Should we get flu shots

[tlbwriter]

sorry folks but some of these make me think. We all know there is a limited supply of flu shots each year, so why are healthy adults getting them? I can understand if you are a doctor or teacher, somewhat, personally wouldn't but thats your choice. But why would an adult who is taking a shot away from someone who needs it more get one?

All of the at-risk population will not get the shots this year, or any year, because they do not all want them. Remember last year when there was a severe shortage, and the vaccine was limited to high risk groups? And then suddenly, later in the season, there was enough for anyone who wanted one? That happened because a percentage of the at-risk population doesn't want the vaccine and won't get it. Maybe the same percentage of the not-at-risk population who declines it. Anyway, unless/until you are officially told otherwise, there is plenty of vaccine for anyone who wants it. And the more people are vaccinated, the harder it is for the flu to spread, so those who are willing to get the vaccine are actually helping protect those who are not.

a lot of the cases seem like people listening to doctors way too much, do some research, getting the flu once a year isn't the end of the world, so your sick for like 3-4 days, so what? its a way of life.

Actually, for the 36,000 Americans who die from the flu every year, it is the end of the world (or this one, anyway). And for the 200,000 Americans who are admitted to the hospital every year due to the flu, it's more than being sick for 3-4 days.

That doesn't mean everyone should get the vaccine. But the decision should be made based on facts, not ignorance and platitudes.

 

[pansmermaidzlagoon]

just something to consider: about the 36,000 who die (and this applies to a great extent for hospitalizations as well) it is important to realize that 90% of those deaths are the elderly and most of the remaining 10% are immune compromised/otherwise unhealthy..so when you talk about these deaths/hospitalizations, you ARE overwhelmingly talking about the "at risk populations" - not otherwise healthy adults and children. Although people can offer personal stories about healthy people outside the "at-risk" who became very ill , etc ...- these are the exception, not the norm.

I agree that healthy adults and children - outside of any risk groups (elderly, infirm, asthmatic, health care professional, etc...) really do not need the flu shot. The shots were marketed this way at first - only recently have they expanded the target consumer group to include just about everyone - I think this is more of a marketing ploy to increase sales, etc. I would feel terrible getting the shot for my family - knowing others out there need it more than I do and may not get it. Even if there were plenty available, we would not get them, we do not feel it is necessary. Having said that - it is a personal decision - and I would not judge or criticize anyone for their personal choice.

****go cowboys***:

I would think twice about flu mist - you said you have researched this so forgive me if I assume you do not know about the following: flu mist is "live" and carries with it the risks associated with live virus. Last I knew it was not approved for children, but they give it anyway - that may have changed since I last read up on it(just after it first came out - a year or two ago). Due to the fact that it is "live" - the virus sheds for quite some time - meaning they can give the flu to others from the vaccine - I believe the time is 2 weeks, not sure - so I would be very careful about who you expose them to during that time period. If you have not already - you may want to research these aspects of FluMist first.

 

[tlbwriter]

I would feel terrible getting the shot for my family - knowing others out there need it more than I do and may not get it.

Well, like I said, there is plenty to go around, so that's a moot point. Anyone who wants it and needs it can have it. Now, if you simply don't want to get it, that's fine - it's your decision. But don't make that decision (or possibly lead others to make that decision) based on the misconception that there isn't enough vaccine for the people who really need it and want it. You're not helping anybody by "saving" the vaccine for someone who isn't going to accept it. And remember that those of us who get the vaccine help prevent/reduce the spread of flu to those who do not. Therefore, it's in everybody's best interest if those who want the vaccine get it, whether or not they're in a high risk group, as long as there isn't a shortage. And right now, there are no reports of a nation-wide shortage. Shortages in certain areas, yes, but that's a distribution problem, not a lack of supply, and the supply will eventually be sent to where it is needed.

