odds of death from h1n1 vs. vaccine

[Anonymous]

I hardly think that was browbeating. He was giving a list of reasons that are commonly heard. Now you are sounding a bit defensive. It sounds like you don't want to admit some people have openly listed on this board unscientific and inaccurate reasons for not wanting to get the shot.

It would NOT be an accurate portrayal or answer of the question had he listed the first three or so reasons. Yes, that is why many are not getting it, but I know for a fact the other reasons he listed are also true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually, it's not so much sarcastic or clever as it is insulting. Not everyone who has questioned whether to get this vaccination is citing their degree from the "University of Google" or anecdotes 3x removed.

If you are confident in your decision to get this vaccine, why the need to marginalize, demonize, or even criticize those who have made a different one? Spending God-knows-how-much time doing so--or making "cute" lists to amuse mothers too insecure to stop second-guessing themselves--seems rather unproductive.

Your post is unproductive. You are completely over-reacting. If you read the posts in this forum with any regularity, you should recognize the reasons stated as coming from our fellow DCUMers. Don't bag on Penguinsix, one of the few voices of reason in the flu forum.

[Anonymous]

Amen. Amen. Amen. Amen!

I don't have any interest in telling someone whether or not they should get vaccinated, but I, too, am disturbed by the pseudo-science that is often used to make arguments. I will second the call to posters to cite the peer-reviewed research on which they base their decisions.

Thank you again, Penguinsix, from those of us who think science is important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hardly think that was browbeating. He was giving a list of reasons that are commonly heard. Now you are sounding a bit defensive. It sounds like you don't want to admit some people have openly listed on this board unscientific and inaccurate reasons for not wanting to get the shot.

It would NOT be an accurate portrayal or answer of the question had he listed the first three or so reasons. Yes, that is why many are not getting it, but I know for a fact the other reasons he listed are also true.

I was not referring to Penguinsix with the browbeating comment. I don't think Penguinsix was doing any browbeating; that was a general comment about the tone of some posts I have seen on this thread by plenty of others.

And I absolutely believe there are people who use unscientific reasons for not getting this vaccine and also *absolutely* concur that there is a war on science in this country that is completely frightening. 110% frightening. But I'm really, really tired of the assumption that anyone who makes a different choice is suspect. This is the prevailing attitude, and that is inarguable. I'm not defending myself, I'm defending that point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hardly think that was browbeating. He was giving a list of reasons that are commonly heard. Now you are sounding a bit defensive. It sounds like you don't want to admit some people have openly listed on this board unscientific and inaccurate reasons for not wanting to get the shot.

It would NOT be an accurate portrayal or answer of the question had he listed the first three or so reasons. Yes, that is why many are not getting it, but I know for a fact the other reasons he listed are also true.

I was not referring to Penguinsix with the browbeating comment. I don't think Penguinsix was doing any browbeating; that was a general comment about the tone of some posts I have seen on this thread by plenty of others.

And I absolutely believe there are people who use unscientific reasons for not getting this vaccine and also *absolutely* concur that there is a war on science in this country that is completely frightening. 110% frightening. But I'm really, really tired of the assumption that anyone who makes a different choice is suspect. This is the prevailing attitude, and that is inarguable. I'm not defending myself, I'm defending that point.

Fine, but I think that the overwhelming message of this thread was that your argument may be valid but misplaced. Start a new thread on this.

Instead, you choose one or two bullets from a long list and nitpicked. And that is why multiple posters are coming on this thread to comment. It sounds like you are taking your issues with other threads and projecting on to penguinsix's list, which is, as another poster pointed out, unproductive.

[Anonymous]

Ugh- just close this post. I am OP and it was actually a ridiculous question, but what can I say, it was a moment of weakness!? Thanks for everyone for their input, productive or not.

Let's all face the fact that no one really knows anything: the odds of either, how safe or unsafe the vaccine is, how effective, how dangerous it is to not get it, to get it, will the flu come back worse, disappear, mutate, make the vaccine ineffective, make it more effective, the true numbers of even h1n1 since they stopped counting, and tests are not accurate.

I think it's getting silly for each person trying to prove their point with this link and that link (myself included)- if top researchers, scientists, doctors, don't truly know, we certainly don't.

