Swine Flu vax does NOT mean you won't get sick

[mefordis]

This would make sense if the vaccine was 100% safe. But we all know that vaccines aren't 100% safe. Read the insert to see the potential risks. Long term risk TBD.

"Assuming" this information is accurate, I tend to look at it this way..

Get the vaccine and you have a 50% chance of not becoming ill/seriously ill/ and or dying..

Don't get the vaccine and your odds are much, much higher of becoming ill/seriously ill/ and or dying - since this flu is currently a widespread epidemic..

I would prefer to go with the 50/50 odds of having the vaccine - if I could find it..

 

[Plannin'Shannon]

I really should stop opening these flu threads

You and me both. But they're contagious.

 

[mefordis]

You and me both. But they're contagious.

I know! Huge waste of time. I"m done.

 

[disney1990]

"Assuming" this information is accurate, I tend to look at it this way..

Get the vaccine and you have a 50% chance of not becoming ill/seriously ill/ and or dying..

Don't get the vaccine and your odds are much, much higher of becoming ill/seriously ill/ and or dying - since this flu is currently a widespread epidemic..

I would prefer to go with the 50/50 odds of having the vaccine - if I could find it..

With any flu vaccine, there is still a chance of getting the flu. Especially in the first 2 or 3 weeks after getting it before it becomes effective. In addition, if you do get the flu after you have received the vaccine, it is likely to be milder than without having the vaccine.

 

[kpm76]

This would make sense if the vaccine was 100% safe. But we all know that vaccines aren't 100% safe. Read the insert to see the potential risks. Long term risk TBD.

Absolutely nothing in life is 100% safe and this includes vaccines. Most of us get in our cars everyday despite the fact that more than 16,000 people in the U.S. died in traffic related accidents from Jan-June 2009 (source: NHTSA). Most of us eat everyday and run the risk of getting sick from whatever it is we ingest. Need surgery? Be careful, you might get an infection from either the surgery or your hospital stay. My point is that we all take calculated risks and in most cases vaccines are perfectly safe. It would be paralyzing to worry about every single "what if" in life. For us, we decided to give the H1N1 vaccine to our 2 yr old because the benefit outweighed the risk. She was quite ill in May with flu like symptoms and suffered a febrile seizure. If we can prevent her from getting that sick again, we will.

 

[Namsupak]

But we all know that vaccines aren't 100% safe. Read the insert to see the potential risks. Long term risk TBD.

This is a very broad statement. Can you qualify this for me because I am at odds on how this conclusion is a "we all know" statement. Did you read my previous post, taking pieces of the insert and coming up with this idea is akin to saying that if something isn't 100% safe you shouldn't do it. I am not sure this is a logical statement because everything has potential risks.

However I do understand this statement coming from certain individuals. Two instances come to mind and those are people who have some aspect of agoraphobia or those suffering from trypanophobia. Either way these are associated with specific triggers which may lead one to prescribe to a philosophy that may assume the logic, "if it isn't 100% safe then avoid it". This isn't an exhaustive list of diagnosis but just somethings that come to mind. If you feel living by this idea is really impacting your life then I would suggest some behavior modification therapy, perhaps as a referral from your primary care physician.

The other statement, "Long term risk TBD" is unfortunately a broad statement that is included with so many inserts. Fortunately this statement is not as broad as the above percentage. There isn't much I can tell you about this since this is information that is not yet available. When it is available what kind of data do you consider long term. 5 years? 10 years? If you are looking for longer periods of information than that would mean it would be difficult to use many products at all. These types of products are put through several phases of development. I won't describe all these specific phases, but essentially if the vaccine continues to be given then we can expect long term data in the future. I wouldn't expect the company to give me this data now. As I stated before the insert contains mostly data with very little interpretation, some of the things in there are most likely for legal purposes as well.

A great thing about being in this country is actually the FDA. I understand that this is probably an area of controversy that we won't delve into here. I just make this point because it is good to have a governmental check and balance for products that are distributed to patients nationwide. In other places in the world there is no such luxury. In those climates it is easier to bring up treatments that are not sufficiently subjected to the proper randomized double blinded studies. Statements made by the developing companies are also less scrutinized as well since there isn't a cohesive regulatory committee like the FDA

 

[mefordis]

So you were SORT of paying attention in your Psych 101 class? Very cute.

When the doctors won't give it to their own kids... well..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1z7KSEnyxw

This is a very broad statement. Can you qualify this for me because I am at odds on how this conclusion is a "we all know" statement. Did you read my previous post, taking pieces of the insert and coming up with this idea is akin to saying that if something isn't 100% safe you shouldn't do it. I am not sure this is a logical statement because everything has potential risks.

