How do you guys feel about it.

I was headed out of the country for a bit and this years is hitting very hard and early so I took mine, and I rarely do. It throws you off a little for a week, but protects against some of the flu strains. My mom's a nurse and has had people of all ages going in with the flu and staying because of complications. I recommend early and and yearly from now on, and I hate needles.

Not for 37 years

My wife and I always get our flu shots and I don’t understand why some don’t unless it might be a financial burden on them. Getting a pneumonia shot is a good idea also.

Never had the flu or a flu shot.

Some years yes, others no. This year....no.....got some kind of bug on 12/31, and still have it lingering on 1/11. Is it the flu? No one will ever know!

Getting the flu shot is a personal decision, atleast untill the government decides to make it mandatory.
Never had the flu and can't see getting injected with something I don't need.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/hea...on-their-safety

Getting a flu shot is a good idea unless you are trying to bolster your immune system by getting the flu. The risks are like not wearing a seat belt. I do not support a government requirement except for maybe healthcare workers and teachers (so they do not infect others), because we all should have the right to be foolish. I was too lazy to get mine this year, so I fit the category.

We actually offer the FLU shot on site free for employees that get insurance thru the company and will payroll deduct $15 for those that do not have health insurance here. I have 9 employees out today and all have the FLU. All 9 employees chose not to get the Flu shot & for 6 of the 9 the shot was even free. With that being said I still stand for freedom of choice.

I get the shot, I've had a bad case of the flu when I didn't get the shot. Many times I had heard someone say that they got the shot and then the next week the had the flu. Guess what, it takes about 6 days for you to get the flu after you are exposed and it also takes 2 weeks for the shot to take effect. People think the shot gave them the flu when in fact that already had the flu but the symptons had not shown up yet. There is about a three week window where you might get the flu after getting the shot which has absolutely nothing to do with the vaccination.

And, if you have ever had measles you SHOULD get a shingles shot. My 92 year old uncle nearly died from shingles last year and I saw this WWII hero naval captain double over in pain with them. I told the doctor that I think that if I had driven uncle Chet to a bridge and stopped the car he would have gotten out and jumped, that is how much pain he had. The pain lasted 6 week.

But I too stand for freedom of choice. As the old country song says, "Don't we all have the right to be wrong now and then?"

Flu shot is one of the greatest medical discoveries, why not get it.. I bet thousands of people die yearly from the flu.. Hard #'s aren't easy to find because flu deaths don't have to be reported as..

I'd say if you can get it, get it.. If not and don't want it don't. Don't complain when your laid up either .

Government mandate is a Joke.. Political crap like every single subject the last 10 yrs..

Sorry got a little ranty there

Strange things happen. An hour after my post on here my sister called me. Her next door neighbor, who she has lived next to for 30 years, has had flu for three days (of course no vaccination). She got out of bed, walked to the living room to lay down on the couch, and her husband discovered an hour later that she had died. 63 years old. We do all have the right to be wrong now and then, dead wrong.

Sorry to here that Bing. I have never got one in my 31 years. I may have to rethink that decision.

I thought they were required when we were small kids Jwann back in school..

I was never sure that 'the flu' or 'influenza' wasn't just some all-emcompassing word to describe being sick especially with an upset stomach or the craps.

As such, I'm not sure if I've ever even had the 'the flu.'

I've never gotten a flu shot either, and have no plans to do so in the foreseeable future. Maybe if I ever had the misfortune to come down with a severe case, I'd give it more thought the following year. As it stands now, whenever the virus makes its annual visit I usually display flu symptoms for a day or two, then I'm on the mend. It's never kept me home from work, or sent me to the doctor's office.

I do believe that there are groups at a higher than average risk from complications resulting from contracting the flu, and I think they would be wise in considering the shot. The elderly, younger children, healthcare workers, and those whose overall health is already compromised in some fashion, would be an example.

@Sunil
You bring up a great point. It wasn't until I had the flu that I knew what the flu really was. Most the time people just have something similar to food poisoning and think it's the flu. The real flu will knock you out for a week and you'll only remember it being three days with all the sleep.
Different severity in different years it was throws people off too. This year up in the NW it's an early and hard hitting strain, while two years ago late and not too bad.

Same experience for me. I only have had the flu once - back during Y2K. I will not forget it!

My company cultures different strains of things for medical use and growing vaccines, etc, so for us, it is fairly well mandatory (although they can't tell us it is mandatory).

