H1N1 vaccine - Should we Leap before we Look?

_

While I do believe that moderation is needed for all good things, it saddens me that we have lost our collective memory of the horrors of illness before the invention of vaccination. One can be anti-Big Pharma and still pro-public health. Not all of Western medicine is part of some for-profit conspiracy. :(

JR8805

he still stands wrote:

My method: I asked my family doctor if he and his family are getting the H1N1 vaccine. His answer was unequivocably YES. I have no reason to not trust my doctor, and certainly no reason to believe he is part of a massive conspiracy intended to innoculate the population or to line the pockets of vaccine companies or his own pockets. So, I will be getting the vaccine, especially since I have a 3-month old at home. Same methodology goes for other vaccines and procedures.

My sister in law is a doctor and has already gotten her vaccine last Monday. Amazingly, she's still alive and practicing medicine and everything. I do agree that people get very hysterical about vaccines. I read that there are basically two types of people when it comes to vaccinations, those that worry about what could go wrong if they don't get the shot and those that worry about what could go wrong if they do. People make emotional decisions about getting the vaccine instead of taking a cold, hard look at the stats. On the vaccine, chances of death or disability are far higher for those not getting the vaccine than those getting it. Some people are convinced that they have low immune systems, whatever that means, and they do or will get the flu with a flu shot. I am convinced that most people who say they have the flu really mean they have a bad cold. I also think that a lot of people are terrified of needles. The immediate fear of receiving a poke is so overwhelming that the pain of the poke becomes so magnified in their minds that it is worth getting a disease substantially more painful than any poke because you are not guaranteed to suffer the disease, whereas you are guaranteed to get poked if you opt for a flu shot.

I admit I'm a weird one myself...I understand the poke, but I have trouble with FluMist. Stick a live virus up your nose? Are you NuTz? I know it's attenuated, but what if they didn't quite attenuate the thing completely? It's sheer idiocy, I'm aware. But, we are all very emotional creatures. What we believe is more important than any facts you can float.

JR8805

Here's a pretty good link from WebMD on the vaccine, including a video and ideas from the author on the vaccine.

http://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/featu ... accine-faq

"OK, you talk a good game. But would YOU get the swine flu vaccine yourself?

This WebMD reporter was a guinea pig in the swine flu clinical trial. You can watch me get my first shot.

What happened? Nothing. There wasn't even soreness at the site of injection. I did catch a cold (sniffles, cough, no fever, no muscle aches) about three weeks after my first shot -- unfortunately, flu shots don't protect against that. But I haven't had the flu, even though I live in a city (Atlanta) that's had a lot of cases."

Jeanwah

scb wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

But to put faith in our doctors to make decisions?? The doctors who are in cahoots with Big Pharma (all western medicinal doctors very much are) are NOT going to tell you not to get it. Actually, I'd love to find a doctor who thinks objectively on this. There seem to be none.

I think this is a little over-the-top. Of course I put faith in my doctors to advise me in making medical decisions. That's why I have doctors. I wouldn't go to a doctor I didn't trust. And this isn't blind trust. I am a well-educated critical thinker who does her research. And so are my doctors.

Not all doctors are in cahoots with Big Pharma. At the health sciences center where I work, we are pharm-free and proud! I was even made to get rid of my Viagra pen, even though I can't prescribe anything. I am 100% sure that my doctors, who are also my friends and co-workers, have nothing but my best interest at heart when they tell me to get a flu shot. And I am confident that they wouldn't tell me to get one if they didn't know what they were talking about. Plus, once again, why would they themselves get dangerous vaccines?

Really? Let me tell you my experience. When I was pregnant, the Drs. found 2 soft markers on the baby for Down syndrome. I wasn't interested in getting an amnio (which would guarantee the probability of the baby having DS). But several doctors urged me to get one; I should know these things and if it turns out positive (that the baby has DS), that I'll regret not terminating. That's right, no factual information, just doctors urging me terminate while I had the chance and to at least get an amnio. Yes, several doctors, too. Since then, and my daughter does have DS, I've done lots of research into how doctors treat pregnant women who's prenatal test show some chance that their child has DS. It's been found that doctors, across the board, have NOT been telling us the facts, but rather the downsides and that we really don't want these babies because of the "trouble" they may cause, the extra care and possible heart conditions.

