Tetanus Shot and What Else?

[seaeagle]

There may be a better Shingles vaccine coming. The current one seems like a crap shoot

A second shingles vaccine from drug manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline, Shingrix, may be available if the FDA approves their filing. Shingrix, a two-dose vaccine, distinguishes itself from Zostavax because it’s derived from a protein of the virus rather than a live strain. The efficacy of Shingrix is more impressive, as Reuters noted that “in clinical trials, GSK’s vaccine remained 90 percent effective in people over age 70, even four years after injections.”

http://www.naturalblaze.com/2017/04/...o-prevent.html

[loulac]

Originally Posted by seaeagle

There may be a better Shingles vaccine coming.l

You're right, Shingrix will be much more effective than Zostavax. The problem is that the FDA is not always in a hurry to give its green light to a new product. If the wait is too long Zostavax can be selected, as far as I know it has never been proved it had caused a case of shingles.
The most important point to know is that you must react immediately if you suspect a rash to be a case of shingles. If you are away from home, and do nothing for a week the consequences will be irreversible, you're likely to suffer from it all your life. Dermatologists keep a list of patients who commited suicide as the pain was unbearable with no hope of recovery.

[Jimbotomateo]

Originally Posted by loulac

You're right, Shingrix will be much more effective than Zostavax. The problem is that the FDA is not always in a hurry to give its green light to a new product. If the wait is too long Zostavax can be selected, as far as I know it has never been proved it had caused a case of shingles.
The most important point to know is that you must react immediately if you suspect a rash to be a case of shingles. If you are away from home, and do nothing for a week the consequences will be irreversible, you're likely to suffer from it all your life. Dermatologists keep a list of patients who commited suicide as the pain was unbearable with no hope of recovery.

Dr gave me a prescription for shot but two places i checked didn't have it. Nurse was going to check to see if insurance would allow my drs office to give shot. Thanks for reminding me.. Jimbo

[bower]

I am generally pro-vaccination but don't find the flu shot a bit tempting. I've never had it, but I've watched my folks get them and then get sick anyway.
Getting the shot every year may reduce its efficacy, according to recent news.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4387051/
https://www.statnews.com/2015/11/11/...effectiveness/
They still recommend people to get it, but are studying to figure out why this happens and what should be done about it. So it's not just the question of having the right strains for the season.

My mom has an immune condition so we are careful not to expose her to anything. I'm not often sick, but if I have had any exposure I stay away from her too until incubation time has run out. In any case if you practice good hygiene you greatly reduce the risk of passing on influenza or other colds and viruses. People with bad habits are bad news.

[gorbelly]

Originally Posted by loulac

shingles.
The most important point to know is that you must react immediately if you suspect a rash to be a case of shingles. If you are away from home, and do nothing for a week the consequences will be irreversible, you're likely to suffer from it all your life. Dermatologists keep a list of patients who commited suicide as the pain was unbearable with no hope of recovery.

The vast majority of people who get shingles recover just fine.

But it's reportedly really miserable to go through, so if a vaccine is available and affordable, there's no reason to not get it if you're the target group for the disease.

[gorbelly]

Originally Posted by bower

I am generally pro-vaccination but don't find the flu shot a bit tempting. I've never had it, but I've watched my folks get them and then get sick anyway.
Getting the shot every year may reduce its efficacy, according to recent news.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4387051/
https://www.statnews.com/2015/11/11/...effectiveness/
They still recommend people to get it, but are studying to figure out why this happens and what should be done about it. So it's not just the question of having the right strains for the season.

Regardless, getting the vaccine is better than not getting it, and there's no reason to not get it unless you have a compelling medical reason it poses a danger to you. Nothing really controversial there, although it's an interesting medical mystery.

[Jimbotomateo]

Originally Posted by gorbelly

Regardless, getting the vaccine is better than not getting it, and there's no reason to not get it unless you have a compelling medical reason it poses a danger to you. Nothing really controversial there, although it's an interesting medical mystery.

Speaking only for me personally.. I used to get the bad flus in the years before I got shots. With yearly shot the incidence of flu was drastically reduced. The times I did contract something the symptoms were much less severe for me than others. Also the time frame for recovery was greatly reduced. Could be just coincidence.. Jimbo

[seaeagle]

Originally Posted by gorbelly

Regardless, getting the vaccine is better than not getting it, and there's no reason to not get it unless you have a compelling medical reason it poses a danger to you. Nothing really controversial there, although it's an interesting medical mystery.

