In its Oct. 26 headline for an article about the efficacy of flu vaccine, the Star Tribune announced "Flu shots fail almost half of us."

Within hours of the article's publication, I had received dozens of calls and e-mails from health care providers, public health workers, reporters, and the general public wondering what this meant for our ongoing efforts to immunize people against influenza.

The providers were wondering how they should respond to patients' questions. The public health professionals were concerned about what the headline would do to their efforts to vaccinate as many people as possible before flu hits the state with full force.

The reporters were looking for controversy. And the general public was simply looking for answers to some basic questions.

Behind each of these inquiries was the belief that the Lancet article that prompted the news coverage would damage the credibility of public health -- that this was a bad day for immunizations and for public health.

My response was just the opposite. This was a great day for public health.

Public health is often defined as the constant redefinition of the unacceptable. In publishing an excellent research article, Michael Osterholm and his colleagues demonstrated the truth of that definition.

They used sound science to demonstrate that the effectiveness of our major weapon against a disease that hospitalizes hundreds of thousands and kills tens of thousands each year is not as effective as we thought, and not as effective as we would like.

As good public health professionals, they were redefining the effectiveness of our current flu vaccine as unacceptable. We needed that information.

The general public also had to receive the same information, because they need to be reassured that they will always be given the truth by people concerned about their health -- even when the truth is inconvenient and problematic.

The release of this study has actually helped increase the credibility of public health. And credibility is crucial if public health is going to be effective.

Although the Osterholm article demonstrates the unacceptability of the current flu vaccine compared to what is needed to give optimal protection, it also clearly demonstrates the unacceptability of not using the current vaccine until a better vaccine is developed.

With an efficacy rate of 59 percent, the flu vaccine remains the best defense we have against a potentially lethal disease.

That's why health care providers should advise all their patients that getting a flu shot is the right thing and smart thing to do to protect themselves and others. And it's why all of us should take that advice.

It's a great day for public health when we get new information about what works and what doesn't in making us a healthier people. It will be even a greater day when a new vaccine is shown to be 99 percent effective against flu.

But even then, the last 1 percent will be unacceptable.

* * *

Edward P. Ehlinger is commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Health.