 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / General / November 2005Follow-Up to Flu Vaccine Predictions
Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains of the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three leading candidates. But if the manufacturers guess wrong, the vaccine is useless, and nobody is protected against the flu. Do the CDC, NIH, manufacturers or anybody else gather data during the infectious period of the winter, to see how good the initial guess was, and if so, how good is the match between the predicted and actual strains? >Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains of the >flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three leading [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Do the CDC, NIH, manufacturers or anybody else gather data during the >infectious period of the winter, to see how good the initial guess was, Yes. >and if so, how good is the match between the predicted and actual strains? It varies. PF > Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains of the > flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three leading > candidates. But if the manufacturers guess wrong, the vaccine is useless, > and nobody is protected against the flu. It may or may not be useless. Some antibodies are often cross-reactive and will provide some protection in the form of reduced severity of disease. This could mean the difference in survival or death. Even the vaccine from a couple of years ago that missed the predominate emergent strain (Fiji?) provided some protection to those people who contracted the it. > Do the CDC, NIH, manufacturers or anybody else gather data during the > infectious period of the winter, to see how good the initial guess was, and > if so, how good is the match between the predicted and actual strains? These decisions are made by a WHO-sanctioned committee in the spring. It takes several months to gear up for vaccine production. So far this year, only the A/Californa/H3N2-like virus has been isolated from an influenza patient in the US. This virus was included in this year's vaccine. >Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains of the >flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three leading [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >infectious period of the winter, to see how good the initial guess was, and >if so, how good is the match between the predicted and actual strains? Yep. There are samples of virus taken from around the country to see which ones predominate. Some years, the vaccine covers those, and some years, it doesn't. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth >>Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains of >>the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > which ones predominate. Some years, the vaccine covers those, and > some years, it doesn't. Do you know where I should look on the internet to find the data about the accuracy of the initial predictions? >>>Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains of >>>the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Do you know where I should look on the internet to find the data about the >accuracy of the initial predictions? Unfortunately, I do not. But I bet someone on here does. Failing that, I'd see if the CDC can help you. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth >>>>Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains >>>>of the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Unfortunately, I do not. But I bet someone on here does. Failing > that, I'd see if the CDC can help you. I didn't have any luck at the CDC site, but I don't have the medical savvy to know exactly which text strings to search for. Would you be willing to give it a try? >>>>>Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains >>>>>of the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >savvy to know exactly which text strings to search for. Would you be >willing to give it a try? IIRC, the MMWRs (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports) summarize rates of influenza geographically, and often include stats on which viral strains were identified as causing a representative number of cases that week. It might be necessary to get at the raw data to satisfy your question. I doubt that the data, especially historic data, would be accessible from the web page, but it might be possible to obtain it on request, perhaps for a fee. I suggest you write to someone at the CDC to find out how to obtain the data. You should be able to find a contact of some sort on the CDC web page. Alternatively, you could search some databases of medical journal articles to see if someone has already done this and published it. PubMed would be a good place to start. >>>>>>Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which >>>>>>strains of the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > articles to see if someone has already done this and published it. > PubMed would be a good place to start. I went digging through PubMed, but all I could find was articles investigating overly focused specifics, such as the vaccine's efficacy on children, the elderly, Thais, in the form of FluMist, etc. What medicine needs is a broad study of the field, which would be more appropriate for a textbook chapter or a review paper in Immunology or Infectious Diseases. Would you be able to recommend a current textbook or a journal of review articles in either of those two areas? > >>>Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains of > >>>the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Unfortunately, I do not. Could be because you are an idiot? I am watching. Just thought that you might want to know. >> >>>Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains of >> >>>the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >Could be because you are an idiot? No. But it could be because I hadn't tried. >I am watching. Just thought that you might want to know. Don't really care. In fact, I don't see why anyone would want to know. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth > >Could be because you are an idiot? > > No. But it could be because I hadn't tried. If you walk like an idiot, write like an idiot, and talk like an idiot: You are an idiot. David, ... You are an idiot. Just my opinion, but idiots like you make it all so easy to be always correct. :) >> >Could be because you are an idiot? >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Just my opinion, but idiots like you make it all so easy to be always >correct. :) Strong words from a twit who think his genes are "superior," but fails to realize that all the other posters also had ancestors who survived the plague. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me." -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth > >If you walk like an idiot, write like an idiot, and talk like an idiot: > >You are an idiot. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > to realize that all the other posters also had ancestors who survived > the plague. Sorry Dave, but you and the other Quackpots, are the idiots here. You are the ones fear mongering, here. Not me! Just thought that you idiots might want to know who the idiots are. >> >>>Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which >> >>>strains of the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > I am watching. Just thought that you might want to know. I missed the origin of this feud, but if you'd like to prove your intellectual superiority over Wright, perhaps you can share your thoughts on where to find the appropriate review paper or textbook chapter. That's a lot more productive than name calling. > Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains of the > flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three leading [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > infectious period of the winter, to see how good the initial guess was, and > if so, how good is the match between the predicted and actual strains? Try searching Google with the following search string. cdc variant surveillance statistics mismatch OR match "influenza virus" site:.gov http://www.google.com/search?as_q=cdc+variant+surveillance+statistics&num=100&hl =en&newwindow=1&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=influenza+virus&as_oq=mismatch+match+& as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=.go v&as_rights=&safe=off See CDC also: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/fluactivity.htm http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5107a1.htm Obviously, the CDC doesn't want anybody to know just how badly the flu vaccination industry actually sucks at their job. 1. The CDC does not pick the influenza strains that are formulated into the US's influenza vaccines. 2. The companies that make the vaccines usually produce the vaccine properly. When they don't, those lots do not get used, such as the case with Chiron last year. 3. In this year's vaccine, one of the viruses formulated is a match for the only one that's been isolated from humans in the US; A/California/H3N2-like. ziggittes@yahoo.com wrote in news:1131980760.581684.82570 @g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > 1. The CDC does not pick the influenza strains that are formulated into > the US's influenza vaccines. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the only one that's been isolated from humans in the US; > A/California/H3N2-like. Does nobody have ANY idea how many other strains inhabit the US, nor what is their poplulation fraction wrt. that of A/Cali/H3N2? >> Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains >> of the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Obviously, the CDC doesn't want anybody to know just how badly the flu > vaccination industry actually sucks at their job. Why do you say this? > >> Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which strains > >> of the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of about three [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Why do you say this? Why is the review paper so hard to find? Is this a totally original idea on you part? Obviously nobody in the flu vaccination industry wants the public to know just how bad their track record is. Prove me wrong by producing said review. I rest my case. >> >> Every year, flu vaccine manufacturers have to predict which >> >> strains of the flu will be prevalent, and the vaccine is a mix of [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> > um=100&hl=en&newwindow=1 >> &btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=influenza+virus&as_o q=mismatch+match+&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt >> > =a >> n [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > idea on you part? Obviously nobody in the flu vaccination industry > wants the public to know just how bad their track record is. You said "The CDC doesn't want anybody to know just how badly the flu vaccination industry actually sucks at their job." You said the same thing about the vaccination industry. Why do you feel that way, and why do you feel that it is obvious? > You said "The CDC doesn't want anybody to know just how badly the flu > vaccination industry actually sucks at their job." You said the same > thing about the vaccination industry. > > Why do you feel that way, and why do you feel that it is obvious? Is there an echo in here or is Stallworth just stalling. Show me the CDC web page where they track the annual matches / mismatches of the flu vaccination industry? How many more failed attempts do you need before admitting defeat? As many threads on sci.med have previously stated, the long lead time required to produce an annual flu vaccine dooms it to failure. There is no other logical possiblity until the long lead time is drastically cut back. > As many threads on sci.med have previously stated, the long lead time > required to produce an annual flu vaccine dooms it to failure. Not really. The committee responsible for choosing the vaccine fomulation have a lot of experience in monitoring emergence of influenza strains and they almost always do a great job because the strains usually persist for several years at a time (see below). > There is no other logical possiblity until the long lead time is drastically > cut back. Here's what I've been able to piece together from MMWR's archives over the last half hour: 1997-2000: Predominant circulating strain: A/Sydney/05/97-like (H3N2), which was in the vaccine. 2000-2001: Predominant circulating strain: A/New Caledonia/20/99-like (H1N1), which was in the vaccine. 2001-2002: Predominant circulating strain: A/Panama/2007/99-like (H3N2), which was in the vaccine. 2002-2003: Predominant circulating strains: A/New Caledonia/20/99-like (H1N1) and A/Panama/2007/99-like (H3N1 and H3N2), the H1N1 and H3N1 strains were formulated in the vaccine, but the H3N2 was not. 2003-2004: Predominant circulating strain: A/Fujian/411/2002-like (H3N2), which was not in the vaccine. Post-hoc studies showed that vaccinated people had less severe disease. The vaccine formulation was A/New Caledonia/20/99(H1N1)-like virus, B/HongKing/330/2001-like, and A/Panama/2007/99 (H3N2) 2004-2005: Predominant circulating strain: A/Fujian/411/2002-like (H3N2), which was in the vaccine. 