hey Alex,

      I got a pamphlet thing in the mail that said that people who take things like immunosupressants, like AIDS patients, should get the shot.  So, you may want to check with your doctor.  With all the other crap you have, it would suck pretty hard for you to get something else.

Sighsnootles I can say verbatim what all good nurses are supposed to be saying to the general public but I assure you behind closed doors many nurses themselves are debating whether to get the H1N1 flu vaccine.

Momsfruitcake, I have noticed the change in explanations also.

I learned today that one of our local GP's was saying that he would not get a vaccine because he had been surrounded by the flu and had not gotten it. Apparently his tune has changed since he became sick.

If only it was an easy decision.

I don't know whether to get the vaccine or just take extra garlic and stay ornery!

There has been so much talk about the vaccine but very little about sick leave for workers.  Sick people staying home would better protect people from the spread of H1N1, especially since I heard that the vaccine will not be available to all who want it until some time in December.  People should be able to stay home when they have the flu but in NS employers only have to give 3 unpaid sick days.  Many give more but those who don't are often workers with low salaries who interact with the public, such as cleaners and staff at restaurants and small retail outlets.  Also contract workers (hospitals in NS have many of these) do not get paid sick days.  So what is a person to do making a low wage with no paid sick days? 

I would not trust that these findings have been accurately reported. This is what I found when I went digging:

This is the study:

http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab004879.html

as linked to from here:

http://gnosis474.blogspot.com/2009_09_01_archive.html

The description of it is badly inaccurate. The 51 studies involve various age ranges, up to children 16 years of age. The so-called "no evidence" is based on only one study of the 51, involving 786 children, that did find an effect from vaccination in children aged 6 to 24 months:

26 of 525 vaccinated children got confirmed influenza as compared to 24 of 261 control children. While that's not great effectiveness, I wouldn't describe that as "similar to placebo". Figures are here:

http://mrw.interscience.wiley.com/cochrane/clsysrev/articles/CD004879/fi...

Didn't really have a choice.  I mean, the Navy said we had the right to refuse but they made you see the Doc anyway and she pretty much pressured everyone into it.  I got it an the regular flu shot...  Saw the seasonal flu take out a lot of people this year... It's a pretty harsh one too.  The whole thing stinks to high heaven though...  Crazy new pandemic that seems to do the most damage to those at the peak of their reproductive years...  A vaccine that's only available to the nations that don't have troublesome birthrates.  I dunno.  Just seems wierd to me.

The resignation of our health minister was called for the way the vaccines are being handled. 

We have real paranoia in Alberta.

It is medieval to stand in line for 6 hours to receive a vaccine.  Appointments should be made this is absolutely ridiculous.

It does seem odd to me, Serena. Here in Oz there is enough vaccine available free for everyone. I just had to make an appointment the next day with my doctor and it was done.

To be fair, I live in a big city - maybe if you live in the bush it might be more difficult. (I'm off to Port Macquarie on Saturday to see my niece who's an OT - so I'll check on her situation.)

What it really comes down to is whether a person wants to entrust their HEALTH to the hands of people who are above all simply NOT QUALIFIED to make any kind of medical assessment ... your doctor is still the only person who is qualified and above all responsible for your well being.

After all it's your lungs and you only have a pair of them

It is my understanding that we cannot get the vaccine at our doctor's office here for some reason. It is crazy because I can get a prescription for another vaccine, like Hep A/B and then have the doc give it to me.

I will be getting the stitches removed from my foot on Nov 9. I am going to ask the doc about that then. It will not be available until about he 10th anyway. By then I am sure the virus will have done its worst in this community.

I have alot of "curiousity questions about this  pandemic. Are Amish communities affectied by the H1N1 virus? They have never vaccinated themselves or their children for anything. How are these communities doing?

Also I thought it was interesting that "Baxter International" filed their patent for the H1N1 vaccine one year prior to the outbreak.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14430

Are Amish communities affectied by the H1N1 virus? They have never vaccinated themselves or their children for anything. How are these communities doing?

I suppose inbreeding does have it's perks

Then again so does isolation

Also you really don't know what goes on if you don't live there they probably bury their dead in the backyard ..... who keeps up with these communities how much jurisdiction does the law have .... ?