I felt the same way as sprkplug for a long, long time, i never had a flu shot in my early years, and then, while writing my thesis @ 23, holy, crazy, bouncy balls did i get the flu.

Day 1, not so bad, just like any other flu ive ever gotten. day 2...yeah, this sucks, nose plugged up, sinuses hurt, some stomach issues, shaking and shivering all the time, but hey, i've had a fever before, no biggie. day 3....uuuhhh.....am i dead? is this real life? i didnt know things could spontaneously eject themselves from EVERY hole in my body at once, sweating while freezing and head hurt so bad i couldn't turn on the lights, couldn't keep down water or crackers, had to hydrate myself by sucking on ice cubes so i would just get a trickle at a time to absorb into my stomach lining, waking up with my sheets & pillow soaking wet with persperation, and even though i haven't eaten anything, needing to use the john once every 20 minutes, ...day 4....dehydrated, half asleep on theraflu, i stumbled into the campus dr's office. the thing that stuck with me for life after that misery...."you didn't get a flu shot, did you....well, that ought to learn 'ya." It took 3 or 4 more days to feel better, with another trip to the dr to hydrate via IV, since i couldn't hold down water.

yeah, even before i got my current job, i would never go a year without a flu shot again. i've had some weird maladies in my life, and that experience was as bad, if not worse, than the majority of them, including norovirus, rotovirus, food poisoning and having my foot opened up for surgery.

however....it is not my, nor anyone else's job (exceptions made for doctors and wives, of course) to tell you which medications you must take. I just hope that you do, cuz seriously, you dont want that. if you've never had to deal with that level of flu, im glad for you, because it is pure misery.

thanks, sorry for the length of the story
skinny

O.K. Just silly questions.

Does the strain of flu that gets the majority of people sick every year stay the same or change?

If it changes, how does the vaccination work? Do they know what strain will be going around and vaccinate for that strain?

The strain changes, but the vaccines are cultured from an educated guess. The way I understand it, there are thousands of worldwide strains of influenza, but a small number here. Sometimes the labs hit it right, and sometimes they don't.

I always get a shot for the same reasons I have good homeowner's insurance. I hope I never need it, but would feel silly if i didn't get the shot.

Me being in public safety, and my wife being an SICU nurse at Parkland for years, it made sense for us just because of the volume of sick people we came in contact with. You would be very surprised at the number of people who still don't wash their hands, or cover their mouth when they sneeze.

I got flu shots when I was taking care of my elderly Mom a few years ago, but never did before and haven't since. I'm not a doctor, so take it with a grain of salt, but I tend to think flu shots are a big scam $$$$$$...there's lots of info on YouTube and Google that explain it better than I can. Of course the "medical establishment" highly recommends it. So I say study the pro's and cons and make your own personal decision...2EachHisOwn.

My work provides the flu vaccine for free. This year was the first year I ever got one because of having a newborn in the house. I've never had the flu, but my wife had it last year and I know several others who have had it or have it now. You will know when you have it... It really beats you up. If you are in question, you probably had a cold or other less serious virus.

As to how effective the flu vaccine is. Each year it varies, this year they are saying those who got the vaccine are 62% less likely to get the flu. And for those who did get the vaccine and were still unlucky enough to get the flu, they tend to not get symptoms nearly as bad as those who did not.

I am friends with a couple of doctors. They are not in a position to make profit off of providing a flu vaccine. They both think it is a good idea. If you can afford it, I would get it.

I wonder if my sisters neighbor's widowed husband thinks his wife would still have died if she had gotten the shot. (See my earlier post]. This year no one who got the vaccination has died of the flu, and they seldom if ever do. Twenty Seven people in Illinois have died of the flu so far this flu season. None had been vaccinated.

Influenza A viruses are the "same" the world over, but certain markers on the surface change season to season-which prevents the development of lasting, permanent immunity, such as to mumps or measles.
The CDC tries to predict which strains will be active in the northern hemisphere by looking at what was most prevalent in the preceding winter in the southern hemisphere; sometimes they're spot on [which appears to be the case this year] and sometimes not even close. A couple years ago, they completely missed the mark and the shot offered no protection.
There is some evidence that getting a flu shot every year leads to the development of "pooled immunity" to influenza strains, giving one some lasting protection.

Influenza A is a predominently respiratory infection, if you've got much in the way of GI symptoms, you probably don't have it. If you're in bed for a week, think you're going to die, and wish you could, that's probably influenza.

