Possible proof that schools are a cesspool of germs and disease?

[Queasy]

Link

The common-sense notion that vaccinating the elderly is the best way to save the elderly also deserves scrutiny, according to a study this week in the journal PLoS Medicine. Infants and the elderly don't spread the flu as much as, say, a schoolchild or business traveler. Might you decrease both illness and death, including among the old, by vaccinating other age groups first?

As it happens, that is what doctors did in Tecumseh, Mich., in 1968. They vaccinated school-age kids, whose lower natural immunity and many contacts (not to mention a tendency to sneeze all over the place) makes them high transmitters of infectious disease. That tactic slowed the spread of disease and cut the death rate from flu to below that in a matching community.

Last year, scientists showed in a model that if you vaccinate about 60% of U.S. schoolchildren, flu deaths among the elderly would fall to 6,600 from the typical 34,000. "It's not necessarily true that the best way to protect someone is to vaccinate that person," says Ira Longini of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle. "In the case of the elderly, flu vaccine doesn't protect them very well, so breaking the chain of transmission provides greater protection."

In the PLoS study, mathematician Lauren Ancel Meyers of the University of Texas, Austin, and colleagues analyzed patterns of flu transmission under different assumptions about how likely a carrier is to infect other people. Using data on household size, age distribution and other factors, they compared a strategy that targets infants and the elderly with one targeting those most likely to catch flu: school-age kids.

For moderately contagious strains, says Prof. Meyers, the optimal strategy is to vaccinate the kids. "This severs the transmission chain," she says, thereby indirectly protecting the old. For very contagious strains, it is better to vaccinate those most likely to die if they catch flu, such as the elderly. "Highly contagious strains can find their way around this buffer of immunized schoolkids," she explains.

Innnnteresting

 

[acemcmac]

Originally posted by: Queasy
Link

The common-sense notion that vaccinating the elderly is the best way to save the elderly also deserves scrutiny, according to a study this week in the journal PLoS Medicine. Infants and the elderly don't spread the flu as much as, say, a schoolchild or business traveler. Might you decrease both illness and death, including among the old, by vaccinating other age groups first?

As it happens, that is what doctors did in Tecumseh, Mich., in 1968. They vaccinated school-age kids, whose lower natural immunity and many contacts (not to mention a tendency to sneeze all over the place) makes them high transmitters of infectious disease. That tactic slowed the spread of disease and cut the death rate from flu to below that in a matching community.

Last year, scientists showed in a model that if you vaccinate about 60% of U.S. schoolchildren, flu deaths among the elderly would fall to 6,600 from the typical 34,000. "It's not necessarily true that the best way to protect someone is to vaccinate that person," says Ira Longini of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle. "In the case of the elderly, flu vaccine doesn't protect them very well, so breaking the chain of transmission provides greater protection."

In the PLoS study, mathematician Lauren Ancel Meyers of the University of Texas, Austin, and colleagues analyzed patterns of flu transmission under different assumptions about how likely a carrier is to infect other people. Using data on household size, age distribution and other factors, they compared a strategy that targets infants and the elderly with one targeting those most likely to catch flu: school-age kids.

For moderately contagious strains, says Prof. Meyers, the optimal strategy is to vaccinate the kids. "This severs the transmission chain," she says, thereby indirectly protecting the old. For very contagious strains, it is better to vaccinate those most likely to die if they catch flu, such as the elderly. "Highly contagious strains can find their way around this buffer of immunized schoolkids," she explains.

Innnnteresting

very

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Queasy
Link

The common-sense notion that vaccinating the elderly is the best way to save the elderly also deserves scrutiny, according to a study this week in the journal PLoS Medicine. Infants and the elderly don't spread the flu as much as, say, a schoolchild or business traveler. Might you decrease both illness and death, including among the old, by vaccinating other age groups first?

As it happens, that is what doctors did in Tecumseh, Mich., in 1968. They vaccinated school-age kids, whose lower natural immunity and many contacts (not to mention a tendency to sneeze all over the place) makes them high transmitters of infectious disease. That tactic slowed the spread of disease and cut the death rate from flu to below that in a matching community.

