Will you get vaccinated?

[watercooled]

I voted yes but that was before reading what you posted. I think I'd wait a while to see how it goes and the fact I have a phobia of needles doesn't help. As I am in frequent contact with a few elderly folks it would be a good idea if it proves safe without any considerable side effects, and obviously I'd rather not get sick myself. On the other hand I've never had a normal flu jab and since swine flu is so far no more dangerous there's a good chance I wouldn't bother.

[funke_munke]

I haven't been even remotely ill in about seven years and like to think of myself as invincible, so no I won't be getting the vaccination.

[Dareos]

but her genes run through my magnificent body

Ok Brucelles, we all love you enough, stop loving yourself quite so much, ok?

please...




I am a bit skeptical of the whole pandemic thing tho, theres been less than 200 cases in the UK so far (well, Scotland, but who cares about the rest of them), and its not exactly the black plague, really, is it?

I'm kinda susceptible to various different infections, mainly because my immune system thinks my skin is erm, attacking itself, and therefore spends most of its time trying to fix what isn't broke, but still, really come on.

IF , and its a big IF, hence the capitals, yer kid comes home from school, with massive pustulent growths under each arm, can barely stay awake, and isn't in the mood for ice cream, then its time to worry. Otherwise, its prolly just flu

[menthel]

Saracen, I feel your concerns actually address a wider feeling of distrust towards government a present rather than the specific subject. As for not trusting big pharma it's difficult (and I work in it!) but you have to look at it in a slightly perverse way. They now realise that coverups are impossible and that negative news impacts the shareholders and therefore value of the company, therefore they are now (yes, I mean now, as in the past 4-5 years) having to make sure that it all adds up. Anyways, who else has the huge sums of money to develop a new drug nowdays apart from big pharma- again, a side effect of regulation and government.

However I agree that pharma are not in it for the patients, it's all about the money! The patients benefit is just an aside to the making of money.

[nightkhaos]

Saracen, I can't quote the bits I want to as it's just too complicated on the iPhone!

You just need paractice. Took me a while, and I'm still miles slower than I would be a computer, but getting there. I think part of the problem is that you need to be IN the textbox to select a certein aspect of it.

Again, I can't predict the future but then again medicine has as much art and intuition as science as we just don't have the full picture yet.

Doctors still seem to be doing well despite this.

Hence my stance. Unless things change, and change a lot, I'll take my chances with flu rather than with the vaccine. I don't fancy being an unpaid test subject in big-Pharma's large-scale field tests.

A good stance, but the fact is someone needs to test the vaccine, because it is going to be developed anyone. As a knee jerk reaction to media pressure, maybe, but the orgins of its development are irrelevent.

You realise that could potentially put you at greater risk, should you become sick? Part of the problem with flu is a lot of the symptoms are a result of the immuno-response.

Oh and it's actually young people between 14 and 25 that you should be avoiding, not young children or the elderly, a flu outbreak like this tends to vector through that age range rather than the normal "at risk" groups.

The immuno-response can be different from person to person. Some people face flu with mild colds and headaches, and some people get the all out flu from a simple cold virus. I very much doubt our friend here is completely immune.

The normal at-risk groups are easy to contain. The virus will actually more likely spread through people with strong immune systems, who can fight of the virus more easily, and thuis when they come into contain with "at risk" groups there will be no signs to indicate they have a potentionally fatal virus.

Your last bit sums up my reservations.

I'm sure lessons have been learned, and while there have bee issues with vaccinations in the past, I did stress that as vaccines have moved on since those days, I don't necessarily expect the same issues to arise now so how instructive those past problems might be is limited.

But ...... do I trust big Pharma to be acting in my best interest? Sorry, but .... hell, no.

And nor do I trust government to be doing so.

Government might be acting for what they consider to be good reason, but they will be looking at the overall picture, and will have strategic considerations in mind, whether they admit it or not. And you said it yourself ..... conventional drug approvals processes are extraordinarily long-winded ... arguably, absurdly so. And, clearly, vaccine development can't follow a 15-year testing cycle, or by the time we have it, tested and available, any damage that strain of flu will do that might have been prevented will be long on the past. It is therefore inherent in the nature of the beast that the scope for large-scale testing will be limited. I don't dispute the pragmatism of that, but it does mean that, regardless of reason, the usual level of testing hasn't been done. Of course, as a layman, I would also expect that the level of unknown issues and potential side-effects may well be a lot lower than for a completely new drug too, so an accelerated testing regime might make practical sense.

