New Intranasal flu vaccine for Toddlers . Yes or no ?

[IAmADonkeyOnTheEdge]

Just had a letter asking us to bring our 3.5 yr Dd for a flu vaccine ( up the nose !). No idea how they will persuade to sniff it up and also not sure if we should go for it or not.... Anyone else having it?

I'm sorry piglet that I didn't use wording you understood

No, that isn't true.

I understood the words you used when you said
"The benefit to an individual healthy child is to not have a less severe case of the flu"

However your statement wass inaccurate.

PJ, get over it and move on. How is this contributing to the thread?

Saintly, you've explained your point very clearly and with great patience. I'm pretty sure my 7 yo would get it! :)

I had got over it, but you (and others) kept arguing.

Saintly even claimed that she hadn't said "The benefit to an individual healthy child is to not have a less severe case of the flu" and that the JCVI had said it

PJ, I haven't argued with you at all.

move on.

Lol.

Piglet - you don't really seem to have got over it. You do appear to take a delight in picking over the exact wording of what people say and then pulling them up for it, because they haven't expressed it the way you would like.

You took me to task for saying 'a lot' and declared that I was just talking about a few old people that I knew. When it was established that it could have been 2 million people that we were talking about you then declared that 80% (i.e. 8 million) was a lot. No-one had said it wasn't. I didn't bother to pursue it - it wasn't worth the effort because it's not a thread about 'how to interpret statistics'.

Yes of course Piglet everyone else is going on about it and not you.

So are you saying you believe that every healthy 2-17 year old is being vaccinated to prevent the small number of cases of flu in healthy children (again those who are vulnerable are already offered it). If you are saying that I disagree. Or do you believe it is being offered to a) save the NHS money and b) reduce the number of (expensive) severe cases in vulnerable groups? Because that's what the rest of us are talking about. Whether zero, 10 or 25 or even a few hundred healthy children get a severe case of the flu is unlikely to have that much impact on whether or not the jab should be introduced to healthy children. Avert 1000's of severe cases in elderly groups though and it starts to look more promising.

Having re-explained on 16 different ways I think there can now be no doubt remaining as to the meaning of that one sentence hastily typed out on a phone whilst feeding 3 children.

I wish I had followed your example LaVolcan

Night all.

Rashing in on all the arguing to say I had a thing in thepst today for my on. First I had heard about it and, no, I won't be taking them up on the offer. Vaccines are not compulsory.

May I attempt to kill this thread, because it's now going round in circles?

The JCVI can hardly say "Let's save the cost to the NHS , let's just bump the old people who get flu off, or just leave them to die", can they? (Compared with the Nazi's 'Useless Eaters')

(Reference to the Nazis is supposed to discussion, although I forget whose law it was supposed to be.)

Supposed to kill discussion. It's getting late.....

To answer the OP yes, my DD will be having it. As will I & DH. One set of very doddery grandparents and my dad not well either... Well, I'd prefer to reduce the risks of any further illness as much as possible!

Very interesting thread.

Godwin's law

It clearly failed in this case!

My 2yr old ds has just had it, he has asthma (not severe as obviously contraindicated for that) and suffered horrendously with repeated upper respiratory infections last winter. I think our A+E count was up to 10 visits for asthma attacks. So I thought if we could save ourselves a little from that stress and let him enjoy the winter season without being couped up with inhalers and prednisolone. It's supposed to significantly reduce the incidence of all urti's compared to the unattenuated vaccine. Here's hoping!