Quote:
Originally Posted by golfing eagles
I'm pleased already 
But seriously, so far I like this thread. Everyone seems to have discussed it with their own doctor and taken the professional advice. No one (yet) has bragged about how they "did they own research" and "made their own decision". No one has tried to compare this new RSV vaccine with the controversy over mRNA vaccines. Of course, I'm not holding my breath....... |
Touche' but dammit you over came my resistance to posting.
Please try to ignore my long history of sarcasm and take these as a serioius questions. I truly have no idea what the answers are.
You had a full career as a doctor. The RSV vaccine is new, but I am guessing RSV is not.
So, how much education would the average family doctor have received in the last year or two on RSV and the vaccine?
Do they go back and take classes on it?
Or do they do their own research?
What research materials do they have access to that the average person does not as a result of their professional status?
If one doctor tells their patient "RSV, is a common respiratory virus that usually causes mild, cold-like symptoms. Most people recover in a week or two, but RSV can be serious. You are in excellent health and have no co-morbidities that would cause you to be at increased risk other than being 60, therefore lets wait a couple of years before you get the vaccine and make sure it is truly safe over the long run" and another Dr. said
Respiratory syncytial (sin-SISH-uhl) virus, or RSV, is a common respiratory virus that usually causes mild, cold-like symptoms. Most people recover in a week or two, but RSV can be serious. But better safe than sorry.
Would they both be right? Or would a doctor never make one of those two statements?