Nonetheless, my point remains. I don't trust government to be acting in the interests of the individual. If they were, we wouldn't have troops in Afghanistan or Iraq, for a start. They're looking at "the big picture" and if the price we pay for that is that some individuals get killed, well, that seems it be a price they'll pay. Nor, as I said, do I trust pharmaceutical companies. Oh, I'm sure hat, by and large, they follow laws and regulations, but I just don't believe that their motivation is philanthropy. It's much narrower than that.

Based on what we've seen so far, my decision is that I have some understanding of the risk I take with the flu itself, but I have to take an awful lot on faith about the vaccine and I don't trust either the pharmaceutical companies or the government enough to do that. I don't expect anyone else to be convinced by that attitude and I'm not trying convert anybody. but nor, in everything the government have said, do I see any reason to change my mind. From the poll results, at least so far, it seems I'm not alone, at least in my conclusions though maybe not in the reasoning. 7.14% say they will take it, 73.81% say they won't, and 19.05% haven't decided. Interesting.

I agree that governments have trouble acting within the best interests of the collective. It is inherit of their nature, they are a collection of representives that have their own ambitions and desires to furfil, and unfortunatly they can be selfish.

As for the testng taking 15 years, that is the slight problem with morden medical sicne, because of the morally questionable actions made at the turn of the 20th century the public is against medical testing. Unfortunatly this means that in order to do things safetly and prevent harmful mistakes happening, like using a mild virus to create immunity to a fatal vrius, will always be questioned by the public. They are in a damned if ya do, damned if ya don't situation.

If they develop a vaccine, then everyone will complain about how everyone was put though this hassle, and many people got flu like systems from the vaccine, however if they don't, and it gets out of control, then they will be blamed for not doing anything to stop it. It is slightly unfair on the medical professionals.

My boss was trying to get us all to have the jab, as he knows I'm asthmatic he has asked me to have it. I have told him there is no way in hell I'm having a bloody flu jab. My reasons for not having it are I'd sooner just have a proper dose of the flu and be done with it.

Needless to say he doesn't like my attitude about and has told me to reconsider. I've pointed out is not a sackable offence, its my choice and theres nothing he can do about it. He said something along the lines of me not caring about the business and me being off with the flu if I got it would cause problems.

Last time I had the jab, some 7 years ago now I think, the nurse administering it made me bleed, she literally stabbed me, I've never been too keen on needles at the best of times, and that just made it worse.

Touch wood I've not had a cold for 4 years. Think I can escape the swine flu.

He has no legal precident on which to force you to take the vaccine. Ignore him, and if he acts on his reservations, you are within your rights to take him to court for discrimation.

I am a bit skeptical of the whole pandemic thing tho, theres been less than 200 cases in the UK so far (well, Scotland, but who cares about the rest of them), and its not exactly the black plague, really, is it?

Don't know where you are gettings you figures from. There are over 20,000 thousand (unconfirmed) cases in the west-midlands. The 200 case figure are the laboratory confirmed cases, the NHS taking a stance not to test to find out what kind of virus it is.

And as I recall, there have only been 5 or 6 confirmed cases in Scotland.

[menthel]

You just need paractice. Took me a while, and I'm still miles slower than I would be a computer, but getting there. I think part of the problem is that you need to be IN the textbox to select a certein aspect of it.

I will paractice more then!

Doctors still seem to be doing well despite this.

I know, I am one!

[Rave]

I voted hell yes, jab me up.

I'm not the slightest bit scared of needles for a start- I pierced my own belly button with a safety pin FFS. I also hate being ill, and I've never had a bad reaction to any vaccine (albeit I have a scar from my BCG, but doesn't everyone my age?).

I had a normal flu jab a few years ago when I worked for the civil service- no problems at all. I've actually never had flu, but colds lay me low on the infrequent occasions when I get one. I don't like my job particularly, but I like it more than I'd like lying in bed really struggling to get up to even go to the toilet for a whole week, which is what proper flu will tend to do to you. So yeah- jab me up.

[Saracen]

Saracen, I feel your concerns actually address a wider feeling of distrust towards government a present rather than the specific subject. As for not trusting big pharma it's difficult (and I work in it!) but you have to look at it in a slightly perverse way. They now realise that coverups are impossible and that negative news impacts the shareholders and therefore value of the company, therefore they are now (yes, I mean now, as in the past 4-5 years) having to make sure that it all adds up. Anyways, who else has the huge sums of money to develop a new drug nowdays apart from big pharma- again, a side effect of regulation and government.

However I agree that pharma are not in it for the patients, it's all about the money! The patients benefit is just an aside to the making of money.

