[Stu from NYC]

Wow the number of doubters of modern medicine.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

Wow the number of doubters of modern medicine.

Sadly, "Modern Science" has given us many reasons to be doubtful, of late...

[Number 10 GI]

My wife has advanced COPD and our primary doctor advised her to get the RSV shot. I got the flu and RSV vaccine a couple weeks ago to protect my wife. Had no noticeable side effects.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Sadly, "Modern Science" has given us many reasons to be doubtful, of late...

Not perfect but I am around only due to medical advances over the years.

[Altavia]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Sadly, "Modern Science" has given us many reasons to be doubtful, of late...

Are you sure "science" is the reason?

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Altavia

Agree you sure "science" is the reason?

Well, "Trust the Science" -is- the mantra, so...

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

Not perfect but I am around only due to medical advances over the years.

Which is why I used the words, "Of Late"...

[Stu from NYC]

Surprised nobody has piped in that it is caused by man made global warming

[dhdallas]

Originally Posted by Velvet

Anybody got this vaccine? I am thinking about it.

According to the FDA website "Participants will remain in the study through three RSV seasons to assess the duration of effectiveness and the safety and effectiveness of vaccination." The FDA also reports that some patients have had side effects of atrial fibrillation, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM), a rare type of inflammation that affects the brain and spinal cord, and Guillain-Barré syndrome (a rare disorder in which the body’s immune system damages nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and sometimes paralysis).

So just like the COVID vaccine, feel free to be another guinea pig for the RSV vaccine roll out. I think I will wait until at least the three RSV seasonal monitoring is complete with more concrete info before I would consider it.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

Surprised nobody has piped in that it is caused by man made global warming

Give it time...

[Cybersprings]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Ok, that question is legitimate enough to warrant a serious answer.

I've been retired 8 years and have not yet looked into the new RSV vaccine, although I believe it is a traditional viral vaccine, unlike COVID. Also, the apparent discovery/infection of adults with RSV is new to me----it has historically been considered a disease of infants and newborns. Personally, I haven't decided whether or not to get this vaccine---but as I already advised everyone else, I'm going to discuss it with my physician, who will be up to date on it.

No, physicians don't "take classes" on every new vaccine or medication. Usually reading the product insert is adequate. There is a publication call "The Medical Letter" that generally does a short review of new meds and vaccines. Beyond that, most of us subscribe to either PubMed or Up to Date----2 professional medical sites that are extremely valuable (not the lay person versions).

Could you get different advice from 2 doctors? Of course---there is an old joke that put 10 doctors in a room and you'll get 10 different opinions, especially with something new. But most vaccines and new drugs are pretty thoroughly tested before they gain FDA approval---no, they're not always 100%, especially when there is an urgent need and they rush something through, but in general they do a good job.

As this develops I'll probably look at the incidence and prevalence of RSV in the over 65 population, and try as best I can to determine if it's for real or just hype.

Thank you for taking the time to respond.
Follow up question. My initial reaction to "product insert" was that it was printed by the drug company, and therefore may not be an objective source of information. Is that an accurate assessment, or is the insert "peer reviewed" or the appropriate term for ensuring that it is 99% objective?

[Cybersprings]

Originally Posted by Bjeanj

I talked to both my family doctor and pulmonologist about this vaccine, and both said it was a good idea. My pulmonologist told me that during COVID, when they were testing people, they found that RSV was more prevalent than they thought.

This post is NOT directed at you, just using your post as the background.

My take as a layperson is that if you have a pulmonologist, you absolutely need to be in a doctor's office discussing this with them. But what percentage of us have a pulmonolgist, meaning, if we have no lung issues or other major health issues, how important is it that we go make a special appointment with our doctor to discuss this?

[Cybersprings]

Originally Posted by Altavia

The same group likely insists on being prescribed antibiotics for viral infections...

Which is doing far more harm than any vaccine.

No disagreement with your premise about antibiotics. But even if it was the same group (I would think otherwise), unless they are a doctor or steal prescription pads and forge signatures, they have zero ability to actually prescribe themselves any. So who is prescribing them? That would be (some) doctors. But they know it won't help and can be very bad in the long run, and do it anyway. So, they can be influenced to prescribe that which is harmful. Would you assert that only applies to antibiotics and not vaccines which do not have anywhere near the scale of data to determine if they have any serious negative effects over the long term?

[Cybersprings]

Originally Posted by Altavia

Really? 90% off people who take antibiotics get better. But 80% of people who don't get antibotics get better. A vaccine would never be released with that performance.

Ever heard of antibiotic resistance? Multi drug resistance? Sepsis?

Any idea what damage antibiotics do to your physiology and gut microbiome when taken unnecessary?

Just posted something very similar to what I am about to say.

DOCTORS are prescribing the antibiotics that you are asserting are bad. Yet, to decide whether or not to get a vaccine that is less than 4 years old, go off the reccomendation of your doctor, they know best. IS NOONE else seeing the hypocrisy in this??
I am NOT saying doctors are evil, incompetent, or just on par with a google search. But since our medical system and our wallet cannot support going to 3 doctors to get their opinions in the way we would for something much less serious as our health like our driveway or lanai project, and as one of the doctors posted/joked you would likely get 3 different opinions, we are limited to basically one doctor who may or may not be one of those prescribing antibiotics for a virus[/B]

And how effective did the COVID vaccine turn out to be IN THE LONG RUN, not according to the first published results.

I have gotten the flu shot on many occassions. The flu sux but I never worry about dying from it.
I got the shingles vaccine because of what I saw friends/family go through with that. As it turns out, I got the wrong one. But, but, they were both FDA approved and I got what my doctor reccommended. Uh, we learned more over time.... DING DING DING DING

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Cybersprings

Thank you for taking the time to respond.
Follow up question. My initial reaction to "product insert" was that it was printed by the drug company, and therefore may not be an objective source of information. Is that an accurate assessment, or is the insert "peer reviewed" or the appropriate term for ensuring that it is 99% objective?

Usually, the product insert, which is pretty much identical to the info in the PDR is written by the drug company's researchers, doctors and pharmacists, with heavy input from their lawyers. It's accurate and factual, the penalties for falsifying any content are draconian.