Just three years ago, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have conceded that false or no information has been given to pregnant women, as 90% of all women pregnant with a child with DS terminated. 90%. Senator Ted Kennedy and another senator got a bill passed to amend the Public Health Service Act to increase the provision of scientifically sound information and support services to patients receiving a positive test diagnosis for Down syndrome or other prenatally and postnatally diagnosed conditions. If it weren't for him, doctors would continue giving their "opinions" rather than factual information.

This is just one area where the truth has been told. H1N1 is too new to really know any factual info.

Jeanwah

scb wrote:

While I do believe that moderation is needed for all good things, it saddens me that we have lost our collective memory of the horrors of illness before the invention of vaccination. One can be anti-Big Pharma and still pro-public health. Not all of Western medicine is part of some for-profit conspiracy. :(

I guess it's completely another topic, but the record number of meds being prescribed for depression, anxiety, and other mental disorders, along with over-prescribing children, is part of the whole equation, also. How about Big Pharma advertising their drugs directly to the patient on TV!

I'm pro public health, but I'm also pro natural remedies before resorting to western medicine.

GTFLYGIRL

TravisTheSky wrote:

Vaccines have replaced cigarettes as a mass-marketed poison that the masses refuse to believe is dangerous.

Joe Camel says... "EAT THE SUGAR CUBE KIDS!!! POLIO IS YUMMY"

_

Jeanwah wrote:

Really? Let me tell you my experience. When I was pregnant, the Drs. found 2 soft markers on the baby for Down syndrome. I wasn't interested in getting an amnio (which would guarantee the probability of the baby having DS). But several doctors urged me to get one; I should know these things and if it turns out positive (that the baby has DS), that I'll regret not terminating. That's right, no factual information, just doctors urging me terminate while I had the chance and to at least get an amnio. Yes, several doctors, too. Since then, and my daughter does have DS, I've done lots of research into how doctors treat pregnant women who's prenatal test show some chance that their child has DS. It's been found that doctors, across the board, have NOT been telling us the facts, but rather the downsides and that we really don't want these babies because of the "trouble" they may cause, the extra care and possible heart conditions.

Just three years ago, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have conceded that false or no information has been given to pregnant women, as 90% of all women pregnant with a child with DS terminated. 90%. Senator Ted Kennedy and another senator got a bill passed to amend the Public Health Service Act to increase the provision of scientifically sound information and support services to patients receiving a positive test diagnosis for Down syndrome or other prenatally and postnatally diagnosed conditions. If it weren't for him, doctors would continue giving their "opinions" rather than factual information.

This is just one area where the truth has been told. H1N1 is too new to really know any factual info.

I'm sorry you had a negative experience with your doctors. But I still don't believe that you can accurately make such blanket statements about healthcare professionals as a whole.

I also don't agree that we can't know any factual information about H1N1 yet. Of course there are limits to epidemiologic knowledge, but we still know what we know. We just need to be sure to ackowledge the limitations, and I think our public health organzations do. No one is making any end-all-be-all statements about this flu; they are only saying "Here's what we know based on the data we have collected so far." So far, the data shows that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks and there is not yet any idication to the contrary.

If you decide to hold out for more data before making your decision - or if you've already decided to never get vaccinated regardless of any medical data - that's fine. But I don't think it's fair to suggest that healthcare providers across the board are not to be trusted or that we have absolutely no factual information.

_

Jeanwah wrote:

scb wrote:

While I do believe that moderation is needed for all good things, it saddens me that we have lost our collective memory of the horrors of illness before the invention of vaccination. One can be anti-Big Pharma and still pro-public health. Not all of Western medicine is part of some for-profit conspiracy. :(

I guess it's completely another topic, but the record number of meds being prescribed for depression, anxiety, and other mental disorders, along with over-prescribing children, is part of the whole equation, also. How about Big Pharma advertising their drugs directly to the patient on TV!

