D11

Alison Ménard

Stumble Upon

del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Print

Email

13 Comment(s)

I have been observing with interest as the debate swirls around me: should we vaccinate ourselves and our children against H1N1 or not?

Some frequently asked questions I have heard are quite practical: Are there precautions we can take instead of, or in addition to, receiving the vaccine? Are the effects of the vaccine worse than the effects of this flu? What option is right for me and my family?

Then there are the more fantastical theories. I have heard different variations of this one: the push to have citizens vaccinated is all part of an elaborate conspiracy in which are supposedly complicit the drug companies, our government and, depending on who you ask, quite possibly the Queen, the Pope, the Gettys, the Rothschilds and even the late Col. Sanders, who may or may not form a mysterious evil pentavirate bent on taking over the world, one vaccination at a time.

Really? It's the Illuminati that are behind this push to vaccinate against swine flu? It's a dark cabal, distracting us with a manufactured flu and vaccine panic while 'they' loot the vaults of all nations? Really?

And then the e-mails and Facebook postings! The messages from friends and strangers alike range in tone from reasoned to hysterical, knowledgeable to know-it-all and sublime to ridiculous.

I can't remember the last topic that took on a life of its own quite like this question of vaccine or no vaccine. But I guess it makes sense: this is a health issue that has aspects both personal and public. In that sense, your decision to vaccinate or not affects you but it also affects me and my children, and my decisions affect you and your children.

Maybe that's why people seem to feel it's so important to convince others of their point of view on this.

The whole thing has raised some pretty interesting questions. For example: can the government require civil servants, or can employers require employees, to take the vaccine? Can the government require unvaccinated children or workers to stay home for some period of time during an outbreak?

Are these scare tactics, or a legitimate attempt to blunt the potential known and unknown public health effects if and when the flu hits an area particularly hard and there is a crisis?

I am convinced it is an intensely personal decision because so many factors in deciding to vaccinate or not depend on a person's own health circumstances, vulnerabilities, status, living arrangements or general context.

Faced with H1N1, the considerations and realities for a homeless drug addict in downtown Vancouver may be very different than those for a 13-year-old student, a middle-aged homemaker or an elderly Scandinavian patient.

That's part of why I find it a bit irresponsible or foolhardy or both that so many people appear to be making these decisions, or guiding others, based on random bits of unverified information they find on the Internet.

It's especially scary when people's best source of information appears to be YouTube or Facebook or their favourite blog. Some of what's out there is no doubt true or absolutely false; much of it is twisted rumour. But how can you possibly know the difference in those circumstances?

How can the average person ensure they are finding the information they need from legitimate sources to make a rational informed decision as to how best protect their health in this case?

I thought I had the answer to that question last night when I was researching this for myself. A healthcare professional answered a group e-mail question from a mutual friend with a reasoned rational recommendation: do as much reading and research as you possibly can and make an informed personal decision that takes into consideration your own particular circumstances and the best sources of information. Don't presume to tell others what the correct answer is for them.

This person also provided a web link, to what she felt as a professional was the best website to consult, and urged us to do so frequently for updates as the science becomes clearer.

"Eureka" I thought as I clicked on the web link, "I have the inside track to the best information."

As the link opened, I was immediately profoundly disappointed. "You've got to be kidding me," I thought. "But you expect me to go to the government website and trust the information contained in it?"

You see, this specialized healthcare worker had directed us to the website for the Public Health Agency of Canada, and my immediate reaction was to question this as a legitimate source of correct information on the swine flu issue.

Which got me to thinking on a topic altogether different then the question of whether or not our family members will be vaccinated.

There was a time in my memory and yours when the government would have been considered by most people to be the best source of information for this kind of thing.

Citizens would have counted on the fact that government employs excellent researchers and scientists and funds programs that result in the most reliable information.

It's quite remarkable, then, to note that I'm surrounded by people who reject what our government is telling us on this issue as questionable, or manipulated, or just plain false.

Maybe it's cynicism and maybe it's stupidity, but maybe it's indicative of a profound loss of faith among citizens.

And maybe it's the natural consequence of the damage wrought by politicians who value the pursuit of power over the more noble duties that used to be associated with occupying public office, in some far-away time in some far-away land.

Maybe we have a lot more than a swine flu pandemic to think about.

* Alison Ménard is a local lawyer and activist who operates a law firm and writes about social justice issues. Her column appears each Friday.