Does getting the shot possibly lead to a stronger, more resistant strain of the virus? Like the way that penicillin is not near as effective as it once was? Is it possible that 50 years from now the shot will no longer be effective? By getting the shot are we possibly contributing to the creation of a newer, more potentially devestating strain of the flu???

Kind of an endless circle scenario?

The shot won't lead to any changes in the virus, as the virus doesn't "resist" the shot in any way-the virus' surface proteins are either recognized and destroyed by the immune system, or not recognized, in which the virus enters cells within the respiratory tract and hijacks their innards.
Bacteria become resistant to antibiotics in many ways, but often by a process of natural selection in which a population of actively reproducing organisms is exposed to a stress [the antibiotic] which leads to selection of a few organisms that have some resistance. Repeated rapid cycling of subsequent generations leads to bugs that have more and more resistance.
The worst influenza epidemic ever, in 1918-19, occurred way before any vaccines were available.

Thanks Yolk, I've wondered about that for some time. At least I now know that I won't be contributing to the development of a superbug by getting the shot.

But I'm still not ready to get one...

[quote=Zep... I tend to think flu shots are a big scam $$$$$$...there's lots of info on YouTube and Google that explain it better than I can. Of course the "medical establishment" highly recommends it. So I say study the pro's and cons and make your own personal decision...2EachHisOwn.[/quote]

I am a small town family medicine doctor. I have been dealing with the flu this year rather hard core for the past 6 weeks. I have never made a dime giving a flu shot, yet i make money every day by treating people who get the flu. i much prefer to see people for preventative treatment rather than treating for a condition that could be prevented.

The flu shot doesn't give you the flu...period... it does start the immune response to develop the immune system to fight the flu. basically, it makes the "army" to fight the virus. During this process, a part of the immune system called cytokines are released and his causes the "flu like symptoms" but this is very short lived. Every year the army has to be changed to protect against the new mutated virus; Thus we get a new shot every year.

A young healthy person who doesn't want the shot... fine, come see me when you are sick!, the young, old or immunocompromised, it is inappropriate to not immunize.

For me and my family, we will take the flu shot!

( I have been exposed to airborne flu virus 10+ times daily for past 6 weeks, thus I feel very strongly that I have good protection this year)

I am no doctor, and still trying to learn and investigate,
but what about stuff like this Dr. Pratt?

"children who had received the flu vaccine had three times the risk of hospitalization, as compared to children who had not received the vaccine, according to new research that will be presented International Conference of the American Thoracic Society in San Diego"

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090519172045.htm


or this?



November 5, 2012

By RONI CARYN

It’s flu-shot season, and public health officials are urging everyone over 6 months of age to get one. Many businesses provide on-site flu shots, and some hospitals have told staff members that they have to wear masks if they do not get the vaccine. By 2020, United States health leaders want 80 percent of the population to get yearly shots.

For vaccine manufacturers, it’s a bonanza: Influenza shots — given every year, unlike many other vaccines — are a multibillion-dollar global business.

But how good are they?

Last month,, in a step tantamount to heresy in the public health world, scientists at the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota released a report saying that influenza vaccinations provide only modest protection for healthy young and middle-age adults, and little if any protection for those 65 and older, who are most likely to succumb to the illness or its complications. Moreover, the report’s authors concluded, federal vaccination recommendations, which have expanded in recent years, are based on inadequate evidence and poorly executed studies.

“We have overpromoted and overhyped this vaccine,” said Michael T. Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, as well as its Center of Excellence for Influenza Research and Surveillance. “It does not protect as promoted. It’s all a sales job: it’s all public relations.”

Dr. Osterholm, who says he is concerned that confidence in current vaccines deters research into identifying more effective agents, comes from the world of public health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A bioterrorism and public health preparedness adviser to Tommy Thompson, the former health and human services secretary, he served on the interim management team during a transition period at the C.D.C. in 2002.

“I’m an insider,” Dr. Osterholm said. “Until we started this project, I was one of the people out there heavily promoting influenza vaccine use. It was only with this study that I looked and said, ‘What are we doing?’ ”

He still considers himself a “a pro-vaccine guy,” Dr. Osterholm said.

“I say, ‘Use this vaccine,’ ” he said. “The safety profile is actually quite good. But we have oversold it. Use it — but just know it’s not going to work nearly as well as everyone says.”

