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 ?
Replies
-
If there was independent research that showed the cost/reward of flu shots as being positive it would be helpful.
That was the study out of an university in Europe that did show taking Vitamin D offered more protection from the flu viris than getting a flu shot. This subject seems to be more based on emotional positions than actual science.12 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »If there was independent research that showed the cost/reward of flu shots as being positive it would be helpful.
That was the study out of an university in Europe that did show taking Vitamin D offered more protection from the flu viris than getting a flu shot. This subject seems to be more based on emotional positions than actual science.
Did Vitamin D pay your fee this month?
And this is from someone who has been taking 400mg a day since May because I never see the sun in winter, and has had the flu once (already explained I can't get the shot due to a reaction) along with multiple colds, literally been sick almost non-stop since June. Full blood workups show all levels optimal.8 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »If there was independent research that showed the cost/reward of flu shots as being positive it would be helpful.
That was the study out of an university in Europe that did show taking Vitamin D offered more protection from the flu viris than getting a flu shot. This subject seems to be more based on emotional positions than actual science.
Yes I would agree that your position is based on emotion and not actual science.13 -
They're fine, I just don't get them myself. My parents never had me get them and I've literally never had the flu so I have never bothered. If I was older or got colds more often, I probably would, but I never catch anything that's going around.1
-
Alatariel75 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »If there was independent research that showed the cost/reward of flu shots as being positive it would be helpful.
That was the study out of an university in Europe that did show taking Vitamin D offered more protection from the flu viris than getting a flu shot. This subject seems to be more based on emotional positions than actual science.
Did Vitamin D pay your fee this month?
And this is from someone who has been taking 400mg a day since May because I never see the sun in winter, and has had the flu once (already explained I can't get the shot due to a reaction) along with multiple colds, literally been sick almost non-stop since June. Full blood workups show all levels optimal.
If you have been taking 400 mg daily for three months and can still post you may have set a medical record. Just 2.5 mg in one day equals 100,000 IU of Vitamin D3 taken.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »If there was independent research that showed the cost/reward of flu shots as being positive it would be helpful.
That was the study out of an university in Europe that did show taking Vitamin D offered more protection from the flu viris than getting a flu shot. This subject seems to be more based on emotional positions than actual science.
Did Vitamin D pay your fee this month?
And this is from someone who has been taking 400mg a day since May because I never see the sun in winter, and has had the flu once (already explained I can't get the shot due to a reaction) along with multiple colds, literally been sick almost non-stop since June. Full blood workups show all levels optimal.
If you have been taking 400 mg daily for three months and can still post you may have set a medical record. Just 2.5 mg in one day equals 100,000 IU of Vitamin D3 taken.
Apologies, I mistyped and meant 4000 IU per day. My point stands.3 -
I'm for them in theory. Three things stop me from getting them. First is I'm not 'high risk' meaning I can haev a flu for a few days and not be in serious condition. Second right now the CDC does a best guess on the strains that will likely hit in the flu season and their track record is under 50% accuracy. Third, in the US pharmacists at the chain stores have to have a quota of shots. So if you're at Rite Aid or CVS or Walgreens or wherever they will push you hard for it, their pay relies on it. That scares me as I wonder what are the chains getting from the pharmaceutical company to do that. So if I become high risk and/or the CDC has a better track record I'd change my position but until then, because of the last reason I pass on it. I do insist my elderly mother get it and I'm for all other immunizations proven to stop disease!5
-
FatAFNoMore wrote: »I'm for them in theory. Three things stop me from getting them. First is I'm not 'high risk' meaning I can haev a flu for a few days and not be in serious condition.
What about exposing vulnerable people in public to the virus -- elderly people who stand next to you in the grocery checkout line, for example?
9 -
They are free to get their shots as they are high risk. I do not oppose it for others. I am an avid hand washer and don't often touch my face so that is the best way to avoid being sick in my personal experience. Others may have less of a tolerance to germs and should then get the shot.2
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I said this upstream and I will repeat it again:
Anyone in this thread who is saying they had the flu who is willing to have it again...
NEVER HAD THE FLU.
If you were not praying for death, you did not have the flu. You had a bad cold. Full stop.
If you had ever had the flu, you would move heaven and earth to never, ever have it again and to ensure your children never had it.
