Killer at college: Meningitis threatens students

[Keith Hamburger]

Meningitis threatens college students - Infectious Diseases - MSNBC.com

Statistically speaking, the doctor was right. Meningococcal meningitis strikes fewer than 3,000 people in the United States each year, many of them college students or children under age 1. But while the bacterial infection is relatively rare, it’s also deadly, killing 10 to 12 percent of those it infects, sometimes within hours. The disease attacks and shuts down major organs and prevents blood from circulating to limbs, causing tissue to die. Among survivors, 20 percent suffer brain damage, kidney disease, loss of hearing or sight, limb amputations or other severe complications.

The disease is spread through air droplets and direct contact with someone who is infected. College students, particularly freshmen living in dorms, are at increased risk because of their lifestyle. They’re living away from home for the first time and many share everything from drinks to drags off each others’ cigarettes. And too many late nights of studying and partying can leave their immune systems run-down and vulnerable.

OK. So, this article is a horror story about the dangers of bacterial meningitis intended to get teenagers to get vaccinated with a facade of opposition opinion to the vaccinations.

But, let's look at some real numbers.

According to the article, some 3000 people per year contract bacterial meningitis. That's about 10 per million. Of those, 10% die (for an easy number, the article actually states 10-12%). 20% develop serious complications. So, that means that 3 per million people in the country will die or develop serious complications from bacterial meningitis.

The vaccine is said (again, according to the article) to be "83% effective against 4 of the five strands [sic] of bacterial meningitis". For convenience, I'm going with 80% effective against 80% of the strains of the bacteria that causes the disease. For all we know, the article doesn't tell us, the fifth strain that it doesn't work against could be the cause of 90% of all of the cases contracted, or it could be 1%. A fair assumption would be 20%.

In that case, 36% of all patients that receive the vaccine are not actually protected against the virus. So, we will still have 3.6 cases of meningitis for every million people, even if everyone in the country were to be vaccinated. And, 1.08 serious complications or death per million.

But, not everyone can be vaccinated. The disease is contracted mostly by infants and college students. The article doesn't state how many of the cited cases happen to each group, and it is very likely that infants are more susceptible to serious complications and death than college students. However, let's assume that 50% of the cases and complications do happen to college students. The vaccine cannot be administered before age 11. That means that it can only prevent half of the potential cases or .54 serious complications or death per million. The other .54, assuming that infants only constitute half of the population with such results (a very long shot in my opinion) cannot be prevented through vaccination.

However, the vaccine is not without effect. 1.25 of every million that receive the vaccine will contract Guillain-Barre syndrome. While this is not fatal it can be very debilitating for weeks, and possibly years. And, it is likely that the vaccine can have other effects, the vaccine is preserved with thimerosal which has been indicated, but not proven, to have significant negative effects in a minority of patients.

So, I guess my main question and point of debate here is, in your opinions, what is the purpose of such scare stories that don't tell us the whole story?

In this case the vaccine is likely to result in more than double the cases of complications than would ever be caused by the disease. It may prevent .18 deaths per million people and .36 serious complications (assuming certain distributions, the actual numbers are likely much lower), but at the risk of causing 1.25+ per million less serious complications.

Does the media really do us a service by printing such one sided stories intending to scare us into actions that may not be beneficial, or of only marginal benefit?

Is it good for us to be scared all the time?

Keith

[PatrickHenry]

Interesting numerical analysis, Keith.

I generally oppose vaccinations, especially forced programs. Unless a pressing public health need can be shown.

But I had one friend die from it about fifteen years ago. And my nephew died from it about forty years back, as an infant. So I wonder about your analysis that 3 of a million die. In the time period I have been aware of the disease, I have personally known two reople who died. Would it be realistic to think I have been acquainted with 666,666 people in that time period? That would be the way the numbers work wouldn't it?

Of course this is only anecdotal from a member of this forum...

[Jimmy the Pro]

The problem is that these stories become such scare stories because people do not do the full research, therefore believe the story above to be completely accurate, which you have shown is not true.

With at least some truth people think this must be the whole truth and therefore a bonifide "scare story" when in actuality its a fallacious story with incomplete numerical research (although Keith you have done yours, good job).

I am glad you've brought this story up and asked about it because I believe questioning the validity of these stories is one way to debunk the "scare"

[Keith Hamburger]

Interesting numerical analysis, Keith.

I generally oppose vaccinations, especially forced programs. Unless a pressing public health need can be shown.

But I had one friend die from it about fifteen years ago. And my nephew died from it about forty years back, as an infant. So I wonder about your analysis that 3 of a million die. In the time period I have been aware of the disease, I have personally known two reople who died. Would it be realistic to think I have been acquainted with 666,666 people in that time period? That would be the way the numbers work wouldn't it?

Of course this is only anecdotal from a member of this forum...

Well, the numbers are fairly clear. If 3000 people per year contract the disease in a population of 300,000,000 (actually estimated at just under 303,000,000, but the round number is easier to work with) that means that 1 in 100,000 will get the disease. If 10% die and 20% suffer serious complications that means that .3 in 100,000, or 3 in 1,000,000 will have serious complications.

So, actually, only 1 in 1 million actually are killed by the disease. So, statistically you would have to know 2 million people to know 2 that were killed.

But, anecdotes and statistics work like that. I personally don't know of anyone that has died from meningitis, I'm not sure I even know anyone that has had the disease. My brother contracted viral meningitis as a teen but that's a whole different question.

Perhaps you're taking on the load of my portion of the average (and a whole lot of others, too).

Keith

[Keith Hamburger]

The problem is that these stories become such scare stories because people do not do the full research, therefore believe the story above to be completely accurate, which you have shown is not true.

With at least some truth people think this must be the whole truth and therefore a bonifide "scare story" when in actuality its a fallacious story with incomplete numerical research (although Keith you have done yours, good job).

I am glad you've brought this story up and asked about it because I believe questioning the validity of these stories is one way to debunk the "scare"

Interestingly, for those that are mentioned in the article as having serious complications, the common factor is a delay in treatment. Even misdiagnosis by medical professionals when they did seek help.

It seems that, instead of spending money promoting vaccines of dubious value, it would be far better to train medical professionals and others in contact with populations at greater risk to better recognize and treat the symptoms. I think that would go a whole lot further to reducing those complications and deaths than the vaccine could ever hope to.

And that would eliminate the risks of the vaccines altogether.

Keith

[PatrickHenry]

My brother contracted viral meningitis as a teen but that's a whole different question.

Keith

What's the difference between the two diseases...aside from the bug that does the infection?

I don't really know whether it was bacterial or viral that killed my two acquaintances.

And what is the incidence of viral meningitis?

As to the reasons for promoting vaccines...can you say pharma-profits?

[Keith Hamburger]

What's the difference between the two diseases...aside from the bug that does the infection?

I don't really know whether it was bacterial or viral that killed my two acquaintances.

And what is the incidence of viral meningitis?

As to the reasons for promoting vaccines...can you say pharma-profits?

Well, I can buy the profit point (pun unintended).

As to the incidence of viral meningitis and the absolute difference (in terms of effects and the like), I really don't know. The article, however, was specifically about bacterial meningitis and the vaccine is for bacterial meningitis.

At the very least, viral meningitis and vaccines for that is a different topic altogether.

Keith

[PatrickHenry]

I just meant that throwing two different diseases into the debate might throw the numbers off. They carry the same name, but are different bugs with different vaccines. I wonder what the mortality rates are...