While researching the report released last month, Dr. Osterholm said, the authors discovered a recurring error in influenza vaccine studies that led to an exaggeration of the vaccine’s effectiveness. They also discovered 30 inaccuracies in the statement on influenza vaccines put forth by the expert panel that develops vaccine recommendations, all of which favor the vaccine.

C.D.C. officials acknowledge that the vaccines do not work as well in the elderly population as they do in younger healthy adults. But, they say, the effectiveness of the flu shots, which are reformulated every year in an attempt to match the strains most likely to be circulating that season, varies depending on the population being inoculated and the year.

“Does it work as well as the measles vaccine? No, and it’s not likely to. But the vaccine works,” Dr. Joseph Bresee, chief of epidemiology and prevention in the C.D.C.’s influenza division, said. And research is advancing to improve the effectiveness of the vaccine.

Although the vaccine may be less effective at preventing influenza in the elderly, Dr. Bresee said, that is the population most susceptible to the disease and at highest risk. Anywhere from as few as 3,000 to as many as 49,000 Americans die of influenza each year, some 90 percent of them elderly.

The new report from the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy is not the first to point out the shortcomings of influenza vaccines, however. The Cochrane Collaboration, an international network of experts that evaluates medical research, concluded in a 2010 review that the vaccines decrease symptoms in healthy adults under 65 and save people about a half-day of work on average, but that they do not affect the number of people hospitalized and have minimal impact in seasons when vaccines and viruses are mismatched.

(When the vaccine matches the circulating viruses, 33 adults need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms; when there is only a partial match, 100 people must be vaccinated for the same effect.) It was also concluded that the vaccines appear to have no effect on hospital admissions, transmission or rates of complications. A separate Cochrane review on vaccines for the elderly determined the evidence was so scant and of such poor quality that it could not provide guidance. Dr. Bresee of the C.D.C. pointed to only one randomized controlled trial of influenza vaccine in older people, and it looked at people age 60 and over in the Netherlands healthy enough to not be hospitalized or in a nursing home.

Another Cochrane review found no evidence that vaccinating health care workers who work with the elderly has any effect on influenza or pneumonia deaths.

“Not having evidence doesn’t prove it doesn’t work; we just don’t know,” said Dr. Roger Thomas, a Cochrane Collaboration coordinator for the University of Calgary in Alberta, who was an author of both of the reviews. “The intelligent decision would be to have large, publicly funded independent trials.”

But those may never be conducted on the elderly, in large part because of the way the vaccine was promulgated. Initially developed for soldiers and approved in 1945, the vaccine was approved for civilian use a year later. In 1960, the surgeon general, Leroy E. Burney recommended vaccinating three high-risk groups: pregnant women, the chronically ill and people 65 and over, Dr. Osterholm said. Once that recommendation was made, scientists felt that it would be unethical to run a trial that would essentially deny a recommended vaccine to participants assigned to the placebo group.

C.D.C. officials say population-based studies show that elderly people who get flu shots are less likely to die of any cause than elderly people who do not get them. Critics say these studies suffer from what’s called the healthy vaccine recipient effect and prove only that older people who are in good health and take care of themselves go to the doctor regularly — and get flu shots.

Many of these are big-picture concerns that an individual patient cannot do much about. The reassuring news is that even critics of the influenza vaccines agree that serious complications are rare.

Another option for those who want to reduce their risk of influenza and flulike infections may be simply this: Wash your hands more often. There is good evidence this works.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/05/reassessing-flu-shots-as-the-season-draws-near/

BGK, at my last Dr. Appointment they informed me I had not had ant immunizations since 1986. Then the proceeded to stick a needle in my arm. I think it was a tetanus shot.

OK here is my experience. I'm 78. As you age your immune system gets weaker. Starting sometime in my early 60's I got a runny nose. This turned into or was the flu but not always. This often led to pneumonia and this was scary. I couldn't breath and thought my lungs were coming out of my throat. Then as often as not it turned into pneumonia and I would wonder am I going to make it this time or not. So I started to get a flu shot every year and the pneumonia shot ever 5 or 10 years, I forget how often it's required. For the last dozen years or so I haven't had a problem.

