Flu shots

Options
123578

Comments

  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    Idris said:

    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    Idris said:

    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    My son had the H1N1 a few years ago. Scary. My close friend is a physician and saw him at home- reassuring us that everything was going to be okay. He was correct- everything turned out well.

    The kid is a very healthy and strong child, but the virus left him a pile of quivering jello. Reading through this thread I am reminded how vulnerable and exposed we all are (and how worried we were entertaining the worst).

    While I tend to think it is a personal choice for all, I get the flu shot for a few of the reasons already listed. And with this said, it didn't do me any good this past weekend while I barfed my face off and lied in bed for two days: relegated to sipping water and chewing Gravol. What a horrible feeling.

    Nature is trying to get us.

    Cool everything turned out well for your son! :)
    -

    Do you know what caused your weekend adventure of barfing and sipping water? Was it flu related or something else? Maybe a little food poisoning or something?
    The whole story comes out: my daughter woke up in the middle of the night puking. Later, in the afternoon, it was my turn. What happened in my house has been happening in many houses- it's not food poisoning.

    On that note... I've had food poisoning twice: not fun.
    cool that makes sense.

    haha!

    I wouldn't necessarily say it was cool, but was has been kind of comical is watching my wife and son monitoring their insides over the past couple of days. They think they missed it- hopefully they did.

    If not... well crap...I guess I'll be doing a little more around the house than I'm typically used to. Poor me.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • Idris
    Idris Posts: 2,317
    Ah! I mean cool as in it now makes sense that you took a flu shot and still got ill as it was not related to what the flu shot was suppose to prevent. (errr dunno if that makes sense)

    btw, If I get a flu bug at all, it mostly comes from my nephew (6 years old), actually I think 2 of the last three times I've been kinda ill was passed on from him to me, he'll be staying with me, throw up (or something), then the next day or 2 I'll start feeling all sluggish and sick, and he'll be perfectly fine.

    (poor you indeed hahah)



  • BinFrog
    BinFrog MA Posts: 7,314
    riotgrl said:


    FACTUALLY speaking, the only reasons studied for recent outbreaks are directly attributed to non-vaxxers. Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that when effectiveness of any vaccine comes up then all fingers point to non vaccination as the only possible cause? If you are vaccinated then shouldn't you be protected from whooping cough, measles, mumps, etc? Why the sudden outbreaks? Over 80% of the whooping cough cases in CA were of vaccinated children. Clearly, the effectiveness of said vaccine is in question. But when safety and effectiveness is brought up, even by scientists and MD's, then it is quickly dismissed and no further studies are conducted. When scientists do question these very things with their own research, many of them are dismissed by pharmaceuticals and the medical establishment as quacks. Shouldn't the REAL response be to conduct double blind studies to ascertain that the vaccines are working the way they are supposed to? Isn't THAT just as much the responsibility of everyone involved?


    Sorry, but you are buying into scare tactics (let me guess: nvic.org?). What you state as fact is FAR from fact. What is actually happening is that the new shots against whooping cough are not 100% effective like they used to almost be. It has to do with a variety of factors.

    So instead of being almost completely effective, they are around 50-60% effective. Seems to me those are odds worth playing.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/01/us-whooping-cough-booster-idUSBRE9700XK20130801
    Bright eyed kid: "Wow Typo Man, you're the best!"
    Typo Man: "Thanks kidz, but remembir, stay in skool!"
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    http://ecoexplained.com/2014/12/flu-vaccine-by-novartis-kills-13-patients-in-italy-within-48-hours-of-administration/

    Flu risk versus vaccine risk...
  • Last-12-Exit
    Last-12-Exit Charleston, SC Posts: 8,661
    I really think that getting the flu shot is in the best interest of all.
  • HughFreakingDillon
    HughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 39,449
    I only started getting the shot to protect my eldest daughter as much as we can. She has an auto-immune disease, and therefore is on immunosuppressants, so anything my wife and I can do to reduce the risk of her immune system taking a beating and possible hospitalization, we will.
    before that, I honestly never thought there was much point to it. I mean, the flu shot mixture is only a PREDICTION of the strain they THINK will be most active that season, and it's still not 100% effective, but yeah, I get it why people with diseases that affect their immunity would want others to get vaccinated.
    but I don't go out of my way to tell people it is their social responsibility to do so. personal choice, that's my belief.
    Hugh Freaking Dillon is currently out of the office, returning sometime in the fall




  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    Hard to believe the logic in this article, in which the nurses union complains that they are being "unfairly targeted" because visitors to the hospital don't have to have flu shots but they do (or wear a mask). Are they actually equating their role in the hospital to that of visitors? Completely aside from the issue of whether or not the flu shot provides a reasonable level of protection, this seems like a ridiculous argument to make.

