Children should not be given the antiviral drug Tamiflu - also used to treat swine flu - because its harms outweigh any benefits, a report said yesterday.
Oxford University researchers found Tamiflu caused vomiting in some children, which can lead to dehydration and complications.
The drug also had little or no effect on asthma flare-ups, ear infections, or the likelihood of a youngster needing antibiotics, the British Medical Journal reported.
Co-author Dr Carl Heneg-han, a GP and expert from the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford, said the policy of giving Tamiflu for mild illness was an "inappropriate strategy".
He suggested children with mild symptoms should be treated as if they had any other flu - with drinks to cool high temperatures and rest, with no need for children who were otherwise healthy to be taking Tamiflu or Relenza.
He said: "The downside of the harms outweigh the one-day reduction in symptomatic benefits."
However, other biomedical scientists said the study had "limitations" and questioned whether the research, which looked at the effects of the drugs on young sufferers of ordinary seasonal flu, could apply to the current outbreak.
The new report comes a week after other research found children given Tamiflu preventatively reported side-effects, including nausea and nightmares.
Experts at the Health Protection Agency (HPA) showed a high proportion of British children reporting problems after taking the antiviral preventatively.
In one study, the most frequently reported side-effect was nausea, followed by stomach pain or cramps and problems sleeping.
Gastro-intestinal side-effects - nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, stomach pain and cramps - were reported by 40% of the children.
That research was carried out in April and May - before the government decided to stop using Tamiflu to contain the spread of the virus.
The authors of yesterday's paper said that, while the prescription of Tamiflu and other anti-virals for children could be counter productive, parents should be on their guard for potential complications and signs their child is getting ill.
Parents of children with weakened immune systems, or conditions such as cystic fibrosis, should discuss their options with their GP, the report said.
Dr Matthew Thompson, a GP and co-author, added: "I think what GPs should do is to weigh up the risks and benefits with the parent."
He said the only benefit found in the study was that children got back to normal half a day to one day earlier if taking Tamiflu or Relenza.
His advice to GPs was "not to rely on Tamiflu as a treatment to reduce complications" or to think of it as a "magic bullet", and he warned widespread use of Tamiflu could result in the virus becoming resistant to the drug. He said: "Going forward We have a treatment which is ineffective because we've given it to everybody."
Both researchers called on the Department of Health to review its current policy.
However, a department spokesman dismissed the claims that the findings would also apply to swine flu.
Meanwhile, reports that a million Scots children would be the first in Europe to get the swine flu jab when they return from their summer break have been played down by the Scottish Government.
It was claimed that under-16s would have two doses of the vaccine three weeks apart in a mass immunisation programme.
Westminster confirmed last week that ministers are considering plans to immunise every schoolchild in the UK but said no decision had yet been taken. But a Scottish Government spokeswoman said there had been no change in its stance that the vaccine would start arriving in the autumn.
A first phase of vaccination would involve those groups deemed to be at most risk, with children and young people and health workers likely to be in that group, she said.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article