As with most science, their are deniers that take bits and pieces to put together "evidence" against the massive and persuasive evidence that convinces most in the field. Even some doctors are quacks, or like doctor Oz, are entertainers. Science is not a democratic enterprise, one scientist with well designed experiments can disprove the "establishment", but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. GM crops are safe, evolution is real, global climate change is happening, Flu shots do much more good than harm (but this year only work in 2 of 3 cases which is not unexpected for a vaccine against multiple viruses), and efficient cold fusion has not been accomplished. If you think there is a conspiracy by scientists to deceive, you can believe that, but believing does not make things so, no no no, no no no...

So then it appears we're back to acting upon faith.... where do you put your money when both sides can apparently present credible evidence proving that their interpretation is the correct one? Those who receive the shot are quick to sing it's praises by virtue of them having not contracted the virus, but the general concensus here seems to be that I've never had a "real" case either, and I'm 46 years old and have yet to receive my first flu shot....and, I have a 9 and a 12 year old enrolled in public school, my wife works with the public everyday, (as do I), and they've never had the shot, (or the flu apparently by way of its description here), either? Even when it's been widespread enough to cancel school?

Is there a first time for everything? Sure. But I would argue that the odds are in my favor, having gone this long without it. I don't have any evidence to support this, but I believe people have varying degrees of....resistance? to occasional maladies, including the flu, different strains notwithstanding.

I also feel strongly that if someone believes the shot helps them, then they should get it. Just like I believe that a little raw ginseng every morning helps keep me healthy. No proof at all, but that does bring us right back to faith....I personally don't believe that the shot itself is dangerous, I just don't think that everyone requires it.

Every decision in life, either consciously or subconsciously is made with a personal risk analysis.

Advantages to getting flu shot:

1. Possible avoidance of inconvenience caused by getting the flu.
2. Possible avoidance of being a vector for passing the flu to others.
3. Possible avoidance of death.

Disadvantages of getting the flu shot.

1. Cost
2. Inconvenience

As a health care provider, the amount of inconvenience and risk involved with getting the flu far outweigh any minor cost or inconvenience. So I get mine.

Since people are not legally required to get the flu shot, it's all personal choice, and I don't get concerned how people analyze and act upon perceived risks. I would however be very concerned if I had an elderly or frail grandmother who was recieving health care from folks who had a cavalier attitude about receiving the injection.

Condello I think you stated it very well. Few words, much wisdom. So you could save fifteen bucks and maybe an hour of your precious time or a week in bed or worse.


Advantages to getting flu shot:

1. Possible avoidance of inconvenience caused by getting the flu.
2. Possible avoidance of being a vector for passing the flu to others.
3. Possible avoidance of death.

Disadvantages of getting the flu shot.

1. Cost
2. Inconvenience

Agreed. I think the elderly, as well as those with compromised immune systems, are at a much higher risk and should have the shot.

I've spent my entire life in the great outdoors. Hunting, fishing, trapping, cutting firewood, harvesting mushrooms and ginseng. All four seasons, every conceivable type of weather, every chance I get, I'm in the woods. I have yet to contract my first case of poison ivy. My 72 year old father, (who by the way got his flu shot! :D), has never had poison ivy.

My wife on the other hand, is not so fortunate. Handling my clothes will cause her to break out....found that out early on in our marriage.

Poison ivy has nothing to do with the flu, but I use this as an example of folks having varying degrees of resistance to something. Maybe I've never had poison ivy because I BELIEVE I'm immune....fine by me, whatever works...I believe in the power of faith, including instances outside of theology. The placebo effect is well documented in science, and I'm not willing to discount the power of having faith just yet. Maybe I've never gotten the flu simply because I don't believe I will?

Brief Hijack Interlude:

Being a terrible sufferer of poison ivy, I've looked into this. In the one North American manufacturing plant that processes urushiol, the active allergen in poison ivy, EVERYONE that works there eventually becomes completely tolerant to the chemical and thus resistant to poison ivy. It's probably your very long history of nearly constant exposure that's lead to tolerance.
There is evidence that ingesting a small amount of poison ivy on a regular basis will lead to the development of tolerance. I've seriously considered doing this, but it appears that if one takes in just a bit too much, the development of very severe itching at the point of excretion can occur. Not sure I want to take that risk!!

Now back to our regularly scheduled program.....

Out of a warped sense of curiosity I have to ask....Yolk, what do they process the urushiol for?? What is the intended use?

Yolk Sac,

Injecting a small amount of an allergen into people and increasing the dose over time is exactly what allergy therapy does. I know I've done it with other allergens. Once a week to the doctor's office for a shot. I had to stop as sitting around for 2 hours at the doctor's office every week wasn't doing anything for my one man business.



