This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Cynthia Harper, MD; Jay Gibson, PhD
University of Cincinnati College of Medicine

JAMA. 1985;254(11):1451.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

The recent article by Patriarca et al¹ provides long-needed additional documentation of the efficacy of the influenza vaccine in the elderly. Although they demonstrated that the vaccine provided some protection, we believe that the efficacy rates they reported are unacceptably low.

The influenza vaccine has been available since 1943, and its use with high-risk groups has been recommended since 1963. Each year a great deal of publicity about these immunizations is directed to both physicians and the public. However, the medical literature that advocates its use conspicuously fails to mention efficacy rates for the elderly.^2,3 Because of the lack of an efficient means of identifying viruses, the practicing physician rarely identifies specific viral agents and has little opportunity to gain firsthand information on the effectiveness of this vaccine. Other commonly used vaccines have much higher efficacy rates (eg, tetanus at almost 100%, diphtheria at more . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?