So do you agree that getting the flu shot is a gamble??? (which viruses are going to land here)

An Educated Guess. Yes. A gamble is going against long odds, whereas the 4 strains chosen by the CDC whatever year has factual basis to back it up. "This one is more motile, this one survives on surfaces better, ect."

It is like buying reman ammo. Are you likely going to be fine(No shot)? Yes. Would I buy reman ammo? Nah. Not worth the risk for me, I will take the safe route and buy new. (Get the shot)

There are statistically very few downsides to getting a flu shot, vs the upside of having a better chance at NOT getting the flu.

Correlation is not causation people. We remind the antigunners about this, we need to remember it too.

I'll assume you're asking me.

A gamble that it'll be the exact right anti-viral, yes, but that's how it's always been (Google cow pox) and until our computer modeling for making that estimate are vastly improved, it's the scientist's educated guess so it'll always be a somewhat of a gamble. No virus is guaranteed to work, but the greater majority do, which can be proven in double blind tests.

Is it a gamble with my health and those around me? Absolutely not.

Is it a gamble for some people's health? Absolutely, which is why herd immunity is so important. Those of us who can tolerate the vaccine protect those who can't by limiting the pool of available hosts. The smaller the attack surface or number of hosts, the less likely the virus can catch hold in the general population and spread. You don't necessarily get the vaccine for yourself, you get it for others who can't. This especially holds true for the very young, and the very old, and those with compromised immune systems.

Why do some people seem to get sick every (or most) years that they get the flu shot, but the same people don't seem to get sick at all when they skip it?
This seems to be a common complaint.
I am pro-science but also pro- individual choice. I cannot imagine living in a society that mandates and enforces catching humans and sliding a needle under their skin to inject a fluid that is someone's best guess.

Regardless of his vaccination record, I think I'd avoid him for a few dozen other reasons! Obviously he isn't going to catch the flu from farm animals (or zits) but there are a whole bunch of other things he could pick up from them, none of which humans are regularly innoculated against.

I'm familiar with how the flu strains are selected for each year's shots. But I guess that's my point about the people who scream that anti-vaxxers are the scum of the earth or sneer that anyone who gets a flu shot is brainwashed. A flu shot is an educated guess -- and in some years it's a guess that's very good and in others it has proven to be seriously off the mark. Even when the guess is good, the shot can still leave large gaps in its protection.

We're also talking about a) a disease scientists don't expect to eradicate with this vaccine (which means it's hardly analogous to the oft-cited polio vaccine), b) an illness that a huge portion of people survive just fine without any vaccination at all (if we use this thread's original stats as a marker, I doubt 40% of Americans will die of the flu this year), and c) a population that's so porous as to make any "herd immunity" discussion largely irrelevant. Travelers coming into the country aren't required to have proof of vaccination against the flu and Americans visiting other countries can easily pick up a strain that's not covered by this year's shot. Herd immunity requires stringent control over access to the herd by outside threat vectors, something that works reasonably well for cows and chickens but which a free country of humans absolutely can't (won't) replicate.

I'm not arguing for or against the flu shot. If you want the vaccine, get it. If you don't, don't. If you're part of a vulnerable population or live with someone who is, then that should probably factor into your decision. Your health is your business and I'm not a fan of interference in that. But if you get sick or if you don't, you have yourself to thank. Or maybe you have sheer luck or a poor guess to thank, and all your good intentions added up to squat. If you DO get sick, whether you got the shot or not, stay home and don't knowingly spread whatever you have. That goes for colds, the flu, and any other bug you might host.

I'm saying, not to anyone in particular but certainly to the people who have been deeply unpleasant in this thread: Is it really all that unreasonable for people to question how they take care of themselves? Obviously people will still think others are idiots because they do or don't get a flu shot. If you're someone who would like to change people's minds, then exercising some civility during those discussions would be appreciated (even if you think you're talking to a moron).

And thank you for your explanation, delliottg, it was very helpful.

If he got the flu shot, he'd be getting the same flu shot as you did.

So what you are saying in all the rest of that is... You are taking exactly the same chance with him, whether he has had the shot or not.

The ONLY benefit to him getting the shot, is that HE might not get that/those particular strains of the flu.

If you have the same shot, you have the same protection. Ergo, no extra benefit to you, that he got the shot.

In other words, if he gets the shot, he and you are now protected from the same things as the shot you yourself got, protects you from. Nothing more.

What you are worried about, is what is not covered by the shot. Which would remain exactly the same concern, whether he gets the shot or not.


You want the shot, get it. Now yer covered. Whether he gets it or not.

If he gets some strain that is not covered by the shot... He would have gotten it anyway, even if he himself had gotten the shot.




