Realist, I am not going to argue with you about this. Diabetics are more likely to die from flu, so I prefer to take the option of having the jab. The jab has never harmed me so I prefer to believe that it does work in helping to increase antibodies to help fight the flu. If you choose not to, then it is up to you to make your decision, but I am very happy with the decision that I have made!
Twink 
I think you are wise to do so as you know, being a diabetic means you are more at risk of serious complication if you get the flu as am I with an existing chest condition.
When deciding to have the vaccination I prefer to listen to the advice given by my doctor, The Center for Disease Control in the USAā¦
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/keyfacts.htm
and the NHS ā¦
rather than anyone who posts on a forum.
I have been having the flu jab for 26 years nowā¦ starting in 1990 when my parentās doctor advised me to have it due to me being their carer every day. They also had their jabs.
I have also had the flu and wouldnāt want to experience that again. I was hallucinating and my husband had to call the doctor out one evening as he was so worried about me. It took almost a month before I could feel strong and well enough to leave the house.
Our son also has the flu jab every year due to him being asthmatic.
Realist, what qualifications do you have? Are you a doctor?
I would sooner be guided by my own doctor ā¦ or Pats on here.
Entirely your choice, same as you are free to believe in Santa Cluas. Thing is, no-one needs to believe anything. The FACTS have been published, the work has already been done for you. You either listen to the facts or purposely choose to ignore them. Each to their own.
Note Megs that the CDC is EXACTLY the same organisation I quoted and I provided the link to THEIR actual staff presentation which advocates an aggressive marketing campaign based on fearmongering. I guess you chose not to read it. Your choice.
As for the NHS . . . it does what it is told to do, period.
I have had the real Flu, i was close to being hospitalized, the GP said i was his first case of real flu he had every seen.
And of course us chaps get Man Flu a proven condition yet i will never again get the jab it made me very ill.
For me itās all hysteria, this 'Flu jab business.
If the Government REALLY gave a toss about us theyād do something about those on really low pensions - stuff the 'Flu jab.
My workmate, who is 69 keeps rabbiting on about it as heās had one - fine, good for you - I donāt want it thank you but he then chastises me - cheeky sod!
Iām 65, fit and very healthy despite a number of health problems and I currently weigh 72kilos.
He is the opposite and weighs far more than me but heās virtually the same build - with loads of padding.
Ask yourself whoās more likely to come down with 'Flu - eh?
I havenāt had 'Flu for years! stevmk2
My medical qualification are not a factor in this discussion Mags.
I have provided links to the Cochrane Library which IS hugely qualified. It has over 10,000 medically trained employees and is THE benchmark internationally respected organisation in its field.
You should be asking about their qualifications not mine.
It is NOT ME that is saying donāt have the Flu Jab. It is the Cochrane Library, who have reviewed over 2000 individual flu related studies involving over 8 million people worldwide.
THEY, not me, have discovered and stated that the Flu jab is pretty much useless helping just 1 in approx 100 people.
It staggers me on these Flu Jab threads that people just donāt get this. Youāre looking to find excuses wherever you can but in the end, this report, and all the data that was gathered for it, can not be disputed.
Itās not my fault. I didnāt do the studies, sorry to disappoint.
Follow the links. Educate yourself. Try to be brutally objective instead of letting emotion and anecdotal nonsense get in the way.
At the very least, if you are going to be objective, your stance should be:
āI accept that the flu jab is largely useless and will only help 1 in 100 people but I choose to have it in case Iām that 1 personā
Are you willing to make such a statement? If not, on what grounds are you arguing against the Cochrane Report?
I am not interested in the Cochrane report and if I had been I would have found it for myself. I do my own research in medical matters and know for a fact that most companies, who produce these reports are usually finding a way to make moneyā¦just like the pharmaceutical companies you criticize. Other countries offer flu jabs to their residents and I am sure that they would not be investing money in them without their own research.
You obviously believe this report and can make your own decision about your flu jab, but can I suggest that, now you have drawn our attention to it, you allow the rest of us the choice of making our own decision on it. Whatever our decisions are, I feel you have no right to request our grounds for ignoring it, because medicine is a personal decision that we do not have to justify to you.
When people need advice on medical matters, they tend to ask the people they trust to offer the best advice, and the people they ask may not always be the ones that you would choose, but it doesnāt mean that they are wrong!
