I am 73 yr old male that lst Jan 12, 2010 I got the H1N1 shot and with in 48 hrs hve been broken out with severe HIVES ALL OVER MY BODY INCLUDING the bottom of ny feet some big as your hand and raised up sever pain itchy. have reported to ind and health dept they say they have not heard of any one having reactions ....
have see several Dr's specialists allegery, derm and ton of lab work and test and everything they tell me comes back ok... no help from dr's 3-hospitals VERY SCARED CONCERNED some where someone has to know what or help please send me any info or contact you may have it has been over 7-MONTHS...

Did another wave appear? (second or third? I can't keep up.)

It could be either. Anecdotes only provide material for hypotheses. They aren't very useful for conclusions.

It is unusual for two family members to have identical adverse reactions. But it is possible, and more likely than random because there is some evidence of a genetic factor.

My 3 year old and 6 month old both got the H1N1 vaccination in November 2010, in the days following that the three year old developed reddish not itchy bumps on her bottom, which still have not gone away, and the baby developed tiny little not itchy bumps first on her tummy, but they then spread to her arms and legs. They were not red, but recently some have turned into pimple like bumps.

The pediatrician says it is an allergic reaction and recommended changing detergent and not using soap on the baby, but the rashes are not going away.

Because they both developed shortly after the H1N1 vaccine, I am suspicious they are connected.

Anonymous wrote:These points about the flu are interesting, but not relevant to my question. My question is whether we have enough instances right on this thread on which to reasonably conclude a correlation between the vaccine and the hives. That is all. I've no interest, for purposes of this question, in balancing the risk of hives with the risk of the flu. That is a different question. Maybe someone else will ask it.

I still haven't heard one person who experienced hives after vaccination state that they would opt for vaccination again. Which is starting to constitute a bit of an admission in my mind.

How the heck do you know if any of the hives people are still even reading this thread? It has been around for a while. But here you are, ready to jump to conclusions based on non-response to an old thread. Oh Gee, it must support my non-sensical arguement.

You know what they say about people who assume...

Anonymous wrote:Implicit in my question as to whether the hives victims would vaccinate again is the question as to whether these people suspect a correlation. Actually, I would ask anyone reading this thread if they suspect a correlation. The fact that you seem to feel threatened by the question makes me think you fear the answer may hurt your case for vaccination.

Also, most of the people who vaccinated and got hives did not fall within the groups of people identified at being at risk for severe complications from the flu. Most of them would have just gotten the flu, period. So for them, the balancing equation becomes whether they would rather suffer from hives for months as a result of vaccination or suffer with the flu for a week as a result of (maybe) not vaccinating.

I'd rather have the flu for a week.

BTW, Francis Collins, that dude who help discover the human genome? Is profoundly religious, and believes in aspects of creationism. I want to be as dumb as Francis Collins. What a moron.

Gee, if that were true, I probably would not have said:

I expect that we will find a relationship

And you are now saying "I'd rather have the flue for a week". If you are going to evaluate the relative risks, why did you dismiss the H1N1 statistics by saying that this is not about the relative risks? You are contradicting yourself.

Lastly, Francis Collins is not a creationist. He is a theistic evolutionist, as am I.

We'll only know whether there is a relationship when the comparisons are made between the rate of hives in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated people. I expect that we will find a relationship. But remember that 1 in 5 people experience hives at some point in their lives. In the U.S. that's over 60 million people. So in a given year, 1 million people will probably have their first case of hives - for any number of reasons. With that many cases of hives occurring due to any number of factors, the only way to answer the question is to look at large scale data.

But if you are the earlier poster from the above, your question has not been whether there is a correlation, but whether a risk of hives should cause us to refuse vaccination. And to make that assessment, you have to balance the relative risks.

You can't just say "people who got hives after vaccination -- what do you think we should do about vaccination?" That's like asking plane crash victims whether air travel is dangerous. Well, yes, to them it was. But statistically it is far safer than riding in a car.

Anonymous wrote:Whatever. I asked whether those who suffered hives after vaccination would do it again. The silence is DEAFENING and says quite a lot.

I spoke with some families who had kids and adults in the hospital. They are quite vocal about vaccination, as I suppose the other 250,000 families with someone hospitallized by H1N1. I suppose that if I talked to the over 10,000 families who lost a loved one, they would be even moreso.

So how many cases of hives are you up to, and when do you think you will hit it will become a bigger deal than a quarter of a million hospitalizations and 12,000 deaths?

Anonymous wrote:I think it is a random sample. A random sampling of people living in the DC metropolitan area who got the vaccine and got hives. And I think it can be considered statistically significant and that fact that you say IT CAN'T means nothing.

If the readership & posters of this thread are limited to regular readers of this board, why is it that this 13-page thread managed to get nearly 11,000 views, while the 179-page "word game" thread got only 17,000 hits? To me the enormous number of views--coupled with the fact that this thread appears first in a world-wide Google search of the topic--says that this is far from a random group of regular DCUM posters.

(And a true random sampling wouldn't depend on people clicking on the thread title and posting a comment. Posting on this thread is in & of itself self-selection.)

Here, I will even do some work for you.

If it makes you feel any better, there are people who are trying to study the efficacy of the effectiveness of hand-washing, wearing face-masks, and segregating sick individuals. But there is not enough yet known to establish efficacy.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/721042

Anonymous wrote:But did you spend your time and money getting an uncomfortable shot? I didn't. So, if you did get the needless shot, that makes me less of an idiot than you, does it not?

No. You have no data to say that your actions prevented you from getting the flu. Only 20% of the population got the flu, even though 60% of the country didn't get the shot. So your healthy habits might have protected you. Or, you might have gotten lucky like a large number of people in the country, who certainly aren't "meticulous" about anything but who did not get the flu. You don't know, because unlike with the flu shot, there is no data to establish the efficacy of your strategy.

I believe that statistical significance is a mathematical concept, not an avian one. Here is a helpful website: http://www.statpac.com/surveys/statistical-significance.htm

Anonymous wrote:I think it is a random sample. A random sampling of people living in the DC metropolitan area who got the vaccine and got hives. And I think it can be considered statistically significant and that fact that you say IT CAN'T means nothing.

Ladies, gents: How many of you with hives would elect to get the vaccine again?

New poster here. The person you are sparring with is right. This is not a random sampling of anything. It is not even a poll of DCUM readers. It's mostly a list of people who had hives reactions. You have no idea how many people did NOT experience a reaction. You don't even know how many DCUM posters did not experience a reaction. You also don't know how many people in this group were hospitalized from H1N1. You also don't know how many people in this group got hives without ever getting vaccinated.


You just have individual stories. All they tell you is that it is worth investigating hives reactions due to the vaccine.

I think it is a random sample. A random sampling of people living in the DC metropolitan area who got the vaccine and got hives. And I think it can be considered statistically significant and that fact that you say IT CAN'T means nothing.

Ladies, gents: How many of you with hives would elect to get the vaccine again?

Anonymous wrote:Lots of assumptions there. I think these anecdotes are statistically significant. 12 pages of people reporting a connection between getting the vaccine and suffering hives means something to me.

But not every single post is a new person reporting hives. Some of the posts are from people who'd gotten hives without ever having gotten the vaccine. Others were the same person posting different parts of their story.