Canada Knocks Out Flu, U.S. Public Kept In The Dark
By David M. Burd, June 2, 2010
Canada the last four years totaled sixteen "flu-associated" fatalities for their paediatric age category, defined as everybody under 18, and this included all H1N1 and seasonal cases. Three-quarters of these deaths had severe and chronic underlying health conditions, as did the mortality of a similar percentage of adults over 18.
Thus over the last four years Canada averaged but a single paediatric flu-associated death per year (not having severe chronic health issues) among its paediatric population of 7.86 million, Canada's total population being 33 million (Flu statistics are from The Public Health Agency of Canada's Fluwatch website). Importantly, this has taken place with 60% (or more) of their paediatric group remaining unvaccinated.
By comparison, during the same four-year time span starting the flu season of 2006 - 2007, the identical U.S. pediatric group had 553 flu-associated deaths, with also the same proportion having severe preconditions, resulting in 138 deaths of those otherwise healthy. Flu statistics are from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control's FluView.
Compared on a per capita basis, the U.S. exhibits a stunning 3.2 times death rate over Canada, either pre-compromised health or not. (Click chart to enlarge)
Since both countries promote flu vaccines, though declined by the large majority of citizens in both countries, and both exhibit similar flu rates, it is clear that Canada has essentially eliminated pediatric flu mortality, while something is terribly wrong in the U.S.
And, since the great majority of flu deaths occur after being hospitalized for days up to weeks, it's logical to review the treatment drugs and protocols and what is different between Canada and the U.S. An exhaustive review by this writer reveals two clear suspects, the antiviral drugs called ribavirin and oseltamivir.
The first suspect is a dangerous chemotherapy drug, called ribavirin, that has been increasingly used over the last decade in the U.S. for hospitalized cases with flu and associated respiratory infections, particularly the syncytial respiratory virus (RSV).
This chemotherapeutic drug has brand names of Virazole, Copegus, Rebetol, and was initially synthesized in the 1970's to investigate its use for cancer treatment when the War On Cancer investigated cancer-attacking therapies. Though never used for cancer, ribavirin was found to have extensive in-vitro (in the laboratory petri dish) action in stopping replication of various viruses. It is a nucleoside analogue and not only does it inhibit viruses, in human cells it takes the place of DNA chain links called guanine and adenosine. When a human cell tries to divide by replicating its DNA for a new cell, ribavirin substitutes itself and very effectively stops the DNA replication, thus aborting the new cell (and the parent cell dies also). This is how chemotherapy typically works when used for cancer treatments, though ribavirin's exceptional cell-killing action takes place throughout the entire human body more than most.
For many decades, a frequent co-infection of flu found in both infants and elderly called respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) has been found in flu patients, and starting about a decade ago ribavirin became increasingly recommended for RSV by various authorities including Aetna Insurance, The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary, the Second Edition, and Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Care Consumers. To this writer, there is no justification for these recommendations, but an example of one writer following another and never checking basic toxicity studies.
Pertinently, ribavirin is also known as the drug of choice (given with interferon) to treat Hepatitis C, again because of its antiviral properties. But, this use is for short treatments as even ribavirin proponents acknowledge its many dangers, particularly dose-sensitive hemolytic anemia, hypoxia, and cardiac arrest via destruction of red blood cells. Of the estimated 8,000 annual U.S. Hepatitis C deaths, many may be directly or in part from the treatment itself as this writer can testify with family experience in the matter.
As for ribavirin and RSV frequently associated with flu, health care professionals increasingly go to medical websites, and WrongDiagnosis.com is one of the world’s leading providers of online medical health information (they say so themselves). According to WrongDiagnosis they are an independent, objective source of factual, mainstream health information for both consumers and health professionals. Here is what WrongDiagnosis.com says about ribavirin for RSV:
"Among the goals of treatment are support of respiratory function, maintenance of fluid balance, and relief of symptoms. Mild cases resolve without treatment. Severe infections require hospitalization to provide supplemental oxygen, humidified air, and hydration by I.V. fluids. Respiratory support using mechanical ventilation may be needed. Ribavirin aerosol may be used in those who have severe RSV or are immunocompromised."
