Flu shot..How long between shots?

[tinerj]

But for me it had been 100% effective in preventing flu for the last five years.

 

[Henning]

But for me it had been 100% effective in preventing flu for the last five years.

I have never had a flu shot and that strategy as well has been 100% effective in preventing flu for the last five years.

 

[NoHeat]

Flu researchers know where to look for new strains of flu -- often South China, where pigs live in the same structure as humans.

Each February the flu researchers pick three dangerous strains for the next season, and start manufacturing vaccines mixed for just those three.

That means the vaccine is intended for one particular season, and it changes each year. That means you should get one flu shot each season.

Of course you might still get the flu, since the shot is for only three strains.

 

[B350ATP]

Get the flu shot. Really no reason not to

 

[NoHeat]

Get the flu shot. Really no reason not to

Unless you have already had the same flu shot.

The OP was asking how long to wait, and the answer is to wait until the next season's shot is available. If he got a shot in January, there would be no point in getting another in March, because it would be the same vaccine.

 

[steingar]

Mercury is the second most toxic element on earth to plutonium. Toxicity of mercury has been linked to many different diseases, including autism, learning disabilities, Alzheimer’s, multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, lupus, chronic fatigue syndrome, arthritis, depression, and bipolar disorder.

Yada yada. Unless you've invested in a firm selling homeopathic medicine there is almost no concern with any of this. Mercury, plutonium, cyanide, arsenic and all sorts of other nasty toxic chemicals are endemic in the environment. But like Mercury in old vaccines, there isn't enough to actually affect you. You're built to deal with all this stuff.

The amount of mercury found in one mercury thermometer is enough to pollute a small lake.

Its enough to pollute a big lake too, at about one part per billion. If you're worried about mercury don't eat fish, that's where it all comes from anyway.

I know we all read stuff online that may or may not be true. Even the source of information can be sketchy. So I wont sound like a complete conspiracy nut heres what the World Heath Organization says.

You aren't a conspiracy nut for looking up WHO statistics, you are a conspiracy nut for your unsubstantiated and highly biased interpretation.

If the flu shat had a noticeable improvement on health without the risks I would say go for it. Sadly it does not.

The Cochrane Database – an objective, gold-standard assessment of available evidence has plainly stated, in TWO STUDIES, that there is no data to support efficacy in children under two, and in adults. Even the former Chief Vaccine Officer at the FDA states: “there is no evidence that any influenza vaccine thus far developed is effective in preventing or mitigating any attack of influenza.” Liking the idea of being protected from the flu does not equate to being protected from the flu. That’s essentially what your vaccine-promoting doctor (or pharmacist) is engaging in – promoting an idea.

Nice that you found an idiot online who agrees with your predawn conclusions. I just hope no one else is dumb enough to listen to you. Unfortunately, lots of people are. We're having significant outbreaks of entirely preventable infectious diseases in the US. Its happened in numerous states, one even happened in my own little city. All of them are the result of anti-science propaganda like what you're reading here, a big piece of evidence of what I see as the anti-science drift of the US, where people would rather risk getting violently ill than trust something made by scientists. The saddest thing is any of these illnesses is far, far worse for you than any potential poisoning from any vaccine present or past.

 

[FastEddieB]

Penn & Teller on the topic (vaccines in general)...

http://youtu.be/RfdZTZQvuCo

 

[loch1957]

I don't care if you get a shot or not. I simply said be informed before doing so. If you feel the need to inject something into your body at least have the sense to read what it is. Where do you draw the line at risk verses action or no action?

Humans have lived on this planet a very long time but I'm betting vaccines did not help us much thousands of years ago.


FACT: The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as hazardous waste.

FACT: The legal "safe" limit for mercury in drinking water is 2 parts per billion

An adult gets four times that, an infant gets something like 20 times more.

I know nothing of medicine but after years in a lab testing metals and corrosion resistance I know exactly what metal poisoning can do. I was trying to help and give another side to a story. So do exactly what you wish,

 

[Gary F]

Thimerosal is a mercury-based preservative that has been used for decades in the United States in multi-dose vials of some vaccines to prevent the growth of germs, bacteria and fungi, that can contaminate them.Thimerosal is a compound that is 49.6% mercury by weight. I for one do not see the need to get a shot that contains mercury.

What is the evidence of harm to those who receive thimerosal?

Did you know that during the 2012-2013 flu season, the flu vaccine's effectiveness was found to be just 56 percent across all age groups reviewed by the CDC in essence, the statistical equivalent of a coin toss. In seniors, aged 65 and over, the US flu vaccines were only nine percent effective.

56% would be bad for a diagnostic test but for a treatment that's very good. What do you recommend? Take your chances? Not only the sick or elderly die from this disease.

The 'gold standard' of independent scientific evaluation and analysis, the Cochrane Database Review, has issued no less than five reports between 2006 and 2010, all of which decimate the myth that flu vaccinations are the most effective flu prevention method available.

In average conditions, when a flu vaccine at least partially matches the circulating virus, 100 people need to be vaccinated in order to avoid just ONE set of influenza symptoms, according to Cochrane’s findings.

Yet as another flu season approaches, all these facts are wholly ignored by conventional medicine and media alike, and you’ll certainly never see them mentioned in any flu vaccine promotion campaign.

Unfortunately, in addition to the fact they may not be nearly as effective as advertised, flu vaccines can, and do, cause harm. The featured video is a potent reminder of what vaccine damage can look like, and why it’s so important to make well-informed decisions about all vaccinations, including routine ones.While death and complete disability from a flu vaccine may be rare, so is dying from the flu itself. So I strongly recommend weighing the risk of suffering a debilitating side effect of the flu vaccine relative to the more likely potential of spending a week in bed with the flu.

Remember, most deaths attributed to influenza are actually due to bacterial pneumonia, and these days, bacterial pneumonia can be effectively treated with advanced medical care and therapies like respirators and parenteral antibiotics.

That statement appears to be contradictory. Are you implying that those who died did not receive effective treatment? Bacterial pneumonia is an opportunist that takes advantage of the damage done to the lungs by influenza. Antibiotics don't always work and by the time somebody requires a ventilator they are in big trouble. What actual experience do you have treating pneumonia? Do you care for people with significant heart or lung disease? I doubt it or you may be the best health care provider alive. What are your qualifications that suggest anybody should take you seriously?

Also, it is important to remember that only about 20 percent of all influenza-like illness that occurs every year is actually associated with influenza viruses because many types of respiratory illnesses with flu-like symptoms can be mistaken for influenza. About 80 percent of cases of suspected influenza sent to the CDC for analysis lab test negative for type A or type B influenza.

That's true if diagnosis is made by those who are not true experts. The accuracy will be better if the health care professional has significant experience or applies more stringent diagnostic criteria.