Posts Tagged ‘Swine Flu’

Global swine flu pandemic is over, WHO says

Healthcare Republic - 11th August 2010 9:28 am

The global swine flu pandemic is now over, the WHO has said, though some groups remain at risk of severe illness from the virus.

Following a meeting of its emergency committee, the WHO announced that the world was now in a ‘post-pandemic period’.

“The world is no longer in phase 6 of influenza pandemic alert,” WHO Director-General Dr Margaret Chan said. “We are now moving into the post-pandemic period. The new H1N1 virus has largely run its course.”

The WHO said that a number of groups remain at increased risk of severe illness from the pandemic H1N1 virus. These include young children, pregnant women, and people with underlying respiratory or other chronic conditions, including asthma and diabetes.

Patients who have severe or deteriorating influenza should be treated as soon as possible with oseltamivir, the WHO said.

Read more at Healthcare Republic.

Swine flu: were we lucky or were we had?

By Mónica Lalanda - 5th June 2010 12:34 pm

Today, when you think about swine flu you either feel that you’ve been had or you’ve been lucky. The truth is that the flu pandemic had very few victims in terms of mortality but has killed public trust in the system.

The whole dynamic of what happened during 2009 - the intense fear that paralysed the first world, the globalisation, the interpretation of data, the minute-to-minute follow up or the part played by the media - were unique.

Looking back into it now seems almost surreal. For several weeks back in April and May we all felt at high risk of death or severe illness, we all praised how the WHO took charge and how health authorities all over the world worked together; at the time, vaccines, antiviral, prevention measures all seemed appropriate. We were all in the same boat.

By June things started to change, we already had data about what happened in the southern hemisphere and the numbers confirmed that the H1N1 was highly contagious but caused very little mortality.

During the summer, one boat turned into two boats. One boat carried the health authorities, the government and the media, and another boat took the growing number of sceptics. The internet played a revolutionary part during these months for some underground information.

I’ll tell you what happened in Spain, which was probably different to how it went in Britain, perhaps because the Spaniards are never good at following orders; here there was a strong and well organised group of medical bloggers called Gripe A, ante todo mucha calma (Swine flu, remain calm) and a few other medical blogs that started to look at the situation with more critical eyes and who were welcomed and religiously followed by medical and lay population alike.

As the weeks went by, and the mismatch in between what we were told might happen and what was really happening increased, the GPs in their surgeries became more and more despondent with the official information and unsurprisingly the vaccination campaign was a huge failure.

By December, the BMJ and Channel 4 unveiled a huge scandal: the studies used by the WHO to recommend the use of Tamiflu were scattered and paid by Roche itself. The investigation also questioned the effectiveness of the drug.

Strangely enough, in the last few months we have seen several simple studies on the immunity to the H1N1 published by Science and The Lancet. They show what we have already realised, that a large part of the population was already immunized since this virus was not new at all.

Why did the governments of the world prefer to use their resources to buy unproven vaccines rather than trigger studies to learn the real risk? Why did they carry on with a policy of fear after July?

I personally think we were had and I am terribly disappointed to see that we abandoned the current obsession with evidence based medicine and moved to a medicine based on clairvoyance. Resources were used as if they were unlimited and we allowed the media to manipulate us all through the irresponsible use of the power of words and images.

There are two clear victims of the flu pandemic, the trust of the population in national and international health authorities and the trust of the population in vaccination.

Both of them might be irreparably damaged, with dangerous consequences. We surely have a lot of lessons to learn, saying that we were just lucky is simply not enough.

WHO swine flu experts ‘linked’ to drug companies

BBC Health - 4th June 2010 3:37 pm

Key scientists behind World Health Organization advice on stockpiling of pandemic flu drugs had financial ties with companies which stood to profit, an investigation has found.

The BMJ says the scientists had openly declared these interests in other publications yet WHO made no mention of the links.

It comes as a report from the Council of Europe criticised the lack of transparency around the handling of the swine flu pandemic.

A spokesman for WHO said the drug industry did not influence its decisions on swine flu.

Guidelines recommending governments stockpile antiviral drugs were issued by WHO in 2004.

The advice prompted many countries around the world into buying up large stocks of Tamiflu, made by Roche, and Relenza manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline.

A year after the swine flu pandemic was declared, stocks are left unused in warehouses and governments are attempting to unpick contracts.

Read more at BBC Health.

