In Monday’s opinion section, Erin Mastre wrote about influenza vaccination [titled “Flu shots: Histroy shed light on their uses and benefits”], and I applaud her for speaking to medical professionals about such a timely subject. However, her column remains misleading when referring to the efficacy of the inactivated influenza vaccine. She cites the anecdotal evidence of her grandparents’ illness in the face of vaccine administration and the failure of complete coverage of all circulating strains as reasons to not receive vaccination. She also cites cross-protection, seen in the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic, as a reason vaccination is unwarranted. None of these are accurate indicators of vaccine efficacy, and a cross-protective effect seen in 1918 should not be extrapolated to modern influenza vaccination strategies.

She also fails to mention herd immunity, one of the most important aspects of influenza vaccination strategies, especially within a diverse collegiate setting. King, et al. in the December 2006 New England Journal of Medicine demonstrated that vaccinating healthy children significantly reduced the spread of influenza to households and the community, even though the vaccines were not optimally matched to circulating strains. Most studies estimate that the influenza vaccine in healthy adults reduces laboratory-confirmed cases by 70-90 percent with optimal strain matching, and between 50-60 percent for non-optimal strain matching [according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention].

Dustin Loy

Senior

Veterinary