Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Flu shot question Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 7
 
 
2012-11-26 2:05 PM
in reply to: #4510518

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
Rogillio - 2012-11-26 1:41 PM

wannabefaster - 2012-11-26 12:22 PM

texasgrrl - 2012-11-23 6:01 PM

I tend to feel similarly to RookieIM..I don't like being "required" to inject myself with a vaccine if I don't want to..Obviously, I don't want to get others with a lower immune system sick in case I am carrying the virus, but at the same time, I don't really want to get the vaccine..Anyway, I'm not afraid of "getting the flu"..I'm more afraid of the Guillam Barre possibility..but I know that's unlikely.  I'll "roll the dice" as another poster put it and hope for the best.  It seems pretty unlikely I will have untoward effects..As far as "what's in" the vaccine..who knows.  There are the 3 strains of virus and then some preservatives...



You know you can get Guillaine Barre from the flu just like you can get it from the vaccine, right?

You are rolling the dice either way.

I love the media coverage of things like the bird flu where, "141 people have died from the bird flu this year." They forget to mention that 1000s die every year from regular old flu. Putting it like that is boring and doesn't help with lead-in news stories at 11:00.

Some years I have gotten a couple flu shots, one at each hospital I work at, because it was easier than going and getting the paperwork to prove I had already done it. I think people who don't get vaccines are a little crazy. Jenny McCarthy should be castigated for the damage she has done to American healthcare with her unsupported crusade against vaccines. Just my opinion. I am sure it will inflame some.......


I have this discussion with people every year. It's hard to find reliable date/studies on this but just for argument sake, I will make up some numbers.

Let's say 100 people got the vaccine
- 80 of them never come in contact with the virus
- 20 of them come in contact with the virus
10 of them got the flu anyway
10 of them did not get flu
of the 10 that did not get the flu, 5 of them were not gonna get the flu even w/o the vaccine

So you vaccinated 100 people and you stopped 5 people from getting the flu.

Again, I've tried to find real numbers to make this argument in times past but there simply are no reliable data.



I see where you’re going, and I’m not a doctor, but is it a reasonable assumption that out of the 20 people who got the vaccine and who were exposed to the virus, the identical number of people got the flu as didn’t? I would assume that the number of vaccinated people who got sick would be significantly lower than the number of exposed vaccinated people who didn’t get sick, otherwise what would be the point of getting vaccinated.

In your scenario, getting the shot provided no protection, statistically speaking, vs not getting it. I doubt that’s accurate.


2012-11-26 2:26 PM
in reply to: #4507831

Veteran
150
1002525
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
Ok..OP here with update..Just to restate..I'm not AFRAID of getting the FLU..I seriously doubt I will..and I'm NOT ANTI-VACCINE, but I was curious how many people got "flu-like symptoms" or none at all.  Both my kids have all their vaccines and I have all mine, (except for the flu)..I'm just more weirded out about what's in the vaccine itself..Today I went to the clinic that my employer (hospital) sent me to to get the flu shot and I had to sign a waiver saying that I wasn't allergic to formalin or formaldehyde (to name a few of the ingredients/preservatives in the shot).  That's just freaky to me.  I'm not even that weirded out about the thimerosal..I have mercury dental fillings and no problems..But putting formaldehyde in my system before I'm dead was just too weird..So I'm waiting until tomorrow to go get a "preservative-free" version of the flu shot. Thanks for all the input everyone!
2012-11-26 3:09 PM
in reply to: #4510552

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
jmk-brooklyn - 2012-11-26 2:05 PM

Rogillio - 2012-11-26 1:41 PM

wannabefaster - 2012-11-26 12:22 PM

texasgrrl - 2012-11-23 6:01 PM

I tend to feel similarly to RookieIM..I don't like being "required" to inject myself with a vaccine if I don't want to..Obviously, I don't want to get others with a lower immune system sick in case I am carrying the virus, but at the same time, I don't really want to get the vaccine..Anyway, I'm not afraid of "getting the flu"..I'm more afraid of the Guillam Barre possibility..but I know that's unlikely.  I'll "roll the dice" as another poster put it and hope for the best.  It seems pretty unlikely I will have untoward effects..As far as "what's in" the vaccine..who knows.  There are the 3 strains of virus and then some preservatives...



