Flu shots - why not?

[Geoff_M]

You will note, in the part of my post you did NOT quote, that I said that if I was aware that my decision would impact someone directly involved with me, I would reconsider. I will do no more than that.

Fair enough, I'll rewind to give you full credit where it's due:

It then follows that if someone were living in my house, or even in my neighborhood, or if my children had someone in their classrooms, etc and that person had compromised immunity, I would reconsider not getting a flu shot to help protect them. But, as far as I know, this is not the case, so, at this point, not an issue.

So you never come in contact with infants under the age of 6-months that cannot receive the vaccine due to their age? None of your kids have classmates that have siblings that are too young, or neighbors?

 

[FireDancer]

So you never come in contact with infants under the age of 6-months that cannot receive the vaccine due to their age? None of your kids have classmates that have siblings that are too young, or neighbors?

I think what she is saying is that she isn't going to base her medical decisions on the immune systems of 6-month olds that aren't her's or the immune systems of her kid's classmates.

None of those things even cross my mind when I decide on what I put into my body and they have absolutely zero effect on what my decision will be.

 

[hambirg]

Vaccines work the same way. Of course the flu vaccine is effective.

Even if it wasn't a general thing, it's FDA approved and been tested for decades. It's not out in the public if no one is sure of its efficacy on an on-label use.

It isn't supposed to eradicate influenza, influenza mutates, hence people need a new vaccination every year for the new strain(s) circulating. As Geoff notes, you DO get lifelong immunity from strains you're vaccinated against, but the strains keep mutating.

How would people feel if and when they come out with the superflu vaccine, designed to protect against all and future strains?

I think your are confusing efficacy and effectiveness.

And I wouldn't oppose a superflu vaccine that has been proven to be safe and effective.

 

[golfgal]

Vaccines work the same way. Of course the flu vaccine is effective.

Even if it wasn't a general thing, it's FDA approved and been tested for decades. It's not out in the public if no one is sure of its efficacy on an on-label use.

It isn't supposed to eradicate influenza, influenza mutates, hence people need a new vaccination every year for the new strain(s) circulating. As Geoff notes, you DO get lifelong immunity from strains you're vaccinated against, but the strains keep mutating.

How would people feel if and when they come out with the superflu vaccine, designed to protect against all and future strains?

Exactly, if the polio virus mutated like the influenza virus does, polio would still be very common...

 

[hambirg]

Exactly, if the polio virus mutated like the influenza virus does, polio would still be very common...

And then the polio vaccine would be ineffective. See where I'm going with that?

 

[LisaR]

What if they came out with a vaccine that could save the lives of those with peanut allergies? The only catch is, the peanut allergic kid doesn't get the vaccination, it is the rest of us that aren't allergic to peanuts that need to get the vaccine. Would those of you that get the flu vaccine for the sole purpose of saving the infant you might come in contact with at the grocery store or the elderly neighbor you may see twice each winter, run out and get the vaccine to potentially save the life of my peanut allergic son?

I do what I can to save the world around me when I get sick. I stay indoors when possible. If I have to go out, I don't cough or sneeze on people, produce, or into the air. I Purell like crazy if I am out when I am sick all for the purpose of saving those around me. It isn't for my benefit; I'm already sick. I will not have something injected into my healthy body every year because I may run into someone once every 20 years when I get the flu and they may or may not catch my virus because I didn't sneeze on them.

 

[golfgal]

And then the polio vaccine would be ineffective. See where I'm going with that?

Yes, down the wrong path. The flu vacciene IS effective for the strains in the vaccine. Next year, there will be DIFFERENT strains that my or may not have been in this year's vaccine. If some of the strains in this year's vaccine happen to be around next year unmutated, you are good to go, if not, you have to get a new shot....

 

[hambirg]

Yes, down the wrong path. The flu vacciene IS effective for the strains in the vaccine. Next year, there will be DIFFERENT strains that my or may not have been in this year's vaccine. If some of the strains in this year's vaccine happen to be around next year unmutated, you are good to go, if not, you have to get a new shot....

Again. . .people are confusing efficacy with effectiveness.

This is what I'm getting at:

The meta-analyses examined the efficacy and effectiveness of inactivated vaccines against seasonal influenza in adults,children, and the elderly. In adults, vaccines show high efficacy against the targeted strains, but low effectiveness overall, so the benefits of vaccination are small, with a one-quarter reduction in risk of contracting influenza but no significant effect on the rate of hospitalization. However, the risk of serious complications from influenza is small in adults, so unless the effect from vaccination is large it might not have been detected. In children, vaccines again showed high efficacy, but low effectiveness in preventing "flu-like illness". In children under two the data are extremely limited, but vaccination appeared to confer no measurable benefit. In the elderly, vaccination does not reduce the frequency of influenza, but seems to reduce pneumonia, hospital admission and deaths from influenza or pneumonia.However, the current data on the effectiveness of influenza vaccines in the elderly may be unreliable, due to high levels of selection bias.

Overall, the benefit of influenza vaccination is clear in the elderly and vaccination of children may be beneficial. Routine vaccination of adults is not predicted to produce significant improvements in public health. The apparent contradiction between vaccines with high efficacy, but low effectiveness, may reflect the difficulty in diagnosing influenza under clinical conditions and the large number of strains circulating in the population. In contrast, during an influenza pandemic, where a single strain of virus is responsible for illnesses, an effective vaccine could produce a large decrease in the number of cases and be highly effective in controlling an epidemic. However, such a vaccine would have to be produced and distributed rapidly to have maximum effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza_vaccine

Sooooo. . .it's a risk versus benefit thing. People are free to make the choice for themselves.

 

[Nancy]

I just don't think it's necessary. No one in the family is at high risk. We allow a healthy exposure to germs so our immune system is running up to speed so we pass on the flu shot. Very rarely does anyone in the family get sick with either colds or flu

This is me too. My kids have had a stomach virus a few times..that is not the flu. They have never had the flu (ages 18, 21 and 23). They get the usual colds once in a while, but not a lot.

The last time I had the flu I was maybe 23 years old...so 30 years ago. I will never forget how bad I felt. I have never had a flu shot and have never been that sick again. I don't even get the stomach bugs that go around. I figure that one illness shored up my immune system big time. I get colds, I get the occasional sinus infection and I get bronchitis at least once every 2 or 3 years..but that's it.

 

[sookie]

For those of you who choose not to get the flu shot - what guides your decision? I have a friend who is having a rant on fb about not 'putting that crap' into her children - if they get the flu, that's what hospitals are for. I always get the shot, my kids too - so I'm just curious as to why people who don't, don't? No flames from me - just wondering.

That is just great. People like me are probably paying her hospital bills too! with an attitude like that - what a great mom.

 

[sookie]

What if they came out with a vaccine that could save the lives of those with peanut allergies? The only catch is, the peanut allergic kid doesn't get the vaccination, it is the rest of us that aren't allergic to peanuts that need to get the vaccine. Would those of you that get the flu vaccine for the sole purpose of saving the infant you might come in contact with at the grocery store or the elderly neighbor you may see twice each winter, run out and get the vaccine to potentially save the life of my peanut allergic son?

I do what I can to save the world around me when I get sick. I stay indoors when possible. If I have to go out, I don't cough or sneeze on people, produce, or into the air. I Purell like crazy if I am out when I am sick all for the purpose of saving those around me. It isn't for my benefit; I'm already sick. I will not have something injected into my healthy body every year because I may run into someone once every 20 years when I get the flu and they may or may not catch my virus because I didn't sneeze on them.

this is baiting.... and I hope that someone you love never ever catches the flu from you... young, old, or otherwise. God forbid that they catch it from you and they end up seriously ill or worse, dead.

some people have no thought about how their choices might affect others. my getting a flu shot won't hurt you. but my choice to NOT getting a flu shot just might hurt you. go figure.

 

[Feralpeg]

I get a flu shot every year. It's not a big deal and, on the chance that the got it right, I am protected from the flu. I've never had a bad reaction, so it is a no brainer to me.

 

[Feralpeg]

What if they came out with a vaccine that could save the lives of those with peanut allergies? The only catch is, the peanut allergic kid doesn't get the vaccination, it is the rest of us that aren't allergic to peanuts that need to get the vaccine. Would those of you that get the flu vaccine for the sole purpose of saving the infant you might come in contact with at the grocery store or the elderly neighbor you may see twice each winter, run out and get the vaccine to potentially save the life of my peanut allergic son?

I do what I can to save the world around me when I get sick. I stay indoors when possible. If I have to go out, I don't cough or sneeze on people, produce, or into the air. I Purell like crazy if I am out when I am sick all for the purpose of saving those around me. It isn't for my benefit; I'm already sick. I will not have something injected into my healthy body every year because I may run into someone once every 20 years when I get the flu and they may or may not catch my virus because I didn't sneeze on them.

If they were to come out with such a vaccine and it would not cause harm to me, I'd get it in a heartbeat. To me, it is sort of like registering to be a bone marrow donor. If there is any way I can save the life of someone else without killing myself, I will do it. You just never know when the situation will be reversed and you will be the one in need.

 

[Coconut36]

this is baiting.... and I hope that someone you love never ever catches the flu from you... young, old, or otherwise. God forbid that they catch it from you and they end up seriously ill or worse, dead.

some people have no thought about how their choices might affect others. my getting a flu shot won't hurt you. but my choice to NOT getting a flu shot just might hurt you. go figure.

And me getting the flu shot still has a pretty high risk of not protecting me or anyone else I come in contact with.

I find it disturbing that people put such blind faith in a shot that covers a teeny tiny fraction of all the flu strains we can be exposed to. The only way I am protected is if I am exposed to the exact strains in the shot. The rare times I got the flu I was told by my Dr that most people who received that shot also came down with the flu (and I know this wasn't the only time that happened..see the CDC info on what factors into the flu shot being effective..one of them is a match of flu shot to strains going around).

I am a pro vaccine person for everything but the flu shot (and Gardasil)..I believe in most situations most vaccines are highly beneficial to those that do not have medical contradictions but I do not share that belief for the flu shot. Polio, measles, mumps, rubella..etc do not have the amount of mutations that the flu has..thus for the majority (not all but the majority) they provide long term immunity..the flu shot can be ineffective that year it is given and provides no immunity beyond that flu season.

 

[golfgal]

And me getting the flu shot still has a pretty high risk of not protecting me or anyone else I come in contact with.

I find it disturbing that people put such blind faith in a shot that covers a teeny tiny fraction of all the flu strains we can be exposed to. The only way I am protected is if I am exposed to the exact strains in the shot. The rare times I got the flu I was told by my Dr that most people who received that shot also came down with the flu (and I know this wasn't the only time that happened..see the CDC info on what factors into the flu shot being effective..one of them is a match of flu shot to strains going around).

I am a pro vaccine person for everything but the flu shot (and Gardasil)..I believe in most situations most vaccines are highly beneficial to those that do not have medical contradictions but I do not share that belief for the flu shot. Polio, measles, mumps, rubella..etc do not have the amount of mutations that the flu has..thus for the majority (not all but the majority) they provide long term immunity..the flu shot can be ineffective that year it is given and provides no immunity beyond that flu season.

According to the CDC website 17 of the past 21 years the vaccine HAS included the strains that have made the rounds in the US...in those years, they have had similar strains in the vaccine and outbreaks were not significant for the most part.

 

[Mermaid02]

No shot for me... last time I had one I broke out in a rash from my knees to my shoulders... they don't know WHAT in the shot did it... but the Doctor said that was my last flu shot- ever.

 

[Pigeon]

That is just great. People like me are probably paying her hospital bills too!

And you base this ridiculous assumption on????

 

[Coconut36]

According to the CDC website 17 of the past 21 years the vaccine HAS included the strains that have made the rounds in the US...in those years, they have had similar strains in the vaccine and outbreaks were not significant for the most part.

I don't buy it..sorry I don't. I got the flu in 2005 and was told the flu shot was useless that year and the strain going around was NOT in the shot and they were being bombarded with cases of the flu..many of the people with having received the vaccine.

April 17, 2008 -- This year's flu shot was only 44% effective, a new study suggests -- the least effective flu vaccine in a decade.

The findings come from a study of 616 Wisconsin residents who came down with flu-like illnesses during the peak of the flu season. Study findings appear in today's issue of the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

In good years, flu vaccines are 70% to 90% effective in preventing confirmed cases of flu bad enough to cause a person to seek medical attention. This year's vaccine appears to be the least effective since the 1997-1998 flu season, when the vaccine was about 50% effective.

Two of the 2007-2008 flu vaccine's three components didn't match most of the flu viruses circulating this flu season. This season's predominant flu bugs have been the mismatched type A H3N2 and type B strains.

The H3N2 component was only a partial mismatch, cutting the vaccine's effectiveness against type A flu to 58%. The type B flu component did not match at all -- and the vaccine seems to have had no effect against this bug.

Dan Jernigan, MD, MPH, deputy director of the CDC's influenza division, takes an optimistic, glass-half-full view of the study findings.

"While the vaccine's effectiveness against H3N2 is less than might be expected ... the evidence suggested that the vaccine provided substantial protection," Jernigan said at a CDC news conference. "The measurable effectiveness of the vaccine in this study suggests we continue to recommend vaccination even in years of mismatch."

This from the CDCs website

In years when the vaccine strains are not well matched to circulating strains, vaccine effectiveness can be variably reduced. For example, in a study among persons 50-64 years during the 2003-04 season, when the vaccine strains were not optimally matched, inactivated influenza vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza was 60% among persons without high-risk conditions, and 48% among those with high risk conditions

A study in children during the same year found vaccine effectiveness of about 50% against medically diagnosed influenza and pneumonia without laboratory confirmation (Ritzwoller, Pediatrics 2005). However, in some years when vaccine and circulating strains were not well-matched, no vaccine effectiveness can be demonstrated in some studies, even in healthy adults (Bridges, JAMA 2000). It is not possible in advance of the influenza season to predict how well the vaccine and circulating strains will be matched, and how that match may affect the degree of vaccine effectiveness.

 

[LisaR]

If they were to come out with such a vaccine and it would not cause harm to me, I'd get it in a heartbeat. To me, it is sort of like registering to be a bone marrow donor. If there is any way I can save the life of someone else without killing myself, I will do it. You just never know when the situation will be reversed and you will be the one in need.

You are a better person than me. Think of all the things they could come out with to protect others. Vaccines for strep throat, a whole array of food allergies, colds, ear infections, etc. The list is endless. I just can't justify filling my body up with things I don't need to prevent diseases I rarely catch. I will most certainly take every precaution I can that doesn't involve chemicals but that is as far as I am willing to go.

As for the bone marrow donor, that is completely different. That is a registry. You are not asked to give bone marrow every year and told this may or may not help others. I am also a bone marrow donor and an organ donor. Big difference, IMO.

 

[NikitaZee]

But the Catch-22 is that often times because of such things like you mention they cannot be given the vaccine themselves and must rely on the hope that the disease vector does not reach them. So what's the mother of a 3-month old baby supposed to do?

That would be fine if we never traveled, never co-mingled, never had any contact with anyone outside of these groups.

And that is just not the case.

I agree with both of these comments. Oddly enough, my friend whose conversation started this thread has a 4 month old and a fragile-health 2 year old. She won't explain why she thinks the vaccine is 'full of crap', she just believes that it is.