Let's say the vaccine only lasts 4 years like the article I linked to in my previous post says.

According to Web MD and I am not sure of this someone here may know better but they say its a one time vaccination

The shingles vaccine is routinely recommended for adults older than 60 years of age. The vaccine is given as a single dose and is only given once.

So assuming the vaccine lasts only 4 years and you can only have it once, when do you roll the dice? 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 70?

In England they won't let you get it until you are 70 years old

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccina...d-answers.aspx

Well my Kool-Aid is ready LMAO

And I am not anti-vaccination, I'll get a Tetanus vaccination and have had at least 5 I think.Never had a flu shot though and had the flu once

[gorbelly]

Originally Posted by seaeagle

Let's say the vaccine only lasts 4 years like the article I linked to in my previous post says.

According to Web MD and I am not sure of this someone here may know better but they say its a one time vaccination

The shingles vaccine is routinely recommended for adults older than 60 years of age. The vaccine is given as a single dose and is only given once.

So assuming the vaccine lasts only 4 years and you can only have it once, when do you roll the dice? 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 70?In England they won't let you get it until you are 70 years oldhttp://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccinations/Pages/shingles-vaccine-questions-and-answers.aspxWell my Kool-Aid is ready LMAOAnd I am not anti-vaccination, I'll get a Tetanus vaccination and have had at least 5 I think.Never had a flu shot though and had the flu once

My comment you're responding to is in response to a specific point about the flu vaccine, not about shingles vaccine.

And who is saying the shingles vaccine only lasts 4 years? According to you:

Originally Posted by seaeagle

Reuters noted that “in clinical trials, GSK’s vaccine remained 90 percent effective in people over age 70, even four years after injections.”

All that says is that the new vaccine is proving to still provide reliable immunity after 4 years of testing. That has nothing to do with when the old vaccine or the new vaccine loses efficacy.

As for the "article" you link to from a notorious woo-woo site about Zostavax causing shingles, I'd take that "source" with a dump truck of salt.

It's true that newer vaccines have less testing behind them, since they are newer, and anything newer has less data associated with it. Exactly how effective the shingles vaccine is may be yet to be determined. But if I were in the age target group, I'd get it as long as it didn't cost too much. Why not? Being ill and disabled by a painful malady when old is something worth trying to avoid. Even if a benefit isn't proven to be 100%, if there's a good chance it cuts my risk by half and has very low risk of bad side effects, that seems like an easy calculation to me.

[Jimbotomateo]

Originally Posted by gorbelly

My comment you're responding to is in response to a specific point about the flu vaccine, not about shingles vaccine.

And who is saying the shingles vaccine only lasts 4 years? According to you:



All that says is that the new vaccine is proving to still provide reliable immunity after 4 years of testing. That has nothing to do with when the old vaccine or the new vaccine loses efficacy.

As for the "article" you link to from a notorious woo-woo site about Zostavax causing shingles, I'd take that "source" with a dump truck of salt.

It's true that newer vaccines have less testing behind them, since they are newer, and anything newer has less data associated with it. Exactly how effective the shingles vaccine is may be yet to be determined. But if I were in the age target group, I'd get it as long as it didn't cost too much. Why not? Being ill and disabled by a painful malady when old is something worth trying to avoid. Even if a benefit isn't proven to be 100%, if there's a good chance it cuts my risk by half and has very low risk of bad side effects, that seems like an easy calculation to me.

In the 60s you got a cold lasted two days. In the 70s we started getting flus that lasted longer and were quite miserable. Dr would give shot, cortisone I think, that would get you going again. Then it was stuff that lasted 6 weeks or more! Now these flues are long lasting and seem to morph into several different symptoms. Almost like they were designed. In the 60s we got something they called Hong Kong flu. Lasted two weeks and the whole time you almost wished you were dead!. You don't want to hear about those symptoms!. Jimbo

[bower]

If there was a vaccine for "just plain cranky" I believe I would get it, whether at risk or not.

[seaeagle]

Originally Posted by gorbelly

My comment you're responding to is in response to a specific point about the flu vaccine, not about shingles vaccine.