CMO’s view of 2009: swine flu, alcohol pricing and quality

By Mike Broad - 26th May 2010 9:33 am

Prof Sir Liam Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer for England, stands down this week. He’s been in post for 12 years, during the same period as the Labour government. His annual reports provide an interesting snapshot of the evolving health priorities over that period. His final one was released recently with little fanfare. Here’s a summary of the year and ongoing priorities, in his own words:

1. Swine flu

The predominant challenge of 2009 was the emergence of the first influenza pandemic for 40 years. From Mexico, the illness spread fast around the world. England was amongst the first countries to have cases of what was rapidly confirmed as a new flu virus - influenza A/H1N1.

England was well prepared. Initial efforts to slow transmission were maintained for several weeks. Inevitably, the number affected grew. A growing number of people were admitted to hospital. In June 2009, the country sadly saw its first death.

Demonstrating the unusual way in which pandemic flu viruses behave, rates of infection continued to swell into the summer months. General practice felt much of the strain, and handled it well.

When the strain was approaching a critical level, the National Pandemic Flu Service was activated. This was an entirely novel concept for the country, and formed an important part of the pandemic plan. The public had never previously been able to access an internet and telephone based diagnostic and treatment service that provided medication when appropriate. The National Pandemic Flu Service was well used, and relieved significant pressure on the mainstream NHS.

As summer turned to autumn, the picture was mixed. There had been deaths. Hospital capacity had been stretched significantly, particularly in intensive care. But rates of infection had peaked in August 2009 and were falling. For most people, the disease was milder than had been anticipated based on the early information from Mexico.

Some have called the public health response to the pandemic an overreaction. In so doing, they draw attention to the overall costs of antiviral drugs and vaccines. They speak of the relatively small number of deaths compared with previous influenza pandemics and seasonal influenza outbreaks. In describing the number of deaths in the present pandemic, they often use the prefix ‘only’. In response, it is important to ask a number of questions. Would it have been acceptable not to plan as well as we did for a pandemic nor procure countermeasures? Having done so, and in the face of emerging, worrying evidence from the first phase of the pandemic in Mexico, would it have been right not to deploy existing countermeasures and not to strengthen our holdings? Would it have been acceptable to hide and conceal statistical projections provided by statistical modellers of international standing, even though releasing them publicly caused alarm in some quarters? Would it have been right to take the view that it was acceptable to ‘tolerate’ a certain number of deaths, considering them low enough to accept, when a way of preventing them was available?

In the first pandemic of the 21st century, we had the option of fighting the illness to protect children and adults from its adverse consequences. It is vital that we learn from what we have seen in this pandemic, for the sake of those who find themselves tackling - and affected by - the next. It is likely to be worse.

2. Alcohol consumption

I made several recommendations, including the introduction of a minimum price per unit of alcohol. I have been pleased to see public health and medical leaders engaging so widely with this issue. Many of its representative bodies have spoken out in favour of a minimum price policy, including the Royal College of Physicians and the BMA. In July 2009, I gave evidence to the parliamentary Health Select Committee’s inquiry into alcohol. Its report, published in January 2010, also calls for a minimum price per unit. The price of alcohol is a crucial determinant of its consumption. Tackling the substantial harms caused by alcohol in this country requires this decisive action.

I remain concerned about young people’s drinking. The evidence shows that 11 to 17 year olds drink 20 million units of alcohol (the equivalent of 9 million pints of beer or 2 million bottles of wine) every week. Young people who binge drink in adolescence are more likely to be binge drinkers as adults, and have an increased risk of developing alcohol dependence. In December 2009, I published guidance on the consumption of alcohol by children and young people. I advised that an alcohol free childhood is the healthiest and best option.

3. High Quality Care for All

Published in 2008, Lord Darzi’s report High Quality Care for All marked an important milestone. Its central tenet is that quality should be the ‘organising principle’ of the NHS. It aims to set the health service on a path defined by the quality of its care. It seeks to promote quality from being the focus of specific workstreams to being at the heart of how the service operates and thinks.

In 2009, the health service began working on a particularly key means of achieving this. It has been collecting the necessary data to produce ‘Quality Accounts’ for 2009/10. Trusts will report their key measures of quality in the same way in which they report their key measures of financial performance. This is vitally important. Focus shifts to where measurement is made. The act of making and reporting measurements of quality will itself catalyse improvement, helping the NHS to continue developing the quality of the service that it provides to patients.