Urushiol is one of the most potent substances on the planet:

* Only 1 nanogram (billionth of a gram) needed to cause rash
* Average is 100 nanograms for most people
* 1/4 ounce of urushiol is all that is needed to cause a rash in every person on earth
* 500 people could itch from the amount covering the head of a pin
* Specimens of urushiol several centuries old have found to cause dermatitis in sensitive people.
* 1 to 5 years is normal for urushiol oil to stay active on any surface including dead plants

http://poisonivy.aesir.com/view/fastfacts.html

Now back to our regularly scheduled program - again...

BTW I won't be getting a flu shot. Why? I predict there will be a shortage and it might as well go to someone that really needs it.

This is my take.

I will not let anyone put a needle in me unless it's a matter of life and death due to the many different things I have read about, that are supposedly put into vaccines.
One of these components per my understanding is a compound known as Thiomersal. It's a compund which is derived from Mercury.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal

I am not a scientist, so I can only glean information, and make my own decisions.

Mercury in your body good? Mercury in your body bad?

The next is what I have read and a bit off the subject, but is Sodium Flouride. Yeah, the stuff they put into toothpaste and drinking water for cavity prevention.
It's my understanding sodium flouride is a by-product of the fertilizer and aluminum industry.
I have also seen evidence that it is a main ingredient in some rodent poisons and insect poisons.

On a tube of toothpaste it specifically says under the warning label and I quote...."If more than used for brushing is accidentally swallowed, get medical help or contact a poison control center right away".

What's up with that? Why isnt that written on a jug of milk?

Should we really be putting that in our mouths?

As I said I am not a scientist, so I can only form my own opinion. Evidence says these things are good, evidence says these things are bad.

Yes science is wonderful, but it also been used in tyrannical ways. Even our own government affiliates used normal vaccines to intentionally infect African Americans with syphillus.

Check this out, who was behind it and the current Federal Executive orders that are able to influence modern "experiments". Third paragraph. Think of this next time a "Federal Entity" recomends something.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment

So my choice is this, I am not going to be the first in line to put something into my body just because some stranger says "It is good for me."

Today, many "scientific studies" are funded by the entities which wish to capitalize from their use.And many times I see the experimental groups are only subjected for short term.

That in my opinion is like picking up my first pack of cigarettes and smoking them, then 3 months later saying "See I dont have lung cancer or emphysema."

Like I say I am no expert but while the jury is still out..........

Sprkplug and Yolk:

I'm in the "not affected by poison ivy" group - until last Spring. I was cutting a LOT of storm damaged trees down, and one warm day I cut a bunch of trees that had a LOT of poison ivy growing up into the trees. The vines were over 1" thick on the trunks. I did get a small spot on the inside of one elbow that itched and had small sores. I thought it was from scratching so much, but it probably was poison ivy. My arms were covered in sawdust for most of the day, and I was sweating pretty good to boot. It took a while to figure out what it was since I've never been bothered by it.

When I was a kid, playing outside in the woods, my friends would be affected by it, but I never was. When turkey hunting in Ca. one day, when the sun came up my friend and I were sitting in a patch of poison oak. In a few days she had symptoms on her ankles and wrists - I had none.

As for the flu shot, I think that it has a lot to do to each individuals exposure, and their immune system. I think some people are easier "targets" than others, just like some people have allergies and some don't. I noticed that I would get sick more often when I was burning the candle at both ends.

Now that my schedule has slowed down a bit during the winter, the colds are few and far between.

Lots of misinformation. Poison ivy is an allergy not a disease. Allergy is a non-productive over-reaction of the immune system, not the lack of sufficient immunity to overcome an invading virus. Thiomersal is a safe preservative used in vaccines, but due to political pressure is no longer used in developed countries like the US, but is still used in developing countries where immunizations must be stored for long periods of time under adverse conditions. Like I said above, it is easy to pick and choose evidence to support a belief, but science is all about considering all the credible evidence. Next time I need a surgery, I will sure not take a vote among the public on which one I need. It is all about who you trust, the scientists, or posters on the web. The personal stories about getting or not getting the flu are kind of like asking folks if the earth looks round or flat when they look out there window.

Best quote on this thread. Thank you!

True RAH, and the "experts" in the day said the world was flat and you would fall off the edge". If one were to negate this theory they were considered "conspiracy theorists", and mostly likely sent to the torture chambers for questioning the the ones with "credibility"!.