    And as an aside, it isn't true that physicians don't have to provide proof of vaccination - they do, just through a different mechanism than the nurses and other hospital staff, because they are contractors, not employees of the health authority.

    http://www.timescolonist.com/news/local/flu-shot-policy-unfairly-targets-nurses-union-1.1635362
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • backseatLover12
    backseatLover12 Posts: 2,312
    I work in a nursing home and more and more I wonder why certain individuals become nurses and especially, nurse aides. These people are supposed to have a compassionate nature, but more and more I see impatience and sometimes violence from them toward patients.

    We live in a very narcissistic society, where we always have the focus on ME. So no wonder nurses and the nurse union are only thinking of themselves. Regardless that they are in a service - and sensitive - driven industry. In the end, people only care about themselves. Me, I don't think twice of getting the flu shot, I do work with patients with low immune systems, after all.

    At the same time, the media only publishes the bad news. I'm sure that there are a lot of great folks out there who do think about the patient first. We just don't hear about them much.
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,644
    OK, I'm one of those "no flu-shot for me" types but I can't help but wonder if I had gotten one that maybe I wouldn't have been down like I've been these last two days. And to make matters worse, I'm a really, really shitty patient, haha!

    bsL12, Kudos to you for working in a nursing home. My mother was cared for by good people like you that last year of her life. Some of the people working their were just putting in the hours but some of them were A#1 great, caring, compassionate people. I few of them came with us to my Mom's memorial and cried with us. They were so great. Thanks.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni











  • Last-12-Exit
    Last-12-Exit Charleston, SC Posts: 8,661
    It's not to late to get a shot Brian.
  • oceaninmyeyes
    oceaninmyeyes Posts: 4,646
    Last-12-Exit said:

    It's not to late to get a shot Brian.

    ;;)
    And the sun it may be shining . . . but there's an ocean in my eyes
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,644
    Last-12-Exit said:

    It's not to late to get a shot Brian.

    That's what I hear. Sure have been thinking about it. Mostly just trying to shake a soar throat- not sure the flu shot will help that. Doing a lot of tea lately.

    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni











  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,876
    About 8 years ago I skipped a flu shot and caught the flu and it was miserable beyond belief. Since then, I religiously get the shot and ensure my children have the shot or the mist. If you've ever seen your child go through the flu, it is hard to defend not getting it even if it only reduces the chances by 20%. It's still worth it in my book. In reality, the prevention level is much higher, but certainly not 100%. Either way, any reduction is worth it in my opinion.
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    I use a bit of common sense....
    when I read that influenza kills between 3,000 and 50,000 common sense asks why the disparity?
    when i read that the shot doesnt actually hurt common sense recalls "didnt like 15 people die within hours of receiving the shot"?
    when i read reduces the chance of dying by 40%, common sense says look of the data, its from 1989, common sense sense says i see free flu shots for 12 years and the last study was done 25 years ago?
    i read 50% effective common sense says look up the research, no research to prove effectiveness
    i read that the comprehensive study shows efficacy range from 16-76% effective, common sense asks why the disparity.
    common sense says stop reading forget the shot even if 1 person died from the shot ill take my chances of dying, from influenza rather than increasing it by getting the shot.

    Did you get your flu shot? I didn't really want to (I hate needles) but as an infectious disease physician at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, it would be exceedingly poor form if I opted out. My job requires it, and I recommend the vaccine to just about every patient, every day. The shot doesn't actually hurt, and if you look at the terrifying data—influenza kills between 3,000 and 50,000 Americans every year—it seems insane not to get immunized. Annual vaccination reduces your chance of dying from the virus by more than 40 percent! But on Wednesday, the Centers for Disease Control announced that this year's vaccine kinda sucks. To be specific, it's less than 50 percent effective against the predominant strain of circulating virus. So what went wrong?

