Mothering › Forums › Health › Vaccinations › When WOULD you give/get the flu shot?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

When WOULD you give/get the flu shot? - Page 2  

post #21 of 39
Recent studies show the flu vax to be ineffective under 5:

http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/...d-age-bracket/

http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/con...ull/162/10/943

The first is an analysis of the report, which is the second.
post #22 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallacesmum View Post
Recent studies show the flu vax to be ineffective under 5:

http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/...d-age-bracket/

http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/con...ull/162/10/943

The first is an analysis of the report, which is the second.
WHY exactly do they go ahead and make these recommendations when they don't have solid research to back it up? I just don't understand.

Thank you for the link.
post #23 of 39
MONEY MONEY MONEY! It disgusts me when I can't pass by a CVS or a Walgreens or even a PUBLIX without Flu Shot signs everywhere. Every year it's the same old tired song and dance about how it's going to be the worst flu season ever so EVERYONE MUST get the flu shot. It's really nauseating.

I personally wouldn't want the toxins in my corpse either LOL!
post #24 of 39
Thread Starter 
Alright, thanks for talking me down! You all just reaffirmed what I already knew, I guess I just needed a little knock upside the head Peainthepod, that website RAWKS! Hard data dumbed down, exactly what I needed!
post #25 of 39
I was a thrift store a few weeks ago and overheard to older ladies talking. One has weak/damaged lungs so she got the flu shot so she wouldnt get pneumonia.

Guess what she was hospitalized for 3 days after she received the vaccine?

Yup. pneumonia.

Another story of a older lady who received the flu shot and then came down with something, the drs couldn't figure out what she had, all sorts of test where run Couldn't be the flu because she had the shot. Anyway the poor gal was sick as a horse for a month.

No I wouldn't get the flu shot doesn't work.
post #26 of 39
"The vaccine analyzed was the inactive vaccine, in years when the antigen match was very poor"

THAT is my problem with that article. I understand completely that it is an inherent risk of the flu vaccine every year that the match is a pure shot in the dark. But within a few weeks, we'll know from the reports that start circulating whether this year's vaccine is a good match or not. I want to see research done when the match is a GOOD one.

Here's my thing...I don't like the ingredients in the flu vax, I don't like that it has to be repeated every year, I don't like the number of reports of it causing flu-like symptoms despite my research that has told me that should be an impossibility. In fact, I think it's more likely that people are picking up a little bug at the dr's office when receiving the vaccine, not that they're actually getting the flu FROM the vaccine, but I can't prove that, and I can't overlook contracting mild flu as a possible side effect of the shot. I'm very concerned by some sources suggesting that repeated yearly infection may be increasing autoimmune diseases, and I've been looking for more research on that fact.

Taking all of that into account, I also can't overlook the fact that my son's airway is MALFORMED. Yes, flu scares me. It does not scare me in the slightest for Ian, myself, or my husband. If I thought that Connor's immune system would mount an appropriate immune response to the flu vaccine, and if I found out that this year's match was a good one, then I think that I just might give him the vaccine. It appears that this decision has been taken out of my hands, though, because after careful lab testing and discussion with his pulmonologist, neither of us thinks that he'd mount an immune response anyway.

We can practice flu prevention techniques at home, sure, and we can keep Connor out of large public places as much as possible. But I still have to go to work, hubby still has to go to school, Ian still has to go to preschool, and we still have to do things like grocery shop.

I don't think many of you understand how scary it is to know that something like the flu can KILL your child. Every cough, every sniffle, every fever scares me because I've been the one holding him when the ER dr says it's pneumonia and admits him, when they bring in the vent to have by his bedside, just waiting for his lungs to fail... That will sure change your perspective on things. Those of you who DO understand this, I'm sorry that you do. No mother ever should.
post #27 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2boyzmama View Post
But within a few weeks, we'll know from the reports that start circulating whether this year's vaccine is a good match or not. I want to see research done when the match is a GOOD one.
Me too. But, the push for this shot begins long before the antigen match is even tested. It's mid-November, how long have we been hearing about the flu shot? If the raft of anxious questions from mothers came AFTER the match was established, in a "good" year, that would prompt a different discussion.

Your situation sounds very challenging, and not one to be taken lightly. I don't believe there is ever true impartiality in analysis - your filters are certainly valid, and highlight the profoundly individual nature of vaccine decisions, even under the assumption that a particular vaccine is statistically effective.

One more reason why top-down social engineering is highly alarming.
post #28 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallacesmum View Post
Me too. But, the push for this shot begins long before the antigen match is even tested. It's mid-November, how long have we been hearing about the flu shot? If the raft of anxious questions from mothers came AFTER the match was established, in a "good" year, that would prompt a different discussion.

Your situation sounds very challenging, and not one to be taken lightly. I don't believe there is ever true impartiality in analysis - your filters are certainly valid, and highlight the profoundly individual nature of vaccine decisions, even under the assumption that a particular vaccine is statistically effective.

One more reason why top-down social engineering is highly alarming.
THANK YOU! for understanding. I find this board to be very informative, but like you said, everyone has their filters, and 99+% of the posters on this board are filtering that their chidren are healthy and can handle these diseases.
post #29 of 39
My 20 month old dd has asthma and she's never had a flu shot despite MUCH pressure to do so, "especially" because of her asthma.
But its that same reason makes me even more adament about not doing it.
post #30 of 39
never.
the flu vax is a total crapshoot, too-they don't know if the strain of flu that is in the shot is the same one that will be going around. plus it has thimerosal in it.
post #31 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Erin* View Post
plus it has thimerosal in it.
I do not advocate the flu shot for any situation that I have ever encountered, IRL or intellectually, but it is important to understand that the above statement is not accurate, and can confuse the larger issue of the risks to the shot that are inherent in vaccines, and not just connected with excipients.
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=973065
post #32 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by momto l&a View Post
I was a thrift store a few weeks ago and overheard to older ladies talking. One has weak/damaged lungs so she got the flu shot so she wouldnt get pneumonia.

Guess what she was hospitalized for 3 days after she received the vaccine?

Yup. pneumonia.
The vaccine takes two weeks to work.
post #33 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murihiku View Post
The vaccine takes two weeks to work.
Really? Do you have a reference, I have never heard that. But I'm also not sure exactly what your point is, either.

Just interested.
post #34 of 39
http://www.gettheflushot.ca/public/a...ine_facts.html

Sorry, should have posted it before. My point was that you can't say the vaccine is completely useless if you get the flu (or pnuemonia) within two weeks of getting it. So if you are going to get it I suppose it makes sense to get it earlier rather than later.

(Or perhaps the point of the anecdote I was responding to was that the vaccine caused pnuemonia, rather than failed to prevent it? If so, I apologize for misunderstanding.)
post #35 of 39
But I think she might have been making a point about getting the flu shot to protect against pneumonia.

I checked out the link, but the statement isn't backed up anywhere - have you seen any confirmation of it elsewhere (I am not saying I don't believe you, just hadn't encountered it). To be honest, the assertion that it doesn't work for 2 weeks, and lasts for about a year, sounds awfully convenient. So, the reaction window just happens to correspond with the window during which the shot isn't effective? And it just so happens that you need another one at just about the time the pharmas have a new load to get rid of.
post #36 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallacesmum View Post
But I think she might have been making a point about getting the flu shot to protect against pneumonia.

I checked out the link, but the statement isn't backed up anywhere - have you seen any confirmation of it elsewhere (I am not saying I don't believe you, just hadn't encountered it). To be honest, the assertion that it doesn't work for 2 weeks, and lasts for about a year, sounds awfully convenient. So, the reaction window just happens to correspond with the window during which the shot isn't effective? And it just so happens that you need another one at just about the time the pharmas have a new load to get rid of.
I like your tag line!

I had thought pneumonia was an occasional complication from the flu?

Crying baby--more later.
post #37 of 39
The only other place I have seen this statement is on the paper handouts from the Ontario Health Unit given to us when we got the shot. (Yes, I get the flu shot.)

I feel quite badly that I just posted a statement about a "fact" without saying "According to the Ontario govt . . ." and supplying a link. That was sloppy.
post #38 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murihiku View Post
The only other place I have seen this statement is on the paper handouts from the Ontario Health Unit given to us when we got the shot. (Yes, I get the flu shot.)

I feel quite badly that I just posted a statement about a "fact" without saying "According to the Ontario govt . . ." and supplying a link. That was sloppy.
You are in high flying company. The CDC has page after page of information for parents on vaccination and there are NO references, no citations, nothing to back up any of their statements.

Hey, we still like YOU. Some of us are not so fond of the CDC, though...
post #39 of 39
Don't feel bad about it, just examine it! How much of your decision to get the shot might have been driven by unsupported assertions? They are all over the place, on all sides of the debate.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Forums › Health › Vaccinations › When WOULD you give/get the flu shot?