Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And I developed GBS nearly a year before the swine flu vaccine. Since GBS is an autoimmune reaction, it's hard to see how the swine flu vaccine could cause a reaction three years later. Glad your brother pulled through, fortunately most people do. Pretty scary while it's happening for sure.
I had a terrible reaction to the swine flu vaccine and never took another vaccine because of that.
Years later, my son had GBS and recovered after several months and was able to walk again. However, part of me has always wondered if that vaccine did something to my eggs that would later give him the tendency to develop GBS.
That article is 4 years old, although no less true. 40 years ago. Do you think some had a bad outcome to an experimental vaccine 140 years ago? Maybe that's still relevant too. Point is - life is never without risk. Ever.
You have to weigh the collective good against the bad - as an administrator and policy maker.
For most of us - the (potential) patients - are choices are Do Nothing - Or - Do Something. And if we do nothing and we get sick or don't get sick, then, eh, such is life.
But if you're a leader - Doing Nothing IS doing something. If folks die because you did nothing - then you - literally - are responsible for those deaths. If you do something and people suffer - then you are responsible for those too.
So you play the odds - and the odds, in this case - are clear. More than 500,000 (USA) would have to die BECAUSE OF the vaccine - before you can say you made the wrong choice. Will that happen? Well, no one knows, obviously, but you use your resources to make the best decision. Can doing NOTHING kill 500,000 more? You betcha. Already proved that one.
So for the leaders - the decision is easy: Take the Vaccine. Recommend the Vaccine. Produce the Vaccine.
In 1976, the "other " consequence never materialized. If it did - and deaths in the USA rose by 15% the preceding year - and the vaccine put an end to it - probably no one would remember they got GBS. Or, if the price of 500K lives was 500 cases of GBS - then that's a compromise most would accept. Life is full of risks. It's pretty clear right now that the risk from covid is greater than the risk from the vaccine. Anyone who says or feels otherwise does not really have anything on their side but bad feelings, a gut instinct, a distrust of gov't., or whatever - but it's not science. Ya got none of that on your side, if you fear the vaccine but not the virus.
I think it's too early to tell just how effective the Covid vaccines are going to be against the virus. The situation in the US today is nothing like it was 12 months ago with regard to the virus. Many more people today have SOME immunity to the virus and most of that has come from them having contracted the virus and survived it. Others, a growing number to be sure, are gaining immunity from the vaccine. At the present time, we don't really know how long the immunity will last from either of those situations.
There is no proof of any kind that no one would have died from the virus had they all been vaccinated 12+ months ago. The spread of the virus is MUCH slower today thanks mostly to there being fewer people who are vulnerable to the virus due to their having already had the virus or have recently had the vaccine.
It also could be posited that the virus has already spread through the greatest concentrations of vulnerable people (the elderly with comorbidities), and the most vulnerable have already contracted it or at a minimum been exposed to it. The most vulnerable succumbed to it and the more hardy ones survived... many without even showing symptoms.
So, the situation today is not at all comparable to 12+ months ago. Arguably, probably 80 to 90% of the population today have ALREADY been exposed to the virus, so most of the people getting the vaccine today are ones who were already exposed to it and didn't catch it. So if they don't catch it in the next 12 months, we can't say with certainty that it was because they got the vaccine. It may well be that they already had been exposed to it, and perhaps already HAD the virus, but showed little or no signs at all of having it.
To put it in a more morbid way, the Grim Reaper has already harvested the easy pickings. Any future harvests will be slim at best due BOTH to people having already had the virus and survived PLUS the vaccine increasing the number of those with immunity. As predicted, herd immunity is just around the corner unless a different strain of the virus presents and proves to be even more deadly than the first strain and also proves to be resistant to the current vaccines... in which case, getting the vaccine would do no good anyway.
Bumping thread..
My opinion, whether a person is fundamentally for, or against, the current vaccine.. the story of the 1976 vaccination effort should be referenced more. It's a glaring omission in the media's narrative/vaccination endorsement.. and ironic, since mainstream media was once upon a time (foremost) skeptical of the CDC. But perhaps their skepticism was cynically underwritten by a desire to embarrass Ford (?)
The flu vax is a fine example of the power of the lobbyist money in Congress and the perversion of science by lawyers.
That first effort by the gov to force everyone to take a flu vax unfortunately occurred when the strain involved had an increased propensity to result in GBS. (GBS is far from rare as a consequence of any infection, not at all limited to flu or the vax.)
The flu vax was first marketed to Congress as a way to "keep workers on the job"..The lawyers soon perverted that to "prevent death." The problem is , it doesn't prevent death. The data consistently shows that death from flu only goes down in the eldest of the age quintiles (80+)-- and that's probably erroneous-- An elderly person who dies with a viral pneumonia and has had a flu shot will not be signed out by the physician as "Influenza" even tho he has no lab proof one way or the other.
Flu vax is only 50% effective at preventing the flu, and only about 15% of Americans get the shot each year. There is limited medical justification for a doctor prescribing it, but unlimited legal jeopardy for not prescribing it.
The exact cause of Guillain-Barre syndrome is unknown. But two-thirds of patients report symptoms of an infection in the six weeks preceding. These include respiratory or a gastrointestinal infection or Zika virus.
Its interesting to read the history of the polio vaccine. Certainly very successful but if you follow the history over years there was always concerns about the Sabin vaccine due to it being a live virus and its side effects.. It wasnt until 2000 that the sabin was discontinued and the govt went back to a improved Salk made in the Netherlands. But it doesnt seem like there were many cases of polio coming from the vaccine and yet the fda was very concerned.
Fast forward to today and the side effects of Pfizer esp the myocarditis and blood clots and yet the fda doesnt seem to have many concerns at all. Whats the difference?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
