15 ms·

Two issues at stake. Are they effective and what are the side effects? Vaccines are good against a known thing, such as Hepatitis B or Polio. So you would wa

by yapcguy 13y ago

Two issues at stake. Are they effective and what are the side effects? Vaccines are good against a known thing, such as Hepatitis B or Polio. So you would want your kids to be vaccinated against things like that. However the flu vaccine is not really effective. Side effects? If you take a Flu vaccine shot or Whooping cough shot you get a different one from that given to pregnant women and babies. Think about that. One contains mercury, the other doesn't. So why doesn't everybody get the safer one? Manufacturer cost. Which leads to a third issue which I didn't mention - money. Corporations abuse whenever they can, why wouldn't it be the same in the pharma industry? Take the flu vaccine, the effectiveness is not proven, yet we are bombarded everyday with marketing/propaganda that flu shots are available and they only cost 60 bucks. The Andrew Wakefield MMR-Autism paper has been discredited but it did make a lot of people ask questions. Why are kids today getting so many more vaccinations than before? Why are more kids getting diagnosed with autism? Is there a causal link? Why instead of single shots are different shots getting combined into one super cocktail - to save money, cut corners? If you read Ben Goldacre's books on the pharma and health industry, you will quickly understand that most big pharma medical trials are poorly controlled experiements and mainly used as marketing tools for new products. They will sponsor/allow dozens of tests confirming a positive result, to crowd out one or two better controlled tests which produce a negative result. Obviously citations needed, but this is from memory. At the end of the day, parents have tough decisions, use common sense and understand that medicine evolves. The last few years, doctors recommended kids take Tylenol before vaccinations to help pain management. Now doctors say take Advil, because Tylenol in young infants and children may be linked to asthma and exczema - and some research indicates Tylenol reduces the effectiveness of the vaccine shot itself!

