There has been a lot of push back when it comes to the H1N1 flu vaccine. Of course, as with any medication, there could be side effects because not all immune systems are created equal.

But what people have to remember is their reasons for not supporting the vaccine – mainly because of the fear that it was rushed and long-term side effects are not yet known – are some of the same reasons preliminary reports of possible side effects could also be coincidental. For example, if someone has a heart attack after receiving their H1N1 flu shot, are they going to assume it’s directly related to the vaccine or attribute it to unhealthy lifestyle decisions?

The Associated Press recently published an article on this topic that looked at how the government will be intensely tracking the side effects of this vaccine and separating legitimate medical concerns from inevitable coincidences.

This is a proactive plan. The government is going to be putting information together for the public in an effort to stop the spread of false rumors and try to put the public at ease.

One major focus will be miscarriage since they are encouraging pregnant women to get the vaccine and miscarriages are quite common anyway.

Like the seasonal influenza vaccine, medical professionals expect the side effects associated with the H1N1 flu vaccine should be minimal. The most common side effect with all flu vaccines is soreness at the injection site, and sometimes people feel achy.

Many Americans are concerned about the safety and efficacy of the newly developed H1N1 flu shot because of a similar vaccine that was linked to a swine flu-like outbreak at Fort Dix in 1976.

Guillain-Barre occurs naturally following upper respiratory illnesses, digestive illnesses and on rare occasions – is associated with drugs and vaccines. However, the frequency is still 1-2 per 100,000 people.

I’ll be keeping a close eye on this, and if anything is reported, I’ll be the first one to let you know.

Here is the latest about the novel A(H1N1) swine flu pandemic virus, and what we are doing about it. Also check out my new Ebook: “Swine Flu; the New Pandemic.”

The best way to decrease the amount of circulating AH1N1 flu virus is to vaccinate as many people as possible. This is known as herd immunity.

The current H1N1 though mild, has infected millions and hospitalized more than 10,000 here in the U.S., killing close to 1000, so mass vaccination is warranted.

Unfortunately, once the vaccination program starts, it will be TOO easy to blame ANY deaths on the vaccine. This happened in Great Britain with the HPV Vaccine, where Cervarix is expected to cut deaths from cervical cancer by 650 and 1.4 million women have already been vaccinated, the vast majority with no problems. Yet a single death which was later found to be unrelated to the vaccine caused hysteria.

Though the 1976 swine flu vaccine was linked to several hundred cases of Guillain Barre Syndrome (paralysis) for a pandemic that never happened, this time there is a real pandemic, and the vaccine has been well studied in clinical trials and found to be very safe and has not been linked to GBS.

This vaccine is made the same as the yearly flu vaccine, with hen eggs, and will be just as safe, with the major complication in the vast majority of cases being local irritation around the injection site.

In discussions with senior officials at the CDC I have determined that it is acceptable to give both the seasonal flu shot and the H1N1 swine flu shot at the same time.

The CDC also recommends H1N1 vaccines even for those who believe they have had the disease. Serological tests to confirm immunity are considered unreliable and are not readily available.

The flu mist inhaled vaccine is being released this week. Since it is using an attenuated (weakened) live virus, it should not be given to pregnant women, those with chronic conditions, or those who are immunocompromised. It has also not been tested in the elderly.

The injectable inactived H1N1swine flu vaccine will start becoming available in two to three weeks. It uses an inactivated (dead) virus, and can NOT give you the flu. It is safe in all except for those with severe egg allergies. It should be given first to health care workers, pregnant women, children, and those with chronic conditions. 250 million doses should be available by sometime in November, and I will be recommending it for all.

Swine flu parties are a bad idea. They are an example of deliberate infection to provoke immunization. Since flu is so easily transmissable, it can easily get beyond the party and spread to someone who is more likely to have a severe outcome, such as a pregnant woman, a young child, or someone with a chronic condition.

The risk of the flu is far greater at this point than the risk of the vaccine. It is still a very mild virus, but must be taken seriously, as flu is tricky, and can kill. Coming out of the southern hemisphere, whose winter just ended, the prevailing strain of H1N1 swine flu is a good match for the vaccine.

