Despite predictions that intended pH1N1 vaccination uptake would decline if there was insufficient data on novel vaccine safety and efficacy [11] , safety issues were not the predominant barrier to vaccination in the present study. While 37% of our study respondents who remained unvaccinated cited vaccine safety concerns, despite good evidence that the vaccine is effective with a risk profile similar to that of seasonal influenza vaccine [65] , almost twice as many, 60%, cited 'low risk of/from swine influenza' as their reason for not getting vaccinated, suggesting that these respondents felt no advantage would be gained by vaccination. Around 11% of respondents, cited both 'low risk of/ from swine influenza' and 'concerns regarding adverse effects of vaccine' as the reasons for not getting vaccinated, seemingly adopting a risk-benefit approach to vaccination decision-making. However, in the setting of low influenza risk, with the reports of vaccine related adverse events in the media after the vaccine was available for the priority groups (Figure 2) , people may shift their perceived risks away from influenza and towards vaccination, suggestive of availability bias (risk distortion by easily recalled events) [66] . We believe that perceived vaccine risk would become progressively less of a barrier to vaccination as perceived influenza risk increases, and vice versa.