RAH, the earth is flat, can't you see that?

Agreed about the allergy thing.

Best I recall, the oil was extracted from cashew shells, where it's found in extremely high concentrations, for use in brake linings. Can't remember in exactly what capacity.

Typically, I believe that science takes the literal interpretation route, rather than the implied message...I'm not comparing poison ivy to the flu, I'm just saying that I believe some may be more resistant to certain viruses than others.

Maybe I've had the flu after all? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44275043/ns/health-cold_and_flu/t/why-some-people-dont-get-flu/

Cashew shells? So you're telling me that there's no market for wild-grown poison ivy?? And here I thought I might be sitting on a small fortune.... Thanks for the info Yolk, that's interesting stuff.

...some may be more resistant to certain viruses than others.

No doubt about that. Antibody studies show a great many people with
evidence of past infections from West Nile, Mononucleosis, even some tic born diseases such as Erhlichiosis-who were never aware that they had a serious illness, and recouperated completely. They probably had mild symptoms attributed to "some virus"....

And there we go.

There are two ways to get antibodies against the flu 1) get the flu 2) get immunized. The vaccine exposes the body to the antigen without the accompanying virulent strain of the virus. The body reacts by producing antibodies, and it is the body's antibodies (not the vaccine) that protect against the flu. This approach mimics the observed protection that was seen for those that got cow pox and then did not get small pox. The vaccine is man copying a natural phenominon. Lots of medicines were develope this way.

Interesting discussion by many smart individuals. So refreshing to witness these opinions that are in some cases 180 degrees apart, and yet no one is calling the other a "moron" or worse.
Carry on!!!

Give us time... Just kidding. This is a refreshing bunch.

Pond Boss at it's very best---but still gotta be careful.

It's great that we can debate the subject, instead of arguing over it.... it shows the high caliber of the membership. And while I don't think I'm going to come down with the flu, (and I know I'm not going to get the shot! ), if I do manage to get sick I will man up, re-open this thread, and admit my human fragility....all those who advocated getting the shot will be entitled to administer a strong dose of "I told you so's,"......and I will defer to their obviously advanced wisdom next year.....

Hey has anybody ever heard of a fish called "Georgia Giants"

Sorry guys could not stop myself

Hey, what's this green stuff in my pond???

I second that...I'm just trying to learn something.


I wouldn't apologize too much...almost 40% of the people that get the flu have had the flu shot.

[/quote]
I wouldn't apologize too much...almost 40% of the people that get the flu have had the flu shot. [/quote]

I hadnt seen this statistic, can you give us a citation?

The flu vaccine provides immunization against the most common strains expected to infect the population. If you are exposed to another strain you are SOL.

Had a flu shot? You'll be OK -- maybe
By CNN Staff

Fri January 11, 2013

"The vaccine isn't a guarantee that you'll be flu-free. In fact, it's about 62% effective, said the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Thomas Frieden, on Friday"

CNN Health - Friday Jan 11, 2013


ps: The link below pretty well sums up my current feelings on the flu shot,
but I am still open-minded about it and willing to learn. By the way the
title is somewhat mis-leading because I think Dr. Helmenstine agrees it
does work sometimes.

Why the Flu Vaccine Doesn't Work - Anne Marie Helmenstine, Ph.D.,

Well I really dont want to argue this into infinity, but I dont know that the fact that almost 40% of the people that get the flu have had the flu shot. It is 62 percent effective but does that mean that 28 percent of the folks who get the vaccination get the flu


BTW, my computer keyboard is really screwed up. I cannot use the hyphen, right brackets, the letter p takes three or four tries to et it right. No question marks, etc. When I try to type p it comes out like poiurewq. Capital p and you might as well shut it down.

Bing, that's why I like desktops. Pieces are easily changed out when they go bad, not like laptops.

I'm aware of that being one semester shy of becoming an RN. I was just responding to the the poison ivy post.

Esshup If you google poiuytrewq, which is the top row of keys starting from the right, it has a fix for the problem but it doesnt work for me. Mine is a Lenovo and it seems to have the issue more than others.

That happened to me after I spilled pop on my last keyboard. The problem I have now is the lettering is rubbing off!

Are you currently pursuing an RN?

Bing it would 38% not 28%...correct?