4. Surgical errors

The 2007 Annual Report, describing surgical safety, highlighted the fact that over 100,000 errors involving surgical patients were reported to the National Patient Safety Agency in that year.

My report recommended that clinical teams should pilot the World Health Organization’s Surgical Safety Checklist. A subsequent pilot study of this checklist involved hospitals in London and seven other locations around the world. It demonstrated that using the checklist could reduce the risk of death and postoperative complications significantly. In 2009, the National Patient Safety Agency started to implement its use nationwide. By late 2009, 80% of hospital trusts in England joined the implementation of this important work.

5. Women in medicine

The proportion of doctors who are women has been climbing rapidly over recent years. It now stands at 41%. In my 2006 Annual Report, I discussed some of the particular issues that this group faces. I formed a National Working Group on Women in Medicine to consider the issues and to develop solutions. I was pleased to receive its report in October 2009. The group proposes a series of steps to enhance opportunities for female doctors. The report makes clear recommendations for a number of bodies, including government departments, universities and NHS employers.

6. Discrimination

On a similar theme, my 2007 Annual Report drew attention to the barriers of racial discrimination that still exist within the medical profession. Substantial improvements have occurred in recent years, but work remains to be done. In 2009, I chaired a series of roundtable meetings on this issue. These brought together high level representatives from the NHS, the GMC and royal colleges. I am pleased by the progress that many of the national bodies are making in this area. I hope that this important issue will continue to receive the attention it deserves.

7. Revalidation

I am also pleased with the progress that is being made to introduce revalidation for doctors. In 2009, the GMC introduced the necessary categories of registration that will allow doctors to obtain and renew their licence to practise. The Department of Health has established a series of pilot sites through which the operational details of revalidation will be tested and refined. I hope that doctors will welcome revalidation. Between qualification and retirement, competence is simply assumed at present. For the vast majority, this assumption is justified. The revalidation process will allow doctors to move from assumption to demonstration. The process will also play an important part in identifying the small number for whom the current assumption is flawed.

Read the full report.

Recriminations begin over swine flu vaccine

By Richard Marks, head of policy of Remedy - 9th January 2010 6:40 pm

At the beginning of the summer it looked as if we could be on the brink of a major health epidemic that could bring the country to its knees. A huge machine went to work preparing for the impending cataclysm. Six months later the swine flu epidemic has been a bit of a damp squib, and the medical profession looks as if it has been ‘crying wolf’ yet again.

Millions of pounds were spent on vaccines and antivirals and a great deal of anxiety has been generated. So was this incompetence? And, are we going to point the finger of blame at someone?

The retrospectoscope is a great and wonderful tool. Looking back to the summer there was a very real threat of a new strain of a virus, which had the potential to spread rapidly across the world. Attempts at containment were unlikely to succeed. In addition, there was evidence from South America showing that this new virus had the potential to be highly virulent, and worst case scenarios suggested that up to 65,000 people could have died.

Those responsible for planning services across the country are in an unenviable opinion. If they under react and under plan then they risk leaving the country vulnerable to a great plague that will cause untold misery and grief. If they over react then they will be accused of unnecessarily crying wolf and wasting money. And if they look indecisive then they appear weak.

Swine flu has been a global problem and the planners in this country will have looked carefully at what the rest of the world was doing. And it looks like everyone else got it about as wrong as we did. Well actually some of them got it even more wrong. The French, for example, bought 94 million doses of vaccine - more than the population of the country - and they only used 5m of them.  Now they are desperately trying to unload their excess stock.

And figures published in Le Monde showed that some other parts of Western Europe bought enough vaccine to immunise their whole population twice over. The US and Canada also bought considerably more than they have used, with Canada recently donating 5m surplus doses to Mexico.

There are some that think we have drawn a line under this too quickly. Flu epidemics come in threes, and we still haven’t seen the end of it. The WHO is still warning that it will be a year before the crisis is over. So maybe before we rush to put our excess vaccines onto eBay we should just wait a little longer. 

Doctors are naturally cautious and I think most of us think that the government largely got it right. It is far better to slightly overreact rather than the opposite. I think the majority of taxpayers would agree with this too.

However the green-ink conspiracy theorists have been on the case and are pointing their fingers at the drug companies. They are suggesting that some of the independent experts sitting on WHO committees have financial links with the pharmaceutical industry. And one blog posting goes further and points the finger at an individual. 