I'm pro public health, but I'm also pro natural remedies before resorting to western medicine.

I think the fact that overprescription of other drugs is part of the eqation is part of the problem. If I want to know whether or not the benefits of a flu vaccine outweigh the risks, the prevalence of people on meds for depression is comletely irrelevant to that medical question. But people let their emotions about Big Pharma cloud their judgement.

I, too, am anti-Big Parma and even anti-anything that mixes profits with healthcare. I do see the conflict of interest there. That's why I ask my doctor, who I trust, about the risks and benefit of the flu shot instead of asking a drug rep, an insurance company, a politcian, or a TV commercial - and I also do my homework.

Also, I'm not some pro-vaccine sheep. Until today, I hadn't received a vaccination for anything in probably 20 years. And I am pro-natural remedies. But I also understand that vaccination (along with sanitation) has been the best thing for public health since... probably ever.

The Champ

scb wrote:

I'm sorry you had a negative experience with your doctors. But I still don't believe that you can accurately make such blanket statements about healthcare professionals as a whole.

I also don't agree that we can't know any factual information about H1N1 yet. Of course there are limits to epidemiologic knowledge, but we still know what we know. We just need to be sure to ackowledge the limitations, and I think our public health organzations do. No one is making any end-all-be-all statements about this flu; they are only saying "Here's what we know based on the data we have collected so far." So far, the data shows that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks and there is not yet any idication to the contrary.

If you decide to hold out for more data before making your decision - or if you've already decided to never get vaccinated regardless of any medical data - that's fine. But I don't think it's fair to suggest that healthcare providers across the board are not to be trusted or that we have absolutely no factual information.

You are correct, and have been one of just a few with sound/balanced reasoning in this thread. Obviously the person you've been debating with has a personal bias, which is both sad and unfortunate....I too have friends who happen to be in the medical field, and guess what, they are not trying to kill me, my family or theirs..Of course, any logical person would rather take advice from their physicians instead of a message board, but that's not what we are dealing with here ...I work in nyc public schools and I too am a little hesitant, but I know I should get the vaccine....I'm just a stubborn fucker..

_

The Champ wrote:

You are correct

Well that settles it then! [/thread]

The Champ wrote:

I work in nyc public schools and I too am a little hesitant, but I know I should get the vaccine....I'm just a stubborn fucker..

I hear ya! I got the seasonal flu shot today (partly inspired by this thread) and almost didn't go through with it. But I'm trying to be more responsible and do my part to promote public health, especially since I work with pregnant women. You still won't find me getting vaccinated for anything that's not communicable though. Although I can rationally acknowledge the benefits of vaccination, I'm still just too chicken-shit. :oops:

polaris_x

scb wrote:

http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/surveillanceqa.htm

59% of people who died from H1N1 in the CDC study at the link above were under age 50, with only 9% being 65 or older. Usually 90% of people who die from the seasonal flu are 65 or older.

http://www.who.int/wer/2009/wer8421.pdf

The study from the article above shows that only 46% of H1N1 deaths in Mexico were of people with underlying conditions, and the median age was 31.

thanks for the info ... it's interesting because up here - all they are really telling us to do is wash our hands and stay at home if we're sick ...

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/alert-alerte ... g.php#faq1

yes - they have vaccines available but it definitely looks like they are treating it as if you want to take it - take it kind of way ...

Jeanwah

scb wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Really? Let me tell you my experience. When I was pregnant, the Drs. found 2 soft markers on the baby for Down syndrome. I wasn't interested in getting an amnio (which would guarantee the probability of the baby having DS). But several doctors urged me to get one; I should know these things and if it turns out positive (that the baby has DS), that I'll regret not terminating. That's right, no factual information, just doctors urging me terminate while I had the chance and to at least get an amnio. Yes, several doctors, too. Since then, and my daughter does have DS, I've done lots of research into how doctors treat pregnant women who's prenatal test show some chance that their child has DS. It's been found that doctors, across the board, have NOT been telling us the facts, but rather the downsides and that we really don't want these babies because of the "trouble" they may cause, the extra care and possible heart conditions.

