or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Selective & Delayed Vaccination › Flu vaccination??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Flu vaccination??

post #1 of 73
Thread Starter 
What are your thoughts I have never gotton one in the past ( me or DS) but I was thinking about it this year since my DD was very sick and hospitalized as a baby plus will be in daycare starting in January
post #2 of 73
It's a scam.
post #3 of 73
None of us has ever gotten the flu vax and none of us has actually gotten the flu. My mom, on the other hand, seems to get the flu every year right after getting the vax. Hmmmm.....
post #4 of 73
We NEVER get the flu vac...dh is in the military so his is mandatory...he's always sick way more than we are...I think they have vac'd his immune system into oblivian and it doesn't even work anymore!!! Everyone I know who has gotten the flu vac ends up with at least a mild case of the flu...I don't even get the vac..even when I was working as an RN, and I"ve NEVER had the flu....neither have my kids, and neither has my elderly grandfather who doesn't get vac'd.
post #5 of 73
Wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole. Most have mercury. It is perhaps the least effective vaccine ever.

-Angela
post #6 of 73
From reading I have done having a diet that includes selenium keeps the flu at bay.

And no I would never get the vaccine!
post #7 of 73
Nope. Would never do it. And wouldn't do it in your situation.
post #8 of 73
My boys were preemies & they did go to daycare from 18 mos-4 years old. I did get them flu shots 2 of those years. You just have to do what you think is best - no regrets, no guilt.
post #9 of 73
Never had one and never plan on it. I work in public schools and I've never gotten it. I just do things to keep my immune system boosted and it seems to work just fine.
post #10 of 73
It's the worst one, contains mercury, and is not even effective.
post #11 of 73

The flu scare game

http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/flu.htm
MUCH on my webpage above including...........

http://www.*********/a/keller1.html
The Flu Scare Game

http://www.redflagsdaily.com/confere...07_sample.html
Annual Number of flu deaths: it’s a guess

http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/FluStatsGeierFall06.pdf
Influenza Vaccine: Review of Effectiveness of the U.S. Immunization Program, and Policy Considerations


http://www.redflagsdaily.com/yazbak/2006_jun16
Calculating U.S. Influenza Deaths
By F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP

For years, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been telling anyone who would listen: “Every year in the United States, on average: 5 percent to 20 percent of the population gets the flu, more than 200,000 people are hospitalized from flu complications, and about 36,000 people die from flu.” (1)

It is not clear how the specific statistic — 36,000 American deaths a year “on average” — was formulated or from what sources it was derived. It seems to have just suddenly appeared, like a rabbit from a top hat. It certainly could have been any other number of thousands of cases. After all, what are a few thousand deaths up or down?

No one knows when the next number change will come but, when it does, it is guaranteed to be an increase. Scaring people, especially old people, out of their wits always sells vaccine and that seems to have become the CDC’s main purpose.

Another well-kept secret is over how many years the influenza deaths were “averaged.” Did the CDC calculate “average deaths” from 2000 to 2004 or from 1980 to 2004?

To have 36,000 deaths “on average,” there must be years with 26,000 deaths and about the same number of years with 46,000 deaths and, not to belabor the point, as many years with 16,000 deaths as with 56,000. At least, this is what most people would think averaging and “on average” mean.

The past influenza season came and went very quietly because the CDC was busy with dying birds in the Far East and Turkey. We will never find out where exactly the most recent “deaths from flu” will fit on the curve, but it is a good bet that 2005-2006 will not be, propaganda-wise, a “real good year.”

Testifying before the committee on government reform of the U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 12, 2004, CDC Director Julie L. Gerberding, MD, carefully stated that “CDC scientists estimate that an average of 36,000 people die from influenza-related complications each year in the United States.” (2)

It is not clear why the director made the distinction, while under oath, between deaths from the flu and deaths from complications of the flu. A few people, including this writer, think there is a distinct difference between the two; many others do not think so.

To place the CDC influenza deaths in perspective, the U.S. lost 33,741 officers and enlisted men and women in Korean War battles from 1950 to 1953. (3) And a special communication published by the Journal of the American Medical Association listed 43,000 deaths due to motor vehicle crashes and 29,000 involving firearms in the U.S. in 2000. (4)

The National Vital Statistics Report for 2001, published on Sept. 18, 2003 [Vol. 52, No. 3], was the last official U.S. government report on influenza mortality before the CDC director’s appearance at the February 2004 Congressional hearing. Certified figures about Influenza mortality [J10-J11] were listed on page 31 of the report. (5)

There were, in all, 257 influenza deaths recorded in 2001.