You know you can get Guillaine Barre from the flu just like you can get it from the vaccine, right?

You are rolling the dice either way.

I love the media coverage of things like the bird flu where, "141 people have died from the bird flu this year." They forget to mention that 1000s die every year from regular old flu. Putting it like that is boring and doesn't help with lead-in news stories at 11:00.

Some years I have gotten a couple flu shots, one at each hospital I work at, because it was easier than going and getting the paperwork to prove I had already done it. I think people who don't get vaccines are a little crazy. Jenny McCarthy should be castigated for the damage she has done to American healthcare with her unsupported crusade against vaccines. Just my opinion. I am sure it will inflame some.......


I have this discussion with people every year. It's hard to find reliable date/studies on this but just for argument sake, I will make up some numbers.

Let's say 100 people got the vaccine
- 80 of them never come in contact with the virus
- 20 of them come in contact with the virus
10 of them got the flu anyway
10 of them did not get flu
of the 10 that did not get the flu, 5 of them were not gonna get the flu even w/o the vaccine

So you vaccinated 100 people and you stopped 5 people from getting the flu.

Again, I've tried to find real numbers to make this argument in times past but there simply are no reliable data.



I see where you’re going, and I’m not a doctor, but is it a reasonable assumption that out of the 20 people who got the vaccine and who were exposed to the virus, the identical number of people got the flu as didn’t? I would assume that the number of vaccinated people who got sick would be significantly lower than the number of exposed vaccinated people who didn’t get sick, otherwise what would be the point of getting vaccinated.

In your scenario, getting the shot provided no protection, statistically speaking, vs not getting it. I doubt that’s accurate.


Well, like I said, I made the numbers up....however, I did find a number somewhere that said the vaccine is 60% effective. The problem of course is for the vaccine developers and CDC have to anticipate the most like viruses. And if some unknow variant comes into the country and spreads wildly the vaccine may not have ANY effect on that particular virus. Every year the vaccine changes based on someone's analysis of the most prevelent viruses.

I would love to be proved wrong but I can't find any data. I'm a scientist man and I need data!! So in the absense of real data, I made some up. My numbers might not be 100% righnt but if you consider this as a Fermi problem (google that, it is facinating) and compensating errors, I might be in the ball part.

But the point I was making is, you are vacinating a huge number of people and protecting only a small number of people. Some people will make the argument 'if just one life is saved, it was worth it'......but I don't buy that reasoning. That's the same argument they make with seatbelt laws....and with each such law our liberties erode.....but don't get me started. Fortunately, as of right now, vaccinations are mostly voluntary.....

2012-11-26 3:22 PM
in reply to: #4507831

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
The difference between the seatbelt analogy and the vaccination analogy is that if you fail to wear a seatbelt (or bike helmet—same thing), you are really only risking your own life. Wheras a non-vaccinated person risks transmitting the virus to another person who could suffer serious consequences or even die.

I think a better analogy would be comparing not getting vaccinated to driving while intoxicated. There is a pretty good chance that you’ll make it home from the bar alive, but there’s an increased risk that you’ll have an accident, and if you do, there’s a chance that someone besides yourself will be injured or killed. It’s possible in both scenarios that you could survive completely unharmed but that another person could die as the result of your choices. I don't really see asking, or even mandating vaccines under certain circumstances, to be an erosion of our personal freedoms.


ETA: Like most analogies, it's not perfect, and I'm not suggesting that it is. There are many people who have legitimate medical reasons, allergies, etc, to not get vaccinated. It's not intended to apply to those few cases.
2012-11-26 3:46 PM
in reply to: #4510678

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
jmk-brooklyn - 2012-11-26 3:22 PM

The difference between the seatbelt analogy and the vaccination analogy is that if you fail to wear a seatbelt (or bike helmet—same thing), you are really only risking your own life. Wheras a non-vaccinated person risks transmitting the virus to another person who could suffer serious consequences or even die.

