I just read all the CDC info. I don't know what I'm saying that's so weird to anyone: since I never get the flu, the side effects aren't worth getting the shot. At all. When I get older or slip into a high-risk category or anyone living with me does the same, I will happily get a yearly shot. But until then, probably not.
Most people are very lucky. The difference between myself and many of them is simply that I realize and acknowledge my good fortune. If I weren't an atheist I'd be certain I was god's favorite. Born into a fantastic family, growing up in a wonderful small town in America's most beautiful state, knowing so many good people, leading an exhilarating and memorable life and living my dream here in Beautiful Central Oregon. But from a health standpoint, I was born with a weak or messed-up auto-immune system which is why I had the measles twice, chicken pox 3 times and nearly died from the horrific Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (likely triggered by a vaccine), all before I reached age 14. SJS didn't kill me, but it pretty much destroyed any chance I ever had for dental health. http://sjsupport.org/?p=753 It's also probably why I developed Psoriasis in my twenties and now have Psoriatic Arthritis and a higher chance of getting cancer.
LOL. Why does Ford recommend you buy an F-150? In historical terms, the American Medical Association's policy of allowing its constituent groups to be racially segregated in areas with widespread prejudice faced considerable opposition from doctors as well as other health care professionals. This came to a head during the Civil Rights Movement, pressure coming from organization such as the Medical Committee for Human Rights (MCHR), and the AMA finally gave up the policy in the late 1960s. Retrospective articles by the AMA's own publications have criticized the AMA's past tolerance of discrimination as against fundamental medical ethics. One such 2008 article used the title "African American Physicians and Organized Medicine, 1846-1968: Origins of a Racial Divide".[34] The intersection of race and health in the U.S. has long been a disputed topic relating to many factors.[35] As well, in terms of history, the AMA's foot-dragging in helping foreign-trained medical professionals fleeing to the U.S. from Nazi-controlled Germany and adjacent nations has brought criticism. Despite a widespread need among natural-born Americans for health services, particularly in the context of the Great Depression, the number of newly licensed foreign-trained doctors after Adolf Hitler came to power remained similar to previous totals.[36] In economic terms, several critics of the American Medical Association, including Nobel Memorial Prize winning economist Milton Friedman as well as his wife, Rose Friedman, have asserted that the organization acts as a guild and has attempted to increase physicians' wages and fees by influencing limitations on the supply of physicians and competition from non-physicians. In the book Free to Choose, a work associated with the television series of the same name, the Friedmans stated that "the AMA has engaged in extensive litigation charging chiropractors and osteopathic physicians with the unlicensed practice of medicine, in an attempt to restrict them to as narrow an area as possible."[36] Counters to this argument have appeared in publications such as The Wall Street Journal, in which AMA-related doctor Cecil B. Wilson argued that the AMA "has been supportive of medical school expansion to help ensure there are enough physicians to care for all Americans." Wilson remarked specifically as well that the sum of "medical schools accredited by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education, of which the AMA is one of two co-sponsors, increased from 125 in 2006 to 137 in 2012" and that the "number of medical students in the U.S. is also increasing."[37] Profession and Monopoly, a book published in 1975, also condemned the AMA for limiting the supply of physicians and inflating the cost of medical care in the U.S. The book asserted that physician supply is kept low by the AMA to ensure high pay for practicing physicians. It states that in the United States the number, curriculum, and size of medical schools are restricted by state licensing boards controlled by representatives of state medical societies associated with the AMA. The book is also critical of the ethical rules adopted by the AMA which restrict advertisement and other types of competition between professionals. It points out that advertising and bargaining can result in expulsion from the AMA and legal revocation of licenses. Restrictions against advertising that is not false or deceptive were dropped from the AMA Code of Medical Ethics in 1980 (AMA Ethical Policy E-5.02). The book also states that before 1912 the AMA included uniform fees for specific medical procedures in its official code of ethics. The AMA's influence on hospital regulation was also criticized in the book.[38] The belief by the AMA and other industry groups predicting an oversupply of doctors and negative issues as a result, the AMA limiting at least somewhat the number of new doctors, has picked up criticism for having created a problem in the other direction. More recently, the AMA changed its position and acknowledged a doctor shortage in multiple areas instead, predicting U.S. trends could worsen.[39] It has been argued, through a commentary article, that the AMA's CPT monopoly has been created by the government and makes the organization subject to government influence. Further, the restricted access to CPT codes may not be in the interest of its constituents.[40] In a 1987 antitrust court case, a federal district judge called the AMA's behavior toward chiropractors "systematic, long-term wrongdoing". The AMA was accused of limiting the associations between physicians and chiropractors. In the 1960s and 1970s, the association's Committee on Quackery was said to have targeted the chiropractic profession, and for many years the AMA held that it was unethical for physicians to refer patients to chiropractors or to receive referrals from chiropractors
This is the exact sentiment I'm defending. If someone decides they don't want something in their body, they don't have to. It doesn't matter if it's the end all be all cure for everything, they don't have to put it in their body. To force it would be an ultimate form of intrusion.
Because if more people got the flu shot then less people would be passing it around? Because some idiot doesn’t get it for their kid and they get the flu and get really sick (and in extreme cases die? It’s not just about the individual who doesn’t get a flu shot. And if you really want to get into it, how about the cost of treating people. And why do we have seat belt laws?
I mean, I get the flu shot every year for my asthma. But forcing it on someone for the betterment of me is a little much. That's similar to me if I went around and started yelling at all the people smoking outside because it fucks up my lungs. I think everyone should get the flu shot, but if they want to be a dumbass (my opinion) and not get one. So be it.
Banned? Why are there so many people smoking freely outside downtown everyday? It's not just cigarettes either. Weed also makes my lungs get wacky. Any smoke.
Yeah banned. You left the house recently? You can’t smoke within 50 feet or whatever of plenty of places. But why? Why do they ban it?
Someone is testy tonight. Yes. I just told you I see people freely smoking ALL the time downtown. Right on the street. Where I walk. Guess it's ok because it's not right next to the building entrance though huh?
Well it goes to the other issue - that downtown Portland is a shit show. Next time I see a “no smoking within 50 ft sign” I’ll send your way.
Some flu vaccines have no mercury. Others that have mercury, use mercury that is bound up with other atoms that make it relatively harmless. Nope, you're better off with the shot. By the way, some dental fillings contain mercury and I don't hear a great hue and cry about that. That mercury is also in a form that is benign.
I always find it funny how people react to things like a extremely small amount of a chemical in something when they have been eating tuna fish for years that contains about the same amount and not a whimper. Being one who worked in the chemical industry since I was 23 I have been exposed to some very dangerous chemicals and this was way before many safety precautions were implemented. Acetone, Toluene, Methylene Chloride, TriChlor. Tri Ethane, Xylene etc. was an everyday experience.