Should we believe the conspiracy theorists? Probably not. The allegations may well turn out to be totally without merit or validity. Whenever a mistake is made then there is always someone ready to leap forward and claim that there is a conspiracy at work. But, with such large sums of money at stake, we do need to be reassured about what went on.

GPs refuse deal to give children the swine flu jab

BBC Health - 8th December 2009 11:41 pm

Plans to vaccinate healthy children under the age of five against swine flu are in disarray after doctors refused to sign up to a deal.

GPs are already immunising people with health problems and pregnant women.

But the BMA and government have ended talks on children after they failed to agree a deal.

Health visitors and district nurses are now to be asked by local NHS managers to step in - but the programme may not now start in December as planned.

However, the vaccination of the first wave groups, which also include health workers, is continuing as normal as they were covered by a deal that was brokered in early autumn.

It is thought the latest talks broke down over the amount of flexibility the government was willing to give doctors over the rest of their workload.

Negotiators had offered doctors £5.25 per dose - the same as they are getting for the first priority group.

Read more at BBC Health.  

Tamiflu-resistant swine flu found in Wales

Healthcare Republic - 23rd November 2009 2:01 pm

A strain of swine flu resistant to Tamiflu has spread between patients within a hospital in south Wales, the National Public Health Service for Wales has confirmed.

Five patients on a unit treating patients with severe underlying health conditions at the University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, have been diagnosed with swine flu resistant to Tamiflu. It is believed that the patients acquired the infection in hospital.

Dr Roland Salmon, director of the NPHS Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, said: “The emergence of influenza A viruses that are resistant to Tamiflu is not unexpected in patients with serious underlying conditions and suppressed immune systems, who still test positive for the virus despite treatment. 

“In this case, the resistant strain of swine flu does not appear to be any more severe than the swine flu virus that has been circulating since April.

“For the vast majority of people, Tamiflu has proved effective in reducing the severity of illness.”

Read more at Healthcare Republic.

Vaccination is the only way to enjoy the X-factor

By Katherine Teale - 12th November 2009 2:41 pm

Today I’ve spent several hours searching for my keys, which have mysteriously disappeared.

The most likely scenario is that, during an episode of the impressive multi-tasking required to keep this household afloat, I’ve made what is known as a ‘human error’ and instead of replacing the keys in their proper place (the fruit bowl) I’ve put them somewhere really stupid. 

This kind of thing is becoming disturbingly frequent, and I’m seriously beginning to wonder whether my husband isn’t practicing some sinister Fanny by Gaslight scenario and deliberately hiding things to make me think I’m going mad. 

Every time I enter or leave a room I now have to complete a mental checklist to make sure I haven’t forgotten something.

Or, of course, it could be an after-effect of the swine flu vaccine I had this week, causing my cerebral hemispheres to gradually disintegrate so that by the end of the week I’m going to be enjoying the X-factor.

Despite the whole swine flu thing obviously being part of a huge government and pharmaceutical company conspiracy, I decided to take the jab. My reasons for this are A. young fit people are dying of swine flu which, in my book, tilts the risk/benefit see-saw towards doing something to avoid it, and B. if the rest of my family go down with the disease I want to be well enough to look after them.

Also, I suppose it would be good if we had a few doctors still fit enough to care for patients, although given the uptake of the vaccine at work, I might be pretty much on my own.

Occupational Health have thrown all their resources (and she didn’t look too happy about it) into going round the wards offering the injections to front line staff so my trainee and I took turns to pop out of our orthopaedic list to be vaccinated. We were unable to persuade any of the surgeons to follow suit, but, as they pointed out, we could probably just about manage during a flu pandemic without relying on the help of orthopaedic surgeons.  

There are lots of reasons why people are choosing not to have the vaccine: a healthy distrust of authority and too much reading of tabloid newspapers, as well as rumours about how awful the vaccination makes some people feel. Although, I’m guessing, a dose of swine flu is going to be more awful.

A recent poll in a medical journal revealed that over half of doctors wouldn’t be vaccinated.

Obviously contracting swine flu simply isn’t pushing people’s panic button yet, and we are not alone in this skepticism. Polls in France reveal that only about 10% would have the vaccine. It will be interesting to see how many patients have to die - perhaps even a celebrity or two (I could nominate several expendable ones but then how would they run X-factor) - before the uptake improves.

So far I can report that, apart from the keys incident, my only ill effect has been a sore arm for 48 hours. I am feeling a bit tired today, but I’m putting that down to rashly agreeing to host a sleepover for a load of eight year-olds last night.