    It turns out the whole thing is a big guessing game. Influenza vaccines are produced in eggs, and take approximately six months to manufacture, which means scientists start making the flu vaccine in February or March, way before they know which strain is going to be the most problematic. The decision of which strains to include in the vaccine is based upon global surveillance of viruses circulating at the end of the prior influenza season. Scientists are making a guess, but it's an educated guess.

    The flu shot you got (or will get) covers three or four strains of influenza. The one I received covers three strains (two of influenza A, and one of influenza B), but at the hospital across the street, Memorial Sloan Kettering, they administer one that covers four strains: two A and two B. It's debatable which one is better.

    This general strategy of vaccine development usually works, but if the virus mutates, or an unexpected strain emerges, you won't be protected. This is not to stay you shouldn't get a flu shot—YOU DEFINITELY SHOULD—but when you do, you really have no idea how much protection it's going to afford you.

    You see, most studies have overestimated the true efficacy of the flu vaccine. The numbers most frequently quoted are between 70 and 90 percent, but a comprehensive review over nine flu seasons indicates that in adults aged 18 to 64, vaccine efficacy was really only 59 percent, with range of 16 to 76 percent. One study found that the effectiveness of the vaccine during the 2004-2005 was only around 10 percent; two years later, during the 2006-2007 season, that number jumped to 52 percent. This year, the predominant strain of influenza is called H3N2, and preliminary studies indicate the vaccine is a good match for only 48 percent of H3N2 strains. (Influenza A and B are are further subdivided by the characteristics of two proteins called hemagglutinin and neuraminidase; H3N2 refers to subtle variations in these two proteins.)

    That is to say, this year's shot is performing worse than average, but not much worse. And on the spectrum of underperforming shots, it's still nowhere near the floor.

    This relatively poor match—let's be honest, less than 50 percent isn't great—is because of something called antigenic drift, which means the virus has mutated ever so slightly, just enough to evade the antibodies that were generated after you got your flu shot. The vaccine makers accurately predicted H3N2, but they were unable to predict this subtle drift.

    "One thing to understand about flu," CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden said in a phone conference Thursday, "is that it is unpredictable. Every season is different, with different flu viruses spreading and causing illness. Unfortunately, about half of the H3N2 viruses that we've analyzed this season are different from the H3N2 virus that's included in this year's flu vaccine. They're different enough that we're concerned that protection from H3N2 viruses may be lower than we usually see."

    Influenza virus is remarkable for its high rate of mutation, which is why you have to get vaccinated every single year. It's also why I've been instructed to use two drugs to treat patients with this flu season: Tamiflu and Relenza. The virus might be able to alter its structure to evade one of these drugs, but probably not both. Let's keep our fingers crossed this strategy works.

    The last thing to consider is that we're still very early into flu season. H3N2 is the predominant strain now, but another strain may emerge in early 2015, one that is covered by the vaccine. I receive a weekly virology report about the infections that are spreading in our city and our hospital and it rarely stays the same from one week to the next. Viruses, like vaccines, are unpredictable. We really don't know what the flu season is going to look like three months from now or if the latest vaccine is actually a dud. So if you haven't yet gotten your shot, don't let the latest news deter you. It's still worth it.

    http://regressing.deadspin.com/why-does-the-flu-vaccine-suck-this-year-1667110237/+kylenw
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    What’s In It?

    Egg proteins: Including avian contaminant viruses
    Formaldehyde: Known carcinogen
    Thimerosal: Mercury-based preservative (only in multi-dose vials)
    Other heavy metals such as aluminum: Known neurotoxin
    Sugar: The essence of all inflammatory disease
    Triton X100: A detergent
    Other additives known to cause allergic reactions

    Today, the only childhood vaccines used routinely in the United States that contain thimerosal (mercury) are flu vaccines in multi-dose vials. These vials have very tiny amounts of thimerosal as a preservative. This is necessary because each time an individual dose is drawn from a multi-dose vial with a new needle and syringe, there is the potential to contaminate the vial with harmful microbes (toxins).