Well, I certainly have a wider range of distrust of government than the present issue, that's for sure. A brief review of the changes to laws over the last decade or so, especially in relation to them changing the balance of power between our rights and the rights of the state to interfere in our lives, would give a firm pointer as to a major reason why. Their mania for central control and big brother surveillance is also a case in point, as with the ID card system (and particularly the database), and the DNA database, and with the centralisation of NHS records. Of course, with all these things, there's an upside and a downside, and government can always claim this or that benefit. I just don't believe them, or that the benefit justifies the downside. I could expand on that a lot, but it isn't what this thread is about.

So yes, I don't trust government. I don't trust their motives, and I certainly don't trust their competence.

As for distrusting big pharma, I take your points. My distrust isn't that they're trying to get away with anything grossly illegal (though I remain sceptical that they wouldn't if they thought they could get away with it). And I certainly accept that developing new drugs is hugely expensive, but it can also be hugely profitable, even accepting that any specific drug is one hell of a risk, if it turns out that there are unresolvable problems discovered late on after the money has been spent. That's one reason why drugs are so expensive - the ones that succeed have to pay for the failures, and for the development of the next good thing. I would also certainly accept that many of these drugs do wonderful things, and that a lot of people are alive today that wouldn't be without them, or that have their lives considerably improved by them.

My distrust of big pharma is not so much that of a rabid conspiracy theorist as that of a confirmed cynic. I'm not, for instance, of the opinion that big pharma would create a virus just to sell drugs to combat it .... or for that matter, that the CIA did, which is one theory I've seen about swine flu. But I do believe that big pharma are quite capable of a subtle PR campaign to excite a little panic, to wind up people's and governments in order to sell vaccines. I wouldn't suggest they'd create the current situation, but I would not be in the slightest bit shocked if it were proven they'd exploited it.

But none of that is why I won't take the vaccine. The main reason I won't take the vaccine is that I don't believe the risk is serious .... and if it is, I'll run it.

[Saracen]

..... I've actually never had flu, but colds lay me low on the infrequent occasions when I get one. I don't like my job particularly, but I like it more than I'd like lying in bed really struggling to get up to even go to the toilet for a whole week, which is what proper flu will tend to do to you. So yeah- jab me up.

Flu does vary a lot, but one thing I will say is that when most people say they've had flu, they mean they've had a cold, and the two tend to be rather different. I did have flu a couple of years ago. That's not my opinion, but that of a consultant virologist ..... not one I saw professionally but one that happens to be a friend of a friend. It was also the opinion of the doctor when I ended up in the local hospital with it. And you're right, I could barely get out of bed for several days. In fact, I spent three days with more or less non-stop hallucinations. Weird things .... it was like a 2 minute section of video tape playing over and over again in my head. I spend hours, experiencing that same "tape" time after time. Then someone would change the tape. I ate virtually nothing, drank water like a fish, most of my joints ached like hell and I got out of bed only for potty trips. I also sweated a small ocean on the hot phase of the hot/cold flushes, and had a temperature of 105 when I ended up in hospital, by which time, I was past the worst of it and over the hallucinations anyway.

As I said, flu varies, but what I had was utterly unmistakeable for a cold, and was absolutely no fun at all.

And I still, despite all that, will not be taking the vaccine, unless things deteriorate a lot. Flu kills. Every year, it kills, and I don't know just how close I came, but closer than I like to think about, according to my virologist friend. But unless this flu turns into something MUCH more deadly that it has so far shown itself to be, no vaccine for me. Could that turn out to be a fatal mistake? Sure, it could. But I'll take the chance, because I'm not convinced it's much more of a chance than I take every year by not having a seasonal flu shot, and I won't have that either.

[malfunction]

I'll be honest enough to say I'm undecided as yet but it's looking highly unlikely. I'm not afraid of getting vaccinated but I just don't see the point given the current circumstances. I'm not convinced that the unconfirmed statistics are anything like realistic - the government, WHO and media all have a vested interest in making it sound serious so that they avoid looking like fools / have something dramatic sounding to report.

[Rave]

Flu does vary a lot, but one thing I will say is that when most people say they've had flu, they mean they've had a cold, and the two tend to be rather different. I did have flu a couple of years ago. That's not my opinion, but that of a consultant virologist ..... not one I saw professionally but one that happens to be a friend of a friend. It was also the opinion of the doctor when I ended up in the local hospital with it. And you're right, I could barely get out of bed for several days. In fact, I spent three days with more or less non-stop hallucinations. Weird things .... it was like a 2 minute section of video tape playing over and over again in my head. I spend hours, experiencing that same "tape" time after time. Then someone would change the tape. I ate virtually nothing, drank water like a fish, most of my joints ached like hell and I got out of bed only for potty trips. I also sweated a small ocean on the hot phase of the hot/cold flushes, and had a temperature of 105 when I ended up in hospital, by which time, I was past the worst of it and over the hallucinations anyway.