I do some work in Amish communities and as a result know that they have access to Health Nurses and nurse practioners.  (at least in the communities I go to)   When I was there 2 weeks ago the moms were talking amongst themselves about their children's health and appeared to be every bit as concerned as I am about my children.  As for the immunizations.....I'm not sure that all groups of Amish/Mennonites avoid immunization.  I'm thinking that some of them do get immunization shots.   Does anyone else know?

The ethical question - autonomy and common good - how to balance?

You will note that those who deal with the public for the most part are getting the vaccination.  So the question is - is fine not to if you do not deal with others - like your family.

The pan in the word only means the flu is everywhere - in some cases mild and others not - We should get into a fear mood.  However, it is serious in the sense that 2 in 5 will get it.  The impact is crucial if you are in a small business or run ER - this is the problem with resources being over come.

If you read the scientific evidence the possibility of a problem with the vaccination is low, but like all things some negative outcomes will happen - but that is true of doing nothing, only  the risks are greater.

This is a real issue for self employed and contract positions.  Some non profit have put in place a tem sick leave policy because they don't want people to come to work with the flu.   Good reason for a union to get better sick leave - and it says something about a company that just does provincial standards.

Monsfruitcake - I hear what you are saying and my thoughts are with you!

My DIL  (and son)  shed many tears before she made the decision to receive the immunization. There is a high incidence of death of pregnant woman but apparently also  risk of fetal death if the mother becomes ill with the virus. The doctor  also feared for her due to the fact that she is due and will be admitted to hospital  (as well as baby) where many are contagious. Apparently there is also a greater risk postpartum.

Again...my thoughts are with you as I realize that this is a huge decision for you to make at this time!

Also, those over 65 who were immunized at the earlier clinics were given the regular flu vaccine and will not be receiving H1N1.

Jes I really find this an offensive post.

Hi Waterfall,

I work in some Amish communities with Amish families and know for sure that some Amish families choose to immunize.  The health nurse and nurse practioner were immunizing Amish children last week at a program that I go to.  Please realize that I said "some" Amish families choose to immunize, not all.

And the moms at the program I attended were every bit as concerned about this flu outbreak as I am.

 It's the same with the Mennonites around here. From talking to a couple apparently some immunize and some don't.   Also the communities are far from isolated, they have both on and off farm business frequented by all sorts of people, work out in the broader communities on things like construction and do shop at regular stores like the farm coops.   Heck you even seem them at WalMart sometimes.   Methinks that comments like Jez are result of stereotypes rather then reality. 

I thought it would be interesting to know how a group such as an old order Amish or Mennonite community fared during epidemics while still refusing  vaccines. Is their mortality rate lower/recovery faster/different preventative measures? I was just thinking they had something to offer as far as tried and true remedies that may also work alongside of how the general population deals with a virus

.

 Waterfall, I did a little bit a googling and though I do think it's an interesting question it looks like it's not an easy answer.  For one the general idea that those communities refuse vaccinations while possibily true at some point in time it doesn't appear to be the case right now.  Granted I haven't spent a whole lot of time researching but according to some of the papers on general public health regarding those sorts of communities they do accept immunizations though at lesser rates then the outside community.  The actual stated percentages I came across ranged from about 45-60%.

As for trying to find specific cases of how they fared during an epidemic, I'm assuming you're refering to affluenza, that might also be difficult as it's been a while since we've had a full scale affluenza epidemic.  Like 30 oddish years.   You might find some answers to your pondering by trying to find some more general info on rates of illness and general healthcare in those communities.  If that's been specifically studied.  That also might be difficult as it appears that many don't avoid the modern public health system as part of their beliefs.   I know at least one clinic in my area that actually has a hitching post outside.   In fact in my googling I discovered that the Mennoinite church itself is involved either in colaitions or on it's own with public health and works at setting up public health clinics and services in underserviced and poorer communities not only in Canada but around the world. 

With that said and this isn't meant as an attack or anything I do think there is a lot of stereotypes about these sorts of communities, like they avoid all things modern etc etc.  I know I had a lot of them until I moved here and learned a little more.  It's more complex then that.  For one there are different levels of acceptence of modern technology.  Like there is a small group here that do have cars or trucks, but they're all black and nothing shiney.  There are those that will never get into a car and a very many that have no problem getting rides from people who do own them.  It's also interesting I think to find out that in both Amish and Mennonite communties the use of renewable technologies like solar cells and modern wind tech is a whole lot higher then the broader community.  Somewhere in the states there's at least one community where over 70% of the households have a solar cell.   

