Flu Shots are out!

[Otter]

My neighbour died the other year from the flu. A really nice old guy.

I'm sorry to hear about your neighbor.

I think flu shots may be justified for people whose immune systems are already weakened. My only qualm about this is that response to the shot taxes the immune system and may allow some other pathogen to take hold. Hence, I'd rather people in poor health carefully consider the risks with their doctors every year than get vaccinated as a mater of course.

One day I was chatting with him and a couple of days later he was gone. You realize that the reason some of those epidemics don't happen is because of something called "herd immunity"

What does suppressing the acquisition of long-term immunities do to the herd?

[apneawho]

I agree with Otter. My employer has made it mandatory this year and I am not happy. Not sure what they can do if I do not take it, but I plan to decline. Will let you know.

[Alshain]

I agree with Otter. My employer has made it mandatory this year and I am not happy. Not sure what they can do if I do not take it, but I plan to decline. Will let you know.

I don't know where you live, but I don't think that is legal in the U.S.

EDIT: There may be exceptions for certain professions like Healthcare workers. Not sure.

[archangle]

What does suppressing the acquisition of long-term immunities do to the herd?

Yes, if we let people catch the real flu through natural processes, the more susceptible people will die. After a few generations, the surviving population will be less susceptible to flu. It won't be a popular public health policy.

Re: "inadequately tested" vaccines

As for "inadequately tested" vaccines, how well "tested" are the naturally mutated flu viruses running around in the wild? Do you want to get the vaccine with a killed virus of a strain that is controlled, tested to some degree, and government approved, or the living virus that's constantly mutated in the wild in pigs and chickens?

Don't forget the 1918 flu killed 10-20% of the people who caught it and it killed 3-6% of the entire world's population. We don't do a whole lot better against virus epidemics now than we did then. Antiviral medicines don't work that well. There aren't enough critical care facilities to treat the people who get respiratory problems in a severe flu outbreak in a normal year. Worldwide travel and mobility make the idea of quarantines a joke.

The H5N1 avian flu killed over 50% of the people who caught it a few years back. Luckily, it didn't spread easily between humans.

The recent swine flu outbreak had the nasty property that it killed the "healthy, strong people who never get the flu" more often than it killed the "average" person.

[Breathe Jimbo]

I get the flu shot every year since 1994 when, at the age of 33, I came down with the flu, suffered complications, and wound up in the hospital for a week and out on disability for several months. It took me an entire year to make a full recovery. I'm not risking that again, thank you very much. The flu kills.

Just now I scheduled my flu shot for tomorrow morning.

[Otter]

What does suppressing the acquisition of long-term immunities do to the herd?

Yes, if we let people catch the real flu through natural processes, the more susceptible people will die. After a few generations, the surviving population will be less susceptible to flu.

Did you completely miss my point, or were you just setting up a straw man for target practice? In case it wasn't clear, I was talking about the effect of blocking Th1 immune response rather than natural selection.

It won't be a popular public health policy.

What won't be popular public policy? Letting people make decisions about their own health? It seems to me that's kindof in right now.

Re: "inadequately tested" vaccines

As for "inadequately tested" vaccines, how well "tested" are the naturally mutated flu viruses running around in the wild? Do you want to get the vaccine with a killed virus of a strain that is controlled, tested to some degree, and government approved, or the living virus that's constantly mutated in the wild in pigs and chickens?

As long as I am in relatively good health and there is no evidence of a true pandemic, I'll take my chances with the flu. Perhaps the long term immunity I gain will help when a real pandemic does surface. My immune system may not be government approved, but it has undergone years of testing.

Don't forget the 1918 flu killed 10-20% of the people who caught it and it killed 3-6% of the entire world's population.

I'm not forgetting that. I just don't think it's a good reason to get vaccinated every single year.

The recent swine flu outbreak had the nasty property that it killed the "healthy, strong people who never get the flu" more often than it killed the "average" person.

Which made it similar to the 1918 outbreak. OTOH, it didn't actually kill that many people. I discussed the vaccine with my doctor, but she wasn't impressed with the "pandemic" and advised against getting the shot.

I did get the flu that year. Perhaps I was lucky enough to be exposed to this less virulent H1N1, and that will help me years from now when a more dangerous H1N1 that is particularly lethal to aging, bearded hoseheads arises and spreads like wildfire before a vaccine can be made and produced in sufficient quantities.

[chunkyfrog]

I have always considered myself a reasonably healthy person; but flu shots, for me, are a MUST!
Even with the significant improvement in my health due to CPAP and weight loss, STILL a priority.
I really hate the flu. HATE IT!
I had the West Nile virus several years ago--recovered without complications--but I would have preferred not to have that again.

[BlackSpinner]

Herd immunity - You may not get the flu badly, you may survive, however there are more the young healthy people in your community (By the way those died more often in the last H1N1 flu) there are the elderly, the young, the chronically ill and others who can't get the flu vaccine - like my granddaughter who is allergic to eggs. Now if everyone who can gets immunized a flu virus will have a much harder time to get hold in a community because it can't find hosts easily do these unprotected and immune compromised people in your community will have less chance of being exposed to the virus and dying from it. Your choice not to get immunized and get a mild case could lead to the deaths of someones grandparents, someones baby, someones chronically ill mother. These dying people are members of your community, not a statistic, that you have chosen not to protect. It is funny that people who will scream about needing to have guns to "protect my community" refuse to have a little shot to actually really protect their community.

In this case "freedom of choice " sounds a lot like "the right to watch other people die"

[Postman]

Flu shots CANNOT give you the flu...period. They are made from DEAD virius. You might have a mild reaction but NOT the flu. (info only, not to start a flame war).