It is awful.
I say this as a person with a very much above average pain/discomfort tolerance. I cite as reference the fact that I had a broken ankle that I soldiered through with just OTC pain meds and ice packs because I couldn't tolerate the prescription pain meds.
The real flu is not something people who have had it are blithe about.
^^ I agree with this.
I used to never get flu shots, for 2 reasons.
One, they scared me because when I was young, my mother had a reaction to a flu shot. She was intolerant to a lot of things like penicillin, so who knows what happened. This was decades ago. Second reason, I didn't get the shots because I almost never get sick with anything -- maybe a cold every 10 years.
Then I came down with the flu and was ghastly sick for 3 weeks. I'm a widow, live alone, and it would take me HOURS to work up the energy to get up and get something to drink. Friends who were concerned about me would leave takeout food and drinks on my porch because I wouldn't let them in the house. I had 103 fever and puked up everything for days.
That's why I get a flu shot now. The shot might not cover the flu strain going around, but then it might. Flu can weaken your heart and kill you.
II also know I have done the responsible thing in case I'm a carrier and not sick myself -- so I don't pass on this horrible virus to frail people in public places.8 -
FatAFNoMore wrote: »I'm for them in theory. Three things stop me from getting them. First is I'm not 'high risk' meaning I can haev a flu for a few days and not be in serious condition.
If you're sick for a few days you didn't have the flu.9 -
The only reason I get emotional about anti-vaxx is the virulent spread of misinformation. I take Vitamin D and I line up first day for flu shots.
The non-emotional reasons:
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/2/07-040089/en/11 -
FatAFNoMore wrote: »I'm for them in theory. Three things stop me from getting them. First is I'm not 'high risk' meaning I can haev a flu for a few days and not be in serious condition.
If you're sick for a few days you didn't have the flu.
I've had the flu. For my personal experience the absolute worst of it lasts 3-5 days, the next couple weeks are recovery but I can handle that without the shot. That's my personal decision. I'm not asking permission or forgiveness. My doctor and I are on the same page so that matters more than what the internet thinks.5 -
FatAFNoMore wrote: »They are free to get their shots as they are high risk. I do not oppose it for others. I am an avid hand washer and don't often touch my face so that is the best way to avoid being sick in my personal experience. Others may have less of a tolerance to germs and should then get the shot.
Excerpts from how flu spreads from the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). I broke up the paragraphs for easier reading.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/spread.htm
How Flu Spreads
People with flu can spread it to others up to about 6 feet away. Most experts think that flu viruses are spread mainly by droplets made when people with flu cough, sneeze or talk. These droplets can land in the mouths or noses of people who are nearby or possibly be inhaled into the lungs. Less often, a person might also get flu by touching a surface or object that has flu virus on it and then touching their own mouth or nose.
To avoid this, people should stay away from sick people and stay home if sick. It also is important to wash hands often with soap and water. If soap and water are not available, use an alcohol-based hand rub....
Most healthy adults may be able to infect other people beginning 1 day before symptoms develop and up to 5 to 7 days after becoming sick. Children may pass the virus for longer than 7 days.
Symptoms start 1 to 4 days after the virus enters the body. That means that you may be able to pass on the flu to someone else before you know you are sick, as well as while you are sick.
Some people can be infected with the flu virus but have no symptoms. During this time, those persons may still spread the virus to others.9 -
2
-
Not that you care, but here you go:GaleHawkins wrote: »If there was independent research that showed the cost/reward of flu shots as being positive it would be helpful.
https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2334-10-71
What study? Post it.That was the study out of an university in Europe that did show taking Vitamin D offered more protection from the flu viris than getting a flu shot.
Spectacularly wrong yet again. All the data supports getting a flu shot. But I understand you are emotionally tied to your Vit D nonsense even though there is no evidence supporting it.This subject seems to be more based on emotional positions than actual science.
8 -
The only reason I get emotional about anti-vaxx is the virulent spread of misinformation. I take Vitamin D and I line up first day for flu shots.
The non-emotional reasons:
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/2/07-040089/en/
Do you have a link that applies to the flu shots which is the subject of this thread?
If you find independent evidence of the validity of getting the flu shot please post but please do not keep trying to change the subject from the flu to other health conditions. There are places that I would not go without specific shots because of their need.
