Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 41
- 91
Why waste the time and money? Nasal spray isn't given for free and my insurance only covers the shot.
ZV
ZV
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Are you seriously suggesting that the flu shot causes people to get the flu and that the entire medical field has never noticed this happening??
I think the real concern is why didn't the people who are most at risk from dying of the flu get the shot?
TraumaRN
Diamond Member
- Jun 5, 2005
- 6,893
- 63
- 91
Usually because they either cant get out to get it, they refuse, or something along those lines. At my hospital we are starting flu shots again on October 1st(I think) And it's standard Op at my hospital that we offer the flu and pneumonia vaccine to EVERYONE, high risk or not.
Wow - another person that believes isolated, possibly coincidental personal experience trumps large, structured, controlled, peer-reviewed studies.
Would a shot work for someone who is immunodepressed for some reason? Seems like, by definition, it wouldn't work or at least not as well.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Thanks, that's exactly what I was trying to say. But, it's amazing how people can see patterns that aren't there; when something has convinced them that they do in fact exist.
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,138
- 18,685
- 146
They are strongly recommended for people with AIDS, so I would say yes.
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/hiv-flu.htm
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 41
- 91
That's a week's worth of dinners. Or a half tank of gas. Or a night out to the movies with the girlfriend. Or any number of other things that offer a real and immediate benefit to me.
If I'm following Ayn Rand's Objectivism, why should I choose to spend any money or time on something that doesn't benefit me personally? I mean, following Rand's logic to it's only conclusion, healthy people shouldn't bother with a flu shot. It will cost them time and money but isn't even an indirect benefit to them. In fact, it's a negative benefit since they would not have gotten the flu anyway, but the shot will induce symptoms that inconvenience the healthy person.
Or is it that this instance shows that following Objectivism is just a wee bit foolish?
ZV
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,138
- 18,685
- 146
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
That's a week's worth of dinners. Or a half tank of gas. Or a night out to the movies with the girlfriend. Or any number of other things that offer a real and immediate benefit to me.
If I'm following Ayn Rand's Objectivism, why should I choose to spend any money or time on something that doesn't benefit me personally? I mean, following Rand's logic to it's only conclusion, healthy people shouldn't bother with a flu shot. It will cost them time and money but isn't even an indirect benefit to them. In fact, it's a negative benefit since they would not have gotten the flu anyway, but the shot will induce symptoms that inconvenience the healthy person.
Or is it that this instance shows that following Objectivism is just a wee bit foolish?
ZV
Not at all. Your assumption that it doesn't benefit you is wrong.
Having the flu sucks.
Having loved ones die from the flu sucks.
Losing business/income/employees to those bed ridden by the flu sucks.
Taking up the slack from sick coworkers sucks.
There are some very selfish reasons for taking it, and urging others to do the same. The problem is, you aren't thinking wide enough in your selfishness.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 41
- 91
Ahh, but as a healthy 24 year old, I'm not likely to have the flu, so the first point is a non-issue.Originally posted by: Amused
Not at all. Your assumption that it doesn't benefit you is wrong.
Having the flu sucks.
Having loved ones die from the flu sucks.
Losing business/income/employees to those bed ridden by the flu sucks.
Taking up the slack from sick coworkers sucks.
There are some very selfish reasons for taking it. The problem is, you aren't thinking wide enough in your selfishness.
I live on the opposite side of the country from my family, so my getting or not getting a flu shot won't impact them because I can't pass the virus over the phone.
I work for a cell phone company, we don't lose business from people being sick, they still pay their monthly bills. And our retail reps are young and healthy like me.
My co-workers are not in high risk demographics for the flu, for practical purposes, they can be assumed to be at no risk.
No, from a selfish perspective, I'm better off just convincing the rest of you to get the shot and therefore make myself able to avoid it.
Now, if we were following Kant's categorical imperative (act in such a way that you could will your actions to be universal), then I'd be morally wrong, but Objectivism supports me in my current situation.
ZV
Gibsons
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2001
- 12,530
- 35
- 91
There's immune depression and severe immune depression.... It can work in immune depressed individuals, but in cases of full-blown AIDS, I suspect it might be useless. CD4 T cells are essential for an immune response to a vaccine, and advanced cases of AIDS have close to zero CD4 cells.