I think everyone should do their research and decide what's best for themselves and their family. If you want the vaccine, get it. If you don't, don't. And hand washing is the most effective way to prevent the spread of disease, so keep that up whatever you do! <- Tracy waving her clean hand

 

[Katerbug]

Personally, vaccinations scare me. I have a son with autism. Not saying he is that way because of vaccinations but I don't know that that's not the reason either. We have never had flu shots and we have never had more than a basic cold each winter. To each his own.

 

[pansmermaidzlagoon]

tlbwriter:

sorry, I guess I should have left that sentence (about getting while others didn't) out of my post as it was already addressed....I wasn't arguing with you personally on that point - you may very well be right about that, I am not totally sure but do not feel strongly enough about that point to argue it! My apologies as I see how putting that in after you had already addressed it - could be seen as argumentative! - it wasn't meant to be.

I agree with you totally on researching and hand washing!

 

[tlbwriter]

Personally, vaccinations scare me. I have a son with autism. Not saying he is that way because of vaccinations but I don't know that that's not the reason either. We have never had flu shots and we have never had more than a basic cold each winter. To each his own.

I'd probably feel the same way if I were in your shoes. To those who are concerned about this issue, there is a thimerosal-free version of the flu vaccine available (one theory is that thimerosal, which is a mercury-based preservative used in vaccines, causes autism). At my county health department, it's being reserved for children ages 6-36 months.

 

[Mom to Jordan]

What helps me on issues such as these is having a pediatrician that I trust completly. They are the ones that know much more about it than I do. Yes, I read all the research before DS started getitng all his baby shots but I never really considered not giving them to him. When DS was a premature infant that first winter home all the doctors from the large teaching hospital where he was in icu for three months told us that we were NOT to allow him in contact with anyone that had not had the flu shot.He was too small to get it himself. Both our families of course got it. He is still considered high risk but his doctor tries to provide shots to all children. We have gotten the shot every year but one since DS was born. That year be was on some medications that would not allow him to get the short. We all three got the flu. It was not just a few days of feeling bad. DS DH and were quite sick and it turned into pneumonia for healthy DH. It ended up meaning 5 or 6 trips to the doctor. Several weeks of work and a few of school missed.
Maybe we are too trusting but when our DR says get them, we do.

Jordan's mom

 

[tlbwriter]

sorry, I guess I should have left that sentence (about getting while others didn't) out of my post as it was already addressed....I wasn't arguing with you personally on that point - you may very well be right about that, I am not totally sure but do not feel strongly enough about that point to argue it! My apologies as I see how putting that in after you had already addressed it - could be seen as argumentative! - it wasn't meant to be.

No problem. We'll probably find out this afternoon that there's a huge shortage anyway.

 

[skiwee1]

Our local Targets have plenty of shots. I spoke with a RN there last week. She told me that for the first part of the month they limited the shots to the elderly and those with diseases such as diabetes and such. They had such a little response that they have double what they anticipated. We have always gotten the shot even though we are healthy. We like to stay that way!

 

[sweetpeakaris]

Getting Flu shots are great! But you must keep in mind that it does'nt protect you from getting the Flu, my son gets the Flu shots every year and he still gets the Flu. I was told by our Dr, that the shot simply helps you to recover faster should you be exposed to the virus. I always thought the Flu shot protects you from contacting the Flu, period.

 

[tlbwriter]

Well, that's not really true. The vaccine does prevent the flu. Not always. Sometimes you just get a weaker case. But the intent is to prevent it altogether.

 

[Ask"WhyNot?"]

Could you point me in the direction of your source? Logically, this statement cannot be true. If it was true, there would be no need for "booster" shots of any kind. All my research shows that the anitbodies wear off as the flu season ends.

I don't know RT2DZ source (obviously) but....

Not all shots do need boosters. Some shots you only get once. Some shots are simply split in order to make it easier on the immune system to digest, usually with smaller children. And, yes, some shots do require boosters to ensure continued immunity (some types wear down after awhile even if they never completely wear off). In case you're interested, our Pedi is the source for this.

