<p>In the last couple of years I’ve sensed that my immune system is a bit weak, so now I definitely get a flu shot. I’m not generally against vaccines. </p>
<p>But for young resilient teens, I just wonder if a yearly flu shot prohibits the development of a stronger immune system, and whether they will be more vulnerable in later years. </p>
<p>(There was an unusual flu in the last few years that was causing death in kids at a higher rate, so I didn’t question that one.)</p>
<p>I’m not a scientist. I doubt there have been longterm studies on this, because flu shots haven’t been around long enough to answer the question I have. A lot of people, including docs, are all for any vaccine, but I wonder what this issue looks like from a longterm viewpoint?</p>
<p>The official recommendation is for everyone age 6 months and older to get a flu shot, both to protect themselves from a wretchedly miserable illness and to protect high-risk people around them (such as elderly grandparents or family members with asthma or heart disease) from an illness that can kill them. Vaccination of other people is also the only way to protect young infants from the flu.</p>
<p>I don’t think these recommendations are made lightly. </p>
<p>My kids, who are in their twenties, have been getting flu shots every year for quite a while now. Their colleges recommended them even before the CDC did (because flu can spread like wildfire in residence halls). This is something they actually remember to do themselves; they don’t want to get sick for a week or more. </p>
<p>Personally, I think that despite all the vaccines, there are plenty of diseases around that we all have to fight off naturally – including an abundance of different cold viruses. If we can be protected against the bad ones, and I count flu as a bad one, great. And I don’t worry about my kids becoming more vulnerable to flu as they get older because they’ll keep getting flu shots every year – just as I will.</p>
<p>When my son was 15, he got the flu. He was very very sick for a good week. He later said to me, “Do you mean there was a shot you could have gotten me so I wouldn’t have gotten sick?!” I felt like a terrible mother!!</p>
<p>Be careful about those shots! What is NOT reported so much are the people who have life-threatening reactions to flu shots. My family personally knows 3 people who were diagnosed with brain cancer shortly after getting a flu shot. It’s pretty scary! It’s hard to dismiss this as having no connection at all - I wonder if the flu shot weakens the immune system which caused the cancer to present itself? Who knows? Hard to be sure!</p>
<p>I work for a pediatric office and our docs recommend kids up to 18 receive it. Recommendations are usually made for these type of things (from places like the CDC or Academy of Pediatrics) when there have been a significant number of consequences (like severe illness or death) from the illness. The recommendations are not made lightly and have much backing behind it (research and statistics) before any medical governing body will recommend it.</p>
<p>Starting in 2000 and up until last year, I always got flu shots for my kids. Our pediatrician used the single shot vials. He died last summer and our new doctor can’t get the single shot vials. Our ped had told us that peds doctors got the single shots first and our new doc is a family practitioner. My husband and I are fighting over it because he doesn’t believe in multi-use vials. I get a flu shot at work and I made D get one last year at college but this year, husband talked her out of it. I took the kids and tried to get it but the boys said “Dad doesn’t want us to” so the doctor refused. I am SO angry over this stubborness on husband’s part. It’s not like he even believes in vaccines and autism and, besides, with the youngest being 12 it’s not likely that any of them will wake up autistic one day. What angers me the most is that he had asthma and bad lungs, as well as a heart condition, and could die if he gets the flu but he won’t get the shot.</p>
<p>I am a scientist, an immunologist in fact. And I can tell you that vaccines do not weaken the immune system, just the opposite in fact. The adjuvants in the vaccine help to keep the immune system cranked up.</p>
<p>When you are exposed to an infectious disease what ensues is a race - a race between your immune system and the germ to see which can expand and become activated the fastest and gain the upper hand. When your immune system wins you either don’t get the disease at all or you get a sub-clinical infection, i.e. no symptoms. When the germ wins you get sick.</p>
<p>The way all preventative (as opposed to therapeutic) vaccines work is to to expose your immune system to a dead or weakened form of the microbe that can’t cause an infection but can induce the immune system to react as though there is one. Thus your immune system expands and activates in advance of the real infection. It gets a “head start” in the race. When the real infection then comes along later the immune system much more easily wins the race and and prevents the disease.</p>
<p>Vaccines aren’t perfect. Even the very best ones are not 100% effective. And like all drugs there are side effects, but weakening the immune system isn’t one of them. On the whole they are a very good deal. I keep all my immunizations up to date and make sure my kids do too.</p>
<p>D2 got the flu 2 years in a row while in grade school (and gave it to me one year :(). After that we all started getting flu shots every year.</p>
<p>I have a different opinion from the OP about long term immunity. Remember that elderly people were statistically less likely to get H1N1 (swine flu) a couple of years ago? This thought to be because of residual immunity from a previous version of the flu. And remember how long it took to get the H1N1 shots out for public use (D2 and I both got that, too, before the shots were available… ugh). I figure that getting flu shots every year could provide a degree of immunity in some future year if the flu shot manufacturers misjudge what the dominant strain will be that year. Or if something new like H1N1 emerges and shots aren’t available right away, but there is some residual immunity from some previous strain we are vaccinated against. I also know that there is some question about how long the vaccine immunity lasts, or how effective it is in all recipients). But I still think we are improving our odds if something like the 1918 influenza outbreak hits the world again.</p>
<p>Joan52, can you get FluMist for your kid? Would that offset your husband’s concern? Insurance coverage for it has improved (at least ours has) since it first came out.</p>
<p>A few more flu statistics for the OP and others:
Seasonal influenza is the 7th leading cause of death in the US
500 million people got the 1918 Spanish flu, killing 20-40 million people.<br>
Soldiers were vaccinated with the earliest influenza vaccine in the 1940. Those soldiers (like my dad) certainly don’t seem to have compromised immune systems.
