Two days ago we read that Tamiflu is not considered to be good for children to take and it may do more harm than good.
Today we hear the government are NOT, I repeat NOT, going to prioritise children for immunisations for swine flu.
So children are left to rely on Tamiflu, which is dangerous to them.
Warped and sadly fatal logic.
5 comments:
Should we be surprised? Or am I being overly cynical?
The government have made the decision on medical advice. Also tamiflu is not dangerous. What the evidence actually shows is that tamiflu only decreases the symptoms of the disease by one day and may not be worth it IF THE SYMPTOMS ARE MILD! Obviously if a child is dying it will be worth giving them the tamiflu. You have to balance things up. You're acting like everyone else is getting the vaccination but children. The vaccine is being given to people at higher risk: those with underlying health conditions, those who are immunocompromised etc etc and health workers. People who are between ages 16-65 are actually at the highest risk anyway. Get your facts right in future because of the nature of swine flu.
I don't have a username by the way I'm not being anonymous on purpose. And I'm a pharmacist so I know what I'm talking about!
But Tamiflu does not save lives, that is the problem. It just shortens symptoms for people who are not going to die anyway. There are not reported cases of Tamiflu saving anyone with bird flu yet the government bought millions of doses of it in order to deal with any suspected bird flu.
Or:
Reducing the symptoms of millions of folk using tamiflu WILL save lies, but obviously no-one will be proving that.
It is like the MMR vaccination, a few will suffer, many more will benefit.
Clearly a day of so many lives means more economic activity, more education etc.
I expect HMG's statisticians have done the relevant sums, and, were they to publish the actuarial results they would be accused of inhumanity or worse.
Pls delete former version, thanks.
Post a Comment