Fever broke?
Jan. 5th, 2008 08:40 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icarusI think the fever's broken, not sure. Either that or I'm having a brief respite, which -- hey -- I'll take it. My throat hurts like you wouldn't believe but even that's an improvement.
I have a theory.
I think these flus are the fault of flu shots.
I never used to get sick, or else which I did, it wasn't very serious. I got a very bad virus back in 1987, then the next one (other than a sniffly week or two) was in the late 90s, once flu shots started to gain popularity. Once my office (from 2000 onward) started pushing flu shots on the entire staff (and you were strongly advised to get one, it was provided for free, in-house -- seems someone examined the stats on on the costs of missed work days) I caught a severe virus every year.
So here's my working theory: flu shots are great for those who get them, terrible for those who don't. By combining the worst flu viruses into one vaccine, people are being exposed to a greater variety of brutal viruses. Most of which they would never face without the shot. Those who have the shot become carriers because viruses aren't the same as polio, measles, etc. Viruses mutate. The whole flu shot theory is founded upon everyone getting the shot.
Now here's where I get cynical. There are only a couple companies allowed to produce flu shots in the U.S. This is a very profitable business, increasingly so with corporations on board with the flu shot theory, sponsoring flu shots for their employees. There may be good intentions involved, but I bet someone at these businesses knows there's a risk of increasing flu epidemics if not everyone gets the shot.
God, I'm so sick of the U.S.
I have a theory.
I think these flus are the fault of flu shots.
I never used to get sick, or else which I did, it wasn't very serious. I got a very bad virus back in 1987, then the next one (other than a sniffly week or two) was in the late 90s, once flu shots started to gain popularity. Once my office (from 2000 onward) started pushing flu shots on the entire staff (and you were strongly advised to get one, it was provided for free, in-house -- seems someone examined the stats on on the costs of missed work days) I caught a severe virus every year.
So here's my working theory: flu shots are great for those who get them, terrible for those who don't. By combining the worst flu viruses into one vaccine, people are being exposed to a greater variety of brutal viruses. Most of which they would never face without the shot. Those who have the shot become carriers because viruses aren't the same as polio, measles, etc. Viruses mutate. The whole flu shot theory is founded upon everyone getting the shot.
Now here's where I get cynical. There are only a couple companies allowed to produce flu shots in the U.S. This is a very profitable business, increasingly so with corporations on board with the flu shot theory, sponsoring flu shots for their employees. There may be good intentions involved, but I bet someone at these businesses knows there's a risk of increasing flu epidemics if not everyone gets the shot.
God, I'm so sick of the U.S.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-01-06 08:34 am (UTC)Not always true. The literature given to parents who are having their kids immunised for some things (I think mumps is one of them) seems to say that adults who are unimmunised and have never had the disease might be at risk from close contact with their recently immunised kid for a day or so.
We'll be being very careful of my husband for a few days when my daughter gets her MMR. He may go away on a trip for the weekend.
Your main point, that being immunised doesn't make you into a carrier of the disease, is largely correct, of course.