4 -
https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2334-10-71GaleHawkins wrote: »The only reason I get emotional about anti-vaxx is the virulent spread of misinformation. I take Vitamin D and I line up first day for flu shots.
The non-emotional reasons:
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/2/07-040089/en/
Do you have a link that applies to the flu shots which is the subject of this thread?
If you find independent evidence of the validity of getting the flu shot please post
You owe me a new irony meter with this line.but please do not keep trying to change the subject from the flu to other health conditions.
Still waiting for that study out of England showing that Vit D protects better than the flu shot.9 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I said this upstream and I will repeat it again:
Anyone in this thread who is saying they had the flu who is willing to have it again...
NEVER HAD THE FLU.
If you were not praying for death, you did not have the flu. You had a bad cold. Full stop.
If you had ever had the flu, you would move heaven and earth to never, ever have it again and to ensure your children never had it.
It is awful.
I say this as a person with a very much above average pain/discomfort tolerance. I cite as reference the fact that I had a broken ankle that I soldiered through with just OTC pain meds and ice packs because I couldn't tolerate the prescription pain meds.
The real flu is not something people who have had it are blithe about.
^^ I agree with this.
I used to never get flu shots, for 2 reasons.
One, they scared me because when I was young, my mother had a reaction to a flu shot. She was intolerant to a lot of things like penicillin, so who knows what happened. This was decades ago. Second reason, I didn't get the shots because I almost never get sick with anything -- maybe a cold every 10 years.
Then I came down with the flu and was ghastly sick for 3 weeks. I'm a widow, live alone, and it would take me HOURS to work up the energy to get up and get something to drink. Friends who were concerned about me would leave takeout food and drinks on my porch because I wouldn't let them in the house. I had 103 fever and puked up everything for days.
That's why I get a flu shot now. The shot might not cover the flu strain going around, but then it might. Flu can weaken your heart and kill you.
II also know I have done the responsible thing in case I'm a carrier and not sick myself -- so I don't pass on this horrible virus to frail people in public places.
THANK YOU, to you & @GottaBurnEmAll
Drives me bonkers when someone with a bad cold for 2-3 days or an upset stomach claims they had "the flu." I always ask if they had the actual scraping swab jammed up their nose for proper testing & usually get, "Uh, no...my doctor just said it's probably the flu..."
No. No, it's not. 6 -
Cost effectiveness; reduced hospitalizations, and increased productivity. Twenty minutes out of my day to prevent a week or more off work.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/keyfacts.htm5 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I said this upstream and I will repeat it again:
Anyone in this thread who is saying they had the flu who is willing to have it again...
NEVER HAD THE FLU.
If you were not praying for death, you did not have the flu. You had a bad cold. Full stop.
If you had ever had the flu, you would move heaven and earth to never, ever have it again and to ensure your children never had it.
It is awful.
I say this as a person with a very much above average pain/discomfort tolerance. I cite as reference the fact that I had a broken ankle that I soldiered through with just OTC pain meds and ice packs because I couldn't tolerate the prescription pain meds.
The real flu is not something people who have had it are blithe about.
^^ I agree with this.
I used to never get flu shots, for 2 reasons.
One, they scared me because when I was young, my mother had a reaction to a flu shot. She was intolerant to a lot of things like penicillin, so who knows what happened. This was decades ago. Second reason, I didn't get the shots because I almost never get sick with anything -- maybe a cold every 10 years.
Then I came down with the flu and was ghastly sick for 3 weeks. I'm a widow, live alone, and it would take me HOURS to work up the energy to get up and get something to drink. Friends who were concerned about me would leave takeout food and drinks on my porch because I wouldn't let them in the house. I had 103 fever and puked up everything for days.
That's why I get a flu shot now. The shot might not cover the flu strain going around, but then it might. Flu can weaken your heart and kill you.
II also know I have done the responsible thing in case I'm a carrier and not sick myself -- so I don't pass on this horrible virus to frail people in public places.
THANK YOU, to you & @GottaBurnEmAll
Drives me bonkers when someone with a bad cold for 2-3 days or an upset stomach claims they had "the flu." I always ask if they had the actual scraping swab jammed up their nose for proper testing & usually get, "Uh, no...my doctor just said it's probably the flu..." No. No, it's not.