I think a better analogy would be comparing not getting vaccinated to driving while intoxicated. There is a pretty good chance that you’ll make it home from the bar alive, but there’s an increased risk that you’ll have an accident, and if you do, there’s a chance that someone besides yourself will be injured or killed. It’s possible in both scenarios that you could survive completely unharmed but that another person could die as the result of your choices. I don't really see asking, or even mandating vaccines under certain circumstances, to be an erosion of our personal freedoms.




The seatbelt laws and helmet laws really gall me. I wear a seat belt and I wear a helmet....but I don't want big brother telling me I have to do these things. Same with vaccines. I don't get sick. I don't know why but I just don't. So why should I be compelled to get a vaccine?

But I still go back to the numbers.....I believe 98.7% of the people who got the shot this year were not going to get the flu anyway or will still get the flu despite getting the shot!




Edited by Rogillio 2012-11-26 3:53 PM
2012-11-26 3:52 PM
in reply to: #4510678

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
jmk-brooklyn - 2012-11-26 5:22 PM

There are many people who have legitimate medical reasons, allergies, etc, to not get vaccinated. It's not intended to apply to those few cases.


Which is why it is important that those who do not have legitimate medical reasons to not get vaccinated should get vaccinated.

Shane


2012-11-26 4:07 PM
in reply to: #4510720

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
Rogillio - 2012-11-26 5:46 PM

But I still go back to the numbers.....I believe 98.7% of the people who got the shot this year were not going to get the flu anyway or will still get the flu despite getting the shot!


Wait, I thought the data indicated that the vaccine was about 60% effective?

Shane

Edited by gsmacleod 2012-11-26 4:09 PM
2012-11-26 4:09 PM
in reply to: #4507831

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
Every person needs to decide if they accept the risks of getting a flu vaccine. I'm not a doctor and know very little about vaccines.....but I can read. There are numerous studies and lots of information. Get multiple sources...and whatever you do, don't rely on information or opinions of non-professionals on a triathlon forum of what you should or should not do.

This is rather disconcerting:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Tocco/mary108.htm

It is common knowledge that the flu vaccines have always had the potential to cause serious side effects. Each year the pharmaceutical companies release new flu shots that are virtually untested. They combine various flu virus strains based on an educated guess and then recommend the shot to everyone, including children and pregnant mothers. According to the CDC Vital Statistics Report 1999-2003, Influenza death for children under the age of 5 skyrocketed as they began to implement the flu vaccine for the children. From 1999 to early 2002, death rates were declining from 25 down to 10 per year then the latter half of 2002 the CDC mandated the flu vaccine for children and the death rate climbed from 25 deaths per year in 1999 to over 90 in 2002! Death is a pretty bad vaccine side effect!

2012-11-26 4:15 PM
in reply to: #4510755

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
gsmacleod - 2012-11-26 4:07 PM

Rogillio - 2012-11-26 5:46 PM

But I still go back to the numbers.....I believe 98.7% of the people who got the shot this year were not going to get the flu anyway or will still get the flu despite getting the shot!


Wait, I thought the data indicated that the vaccine was about 60% effective?

Shane


Depends on how you define 'effective'. They are less than 60% effective on people who got the shot and STILL GOT THE FLU! But there are millions who will get the shot and not get the flu but would not have gotten the flu even if they did not get a shot. That is where my (facious) 98.7% came from.
2012-11-26 4:22 PM
in reply to: #4510764

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
Rogillio - 2012-11-26 6:15 PM

Depends on how you define 'effective'. They are less than 60% effective on people who got the shot and STILL GOT THE FLU! But there are millions who will get the shot and not get the flu but would not have gotten the flu even if they did not get a shot. That is where my (facious) 98.7% came from.


How can they be "less than 60% effective" for any one individual? Granted, I haven't done a ton of research into the flu vaccine but I thought in most years they were about 60% effective across a population. Because you can't tell anything with an n=1, they do detailed studies of the effiacy of the vaccine and while not perfect, they do offer protection both to individuals and to the herd.