[Postman]

Flu shots CANNOT give you the flu...period. They are made from DEAD virius. You might have a mild reaction but NOT the flu. (info only, not to start a flame war).

[archangle]

What won't be popular public policy? Letting people make decisions about their own health? It seems to me that's kindof in right now.

...

Which made it similar to the 1918 outbreak. OTOH, it didn't actually kill that many people. I discussed the vaccine with my doctor, but she wasn't impressed with the "pandemic" and advised against getting the shot.

I did get the flu that year. Perhaps I was lucky enough to be exposed to this less virulent H1N1, and that will help me years from now when a more dangerous H1N1 that is particularly lethal to aging, bearded hoseheads arises and spreads like wildfire before a vaccine can be made and produced in sufficient quantities.

I'm not suggesting mandatory vaccines. I'm trying to point out the errors of the anti-vaccine rhetoric.

The recent "swine" flu virus didn't infect that may people, but it used up most of the specialized ventilation equipment needed to keep those with extreme reactions alive. If it had been just a little bit more common, victims would have been dying because the right hospital equipment was not available. i.e. we dodged a bullet this time. That doesn't mean we should go stand in the path of the bullets next year.

Most people who got flu that year got "seasonal" flu, not H1N1.

By the way, the 1976 swine flu vaccination panic was entirely caused by the news media. Despite the panic in the news media, people who got the shots got Guillain-Barre Syndrome at the same rate as people normally get GBS.

Yes, vaccines are carry some risk. However, it's abundantly clear that your risk of dying from not getting the vaccine is at least 10 times higher than the risk of dying from getting the vaccine. The same is true for the risks of getting some serious medical complication. The flu is enormously more risky than the vaccine.

If another 1918 style flu epidemic happens, it could kill 9-18 million Americans. In a normal year, 40,000 or so people in the US die from flu. The number of people with any kind of complications from the vaccination is an insignificant drop in the bucket compared to this.

We've got a serious problem of not understanding numbers in this country. Suppose that flu vaccines killed 20 people one year in the US, but they saved 2000 lives that year. We'd hang the president of the company that made the vaccine.

[archangle]

Flu shots CANNOT give you the flu...period. They are made from DEAD virius. You might have a mild reaction but NOT the flu. (info only, not to start a flame war).

The "nasal squirt" flu vaccine DOES contain a live but "attenuated" virus. It carries a weaker strain of the flu. They warn you not to take it if your immune system is compromised, or if you're around someone with a compromised immune system. In theory, it gives you a mild case of the flu, maybe so mild you don't even notice it.

As far as I know, all current injected flu vaccines are killed viruses, although it's possible they might use an attenuated virus vaccine at some time in the future.

[Vader]

They're not giving the nasal vaccination for H1N1 in children anymore.

I wonder if this years Flu vaccination includes the H1N1 again in the injection?

[Otter]

Herd immunity - You may not get the flu badly, you may survive, however there are more the young healthy people in your community (By the way those died more often in the last H1N1 flu) there are the elderly, the young, the chronically ill and others who can't get the flu vaccine - like my granddaughter who is allergic to eggs. Now if everyone who can gets immunized a flu virus will have a much harder time to get hold in a community because it can't find hosts easily do these unprotected and immune compromised people in your community will have less chance of being exposed to the virus and dying from it. Your choice not to get immunized and get a mild case could lead to the deaths of someones grandparents, someones baby, someones chronically ill mother. These dying people are members of your community, not a statistic, that you have chosen not to protect. It is funny that people who will scream about needing to have guns to "protect my community" refuse to have a little shot to actually really protect their community.

In this case "freedom of choice " sounds a lot like "the right to watch other people die"

But what of the fact that the herd immunity from flu shots lasts less than a year? If we make vaccination mandatory for everyone, or nearly everyone chooses to do it voluntarily, there will be fewer cases of the flu. But there will also be fewer people whose immunity does not depend on an injection. After a few decades of this, we'd have an immunologically naive population, but it's unlikely influenza would be eradicated. What then happens when the supply of vaccine fails or the scientists miss a highly contagious and virulent strain? While herd immunity to expected strains would be high, the herd would have relatively little immunity to anything that wasn't in the vaccine.

It seems to me that mandatory vaccination is a bit like putting out all forest fires as quickly as possible. This was the policy in the US for years, but it eventually lead to thousands of square miles of kindling and an epidemic of huge and uncontrollable fires. Do we need to make the same mistake with our own bodies?

[codinqueen]

I am much like another poster here. I will be getting the flu shot, even if I have to steal the money for the co-pay. In 1977 I neglected to get the flu shot because I couldn't afford it that year. I got the flu in Dec, ended up in the hospital for a week with post-flu syndrome in Jan, then got pneumonia in Feb and spent another week in the hospital. I ended up losing my job, had to get food stamps to be able to afford to eat and was so weak from it that I had to have help to even walk to the bathroom for about a month and ended up losing my apartment in March.
I have managed to get the flu shot every year since and have not had the flu in the years that I got the flu shot. I have to fight with my Dr to get it before October, and the year he refused, and I was going to be flying home to another state to see my mum, I had to go to Walgreens to get it, and they don't accept my insurance, so it cost me $35.00 but I will pay $100.00 for it if I have to, just to be sure i get it. I have OSA, COPD with asthma, as well as fibromyalgia and had blood clots in my lungs last Sept, and still not recovered from that, so I MUST get a flu shot.
I agree that flu shots do not "give" anyone the flu, those people are having reactions to the shot, they might be allergic to eggs and not know it. I am allergic to eggs, but still take the shot without problems. (Just like I am allergic to cats but still have one in the house that my hubby and I adore.)