However, here is what is found on WebMD, sponsored by the entity RxList:
"Deaths during or shortly after treatment with aerosolized Virazole have been reported in 20 cases of patients treated with Virazole (12 of these patients were being treated for RSV infections). Several cases have been characterized as "possibly related" to Virazole by the treating physician; these were in infants who experienced worsening respiratory status related to bronchospasm while being treated with the drug."
So, American providers may employ ribavirin depending on their reference source and habit. But, do Canadian doctors ever use ribavirin for RSV, flu-associated or not? A representative answer comes from the Province of British Columbia with their health site called HealthLinkBC (their term "very rarely" basically means never):
"Ribavirin (Virazole) is an antiviral medicine that is very rarely used to treat people with RSV infections who have a high risk of developing complications. Studies so far have provided conflicting evidence regarding its effectiveness. The doctor will consider the particular circumstances of the person being treated before making a recommendation about ribavirin."
The 2003 experience of doctors in the Canada Province of Ontario is telling, and their experience with ribavirin is crucial. Canadian doctors in Toronto hospitals gave strong doses to virtually all patients during the 2003 SARS Panic that had seized the medical world. SARS was defined as being mild pneumonia symptoms and having contact to SE Asia, initially thought caused by a mutated corona virus (later disproven). After experiencing quickly rising hospital deaths, and belatedly realizing hemolytic anemia symptoms were caused by ribavirin, Canada authorities blew the whistle and stopped its use, and deaths quickly fell off.
Not by coincidence, not a single American died of SARS and there was only a single death in all of Europe, as all respective health authorities declined the use of ribavirin. All other SARS deaths (but one in South Africa) took place in SE Asia and China with extensive documentation of patients strongly dosed with ribavirin. Even more telling, one Chinese Health District did not use ribavirin and had no mortality, while in contrast neighboring Districts using ribavirin recorded significant mortality. The total SARS deaths were 43 in Canada, 1 in Europe, 1 in South Africa, and 738 in SE Asia and China.
Learning their lesson from SARS, Canada's doctors have apparently taken it to heart, and it seems extremely unlikely their RSV treatments include the chemotherapy ribavirin, unlike apparent widespread use in the U.S. Flu deaths in both Canada and the U.S. are almost all listed as flu-associated and one of these associations is RSV. With Canada averaging but one pediatric flu-associated death a year (of those previously healthy), they certainly are doing something right.
The second questionable drug affiliated with U.S. pediatric flu death is oseltamivir, also known as Tamiflu, another antiviral drug effective in a petri dish against virus replication. The petri dish is one thing, but its cellular toxicity in humans is another, and makes this writer question any legitimate use. There is a wealth of evidence citing its dangers.
For instance, in 2007 Japan authorities banned Tamiflu after determining it was THE causal factor in teenager suicides, and in August, 2009 the UK's Telegraph news reported there were 400 cases of significant Tamiflu side effects as many panicked by the Swine (H1N1) flu rushed to take the antiviral medicine.
Despite the U.S. CDC saying Tamiflu was marginally effective (if at all) when quickly used at onset of flu symptoms, medical records show it is inexplicably employed continuously until a patient is either discharged, or dies. This is specifically documented in the MMWR weekly report of September 4, 2009 with a chart of 36 pediatric deaths showing every death but one after a hospital stay (involving at least an overnight admission to the ICU) was in all likelihood continuously treated with oseltamivir or other antivirals at unspecified dosages. (See: HERE. ) However, adult fatality case reports cite double-strength oseltamivir dosing, an ominous clue that suggests what may also be happening in pediatric patients.
Since flu has been convincingly demonstrated by Canada to be of minimal risk to kids, it makes sense to seriously question the safety and risks of flu vaccines.