Last year, scientists showed in a model that if you vaccinate about 60% of U.S. schoolchildren, flu deaths among the elderly would fall to 6,600 from the typical 34,000. "It's not necessarily true that the best way to protect someone is to vaccinate that person," says Ira Longini of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle. "In the case of the elderly, flu vaccine doesn't protect them very well, so breaking the chain of transmission provides greater protection."

In the PLoS study, mathematician Lauren Ancel Meyers of the University of Texas, Austin, and colleagues analyzed patterns of flu transmission under different assumptions about how likely a carrier is to infect other people. Using data on household size, age distribution and other factors, they compared a strategy that targets infants and the elderly with one targeting those most likely to catch flu: school-age kids.

For moderately contagious strains, says Prof. Meyers, the optimal strategy is to vaccinate the kids. "This severs the transmission chain," she says, thereby indirectly protecting the old. For very contagious strains, it is better to vaccinate those most likely to die if they catch flu, such as the elderly. "Highly contagious strains can find their way around this buffer of immunized schoolkids," she explains.

Innnnteresting

I tried to explain this in my flu shot thread, but was bombarded bullsh!t flu shot myths.

 

[mugs]

Children are dirty and disgusting. I used to work as a volunteer sysadmin at an elementary school, the mice and keyboards were DISGUSTINGLY filthy. It doesn't surprise me that they spread disease too.

 

[Gooberlx2]

I thought it was commonly known that schools are cesspools of disease. They're the best way for your kid to build an immune system. Same reason why mothers tend to send Johnny over to Susie's house when she has the chicken pox.

 

[j00fek]

i thought it was known that schools are a wash in a mess of germs, just look 10 ppl at work are sick since their kids went back to school

 

[MisterJackson]

My kid is like a carrier monkey......he like bananas!

 

[Bryophyte]

My daughter's first year school (kindergarten) last year, she went from healthy as a horse to having (over the course of about 6 months):
-Three or four colds
-TWO bouts of pneumonia (several months apart, not a continuation of just one)
-Norwalk virus
-Sinus infection
-Ear infection
-Influenza
-Several fevers lasting less than a day with no known cause

She had never had ear or sinus infections or pneumonia before this. Every time we got her report card, they'd include a letter threatening to have a meeting with the principal because she missed so much time at school. We only kept her home if she had a fever or had something erupting or oozing from some orifice. What did they want? A kid barfing or spreading Norwalk?

My son started a new school last year, 4th grade, and he had:
-Viral meningitis (lasted over two weeks with constant, extremely bad migraine-like headaches, stiff neck, light sensitivity)
-Several colds
-Norwalk virus

He got a flu shot when I did, so he was spared the flu when it came home with my daughter. I got permission from our doctor for my daughter to get a flu shot, but she was never well enough to get one when they had vaccine available. :|

 

[waggy]

Well duh!

who would have thought a place where a bunch of children are stuck in one place would be filled with germs?

 

[Fenixgoon]

let kids get dirty.. its what kids do.

 

[sao123]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
let kids get dirty.. its what kids do.

exactly...the more kids are expsed to germs earlier... the more immunity they'll have later.

 

[Amused]

Having your kid get the flu vaccine will not rob their immune system of it's chance to fight off a germ. The immune response to the vaccine is virtually identical to the immune response it would have to the real virus. There is no reason to make them suffer the flu and spread it to others just to train their immune system. Vaccines do the same thing without the misery and danger to others.

 

[LcarsSystem]

Originally posted by: Amused
Having your kid get the flu vaccine will not rob their immune system of it's chance to fight off a germ. The immune response to the vaccine is virtually identical to the immune response it would have to the real virus. There is no reason to make them suffer the flu and spread it to others just to train their immune system. Vaccines do the same thing without the misery and danger to others.

:thumbsup:

Exactly, I hope everyone here knows that a vaccine is just a weakened or dead strain of whatever you are trying to prevent yourself from getting; so the immune response is the same.