That’s right, ABC news/ HealthDay reports that some parents are willingly exposing their kids to those already infected with the virus. The logic behind this trend? Apparently, these parents believe that by exposing their children to the current, milder strain, they’ll be protecting them if a more virulent strain occurs in the future.
So what do health officials think of swine flu parties?
“I think it’s totally nuts,” Dr. Anne Moscona, a flu specialist at Weill Medical College of Cornell University, told the New York Times this summer. “I can’t believe people are really thinking of doing it. I understand the thinking, but I just fear we don’t know enough about how this virus would react in every individual. This is like the Middle Ages, when people deliberately infected themselves with small pox. It’s vigilante vaccination — you know, taking immunity into your own hands.”
In a recent post about swine flue parties, the CDC states that it does not recommend them for two reasons 1) while the 2009 strain of H1N1 has been mild so far for some people, it has been severe to fatal for others and 2) there’s no way to predict how the virus will be handled by the willingly exposed, let alone all the other people that could get it from an unintentional exposure. Add to that the fact that the virus is particularly hard on children and young adults--according to the CDC, 27 states reported that of the 4,958 people hospitalized with H1N1 swine flu from September 1-October 10, 53 percent (more than half!) were under the age of 25--and well, I’m just dumbfounded.
Why would anyone willingly expose their kids to a potentially lethal virus? And where does “vigilante vaccination” leave the rest of us?