    There is no evidence that the small amounts of thimerosal in flu vaccines causes any harm, except for minor reactions like redness and swelling at the injection site. Although no evidence suggests that there are safety concerns with thimerosal, vaccine manufacturers have stopped using it as a precautionary measure. Flu vaccines that do not contain thimerosal are available (in single dose vials).
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    image
  • Last-12-Exit
    Last-12-Exit Charleston, SC Posts: 8,661
    JC29856 said:

    I use a bit of common sense....
    when I read that influenza kills between 3,000 and 50,000 common sense asks why the disparity?
    when i read that the shot doesnt actually hurt common sense recalls "didnt like 15 people die within hours of receiving the shot"?
    when i read reduces the chance of dying by 40%, common sense says look of the data, its from 1989, common sense sense says i see free flu shots for 12 years and the last study was done 25 years ago?
    i read 50% effective common sense says look up the research, no research to prove effectiveness
    i read that the comprehensive study shows efficacy range from 16-76% effective, common sense asks why the disparity.
    common sense says stop reading forget the shot even if 1 person died from the shot ill take my chances of dying, from influenza rather than increasing it by getting the shot.

    Did you get your flu shot? I didn't really want to (I hate needles) but as an infectious disease physician at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, it would be exceedingly poor form if I opted out. My job requires it, and I recommend the vaccine to just about every patient, every day. The shot doesn't actually hurt, and if you look at the terrifying data—influenza kills between 3,000 and 50,000 Americans every year—it seems insane not to get immunized. Annual vaccination reduces your chance of dying from the virus by more than 40 percent! But on Wednesday, the Centers for Disease Control announced that this year's vaccine kinda sucks. To be specific, it's less than 50 percent effective against the predominant strain of circulating virus. So what went wrong?

    It turns out the whole thing is a big guessing game. Influenza vaccines are produced in eggs, and take approximately six months to manufacture, which means scientists start making the flu vaccine in February or March, way before they know which strain is going to be the most problematic. The decision of which strains to include in the vaccine is based upon global surveillance of viruses circulating at the end of the prior influenza season. Scientists are making a guess, but it's an educated guess.

    The flu shot you got (or will get) covers three or four strains of influenza. The one I received covers three strains (two of influenza A, and one of influenza B), but at the hospital across the street, Memorial Sloan Kettering, they administer one that covers four strains: two A and two B. It's debatable which one is better.

    This general strategy of vaccine development usually works, but if the virus mutates, or an unexpected strain emerges, you won't be protected. This is not to stay you shouldn't get a flu shot—YOU DEFINITELY SHOULD—but when you do, you really have no idea how much protection it's going to afford you.

    You see, most studies have overestimated the true efficacy of the flu vaccine. The numbers most frequently quoted are between 70 and 90 percent, but a comprehensive review over nine flu seasons indicates that in adults aged 18 to 64, vaccine efficacy was really only 59 percent, with range of 16 to 76 percent. One study found that the effectiveness of the vaccine during the 2004-2005 was only around 10 percent; two years later, during the 2006-2007 season, that number jumped to 52 percent. This year, the predominant strain of influenza is called H3N2, and preliminary studies indicate the vaccine is a good match for only 48 percent of H3N2 strains. (Influenza A and B are are further subdivided by the characteristics of two proteins called hemagglutinin and neuraminidase; H3N2 refers to subtle variations in these two proteins.)

    That is to say, this year's shot is performing worse than average, but not much worse. And on the spectrum of underperforming shots, it's still nowhere near the floor.

    This relatively poor match—let's be honest, less than 50 percent isn't great—is because of something called antigenic drift, which means the virus has mutated ever so slightly, just enough to evade the antibodies that were generated after you got your flu shot. The vaccine makers accurately predicted H3N2, but they were unable to predict this subtle drift.

    "One thing to understand about flu," CDC Director Dr. Tom Frieden said in a phone conference Thursday, "is that it is unpredictable. Every season is different, with different flu viruses spreading and causing illness. Unfortunately, about half of the H3N2 viruses that we've analyzed this season are different from the H3N2 virus that's included in this year's flu vaccine. They're different enough that we're concerned that protection from H3N2 viruses may be lower than we usually see."