  Last year I saw something pretty cool in the farms around here.   Over the past few years you see more and more growers of vegetables putting down a plastic mulch for weed suppression in long rows.  There is a machine that you attach to a tractor which lays it automatically.  I saw a farmer using it this spring.   Then driving through an area which had a lot of mennonite farms I saw the same mulching technique all over their fields. Now I use a layer mulch and no how much work it would take to lay it by hand and my automatic assumption was thats what they were doing and I was impressed.  I was wrong though because a while after that I saw a mennonite farmer laying it out.  It was the exact same machine that the tractor farmer used, it was just adapted and pulled by a horse.  Thought that was pretty cool.

The thing I did come across though, related to what can happen in a demographic where most don't immunize,  was about the mumps outbreak in BC that occured in 2008. It was primarily centered in a relgious community that doesn't vaccinate on relgious grounds. http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=d52a2724-d5f1-489e...

I think that, for those who are waffling on taking the vaccine and who are practicing Christians, this is a good test of their "Christianness."

If they are willing to put themselves at risk for the greater good, to put their lives and the lives of their unborn at risk...to help keep the rest of us from getting sick or dying*...

As always, there are tests of faith.  As always, there are tests to be able to "put one's money where the mouth is." Being a Christian, instead of saying one is a Christian.

Congratulations to those who are undergoing that.

Which is my way of saying, accept your concern as your responsibility, that you can influence :3

For those of you who are concerned because of the 'reliability' of the vaccine or it's potential to cause harm to yourself/your unborn:

1. It has passed the Peer Reviewing test;

2. allopathic medicine (that is the technical term for the medicine we all tend to use, and doctors, our health care system, etc) is based upon probabilities.  When they test a drug, in their findings they say that "for most of the population, it will act this way"; allopathic medicine follows a Bell Curve, with the most common results in the middle, with two 'tails' of lesser probability to either side;

3. you, daily, are in contact with substances and medicines and such that you have faith in, that you think aboot or concern yourself with.  So if you are concerned, I suggest not  just being skeptical, but being cynical in the original sense of the word: be skeptical aboot *yourself*, with things like, why are you feeling and acting this way?  Why now? Do you have a choice?  Is there any other way I can think or feel aboot this? And so forth.

3.a. In other words, being skeptical is the easy way--anyone can find one thing wrong with anything and go "It doesn't work."

4. Unless you know how you work and the media works, don't confuse what they say (or yourself) with truth.  Take it as an opinion or as entertainment.  Stay with the Authority figures.  Mine are places like the Centre for Disease Control and the World Health Organization.

5. Don't forget to treat yourself.  You are a child of G_d -- and he/she/it/they/thou loves it when you remember why you're here: http://www.ferryhalim.com/orisinal/g3/crossing.htm

Just a Self-writing poem,
Inannawhimsey

* note that I am not saying that sickness or death will happen to you -- I am saying that either way, you are being a Christian in the deepest sense of the term when you take the vaccine.

Thanks Jadespring. I read today that  a homeopathic remedy is Gelsemium---used during the Spanish Flu before vaccines. I'm not endorsing it as I do not know much about it first hand. Anyone???

Those groups have been linked to outbreaks of measles in Canada in the last few years.

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/bid-bmi/dsd-dsm/nb-ab/2000/nb2700-eng.php

That's just bad theology. A flu shot isn't a "measure" of one's faith. It's a reasonable preventative act.

I agree, DKS. Christians don't need this as a mantle on their shoulders. It would be the sign of a good muslim, a good hindu etc. i don't think so. it is a sign that we are all struggling to make the best Health Choices that we can . religion has nothing to do with it.

You drive a hard bargain, InannaWhimsey, but I think you're right. Often when I ask myself, "what would Jesus do?" I  find I haven't the courage and/or inclination to do it.

But not his time. After attending the funeral of my friend's grandson, who was medically compromised, I knew what was required of me and got the injection. I implore others that are wavering to give serious consideration to the needs of those who are less able.

Greetings!

I also disagree with Ianna Whimsey, and PilgrimsProgress.  Even if you personally view not getting an h1n1 flu shot as the most horrendous, selfish act in the world, it has no bearing on whether one is a Christian or not - just as being selfish about anything else, or any other unloving act is not.  None of us go through this life with perfection.