Sorry for opening this can of worms. Hope everyone stays well!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hope everyone stays well!!

And Amen to that!

[Anonymous]

Well, science brought us the Tuskogee Study, sponsored by the United States Government. We got legitimate scientific data as a result of that study, though its subjects didn't fare too well. Now, the United States Government is touting a new H1N1 vaccine, and is essentially asking its citizens to test it for them like so many guinea pigs. The same government that can't even keep the cast of a reality television show from trespassing the White House wants to "protect" you with a chemical injection that they put together in a hurry.

Thanks, but I think I'll take a pass. I guess that means I'm going to engage in a war against science and rational thought, too.

But yes, Penguin6, those of us who value science are indeed in your debt. Thank you so very much for helping us though our thought processes as we try to make very personal medical decisions. Do try not to let those whose thought processes may differ from yours drive too much of the "bejesus" out of you. Frankly, it does not appear that you have a whole lot of "bejesus" left to run on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, science brought us the Tuskogee Study, sponsored by the United States Government. We got legitimate scientific data as a result of that study, though its subjects didn't fare too well. Now, the United States Government is touting a new H1N1 vaccine, and is essentially asking its citizens to test it for them like so many guinea pigs. The same government that can't even keep the cast of a reality television show from trespassing the White House wants to "protect" you with a chemical injection that they put together in a hurry.

Thanks, but I think I'll take a pass. I guess that means I'm going to engage in a war against science and rational thought, too.

But yes, Penguin6, those of us who value science are indeed in your debt. Thank you so very much for helping us though our thought processes as we try to make very personal medical decisions. Do try not to let those whose thought processes may differ from yours drive too much of the "bejesus" out of you. Frankly, it does not appear that you have a whole lot of "bejesus" left to run on.

What is that supposed to mean? That doesn't even make sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, science brought us the Tuskogee Study, sponsored by the United States Government. We got legitimate scientific data as a result of that study, though its subjects didn't fare too well. Now, the United States Government is touting a new H1N1 vaccine, and is essentially asking its citizens to test it for them like so many guinea pigs. The same government that can't even keep the cast of a reality television show from trespassing the White House wants to "protect" you with a chemical injection that they put together in a hurry.

Thanks, but I think I'll take a pass. I guess that means I'm going to engage in a war against science and rational thought, too.

But yes, Penguin6, those of us who value science are indeed in your debt. Thank you so very much for helping us though our thought processes as we try to make very personal medical decisions. Do try not to let those whose thought processes may differ from yours drive too much of the "bejesus" out of you. Frankly, it does not appear that you have a whole lot of "bejesus" left to run on.

It is a pandemic flu. I for one am glad someone figured out how to put a vaccine together "in a hurry."

Are you kidding me? Ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually, it's not so much sarcastic or clever as it is insulting. Not everyone who has questioned whether to get this vaccination is citing their degree from the "University of Google" or anecdotes 3x removed.

If you are confident in your decision to get this vaccine, why the need to marginalize, demonize, or even criticize those who have made a different one? Spending God-knows-how-much time doing so--or making "cute" lists to amuse mothers too insecure to stop second-guessing themselves--seems rather unproductive.

Seriously! P.S., do you have a day job?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, science brought us the Tuskogee Study, sponsored by the United States Government. We got legitimate scientific data as a result of that study, though its subjects didn't fare too well. Now, the United States Government is touting a new H1N1 vaccine, and is essentially asking its citizens to test it for them like so many guinea pigs. The same government that can't even keep the cast of a reality television show from trespassing the White House wants to "protect" you with a chemical injection that they put together in a hurry.

Thanks, but I think I'll take a pass. I guess that means I'm going to engage in a war against science and rational thought, too.

But yes, Penguin6, those of us who value science are indeed in your debt. Thank you so very much for helping us though our thought processes as we try to make very personal medical decisions. Do try not to let those whose thought processes may differ from yours drive too much of the "bejesus" out of you. Frankly, it does not appear that you have a whole lot of "bejesus" left to run on.

If you reject the US public health system because of the Tuskegee Study, that's your right, but it's a bit paranoid and I seriously doubt you have the courage to reject all the other government contributions to medicine. On the other hand, making medical decisions based on a mistake by the Secret Service? If this is your war against rational thought, you have already won.