are not the best defense, and the lead researcher is quick to advise people to continue vaccinating while they continue looking for ways to improve those vaccinations. Annual vaccinations are our best chance to avoid getting the flu and protect the more vulnerable around us. As with everything in science, it’s important not to jump to conclusions, but to investigate questions for broader implications. As it stands, the current program is our best defense. Below I’ve included the takeaway from Skowronski and other doctors and researchers.
It’s also important to remember that while the flu shot is our best first defense, it is not the only thing that we all can and should do to protect ourselves and others, whether we get the shot or not. Check out our ‘What else can I do?’ page for other ways to stay healthy this season and prevent the spread of the flu to people in our community. There isn’t one single answer to this problem, but a number of pieces that we need to put together for the best possible results. We can all find a ways to do better this season.
—————————————————————————-
In the interim, doctors maintain that the flu shot is a life-saver and that everyone — especially seniors, children under the age of two and people suffering from chronic medical conditions — should continue receiving them.
“I think it would be premature and possibly even dangerous, frankly, for us to make strong statements in either direction, or a radical policy change, on the basis of these findings,” Skowronski says.
“It would be hazardous for those individuals to stop getting the influenza vaccine on the basis of these early signals.”
Such signals are so recent that public health officials don’t yet know if they are real or scientific red herrings. Until more conclusive evidence is established, annual flu shot campaigns will remain unchanged.