Thatās fine. However given that it is the primary source of collective information pertaining to the Flu Jab that means we cannot discuss the topic further in any meaningful way.
A bit like entering a discussion on what Revelations means and saying āIām not interested in the Bibleā.
They invest money because peddling useless flu jabs is very big business. Thatās about it.
I have thus far seen no tangible reason not to believe it. Itās been done by the internationally respected defacto organisation for medical studies who employ over 10,000 medical related staff. Why would I not believe it?
Everyone is always free to make their own decisions and no-one here afaik is trying to tell anyone what decision to make.
Well, the thing is, this is an open forum discussion on the topic of the flu jab. The whole purpose is to debate the issues. If you are not happy discussing the issues then why are you here in the thread? Makes no sense.
To discuss the merits of any medical treatment or cure, you have to debate the facts and information pertaining to it. Itās quite appropriate for anyone to challenge a view or to ask how someone arrived at a view. Thatās the debating process.
So absolutely, if you are going to set out a case to say that the Cochrane Library is a nonsense, then you definitely are going to be asked for data to support that. If as you say, you are just choosing to ignore it, then itās pretty pointless participating in a debate on the topic.
No-one is saying that they are wrong. I am simply presenting the data, the facts which as I said, even now, no-one has disputed or attempted to discredit.
Your personal choice to ignore those facts is absolutely fine, itās a free world however itās pointless debating further once you take that stance.
I have never had the flu injection, l flatly refuse it!
Incorrect.
People with diabetes are more at risk of potentially serious complications of flu infections such as pneumonia. Elevated blood glucose levels, as a response to infection, can increase the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) or Hyperglycaemic Hyperosmolar State (HHS), either of which can be potentially fatal.
I just wonderedā¦ do Vegans refuse the flu injection as it contains eggs?
There are two flu vaccines that donāt contain egg proteins approved for use in adults age 18 and older.
Sadly, you it seems are doing the latter.
Edited to addā¦I had mine on Thursday.
No it isnāt.
Yep. Not my point though. The flu jab is the flu jab. What it is and what it contains is not affected by the health of the person it goes into.
Really. What facts are those then ?
Further reading for those interested:
Flu Vaccine for All: A Critical Look at the Evidence
[I]"The rationale for flu immunization as a national health priority is that influenza is a disease with serious complications, such as pneumonia, hospitalization, and death.[5,13,28] If the reason for influenza vaccination is that flu is such a serious disease, then the relevant outcomes are whether vaccination improves morbidity and mortality from flu. However, after decades of vaccine use, it is hard to detect any public health impact. This is in stark contrast to other routine vaccinations, such as polio and Haemophilus influenzae type b, where introduction of the vaccine led to obvious decline of the disease.
We are paediatricians, and we believe in childhood immunizations. Many vaccines have provided immense public health value. We simply question whether the policy of routine influenza vaccination has outpaced the data supporting its use.
Influenza vaccination now supersedes many other priorities of public health (such as obesity, illiteracy, and high school dropout), and we question whether so much time, effort, and money should be dedicated to flu vaccination while these other national healthcare priorities remain on the back burner."[/I]
And another:
A Shot Never Worth Taking: The Flu Vaccine
"Tragically, we all know, now, of someone who has died from the flu vaccine, just this past week. CHANDLER WEBB, a healthy 19 year old, was given a āroutineā and ārecommendedā flu vaccine at his physical, one day before he became violently ill, and one month before he died. He died from vaccine-induced encephalitis, a known risk of this intervention. In addition to feeling remorse for the pain that this family is experiencing, I feel rage for what I believe to be manslaughter. This is a medical intervention, delivered without any regard for its objectively determined lack of efficacy, and its potential to maim and kill healthy adults. "
āIt doesnāt work: The Cochrane Database ā 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: āthere is no evidence that any influenza vaccine thus far developed is effective in preventing or mitigating any attack of influenza.ā Liking the idea of being protected from the flu does not equate to being protected from the flu. Thatās essentially what your vaccine-promoting doctor (or pharmacist) is engaging in ā promoting an idea.ā
The point is that the health of the person can be crucial in their need to be protected from contracting the flu by the protection that the vaccine gives them.