2005-2006: So far, the predominant circulating strain is A/California/07/2004-like (H3N2), which is in the vaccine. It's too early to tell if this will be THE predominant strain, but so far the vaccine's on target. It appears that in the last 9 years, all but one vaccine was on target. And even the one that missed reduced the overall severity of influenza infections. > Not really. Yes, really! > 1997-2000: Predominant circulating strain: A/Sydney/05/97-like (H3N2), > which was in the vaccine. The 1997/1998 season is on record for having had a considerable mismatch between the H3N2 vaccine component and the prevalent epidemic influenza A(H3N2) virus. > 2003-2004: Predominant circulating strain: A/Fujian/411/2002-like > (H3N2), which was not in the vaccine. Post-hoc studies showed that > vaccinated people had less severe disease. The vaccine formulation was > A/New Caledonia/20/99(H1N1)-like virus, B/HongKing/330/2001-like, and > A/Panama/2007/99 (H3N2) In the 2003-04 flu season the vaccination protected against H3N2 Panama, H1N1 New Caledonia and Influenza B Hong Kong. As expected, a Fujian variant of the H3N2 Panama was detected by global surveillance in Australia early in 2003. Since the flu vaccination industry is so slow to respond it was too late to include that strain in the influenza vaccine for that flu season. This missing strain was in fact responsible for most of the influenza-related deaths during the 2003-04 flu season. Gee, we seem to have a mismatch, here? Why am I not surprised? "In fact, in almost all years, by the end of the flu season, some new strain or some new drift species will show up," said Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the CDC, during a press conference on Nov. 17, 2003. If you rely on the vaccine for protection, and you happen to come down with the new strain or some new drift species of the flu, the fact that the vaccine covers the so-called predominant circulating strain wont help you any. Also, the reports says 'similar to' what is in the vaccine. I have yet to see one report that said there was a perfect match. Where is the corresponding CDC web page? Just thought that you might want to kow. > > Not really. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > mismatch between the H3N2 vaccine component and the prevalent epidemic > influenza A(H3N2) virus. This is correct; the first year did not have Sydney formulated as it emerged in the US in December of that year. The following two years had the Sydney isolate, which predominated during those two years. > > 2003-2004: Predominant circulating strain: A/Fujian/411/2002-like > > (H3N2), which was not in the vaccine. Post-hoc studies showed that [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > slow to respond it was too late to include that strain in the influenza > vaccine for that flu season. The vaccine industry does not choose the vaccine strains, an advisory committee does. You cannot fault the industry for something they are not responsible for. In addition, the capacity for flu vaccine production is woefully inadequate. The use of embryonated eggs really slows things down - what's needed is a cell culture-based production system, which is not yet in place. Newer technologies, such as reverse genetics, may expediate vaccine formulation and production, but it's several years away at least. > This missing strain was in fact > responsible for most of the influenza-related deaths during the 2003-04 > flu season. Yes, as I said, this one was missed. But even still the vaccine used that year confered some protection and reduced the severity of infections. > Gee, we seem to have a mismatch, here? Why am I not surprised? So it missed two years of the last nine. That's still better than not formulating a seasonal flu vaccine each year. > "In fact, in almost all years, by the end of the flu season, some new > strain or some new drift species will show up," said Dr. Julie > Gerberding, director of the CDC, during a press conference on Nov. 17, > 2003. Yes, this is viral evolution. It happens constantly, otherwise they would go extinct. There are hundreds of flu viruses (distinct genotypes) circulating out there. The monitoring system is the best that we have at the moment. > If you rely on the vaccine for protection, and you happen to come down > with the new strain or some new drift species of the flu, the fact that > the vaccine covers the so-called predominant circulating strain wont > help you any. This is simply not true. Cross reactivity of polyclonal antibody responses frequently confer some degree of protection, usually protection or reduction in disease severity. > Also, the reports says 'similar to' what is in the > vaccine. I have yet to see one report that said there was a perfect > match. Your insistence of a perfect match is unreasonable. Mutant strains arise all the time because influenza viruses use RNA polymerase to synthesize their genetic information. RNA polymerases typically have an error rate of 10^-4 (i.e., one mistake for every 10,000 bases). Compare this to DNA polymerases, which have mutation rates of 10^-7 to 10^-9. Considering that the influenza A genome is almost this size, just about every new progeny virus will have at least one mutation. On top of this, in a productive infection 10^12 or more progeny viruses will be produced. This is a tremendous amount of variation and also one of the reasons why influenza viruses are capable of eluding immune responses. I can assure you that next year's circulating A/California/H3N2 will be different from this year's A/California/H3N2 at the RNA level. Will this have much meaning, immunologically? Unlikely. > Where is the corresponding CDC web page? As far as I am aware there is no CDC page that tracks this information in a tabular form, probably because it's published elsewhere (e.g., MMWR). Is this important? > Just thought that you might want to kow. > Is there an echo in here or is Stallworth just stalling. You're avoiding the qiestion, which I've politely asked twice. You're plonked. > > Is there an echo in here or is Stallworth just stalling? > > You're avoiding the qiestion, which I've politely asked twice. You're > plonked. Is there an echo in here or is Stallworth just stalling? Sorry to inform you, but you did not answer any of my questions. Go ask Mark or David, and see if you get a better response. Ha, ... Hah, Ha! Just thought that you might want to know. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.