carbocation 13y ago
> So why doesn't everybody get the safer one? Manufacturer cost. What is your evidence that there are unsafe vaccines currently on the market that are being promulgated over safer vaccines due to manufacturer cost?
- yapcguy 13y ago
  Speak to your OB and ask if the vaccines given to pregnant women are the same as the ones from Walgreens or Safeway... and ask about the mercury.
  - ceejayoz 13y ago
    > Speak to your OB and ask if the vaccines given to pregnant women are the same as the ones from Walgreens or Safeway... and ask about the mercury. See, you can't even get that right. Setting aside for a moment the fact that autism rates have continued to increase despite the removal of thimerosal from nearly all vaccines (and that you get a lot more mercury from coal power plant emissions)... The version of the flu shot that's contraindicated for pregnancy is the nasal spray, which lacks thimerosal because it's a single-dose variant. People at Walgreens/Safeway love the nasal spray. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/vis-statements/flulive.html http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/vis-statements/flulive.h... "LAIV may be given to people 2 through 49 years of age, who are not pregnant. LAIV does not contain thimerosal or other preservatives." Pregnant women have to get the shot, which in multi-dose vials contains the preservative.
    - yapcguy 13y ago
      Walgreens says about the nasal spray "It should not be used in pregnant women" which implies it is harmful in some way, does it not? http://www.walgreens.com/marketing/library/contents.jsp?docid=002025&doctype=1 http://www.walgreens.com/marketing/library/contents.jsp?doci... Flu shot by injection does contain thimerosal, unless you get the special version which doesn't. Walgreens and Safeway have a limited supply of it and people have to call ahead to get this special version. Given that an OB confirmed the above to me and I watched the OB's nurse administer a single shot without thimerosal, I think I'm more right than you on these matters.
      - ceejayoz 13y ago
        > Walgreens says about the nasal spray "It should not be used in pregnant women" which implies it is harmful in some way, does it not? Not at all. Sometimes medicines are contraindicated simply because there isn't enough study in the population at question. If the flu shot is known to be safe and the nasal, while believed to be safe, still needs more study in pregnant women, they'll recommend the shot. > Flu shot by injection does contain thimerosal, unless you get the special version which doesn't. Some of it does, some of it doesn't. It's a red herring - the safety of thimerosal is long since stablished, attempts from fraudsters like Wakefield notwithstanding. > Given that an OB confirmed the above to me Many OBs will spout the American theory that a single glass of red wine is bad for a baby, too. I'll trust the CDC over anecdotes from individual OBs.
DenisM 13y ago
Flu vaccines are 60% effective, so you're 60% less like to get sick after getting vaccinated. In layman terms, someone who normally gets sick 6 yeas out of 10 would now get sick only 2 years in the same period. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm?mobile=nocontent http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm?mobile=noc... The problem is not your ignorance (we're all ignoran of many things), it's the combination of ignorance, willingness to hold a strong opinion on the subject, and simultaneous lack of curiosity to explore the subject.
- yapcguy 13y ago
  Are you describing yourself in that last sentence? "The current flu shot is only 9% effective for the elderly and only 56% effective in general, according to CDC figures. CDC officials are baffled why the vaccine is so ineffective in the elderly." NYT And from the Lancet: "Background: No published meta-analyses have assessed efficacy and effectiveness of licensed influenza vaccines in the USA with sensitive and highly specific diagnostic tests to confirm influenza. Findings (Interpretation): Influenza vaccines can provide moderate protection against virologically confirmed influenza, but such protection is greatly reduced or absent in some seasons. Evidence for protection in adults aged 65 years or older is lacking. LAIVs consistently show highest efficacy in young children (aged 6 months to 7 years)." http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099%2811%2970295-X/abstract http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-30... Heck, if the flu vaccine is so good for you why is it that health-care workers and doctors can't be bothered to get it? http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2811%2961156-2/fulltext http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67...
  - ceejayoz 13y ago
    > CDC officials are baffled why the vaccine is so ineffective in the elderly. The elderly having a weaker immune system is hardly new knowledge. It's one of the reasons the people they come into contact need vaccinations, so the elderly and young children benefit from herd immunity. > Influenza vaccines can provide moderate protection against virologically confirmed influenza, but such protection is greatly reduced or absent in some seasons. Hardly surprising or new info. They put a couple strains in the vaccine based on what they think will crop up that flu season. Sometimes it's wrong and the vaccine doesn't do much good. Sometimes a new threat like H1N1 come up mid-season and they make an additional one. > Heck, if the flu vaccine is so good for you why is it that health-care workers and doctors can't be bothered to get it? Because there are just as many idiot doctors and nurses as in the general population? You'll find people who don't believe in evolution as doctors and nurses, too. Hell, my wife's nursing textbook had analyzing auras as a possible care component.
mikeash 13y ago
The flu vaccine certainly is effective. It is not 100% effective, but it is still effective. Getting it makes you much less likely to catch the flu than not getting it. For vulnerable people, this greatly improves their chance of survival. For the rest of us, this greatly improves our chances of not spending a week in bed. Plus, if a significant proportion of the population gets the vaccine, that reduces the chance of it getting transmitted, making it even more effective. Speaking of cost, my HMO gives my family flu vaccines for free. The only reason they would do this is if they think it's cheaper for them overall, because the campaign reduces doctor visits. They may be motivated solely by profit, but in this case, their desire for profit lines up with my desire for health. I can't believe you seriously ask why kids are getting so many more vaccinations than before. You might as well ask why kids are getting so many more surgeries than before. Kids get more vaccines today because more vaccines are available. Obviously, kids weren't getting flu vaccines before the flu vaccine was actually developed.
- yapcguy 13y ago
  It's not effective. If brakes only operated 9% of the time, would they be effective? "The current flu shot is only 9% effective for the elderly and only 56% effective in general, according to CDC figures. CDC officials are baffled why the vaccine is so ineffective in the elderly." NYT And from the Lancet: "Background: No published meta-analyses have assessed efficacy and effectiveness of licensed influenza vaccines in the USA with sensitive and highly specific diagnostic tests to confirm influenza. Findings (Interpretation): Influenza vaccines can provide moderate protection against virologically confirmed influenza, but such protection is greatly reduced or absent in some seasons. Evidence for protection in adults aged 65 years or older is lacking. LAIVs consistently show highest efficacy in young children (aged 6 months to 7 years)." http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099%2811%2970295-X/abstract http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-30... Heck, if the flu vaccine is so good for you why is it that health-care workers and doctors can't be bothered to get it? http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2811%2961156-2/fulltext http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67...
  - ceejayoz 13y ago
DanBC 13y ago
> The Andrew Wakefield MMR-Autism paper has been discredited Wakefield was a swindling crook. http://tallguywrites.livejournal.com/148012.html http://tallguywrites.livejournal.com/148012.html > but it did make a lot of people ask questions. Easily answered questions > Why are kids today getting so many more vaccinations than before? Because we now have vaccinations that are safe and effective. The alternative is dead, or crippled, people. > Why are more kids getting diagnosed with autism? Because we have more doctors able to diagnose; we have diagnostic criteria; we have parental awareness. > Is there a causal link? No. > Why instead of single shots are different shots getting combined into one super cocktail - to save money, cut corners? Vaccines that are cheaper and more effective are a good thing. Someone would have to be some kind of fucking half-wit to think otherwise. EDIT: > If you read Ben Goldacre's books ... and came away thinking there's any serious risk from vaccinations then you need to re-read the books.

by yapcguy 13y ago

carbocation 13y ago

> So why doesn't everybody get the safer one? Manufacturer cost. What is your evidence that there are unsafe vaccines currently on the market that are being promulgated over safer vaccines due to manufacturer cost?

yapcguy 13y ago
Speak to your OB and ask if the vaccines given to pregnant women are the same as the ones from Walgreens or Safeway... and ask about the mercury.
- ceejayoz 13y ago
  > Speak to your OB and ask if the vaccines given to pregnant women are the same as the ones from Walgreens or Safeway... and ask about the mercury. See, you can't even get that right. Setting aside for a moment the fact that autism rates have continued to increase despite the removal of thimerosal from nearly all vaccines (and that you get a lot more mercury from coal power plant emissions)... The version of the flu shot that's contraindicated for pregnancy is the nasal spray, which lacks thimerosal because it's a single-dose variant. People at Walgreens/Safeway love the nasal spray. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/vis-statements/flulive.html http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/vis/vis-statements/flulive.h... "LAIV may be given to people 2 through 49 years of age, who are not pregnant. LAIV does not contain thimerosal or other preservatives." Pregnant women have to get the shot, which in multi-dose vials contains the preservative.
  - yapcguy 13y ago
    Walgreens says about the nasal spray "It should not be used in pregnant women" which implies it is harmful in some way, does it not? http://www.walgreens.com/marketing/library/contents.jsp?docid=002025&doctype=1 http://www.walgreens.com/marketing/library/contents.jsp?doci... Flu shot by injection does contain thimerosal, unless you get the special version which doesn't. Walgreens and Safeway have a limited supply of it and people have to call ahead to get this special version. Given that an OB confirmed the above to me and I watched the OB's nurse administer a single shot without thimerosal, I think I'm more right than you on these matters.
    - ceejayoz 13y ago
      > Walgreens says about the nasal spray "It should not be used in pregnant women" which implies it is harmful in some way, does it not? Not at all. Sometimes medicines are contraindicated simply because there isn't enough study in the population at question. If the flu shot is known to be safe and the nasal, while believed to be safe, still needs more study in pregnant women, they'll recommend the shot. > Flu shot by injection does contain thimerosal, unless you get the special version which doesn't. Some of it does, some of it doesn't. It's a red herring - the safety of thimerosal is long since stablished, attempts from fraudsters like Wakefield notwithstanding. > Given that an OB confirmed the above to me Many OBs will spout the American theory that a single glass of red wine is bad for a baby, too. I'll trust the CDC over anecdotes from individual OBs.

DenisM 13y ago

Flu vaccines are 60% effective, so you're 60% less like to get sick after getting vaccinated. In layman terms, someone who normally gets sick 6 yeas out of 10 would now get sick only 2 years in the same period. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm?mobile=nocontent http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm?mobile=noc... The problem is not your ignorance (we're all ignoran of many things), it's the combination of ignorance, willingness to hold a strong opinion on the subject, and simultaneous lack of curiosity to explore the subject.

yapcguy 13y ago
Are you describing yourself in that last sentence? "The current flu shot is only 9% effective for the elderly and only 56% effective in general, according to CDC figures. CDC officials are baffled why the vaccine is so ineffective in the elderly." NYT And from the Lancet: "Background: No published meta-analyses have assessed efficacy and effectiveness of licensed influenza vaccines in the USA with sensitive and highly specific diagnostic tests to confirm influenza. Findings (Interpretation): Influenza vaccines can provide moderate protection against virologically confirmed influenza, but such protection is greatly reduced or absent in some seasons. Evidence for protection in adults aged 65 years or older is lacking. LAIVs consistently show highest efficacy in young children (aged 6 months to 7 years)." http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099%2811%2970295-X/abstract http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-30... Heck, if the flu vaccine is so good for you why is it that health-care workers and doctors can't be bothered to get it? http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2811%2961156-2/fulltext http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67...
- ceejayoz 13y ago
  > CDC officials are baffled why the vaccine is so ineffective in the elderly. The elderly having a weaker immune system is hardly new knowledge. It's one of the reasons the people they come into contact need vaccinations, so the elderly and young children benefit from herd immunity. > Influenza vaccines can provide moderate protection against virologically confirmed influenza, but such protection is greatly reduced or absent in some seasons. Hardly surprising or new info. They put a couple strains in the vaccine based on what they think will crop up that flu season. Sometimes it's wrong and the vaccine doesn't do much good. Sometimes a new threat like H1N1 come up mid-season and they make an additional one. > Heck, if the flu vaccine is so good for you why is it that health-care workers and doctors can't be bothered to get it? Because there are just as many idiot doctors and nurses as in the general population? You'll find people who don't believe in evolution as doctors and nurses, too. Hell, my wife's nursing textbook had analyzing auras as a possible care component.

mikeash 13y ago

The flu vaccine certainly is effective. It is not 100% effective, but it is still effective. Getting it makes you much less likely to catch the flu than not getting it. For vulnerable people, this greatly improves their chance of survival. For the rest of us, this greatly improves our chances of not spending a week in bed. Plus, if a significant proportion of the population gets the vaccine, that reduces the chance of it getting transmitted, making it even more effective. Speaking of cost, my HMO gives my family flu vaccines for free. The only reason they would do this is if they think it's cheaper for them overall, because the campaign reduces doctor visits. They may be motivated solely by profit, but in this case, their desire for profit lines up with my desire for health. I can't believe you seriously ask why kids are getting so many more vaccinations than before. You might as well ask why kids are getting so many more surgeries than before. Kids get more vaccines today because more vaccines are available. Obviously, kids weren't getting flu vaccines before the flu vaccine was actually developed.

yapcguy 13y ago
It's not effective. If brakes only operated 9% of the time, would they be effective? "The current flu shot is only 9% effective for the elderly and only 56% effective in general, according to CDC figures. CDC officials are baffled why the vaccine is so ineffective in the elderly." NYT And from the Lancet: "Background: No published meta-analyses have assessed efficacy and effectiveness of licensed influenza vaccines in the USA with sensitive and highly specific diagnostic tests to confirm influenza. Findings (Interpretation): Influenza vaccines can provide moderate protection against virologically confirmed influenza, but such protection is greatly reduced or absent in some seasons. Evidence for protection in adults aged 65 years or older is lacking. LAIVs consistently show highest efficacy in young children (aged 6 months to 7 years)." http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099%2811%2970295-X/abstract http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-30... Heck, if the flu vaccine is so good for you why is it that health-care workers and doctors can't be bothered to get it? http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2811%2961156-2/fulltext http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-67...
- ceejayoz 13y ago

DanBC 13y ago

> The Andrew Wakefield MMR-Autism paper has been discredited Wakefield was a swindling crook. http://tallguywrites.livejournal.com/148012.html http://tallguywrites.livejournal.com/148012.html > but it did make a lot of people ask questions. Easily answered questions > Why are kids today getting so many more vaccinations than before? Because we now have vaccinations that are safe and effective. The alternative is dead, or crippled, people. > Why are more kids getting diagnosed with autism? Because we have more doctors able to diagnose; we have diagnostic criteria; we have parental awareness. > Is there a causal link? No. > Why instead of single shots are different shots getting combined into one super cocktail - to save money, cut corners? Vaccines that are cheaper and more effective are a good thing. Someone would have to be some kind of fucking half-wit to think otherwise. EDIT: > If you read Ben Goldacre's books ... and came away thinking there's any serious risk from vaccinations then you need to re-read the books.