Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

203 profile views
  1. Strange--it seems the original study referenced a much lower incidence of the flu.
  2. First post here so go easy on me I've never been a big fan of flu shots, but I suppose if they do cut risk without any potential downside, then it makes sense to consider. Kpfleger, you mention that it cuts risk by a half. I suppose that's true as far as the math goes, but going from an absolute risk of ~2% to just under 1% is much much different than having risk cut from say 40% to 20%. The other thing i find interesting in situations like this--most everyone seems to benefit by pushing for flu shots and overstating their efficacy The Cochrane collaboration seems to be the only group I know of that pushes back against the mainstream opinion. If you're unaware of what studies say about the flu shot, you probably think you're doing yourself a huge favour. Same thing with doctors, pharmacists, and even school administrators. Everyone seems to benefit by pushing for them. I guess my main point in writing is that there does seem to be evidence that they help, but it's quite minor. You'd prob be better off focusing on washing your hands or eating more garlic.