Gibsons
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2001
- 12,530
- 35
- 91
The 1918 influenza pandemic was rather notorious for killing young, otherwise healthy individuals. You're not as bulletproof as you think.Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Ahh, but as a healthy 24 year old, I'm not likely to have the flu, so the first point is a non-issue.Originally posted by: Amused
Not at all. Your assumption that it doesn't benefit you is wrong.
Having the flu sucks.
Having loved ones die from the flu sucks.
Losing business/income/employees to those bed ridden by the flu sucks.
Taking up the slack from sick coworkers sucks.
There are some very selfish reasons for taking it. The problem is, you aren't thinking wide enough in your selfishness.
I live on the opposite side of the country from my family, so my getting or not getting a flu shot won't impact them because I can't pass the virus over the phone.
I work for a cell phone company, we don't lose business from people being sick, they still pay their monthly bills. And our retail reps are young and healthy like me.
My co-workers are not in high risk demographics for the flu, for practical purposes, they can be assumed to be at no risk.
No, from a selfish perspective, I'm better off just convincing the rest of you to get the shot and therefore make myself able to avoid it.
Now, if we were following Kant's categorical imperative (act in such a way that you could will your actions to be universal), then I'd be morally wrong, but Objectivism supports me in my current situation.
ZV
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,138
- 18,685
- 146
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Ahh, but as a healthy 24 year old, I'm not likely to have the flu, so the first point is a non-issue.Originally posted by: Amused
Not at all. Your assumption that it doesn't benefit you is wrong.
Having the flu sucks.
Having loved ones die from the flu sucks.
Losing business/income/employees to those bed ridden by the flu sucks.
Taking up the slack from sick coworkers sucks.
There are some very selfish reasons for taking it. The problem is, you aren't thinking wide enough in your selfishness.
I live on the opposite side of the country from my family, so my getting or not getting a flu shot won't impact them because I can't pass the virus over the phone.
I work for a cell phone company, we don't lose business from people being sick, they still pay their monthly bills. And our retail reps are young and healthy like me.
My co-workers are not in high risk demographics for the flu, for practical purposes, they can be assumed to be at no risk.
No, from a selfish perspective, I'm better off just convincing the rest of you to get the shot and therefore make myself able to avoid it.
Now, if we were following Kant's categorical imperative (act in such a way that you could will your actions to be universal), then I'd be morally wrong, but Objectivism supports me in my current situation.
ZV
Your first assumption is wrong.
Young healthy immune systems are no more immune to infection from the flu virus than anyone else. They are only less likely to die from serious complications. One can only have an acquired immunity to the specific flu virus they are exposed to. No one has a natural immunity.
If one person came into your office with the flu, the majority of you would come down with it.
Having the flu still sucks.
I have had the flu shot 3 times, and i got the flu twice withing a few days of the immunization. The only reason i didn't get sick the 3rd time was because it was the same flu shot as number 2, they just didn't but it in my record.
I am not saying i got sick from the shot, but merely that taxing my immune system to counter the shot left my body vulnerable. In fact the only times in the last 5 years that i have been sick enough to miss work has been from the first two flu shots.... Go figure.
I am not saying i got sick from the shot, but merely that taxing my immune system to counter the shot left my body vulnerable. In fact the only times in the last 5 years that i have been sick enough to miss work has been from the first two flu shots.... Go figure.
OutHouse
Lifer
- Jun 5, 2000
- 36,410
- 616
- 126
The medical community seems divided about the appropriateness of flu shots. While some research has shown that these immunizations may be beneficial for the elderly and immuno-compromised individuals, other research suggests that these shots are mostly ineffective. According to Richard Jedelsohn, MD, Associate Chairman of the New York State Immunization Advisory Council, 30% of these vaccines are not effective. In higher-risk groups, which include the people who are most in need of protection, flu and pneumonia vaccines are 50-60% ineffective. Doctors see many patients with the flu who have had their flu shot.
{Let?s Live magazine, by the Editor, Jan. 2000}
The FDA estimates that less than 10% of physicians report vaccine adverse effects, so when we are told that the benefits of a flu vaccination outweigh the risks, no one knows what the true risks are.
Congress and the American taxpayer have been defrauded about the alleged advantages of flu shots. Instead of being an effective prevention, evidence indicates that flu shots may be worthless. The benefit is for those who make money from them.
