Get your flu shot

This is going to get horrible very, very quickly.

_ said:

mtn said:

About that time folks. Go get your flu shots. 

• But it is a scam!
  • Yeah, big pharma is horrible. Oh, but your insurance probably covers it!
• My insurance doesn't cover it
  • Fine, go to Costco. $15. Or Walmart, $25
• It gave me the flu
  • No it didn't. You may have had an adverse reaction to the shot (tell them if you're allergic to eggs), but you didn't get the flu
• No, really, it gave me the flu!
  • No, it didn't. You may have gotten "the flu", but "the flu" and "flu-like symptoms" are not influenza. 
  • No, it didn't. You may have gotten influenza, but it was a different strain and the flu shot had no impact on you getting that strain or not getting it.
  • No, it didn't. You may have gotten the strain that you were vaccinated for, but it takes 2 weeks for the vaccine to provide full immunity. So if you did indeed get the flu strain that you were vaccinated for, it means you were exposed right before or after you were vaccinated. 
• I'm not getting it because it doesn't work, obviously! It is only 25% effective!
  • This argument is like saying you're not going to wear seatbelts because 95% of fatalities in car wrecks were wearing seatbelts. Even if you do get the flu, it wasn't the strand that you're vaccinated for (or you were getting it anyways because the vaccine didn't have enough time to provide immunity), and typically it still reduces hospitalizations for people that do get the flu
• I've never had the flu
  • But you might have. About 20% (I need to confirm this number, working off of memory) of people carrying the virus exhibit no symptoms, but can pass it on to people that end up with symptoms and then could end up dead. (Seriously, remember the Spanish Flu? Kinda a big deal back in 1918)
• I have Guillain-Barre Syndrome
  • You win! You're the one that shouldn't get it. Seriously, if you have GBS don't get the flu shot. 

 

Seriously folks, go get your flu shot. 

 

Oh, and if anyone mentions how vaccines cause autism, go do humanity and society a favor and isolate yourself from all other humans.  

I’m gonna need to see some credentials before I proceed with my beration. 

This is hysterical based on some of the stuff you post here. 

I do a lot of work in hospitals,  so it is a requirement for my job.  I have no problem with that and would more than likely get it anyway.

While you're at it, get the shingles vaccine if you're over 50. My dad got it bad this year and has basically lost the entire summer, and his nerve pain from the secondary skin infection he got is ongoing. I know it's not 100% effective but it's probably better than nothing.

Well I’m definitely not against it but... idk pry just to lazy

also y’all guys better chill already 

MrSmokey said:

Well I’m definitely not against it but... idk pry just to lazy

 

 

Takes about 5 minutes while you're out grocery shopping. 

Keith Tanner said:

Curtis said:

I would, if I have ever had the flu.

Let's see, I'm 45.  I got the flu shot one year and didn't get the flu.  The other 44 years I did not get the shot and also didn't get the flu.

This is not solid logic, unfortunately. I've never had my life saved by a seatbelt either but I still wear them.

I know... I was being snarky.

I am unreasonably terrified of needles so for years and years I didn't get one.  Never got the flu, either.  But a couple years ago I started showing up for free flu shot day at work since I'm around my parents very frequently and they're at risk because of their age. Small price to pay to reduce the number of vectors for the flu to get to them.  Even if it's not 100%.

mtn said:

• No, really, it gave me the flu!
  • No, it didn't. You may have gotten "the flu", but "the flu" and "flu-like symptoms" are not influenza. 

Well, technically, "the flu" is Influenza. 

( I had a lot to say, but I'm editing myself)

Get your flu shots, please. 

Woody said:

This is going to get horrible very, very quickly.

This has already gotten horrible pretty quickly.

I'll say this.  I have not gotten a flu vaccine in years.   I have not gotten the flu in years either.  Like 25 years. 

This past February I developed "walking" pneumonia then caught the flu.  Fever was almost 105 for several days.  I didn't move except for bodily functions for almost 5 days.   I ended up on antibiotics for 2 weeks for the bacterial pneumonia.     Did I mention I am 61?  You don't recover as quickly from this stuff when you get older.   And I am a guy who exercises regularly, no smoking, weights the right weight, etc.  

It took almost 6 months for me to feel "ok".  Something called "post virus syndrome" from the flu plus pneumonia recovery for my lungs.   You just feel horrible all the time, I got by on sheer willpower.   I still don't feel 100% but at least I can cut my grass without being wiped out for a few days. 