However I do understand this statement coming from certain individuals. Two instances come to mind and those are people who have some aspect of agoraphobia or those suffering from trypanophobia. Either way these are associated with specific triggers which may lead one to prescribe to a philosophy that may assume the logic, "if it isn't 100% safe then avoid it". This isn't an exhaustive list of diagnosis but just somethings that come to mind. If you feel living by this idea is really impacting your life then I would suggest some behavior modification therapy, perhaps as a referral from your primary care physician.

The other statement, "Long term risk TBD" is unfortunately a broad statement that is included with so many inserts. Fortunately this statement is not as broad as the above percentage. There isn't much I can tell you about this since this is information that is not yet available. When it is available what kind of data do you consider long term. 5 years? 10 years? If you are looking for longer periods of information than that would mean it would be difficult to use many products at all. These types of products are put through several phases of development. I won't describe all these specific phases, but essentially if the vaccine continues to be given then we can expect long term data in the future. I wouldn't expect the company to give me this data now. As I stated before the insert contains mostly data with very little interpretation, some of the things in there are most likely for legal purposes as well.

A great thing about being in this country is actually the FDA. I understand that this is probably an area of controversy that we won't delve into here. I just make this point because it is good to have a governmental check and balance for products that are distributed to patients nationwide. In other places in the world there is no such luxury. In those climates it is easier to bring up treatments that are not sufficiently subjected to the proper randomized double blinded studies. Statements made by the developing companies are also less scrutinized as well since there isn't a cohesive regulatory committee like the FDA

 

[DVC Sadie]

When the doctors won't give it to their own kids... well..

I have to go to the hospital 3x a week for treatments and I have yet spoken to any of my doctors who did not choose to vaccinate their own children.

 

[mefordis]

I have to go to the hospital 3x a week for treatments and I have yet spoken to any of my doctors who did not choose to vaccinate their own children.

There are many but not all feel compelled to share their true thoughts on the vaccine. Dr Oz did (he will not be vaccinating his children) and he's getting some backlash.

I encourage everyone to do their own research outside of the news media.

Here is another one.
http://www.drjaygordon.com/development/news/h1n1update.asp

 

[luvmy3]

So you were SORT of paying attention in your Psych 101 class? Very cute.

When the doctors won't give it to their own kids... well..

And you also have docs who say that those born in the 70's will have (at least some) immunity to H1N1. I trust my ped, but just because it comes out of his mouth doesn't mean its gospel. I think that people should heed the advice in the below post, and that includes doing your own research outside of what your doc says, because they do not know it all

There are many but not all feel compelled to share their true thoughts on the vaccine. Dr Oz did (he will not be vaccinating his children) and he's getting some backlash.

I encourage everyone to do their own research outside of the news media.
Here is another one.
http://www.drjaygordon.com/development/news/h1n1update.asp

 

[NikitaZee]

There are many but not all feel compelled to share their true thoughts on the vaccine. Dr Oz did (he will not be vaccinating his children) and he's getting some backlash.

In his interview, Dr. Oz said that it is his wife that is choosing not to get their children vaccinated.

 

[Geoff_M]

There are many but not all feel compelled to share their true thoughts on the vaccine.

When you say "many" that statement is a tautology that can be applied to most any aspect of medicine, even supporting notions that most would consider "quackery".

I encourage everyone to do their own research outside of the news media.

I agree, the news media is generally a terrible place to get medical news. They love a good medical "scare" story and have done much to keep vaccine "controversies" in the fore.

However, "do it yourself" medical research has its own set of pitfalls. Your gross misinterpretation of the information in the package insert, as pointed out by Namsupak, you cited in the first post of this thread is a prime example.

Here is another one.
http://www.drjaygordon.com/development/news/h1n1update.asp

Yep, that's "another one". But it's hard to take a guy seriously when he's seen passing on patently misleading information such as calling the H1N1 vaccine and seasonal flu vaccines "experimental". Today's flu vaccines are based on decades of medical experience and observation and the FDA is loath to deviate from the standard flu vaccine "playbook". If you've read the latest H1N1 vaccine news this week, you'll know that the most cited reason for lagging in vaccine production is that we're still using the "chicken egg" method for culturing the target antigens. News stories are calling this method "antiquated". An alternative would be to use more modern techniques like using a bio-reactor to grow the virus and use more novel formulations. But the FDA prefers to stick with the old method with a long documented track record and is fearful of trying something new and truly experimental as "Dr. Jay" accuses them falsely of doing now. He also loses points from me as being the pediatrician for Jenny McCarthy's son that was "cured" of autism and he wrote the forward for her book on the topic.... speaking of "quackery".

(If others would like a more detailed discussion of some of the problems that "Dr. Jay - Celebrity Pediatrician" has with his science and facts, look here.)

 

[mefordis]

Okay, how can we take you seriously when you work for the Pharm industry? No agenda there, is there?

When you say "many" that statement is a tautology that can be applied to most any aspect of medicine, even supporting notions that most would consider "quackery".