And who is saying the shingles vaccine only lasts 4 years? According to you:



All that says is that the new vaccine is proving to still provide reliable immunity after 4 years of testing. That has nothing to do with when the old vaccine or the new vaccine loses efficacy.

As for the "article" you link to from a notorious woo-woo site about Zostavax causing shingles, I'd take that "source" with a dump truck of salt.

It's true that newer vaccines have less testing behind them, since they are newer, and anything newer has less data associated with it. Exactly how effective the shingles vaccine is may be yet to be determined. But if I were in the age target group, I'd get it as long as it didn't cost too much. Why not? Being ill and disabled by a painful malady when old is something worth trying to avoid. Even if a benefit isn't proven to be 100%, if there's a good chance it cuts my risk by half and has very low risk of bad side effects, that seems like an easy calculation to me.

My apologies, I didn't know we had started talking about the flu shot, and nothing personal meant at all. It's just a good debate to me.

Back to the Shingles debate.The attorney that is bringing the class action lawsuit against Merck is one of the top trial lawyers in the United States according to Fortune Magazine and many others and he thinks he has a good case.Forget the fringe website that I linked as these were probably the same kind of nuts who were warning us about the dangers of tobacco and asbestos back in 50's.

And there is evidence that this so called Shingles Vaccine starts losing its effectiveness after 4 years.

This one time vaccine was thought to be effective for a lifetime. Now we are finding that the effectiveness starts to wane as early as 4 years

References: Jacobsen, E et al. Herpes Zoster infection. Clinician Reviews, August 2013, pp. 42-49.

After I finish this Kool-Aid I promise I will be good

[imp]

Originally Posted by Jimbotomateo

In the 60s you got a cold lasted two days. In the 70s we started getting flus that lasted longer and were quite miserable. Dr would give shot, cortisone I think, that would get you going again. Then it was stuff that lasted 6 weeks or more! Now these flues are long lasting and seem to morph into several different symptoms. Almost like they were designed. In the 60s we got something they called Hong Kong flu. Lasted two weeks and the whole time you almost wished you were dead!. You don't want to hear about those symptoms!. Jimbo

I don't think you were getting cortisone for the flu.

There have been several flu epidemics here in this country, one I experienced and posted about earlier. Spanish Flu anyone? Killed lots of people and those who got it and survived were sick a long time, some with life long effects.

Flu illnesses, since they are virus' can change quickly as they go through a community. Virus' are really pretty neat to study, so many options and the virus can be incredibly adaptable.

[bower]

Originally Posted by imp

I don't think you were getting cortisone for the flu.

There have been several flu epidemics here in this country, one I experienced and posted about earlier. Spanish Flu anyone? Killed lots of people and those who got it and survived were sick a long time, some with life long effects.

Flu illnesses, since they are virus' can change quickly as they go through a community. Virus' are really pretty neat to study, so many options and the virus can be incredibly adaptable.

Bird flu, Spanish flu... yep I would be stepping up to get the shot if they had one.
I read about virus a lot. Including influenza.
We had swine flu a couple years ago that was a bad one, but the shots hadn't arrived here before the flu did. I had a big sales event right around that time, so definite likelihood of exposure. So I did what works for me, that is:
1) minimize the amount of inoculum. Wash hands. Don't eat or put hand to face for any reason without washing hands.
2) kill any airborne virus that you may have taken home at the end of the day. I put eucalyptus oil and cinnamon oil on a tissue, and just sit and inhale it for about five minutes after getting home.
3) assume you have contracted the virus and treat yourself as if already sick. Pamper yourself with good food and as much rest as you can get. My flu kit includes:
pomegranate juice; and/or black currant (antiviral flu)
eleuthero (aka siberian ginseng) tincture
vitamin C X 1000 mg for antihistamine fx
cinnamon oil (antiviral flu) + eucalyptus oil (just a great antiinflammatory for respiratory stuff)
lemon, garlic, eggs, soup cube for the quick and easy food

As long as exposure is small enough, I reckon I can get the jump on the average flu, and get my immunity the scary way... live. As long as you kill it good and they aren't too many, it seems to work.

But as I commented earlier, that reasoning doesn't apply to tetanus. Shot is the best medicine.

[brownrexx]

Hubby and I both got the Zostivax vaccine several years ago. No ill effects.

I have known people, including my mom, who have had shingles and it was not pretty. It is not just that the rash looks bad but it is very, very painful.