I'm not sure how making up numbers helps further any argument regarding people educating themselves and making an informed decision for themselves.

Shane
2012-11-26 4:43 PM
in reply to: #4510769

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
gsmacleod - 2012-11-26 4:22 PM

Rogillio - 2012-11-26 6:15 PM

Depends on how you define 'effective'. They are less than 60% effective on people who got the shot and STILL GOT THE FLU! But there are millions who will get the shot and not get the flu but would not have gotten the flu even if they did not get a shot. That is where my (facious) 98.7% came from.


How can they be "less than 60% effective" for any one individual? Granted, I haven't done a ton of research into the flu vaccine but I thought in most years they were about 60% effective across a population. Because you can't tell anything with an n=1, they do detailed studies of the effiacy of the vaccine and while not perfect, they do offer protection both to individuals and to the herd.

I'm not sure how making up numbers helps further any argument regarding people educating themselves and making an informed decision for themselves.

Shane


Like I said, the data available is sketchy and difficult to interpret. About 40% of the country will get a flu shot yet 40% of them still got the flu? OK, not sure wth that effecitveness metric really means. I do know that 225 million Americans will NOT get the flu shot this season.

The point I am trying to make is don't be a sheep and just follow the herd. Do your own research and decide if you are at risk and if your risk of getting the flu is high enough to justify the risk of the vaccine and if you did get the flu, are you gonna die or miss a week's work as you quaratine yourself. There are also lot of other things one can do to avoid getting the flu such as washing your hands frequently and using disinfectants. I don't like the idea of injecting myself with anything.....especially something that has not been tested very much.



2012-11-26 4:56 PM
in reply to: #4507831

User image

Extreme Veteran
3177
20001000100252525
Subject: RE: Flu shot question

I work in a cancer hospital. I have seen the first hand effects of what happens when an immune-compromised patient - pediatric, adult, and geriatric - get exposed to the flu by a healthcare worker, care taker, or other person. I do not want to feel like I did not do my best to prevent this from occuring.

My work requires it and I support it. Some think it goes against our personal rights or liberties but when it comes to protecting patients who have no way of protecting themselves, there is no compromise in my mind. (we do have special allowance for those who cannot medically receive it but if you do not have a confirmed medical reason - you get ALL of the required vaccinations as well as regular TB tests and even occassional titers for the different hepatitus viruses).

The risks of me having a bad side effect, are worth it in my mind as compared to the guilt I might feel if someone I came into contact with died from the flu and I had not gotten the virus. (I know this is N=1 and a probably severe circumstance but it is the world and job that I live in)

2012-11-26 6:14 PM
in reply to: #4507831

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
I read the CDC website on what the 60% effective means. It means in a controlled sample the number of flu cases was reduced 60%. This means nothing as to your chances. It may mean out of 1000 people, 10 would have gotten the flu but if they all took the shot, only 6 would get the flu. Or maybe the sample is 100. Doesn't say....doesn't matter unless you know how many people got the flu.

So typically 3 to 5 million get the flu....out of 380 million. 160 million got the shot and that reduced the incidence 60%. So say 4 million get the flu.

So about 1% of the country's 380 million will get the flu. This includes the reduction of 60% of cases from the 40% who got the shot.

If we say that the number of cases was roughly split been the shots and non shot, 160 million people got the shot so that 1% vs 1.5% got the flu.

Please fell free to correct my numbers but cite your source.

2012-11-26 6:15 PM
in reply to: #4507831

New user
37
25
Subject: RE: Flu shot question

A couple quick ones, not all vaccines contain formaldehyde or even thimerasol, differant manufactures use differant processes for isolation and preserving.  And those that use thimerasol generally remove all but a scant trace for the final product.  Same goes for egg protein, only those with the most severe allergies should not get a shot. 

CDC estimates the flu shot at 75% effective.

It is not indiscriminately approved every year without human testing.  The process and all ingredients do not change from year to year, only the strain of the viruses included.  And the process for collecting/culturing the strains is not changed either... even when the H1N1 was 'rushed' to the market a few years ago- same vaccine as always, just a slightly differant strain.

There is a gigantic wealth of info available to all on the CDC wesite.

For those, like myself, in healthcare and mandated to get the flu shot...oh well.  The carreer comes with many obligations, like working holidays, working during snow storms/hurricanes/ everything else.  I bet i'm at greater risk for driving to the hospital when the state orders the roads closed then from an fluvac ADR.

-Mike

2012-11-26 6:19 PM
in reply to: #4507831


1053
10002525
Subject: RE: Flu shot question

Even if it is difficult to design a study to find the exact effectiveness of the vaccine, it is still almost impossible to argue that it is not effective. 

Also, if you don't care about being sick, there is someone out there who cant afford to be. I do believe in the personal choice to vaccinate or not, but I think too many people are misinformed and misguided by simple falsehoods. 

The science behind vaccines is solid, look at measles or polio. When was the last time you heard of someone with diphtheria?  Influenza is tricky, with multiple strains of constantly mutating viruses, but the vaccines still work, not as well, but they do prevent illness and death in many people. 

Trying to list the reasons for not getting the flu shot I've come up with:

1) Lazy

2) Misinformed

3) Fear and phobias

4) Individual does not care if they get the flu or pass it on to others

5) Conspiracy theorist (this one is interesting, including fun topics such as nanotechnology, and suppression of the masses through chemical manipulation)

I could probably come up with more, but I have to go yell at my children.

2012-11-26 6:38 PM
in reply to: #4510868

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
ImSore - 2012-11-26 6:19 PM

Even if it is difficult to design a study to find the exact effectiveness of the vaccine, it is still almost impossible to argue that it is not effective. 

Also, if you don't care about being sick, there is someone out there who cant afford to be. I do believe in the personal choice to vaccinate or not, but I think too many people are misinformed and misguided by simple falsehoods. 

The science behind vaccines is solid, look at measles or polio. When was the last time you heard of someone with diphtheria?  Influenza is tricky, with multiple strains of constantly mutating viruses, but the vaccines still work, not as well, but they do prevent illness and death in many people. 

Trying to list the reasons for not getting the flu shot I've come up with:

1) Lazy

2) Misinformed

3) Fear and phobias

4) Individual does not care if they get the flu or pass it on to others

5) Conspiracy theorist (this one is interesting, including fun topics such as nanotechnology, and suppression of the masses through chemical manipulation)

I could probably come up with more, but I have to go yell at my children.



6). Risk of getting the shot greater than the risk the shot is trying to mitigate for me. 49 years old, never had the shot, never had the flu, never get sick. The risk of injecting a dead virus into my body is not a risk I'm willing to take.

Here are some more I found on line:

All vaccines are immune suppressive—that is, they suppress your immune system, which may not return to normal for weeks to months. Here are just some of the ways vaccines impair and alter your immune response:

Some components in vaccines are neurotoxic and may depress your immune and brain function, particularly heavy metals such as mercury preservatives and aluminum adjuvants

The lab altered vaccine viruses themselves may further impair your immune response
Foreign DNA/RNA from animal tissues can wreak havoc in your body and trigger autoimmunity in some people

Vaccines may alter your t-cell function and lead you to become chronically ill

Vaccines can trigger allergies by introducing large foreign protein molecules into your body that have not been properly broken down by your digestive tract (since they are injected). Your body can respond to these foreign particles in the form of an allergic reaction


2012-11-26 6:38 PM
in reply to: #4510868

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
ImSore - 2012-11-26 6:19 PM

Even if it is difficult to design a study to find the exact effectiveness of the vaccine, it is still almost impossible to argue that it is not effective. 

Also, if you don't care about being sick, there is someone out there who cant afford to be. I do believe in the personal choice to vaccinate or not, but I think too many people are misinformed and misguided by simple falsehoods. 

The science behind vaccines is solid, look at measles or polio. When was the last time you heard of someone with diphtheria?  Influenza is tricky, with multiple strains of constantly mutating viruses, but the vaccines still work, not as well, but they do prevent illness and death in many people. 

Trying to list the reasons for not getting the flu shot I've come up with:

1) Lazy

2) Misinformed

3) Fear and phobias

4) Individual does not care if they get the flu or pass it on to others

5) Conspiracy theorist (this one is interesting, including fun topics such as nanotechnology, and suppression of the masses through chemical manipulation)

I could probably come up with more, but I have to go yell at my children.



6). Risk of getting the shot greater than the risk the shot is trying to mitigate for me. 49 years old, never had the shot, never had the flu, never get sick. The risk of injecting a dead virus into my body is not a risk I'm willing to take.

Here are some more I found on line:

All vaccines are immune suppressive—that is, they suppress your immune system, which may not return to normal for weeks to months. Here are just some of the ways vaccines impair and alter your immune response:

Some components in vaccines are neurotoxic and may depress your immune and brain function, particularly heavy metals such as mercury preservatives and aluminum adjuvants

The lab altered vaccine viruses themselves may further impair your immune response
Foreign DNA/RNA from animal tissues can wreak havoc in your body and trigger autoimmunity in some people

Vaccines may alter your t-cell function and lead you to become chronically ill

Vaccines can trigger allergies by introducing large foreign protein molecules into your body that have not been properly broken down by your digestive tract (since they are injected). Your body can respond to these foreign particles in the form of an allergic reaction
2012-11-26 6:47 PM
in reply to: #4510876

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
Rogillio - 2012-11-26 6:38 PM

ImSore - 2012-11-26 6:19 PM

Even if it is difficult to design a study to find the exact effectiveness of the vaccine, it is still almost impossible to argue that it is not effective. 

Also, if you don't care about being sick, there is someone out there who cant afford to be. I do believe in the personal choice to vaccinate or not, but I think too many people are misinformed and misguided by simple falsehoods. 

The science behind vaccines is solid, look at measles or polio. When was the last time you heard of someone with diphtheria?  Influenza is tricky, with multiple strains of constantly mutating viruses, but the vaccines still work, not as well, but they do prevent illness and death in many people. 

Trying to list the reasons for not getting the flu shot I've come up with:

1) Lazy

2) Misinformed

3) Fear and phobias

4) Individual does not care if they get the flu or pass it on to others

5) Conspiracy theorist (this one is interesting, including fun topics such as nanotechnology, and suppression of the masses through chemical manipulation)

I could probably come up with more, but I have to go yell at my children.



6). Risk of getting the shot greater than the risk the shot is trying to mitigate for me. 49 years old, never had the shot, never had the flu, never get sick. The risk of injecting a dead virus into my body is not a risk I'm willing to take.

Here are some more I found on line:

All vaccines are immune suppressive—that is, they suppress your immune system, which may not return to normal for weeks to months. Here are just some of the ways vaccines impair and alter your immune response:

Some components in vaccines are neurotoxic and may depress your immune and brain function, particularly heavy metals such as mercury preservatives and aluminum adjuvants

The lab altered vaccine viruses themselves may further impair your immune response
Foreign DNA/RNA from animal tissues can wreak havoc in your body and trigger autoimmunity in some people

Vaccines may alter your t-cell function and lead you to become chronically ill

Vaccines can trigger allergies by introducing large foreign protein molecules into your body that have not been properly broken down by your digestive tract (since they are injected). Your body can respond to these foreign particles in the form of an allergic reaction


What's the source for all of this^^^^? It sounds like more of the same pseudoscientific paranoid Jenny McArthy nonsense that we've been hearing for years and which is disproven over and over again. The mercury issue for example was already addressed on this thread. There's more mercury in a salmon fillet than in a flu shot.

