It prevents you from getting sick or having symptoms 40% of the time.
You can still get it and pass it along without getting sick yourself (or rather sick enough to suspect the flu).
This new variant of vaccine is going to be like the swine flu vaccine.
We are all going to have narcolepsy.
We are all going to have narcolepsy.
Ok, let me clarify. That one brand of swine flu vaccine that caused everyone overseas to get Narcolepsy. Pandemerix or something.
I should have said you can still “catch it” (your term)....
Catching it and getting sick from it are two different things.
I'd like to point out you're the one who said "They don't work." not me.
Having the flu is fucking terrible. If I can reduce the chances of having to experience that by about half, I'll need a good reason not to take it.
It’s selfish. Get the flu, stay home sick (not spreading it) 3 days max and then you are good.
Take the shot, still get it but keeping shopping, working, and socializing giving it to everyone around you. Then you have 60% of the population sick with it.
Side note: Last flu season vaccine had 16% efficacy.
I’m getting mine the first week of October.
False.
Well, I’d like to point out that you said
“It prevents catching the flu about 40% of the time.”
Which is wrong.
Lol
I'm being agreeable and not getting granular about your use of the term "Getting sick" . Even if we assume your definition is correct, you still acknowledge that the flu shot does work.
It does not work at preventing you from catching nor spreading the flu virus.
It prevents you from getting sick from the flu virus 16% of the time.
That’s not a success story in my book.
If you're coughing you're more likely to spread the virus. For reference the time I got the most sick from the flu I got it from someone who showed no symptoms until 48 hours after I had contact with them. So...
40% is the reported average.
Even if we assume 16% is correct, shit, let's say 10%. If I told you "Hey, this vaccine will make it 10% less likely you get an illness that sucks and there's no downside." what rational case can be made against it?
Side effects and spreading it to others who may be more vulnerable.
If it wasn’t required for my job I wouldn’t get it.
I've never had a side effect, and your suggestion at increased likelihood of spread is suspect at best. Again, even if we assume you're correct, more vulnerable people should, and overwhelmingly do, get their flu shots, then it becomes a moot point as they're protected from the same strains you are.
Pentagon study showed it made you more susceptible in years after "vaccination"...it has been "debunked" though
I'm not sure why we should even trust those numbers...40% 16% 95%
Reason not to get it, is because your messing with your natural immune system with something you need to put into your bloodstream yearly.
I don't see any reason to take it at all.
+ I saw a family friend get the Bells from it.
Last edited:
Had the flu shot twice. Got the flu right after both times. Nobody could ever convince me to take another one again. I don't care if they offer free doughnuts for life.
That is what I have seen with family members
They don't see a correlation but I can't help but wonder
Doesn't matter either way because they go back for another the next year
It is interesting to say the least
So you believe that if I and an immune compromised person (or elderly) get the same flu shot, then catch the same flu strain, we will get the same immune response? Or the same amount of sickness/symptoms from it?