I would think if the flu vaccine is "62% effective",
that would mean it is 38% (almost 40%) ineffective and
for it to be "ineffective" people that took the shot would have
got the flu. What other definition of a flu shot not being effective
could there be?

28 not 38, just poiurewqroves my keyboard is screwed upoiurewq. What isnt clear to me from that is that the 38 percent who got the shot and the shot was ineffective got the flu. perhaps so, but they could have had ineffective virus but were not exposed to the virus and therefore did not get it. I think you could prove the virus was 38 percent ineffective without the haveing 38 percent getting sick. As I said, not trying to beat a dead horse but there is just so much evidence that it works much better than doing nothing. Remember we still have freedom of choice.

The other 10% were smokers and ate bad sushi.......still waiting for test results to see if they actually had the flu.................

Post-mortem autopsy reports still not in yet.....stay tuned.

Agreed Bing...God Bless the USA!

No, that was back in my younger days. I have all the respect in the world for nurses but it wasn't my cup of tea. I found hospitals boring and nursing homes depressing when I did my clinicals. I was also getting busier and busier with my taxidermy and decided I'd rather be self employed.

Obviously not, best I recall Cecil is a happily married man.

This is a site where guys who wear pink hats get to be moderators.

You think we're going to get hostile over a little thing like flu shots?

LMAO. Seen it happen.

So this data...could be very misleading.
I would bet that the 40% had a MUCH higher degree of comorbid medical conditions, immunocompromise, and oveall poor health.

I have given 300+ flu vaccines in my clinic. I am seeing 10+ people a day with the flu right now. ONLY ONE patient got the shot and still got the flu. he also has cancer, and is on meds that probably kept him from mounting the complete response needed to obtain immunity.









Bottom line this is the best info here. The only thing i would add is that Data are very tricky. It is all about how the epidemiologists present said data.

I could pull data that show you that penicillin kills people and is bad. I can also show you how many lives it has saved. The truth is usually in the middle.. the trouble is finding the correct middle.

There was a HUGE study a few years ago called the Women's Heath Initiative. Long story short it showed that estrogen was bad and we shouldn't treat women with this. The trouble was the data was spun in such a way that this was not entirely correct. It changed the way our country practiced medicine with what some feel was very bad data. It was/is a huge controversy.

Thank you very much for adding this example. Same type thing is going on for testosterone supplements for men. Increased vigor, shorten lifespan? Bottom line to me is that my physician, whom I trust completely with all my other medical needs, want's me to get a flu shot.

Now back to the flu shot thread.

Good catch!

Me too.
Sometimes you post something that seems so obvious, something inherently and patently truthful, that a reasonable person simply couldn't disagree with you, only to find that some misguided, deluded individual indeed does hold a contradictory opinion, and must have been just waiting to pounce on your innocent contribution, spewing forth venomous ad hominem attaks and falsehoods.

Like this, from the BP archives:

Yolk Sac: Green sunfish suck.

JHAP: You Moron!

So TRUE!!

LMAO!

I couldn't agree with you more. Do you know that after I posted that I actually got a PM from a guy that insisted that you weren't a moron. We argued back and forth for several days until he provided me a with Wikipedia link that educated me as to the fact that "Moron" is actually a mountain in Switzerland.

It was at this point I conceded that in fact you were not a Moron.

After all, there is no way that I wanted to be accused of making a mountain out of a molehill.

Gee, thanks JHAP, I think it's great how people on opposite sides of a divisive issue can come together and be civil and supportive of each......wait a minute, what's that....

Never mind.

cupla idjits!

Dave I had to Google it but you are right!!!

Yolk Sac: "I'm no slouch myself".

JHAP: "Don't sell yourself short, Yolk. You're a tremendous slouch".

I just took the kids to see the Hobbit last weekend, and Dr. Slouchy Molehill has an earthy, colloquial, hobbit-like quality to it. Well done, JHAP and BC - you are the Kings of nicknames.

I would be deeply offended by this remark were it not truth supported by undeniable facts.

I think that this nick name should appear on a line below Yolk's screen name.

TJ, I'm convinced that if you thoroughly researched your ancestry you would find that you are somehow related to Bilbo & Frodo Baggins.

Rearrange some hair and you are a dead ringer for Frodo. That can't merely be coincidence. Besides TJ Baggins has a nice ring to it.




Ring, get it?.... jeez some times I crack myself up.

I have been known to eat a second lunch now and again and do have a penchant for adventures...

The love of fireworks came from Gandalf, obviously.