By the time the vaccine reached young Canadians, it was next to uselessTIM SLOAN
Children were twice as susceptible as adults to becoming ill with the H1N1 influenza, a new study published in the New England Journal of Medicine shows. If one person in a household had the disease, a child was much more likely to sponge up the germs than an adult. It's more reason for Canada to rethink its strange vaccination strategy, in which children were an afterthought.
Anyone five and older was shunted to the back of the line for the flu vaccine in most provinces. By contrast, the United States allowed young people up to the age of 24 to join the line early on.
When the Public Health Agency of Canada, after consultations with the provinces, published its list of at-risk groups, the main criterion was not who was most likely to get the disease but how likely they were to suffer severe illness, or die from it. That's a reasonable approach, especially in light of shortages of the vaccine.
But after the initial priority groups, including children under five, aboriginals, pregnant women and health-care workers, received their chance at vaccinations, other at-risk groups popped up, which in some cases were at no great risk of dying (police and firefighters, who on the initial PHAC priority list were side by side with children five and over), and in other cases were at reduced risk of contracting H1N1, such as elderly people. The elderly, though not given priority for the vaccine in the U.S., were to be given prompt treatment with Tamiflu, under the strategy adopted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
By the time the vaccine reached Canadian children, it was next to useless. Many had already had the influenza, or had been exposed to it. In effect, public health authorities in much of the country (Saskatchewan and New Brunswick being notable exceptions) left children unprotected. Children were shoved so far down the list that three weeks passed from the first vaccinations and most Canadian children had not been given a chance to protect themselves. This was the very group most likely to get the disease: children have made up about 60 per cent of swine-flu cases.
No, they didn't die in great numbers. But if H1N1 had been deadlier than it turned out to be, they might have. And no one knew with any degree of certainty how severe the illness would be. Canada cited supposed epidemiologic evidence showing they were not at elevated risk of death; the U.S. cited other evidence showing that they were. Far better to err on the side of caution with children's health.
There may be other flus, other pandemics. Canada should never take such chances with its children again.