~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This message is from PedTalk! To reply to the group, use "" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dr. Adler makes a good point about lost wages, one that the cost-effectiveness studies emphasized. However, there is a difference between the deaths of 50-100 children and estimating lost wages. The former is a discrete, easily quantified endpoint, the latter a nebulous, slippery figure dependent on estimates, statistical inference, and outright guessing. Some of the suppositions that underpin the aforementioned studies used to justify the vaccine, strain credulity with the scope and precision of their foresight. Remember, the cost/benefit analyses were projected out over 30 years, and only showed a benefit when including the cost of wages lost. I don't think it's likely that forecasts today of 1) wage levels in 20 years 2) interest rate changes (affecting the discount rate used in calculations) 3) composition of the workforce 4) employee benefits.. etc., etc. are going to be anymore accurate regarding the varicella vaccine than they are regarding the economy in general.