    Influenza virus is remarkable for its high rate of mutation, which is why you have to get vaccinated every single year. It's also why I've been instructed to use two drugs to treat patients with this flu season: Tamiflu and Relenza. The virus might be able to alter its structure to evade one of these drugs, but probably not both. Let's keep our fingers crossed this strategy works.

    The last thing to consider is that we're still very early into flu season. H3N2 is the predominant strain now, but another strain may emerge in early 2015, one that is covered by the vaccine. I receive a weekly virology report about the infections that are spreading in our city and our hospital and it rarely stays the same from one week to the next. Viruses, like vaccines, are unpredictable. We really don't know what the flu season is going to look like three months from now or if the latest vaccine is actually a dud. So if you haven't yet gotten your shot, don't let the latest news deter you. It's still worth it.

    http://regressing.deadspin.com/why-does-the-flu-vaccine-suck-this-year-1667110237/+kylenw

    Sorry for quoting such a long post, but I haven't figured out how to quote just one or two sentences. But I think, Jc, you are saying "what harm can it do so might as well get the shot." If that is what you mean, we agree on something. It's a start...
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    Yes, it's not for everybody. Some people are injured and some die after getting the shot. Since 1989 when congress pass laws shielding vaccine manufactureres and doctors who create and administer vaccines and created the taxpayer subsidized national vaccine injury program more than $3b has been paid out(that's on all vaccines not just flu). I'm assuming it's no easy task filing and winning vaccine injury cases.
    A simple Google search of Flu shot injuries can help people understand that flu shots are not for everyone.

    Just keep this in mind, health organizations and health care providers jobs are to keep the masses healthy and safe, you and i have to keep you and i healthy and safe, success for them is batting .800 (keeping 8 out of 10 healthy safe) you and i have to bat .1000. Using the baseball analogy, you and i can't swing and miss.
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    Everything in life has consequences, and every medication has some potential side effects, so yes, there is always a remote chance that you will be the unlucky one with a serious side effect from an immunization. Ideally each person would weigh for themselves the risks versus benefits, instead of just going with personal prejudices or sensationalistic reporting.

    The current investigation suggests that the purported "flu shot deaths" in Italy weren't actually related to the immunizations. Autopsies continue but the first autopsy shows solidly that the vaccine was not responsible - the guy died of a rupture of an existing aortic aneurysm. Unfortunately, when we are talking about people in their 70s and 80s, a certain percentage will die within a few days of any event.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    Prejudiced and sensationalized reporting by the department of justice

    http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/government-pays-damages-to-vaccine-victims-flu-shot-most-dangerous-with-gbs-and-death-settlements/

    The June 2014 report from the Department of Justice on damages paid by the U.S. Government to vaccine victims was recently published on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources website. There were 120 cases of vaccine injuries decided. 78 cases received compensation, while 42 cases were denied.

    Most of the U.S. public is unaware that a U.S. citizen, by law, cannot sue a pharmaceutical company for damages resulting from vaccines. Congress gave them total legal immunity in 1986, and that law was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2011. There is a special “vaccine court” called the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program that is funded through a tax on vaccines. If you are injured or killed by a vaccine, you must hire an attorney and fight tax-funded government attorneys to seek damages, as you cannot sue the drug manufacturers. As you can see from the report below, it takes years to reach a settlement, with the longest case below being settled after 11 years. Therefore, this report probably only represents a tiny fraction of the actual number of people harmed or killed by vaccines, since it is so difficult to fight the government in court to win a settlement.

    As in previous reports, the June 15, 2014, report covering a 3-month period shows that the flu vaccine is the most dangerous vaccine in America. 78 cases were awarded settlements for vaccine injuries, with 55 of the settlements being for the flu shot, including one death. Most of the settlements for injuries due to the flu shot were for Guillain-Barré Syndrome. Other flu vaccine injuries included: Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy, Rheumatoid arthritis, Shingles, Brachial plexus neuropathy, Bell’s Palsy, Brachial neuritis, Transverse myelitis, Lichenoid drug eruption, and Narcolepsy.

Categories