Just three years ago, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have conceded that false or no information has been given to pregnant women, as 90% of all women pregnant with a child with DS terminated. 90%. Senator Ted Kennedy and another senator got a bill passed to amend the Public Health Service Act to increase the provision of scientifically sound information and support services to patients receiving a positive test diagnosis for Down syndrome or other prenatally and postnatally diagnosed conditions. If it weren't for him, doctors would continue giving their "opinions" rather than factual information.

This is just one area where the truth has been told. H1N1 is too new to really know any factual info.

I'm sorry you had a negative experience with your doctors. But I still don't believe that you can accurately make such blanket statements about healthcare professionals as a whole.

I also don't agree that we can't know any factual information about H1N1 yet. Of course there are limits to epidemiologic knowledge, but we still know what we know. We just need to be sure to ackowledge the limitations, and I think our public health organzations do. No one is making any end-all-be-all statements about this flu; they are only saying "Here's what we know based on the data we have collected so far." So far, the data shows that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks and there is not yet any idication to the contrary.

If you decide to hold out for more data before making your decision - or if you've already decided to never get vaccinated regardless of any medical data - that's fine. But I don't think it's fair to suggest that healthcare providers across the board are not to be trusted or that we have absolutely no factual information.

It's not that I just had a negative experience with doctors. You can't deny, once you do the research, or talk to people who've had botched surgeries or things go wrong in the hospital, that doctors are only human. They make mistakes all the time. There is much to much praise for doctors to save the world, as no one can. And it's sad that people take doctors opinions as the ultimate of all knowledge. That's why 2nd opinions are so important in many cases. I gather from what you've said that you've been with your doctor for some time, and ultimately rely on him/her to make the best judgments for your health. While I do think it's great you've found a fantastic doctor you can trust, you can't trust them all. It's a no brainer that not all doctors out there are as awesome as yours. MANY make mistakes, and/or don't offer factual information. And in my findings for ALL those OB/GYNs to not give factual info to their patients, that's just the beginning of the truth being told. Who really knows what many other doctors are telling their patients? That's why patients doing their own research is so important and not just doing what the doc tells you.

I've talked to my sisters, who are RNs that this vaccine is too new to accurately foretell if they work or not. The vaccines are still being tested. You're one of the guinea pigs.

ETA: I noticed that you and the Champ feel my experience is personal (well, it is but...), but it had to do with a nationwide issue. Not giving credit to what's really going on, especially when Senators have to get involved...that's blatantly ignoring that there's an issue with Doctors communicating with patients. Throw the info aside if it doesn't pertain to you personally, but it's HAPPENING. Whether we want to believe it or not.

polaris_x

all vaccines are "best guesses" ... the current strain of h1n1 is treatable with anti-virals ... the issue ultimately is when the virus mutates into soemthing else or combines with another flu that currently has no treatment ...

although i do believe that those that are on the high risk or work in the health care profession should take the vaccine and do believe that everyone has to make their own decisions based on informed decisions ...

know1

I don't even really care about the testing.

My question is this - is the flu a much bigger health threat today than it was 20 years ago?

20 years ago, there was some flu vaccines available, but it seems that only a small number of people were getting them.

Today, it seems as if all of the information you see says that EVERYONE should get them.

Why is that? My thought is that it's mostly about the $$$$.

Claireack

I've just been to our departmental meeting (I work for the NHS) and one of the topics discussed was encouraging us to have the regular flu jab, then the H1N1.

The majority of us aren't going to have either as we felt that with the flu one there was no guarantee that the scientists who decide which flu strain is going to be the one to watch for this year would be correct. With H1N1 we pretty much decided that it wasn't necessary for us as we weren't in the high risk category and didn't want initial side effects. A few people did say that they wouldn't take the risk of catching either and were going to have both.

We were however, offered an incentive to get the jab, which was ......




................................... .............................. a sticker.