2012-11-26 7:06 PM
in reply to: #4510883

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
jmk-brooklyn - 2012-11-26 6:47 PM

Rogillio - 2012-11-26 6:38 PM

ImSore - 2012-11-26 6:19 PM

Even if it is difficult to design a study to find the exact effectiveness of the vaccine, it is still almost impossible to argue that it is not effective. 

Also, if you don't care about being sick, there is someone out there who cant afford to be. I do believe in the personal choice to vaccinate or not, but I think too many people are misinformed and misguided by simple falsehoods. 

The science behind vaccines is solid, look at measles or polio. When was the last time you heard of someone with diphtheria?  Influenza is tricky, with multiple strains of constantly mutating viruses, but the vaccines still work, not as well, but they do prevent illness and death in many people. 

Trying to list the reasons for not getting the flu shot I've come up with:

1) Lazy

2) Misinformed

3) Fear and phobias

4) Individual does not care if they get the flu or pass it on to others

5) Conspiracy theorist (this one is interesting, including fun topics such as nanotechnology, and suppression of the masses through chemical manipulation)

I could probably come up with more, but I have to go yell at my children.



6). Risk of getting the shot greater than the risk the shot is trying to mitigate for me. 49 years old, never had the shot, never had the flu, never get sick. The risk of injecting a dead virus into my body is not a risk I'm willing to take.

Here are some more I found on line:

All vaccines are immune suppressive—that is, they suppress your immune system, which may not return to normal for weeks to months. Here are just some of the ways vaccines impair and alter your immune response:

Some components in vaccines are neurotoxic and may depress your immune and brain function, particularly heavy metals such as mercury preservatives and aluminum adjuvants

The lab altered vaccine viruses themselves may further impair your immune response
Foreign DNA/RNA from animal tissues can wreak havoc in your body and trigger autoimmunity in some people

Vaccines may alter your t-cell function and lead you to become chronically ill

Vaccines can trigger allergies by introducing large foreign protein molecules into your body that have not been properly broken down by your digestive tract (since they are injected). Your body can respond to these foreign particles in the form of an allergic reaction


What's the source for all of this^^^^? It sounds like more of the same pseudoscientific paranoid Jenny McArthy nonsense that we've been hearing for years and which is disproven over and over again. The mercury issue for example was already addressed on this thread. There's more mercury in a salmon fillet than in a flu shot.



IDK, I did not bookmark the site but one only need to Google "deaths from flu vaccine" or "is the flu vaccine effective" and you can find hundreds of articles, websites, new reports and studies. I cited one of the cites on the previous page of his thread.

I don't necessarily believe all this garbage but just becaus there is some junk science, does not mean all anti flu data is junk science.
2012-11-26 7:33 PM
in reply to: #4507831

User image

Extreme Veteran
1190
1000100252525
Silicon Valley
Subject: RE: Flu shot question

Let's put some of this information into perspective.  I have looked at some of these sites that report 'flu shot deaths' and if you read them carefully many say things like '...dies x days after getting a flu shot.  Official cause of death is pending.'  However if you keep reading you never see what the official cause of death was even after months/years.  OK conspiracy theorists, jump right in.  One site hold up as 'proof'  42 cases reported to them in a little under two years.

Now let's look at the number of death attributed to people who DO get the flu.  According to the CDC for Flu Season 1977-78 to 2006-07 the average annual number of deaths was over 6300.

For the record, I have a great deal of empathy for the families of loved ones who do have severe allergic reations to any vacine.  Unfortunately they are not perfect.  However, if you look at the real numbers of people who used to die from the diseases we no longer get because of vacines, the trade off is statistically a good one.  That includes the flu vacine deaths vs flu deaths.

 

2012-11-26 7:38 PM
in reply to: #4507831


161
1002525
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
Every yea in my life I have gotten the vaccine, I have gotten sick. Every year I haven't, I haven't. 


2012-11-26 7:41 PM
in reply to: #4510921

User image

Expert
2192
2000100252525
Greenville, SC
Subject: RE: Flu shot question

XCtoTri - 2012-11-26 8:38 PM Every yea in my life I have gotten the vaccine, I have gotten sick. Every year I haven't, I haven't. 

same. i figure if everyone else gets it there is a slightly less of a chance of me getting it anyways.

