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.
Then you look at the conflicts of interest and you wonder if we'll ever get an honest, unbiased answer about what is really going on.
We'll never get the truth when the studies come straight from the pharmaceutical companies or from those who get money from pharmaceutical companies so people are left to speculate based on the available information.
I'd say that the people who have lost a loved one to the flu, or who have time in hospital and weeks recovering, really appreciate some thinking that it is just reported for "shock value". duh.
Question on the 6-month lead time and the vaccine.
Australia is wintering while we are summering. So starting back in April/May through September, they went through their winter and flu season using the same flu shot that we have today. For them, the flu shot was developed 6 months prior to their Winter, which would have been in late 2016/early 2017. Which means that by the time we are getting our flu season, we are using a vaccine that was developed 6 months prior to Australia's flu season.
It seems to me that in March/April when the flu started to hit in Australia and they knew that the vaccine missed the mark so to speak, that another vaccine should have been developed now that they knew the strains that would be heading over to the U.S.
Or am I just way off base here?
We work from about January thru August on our Northern Hemisphere flu vaccine. Then we work for three or four months on our Southern Hemisphere flu vaccine. We are in contact with their equivalent of our CDC and the FDA to produce the strains they feel will be needed and to ensure the quality standards necessary.
Like the one thread I tried on the health forum about the new technology; this scheduling should be changing shortly. We should be able to react and produce quicker in the near future. I do not know if it is possible but some of the articles talk about producing the vaccine within weeks - that beats six months! Of course that has to be proven and it will take time.
So should the manufacturer be responsible for those deaths since it failed to provide protection in it's own product?
Unless the vaccine is 100% effective, no one can be held accountable for any flu deaths.
Don't be silly. No vaccine at this time can be 100% effective against the flu viruses. There are too many variables and limitations. But within the population, the flu vaccine is enormously effective. Look at it this way--a highly contagious virus is out there; the vaccine can help limit those who actually pass the virus on and can diminish the severity of an infection.
There are those for whom a vaccine is not recommended (allergic to eggs, for example). They shouldn't get the vaccine, and it is not forced on them. So what protects them? Those individuals then have to rely on more people around them vaccinating.
As far as vaccine injuries, that data isn't reliable--it is self-reported. And some who die end up dying of complications from the flu itself. Vaccine injuries can be as mild as a sore arm, too. One must also consider that without ANY flu vaccine, the number of flu deaths could be astronomical.
Don't be silly. No vaccine at this time can be 100% effective against the flu viruses. There are too many variables and limitations. But within the population, the flu vaccine is enormously effective. Look at it this way--a highly contagious virus is out there; the vaccine can help limit those who actually pass the virus on and can diminish the severity of an infection.
There are those for whom a vaccine is not recommended (allergic to eggs, for example). They shouldn't get the vaccine, and it is not forced on them. So what protects them? Those individuals then have to rely on more people around them vaccinating.
As far as vaccine injuries, that data isn't reliable--it is self-reported. And some who die end up dying of complications from the flu itself. Vaccine injuries can be as mild as a sore arm, too. One must also consider that without ANY flu vaccine, the number of flu deaths could be astronomical.
Agree with all you say but the bold. People who are allergic to eggs can now either a) get the regular vaccine under the supervision of a health care provider who is able to recognize and manage severe allergic conditions, as the research has shown that there is so little egg protein in the vaccine that it is unlikely to cause problems even in people with severe allergy, or b) get the vaccine that is not grown in eggs. But you're right in general, getting vaccinated protects those who can't be. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vacc...-allergies.htm
Agree with all you say but the bold. People who are allergic to eggs can now either a) get the regular vaccine under the supervision of a health care provider who is able to recognize and manage severe allergic conditions, as the research has shown that there is so little egg protein in the vaccine that it is unlikely to cause problems even in people with severe allergy, or b) get the vaccine that is not grown in eggs. But you're right in general, getting vaccinated protects those who can't be. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vacc...-allergies.htm
Thanks for the up-to-date info! I haven't paid much attention to that part, since it's not a sensitivity we have in my family. See, everyone can learn something new!
The Cochrane Review included 15 studies that were industry funded in their review because those studies met the criteria of being well designed and conducted.
Quote:
We found 52 clinical trials of over 80,000 adults. We were unable to determine the impact of bias on about 70% of the included studies due to insufficient reporting of details. Around 15% of the included studies were well designed and conducted. We focused on reporting of results from 25 studies that looked at inactivated vaccines.
People who quote Cochrane do so because it's one of the most unbiased, reputable sources of information for people who want that.
Here's what the Cochrane Review found regarding flu vaccine.
Quote:
Healthy adults who receive inactivated parenteral influenza vaccine rather than no vaccine probably experience less influenza, from just over 2% to just under 1% (moderate-certainty evidence).
And this:
Quote:
Injected influenza vaccines probably have a small protective effect against influenza and ILI (moderate-certainty evidence), as 71 people would need to be vaccinated to avoid one influenza case, and 29 would need to be vaccinated to avoid one case of ILI.
There are few studies about autoimmune disease and vaccines, which is what I was talking about in my post that you quoted.
Complicating this season is that, especially on the east coast, there is an adenovirus that is rampant and has all the same symptoms of the flu. Feels just as bad but, fortunately, rarely causes the complications the flu does.
If you read the CDC data, they show that XXX number of people visited the emergency room for "flu like" illness on any given week. I think the last report I read said that of those XXX number people, 26% were positive for flu.
There are a lot of people showing up at the ER just thinking they have the flu. I think it's wise of the media to report the dangers but it also has the added effect of scaring people to run to the ER because they think they're gonna die.
It's particularly bad this year. I don't think it's media hype at all.
Would not the media be doing a disservice if they never told the public that a flu vaccine was available? I can't stand the media, but in this case a little hype isn't so bad, a lot of people are really sick.
Would not the media be doing a disservice if they never told the public that a flu vaccine was available? I can't stand the media, but in this case a little hype isn't so bad, a lot of people are really sick.
Of course.
Imagine the outcry if they didn't report it and thousands died for lack of knowledge of how virulent it is?
It seems that there are those who simply don't want to know that people are dying.
Fair enough I guess, but it would be really irresponsible to not let people know that they might stave off that outcome.
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.
