Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Flameful H1N1 confession
I'm very concerned that the makers of the vac have absolved themselves in advance of any wrongdoing. To me, that says "Hey, theres a good chance this vac could really f- up your day. If anything bad happens to you, thats too bad, but we're immune to your subsequent lawsuit. And we wont pay your medical bills either! Kthanksbi!"
That, and the fact that
they're telling everyone its safe, but you'd have to go through like 10
metal vaults and obtain high security clearance to see the side effects
listed on the insert-some of which are pretty nasty. ::Sarcasm::
This is the reason I'm not getting it. Like I said, flameful 
You guys know me IRL-Im typically pretty informed, please dont let this cloud your judgment of me going forward. This shiz just freaks me out-especially in 1st tri.
ETA: this is regarding H1N1 only. Of course the kid will have regular vacs on a regular schedule.
Re: Flameful H1N1 confession
See, this is totally how I felt at first, but then I did a TON more research on it. It literally is just as safe as the seasonal flu....the chance of you getting any of the side effects are about 1 in a million..the chance of you getting the H1N1 are WAYYY higher than that..and having complications (for me) are pretty high as well considering I have asthma.
I will admit that it DOES make me nervous that you can't sue them, etc. It makes me nervous as hell...but I've been going back and forth on whether or not to get it for months now...and just seeing all the perfectly healthy young people getting it and dying from it scares the sh!t out of me. It's different than the normal flu because none of us young-ins have been exposed to H1N1 in the past...so our bodies have zero immunities and have a really hard time fighting it off.
And of course I could NEVER flame you! Hell you know that just a few weeks ago, I told you face-to-face that I wouldn't be getting the H1N1 vaccine...hahaha. It's just a culmination of the more research I've done, the lingering cold that was really hurting my chest last week, and the kid dying at DH's school...oh and the 13 absent kids from the classroom I'm observing in yesterday that ultimately made the decision for me. two teacher's were also out with H1N1.
having said all that, if I didn't have asthma, and if I wasn't observing in schools on a regular basis, I wouldn't be getting it. When you hear about another death...what do you hear of them dying from? Complications that lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome...and I am at a MUCH higher risk of that happening to me with my already compromised lungs.
but, other people post away! i love having discussions about this and hearing everyone else's thoughts! so, i'm eager to hear!!
ps - rebecca don't hate me because i'm getting the vacc
Visit my blog about my family's experiments in eco-living
My amateur photo blog
You are far more likely to get H1N1 than you are going to suffer those severe side effects. All medications have the possibility of severe reactions - even the OTC pain relievers and medications we all take.
I've seen how fast and severe H1N1 can be. It spread through my friend's family in 3 days. It spread through another friend's wedding in 2 days. A friend contracted pneumonia as a result of her H1N1. And these are all in healthy, young adults (25-30 years old). IMHO, I would suggest any preggo friend get the vaccine (including you guys!).
TTC #1 since May 2010. BFP #1 - 5/31/10; m/c on 7/22/10
Started seeing RE in August 2011
5 IUIs: BFN; IVF #1 - Success! BFP - 7/25/12
Well, you know what they say about opinions
I have never gotten a flu shot, neither has DH. We also won't be getting any flu shots this year, or the H1N1 shot. Neither DH or I have had any kind of flu since we were old enough to remember. We do get 1-2 colds per winter, but I think most people do.
We had decided not to get any flu shots for B, then our Pedi talked us into it, so we gave her the first shot, and about a week later, Kaiser ran out of the 2nd shot (babies need 2 doses). DH and I decided that even if they are able to offer it at a later time, as of now we will not be giving her any more flu shots. Of course that could change as she gets older, if she seems to get the flu every year, etc.
Of course, the regular childhood vaccines are a whole seperate debate!! Scarlett, I think you should look into "Dr Sears Alternative Vaccination Schedule"...I think you might like that. We personally chose not to give the Hep vaccine at birth, and we will be delaying the MMR shot until she's 2, and not giving the chicken pox vaccine.
I hink it just comes down to...make the choice that you are the most comfortable with.
Thanks for your thoughts guys! I love discussions, even if we have a diff of opinion.
And Daisy, you silly goose! Nothing you do or say would make me love you any less.
In fact, in your case I would totally advocate for the vac-you have a respiratory illness to begin with, and thats totally understandable. In fact, with DH's recent diagnosis, i reallllly want him to get the reg flu shot, but he wont. 
.
Jen-I will look into the suggestion you had. I'm pretty freaked out about shooting my kid up as I'm sure you've guessed, but polio sucks. So does the measles-and then she'd be scarred for life...so yeah, no black helicopters there
. Pretty sure I'll let her go ahead and get chicken pox though.
It was a tough decision, and I respect that everyone has a right to make their own. I just hope I dont regret mine. 2nd Tri is right around the corner-maybe i'll be more open to it then when the guppy's brain is less susceptible to bad stuff.
This is SOP for any and all vaccinations. And given the pressure that the mfg has been under (primarily from our gov't) to produce mass quantities of the vax in a ridiculously short period of time, I don't know why anyone would be surprised that the mfg feels moved to to protect itself.
Huh. I guess I see your point, but I'm more concerned with protection being offered to consumers, not big pharma. If the risk of side effects is so low, why not just pay the medical bills of the unfortunate few? I'm sure they're enjoying a healthy profit and that wouldn't affect their bottom line at all.
My stance is, if a product hurts people, like a faulty crib or a bad seat belt, then the manufacturer is expected to pay and society as a whole agrees with this. There are recalls every year, and we expect those who manufacture the products to be held liable and responsible for injuries suffered as a result of a faulty product.
So to me, its very surprising for consumer to advocate against themselves in this situation, SOP or not. Its ok for a drug company to hurt someone without consequences, but not, say, a tire manufacturer? Why the disconnect? Honest question.
It's not "ok" to hurt someone, but there's a big difference between negligent tire manufacturing vs. humans experiencing adverse side effects (including death) from having something put in their bodies. I'm not aware of ANY drugs that are without side effects--some of them severe. Birth control, for instance (perhaps you've seen this debate raging on a few boards lately)--millions of women use hormonal birth control and ignore the very real, very well-documented risk of strokes and blood clots. Then when someone actually experiences that side effect (there's a thread on S&R about this right now), people freakthefuck out. Lawsuits fly, people panic, etc.
People expect medicine to be infallible. It's not. Most people will experience few, if any, side effects from any given medicine or vaccination. But a handful of people will suffer serious problems--that doesn't mean that the mfg screwed up. Given the litigious nature of our society, it's not shocking AT ALL that drug companies want to protect themselves.
Hmmm. I thought the BC lawsuits were bc there was additional, undisclosed risk in those cases? Like, what was it Yaz-that one apparently has a greater incidence of blood clots and/or stoke. But that was not previously disclosed. Isnt that what the suit is about?
I see both sides, and its actually a pretty fascinating debate IMO. I think protecting yourself is one thing, but refusing to help someone that your product harms is a bit excessive. That being said, the multi million dollar settlements are not what I'm talking about here-just helping someone who was injured become healthy again...I know thats not exactly corporate values, but I see too much concern here for the company and not enough for the individual. SWIM?
Yes, I see what you mean, but I don't assume that the drug company seeking to protect itself from litigation means that it's up to no good--it's not evidence that they are selling a bad product. As I noted in your thread on PC&E, we know that even if the drug company does everything right and there is nothing wrong with their product, some people will have adverse effects. It's not unreasonable for the company to seek to protect itself in those cases. I don't think the company has a duty to "help" anyone who has an adverse effect if the company hasn't done anything wrong.
LOL, I dont know which thread to respond to
I'll move to P&E for the duration.
Scarlett, I'm with you, but for a different reason.
I read this great article in the Atlantic Monthly about the vaccine, and whether or not we know if it is actually effective.
You may want to read it: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200911/brownlee-h1n1