My GP surgery has written saying I'm at risk of death (flu). This has cheered me up.
-
-
hmm....thinking twice now...
-
I think it is a matter of mentality - like so many things in medicine
-
Evidence based mentality? That's a new one...
-
No, there are people who would do things when there is a 5% probability of benefit. And people who want 99%.
-
Accepted, but probability is a fluid concept in such a blatantly unscientific environment. As much probability of harm as benefit, potentially. I'll stop now though. I'm pretty sure
@nw_nicholas could live without a flu jab debate filling his timeline any further. :) -
I have 2 friends going through breast cancer treatment at the mo, very similar cancers/stages, presented with same evidence ( both in same service), different reactions. "Gimme everything" vs. "prove the benefit to me". I agree though that in general there is a lot of spin.
-
Ok... 1 last tweet. I have a vaccine damaged son. Proof of benefit & safety was what I set out find, belatedly. I sadly found neither. I'm with your 2nd friend now - benefits need to be proven. Scientifically. But they're not. Best wishes to both of your friends btw. So sorry.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This study was based on healthy individuals John. Dangerous to advise when you do not know the medical history of the individual.
-
All I've advised is to read the Cochrane review before settling on a decision. Does that seem unreasonable?
-
Yes John it does because not all will understand the study and may deter them from getting a life saving vaccination. How many will read that report and miss that it’s carried out in patients with no health issues?
-
If there's one thing I know about
@nw_nicholas, it's that he's not daft. I'm sure he can discern the right thing to do for himself, whether from the likely computer-generated letter he received, from the Cochrane review, or from a healthcare professional. He's a big boy. -
I do have COPD though, which is why I was sent the letter....(Stage 2)
-
Then it's worth finding out if that makes a difference. Although it won't alter the lack of science underpinning the evidence presented. And I'm not sure that results from people in good health makes the case any stronger for use with ill patients. Depends on each case I suppose.
-
If it doesn't harm me, I probably should have it
-
All medicine is a personal decision and it all comes with risk (even when it's claimed it doesn't sometimes). Only you can weigh those risks. I'm just happy you'll get to make a more informed decision than before - whatever your choice. :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"Modest" will do me on this one. We had several cases on our unit last winter. Not being vaccinated would have made me stress more.
-
'Modest' is probably about as good as any review of available studies can be when half of them are selectively hidden, I suppose. The worst of the problems never get chance to be reviewed. Science has long since been filtered out by this stage.https://psmag.com/news/a-new-website-names-and-shames-universities-and-companies-that-run-clinical-trials-in-europe-but-dodge-public-disclosure-rules …
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.