So far, so good…

Updated guidance on working during pandemic

By Mike Broad - 3rd November 2009 10:21 am

The GMC is advising doctors during the swine flu pandemic to prioritise patient care on the basis of clinical need and the patient’s likely capacity to benefit rather than factors such as age.

In updated guidance for doctors working in a pandemic, the GMC this week outlines the standards of practice expected if their work is affected.

The guidance, which forms part of Good Medical Practice, acknowledges that a pandemic can break out regionally and so while some doctors may be working normally, others may be struggling to cope with the additional workload. The guidance allows those most affected to work flexibly to provide assistance where it is most needed.

In addition to offering guidance on making decisions about which patients receive treatment where resources are scarce, the GMC document makes allowance for doctors to work outside their normal field of practice so long as they are able to do so safely. An orthopaedic surgeon may be asked to support A&E admissions or administer vaccines for example.  

While key responsibilities such as acting with honesty and making patient safety a priority remain unchanged, the guidance recognises the constraints on time and resources likely in a pandemic.

There is no formal duty to report concerns about resources, equipment or insufficient patient services, other than in exceptional circumstances - because managers will already be aware of the pressures involved working in a pandemic.

And doctors running research programmes are asked to consider whether to interrupt them during a pandemic.

Jane O’Brien, GMC head of standards and ethics, said: “If services and resources come under real strain because of a pandemic, it is right that doctors should have some flexibility to ensure their efforts are directed towards treating patients and maintaining patient safety.

“Whilst the GMC expects doctors to provide a good standard of care, even in difficult circumstances, we do recognise that in a pandemic, some will have to make difficult decisions due to additional pressures.  Should a complaint be made against a doctor working under the strain of a pandemic, the GMC will take into account the circumstances under which they were working. However, it is important to note that all doctors should be ready to explain how and why they altered their practice if called upon to do so.”

Good Medical Practice, responsibilities of doctors in a national pandemic, was first made available in March 2009. It has since been amended to be consistent with the varying and regional impact of the pandemic on health services so far. Read the updated guidance online.

It can be used immediately, if necessary, by doctors working under strain because of the pandemic. It no longer requires a UK alert level 3 to be announced before it is effective.

Meanwhile, cases of swine flu have risen again with an estimated 78,000 new infections last week. The latest official figures for England also show that the number of people needing critical care has jumped to 157 patients - the highest number since swine flu emerged.

Read a blog on doctors’ responsibilities during swine flu.  

The swine flu conspiracy theory, according to Jerry Nelson

By Mr Jerry Nelson - 2nd November 2009 1:06 pm

Good news and bad news this week. On the plus side, the luscious Gabrielle, posh totty anaesthetist, has duly been appointed medical director of Middle Bit of England NHS Trust, so I look forward to seeing her strutting around in a power suit and high heels telling people off.

On the minus side, we’re all being ‘encouraged’ to have this new bloody swine flu vaccine. Is it just me, or do you smell a rat here?

So there’s this terrible so-called pandemic of so-called swine flu, which has claimed the lives of a whole load of Mexicans, but mysteriously almost nobody else, except there’s going to be a ’second wave’ of infections that are going to be super awesomely bad, and everyone’s going to die, unless you take this so-called ‘vaccine’ that some mega company in America just happens to have produced in ten minutes flat, that’s definitely safe.

What if it causes autism like the polio vaccine, huh? What then? We’ll all be reduced to hopeless sociopaths, only capable of tedious repetitive menial jobs. Dan The Fat Gasman says he’s not scared, but then he’s an anaesthetist. He already does a tedious repetitive menial job.

The truth is obvious. The CIA went down to Mexico and capped a few people with the sniffles, then the drug companies created this huge scare, via their stooges in the mainstream media, forcing everyone to buy their drug to cure a non-existent disease, and MI5 definitely killed Princess Diana, and if you rearrange the words TWIN TOWERS NINE ELEVEN you get the phrase BUSH DID IT HA HA HA. And if it wasn’t for bloggers such as myself, no-one would know ANY of this.

When I raised these concerns to Occupational Health, they pointed to the fact that all the orthopaedic surgeons had had theirs already and seemed OK, so it must be safe. What a laugh! How do you detect sudden-onset autism in an orthopod? You might as well give it to a herd of cows. No way, José, I’m sticking to my guns on this one.

UPDATE: Gabrielle says I have to have the jab.

UPDATE 2: Ouch!