{?Flu shots? Do they really Work?? Dr. Kristine Severyn, RPh, PhD, founder and Director of Vaccine Policy Institute}
?I have heard from people who did get their flu shots and they still have come down with influenza, really feeling bad, having headaches and fever, and muscle aches,? says Joe Graedon. Dr. Sidney Wolfe of the Health Research Group advised not to use the new flu drugs because they are not effective. There are some reports that pain relievers like aspirin, acetaminophen, and ibuprofen, may increase viral replication.
{?People?s Pharmacy,? Jan. 22, 2000. Public Radio}
The influenza shot prevents the flu in only about 30 to 40% of the elderly population. In fact, getting vaccinated could give these people a false sense of protection, which might lead them to be less cautious. The flu shot does not protect a person from getting a host of other upper-respiratory-tract infections that also commonly circulate during the winter season. Although the CDC claims the flu vaccine is safe, a large body of anecdotal evidence shows a link between the flu shot and Guillain-Barre syndrome (which causes muscle weakness, pain and paralysis). It often takes weeks after any vaccination for disorders to become apparent.
{?Shots in the Dark,? Natural Health magazine, Nov./Dec. 1999}
The Wall Street Journal suggested that there isn't as much flu as there is advertising about the flu. Some doctors think it is less a matter of medicine than of marketing, and consumer groups say it?s all hype. They argue that the new drugs are expensive and they don't even work very well. Dr. Sydney Wolfe says the drug companies are inflaming people?s worries about the flu in order to sell their drugs. Doctors agree that the flu is serious, but some say the drug companys' campaign has reached epidemic proportions.
{?Flu Epidemic May Be Just a Flu Advertisement,? ?Outrage of the Month,? Public Citizen?s Health Letter. Taken from ABC World News Tonight story on Jan.11, 2000, with Peter Jennings and Ned Potter}
In the 1976 ?Swine Flu Fiasco,? medical officers warned that the ?swine flu? would be one of the worst epidemics in medical history, and millions of dollars were appropriated by Congress to develop and administer a vaccine to prepare for this ?killer flu.? Only a total of six cases were reported, but the ?swine flu? vaccine reportedly caused 565 cases of Guillain-Barre paralysis, 30 to 60 deaths and numerous other problems, including blindness and impotency. Although improvements have been made in flu vaccines since 1976, any and all flu vaccines are capable of causing Guillain-Barre.
Leon Chaitow in his book, ?Vaccinations and Immunizations: Dangers, Delusions and Alternatives,? says that there is strong evidence to link vaccines with allergies. For example, those adults receiving flu immunizations have shown a worsening of allergic symptoms. In one survey this occurred in six out of every seven people who were immunized, as well as a worsening of other symptoms. Chaitow also explains the ?Provocation Disease,? in which a vaccination against one disease leaves the body more susceptible to another disease. This occurs when there is a latent or incubating infection already present.
{?Vaccinations - Deception and Tragedy,? Michael Dye. 1999}
An article in ?The Lancet,? on ?Vaccination and the control of influenza,? described the effect of influenza vaccination on staff in the Post Office. After comparing absences due to sicknesses in over 50,000 employees in both the vaccinated and unvaccinated, it was concluded that the flu shots did not result in a significant reduction in flu. The effectiveness levels of flu vaccine can be down as low as 30%. Ever since the flu vaccine was introduced, published reports of ineffectiveness and adverse reactions, including deaths, were filling medical journals. Mass influenza immunization programs, instead of protecting, actually predispose many people to the disease and made them susceptible through the process of desensitization to serious, and indeed, fatal outcomes.
Legionnaires? Disease outbreaks (even in different parts of the U.S.) coincide with flu vaccine injections.
{?Vaccination - 100 years of Orthodox Research shows that Vaccines Represent A Medical Assault on the Immune System,? by Viera Scheibner, PhD 1993}
Researchers have identified a lowering of the body?s resistance resulting from vaccinations.
{?Vaccines: Are they really safe and effective?? Neil Miller. 1995}
{Let?s Live magazine, by the Editor, Jan. 2000}
The FDA estimates that less than 10% of physicians report vaccine adverse effects, so when we are told that the benefits of a flu vaccination outweigh the risks, no one knows what the true risks are.
Congress and the American taxpayer have been defrauded about the alleged advantages of flu shots. Instead of being an effective prevention, evidence indicates that flu shots may be worthless. The benefit is for those who make money from them.
{?Flu shots? Do they really Work?? Dr. Kristine Severyn, RPh, PhD, founder and Director of Vaccine Policy Institute}
?I have heard from people who did get their flu shots and they still have come down with influenza, really feeling bad, having headaches and fever, and muscle aches,? says Joe Graedon. Dr. Sidney Wolfe of the Health Research Group advised not to use the new flu drugs because they are not effective. There are some reports that pain relievers like aspirin, acetaminophen, and ibuprofen, may increase viral replication.
{?People?s Pharmacy,? Jan. 22, 2000. Public Radio}
The influenza shot prevents the flu in only about 30 to 40% of the elderly population. In fact, getting vaccinated could give these people a false sense of protection, which might lead them to be less cautious. The flu shot does not protect a person from getting a host of other upper-respiratory-tract infections that also commonly circulate during the winter season. Although the CDC claims the flu vaccine is safe, a large body of anecdotal evidence shows a link between the flu shot and Guillain-Barre syndrome (which causes muscle weakness, pain and paralysis). It often takes weeks after any vaccination for disorders to become apparent.
{?Shots in the Dark,? Natural Health magazine, Nov./Dec. 1999}
The Wall Street Journal suggested that there isn't as much flu as there is advertising about the flu. Some doctors think it is less a matter of medicine than of marketing, and consumer groups say it?s all hype. They argue that the new drugs are expensive and they don't even work very well. Dr. Sydney Wolfe says the drug companies are inflaming people?s worries about the flu in order to sell their drugs. Doctors agree that the flu is serious, but some say the drug companys' campaign has reached epidemic proportions.
{?Flu Epidemic May Be Just a Flu Advertisement,? ?Outrage of the Month,? Public Citizen?s Health Letter. Taken from ABC World News Tonight story on Jan.11, 2000, with Peter Jennings and Ned Potter}
In the 1976 ?Swine Flu Fiasco,? medical officers warned that the ?swine flu? would be one of the worst epidemics in medical history, and millions of dollars were appropriated by Congress to develop and administer a vaccine to prepare for this ?killer flu.? Only a total of six cases were reported, but the ?swine flu? vaccine reportedly caused 565 cases of Guillain-Barre paralysis, 30 to 60 deaths and numerous other problems, including blindness and impotency. Although improvements have been made in flu vaccines since 1976, any and all flu vaccines are capable of causing Guillain-Barre.
Leon Chaitow in his book, ?Vaccinations and Immunizations: Dangers, Delusions and Alternatives,? says that there is strong evidence to link vaccines with allergies. For example, those adults receiving flu immunizations have shown a worsening of allergic symptoms. In one survey this occurred in six out of every seven people who were immunized, as well as a worsening of other symptoms. Chaitow also explains the ?Provocation Disease,? in which a vaccination against one disease leaves the body more susceptible to another disease. This occurs when there is a latent or incubating infection already present.
{?Vaccinations - Deception and Tragedy,? Michael Dye. 1999}
An article in ?The Lancet,? on ?Vaccination and the control of influenza,? described the effect of influenza vaccination on staff in the Post Office. After comparing absences due to sicknesses in over 50,000 employees in both the vaccinated and unvaccinated, it was concluded that the flu shots did not result in a significant reduction in flu. The effectiveness levels of flu vaccine can be down as low as 30%. Ever since the flu vaccine was introduced, published reports of ineffectiveness and adverse reactions, including deaths, were filling medical journals. Mass influenza immunization programs, instead of protecting, actually predispose many people to the disease and made them susceptible through the process of desensitization to serious, and indeed, fatal outcomes.
Legionnaires? Disease outbreaks (even in different parts of the U.S.) coincide with flu vaccine injections.
{?Vaccination - 100 years of Orthodox Research shows that Vaccines Represent A Medical Assault on the Immune System,? by Viera Scheibner, PhD 1993}
Researchers have identified a lowering of the body?s resistance resulting from vaccinations.
{?Vaccines: Are they really safe and effective?? Neil Miller. 1995}
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter