"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - Flu shot - an easy way to prevent training interruption?

Nothing ruins a good build period like an illness. Did you, or will you, get a flu shot?

Got mine.

I love them.

I prefer the flu. I have it now. Or maybe it's a bad cold. Can anyone really tell the difference?

No.

Ya know Pcad, people your age die from the flu frequently. Immunizations are good. I get all I can.

Got mine on Tuesday. As a state employee I get it for free.

Hope you feel better soon, Pcad.

Ya know Pcad, people your age die from the flu frequently. Immunizations are good. I get all I can.

I will outlive all of you. If this cold doesn't kill me I mean.

By the way, thanks Gromit.

My professional opinion as a molecular biologist is that they are unnecessary except for young children and elderly persons. In adults, especially physically active ones, regular consumption of vitamin C in a natural form (eg. orange juice) as part of a balanced diet (ie. not fast food) and getting a consistent 8-9 hours sleep per night are just as effective, if not more so, than flu vaccination.

Flu almost killed me the one year I skipped vaccination. I'd suffocate when I nodded off because breathing required so much effort it couldn't be done while sleeping. Took a week in the hospital and another month before I could climb a flight of stairs without stopping to catch my breath.

I don't get them in part because, World Health Officials select three strains they figure will be most virulent for the next season, culture in chicken embryo and then put 25 micrograms of Thermarisol in it. Sounds yummy but, I'll take my chances. Here the timeline. http://www.influenza.com/Index.cfm?FA=Science_History_6

elgalad, do you know how accurate the strain selection is?

Hell no. The flu affects you for one or maybe two days unless you are old, feeble, or pregnant.

On the other hand, the mercury and formaldehyde in the flu vaccination affect you for your entire life. And, as elgalad inferred, even if you get the flu vaccination, you still have a fair chance of contracting the flu.

And, as elgalad inferred, even if you get the flu vaccination, you still have a fair chance of contracting the flu.

I was trying to read between the lines in his post, and I didn't catch that.

I'm a college kid, so I got mine. I've had pneumonia 3 times (2 being in college) many of those times starting from flu. When I get pneumonia, I feel weak as hell for about a month, and takes for ever to get back to the shape you were in before the illness. If getting my flu shot can cut my chances slightly, I'm taking the edge.

ive never gotten the flu so i see no need to get a shot to prevent it

Hell no. The flu affects you for one or maybe two days unless you are old, feeble, or pregnant.

:rolleyes:

Do you by any chance ride a triple?

I've never been terribly impressed with Chuck Norris.

Hell no. The flu affects you for one or maybe two days unless you are old, feeble, or pregnant.


Apparently you have never contracted influenza. Should that ever occur, you'll be clearing your calendar for a week. Actually, somebody else will have to do that for you, you'll be flat on your back in bed. I got the flu half a dozen times as a kid, and maybe 3x since age 20 (50 now). I don't sense that what I have now is flu, but for a cold, it's a whopper. So perhaps it's a less virulent flu strain. Again, what's the difference? Only your microbiologist can tell you. I don't have one.

To understand the true cluelessness of sestevers' post one need only study the influenza pandemic of 1918 that killed millions globally, including tens of thousands in the US. Most of them young, strong, healthy army recruits living in training camps here in the USA. There's a monument in Cresskill, NJ that we pass on the Nyack Ride each Sunday. A 50' tall obelisk. It was erected in commemoration of all the young soldiers who died in that influenza outbreak. They weren't old, feeble or pregnant when they died.

I've never been terribly impressed with Chuck Norris.

I watched "Walker, Texas Ranger" for two years before figuring out that it is not actually a comedy.

Hell no. The flu affects you for one or maybe two days unless you are old, feeble, or pregnant.

On the other hand, the mercury and formaldehyde in the flu vaccination affect you for your entire life. And, as elgalad inferred, even if you get the flu vaccination, you still have a fair chance of contracting the flu.

Please tell us: where did you get your medical degree?

^^^You'll develop antibodies to the three strains that are injected into your body. If the flu isn't one of those three strains then it's worthless and you've just injected your body full of things that are usually not consumed by humans. That's all.

Go here for a list of what's in the flu Vaccine: http://www.909shot.com/excipients.htm and click on Vaccine Excipient and Media Summary. It's a PDF.

The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is a national, non-profit organization dedicated to preventing vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and defending the right to informed consent to vaccination

Conspiracy theorists are like the inverse of snake oil salesmen: every bit as bad for the opposite reason.

People born into modern western society and given at least a standard education (surprisingly often they've more than that) have also been convinced that:

amalgam fillings are slowly poisoning you
antiperspirant gives you Alzheimer's
sugar gives you diabetes
_________ [insert artificial sweetener] causes cancer of the _________[random organ goes here; brain is a popular choice]
mucous in the intestinal tract is bad
drilling holes in their skulls is therapeutic
man hasn't landed on the moon
someone invented a 100mpg carburetor but the oil companies bought the patent and killed it

Some of these people eventually find Snopes and get wise to reality. The rest are hopelessly lost, and wander around their lives spouting off nonsense to anyone, never realising people know they're full of crap because it's much easier to smile and nod than argue.

Here on the internet, very few feel compelled to smile and nod when presented with such ridiculous asshattery. Anyone who tells you that vaccines are bad is a gudgeon or a wilful idiot.

Ridiculous Asshattery RULES.

elgalad, do you know how accurate the strain selection is?

My understanding is that the selection is usually quite good, given that strains that are gong to be appearing in the US winter have generally already been observed in the southern hemisphere's winter. However, there are no guarantees that you won't come into contact with another strain.

Also, it's important to note that many people who get the shot get flu-like symptoms in the weeks following the jab, which may interfere with your training.

I'm not trying to say that the vaccination is worthless, but the current obsession with bacteria and viral infections that pervades the western mentality is causing more harm than good. Case in point: thanks to the use of antibacterial agents in cleaning products, something on the order of 75% of Australian hospitals now contain one or more antibiotic-resistant strains of staphylococcus.

In my opinion, children, the elderly, and other high-risk groups are the only ones that should obtain regular flu vaccinations.



Ridiculous Asshattery RULES.

Agreed. However, obsessing over non-lethal viral infections is equally absurd.

My professional opinion as a molecular biologist is that they are unnecessary except for young children and elderly persons. In adults, especially physically active ones, regular consumption of vitamin C in a natural form (eg. orange juice) as part of a balanced diet (ie. not fast food) and getting a consistent 8-9 hours sleep per night are just as effective, if not more so, than flu vaccination.

With all due respect, molecular biology and infectious disease are pretty distinct from one another. This is a little like getting advice on cars from a motorcycle expert.

Most GPs agree that flu shots are a good idea for adults with asthma (including sub-clinical asthma) and on medication regimens that conflict with over the counter cold medications.

BTW, there is literally NO downside to the flu shot. Stories of contamination and foul play are exaggerated.

With all due respect, molecular biology and infectious disease are pretty distinct from one another. This is a little like getting advice on cars from a motorcycle expert.

Most GPs agree that flu shots are a good idea for adults with asthma (including sub-clinical asthma) and on medication regimens that conflict with over the counter cold medications.

BTW, there is literally NO downside to the flu shot. Stories of contamination and foul play are exaggerated.

No offense to GP's, but their understanding of infectious diseases stretches about as far as knowing which pills go with which symptoms. My job everyday is to work on the fundamental mechanics of these processes, so I think I'm pretty highly qualified to comment :rolleyes:

Adults with asthma would fall into one of the high-risk groups I was talking about earlier. However, for adults without asthma or other complicating illnesses, the flu shot is unnecessary.

There IS a downside to the flu shot, as I mentioned earlier, in that a significant fraction of those who get it develop flu-like symptoms in the weeks following vaccination. I believe that for healthy adults it is not worth the trouble.

As an 59 year person with asthma I think getting a flu shot every year makes sense. I do agree however that far too many doctors prescribe antibiotics and it has caused a big problem.

Every year I've gotten a flu shot, I get the most insanely virulent flu that ****s me up beyond any flu I've gotten when I *didn't* get a flu shot. Honestly, I have no idea if getting a flu shot is correlated with getting an insanely bad bout of flu, so I decided to test it out. No flu shot this year. :o

My professional opinion as a molecular biologist is that they are unnecessary except for young children and elderly persons. In adults, especially physically active ones, regular consumption of vitamin C in a natural form (eg. orange juice) as part of a balanced diet (ie. not fast food) and getting a consistent 8-9 hours sleep per night are just as effective, if not more so, than flu vaccination.

You need a new profession. Vitamin C has been proven to have no efficacy against viruses.
I guess the great pandemic of 1918 that killed 12 million people worldwide was due to sniffles?

Darwin is clearly at work in this thread.

Honestly, I have no idea if getting a flu shot is correlated with getting an insanely bad bout of flu

It's not.

next.

My understanding is that the selection is usually quite good, given that strains that are gong to be appearing in the US winter have generally already been observed in the southern hemisphere's winter. However, there are no guarantees that you won't come into contact with another strain.

Also, it's important to note that many people who get the shot get flu-like symptoms in the weeks following the jab, which may interfere with your training.

I'm not trying to say that the vaccination is worthless, but the current obsession with bacteria and viral infections that pervades the western mentality is causing more harm than good. Case in point: thanks to the use of antibacterial agents in cleaning products, something on the order of 75% of Australian hospitals now contain one or more antibiotic-resistant strains of staphylococcus.

In my opinion, children, the elderly, and other high-risk groups are the only ones that should obtain regular flu vaccinations.


Tip: before you waste more time with your opinions, take that time to read some books about immunology, because you are seriously confused.

Getting the flu shot is easy and inexpensive "insurance" that increases the likelihood of getting through the winter without nasty illness.
I faithfully get the shot each November in the early part of the month and haven't suffered the flu in decades.

Tip: before you waste more time with your opinions, take that time to read some books about immunology, because you are seriously confused.

If they wouldn't have bothered with smallpox vaccinations it wouldn't be nearly as virulent as it has become now, right?

Well I do know that the shot doesn't do crap for me. I still get the flu. I think because I live in NYC, I'm always going to get it because of the huge variety of lovely bugs I'm exposed to in the subway, so I expect there'll always be 2 weeks off (with an extra week of recovery) during the winter. That's life.

People should keep in mind that the vast majority of people who die from the flu (including in the 1918 "Spanish flu") died from pneumonia, NOT the flu. So, if you're not at risk for contracting pneumonia when your immune system is weakened (like most healthy adults) then you're not risking much by contracting the flu. Yes, you also risk varying levels of pain while you're sick, but not anything that will affect your long-term health.

These are just questions, not really meant to make an argument either way:

Exactly what (besides the obvious: money) is keeping the vaccine companies from producing a vaccine without mercury in it? Pregnant women supposedly endanger their fetuses if they eat too much tuna (which may or may not have elevated mercury levels). But doctors recommend that they knowingly inject mercury directly into their bodies to prevent the flu. Why is there still not an alternative?

How does getting the flu vaccine prevent spreading the flu to others? As far as I know, whether or not I am sick, I can carry and spread plenty of germs and viruses. If specific germs or viruses are introduced into my workplace, for example, I can still transmit those germs or viruses to my family even if I never get the infection. Does the flu really have to be active inside my body for me to transport it to another person?

Flu is for wussy

Exactly what (besides the obvious: money) is keeping the vaccine companies from producing a vaccine without mercury in it? Pregnant women supposedly endanger their fetuses if they eat too much tuna (which may or may not have elevated mercury levels). But doctors recommend that they knowingly inject mercury directly into their bodies to prevent the flu. Why is there still not an alternative?

How does getting the flu vaccine prevent spreading the flu to others? As far as I know, whether or not I am sick, I can carry and spread plenty of germs and viruses. If specific germs or viruses are introduced into my workplace, for example, I can still transmit those germs or viruses to my family even if I never get the infection. Does the flu really have to be active inside my body for me to transport it to another person?

The flu shot does not contain mercury, that's a myth.

http://www.ech.ab.ca/programs/Influenza%20Prevention/Resources/VaccineInformation/Influvac_Product%20Monograph_30MAY2006.pdf
"INFLUVAC is a clear to slightly opalescent liquid. INFLUVAC is thimerosal-free, mercury free,
and contains no preservative."

To be considered contagious you have to have the active disease. Your body has to culture up a significant viral load and then package it into a nice aerosol (cough/sneeze) for others to enjoy.

That's nice to know, but the flu vaccine that I was required to receive when I was in the Navy (just last year) specifically listed Thimerosal in the ingredients. Most likely it's the same vaccine given to anyone using the Naval hospitals (retirees, dependent spouses, and children).

I've heard if you eat your bugers alot, you won't get sick nearly as much... :lol:

I think we should all be able to agree that healthy young athletes don’t NEED a flu shot. We should also be able to agree that for the frail, and their close contacts, the flu shot can be a real life saver.

The purpose of the thread was to discuss if athletes can use the flu shot as a way of ensuring quality training, and as such consider the shot a performance enhancer. Certainly the performance of a healthy person is greater than that of one who has an infection.

Let’s consider a very large imaginary group of well matched athletes on similar training programs. Half the group gets the shot and half does not. Do you think the flu shot group will show greater improvement (or detrain less) than the control group come spring? It certainly seems plausible...

I don't think you'd have valid results favoring one side over the other. Most well-trained athletes wouldn't get the flu even if they didn't get the flu vaccination.

The only way you could achieve the results you're looking for would be to know in advance whether or not someone would have gotten the flu if they had not gotten the vaccination.

You'd also have to consider that a person who got the flu could gain performance by fighting through it... that which does not kill us only makes us stronger, right? Although I don't think you'd see raw strength improvements... improved endurance would make sense.

You'd also have to consider that a person who got the flu could gain performance by fighting through it... that which does not kill us only makes us stronger, right?
--

Are you serious?

My wife received a flu shot this year. She works in a clinic full of sick people. She doesn't go outside much when it's cold.

I didn't get a shot. I work in a small office and hate staying indoors.

Any bets on who gets sick first this year?

If they wouldn't have bothered with smallpox vaccinations it wouldn't be nearly as virulent as it has become now, right?

What? wrong.

This is almost as bad as a Materials Science discussion.

Exactly what (besides the obvious: money) is keeping the vaccine companies from producing a vaccine without mercury in it?

How does getting the flu vaccine prevent spreading the flu to others?


See Enthalpic's comment, no thimerosal has been used in vaccines in 20 years, but regardless, studies have concluded that putting it in or not does not make any difference to health.
You will get 1000X more mercury in a week from riding outside near smelting plants. Some sleazy lawyers have tried to make a buck off of this concept, but the science is not there.

The reason flu spreads is person-to-person, and virus can be shedding before the first person even feels sick. The shot primes your immune system to deal with the virus quickly and not produce any new virus to spread to others.

A more effective campaign than flu shots would be to educate people not to come to work sick, and not to go outside when sick, also, simple rules of how to sneeze in public.

If you don't like vaccines, read up about what life was like before the Salk vaccine in the US. They could not make iron lungs fast enough.

http://pathmicro.med.sc.edu/lecture/images/ilung35p.jpg

If you don't like vaccines, read up about what life was like before the Salk vaccine in the US. They could not make iron lungs fast enough.

http://pathmicro.med.sc.edu/lecture/images/ilung35p.jpg

Today they would be CF or Ti Lungs.

I thought it was a scene from "The Matrix".

I don't think you'd have valid results favoring one side over the other. Most well-trained athletes wouldn't get the flu even if they didn't get the flu vaccination.

The only way you could achieve the results you're looking for would be to know in advance whether or not someone would have gotten the flu if they had not gotten the vaccination.

You'd also have to consider that a person who got the flu could gain performance by fighting through it... that which does not kill us only makes us stronger, right? Although I don't think you'd see raw strength improvements... improved endurance would make sense.

We are looking at statistics not individual cases. So of course there will be people in the shot group who get the flu and/or experience an adverse effect. Likewise there will be controls that do not get the flu. With a large sample size all of this should come out in the wash (CLT) leaving us with a statistical measure of the effect of the shot on training.

The individual athlete will have no idea whether or not they were a responder or non-responder to the shot; or if they even got the shot, as the controls would have to receive a “blank” shot to remove placebo effects.

The flu shot does not contain mercury, that's a myth.
http://www.ech.ab.ca/programs/Influenza%20Prevention/Resources/VaccineInformation/Influvac_Product%20Monograph_30MAY2006.pdf
"INFLUVAC is a clear to slightly opalescent liquid. INFLUVAC is thimerosal-free, mercury free,
and contains no preservative."

To be considered contagious you have to have the active disease. Your body has to culture up a significant viral load and then package it into a nice aerosol (cough/sneeze) for others to enjoy.



If you actually take time to read this: http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm you can clearly see if mercury is used or not. INFLUVAC isn't on the list. INFLUVAC is a single dose, therfore not requiring a preservative like Thimerosal. If not single dose, the bottles are usually 10 doses. Meaning their needs to be some sort of preservative like mercury. Most people don't have any idea about single vs multi dose vials. 25 micrograms isn't a lot of Mercury but, Jesus why knowingly put it in your body.

See Enthalpic's comment, no thimerosal has been used in vaccines in 20 years, but regardless, studies have concluded that putting it in or not does not make any difference to health.
You will get 1000X more mercury in a week from riding outside near smelting plants. Some sleazy lawyers have tried to make a buck off of this concept, but the science is not there.

The reason flu spreads is person-to-person, and virus can be shedding before the first person even feels sick. The shot primes your immune system to deal with the virus quickly and not produce any new virus to spread to others.

A more effective campaign than flu shots would be to educate people not to come to work sick, and not to go outside when sick, also, simple rules of how to sneeze in public.

If you don't like vaccines, read up about what life was like before the Salk vaccine in the US. They could not make iron lungs fast enough.

http://pathmicro.med.sc.edu/lecture/images/ilung35p.jpg

Say what? Stop riding around those smelters Doc;)

Are we trying to normalize vaccination causations? Seriously, what does the CLT have to do with this? You've got an iid Binomial with a pbar and s. Why do we care about the rest?


We are looking at statistics not individual cases. So of course there will be people in the shot group who get the flu and/or experience an adverse effect. Likewise there will be controls that do not get the flu. With a large sample size all of this should come out in the wash (CLT) leaving us with a statistical measure of the effect of the shot on training.

The individual athlete will have no idea whether or not they were a responder or non-responder to the shot; or if they even got the shot, as the controls would have to receive a “blank” shot to remove placebo effects.

25 micrograms isn't a lot of Mercury but, Jesus why knowingly put it in your body.

With the wide availability of mercury free shots we can ignore mercury toxicity concerns for the purposes of this discussion.

I do agree that you might as well avoid the mercury containing shots, regardless of how trivial the dose may be.