For daily updates on the H1N1 swine flu strain, twitter me at marcsiegelmd.  I will post my latest articles, updates, and answer questions.

Dr. Marc Siegel is an internist and associate professor of medicine at the NYU School of Medicine. He is a FOX News medical contributor and writes a health column for the LA Times, where he examines TV and movies for medical accuracy. Dr. Siegel’s new Ebook: Swine Flu; the New Pandemic, will be published in early October. Dr. Siegel is also the author of “False Alarm: The Truth About the Epidemic of Fear“ and “Bird Flu: Everything You Need to Know About the Next Pandemic.” Read more at www.doctorsiegel.com

I want to know what you think.

Eight states are considering passing legislation that would require random drug testing for people to receive food stamps, unemployment benefits or welfare.

Click here to read the article, “States Consider Drug Tests for Welfare Recipients”

Supporters of this legislation feel that it’s necessary in response to an ever-growing population of Americans applying for government-funded aid as a result of the economic downturn. These lawmakers feel it would help to identify the potential health risks and the probability of those receiving aid getting back on their feet when the economy turns around — and that it would also send a clear message: In America, you don’t get something for nothing.

Why not get tested? Millions of Americans are drug tested at random for their jobs every day — the same Americans whose taxes are funding government assistance programs like food stamps, unemployment and welfare. And as American citizens, we need to take responsibility for our own well-being and that of our families.

Now, I’m not getting down on the millions of Americans who may be down on their luck, or for whatever reason, must rely on government aid to help them through tough times while they try their best to get back on their feet. But then if that’s the case, a random drug test should not be a problem, right?

But there are two sides to every argument — and there may be a couple of questions worth asking when considering this proposal …

What about the unintentional effects that limiting aid to a family — especially one with children — may have in failing to provide them with necessities as basic as food on their plates? We don’t want to punish the children for their parents’ actions. But then, in some cases, with severely drug-addicted parents, how can we be sure that the money is going to support the children, rather than to support the habit?

Just last year, a contest in southern California called “There Ought to Be a Law,” yielded a disabled 16-year-old winner whose life challenges inspired his proposal of legislation to mandate random drug testing for all pregnant women on welfare. R.J. Feild was born weighing just 2 pounds, 2 ounces with traces of heroin, marijuana, methamphetamine, alcohol and cocaine in his system due to his mother’s drug use while she was pregnant.  And while the “R.J.’s Law” never made it into legislation, it brought to light an important issue.

But then what happens to people who test positive for drugs while on public assistance? Would the states flat-out refuse help forever, or would they help them get into a rehabilitation center to kick the habit? Right now, most states can’t even meet their Medicaid requirements for people to get routine health care. Perhaps a better plan might be to pump the government aid they would normally receive directly into rehabilitating them.

So I’d like to know what you think, because at the end of the day, we’re the ones funding these programs.

Australian surgeons are being credited for saving the leg of an unborn baby by operating on her while her mother was just 22 weeks pregnant, French news agency AFP is reporting.

The hospital told AFP Monday that this may be the earliest in utero surgery of its kind.

Baby Leah was diagnosed with a condition called amniotic band syndrome in which bands of tissue wrap themselves around a developing fetus’ limbs, hands or feet and cut off blood flow. Doctors say the tissue had wrapped around both Leah’s legs.

A hospital spokeswoman told AFP that doctors usually hold off on operating until 28 weeks of pregnancy to better the baby’s chances for survival. However, Leah risked losing both legs if doctors had waited in this case.

A mother who decided to abort her son because he may have inherited a life-threatening kidney condition is overjoyed that he survived the procedure.

Jodie Percival of Nottinghamshire, England, said she and her fiancee made the decision to abort baby Finley when she was eight weeks pregnant.

Percival’s first son Thane died of multicystic dysplastic kidneys — which causes cysts to grow on the kidneys of an unborn baby — and her second child Lewis was born with serious kidney damage and currently has just one kidney, the Daily Mail reported.