Of those, 13 deaths were under the age of 5; 50 were between 5 and 54; 21 from 55 to 64; 21 between 65 and 74; 56 from 75 to 84; and 96 were 85 years old or older.

Also in 2001, there were 61,777 official deaths due to pneumonia (J12-J18) of which 48,686 (79 percent) were 75 years old or older.

The same document (table 11, page 35) lists the reciprocal number of deaths per 100.000 population. In 2001, influenza-pneumonia deaths (J10-J18) amounted to 21.8 per 100.000 with influenza at 0.1 and pneumonia at 21.7.

With the U.S. population being around 284 million in 2001, it would seem that the calculated number of 284 (0.1/100.000) deaths from influenza would be close enough to the actual listed number of 257.

The following should be kept in mind:

“Pneumonia” is caused by bacteria, viruses and fungi. Elderly patients (75 years and over) who have laboratory confirmed influenza disease may develop pneumonia but die from other underlying serious conditions, such as heart or kidney failure to name just two. It is not known how many of the 48,686 elderly individuals who died in 2001 had received the influenza vaccine that year. People of that age are usually vaccinated early in the season and certainly more frequently than others. In the U.S., influenza/influenza-like illnesses only occur during the flu season, a period of three months on average and rarely four months. Pulmonary complications and specifically deaths due to influenza will only occur during that short period, while other causes of pneumonia deaths exist year-round.

Most people who have influenza-like illness, as the condition is fondly referred to by the CDC, do not have influenza; only a small percentage of them are ever confirmed by culture or other accurate laboratory means. For the period 2000-2005, influenza virus positive cultures were 11 to 18.9 percent of the obtained cultures with a mean of 12.5 percent. It is well known that the virus strains in the community may be different from those in the available vaccine. Because immunity is strain-specific, vaccination in such cases is essentially ineffective in preventing disease. The percent of antigenic match between 2000 and 2005 varied from 11 to 63.2 percent with a mean of 54.2 percent. The maximum effectiveness of the vaccination effort, therefore, ranged between 2.1 percent in 2003-2004 and 11.5 percent in 2002-2003 with a mean of 7.2 percent. (6)

Taking all these facts into consideration, it is safe to say that only a small percentage of the 61,777 individuals who died of pneumonia in 2001 actually had influenza. Clearly, therefore, a large majority of individuals who died that year of pneumonia did not die of influenza or influenza-related complications.

In addition, the CDC figures clearly show that a large percentage of those who died were elderly and, historically, the elderly, as a group, have always been better vaccinated. As to the 257 individuals who were actually listed as influenza deaths in the 2001 statistical report, the influenza virus was actually identified in only 18 of them, the 18 classified as J10. (6)

Apparently in 2001, not even 257 people died of influenza or influenza-related complications.

The Monthly Vital Statistics Report of Sept. 17, 1981 sheds additional light on the issue. Under pneumonia and influenza, the report states: “An estimated 52,720 deaths in 1980 were attributed to pneumonia and influenza. The age-adjusted death rate for this cause increased about 14 percent from 11.1 per 100,000 population in 1979 to 12.6 in 1980, reflecting the influenza epidemics in 1980 and the absence of one in the previous year. For pneumonia and influenza, death rates increased for the age groups 35 years and over.” (7)

The above statement by none other than the CDC suggests that around 1.5 deaths per 100,000 were or could have been attributed to influenza or influenza complications in 1980, an epidemic year, when one would have expected a very large number of cases and more severe illness and certainly in a period when influenza vaccination was not as popular as it is now.

Considering that the U.S. population was around 226.5 million in 1980, 1.5 deaths per 100.000 would translate to around 4,000 deaths that year. So here we have official CDC statistics listing around 4,000 deaths, unconfirmed by viral cultures, from influenza and influenza-related complications in 1980, a banner year, and maybe 18 or 257 in 2001 and the propaganda machine is still talking about “an average of 36,000 deaths” a year.

How preposterous!



References



1. Key Facts about Influenza and the Influenza Vaccine, CDC.

Available at http://www.cdc.gov/flu/keyfacts.htm

2. J.L. Gerberding. Protecting the Public's Health: CDC Influenza Preparedness Efforts. Testimony before the Committee on Government Reform U.S. House of Representatives, Feb. 12, 2004.

Available at http://www.cdc.gov/washington/testim...2122004200.htm

3. America's Wars: U.S. Casualties and Veterans.

Available at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004615.html

4. A.H. Mokdad et al. Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000. JAMA. 2004; 291: 1238-1245. Avai lable at http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content...ct/291/10/1238

5. E. Arias et al. Deaths: Final Data For 2001. National Vital Statistics Reports. Volume 52, Number 3. Sept. 18, 2003.

Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_03.pdf

6. D.M. Ayoub, F.E. Yazbak. Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. J. Am Phys Surg. 2006; 11(2): 41-47. Available at http://www.jpands.org/vol11no2/ayoub.pdf

7. Annual Report of Births, Deaths, Marriages and Divorces: United States 1980. Monthly Vital Statistics Report: Vol. 29, No.13. Sept. 17, 1981.

Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/mvsr/supp/mv29_13.pdf
post #12 of 73
We got the flu vaccine one year. No side effects, except I did feel kinda crappy that day, but no biggie. I did still end up with the flu later that year so I just don't think it's very effective.

BUT, my mom and dad both get it every year and they never get sick....and they are sick people who tend to catch everything. One time I had the flu and my mom came over to help me and she was the only one who did get the flu. So I think for some people it does work. My mom is immunocompromised so I worry about the flu shot and I also worry about her getting the flu.

I wouldn't get the flu vax for myself, but like anything, you have to weigh the pros and cons of it.

I think if I am/was going to get the flu vax I would go with the nasal spray just because I think it's thimersol free and it just seems a more natural route of transmission.
post #13 of 73
I wouldn't do it, and I'm one who does believe in the value of vaccines in general (though we're following a delayed/selective schedule). There's not even a guarantee that the flu vax will protect against the actual flu strain that will end up being most common in your area, so it very well could be completely ineffective. Plus, it is the only one still offered to infants/toddlers that contains the full dose of mercury. I fell for the flu scare when I was pg with DS and got a flu shot (it was the year of the shortage) and we never even saw flu in our area; I still feel so bad for introducing DS to all that mercury .
post #14 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by tatermom View Post
Plus, it is the only one still offered to infants/toddlers that contains the full dose of mercury.
Actually, only the multidose vial Fluzone still contains full strength thimerosal preservative.
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm
post #15 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by amnesiac View Post
Actually, only the multidose vial Fluzone still contains full strength thimerosal preservative.
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm

But isn't that the one that is usually offered? I think that's the one I got when pregnant.
post #16 of 73
Someone PM'd me to say the Fluvirin does also come in a multidose that has the same amt. of thimerosal but Fluvirin isn't used in kids under 4 years old - Fluzone is the only product for that age group.

What's offered just depends on how old you are, where you get it from & whether that facility prefers single or multidoses. Places serving adults are trying to split up their ordering so they get flu vaccine from multiple manufacturers - that way if one manufacturer has a supply problem, they can still get vaccine from another - so they are likely to stock more than one product.

Fluvirin isn't licensed for use in kids under 4 so little ones won't be offered that & Fluarix is for adults only. Where I live, the little Fluzone prefilled syringes (no thimerosal) were used for that under 4 year old group but you'd just have to ask to be sure they're not drawing it from a multi-dose vial. Fluzone also comes in single dose vials for the 4+ kids/adults which are preservative free.
post #17 of 73
We get the flu vaccines every year from our DO doc, he gets the preservative free (no mercury) shots so I am more comfortable with them. Like you, we also had a hospitalized baby from the flu so we just get it, I don't ever want to go through that experience again. Since we have been getting them we have been flu free.

For what it's worth, we live in a tourist town and the flu comes in every year, without fail. It goes through my kids schools but they don't get it...I can only assume it's due to the shot cause they catch everything else, LOL!!

personally I do not feel it is a scam but to each their own...
post #18 of 73
okay - what are the thoughts on a family with a 12 and 10 y/o and a 4 m/o? Are the LO's chances increased to getting the flu with big bro and sis out there in the germ ridden world and bring it home to baby??? I know he couldn't get the vax on this year but what about next year?? thoughts?


TIA!
post #19 of 73
My boys will be 15 12 and 3 ( in oct/nov) we have never gotten a flu shot and they never brought the flu home to Nathan. We wash hands and take extra Vit C. My mom, sister and brother are all RNs and they also refuse flu shots.
post #20 of 73
I would think if the flu shot worked they would stop using the 36,000 avg deaths and show us a smaller number. Since they stick with the 36,000 deaths to scare people, it seems the shot isn't doing much.

Isn't the lack of effectiveness in the elderly the excuse they are using to vaccinate the children now. Not to protect the children, but to protect the elderly.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Selective & Delayed Vaccination
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Selective & Delayed Vaccination › Flu vaccination??