Demanding that he get the same shot, because you are worried about your own health, is kind of like demanding that his guns be taken away, because you don't have or want one.

And you are afraid of the unknown.

Flu = What other strain he might come down with. What other strains people have come down with.

Guns = What he might do with his guns. What others have already done with theirs.

If you had your own gun, (flu shot), you'd be protected to what extent is possible.

In neither case is it logical to worry about what he does, when you have already protected yourself.

The flu shot does not guarantee imunity to a disease. It does boost resistance, which means: it takes a higher pathogen load to successfully infect you, you will experience less severe symptoms, and the pathogen will not be able to reproduce as much in your body, which decreases the risk that you will transmit it to someone else.

If I were going to make a guess, it's not that they actually get sick after getting vaccinated, or they don't get sick when they don't, it's more confirmation bias. You haven't gotten a shot, and you get sick. You tend to not correlate that to any particular thing. But you do get your jab, and you get sick within some short-ish time frame afterward, ah-HAH, I got sick because of the shot.

Imagine you are thinking about buying an odd vehicle that's no longer made, say a VW Vanagon. Up till now, you'd never thought about getting one of those so you rarely saw them. Now that you're interested in one, they're everywhere! Why? Confirmation bias. (now you guys are going to start seeing them all over the place because it's in your head).

Good point... Confirmation bias is powerful stuff!

The greatest challenge that I faced was peeling back the layers of my own bias

I believe drugs make your immune system weak....as in muscles if you don't use them they grow weak......use it or lose it

The legend that pregnant women can't clean a cats litter box.

Toxoplasmosis is rare for working folks, they have probably already been exposed to it and developed an immunity to it.

I rarely wash my hands and I never get sick.

Don't click on this!!!!
NSFW, misogynist, sexual content, and in poor taste

Spoiler: show

I was fingering a lady and she said "Have you washed your hands?" I told her "I'm doing it now!"
True story.

It’s hard to keep up on this thread. Not enough time in the day.

I’ve spent my entire day pressure washing rotten chicken shit and vacuuming up wet decaying rodents out of a dump truck I bought from one of the largest chicken farms in the state.
I may have even scratched my ass and picked my nose a few times to!

Holy smokes! That's where all of this bird flu is coming from!

The reason anecdotal information is used because each side will adhere to the sources they believe and discredit the other side. Therefore a personal story is hard to disprove and provides a human face to the issue we face. And I am not a statistic, I am a human being.

Here are some vaccine inserts by the manufacturer:
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm

In reading thru the inserts, it is legalese to the risks involved and the probability of occurrence. You'd think that an insert directed to the consumer (you'd hope), it would be in mandatory to communicate the risks in an everyday manner.

One reason for reluctance on my part to trust the vaccine manufacturers is the laws protecting them from lawsuit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_ ... Injury_Act
https://www.policymed.com/2011/03/supre ... suits.html
and others

I did try to report my reactions to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System but it was onerous to use, took a lot of time and waiting around, and I did not have the time to follow through during my mobilizations. Nor did I have convenient access to a phone or email.

And autism rates are on the rise. The exact numbers are different on who you listen to, but even with the CDC's latest numbers in 2014:
http://time.com/5255729/us-autism-rates/
Approximately 1.7% — or 1 in 59 — of 8-year-old kids in 11 diverse communities across the U.S. could be identified as having autism in 2014
Really sucks to be a parent with an autistic kid.

CNN's poll is higher at 1 in 40:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/26/health/a ... nce-study/
In other words, the condition was reported in 2.5% of children, representing an estimated 1.5 million kids ages 3 to 17.

Who the heck is going to take care of 1-1.5 million soon to be adults in this country?!? What a drain on our resources! Why is this happening? Do you think we ought to try to solve it?

I'm open to any ideas why the autism rate goes higher, but the Amish do not have an incidence of autism. What do they do?

All of these are correlation not causation, nothing here compares the things directly. Nothing here directly ties vaccination to autism. You are just pointing out that Autism is on the rise.

They have nothing to do with one another in these studies or with these figures.

The Amish, do not report nor do they have a way of tracking such data. That is starting with a false narrative. Or we could say that Cell Phones cause Autism, hell semi auto firearms cause it. Because the Amish don't have those, and don't have autism. Therefore its the cause.

There has ever only been ONE study to show any relation to Autism and Vaccinations. Guess what, it was proven to be falsified. Only included 12 participants, the researcher was paid nearly a million dollars to come to that result. Not to mention that study was pulled back by the journal that published it!

So, I politely disregard your anecdotes in this thread on general Vaccination of the populace. I think you are working from bad data, and only want to find what you think will reinforce your position. Nor will you allow actual publications change your mind, as you have firmly formed your own opinion and do not wish to be open to change it.

That is your choice.