Flu shots are only for 3 specific types of flu each season. They don't "wear off"; they simply aren't the same shot from year to year because it usually isn't the same flu from year to year and never predicated to be. Although flu has a "season", it is a virus and therefore, is year round otherwise the virus would die out and we wouldn't have a flu. The flu shots only have enough preservatives to not expire from one year from start of flu season to one year later (A segment from Good Morning America with a/by a Dr. is my source).

I'd be interested in your sources, as my research has never pointed my in the direction you have stated. Not saying your wrong, just saying I'd like to check it out. I believe everyone has an obligation to educate themselves as highly as possible and then weighing all sides of an issue, make the decision for themselves that they feel is best.

I don't think you're wrong for not getting the shot. I wouldn't get one before I had children myself. I actually didn't start getting them until I had a child under 6 months during flu season (premature and has asthma). The flu I only got about once every 3 years, suddenly didn't come around anymore. That made me a believer--especially when I was 19 I was in the hospital, and I'm not at all high risk, for two weeks with the flu. Glad to skip that experience.

My kids have never had the flu. Possible just a coincidence, possibly not. Will never know. We do wash hands frequently. I tought my kids from a very little age (I have 5 and most are older) to not touch their eyes, noses, and mouths, but face it, some virus are or at least partially airborn also. That is just a precaution, same as the shot. Yes, the shot doesn't guarantee you wouldn't get the flu; it could be a different strain or you could still get a weak case from what would have been a horrible case.

To each their own. As I believe someone else posted, those who do vaccinate are actually helping those that don't. That is why with some people not vaccinating there still isn't large reoccurance of illnesses. And with the large amount of those vaccinating, isn't it nice that some illnesses have died out altogether?

 

[CleveRocks]

Although people can offer personal stories about healthy people outside the "at-risk" who became very ill , etc ...- these are the exception, not the norm.

The same is true for problems associated with vaccines. They are the exception, not the norm.

-- Eric

 

[go cowboys]

****go cowboys***:

I would think twice about flu mist - you said you have researched this so forgive me if I assume you do not know about the following: flu mist is "live" and carries with it the risks associated with live virus. Last I knew it was not approved for children, but they give it anyway - that may have changed since I last read up on it(just after it first came out - a year or two ago). Due to the fact that it is "live" - the virus sheds for quite some time - meaning they can give the flu to others from the vaccine - I believe the time is 2 weeks, not sure - so I would be very careful about who you expose them to during that time period. If you have not already - you may want to research these aspects of FluMist first.

[/QUOTE]

thanks for your input. We have a great pediatrician who is also an infectious disease specialist. She highly recommends flu shots and offers flumist for all her patients over five years old. I checked the website again and it is approved for children. Here is a link: http://www.flumist.com/consumer/aboutflumist/

And yes, even though the virus is weakened, it is suggested that you should avoid contact with severely immunocompromised individuals, ie. AIDS, chemo patients for three weeks. Most of us do not know many people that would fall into that category. We didn't. For us it was a great alternative to the dreaded needle.

Again, we all have to do what we feel is best for our family. Not always easy though.

 

[bntrdntht]

oh my GOSH... to the original post, I feel so bad for you for asking just a small advise question and it looks like you have a big capitol debate going on here. Thought this was a HAPPY WEB SITE.. to everyone getting the flu shot and everyone not getting the flu shot might want to all take a CHILL PILL

 

[Bird-Mom]

I don't know RT2DZ source (obviously) but....

Not all shots do need boosters. Some shots you only get once. Some shots are simply split in order to make it easier on the immune system to digest, usually with smaller children. And, yes, some shots do require boosters to ensure continued immunity (some types wear down after awhile even if they never completely wear off).