I think I can live without the sticker.

decides2dream

scb wrote:

While I do believe that moderation is needed for all good things, it saddens me that we have lost our collective memory of the horrors of illness before the invention of vaccination. One can be anti-Big Pharma and still pro-public health. Not all of Western medicine is part of some for-profit conspiracy. :(

scb wrote:

Also, I'm not some pro-vaccine sheep. Until today, I hadn't received a vaccination for anything in probably 20 years. And I am pro-natural remedies. But I also understand that vaccination (along with sanitation) has been the best thing for public health since... probably ever.

very true!
i am registered for my seasonal flu vaccination 10.28. i'll leave H1N1 to all of you, for now. as i am no longer in the classroom, not a high risk, i'll wait it out.

Heatherj43

JR8805 wrote:

he still stands wrote:

My method: I asked my family doctor if he and his family are getting the H1N1 vaccine. His answer was unequivocably YES. I have no reason to not trust my doctor, and certainly no reason to believe he is part of a massive conspiracy intended to innoculate the population or to line the pockets of vaccine companies or his own pockets. So, I will be getting the vaccine, especially since I have a 3-month old at home. Same methodology goes for other vaccines and procedures.

My sister in law is a doctor and has already gotten her vaccine last Monday. Amazingly, she's still alive and practicing medicine and everything. I do agree that people get very hysterical about vaccines. I read that there are basically two types of people when it comes to vaccinations, those that worry about what could go wrong if they don't get the shot and those that worry about what could go wrong if they do. People make emotional decisions about getting the vaccine instead of taking a cold, hard look at the stats. On the vaccine, chances of death or disability are far higher for those not getting the vaccine than those getting it. Some people are convinced that they have low immune systems, whatever that means, and they do or will get the flu with a flu shot. I am convinced that most people who say they have the flu really mean they have a bad cold. I also think that a lot of people are terrified of needles. The immediate fear of receiving a poke is so overwhelming that the pain of the poke becomes so magnified in their minds that it is worth getting a disease substantially more painful than any poke because you are not guaranteed to suffer the disease, whereas you are guaranteed to get poked if you opt for a flu shot.

I admit I'm a weird one myself...I understand the poke, but I have trouble with FluMist. Stick a live virus up your nose? Are you NuTz? I know it's attenuated, but what if they didn't quite attenuate the thing completely? It's sheer idiocy, I'm aware. But, we are all very emotional creatures. What we believe is more important than any facts you can float.

3 years ago I had the flu. I know it was the flu cuz they put one of those swabs up my nose to test to see if it was really the flu.
I have a low immune system AT THE MOMENENT. What that means is that AT THE MOMENT my iron is low, as well as other nutrients, vitamins and minerals that need to be in my body to help fight off disease. All I know is I don't want amy flu again. I likely had the real flu 3 times in my life. I am now 54 years old. In the past, the flu turned into pneumonia and other illnesses that were hard to fight off.
At my age, its healthier to get the shot.
I hope we all make it thru this flu season as best as we can.

_

Jeanwah wrote:

It's not that I just had a negative experience with doctors. You can't deny, once you do the research, or talk to people who've had botched surgeries or things go wrong in the hospital, that doctors are only human. They make mistakes all the time. There is much to much praise for doctors to save the world, as no one can. And it's sad that people take doctors opinions as the ultimate of all knowledge. That's why 2nd opinions are so important in many cases. I gather from what you've said that you've been with your doctor for some time, and ultimately rely on him/her to make the best judgments for your health. While I do think it's great you've found a fantastic doctor you can trust, you can't trust them all. It's a no brainer that not all doctors out there are as awesome as yours. MANY make mistakes, and/or don't offer factual information. And in my findings for ALL those OB/GYNs to not give factual info to their patients, that's just the beginning of the truth being told. Who really knows what many other doctors are telling their patients? That's why patients doing their own research is so important and not just doing what the doc tells you.

I've talked to my sisters, who are RNs that this vaccine is too new to accurately foretell if they work or not. The vaccines are still being tested. You're one of the guinea pigs.