As I said, flu varies, but what I had was utterly unmistakeable for a cold, and was absolutely no fun at all.

And I still, despite all that, will not be taking the vaccine, unless things deteriorate a lot. Flu kills. Every year, it kills, and I don't know just how close I came, but closer than I like to think about, according to my virologist friend. But unless this flu turns into something MUCH more deadly that it has so far shown itself to be, no vaccine for me. Could that turn out to be a fatal mistake? Sure, it could. But I'll take the chance, because I'm not convinced it's much more of a chance than I take every year by not having a seasonal flu shot, and I won't have that either.

Yes- flu's like that, which is why I know I've never had it. Glad you survived. I don't fancy it in the slightest, which is why I'll have the jab if they offer it. I distrust the government and Big Pharma too, but I don't think either would go out of their way to poison me with some kind of sham vaccine?:

I'm taking a lot of cod liver oil at the moment- it's dirt cheap, so why not?

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/51913.php

TBH, I've never had a disease I've been vaccinated against, and never had a bad reaction (beyond a BCG scar) to any vaccine, so I'm perfectly happy, on the balance of scientific evidence and my own experience, to keep taking them when they're offered.

I suppose I won't get the vaccine if they tag on a requirement to register on the National Identity Databse before they give it to you....I wouldn't put it past them.

[Yosh]

I am undecided. I am Diabetic, which means i have the standard Flu Jab every year, but i do not know if i should have the Swine Flu Jab because of the testing cycle.

I once saw on a program on BBC3/4 and the Chemist in question stated that new drugs should have a certain period like 10 or more years to test the side effects in Humans before they are to be used.

There is no confirmation that the Swine Flu jab will not cause further harm to you in the future.

[Lucio]

I am undecided. I am Diabetic, which means i have the standard Flu Jab every year, but i do not know if i should have the Swine Flu Jab because of the testing cycle.

I once saw on a program on BBC3/4 and the Chemist in question stated that new drugs should have a certain period like 10 or more years to test the side effects in Humans before they are to be used.

There is no confirmation that the Swine Flu jab will not cause further harm to you in the future.

Drugs testing is always a bit of a nisnomer anyway, because ultimate it's a lot like software bug testing, you can eliminate the likely risks, and test boundry cases, but you can never completely rule something 100% safe as we're all different. I think for the most part we have a fairly robust drugs testing system in place, there's far too much of the countries GDP invested in the medical industry to risk a company getting sued into the ground due to a bad batch.

[dangel]

I probably will - because my wife is in a the high-risk group and the consequences for her well.. let's not go there. Plus flu sucks.

[menthel]

I am undecided. I am Diabetic, which means i have the standard Flu Jab every year, but i do not know if i should have the Swine Flu Jab because of the testing cycle.

I once saw on a program on BBC3/4 and the Chemist in question stated that new drugs should have a certain period like 10 or more years to test the side effects in Humans before they are to be used.

There is no confirmation that the Swine Flu jab will not cause further harm to you in the future.

Don't forget that vaccines undergo a different testing and approval process that other pharmaceutical drugs. Seasonal flu has a very short approval process itself because you have to wait for the prevalent strain to appear that year before they can work on them. However the testing process does seem to be even shorter than usual for the swine flu vaccine.

[trisit]

I'm gonna get vaccinated as I have had really nasty normal flu - was really unpleasant.

I do agree that this swine flu should be renamed "flu" as "swine flu" is giving it high currency where at the moment is does not seem to be especially vicious for most people and has been lethal in only a small number of cases (either 27 or 31 depending which source).

I don't know for sure but I expect the vaccine will be a "dead-virus" vaccine instead of a live weakened virus.

If it is a "dead-virus" vaccine then I will definitely take the vaccine if it is offered to me.

and now for the science ...
Viruses are amazingly simple life forms. They consist only of a short piece of DNA encased in a protein coat. They invade host cells and use the machinery inside the body's cells to replicate. If you remove the DNA from the inside of the virus then all that is left is a few bits of protein and this is what is used to make the vaccine. The protein can be easily broken down by the human body and is harmless - it is the DNA that causes the problems.

So the protein from the virus is injected into the human body but it has no ability to replicate (as it is missing the DNA). The immune system then makes antibodies against the proteins so that if you get infected with live virus your body is pre-armed to attack and kill the virus particles when there is only a few of them and before they begin to multiply.

So there should really be a very low risk of developing complications from getting the vaccination - as i say, if it is a "dead-virus" vaccine.