Vaccines are never easy on the immune system. You bombard what is otherwise a normal system with disease and preservatives, ingredients such as aluminum, antifreeze, traces of mercury, dead animal tissue. That is never easy to "digest". Small children are given vaccines only because public health studies show that parents are most likely to take their children to the doctor before the age of 2. Regarding doses of vaccines, this is a very interesting article:http://www.mercola.com/2004/dec/29/vaccination_schedule.htm

Perhaps I should not use booster so generally. However, all vaccinations on the childhood schedule are given in multiple doses to "make sure". Children are not tested to see if they really need another dose. And some vaccines never take, such as pertussis (only takes in 73% of people) and rubella. I know many women who do not test immune for rubella, get the MMR (so get more measles and mumps without knowing if it is necessary because we do not check for those in the titer and it is increasingly difficult to get the individual vaccines), and then test negative again for rubella immunity.

They don't "wear off"; they simply aren't the same shot from year to year because it usually isn't the same flu from year to year and never predicated to be. I'd be interested in your sources, as my research has never pointed my in the direction you have stated.

go cowboys, who has represented him/herself as a physician, has already made it clear that yes, it does wear off. I am in the women's health care field and have had many discussions on the subject, but here is a quote from a quick google search to document:

"The flu vaccination offers temporary protection from specific strains of the influenza virus. These antibodies then lose their effectiveness within a few months." Thomas Lee, NMD

I wouldn't get one before I had children myself.

I do have children. Two of them. And they are *gasp* unvaccinated. I have an autoimmune disease that has been traced back to vaccination. I also have a dd who is developmentally disabled, which with all the hype about thimerisol scares the daylights out of me. I won't subject them to what I live with, and I am not afraid of any disease. For me, the risk of vaxes is worse than the small possibility of the disease. FTR, my oldest dd has had a VPD (vaccine preventable disease) and she came through it just fine.

As I believe someone else posted, those who do vaccinate are actually helping those that don't. That is why with some people not vaccinating there still isn't large reoccurance of illnesses. And with the large amount of those vaccinating, isn't it nice that some illnesses have died out altogether?

Yes, herd immunity helps to a certain extent. However, better/more sanitary living conditions, increased awareness of good hygeine, and better nutrition helps fight disease. Vaccinations are not always a great invention.

We have to do what is right for our families. It really does scare me the amount of blind trust placed in a doctor. Do your research...and then wash, wash, wash those hands!

 

[Ask"WhyNot?"]

Vaccines are never easy on the immune system. You bombard what is otherwise a normal system with disease and preservatives, ingredients such as aluminum, antifreeze, traces of mercury, dead animal tissue. That is never easy to "digest". Small children are given vaccines only because public health studies show that parents are most likely to take their children to the doctor before the age of 2. Regarding doses of vaccines, this is a very interesting article:http://www.mercola.com/2004/dec/29/vaccination_schedule.htm

Perhaps I should not use booster so generally. However, all vaccinations on the childhood schedule are given in multiple doses to "make sure". Children are not tested to see if they really need another dose. And some vaccines never take, such as pertussis (only takes in 73% of people) and rubella. I know many women who do not test immune for rubella, get the MMR (so get more measles and mumps without knowing if it is necessary because we do not check for those in the titer and it is increasingly difficult to get the individual vaccines), and then test negative again for rubella immunity.




go cowboys, who has represented him/herself as a physician, has already made it clear that yes, it does wear off. I am in the women's health care field and have had many discussions on the subject, but here is a quote from a quick google search to document:






I do have children. Two of them. And they are *gasp* unvaccinated. I have an autoimmune disease that has been traced back to vaccination. I also have a dd who is developmentally disabled, which with all the hype about thimerisol scares the daylights out of me. I won't subject them to what I live with, and I am not afraid of any disease. For me, the risk of vaxes is worse than the small possibility of the disease. FTR, my oldest dd has had a VPD (vaccine preventable disease) and she came through it just fine.



