Most would refuse emergency use H1N1 vaccine or additive
A majority of Americans would not take an H1N1 flu vaccine or drug additive authorized for emergency use by the food and Drug Administration, according to a University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health and University of Georgia study. The study, available in Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science , found that fewer than 10 percent of those surveyed said they would be willing to take such a vaccine or drug and nearly 30 percent remained undecided.
The passage of the Project Bioshield Act in 2004 created the emergency use authorization (EUA) giving the FDA the ability to use experimental or "off label" drugs in the event of an actual or potential emergency. To date, four vaccines against H1N1 virus have been approved under the same process used by the FDA for the seasonal flu vaccine. Also, several drug additives, or adjuvants – sometimes added to vaccines to strengthen the immune response and stretch the quantity of available vaccines in the event of a pandemic – have been ordered and stockpiled by the federal government in case they may be needed. But adding them to H1N1 vaccines would trigger an EUA, which is one of the reasons the federal government has chosen not to use them.
"Although the U.S government has held off on including an adjuvant in H1N1 vaccines for now, American officials may need to reconsider this decision as the pandemic unfolds," said study author Sandra Quinn, Ph.D., associate dean for Student Affairs and Education and associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health. "There also remains a significant shortage of the vaccines in many countries around the world. Given this, our finding that few people would accept a new but not yet fully approved H1N1 vaccine or drug is very worrisome," she said.
The study was based on a survey that focused on attitudes toward H1N1 and willingness to accept flu vaccines and drugs not officially approved by the FDA, but authorized for emergency use. Of the 1,543 adults questioned in June 2009, 46 percent of people surveyed said they were concerned about getting swine flu. However, nearly 86 percent said they thought it was unlikely or very unlikely that they themselves would become ill.
Researchers also report that 63 percent of people surveyed said they would not be willing to take "a new, but not yet approved vaccine", and 50 percent said they would be very or extremely worried about taking it. Of those who reported they would be moderately to extremely worried, 70 percent said they would refuse the vaccine outright. Only 4 percent of the most worried said they would take the vaccine, compared to 23 percent of those who were not at all or slightly worried.
In addition, 65 percent of those who said they would refuse the vaccine reported being confident about their decision, compared to only 46 percent of those who said they would take the vaccine.
Race also was associated with refusal to take the vaccine – 66 percent of whites and 60 percent of blacks reported they would refuse the vaccine, compared to 47 percent of Hispanics. Blacks reported they were the most worried (62 percent), followed by Hispanics (52 percent) and whites (46 percent).
According to Dr. Quinn, these results differ from some current opinion polls on public acceptance of an H1N1 vaccine because the researchers explicitly asked about vaccines approved under the EUA designation.
"Communication about the H1N1 vaccine is enormously challenging," said Dr. Quinn. "The additional issue of emergency use designation would further complicate challenges to clear communication. In the event an emergency-use adjuvant is required to stem the H1N1 pandemic, public health professionals will need to articulate a strong case for the vaccine and aggressively address myths and misinformation to increase understanding and acceptance."
The potential challenge in communicating with the public about emergency use authorization is relevant beyond the question of the H1N1 vaccine, added Dr. Quinn. "EUAs are an important tool for the protection of the public's health in an emergency. It would behoove public health agencies to begin now to think about communication and education of the public on this issue."
Most read news
Topics
Organizations
Other news from the department business & finance

Get the life science industry in your inbox
By submitting this form you agree that LUMITOS AG will send you the newsletter(s) selected above by email. Your data will not be passed on to third parties. Your data will be stored and processed in accordance with our data protection regulations. LUMITOS may contact you by email for the purpose of advertising or market and opinion surveys. You can revoke your consent at any time without giving reasons to LUMITOS AG, Ernst-Augustin-Str. 2, 12489 Berlin, Germany or by e-mail at revoke@lumitos.com with effect for the future. In addition, each email contains a link to unsubscribe from the corresponding newsletter.
Most read news
More news from our other portals
Last viewed contents
Par_Pharmaceutical

Using nature as a model for low-friction bearings

Scientists blueprint tiny cellular 'nanomachine'
Hantavirus
Jacob_B._Winslow
Minoxidil
Bayer CropScience expands global R&D activities in seeds and traits by setting up new research focus area in cereals - Superior solutions for wheat farmers could be available as early as 2015
Buckthorn
Ancient_DNA

Tiny light-up barcodes identify molecules by their twinkling - Tags made of flashing DNA let researchers tease apart dozens of molecules at once