I agree, the news media is generally a terrible place to get medical news. They love a good medical "scare" story and have done much to keep vaccine "controversies" in the fore.

However, "do it yourself" medical research has its own set of pitfalls. Your gross misinterpretation of the information in the package insert, as pointed out by Namsupak, you cited in the first post of this thread is a prime example.

Yep, that's "another one". But it's hard to take a guy seriously when he's seen passing on patently misleading information such as calling the H1N1 vaccine and seasonal flu vaccines "experimental". Today's flu vaccines are based on decades of medical experience and observation and the FDA is loath to deviate from the standard flu vaccine "playbook". If you've read the latest H1N1 vaccine news this week, you'll know that the most cited reason for lagging in vaccine production is that we're still using the "chicken egg" method for culturing the target antigens. News stories are calling this method "antiquated". An alternative would be to use more modern techniques like using a bio-reactor to grow the virus and use more novel formulations. But the FDA prefers to stick with the old method with a long documented track record and is fearful of trying something new and truly experimental as "Dr. Jay" accuses them falsely of doing now. He also loses points from me as being the pediatrician for Jenny McCarthy's son that was "cured" of autism and he wrote the forward for her book on the topic.... speaking of "quackery".

(If others would like a more detailed discussion of some of the problems that "Dr. Jay - Celebrity Pediatrician" has with his science and facts, look here.)

 

[C.Ann]

This would make sense if the vaccine was 100% safe. But we all know that vaccines aren't 100% safe. Read the insert to see the potential risks. Long term risk TBD.

And if we "don't" get the vaccine there is a 100% guarantee that we won't get the Swine flu? Won't become very ill? Won't become seriously ill? Won't be the "next" person that dies due to the Swine flu?

You could also say that all of the vaccinations that infants and children are required to have aren't 100% safe either, but do most parents choose to get them for their children? Or do they "wing it" - and hope for the best?

 

[mefordis]

Or they take a proactive, NATURAL, preventative approach through proper nutrition (ie: not Lunchables) and plenty of hand washing.

More info on VAX:

http://drtenpenny.com/the_truth_about_the_flu_Shot.aspx

And if we "don't" get the vaccine there is a 100% guarantee that we won't get the Swine flu? Won't become very ill? Won't become seriously ill? Won't be the "next" person that dies due to the Swine flu?

You could also say that all of the vaccinations that infants and children are required to have aren't 100% safe either, but do most parents choose to get them for their children? Or do they "wing it" - and hope for the best?

 

[NikitaZee]

Or they take a proactive, NATURAL, preventative approach through proper nutrition (ie: not Lunchables) and plenty of hand washing.

Until little Susie in the seat next to them in school sneezes in their face. No, thanks, I'll take my chances with the vaccine over the virus any day of the week.

 

[luvmy3]

Or they take a proactive, NATURAL, preventative approach through proper nutrition (ie: not Lunchables) and plenty of hand washing.
More info on VAX:

http://drtenpenny.com/the_truth_about_the_flu_Shot.aspx

If it were truly that easy to avoid getting infected with the flu I would be so relieved. Unfortumately I found that my dd who doesn't eat Lunchables and does wash her hands frequently (due to her hypochondriac nature) still managed to come down with it last spring when it was going around the school. We'll definitely take the 50/50 odds of the vaccine this season.

 

[C.Ann]

Or they take a proactive, NATURAL, preventative approach through proper nutrition (ie: not Lunchables) and plenty of hand washing.

More info on VAX:

http://drtenpenny.com/the_truth_about_the_flu_Shot.aspx

Right - "not eating Lunchables and plenty of hand washing" will prevent one from catching: regular seasonal flu; Swine flu; measles; mumps; chicken pox; whooping cough; diptheria; smallpox; - and on and on..

 

[DMRick]

Until little Susie in the seat next to them in school sneezes in their face. No, thanks, I'll take my chances with the vaccine over the virus any day of the week.

My grandson couldn't be vaccinated because of health issues, although his school has been doing the mist all week. His rheumatologist said no, he didn't want him vaccinated. And that darn little Susie did sneeze in his face (and many other's faces, according to the note sent home from school) and today he was dx'd (he's been sick for two days) with H1N1. His temp has been hovering from 104-105 for the two days with medication, and he's on tamiflu now. He has to be fever free for 24 hours without motrin/tylenol before he can go back to school. I wonder how many parents wait that long to send kids back to school.
His mom has always made sure he eats healthy, and as a nurse she's right there teaching him heathy hand wasing and how to be careful.
But that darn Susie.....

This headline says a lot:
ATLANTA (Oct. 24) - President Barack Obama declared the swine flu outbreak a national emergency and empowered his health secretary to suspend federal requirements and speed treatment for thousands of infected people.

 

[sharonW]

That video is reason to doubt getting the vaccine, esp for kids.
I know a nurse who once told me NEVER would she receive a vaccine that contained live virus. It is all so confusing!