Yeah, I got the flu in mid-June. I think I finally got over it my mid-August, and then got a cold. Today is actually the first day I've felt human, literally since the beginning of winter.2 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »The only reason I get emotional about anti-vaxx is the virulent spread of misinformation. I take Vitamin D and I line up first day for flu shots.
The non-emotional reasons:
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/2/07-040089/en/
Do you have a link that applies to the flu shots which is the subject of this thread?
If you find independent evidence of the validity of getting the flu shot please post but please do not keep trying to change the subject from the flu to other health conditions. There are places that I would not go without specific shots because of their need.
Here's more:
http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050211
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0066312
https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/184/6/665/841892/Influenza-Vaccine-Effectiveness-in-Preventing
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23966030
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24046301
Now how about posting that Vit D study?4 -
Not that you care, but here you go:GaleHawkins wrote: »If there was independent research that showed the cost/reward of flu shots as being positive it would be helpful.
https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2334-10-71
What study? Post it.That was the study out of an university in Europe that did show taking Vitamin D offered more protection from the flu viris than getting a flu shot.
Spectacularly wrong yet again. All the data supports getting a flu shot. But I understand you are emotionally tied to your Vit D nonsense even though there is no evidence supporting it.This subject seems to be more based on emotional positions than actual science.
I understand your need to think there are independent studies at support the valid of your views on flu shots but even your owe link above does not. You can keep trying to push a log chain uphill but the results will always be the same.
The Vit D study was posted in this thread last week. The fact that MD's do not support requiring mandatory flu shots should be a clue to the lack of medical value of the flu shots.
"Conclusions
This randomized, placebo-controlled trial showed that the average efficacy of TIV for the prevention of VMCCI over the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 influenza seasons was 46.3%. Although the differences between the vaccine and placebo groups in the primary endpoint did not meet the pre-defined criterion for success, the TIV clearly demonstrated clinical benefit (i.e. it was readily differentiated from placebo by all culture and/or laboratory-confirmed influenza endpoints) and the primary endpoint result must be interpreted with some caution in view of the very low influenza attack rates in both seasons; a factor which has previously been associated with low efficacy estimates in influenza vaccine trials. Furthermore, the immune responses to TIV fulfilled the licensure criteria for seasonal influenza vaccines [36]. Overall, TIV had a safety profile that was considered to be acceptable, and was consistent with other inactivated influenza vaccines."5 -
I posted other studies but you ignored those. The science is clear, flu shots work, no matter how much you deny it.GaleHawkins wrote: »
Not that you care, but here you go:GaleHawkins wrote: »If there was independent research that showed the cost/reward of flu shots as being positive it would be helpful.
https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2334-10-71
What study? Post it.That was the study out of an university in Europe that did show taking Vitamin D offered more protection from the flu viris than getting a flu shot.
Spectacularly wrong yet again. All the data supports getting a flu shot. But I understand you are emotionally tied to your Vit D nonsense even though there is no evidence supporting it.This subject seems to be more based on emotional positions than actual science.
I understand your need to think there are independent studies at support the valid of your views on flu shot
Yes, it does, but you just cherry picked the line that supports your ridiculous narrative and ignore the rest of it.but even your owe link above does not."Conclusions
This randomized, placebo-controlled trial showed that the average efficacy of TIV for the prevention of VMCCI over the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 influenza seasons was 46.3%. Although the differences between the vaccine and placebo groups in the primary endpoint did not meet the pre-defined criterion for success, the TIV clearly demonstrated clinical benefit (i.e. it was readily differentiated from placebo by all culture and/or laboratory-confirmed influenza endpoints) and the primary endpoint result must be interpreted with some caution in view of the very low influenza attack rates in both seasons; a factor which has previously been associated with low efficacy estimates in influenza vaccine trials. Furthermore, the immune responses to TIV fulfilled the licensure criteria for seasonal influenza vaccines [36]. Overall, TIV had a safety profile that was considered to be acceptable, and was consistent with other inactivated influenza vaccines."
I guess you didn't read the entire conclusion, it showed 46.3% efficacy. It works.The Vit D study was posted in this thread last week.