Yes, herd immunity helps to a certain extent. However, better/more sanitary living conditions, increased awareness of good hygeine, and better nutrition helps fight disease. Vaccinations are not always a great invention.

We have to do what is right for our families. It really does scare me the amount of blind trust placed in a doctor. Do your research...and then wash, wash, wash those hands!

I am a trained journalist and therefore can not fully answer you fully right now. I never go by an article without first checking out the sources used for the article first myself--it's that training. However, I do find it necessary to be a little clearer first.

I figured you had children. I believe you stated so. All I said was that I didn't get the shot before I had children. Not that that was your reason for not getting the shot.

I also feel not getting vaccinated has some valid arguements. I don't think you are "wrong" for not doing it. My research has just led me to make a different decision. For me getting the shots had more pros than cons. And, it was a difficult decision for me to make. Like I said, not vaccinating is a very valid choice.

go cowboys, did NOT make it clear that the vaccine wears off. He (she?) never said any such thing. What was said is that you have to get it every year because it is a different vaccine every year and one shot will not cover you for future strains in future years. I went back and re-read all his posts to be sure of this. I was right.

The reason you the amount of your immunity is not tested is because there would be a trip to the doctor for the blood test. Wait for days to see the result and then another trip to the doctor for another shot if needed. And this would have to repeated every year. That is a lot to put a small child through. Shots are given to infants so that they can get the immunity as quickly as possible. The state mandates (at least ours) that you take your child to the doctor every so often. That is why schools check shotrecords and require waivers signed by doctors for those who do not vaccinate.

And sure, some diaseases that we vaccinate against aren't that difficult to live through. But ask anyone who suffered from POLO if they would rather have been vaccinated or gone through the disease and you might find they would choose the vaccine. But--for the third or fourth time--I don't think it is a horrible parent who doesn't vaccinate their child; it's just a different choice.

 

[jenjersnap]

That is why schools check shotrecords and require waivers signed by doctors for those who do not vaccinate.

Just pointing out that this is not so in my state. I simply signed a philosophical exemption (religious and medical are also valid exemptions), no physician's signature required for philosophical or religious reasons for not vaccinating.

This is a very minor point but so often on other parenting boards I have encountered moms who have vax concerns but believe there is nothing they can do because states "require" something or other. Often that is not true and I encourage parents to research their options.

 

[Bird-Mom]

The reason you the amount of your immunity is not tested is because there would be a trip to the doctor for the blood test. Wait for days to see the result and then another trip to the doctor for another shot if needed. And this would have to repeated every year. That is a lot to put a small child through.

So we should overload their bodies with chemicals instead?

Shots are given to infants so that they can get the immunity as quickly as possible. The state mandates (at least ours) that you take your child to the doctor every so often.

This is simply not true. Studies show parents are most likely to bring their children to the doctor before the age of 2. As for the state mandating doctor visits? No way. Who is the parent here? I do not do well baby visits and neither do most of my friends. They are a waste of time and primarily for vaccines or nervous parents.

That is why schools check shotrecords and require waivers signed by doctors for those who do not vaccinate.

Jenjersnap is right. Medical waivers require a doc's signature, but in my state, we have religious and personal exemptions as well. I just check the religious box and sign the form. No problems.

And sure, some diaseases that we vaccinate against aren't that difficult to live through. But ask anyone who suffered from POLO if they would rather have been vaccinated or gone through the disease and you might find they would choose the vaccine.

Did you know that 95% of people who have POLIO simply have a rash and high fever? And don't even know it is polio? We only see and hear about the worst cases.

 

[kiddoc]

I am a pediatrician and won't even begin to get in the vaccine debate. However, I do disagree with the no well-baby visits. Many times, I'll admit, well-baby visits are just that--well babies. However, there are times that subtle abnormalities can be picked up that may save suffering, long-term disabilities or death. Do you have dental check-ups? Do you yourself have regular OB check-ups? Regular physician visits are important regardless of age.