2012-11-26 7:55 PM
in reply to: #4510865

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
Rogillio - 2012-11-26 8:14 PM

I read the CDC website on what the 60% effective means. It means in a controlled sample the number of flu cases was reduced 60%. This means nothing as to your chances. It may mean out of 1000 people, 10 would have gotten the flu but if they all took the shot, only 6 would get the flu. Or maybe the sample is 100. Doesn't say....doesn't matter unless you know how many people got the flu.

So typically 3 to 5 million get the flu....out of 380 million. 160 million got the shot and that reduced the incidence 60%. So say 4 million get the flu.

So about 1% of the country's 380 million will get the flu. This includes the reduction of 60% of cases from the 40% who got the shot.

If we say that the number of cases was roughly split been the shots and non shot, 160 million people got the shot so that 1% vs 1.5% got the flu.

Please fell free to correct my numbers but cite your source.


I'm confused about your numbers and wondering if I'm reading something incorrectly. You say the CDC says that 60% effective means flu cases are reduced by 60%. So in your example of 10 people getting the flu, shouldn't the number who would then get the flu be 4 not 6?

To the US example, if 5 million normally contract the flu and about half the population is immunized, then shouldn't the reduction in the number of cases be 1.5 million, not 1 million?

Of course, beyond this, targeted immunization of those most likely to be exposed to the flu and who are in regular contact with high risk groups should make the impact even greater since it should limit exposure for those at the greatest risk of dying due to the flu.

Shane
2012-11-26 7:58 PM
in reply to: #4507831

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
For some reason, this thread makes me think of this article:

http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml

Shane
2012-11-26 8:26 PM
in reply to: #4510932

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Flu shot question
gsmacleod - 2012-11-26 7:55 PM

Rogillio - 2012-11-26 8:14 PM

I read the CDC website on what the 60% effective means. It means in a controlled sample the number of flu cases was reduced 60%. This means nothing as to your chances. It may mean out of 1000 people, 10 would have gotten the flu but if they all took the shot, only 6 would get the flu. Or maybe the sample is 100. Doesn't say....doesn't matter unless you know how many people got the flu.

So typically 3 to 5 million get the flu....out of 380 million. 160 million got the shot and that reduced the incidence 60%. So say 4 million get the flu.

So about 1% of the country's 380 million will get the flu. This includes the reduction of 60% of cases from the 40% who got the shot.

If we say that the number of cases was roughly split been the shots and non shot, 160 million people got the shot so that 1% vs 1.5% got the flu.

Please fell free to correct my numbers but cite your source.


I'm confused about your numbers and wondering if I'm reading something incorrectly. You say the CDC says that 60% effective means flu cases are reduced by 60%. So in your example of 10 people getting the flu, shouldn't the number who would then get the flu be 4 not 6?

To the US example, if 5 million normally contract the flu and about half the population is immunized, then shouldn't the reduction in the number of cases be 1.5 million, not 1 million?

Of course, beyond this, targeted immunization of those most likely to be exposed to the flu and who are in regular contact with high risk groups should make the impact even greater since it should limit exposure for those at the greatest risk of dying due to the flu.

Shane


Yeah my mistake on the 4 and 6. I'm typing on my iPad and going back and forth to my calculator and the CDC web sites and other sites.

I admit there are some quackery websites but there also a lot of credible sources as well. The best data I could find on number of flu cases said 3 to 5 million. Geeze, that's a big margin. I also read that what many think is the flu is not the flu. Regardless, 5 million out of 380 million is 1.3%.

I am not a conspiracy theorists but the money involved and pharmaceutical profits concern me as potentially tainting CDC data.

I'm not saying the vaccine is not right for everyone, some people it makes good sense, but I not think it makes good sense for everyone. I'm not injecting a virus, albeit a dead one, into my veins. Just not going to to do it. I will trust my immune system to do its job when and if the situation dictates.
New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Flu shot question Rss Feed  
 
 
of 7