Newest Threads

**dkwolf** · 10-01-2012, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broadbill

On the flip-flip side I know plenty of people who get the flu because they didn't get the shot.

I'm all for ain't-broke-don't-fix, but when I only have a fixed amount of PTO time every year, I'm not to keen on blowing a week of it laid up on my back feeling like s*it. That shot is pretty cheap insurance!

And I'd wager there's nearly as many, like GilaMinumBeer, that get the flu even though they had the shot.

I believe they decide which strain(s) to innoculate against based on what starts showing up in Asia first (I could be wrong or mis-remembering). Then, they assume the same strain will show up in the US. Last year or the year before, they guessed wrong and millions of people got a worthless shot.

And when "insurance" offers only a 50-70% chance of working when they guess RIGHT, and lower yet when they guess wrong.. I don't call that insurance. I call it a gamble.

david_42 · 10-01-2012, 08:48 PM

The big problem is the vaccine takes over 6 months to make, so they are just guessing about the strains. There's a new method for growing the vaccine that takes less than 2 weeks, but it is still in the approval cycle. Once that's available, the shots can be made after the first people get sick.

Grantman1 · 10-01-2012, 08:55 PM

There's no evidence that the flu shot has ever even worked. You are right in that they just guess which strains to protect against, and there's no way of predicting. It's basically a waste of time, money, and a slight pain in the arm, and who knows what else comes of it. I wouldn't want a bunch of dead flu cells injected into my body.

It's about as effective at preventing the flu as a the occassional rye IPA, and not nearly as tasty.

Skip it, people!

broadbill · 10-01-2012, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkwolf

And I'd wager there's nearly as many, like GilaMinumBeer, that get the flu even though they had the shot.

Its difficult to tell if these people get the flu virus they were inoculated for, or one that the vaccine doesn't provide protection for, or maybe they didn't even have a flu virus in the first place (there is a reason why everything is described as "flu-like symptoms"!)

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkwolf

I believe they decide which strain(s) to innoculate against based on what starts showing up in Asia first (I could be wrong or mis-remembering). Then, they assume the same strain will show up in the US. Last year or the year before, they guessed wrong and millions of people got a worthless shot.

2007....otherwise is been good pick for 20 of the 23 years the flu vaccine has been offered....

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkwolf

And when "insurance" offers only a 50-70% chance of working when they guess RIGHT, and lower yet when they guess wrong.. I don't call that insurance. I call it a gamble.

So to expand on your gambling idea: you wouldn't take a gamble that you had 50-70% chance of winning? When losing could mean being down-n'-out for 3-4 days, possible hospitalization and death?

***Yooper*** · 10-01-2012, 09:46 PM

The thing with the flu is that for many people, it's a pretty bothersome respiratory illness for a week or so, and that's it. Fever, coughing, chills, and that's about all. It's miserable, that's for sure.

But for immune-compromised individuals, the flu is deadly. That's why it's recommended for vulnerable people, including the elderly.

Pneumonia is a frequent complication, and for people with asthma (like me), it can mean a hospital stay.

I've had the flu only once, but I had H1N1 (Swine flu). I thought I was going to die. But I'm pretty healthy (asthma is totally controlled) and recovered just fine. I gained back the weight I lost really quick, as a matter of fact!

Jboyles123 · 10-01-2012, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grantman1

There's no evidence that the flu shot has ever even worked. You are right in that they just guess which strains to protect against, and there's no way of predicting. It's basically a waste of time, money, and a slight pain in the arm, and who knows what else comes of it. I wouldn't want a bunch of dead flu cells injected into my body.

It's about as effective at preventing the flu as a the occassional rye IPA, and not nearly as tasty.

Skip it, people!

If you don't want to take the shot that's fine, but most if your post is absolutely wrong. There is absolute evidence it does work!

Grantman1 · 10-01-2012, 10:12 PM

I read a study recently that found that the flu vaccine only prevented type A or B flu in less than 2 out of 100 adults. Consider that, and the fact that the CDC says that no more than 20% of flu-like illnesses are actually the flu.

The other part to think about is what is never mentioned when it comes to vaccines. Aside from the vaccine itself, every vaccination injection also includes chemicals that irritate your immune system, allowing it to react to the vaccine. These chemicals include aluminum and mercury.

So anyway, I don't care if anyone else wants to get a flu shot, but I'd rather take my chances than have some of that stuff flowing through my veins. I like to pick my poisons, and that's not one of them!

porcupine73 · 10-01-2012, 11:04 PM

It's interesting how polarized people are on the flu shot (and vaccines). I've been in similar threads on other forums and most people who post seem to be strongly in favor of one direction or the other. Well I suppose that's not uncommon for any thread though.

broadbill · 10-02-2012, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grantman1

I read a study recently that found that the flu vaccine only prevented type A or B flu in less than 2 out of 100 adults. Consider that, and the fact that the CDC says that no more than 20% of flu-like illnesses are actually the flu.

Source please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grantman1

The other part to think about is what is never mentioned when it comes to vaccines. Aside from the vaccine itself, every vaccination injection also includes chemicals that irritate your immune system, allowing it to react to the vaccine. These chemicals include aluminum and mercury.

And that right there is the mark of a true anti-vaccine whackaloon...pinning all of the ails of the world on ingredients that haven't been in vaccines for 20 years, yet they somehow continue to poison children.

Tell Jennifer McCarthy I said hi.

porcupine73 · 10-02-2012, 01:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grantman1

These chemicals include aluminum and mercury.

Quote:

Originally Posted by broadbill

And that right there is the mark of a true anti-vaccine whackaloon...pinning all of the ails of the world on ingredients that haven't been in vaccines for 20 years, yet they somehow continue to poison children.

Well I don't see why you would claim that, when right on the CDC's own website they list as of 2009 the statement "Aluminum is present in several vaccines to improve the immune response."

And "Thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative that is added to vials of vaccine that contain more than one dose to prevent contamination and growth of potentially harmful bacteria."

Not sure who in this thread mentioned 'pailing the ails of the world' and 'somehow continue to poison children' because that is the first mention of those terms I see in this thread. Interesting.