Flu vaccinations are endlessly promoted and the U.S. CDC has for years designated the first week of December as National Flu Vaccination Week, with countless media promotions and the CDC press releases in the news. However, news of Canada's next-to-zero flu toll is unknown to the American public. Also ignored by U.S. media (and apparently by CDC) is recent dramatic news from Australia.
Australia's ABC News reported April 23, 2010 that seasonal flu vaccines for young children had been deemed too dangerous with reactions greatly under-reported, and Australian doctors have now been warned not to give the seasonal flu vaccine to children under the age of five, after a child fell critically ill and dozens more suffered serious adverse reactions after receiving the vaccine in Western Australia, with The Australian Medical Association backing this move to suspend vaccinations in children under five around the entire country.
Canada's paediatric group averaging a single flu-associated death per year the last four years strongly questions the sanity of promoting a mercury-laden flu vaccine jab that also brings many other toxic ingredients such as aluminum-compound adjuvants and many other alien substances into cellular contact of fragile developing neurological systems, particularly infants and kids as young as six months.
It is vital to note Canada’s minimal flu toll takes place while many are actually declining the vaccine jab. From the April 21, 2010 Times Colonist in British Colombia comes "Only 40 per cent of B.C.'s population chose to be vaccinated against H1N1, which meant roughly 2.5 million of the 4.3 million doses ordered by the province were not used, said Ida Chong, minister of healthy living and sport." Importantly, all of Canada (except New Brunswick)* called off the seasonal jab in lieu of the H1N1 jab, thus eliminating the role of multiple flu shots. *(See HERE for a May 17 post by this writer on New Brunswick advocating both seasonal and H1N1 flu shots, resulting in much higher sickness rates).
So, Canadians by a wide margin refuse flu vaccines yet have but one flu-associated paediatric mortality a year, as close to zero as it gets. From this writer's perspective, the documented risks of flu vaccine can be dire and deadly, while the jab's benefit is an illusion wrongly promoted by evidence also as strong as it gets. To wit: the U.S. vaccine adverse event reaction system called VAERS from September 2009 to the present recorded 16,982 flu-vaccine reactions among all ages. But this is just the tip of the iceberg, as experts have long stated at most 10% adverse reactions are actually recorded in the VAERS database.
Canada's doctors have figured out flu treatment and the hazards of the chemotherapy ribavirin by the School of Hard Knocks, while Australian doctors have blown the whistle about extreme flu vaccine dangers to their kids. Meanwhile the U.S. public is kept in the dark, exhorted to take 6-month old infants to be vaccinated, and further having them treated by medical protocols using pervasively deadly ribavirin created for cancer chemotherapy, and/or with copious doses of toxic Tamiflu.
How can U.S. Health Generals and mainstream media not notice Canada’s weekly reports having identical record-keeping as the CDC? Or, pay attention to Australia’s warning with their flu season preceding the U.S.? Or review and report objectively the unambiguous dangers of antiviral drugs?
Instead, health officials are typified by their CDC spokeswoman nationally broadcast last October on National Public Radio stating “mercury in flu vaccines poses absolutely no risk to infants and children" -- a statement that left me speechless then, as it does now.
David (DB) Burd's professional experience spans four decades of technology innovation, design, and trouble-shooting with various engineering firms, and has concentrated the last decade on medical technology and related topics after experience as a U.S. patent examiner in medical technology. DB's corporate and consulting activities followed an initial eight years of positions in the national defense arena. DB was in the first graduating class of "rocket scientists," with a BSME in Mechanical Engineering and Astronautical Sciences from Northwestern University. DB also writes on medical topics, and provides analytical expertise to organizations involved in major public health issues.
How can U.S. Health Generals and mainstream media not notice Canada’s weekly reports having identical record-keeping as the CDC? Or, pay attention to Australia’s warning with their flu season preceding the U.S.? Or review and report objectively the unambiguous dangers of antiviral drugs?