The current egg-based process for creating flu vaccines was created in the 1950s. So there are certainly people who were vaccinated starting 50 years ago who are still alive today without any notable negative impact on their immune system.</p>
<p>Our whole family gets them with no side effects so far. Our 16 yr. old son has an autoimmune disease and takes meds that inhibit his immunity system so we make sure to get them to expose both him and my elderly mom to as little as possible. I am a firm believer that the benefits of vaccines outweigh the risks, but I guess it has to be a personal decision.</p>
<p>My insurance covers Flumist only if there is a medical reason for not taking the shot. My husband’s insane theories about multi-use vials don’t qualify. However, our insurance is changing 1/1 and I will check with the new carrier on this topic.</p>
<p>Coureur -</p>
<p>To sort of threadjack - my D received the HPV/Gardasil set of shots. Now I see they are saying boys should get them as well. I have 4 sons, 21 down to 12. The oldest is the only one who is sexually active and I know his gf of 3 years has not had the shots because her mother doesn’t believe in it. I am very willing to get the shots for my boys, to protect them and to protect their partners, but I am not sure if the vaccine is as useful for boys as for girls. Do you have any thoughts on this? Thanks.</p>
<p>Joan52…if your son has a heart ocndition and asthma he will not be eligible for the nasal flumist. Since the make up of the mist is different (it’s a live attenuated influenza virus) people with asthma or other health conditions should not use it…what if you ask the office if your kids can have the first doses from the vial? You (your husband) could watch them open the vial for the first time to be more comfortable? Offices go thru so many vials that I think they could easily accommodate this request!</p>
<p>It’s my husband who has the heart condition and asthma. Thankfully, my children have all enjoyed fairly good health. I do like the suggestion about using the first dose from the vial. I hadn’t thought of that. Maybe my husband would agree if the doctor used a vial just dedicated to them (5 in all) and not one that was already opened. Thank you for the suggestion. You can’t know how much it has troubled me that the children have not had flu shots for 2 years. It bothers me about hubby, too, but he is an adult.</p>
<p>Joan.hubby def needs the vaccine every year! ( I can imagine he is not the best patient and would be miserable to be around if he was sick!
Most docs/offices are more than happy to use a new vial, open the vial seals, open the sterile packaging of the syringes etc. in front of the patient (or parent) if it makes them more comfortable…</p>
<p>I remember reading somewhere that most deaths in 1918 were due to secondary infections, which can be treated now with antibiotics which weren’t available in 1918.</p>
<p>Bird flu, swine flu, H1N1… all proclaimed the next pandemic, all more or less fizzled.</p>
<p>What is his particular objection to the multi-dose vials? Is it that they are preserved with thimerosal (single-dose vials and pre-filled needles generally do not have thimerosal)?</p>
<p>Many pharmacies (Walgreens, CVS, Safeway, etc.) offer flu vaccine. They often have a choice, with options for thimerosal-free or nasal spray. Even if you have to pay for it yourself, the cost is often significantly lower than going to your doctor’s office for it.</p>
<p>intparent, thank you for all those historical facts! (just to make clear, I didn’t have an opinion so much as was wondering.)
coureur, this is so helpful and exactly the stuff I didn’t know!
And I very much look forard to reading the Atlantic article.
Thank you everybody.</p>
<p>Yes, his objection is to the thimerosal but he also objects to an already used vial. I can probably handle that one but the pharmacies around here did not have Thimerosal free flu shots last year. I will go around and ask again. He can’t do the Flumist becuase of his health. Our co-pay is $20 but I think shots are exempt. Anyway, it’s not the money because I also have a medical care account and if it’s got no more money in it, I can thankfully afford to pay.</p>
<p>Well, the HPV virus has a different presentation and causes different cancers in males than females. The penile cancer it causes in males is far rarer than the cervical cancer in females. But that doesn’t mean it’s not beneficial. Clinical trials were done to show the benefits to males as well as females. Plus it makes sense to treat both halves of the HPV transmission equation and not just the female side.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>That has happened to me a few years too. My understanding is that the extended soreness is possible when the vaccine is inadvertently inject very near a nerve. The nerve reacts to the inflammation produced at the injection site. As I recall it took a while but the pain did eventually clear up.</p>
