Viewing the message boards in:
Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Flu shots? For them or against ?

Options
1141517192042

Replies

  • Posts: 11,502 Member

    This really doesn't make sense to me. In both instances, the worst case scenario is that you will get the flu. If the vaccine is based on the "wrong" strains, you're in the same boat as the people who didn't get the vaccine at all. You're still not worse off than you would have been without the shot.

    But by choosing to get the shot, you increase your chances of the best outcome -- that you are able to avoid getting a case of the flu that you otherwise would have gotten (and you avoid passing it to other people in your community, people that may be more vulnerable). Some years you dramatically increase your chances of the best outcome, sometimes the increase isn't so great. But it's still a chance at the best outcome.

    Not getting the shot at all completely eliminates your chance at that outcome.

    My thoughts also, except if there are other factors - such as costs (financial or time) or fear of needles.
  • Posts: 8,436 Member
    mph323 wrote: »

    Yes, the bogus study that just won't DIE! Not only is it fear-mongering, it's guilt-mongering for the parents who vaccinated their children and later learned they were autistic. Unrelated, but there's this old discredited study out there that's telling them it's your fault

    Who says she is wrong ? Plenty private studies out there from country to country that get no news or internet coverage . I'd take someone's study that has nothing to gain over someone who has something to gain any day of the week .
  • Posts: 189 Member
    I had a health cousin die at 34 from the flu. She had no reason to think there was anything abnormal about the flu she had, called her husband at work to come home and take her to the doctor but was gone by the time he got home 30 minutes later. So...yeah. I get a flu shot and you all really should too. You could literally die from not getting one, or you could spread the flu and kill someone else.
  • Posts: 11,502 Member
    finny11122 wrote: »

    Who says she is wrong ? Plenty private studies out there from country to country that get no news or internet coverage . I'd take someone's study that has nothing to gain over someone who has something to gain any day of the week .

    Most studies published in the U.S. get no media attention. When a study does get picked up in the press, there is rarely enough detail to form a thorough understanding anyway. There are sufficient repositories of peer reviewed scientific journals. If a scholastic journal is difficult to find, though, then it would be difficult for other experts to contribute to a peer review process. And therefore, I would question an article published only in such a journal.
  • Posts: 62 Member
    ... or you could spread the flu and kill someone else.

    I've never been personally receptive to the flu; just doesn't make me sick generally. But I read about being a potential carrier while I was working with a gentleman who was undergoing chemo. Started getting them then. I don't get them consistently anymore, but that was an eye-opener at that time

  • Posts: 25,763 Member
    finny11122 wrote: »

    Who says she is wrong ? Plenty private studies out there from country to country that get no news or internet coverage . I'd take someone's study that has nothing to gain over someone who has something to gain any day of the week .

    What private studies are you referring to? Also, if they aren't covered at all by the media or if they aren't available online, how are you hearing about them?
  • Posts: 1,701 Member
    MeganAM89 wrote: »
    I really need to stop coming into this thread.

    Me too. I need to get out more.
  • Posts: 15,532 Member
    finny11122 wrote: »

    Who says she is wrong ? Plenty private studies out there from country to country that get no news or internet coverage . I'd take someone's study that has nothing to gain over someone who has something to gain any day of the week .

    Could you list some of these studies? I have database access and would be interested.
  • Posts: 10,476 Member
    I'm not for them (for me). They always seem to predict the wrong strand that will be super active (or don't have a vaccine prepared for whatever strand happens to be particularly virulent) that year. So I either get sick anyway or not at all (usually this one). Also, I despise being poked with needles and the nasal thing burns horribly every time I try. There's also the small matter that every time the "season" rolls around, the clinics around here never seem to have the vaccines in supply until half the population gets sick or we're halfway or more through it already. Not seeing how that's effective.

    Buuuut, I have nothing against flu vaccines or vaccines in general. They serve a purpose and I generally believe they are safe, but I don't feel a need to run out and get one every year.
  • Posts: 1,701 Member
    I guess I'm lucky because in the uk they are free for people at risk or who work/live with someone at risk. And for others it's not expensive
  • Posts: 8,159 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »

    No, the fact that there is absolutely no proof of even correlation found in any non-fraudulent research makes it untrue medically speaking.

    According to the CDC, 1 in 68 children has autism (https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html). That is 1.5% of children. Taking into consideration that there is a lower threshold for diagnosis now as opposed to previous generations so that % is inflated by comparison. And anywhere from 80-95% of children in the US get vaccinations (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/immunize.htm). If vaccinations cause autism, why do such a low % of children get autism. Aren't there countless other things that 1.5% of children might have in common, that the other 98.5% of children don't?

    I agree. There are only questions with no Yes/No answers.
  • Posts: 2,081 Member

    Nor does it make it untrue medically speaking.

    Study after study can't find a link between vaccines and autism. Some are very large studies.
  • Posts: 8,159 Member
    I expect the starting age of vaccinations maybe a factor in their possible side effect risks.
  • Posts: 3,685 Member
    MeganAM89 wrote: »
    I really need to stop coming into this thread.

    @MeganAM89 Me too... :disappointed:
  • Posts: 3,685 Member
    I'll just drop this here:

    https://youtu.be/Rzxr9FeZf1g
  • Posts: 1,701 Member
    Or how about " my mother smoked all her life and didn't get cancer,therefore smoking doesn't cause cancer "
  • Posts: 8,159 Member
    With so much fake science data out there what to do or not to do for our health is confusing at best.
  • Posts: 25,763 Member
    I expect the starting age of vaccinations maybe a factor in their possible side effect risks.

    What is the basis for that suspicion? Like, the scientific basis?
  • Posts: 21 Member
    I am for but can't have them :( If you have shellfish allergies watch out for A site reaction!!!
This discussion has been closed.