Posted by: rg kushwah | February 10, 2013 at 11:18 AM
i am very glad
Posted by: rg kushwah | February 10, 2013 at 11:08 AM
brilliant article the information is really detailed thank you
Posted by: tom health | January 21, 2013 at 08:00 AM
Jessica, Yes, Ontario as you point out, did offer both shots beginning January of 2010, 3 months after they called off the jabs normally given Sept-Oct. However, it appears almost nobody wanted them as flu cases had plummeted toward zero by the new year.
Yet, New Brunswick was the only Province to offer/promote both jabs the whole time, and as I wrote May 7 here on AoA, NB's flu-case rate was 50% higher (or 100% higher as only 1/2 max. took both jabs) than the rest of Canada (compared to the previous 4 years when all Provinces promoted the seasonal jab). Thanks for your contribution.
Posted by: davidburd | June 16, 2010 at 08:16 AM
Many provinces did indeed offer both the seasonal and H1N1 flu shots -- Ontario being one of them.
You'd best research a little more deeply before you start throwing around partial truths in order to prove a point. You can't use an article you wrote as a source to prove that NB was the only province to offer the dual shots.
Posted by: Jessicva | June 16, 2010 at 02:48 AM
I know mainstream medicine gets beat up badly here - however fair or unfair that may seem - but as an aside, based on the comments from the fellow Hosers on the list, I'd like to shout out to the staff at CHEO who have been described as "incredible" and "angels" by my family during recent unfortunate circumstances.
I still think mainstream medicine, from a broader point of view, needs a jump start, and some of the people in the mix, like the rest of us humans, can have their heads up their butts at times, but there are some damn good people in there too. I think they get painted over by the wide brush. Just throwing that out there for Judith and company, fwiw...
Posted by: randy | June 11, 2010 at 03:45 PM
Poland has NOT PURCHASED a single AH1N1 vaccine and the reason was that the sellers/manufacturers did NOT WANT to take part in risk/cost in case of adverse effects leaving thus all responsibility to the government. There were lots of opposition cries here.
Posted by: Robert | June 11, 2010 at 06:26 AM
GREAT Article!! I am a resisent of Victoria,BC, Canada and I agree, our public health care system despite it's faults is amazing!
I have never given my 2 children the seasonal flu shot....and never will!
Thanks for this great article!
Posted by: Leona | June 10, 2010 at 09:02 PM
As a pediatric nurse, born, raised and educated in the Ottawa area, I can tell you one of the biggest reasons why Canada has less flu deaths compared to the US is PUBLIC HEALTH CARE!
I worked for a year at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario before moving to Texas to work at the Children's Medical Center in Dallas. I was primarily working with infants who had RSV and other respiratory issues in both hospitals.
In Canada, parents took their children to the doctor/hospital when they were sick, but not deathly ill.
In the US, these children were DEATHLY ILL! And almost all of them had no health insurance (or were illegal!)
In Canada, the parents were not worried about a bill that they could not afford, so they were cautious, and proactive.
In the US, the parents did everything possible NOT to bring their child to the hospital due to the concerns about $$$$ and immigration status.
I lasted 6 months working pediatric nursing in hospital in the US. Lack of staffing with a combination of REALLY sick kids was just a little too stressful for me.
So, yes, I believe these drugs are dangerous and should be banned, but Canada's health care model does work. Of course, the population of Canada is much less, and I'm not sure if a similar model in the US will work.
Oh, and the propaganda in Canada for the flu shots, and the H1N1 is just as bad as the US. 2 of my sisters rushed to get their children vaccinated (especially after that 1 middle school boy died from it). Funny, the youngest sister, who is a nurse, chose not to!
Posted by: Judith | June 10, 2010 at 12:48 PM
Wow. Thank you for the report-- I'm sharing it everywhere.