You mean this study that you keep droning on about:
http://www.bmj.com/content/356/bmj.i6583
I've asked you a couple of times to please point out in this study where it says Vit D protects better than the flu vaccine. So now put up or shut up, show me where it says that in this study or stop posting.
Again, logical fallacy, argument by assertion. I've asked you to provide evidence for this nonsense and yet you can't. Again, put up or shut up.The fact that MD's do not support requiring mandatory flu shots should be a clue to the lack of medical value of the flu shots9 -
Still waiting for that study out of England showing that Vit D protects better than the flu shot.
Great posts, but also I'm wondering where it was made law that one can only take Vit D OR get a flu shot. I take Vit D in the winter, and no one told me I was doing that instead of the flu shot and therefore cannot get one.
This Vit D distraction is 100% irrelevant to the thread.8 -
John are you even reading the links you are posting? I think many of us have had a need to beleive government marketing materials to sell the public on getting the flu shots even when they are paid for by all tax payers.
Your link journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050211 states the below:
"..... Limitations of this study include the ecological study design, the nonspecific outcomes, difficulty in modeling baseline events, data quality and availability, and the inability to control for potentially important confounders.
Conclusions
Compared to targeted programs in other provinces, introduction of universal vaccination in Ontario in 2000 was associated with relative reductions in influenza-associated mortality and health care use. The results of this large-scale natural experiment suggest that universal vaccination may be an effective public health measure for reducing the annual burden of influenza.
John do you agree "may be" and "may not be" terms are not medical proof of anything?
You may want to read the full study details from your link including this:
"Funding: This study was supported by an operating grant from the Public Health Agency of Canada, a Fellowship Award (to JCK), a Canada Research Chair Award in Primary Care Research (to REGU), and a Chair in Applied Public Health (to DGM) from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and a Career Scientist Award from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (to DGM). The Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) is supported in part by a grant from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The findings and conclusions in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, or Manitoba Health and Healthy Living.
Competing interests: AJM reports receiving travel grants from Sanofi Pasteur and Solvay Pharmaceuticals for speaking at meetings, and payment from Sanofi Pasteur for chairing a safety committee for a clinical trial."
ALL researchers with advanced degrees know you throw a marketing bone to the people paying your house and car payments. "May Be" terms about results are red flags to healthcare workers.
Grant results that dump on the ones paying for the studies can (not may be) put you at risk of getting your next research grant.
Missing the red flags can be of concern.
4 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Still waiting for that study out of England showing that Vit D protects better than the flu shot.
Great posts, but also I'm wondering where it was made law that one can only take Vit D OR get a flu shot. I take Vit D in the winter, and no one told me I was doing that instead of the flu shot and therefore cannot get one.
This Vit D distraction is 100% irrelevant to the thread.
The major distraction no one has posted medical proof that getting the flu shot is of any net medical value.
In the USA access to Vitamin D3 is not under the control of our government. While there is evidence Vitamin D3 can be of value for many medical conditions its main use seems to prevent our bones from thinning and breaking as we age.4 -
100% for them! I never miss getting one and I have never had the flu.
My 7 year old got his flu shot last fall and still got the flu this past spring, but he got a mild case and missed a day of school. So yes, you can still get it, but I'm certain his would have knocked him out for a week without the shot.4 -
This content has been removed.
-
TeacupsAndToning wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Still waiting for that study out of England showing that Vit D protects better than the flu shot.
Great posts, but also I'm wondering where it was made law that one can only take Vit D OR get a flu shot. I take Vit D in the winter, and no one told me I was doing that instead of the flu shot and therefore cannot get one.
This Vit D distraction is 100% irrelevant to the thread.
The major distraction no one has posted medical proof that getting the flu shot is of any net medical value.
In the USA access to Vitamin D3 is not under the control of our government. While there is evidence Vitamin D3 can be of value for many medical conditions its main use seems to prevent our bones from thinning and breaking as we age.
I'm not sure what you've been reading for the past 32 pages but a lot of people have posted this, and multiple people have asserted that you've just ignored it.
Notice I said "any net medical value". I am still looking to find a study that does prove the net value of flu shots.
If one wants to take the flu shots I think they should because if doing so brings some peace of mind then it could be of net medical value. It seems most medical conditions may be triggered first from a mental state over time.7
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions