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.
You are still trying to ignore the fact that most people who take the vaccine will not catch the flu and therefore will not spread it. In the preschool age group, the intranasal vaccine is about 85% effective, much better than the overall average. You are focusing on the less likely scenario. It's as if you can only see the 15% who might catch the flu even though they have been vaccinated and you are totally blind to the 85% who will not get it.
The chances of catching the flu are pretty low no matter one's vaccination status and no matter how the statistics are skewed.
"In a four-year randomized, placebo-controlled study of inactivated and live influenza vaccines among children aged 1–15 years, vaccine efficacy was estimated at 77% against influenza A (H3N2) and 91% against influenza A (H1N1) virus infection (Neuzil et al., 2001)."
[Some shorter studies had lower efficacy rates.]
"Because LAIV (nasal spray) vaccine was licensed more recently than inactivated vaccines, there are more data available on its effects from large randomized trials. For example, a RCT conducted among 1,602 healthy children initially aged 15–71 months assessed the efficacy of trivalent LAIV against culture-confirmed influenza during two seasons (Belshe et al., 1998; 2000). In season one, when vaccine and circulating virus strains were well-matched, efficacy in preventing laboratory-confirmed illness from influenza was 93% for participants who received two doses of LAIV. In season two, when the A (H3N2) component was not well-matched between vaccine and circulating virus strains, efficacy was 86% overall."
So, in young children the vaccine is more effective than the overall average.
Increasing vaccination rates to a level that would provide herd immunity would result in many fewer influenza victims, hospitalizations, and deaths.
You don't think so? I have seen so much contradictory information coming from different studies. The researchers often find themselves in heavy disagreement.
Quote:
Your daughter caught it despite your family's "healthy" life style, didn't she?
Yes. I have never expected a "healthy lifestyle" to stop the flu but I do believe that it will help to fight it and avoid serious complications and death. I have been clear about that.
Quote:
The chances of a child under five years old catching it with the vaccine are 85% less than the chances without it.
Again, it depends on what studies you are looking at.
Look what happens when you leave for a few hours, to buy your seeds and plants for the garden! (Yes, I have a life!) I'm going to divide my multiquotes into two categories, general lack of knowledge, and lack of knowledge about the much-celebrated "immune system". First category:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Are you in favor of legislating health decisions for all? I'm not. People can choose to take care of their own health in the way that they see fit. Or not. It's not up to me what others decide to do with their bodies. I would hope that they would choose a healthy lifestyle and I would hope that they would stay home when sick but I recognize that I have zero control over those things.
As for your eye roll, is that your way of denying that vaccinated people are capable of infecting others? Because they absolutely can.
I can't answer for Zimbochick, though we agree on immunization principles, so I'll answer for myself. I'm in favor of legislation that benefits the public. In this case, that means mandatory immunizations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
It's limiting people's choices.
If people who get the flu vaccine can get the flu then they can most certainly spread the flu. I'm not talking about vaccine shedding.
Choices to spread disease.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
That is quite different and I assume you know that.
The flu vaccine is around 65% effective (I don't recall the exact number) according to a poster on this thread. Are you really saying that those who contract the flu despite getting the vaccine cannot spread the flu? Your reply to me indicates that you seem to be stuck on the shedding aspect which I already told you is not what I'm talking about.
LOL, the old "that's different"! The fact that you're not talking about shedding virus shows you don't know much about how flu spreads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
The chances of catching the flu are pretty low no matter one's vaccination status and no matter how the statistics are skewed.
That's a good one! http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...65177938,d.aWc "Age-specific influenza attack rates were based on surveillance
studies and published literature [5,6–8]. Attack rates
ranged from 6.6% (range: 2.6%–15.5%) for working-age
adults to 20.3% (range: 7.5%–25.8%) for children under 5
years old."
Now to people with no background in epidemiology, these numbers may not seem high, but they are, and note that children under 5 (the kids being discussed in this thread, day care attendees) have a rate about three times that of working-age adults.
The conclusion of this study is:
**Based on 2003 US population, we estimated that annual influenza epidemics resulted in an average of 610,660 life-years lost
(undiscounted), 3.1 million hospitalized days, and 31.4 million outpatient visits. Direct medical costs averaged $10.4 billion (95% confidence
interval [C.I.], $4.1, $22.2) annually. Projected lost earnings due to illness and loss of life amounted to $16.3 billion (C.I., $8.7, $31.0) annually.
The total economic burden of annual influenza epidemics using projected statistical life values amounted to $87.1 billion (C.I., $47.2, $149.5).
Conclusions: These results highlight the enormous annual burden of influenza in the US. While hospitalization costs are important contributors, lost productivity from missed work days and lost lives comprise the bulk of the economic burden of influenza.**
This includes missed work days due to taking care of sick children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
You don't think so? I have seen so much contradictory information coming from different studies. The researchers often find themselves in heavy disagreement.
Yes. I have never expected a "healthy lifestyle" to stop the flu but I do believe that it will help to fight it and avoid serious complications and death. I have been clear about that.
Again, it depends on what studies you are looking at.
Yes, different studies will give you different numbers, but there really is no doubt that vaccination does prevent the flu in a substantial number of cases.
Really, a holistic medicine study with no corroborating evidence is useless.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 04-22-2014 at 04:55 PM..
Flu is like a cold, everyone will get it some time, regardless if you vaccinate or not. If athletes get them, everyone get them.
Getting vaccinate prevent the child go building up their immune system and in the future, depends on vaccine to help them "defense" flu.
No, flu is not like a cold. The symptoms are way more severe, the length of illness is longer, and the complications are far more serious, including death.
There is no difference in the antibodies produced by natural disease and the antibodies produced by vaccine. It seems that a lot of people think immunization is like an antibiotic. It's not. Vaccine stimulates your immune system to produce antibodies to the disease w/o you getting sick!
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
In the preschool age group, the nasal vaccine is about 85% effective. Since the vaccine works by using the immune system, it is just as "natural" as your elderberry syrup and vitamins.
The higher the vaccination rate, the less risk there is that anyone, vaccinated or not, will be exposed to the flu. Since 15% of the children who take the vaccine will not respond to it, that includes that group.
The sad thing is that the folks who do not vaccinate believe that the flu vaccine is dangerous. It is not. The risk of a severe adverse effect from the vaccine is tiny. The risk of severe illness or death from influenza is significant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
lol
The fact that one would dismiss this with a "LOL" shows a total lack of understanding of influenza, and immunizations in general.
Medical exemptions are valid, and should be respected. These children are usually closely monitored by a health care provider. Philosophical exemptions are now upward of 15% in this country and pose a public health risk. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see philosophical exemptions become much more difficult to obtain.
Agreed. Colorado is working on making it harder to get a philosophical exemption. The bill passed the House of Reps. It's in the senate now.
You don't think so? I have seen so much contradictory information coming from different studies. The researchers often find themselves in heavy disagreement.
Yes. I have never expected a "healthy lifestyle" to stop the flu but I do believe that it will help to fight it and avoid serious complications and death. I have been clear about that.
Again, it depends on what studies you are looking at.
The full article in your first link is behind a pay wall. Was the vaccine studied the injectable or the intranasal or both? The intranasal is more effective than the injectable in young children. We have to to compare the same vaccine.
The author of your second link does not understand statistics or the article he is reviewing.
For example, he misuses the word "effective." he says, "In children over two years of age, it [the vaccine] was only effective 33 percent of the time in preventing the flu."
That's not what the 33% means. It means that children who got the vaccine were 33% less likely to catch the flu than kids who did not get the vaccine.
He also does not understand the number needed to vaccinate:
"With 1 outpatient visit being prevented through vaccination of <50 children, influenza vaccination can reduce influenza-attributable medical visits in children significantly, even in years with modest vaccine efficacy."
Dr. Brownstein doesn't know what he is talking about.
Don't we all. A big part of my life that I highly value is the freedom to choose what substances I put into my body and the bodies of my children. The idea that the government can mandate these types of things and take the decision out of our hands is frightening and should not be tolerated. May we always be so free.
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.
A big part of my life that I highly value is the freedom to choose what substances I put into my body and the bodies of my children. The idea that the government can mandate these types of things and take the decision out of our hands is frightening and should not be tolerated. May we always be so free.