Posted by: Gatogorra | June 09, 2010 at 06:13 PM
thanks for the link, samaxtics. Have those idiots ever heard of "epigenetics?" THey do mention "new mutations" which is interesting. I'll definitely let you guys know if my local Alberta library accepts my donation of a brand new copy of Callous Disregard. I'm and Ontario girl at heart. I find Alberta a little too conservative but I'm glad it's good for kids with autism and their families. Me, I miss my lakes!
Posted by: jen | June 09, 2010 at 06:06 PM
thanks for the link samaxtics - yes, shills-a-plenty (actually only 1 or 2 with repeat performances) + a troll or 2 thrown in - the usual recipe.
It's amazing how some people will crawl out from under their rocks just to try to get under the skin, with some obscene insulting remarks, all seemingly driven by the mere mention of autism and vaccines in the same sentence.
Posted by: randy | June 09, 2010 at 05:35 PM
Guys before you all move up here - don't even dare to think it is Nirvana. It isn't. Canada is the epicentre of 100% genetic bunk. See Anne's article all about it:
Experts on the 'Search for a Quick and Dirty Explanation'
By Anne Dachel
May 1, 2010
Posted by: Henderson | June 09, 2010 at 05:01 PM
Randy, another fun fact I forgot to mention-very year when we get our taxes done we ask for a comparative with other provinces-and here in AB we got back almost twice the amount we would have gotten in BC and 7 x the amount that we would have gotten if we lived in ON.... if you're looking for another reason to come here :)
I would, however, be loath to leave Ontario myself if I lived there! (I am an easterner at heart even though I was born out west). We spent/lost on real estate- an enormous amount of money moving from NY to BC to AB just to put us in the best position to raise our family and attend to our son's needs. My husband was able to remain with his company all through this fortunately. Yah, we don't have all the fancy toys our neighbours have but my son is doing so much better here than he would have if we would have stayed in BC. And hard to believe, but there is a DAN! doctor at the rehabilitation hospital here where they assess the children for autism spectrum and other disorders. He came after we were seen there for my son's diagnosis; we continue to use our ND.
It is a crime that services and funding for autism aren't universal across Canada. But for all the flack that Alberta takes from the ROC, it does appear to have its advantages.
Have you seen today's article in the G&M about autism caused by genes? http://tinyurl.com/2gyfrof
The usual eejits/shills commenting.
Posted by: samaxtics | June 09, 2010 at 04:44 PM
Going now to investigate Canadian citizenship....
Posted by: Garbo | June 09, 2010 at 03:38 PM
o.k. with news like this, really, Where in the World is Matt Lauer???
Posted by: jen | June 09, 2010 at 03:09 PM
yay!! Just got my copies of Callous Disregard and will give one to the local library and if they don't want it I'll put into circulation at the local (large) grocery store in the "leave a book, take a book" area. Bwahahaha....
Posted by: jen | June 09, 2010 at 02:04 PM
David, the information you have taken the time to gather is amazing!!!!!!!!!!! I hope Orac and his "scientific disciples" are reading it.I'd like to see them spin their way out of that data. Yes, Henderson, there is no other way for people besides universal health care. It is the only sane, humane option and it is there when you really need it. It isn't perfect but very good for emergencies. I'm glad you gave the link for the globe and mail article about the WHO analysis of H1N1 (fear mongering). I am also glad that we apparently (Canada) learned something from that SARS scare. It is criminal that the US is promoting this dangerous protocal of harmful drugs when evidence exists to show it to be more harmful than helpful. Re. Alberta, I am not sure as to the costs of ABA as I do not have a child with autism but work with kids in the schools. I know that there has been a huge outcry about the burden of the costs for the parents in Canada.
My friend with MS just refused a toxic protocal for her condition and she is not taking it lying down (even though she's in a wheelchair at this point). She's getting a doppler done in the US and then depending on the result she's going wherever it takes to get the "liberation" procedure done to remove any blockages in her neck area. Those MS people are PISSED OFF. There are alot of parallels with the autism community. Apparently the MS society is pharma driven and they couldn't give a shit about recommending the procedure or even putting monies toward studying it anytime soon. They are being about as passive-aggressive as groups like the IAAC or AS. May they feel alot of guilt over this. It's terrible weather here in Calgary. Yuk. I know it's nicer in T.O. now!!
Posted by: jen | June 09, 2010 at 01:56 PM
So I look up benefits for Canada, and I find this organization. Same ole, same ole...Ugh!
Posted by: Julie Leonardo | June 09, 2010 at 01:45 PM
Very interesting article I read today. It discusses an investigation by the BMJ into the Conficts of Interest within the body of scientists that the WHO uses to advise them on pandemics:
Here's a small snippet:
"A joint investigation by the BMJ and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has uncovered evidence that raises troubling questions about how WHO managed conflicts of interest among the scientists who advised its pandemic planning, and about the transparency of the science underlying its advice to governments. Was it appropriate for WHO to take advice from experts who had declarable financial and research ties with pharmaceutical companies producing antivirals and influenza vaccines? Why was key WHO guidance authored by an influenza expert who had received payment for other work from Roche, manufacturers of oseltamivir, and GlaxoSmithKline, manufacturers of zanamivir? And why does the composition of the emergency committee from which Chan sought guidance remain a secret known only to those within WHO? We are left wondering whether major public health organisations are able to effectively manage the conflicts of interest that are inherent in medical science."
I will be posting a rebuttal on my site to the idiots in the Quackosphere(tm) who seem to think that this shouldn't be a concern.
Posted by: Craig Willoughby | June 09, 2010 at 01:40 PM
You realize of course what will happen when flu shot revenues start to plummet in the US
Posted by: randy | June 09, 2010 at 01:28 PM
"whilst I'm promoting Alberta, no provincial sales tax, choice in education and the availability of respite funding makes this province practically utopia for autism families. :) "
Sounds wonderful samaxtics - but many of those same families looking in are broke - I think if I sold everything I own, and begged and pleaded for more, I wouldn't have enough to put a dent in a down payment on a new life in Alberta. It's a long walk from Ontario, figuratively speaking. Literally, if I also sell the car :-)
Not a shot at you or your beautiful province - I'm just kinda grumbling - where I am sucks for services but we can't live in a shoe box either. So near and yet so far, you know...? :-(
Posted by: randy | June 09, 2010 at 01:24 PM
I'm sooooo jealous :).
And, everyone -
Here's jen's & my discussion re: H1N1 panic last October from a Canadian perspective (different vaccinations than in the States).
Both of us share on this board - that if we had the non-adjuvant vaccine we would have seriously considered taking it (we had adjuvant filled H1N1 shots up here). That's how much it was in the media. So, really - the press promoted (and terrified) everyone here too.
Posted by: Henderson | June 09, 2010 at 12:42 PM
In the USA,
The CDC drags our the same 36,000 flu death number each and every year, so they do not have to bother with trying to figure out real numbers.
Look for Dr. Nancy to give out the number on NBC in a few months.
Posted by: cmo | June 09, 2010 at 12:41 PM
This report is valuable since it is written with great care and thoroughness. Here in Germany, only 26 percent of the population got vaccinated, and the government has difficulties now with selling the superfluous vaccines.
It appears that the vaccine industry had judged the need for these vaccines wrongly, and now, the machinery for making vaccines is occupied by flu vaccines. The big problem is to get the whole equipment sterilized before a different vaccine is made.
This is the same as sterilizing surgical instruments, and the heat and hot steam used for surgical instruments just cannot be attained in the vaccine machinery so sterility has become a big big problem.
Perhaps David Burd could find some details on this in patents files, with help from former colleagues in the USPTO.
If sterilization does not occur, even just in some remote corners of such a machine, the vaccines made will be useless and dangerous since mutations are occuring constantly in such machines, and nobody can tell for sure what is in a vaccine vial. The only reliable things are the glass vial and the label...
Hans (patent attorney - I immediately recognized the patent style of David. This is called deformation professionelle.)
Posted by: Hans RAIBLE | June 09, 2010 at 12:33 PM
New Zealand has bought 800,000 doses for this winter for a population of just over 4,000,000. So much for their silly herd immunity theory.
Posted by: Ajac | June 09, 2010 at 12:09 PM
I got so much flack from my aunt, who has 2 brother's who are Dr.'s, about not getting the flu and H1N1 shots for myself and my daughter. Can't wait to fill her in on the actual statistics vs. the amount of media hype it was given especially after she accused me and my sister of fear mongering because my sis posted an article I forwarded her about H1N1 vaccine concerns.
Posted by: Moonstonemama | June 09, 2010 at 11:43 AM
Our government is such an embarassment. Can I move to Canada?
Posted by: Mary | June 09, 2010 at 11:20 AM
Maybe we parents should join together and become a corporation - then maybe the CDC/FDA will be interested in what we are saying.
Posted by: farmboy | June 09, 2010 at 09:53 AM
Alberta, IIRC as we don't use ABA, pays up to $60,000 a year up to 18 years of age. I think we are only surpassed by the Northwest Territories. And whilst I'm promoting Alberta, no provincial sales tax, choice in education and the availability of respite funding makes this province practically utopia for autism families. :)
Posted by: samaxtics | June 09, 2010 at 09:42 AM
Thank you for this warning. I only knew about the problems associated with Tamiflu.
Lori is so right about docs feeling they haven't done their job unless they hand over a prescription. Unfortunately many patients feel they haven't gotten their money's worth unless they walk away with a prescription. We've been conditioned to receive a pill for whatever ails us.
Posted by: Just say no | June 09, 2010 at 09:37 AM
For parents looking for an alternative to flu vaccines for flu prevention, don't forget the humble elderberry. This little berry is a powerhouse against all types of flu - even H1N1.
Posted by: Libby | June 09, 2010 at 09:15 AM
The Flu vaccination(s) are heavily promoted up here. Especially, for children. When a child died early on from H1N1 (healthy, hockey playing, middle school student) - the media went into terror overdrive:
This article above shows that the uptake of the H1N1 wasn't as they had hoped it would be - but that is largely because the actual wave of H1N1 hit before the shot was available.
They promoted that we take the regular flu shot in January (so resources were available for the H1N1 in the fall).
Truly, it felt like the media spoke of nothing else last year.
Re: you didn't mention what I feel is the main reason why children do not die as readily from serious cases of the flu. Public health care.
Imagine - your child is very, very sick and you don't have healthcare - or your premiums are so large that you cannot afford to go to the hospital, etc., etc.
Cost scenarios do not exist here. It really is wonderful (American in Canada). Your child is sick - you have access to a doctor - it's pretty simple. As you show, Canadian doctors are not giving the antivirals as readily - but in cases that dictate the need for hospitalizations - it will happen that much sooner here (and kids will be supported on IVs, etc.).
Now, for specialty healthcare (e.g., ABA, etc.). My province is terrible (as are most outside of Alberta). Alberta has very good ABA services (or so I'm told) - as they have tons of oil money.
But, "jen" should chime in here re: Alberta :).
Posted by: Henderson | June 09, 2010 at 08:04 AM
This is such valuable information. Thank you for taking the time to research the issue. It certainly makes me feel better regarding the choices I have made with my children. There is such tremendous pressure from the media and mainstream physicians to aggressively treat flu symptoms. As a rule physicians feel the need to treat a symptom with medication. It's how they are trained. I really believe that they feel like they haven't done their job unless you leave with a prescription. How about writing on a prescription "Rest, fluids, and cold compresses."
Posted by: Lori NP | June 09, 2010 at 07:52 AM
GREAT article and investigative reporting!! The FDA fails us in so many ways.
Posted by: Beth | June 09, 2010 at 07:24 AM