This coming flu season I will be getting the flu and pneumonia vaccinations or whatever my doctor recommends.  

I've been getting a yearly flu vaccine for about the last 10 or 15 years. I work with the public, so I get exposed to a lot of different pathogens at work.

I got the new shingles vaccine this year. I'm wondering if I should get a pneumonia vaccine as well. I've got my yearly checkup on Monday, I'll have to ask for a recommendation.

My 64th birthday is this month. I need to stay healthy as long as possible.

In reply to mtn :

Nope. Eat eggs frequently. No allergies at all.

I should do that. Don't remember the last time I did...

I have a one year old in daycare...

Reminds me that I need to find out when they are free at work, either that or go ahead and pay to get it early

wae said:

I am unreasonably terrified of needles so for years and years I didn't get one.  Never got the flu, either.  But a couple years ago I started showing up for free flu shot day at work since I'm around my parents very frequently and they're at risk because of their age. Small price to pay to reduce the number of vectors for the flu to get to them.  Even if it's not 100%.

I don't do needles so good either, but the syrettes they used on me in March literally felt like nothing.

I don't normally get flu shots, mostly out of apathy, but I was in there already for the MMR booster that I didn't know you're supposed to get as a teenager  (apparently they started doing it the year after I was that age) and, well, there really is no justifiable reason why not.

Also: There is a pneumonia vaccine??  Sign me the berk up.  I had pneumonia at least once a year, every year, from the time I was 8 up until I can't even remember.  I had a few instances of almost-there-but-too-stubborn-to-not-fight-through this year as well.  

Here's the skinny from my point of view (with a lowly B.S. in Biology).

All diseases have classifications surrounding their qualities, such as the R-naught value (known as Basic Reproduction Rate) which is basically its "infectability," or how likely it is to spread.  Low R values (below 1) are diseases that are highly unlikely to spread and the outbreak (and sometimes the pathogen itself) will die out.  The R-naught is calculated by several things, like how long a carrier is contagious, how many people on average the infected person contacts others (i.e. someone living in rural Mongolia is less likely to encounter as many people as someone in downtown Tokyo), and HOW it's transmitted.  As a general rule, it works out that the R-naught value is an average of how many people the disease is likely to infect.  R2 means that the disease is likely to spread to two people from one.

Then there are several other quantifications, the more important one being the mortality rate.

So if you have something like Colitis, it has an incredibly low mortality rate, and it is highly unlikely you will pass it to someone (R < 1) unless you are exchanging butt fluids.  No need for a vaccine.

Something like Measles with an R of 17, but still has a lower mortality rate... yes vaccine.

Something like SARS has a high mortality rate, but it is no more likely to spread than the Flu (R~2), but even though SARS exists in North America, nobody gets a SARS vaccine.

But even the worst ever R-rate for the most widespread flu outbreak (1918) only had an R of about 2.5, and the mortality rate for healthy, non-immuno-compromised people is incredibly low.

The goal of vaccines is to sequester or eliminate the number of occurences of the disease.  Back through the early 70s, every kid was vaccinated for Polio.  Bingo.  Polio gone from our vernacular, stop giving the vaccine.  Polio was polio.  The Flu has almost 150 strains.  There is no hope of eliminating the flu with a vaccine.

Long story short... the numbers in no way support such a widespread application of the flu vaccine.  In fact, the numbers support a Pertussis, Rubella, or Mumps vaccine more than they support a flu vaccine.  It's just that the word "flu" is shoved in our faces.

I am all FOR vaccines for myself.  We didn't have measles for decades until someone said "vaccines might cause Autism" and a movement was started.  Now we have measles again.  The point of vaccines is the group immunity.  The flu vaccine does not in any way support the group immunity.  They guess on which 3 of the 150 strains might be prominent and they get it about 25% right.  With polio and measles, vaccines get it 99.999% right.

Measles, yup.  Polio, yup.  Anything where the effective rate is high (supports the group immunity) and the mortality/suffering rate is high, yes... vaccine.  The Flu with a low mortality rate, highly ineffective success rate (does not support the group immunity) then no... I won't line the pockets of the medical industry for something that the numbers biologically don't support.

The Flu vaccine (biologically and medically speaking) is clearly a case for ad hoc PRN - meaning based on your individual needs.  Older people, immuno-compromised people, people who normally get sick, people who are just paranoid... great.  get it, don't get it, don't care.  The extremes to which "they" go to scare everyone into getting a vaccine for a disease that numbers don't add up, it smells a little too fabricated for me.

Cotton said:

I do a lot of work in hospitals,  so it is a requirement for my job.  I have no problem with that and would more than likely get it anyway.

Same here.

And I do even if I don't work in a hospital that flu eason.

Wow, the first well reasoned argument against it.

Some points/counterpoints:

• I wouldn't include SARs in your comparison. There is no SARs vaccine - at least not that I've ever heard.
• "No hope of eliminating the flu with a vaccine"... well, someone probably said the same thing about smallpox at one point. Someone said the same about the 300mph barrier, probably.
• Pertussis, Rubella, Mumps,  Measles, Polio, Chicken Pox, HepB, Meningitis, along with others I'm sure, probably the pneumonia one, are all required at many school districts. You don't hear about them because it is a once every few years thing. 
• It is also doing "something" to help herd immunity. Even if you don't think it is enough, it is doing a little bit.

But... what is it hurting you by doing it? 

I was active duty military for 15 years. The Flu vaccine was not optional. They would still probably drive your corpse to the clinic to get a shot. No excuses. They gave us the shot for a while before switching to the nasal gel stuff. Ugh I hated those. It seemed like they would have the med group come out and vaccinate the whole unit the day before a 3 day weekend. Feel like poo on your own time!

We get them for free at work, so yes I will.

In reply to mtn :

You tell me? Show me any long term study of any one flu shot anywhere that proves it is safe

stanger_missle said:

I was active duty military for 15 years. The Flu vaccine was not optional. They would still probably drive your corpse to the clinic to get a shot. No excuses. They gave us the shot for a while before switching to the nasal gel stuff. Ugh I hated those. It seemed like they would have the med group come out and vaccinate the whole unit the day before a 3 day weekend. Feel like poo on your own time!

From an organizational standpoint, that makes a lot of sense, as much as it sucks for the individual's concerns.

I've heard stories of being marched through a tent with a whole "gauntlet" of techs treating you like a pincushion as you went through.

As for "flu like symptoms"... well no E36 M3.  Half the symptoms you get from a disease are your immune response ramping up.  The disease doesn't give you a fever and stuff, that is your body's immune response.  So, kind of like that tingling feeling you get from that medicated shampoo (which is really just methanol, shhh) that logy feeling lets you know that the vaccine is working.

mtn said:

Wow, the first well reasoned argument against it.

Some points/counterpoints:

• I wouldn't include SARs in your comparison. There is no SARs vaccine - at least not that I've ever heard.
• "No hope of eliminating the flu with a vaccine"... well, someone probably said the same thing about smallpox at one point. Someone said the same about the 300mph barrier, probably.
• Pertussis, Rubella, Mumps,  Measles, Polio, Chicken Pox, HepB, Meningitis, along with others I'm sure, probably the pneumonia one, are all required at many school districts. You don't hear about them because it is a once every few years thing. 
• It is also doing "something" to help herd immunity. Even if you don't think it is enough, it is doing a little bit.

 

But... what is it hurting you by doing it? 

SARS... no vaccine yet, but imminent.  

"no hope of eliminating..."  at current effective rates, there is no hope.  At current effective rates, the flu vaccine is no more effective than blood-letting or leeches at providing group immunity for the flu.  Right now the flu vaccine is like throwing three darts at a dartboard... but the dartboard isn't numbered, and you're trying to get a score of 99.

I don't have a firm stance on mandatory vaccines, but citing that they are mandatory should not be considered evidence of their effectiveness or requisition.

herd immunity... negative.  Herd immunity by definition can't even be considered a term (as it pertains to vaccines) unless the vaccine is considered a bona fide prevention.  25% (or whatever the current year's cocktail ends up preventing) is not "effective," it's a "hail mary" for something that has extremely little chance of killing you in the first place.  Someone mentioned seat belts earlier.  Would you wear a seat belt if it had a 25% chance of protecting you and a 75% chance of causing serious injury?

re: "what is it hurting you..."  My point is that I don't know, so I won't take ineffective drugs that might end up in a class action suit later.  Now, if it was 99.99% effective like many other vaccines, I might consider it.  In fact, by the very definition of a vaccine, it isn't a vaccine.  But I grew up putting Mercurochrome on cuts.  My parents grew up with DDT.  My grandparents grew up with thalidymide babies and Opium for cough syrup.  All things that we discovered later were no bueno.

My question is not "what is it hurting me," it's "are the benefits worth the potential risks?"  Right now, the risks seem to be zero, but the benefits are incredibly low.  I just don't see the point.