ETA: I noticed that you and the Champ feel my experience is personal (well, it is but...), but it had to do with a nationwide issue. Not giving credit to what's really going on, especially when Senators have to get involved...that's blatantly ignoring that there's an issue with Doctors communicating with patients. Throw the info aside if it doesn't pertain to you personally, but it's HAPPENING. Whether we want to believe it or not.

I do understand that your experience had to do with a nationwide issue and isn't just based on one personal experience, so I don't mean to be dismissive about it. I just didn't want to comment on that issue in particular because I didn't really understand exactly what you were saying happened and because I don’t think the conclusion about H1N1 vaccine really follows from the argument about amnios & DS kids.

Here are the points on which I agree with you:

1. Yes, of course doctors are only human and they make “mistakes”. (I put mistakes in quotes because I think some decisions are truly mistakes and some are just a result of varying professional opinions.)
2. People shouldn’t think doctors have all the right answers all the time and there is no other knowledge in the world. (There aren’t necessarily right or wrong answers anyway.)
3. Yes, I have an awesome doctor and, no, not all doctors are as awesome as mine.
4. Yes, people should do their own research and get second opinions.

Here are the points where we seem to conflict:
1. I don’t believe that ALL doctors or healthcare professionals or public health servants are in bed with Big Pharma.
2. I do, in general (but of course never always), trust that the medical community (and especially the public health community) has the patients’ and the public’s best interest at heart.
3. I do believe that there are some sources of information that are more valid or reputable than others, and good doctors and epidemiologic data are two of those sources.

I have the impression, by the way, that you think I’m an ignorant sheep of a consumer of anything someone with letters behind his/her name throws at me, who blindly follows doctors as deities without doing my own research or getting second opinions. I want to be clear that that couldn’t be further from the truth.

I do have an excellent doctor who I have seen for more than half my life. I also work with him and many other doctors. I see some of these other docs as a patient as well. I always do my research and ask all the other docs their opinions on medical subjects. I am fortunate to have access to a wealth of medical data and professional opinions, not all of which always agree.

I am also fortunate to be good friends with many doctors, and I know with 100% certainty that they have nothing but their patients’ (and their families’, and their own, and my) best interests at heart and have absolutely no conflict of interest with drug companies. They are people, like you and me, who fight to keep for-profit interests out of medical care. I guess I feel the need to defend them.

_

know1 wrote:

I don't even really care about the testing.

My question is this - is the flu a much bigger health threat today than it was 20 years ago?

20 years ago, there was some flu vaccines available, but it seems that only a small number of people were getting them.

Today, it seems as if all of the information you see says that EVERYONE should get them.

Why is that? My thought is that it's mostly about the $$$$.

It depends on how you define "much bigger health threat". Today, with the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus accounting for 99% of the flu we are seeing, what makes it a bigger threat is that most people don't have any immunity to this virus as they do to the regular flu virus. (They think maybe elderly people do have some immunity.) So the issue is that this will spread much more quickly and easily than the regular seasonal flu. So fewer people were at high risk of getting a really bad case of the normal flu strain because they had some immunity, but now that people don't have immunity they are at higher risk and vaccination is being more strongly encouraged to combat that higher risk.

soulsinging

know1 wrote:

I don't even really care about the testing.

My question is this - is the flu a much bigger health threat today than it was 20 years ago?

20 years ago, there was some flu vaccines available, but it seems that only a small number of people were getting them.

Today, it seems as if all of the information you see says that EVERYONE should get them.

Why is that? My thought is that it's mostly about the $$$$.

My suspicion is that you are correct about that. I don't recall anyone ever getting a flu vaccine when i was a kid. now even walgreen's gives them away. and every year there's a new panicked epidemic... avian flu, swine flu, SARS... and every year... like 10 people die in an impoverished country and that's it. this is all a huge hoax to drum up business. it's a flu people. i bet 99% of everyone on this forum do not even know anyone who knows anyone else that even heard of someone dying of a fucking flu.

and if i get it and go down, +1 for mother nature. a little natural selection might not be such a bad thing for this overpopulated planet.