And when there are many who are not able to get the h1n1 flu shot, for whatever reason, I do not think it is not fair nor appropriate to infer that they would be the cause of someone else's illness or death.

Hope, peace, joy, love ...

Let us do a little theology:   If faith means anything it means influencing how one interacts with issue for the common good.  All values are tested by our living.

If we live in  a relational world - which is a given- then we always participate in the events of others.  If it is a relational world we do have causal efficacy on others - so our action do have causal effect.

If faith has something do with the common good and we influence or act on others then we must ask what should we do to lessen the negative impact and value up the positive impact. 

One can suggest that to act selfishly is an indication of not living up to what value system influences one, or one claims that this value system is part of their identity - be it christian or some other religious or humanistic claim.

One can make that judgement without laying a perfectionist model on others. Yes it is a decision about a resonable prevention action but the prior question why do the prevention.  It has all to do with values, and in the case of a christian ( or any other value system) one has to ask what is required of us ( do justice seems to come mind). 

In the Ottawa citizen a woman wrote in how she and her mother who had a particular type of cancer refused to ask for a new drug because it would cost a million to tax payers - that she was willing to let go of an individual need for the greater good.  This was in response to some who felft they had a 'right' to the drug no matter what the cost.   Individualism trumping the collective good.

So to say what do about the shot has nothing to do with ones religious claims is an illustration of how we have failed to understand how character is formed by religion ( or non religious) and character helps us act.

Of course one can say because these reasons I will not get the shot, but I know my self needs are first in the ethical consideration - and there may be some ethical reasons based on medical reasons not to take the shot... but to say no demands a thinking through of the reasons to say no or yes.   And lm and pp do point out that faith has implication for actions and to deny that is to deny the efficacious of faith.

True, but . . . just because we do not live up the action, does not mean we do  not have faith, and in the case of a Christian faith, are not Christian.

Hope, peace, joy, love . . .

And some times, people, even Christian people or people of any faith, don't act immediately, but may take some time to think about things.  I don't think any one else can determine if a person is Christian or has faith based on their actions, only the person themselves can, and God .

Beloved you point stands in part - yes it takes time and reflection but to refuse does signify something about a claim and that is what was the point of the post - when some acts against what is understood as a value how can you claim to be a member of club.  To rufuse to play hockey, for example, would question the claim to be a hocky player rather than a fan or watcher.

My pregnant wife (26 weeks) and 2 year old were vaccinated yesterday.

Both are still alive.  I'll update this thread as their conditions worsen.

I got mine, yesterday. If you don't hear from me, it means I am fine.

I completely agree with this!  Thanks Beloved!

I also agree with Panetheism, but there are other aspects to the same issue.  Are you getting the vaccine but only after others are able to get it?  If you do get sick (whether or not you were vaccinated), are you going to do everything you possibly can to avoid spreading it to others?  If you have a mild case are you going to take Tamiflu to relieve your symptoms or are you going to leave it for others?  If you have a more severe case are you going to take Tamiflu?

I would argue that someone who gets the vaccine but still gets sick (it isn't 100% effective, and takes a while to be effective) and isn't careful about avoiding spreading the virus to others is more selfish than someone who doesn't get the vaccine but if they get sick they do everything they can to avoid infecting others.

There are also contraindictions to the vaccination.  Even if these people wanted to receive it, they would not be able to get someone to legally vaccinate them unless they lied about their condition.

Pan, what is the understood value you are referring to?   Are you meaning that to be a Christian or a person of faith one of the values of such is to protect society by getting an h1n1 vaccination?  And if you don't you aren't a Christian or part of a faith group?  I disagree that this is a measure of our "membership" in the Christian faith. 

As human beings, Christians and persons of faith, we all fail, make purely bad decisions, sin, make terrible mistakes, screw up, and don't live up to what some might see as understood values.  We might be Christians in need of grace, but we are still Christians/people of faith.

Jes I really find this an offensive post.

Is there anything that does not offend you ?

No, just some of your posts.

Folks, I feel a bit like a fox in the chicken yard on this issue. I see chickens scattering in flight all over the place.

It seems to me that if we call ourselves Christians our response should entail consideration of the thought, "What would Jesus do?" Obviously, this covers all behaviours and actions - not just getting the H1N1 vaccination.

Of course, there'll be many times when we don't measure up to what our conscience indicates Jesus's response might be.

My understanding is that by God's grace we are forgiven and His love for us is unwavering - so surely under such magnanimity we can show enough humility to acknowledge that our actions didn't measure up. I think it's important to acknowledge the particular act - a blanket "we do not always do what we should do" response seems a bit distant from acknowledging individual responsibility.

I suppose the reality of asking "what would Jesus do?" is looking to our individual conscience. Obviously, by attending the funeral of a nine years old child, my conscience on the H1N1 issue gave me a clear message.  (I can also see that if I had a grandchild who was allergic to vaccinations I might well have formed a different conclusion.)

I hope that Christians will always keep asking themselves, "what would Jesus do?". Our faith should require nothing less.

 Wow...  I think the red herring here was pretty ripe.  Once the argument moved from objective claims (right or wrong) about the vaccine into the realm of individual's understandings of a fairly abstract proper name (in the full Derridian sense of ambiguity and imprecision due to the uniqueness of the name) we lost the argument.  I agree with Pan that this CAN be a place where faith claims are actioned, but I'm not sure if I agree on the direction of argument.  Innana chose imprecise language by using "Christianness".  What does that even mean?  Is Christianness measured by faith in a correct series of propositions?  Is it measured by adherence to a correct set of actions?  Is it measured by the response of the outsider 'knowing we are Christians (substitute any faith tradition) by our love?'  Or perhaps it is measured by conscience?

Depending on how we answer those questions we reveal our interpretive stance.  

Anyway, I got the shot a week ago.  Still here.  The 150 people on my ship that got the shot are all still with us...  A little arm tenderness for a day but no side effects.  I still don't rule out conspiracy, but the vaccine doesn't seem to be worth the stress.

Beloved yes we fail and one does not want to use a club to say who is in or out of a club ( no pun)  Warrior points out that there is a connection between a claim and action and I think that is all some of us want to say.  An identity gives action or how we should live.  In the identity is also the point that we do fail to live up to the identity, but we, in reflection, begin again.  It is not a once for all time - fail here and you no longer can claim to be a christian - for that is wrong.  But to claim to be a christian means we must apply that to all aspects of our living - knowing that perfection is not a once for all times reality, but an imprecise application of our values in this moment given these conditions - does it work for this moment and in this context - it is our best aproximation and we are on a journey.

Yes the reading can be influenced by those who live out proposational belief where as faith is a dynamic construction project.  Thus I was not be proposational which is the problem many have about the church, because it has been so inlfuenced by right belief as the standard, and that got moved into right action - as if this action is the true proposation.  Neither sense is helpful as an absolute standard for action for ethics is a dance and changing, but built on some guidelines we have developed.

I'm lost in all the argument and counterargument.  Could I reduce this to two questions.

As a Christian should one get the shot to minimize the possibility of being responsible for passing flu germs to others?

As a Christian should one not get the shot as that will leave the way clear for other people to get one?

OMG 

Are you kidding ? LOL

As a christian you could maximize common sense among your fellow christians

There us a prioty list - they should go first and those not on that list wait.

A value system ( and it is connected to christian ethics) suggests that we protect the common good - that is care for others so getting a shot lowers the risk for others thus suggest we should get a shot - in the right order.

Remember to forget the panic - the issue is how it will hit certain groups - like those who work in ER and if too many of them get the flu then that area will be closed down.  The other is not to panic and overflow - overcrowd ERs - just stay home or go to the alternative clinics - the risk of death is low and is more a problem for certain groups of people who are young or have pre conditions.

kay,

I like your directness - you could almost be an Aussie!  

Ask yourself, "what would Jesus do?" (Which could be just another way of looking to your own conscience.)

Luckily, over here there wasn't a supply shortage, but I can see your dilemma.

Jes - what makes you think I'm a Christian?  I come here trying to understand them.

Pan - I know all about the items you brought up.

I also know when shots will be available for people in my group.  I plan to get one when it is available.  I'm not in any sort of panic.  I have been living with a potentially life threatening condition for a long time - if I get any sort of flu it will kill me - or not.

Again, Kay, I don't think it has anything to do with being Christian. I think we should make the decision as human beings of any faith persuations. Wait until the call for shots is for us.And pilgrim, I think that's what Jesus would have done. Stood in line for his turn.FRom the Advent hymn "The last shall be first and the weak shall be strong , and none shall be afraid".

crazyheart, you have a more visual mind than I (me?). I hadn't envisaged Jesus standing in line waiting for the H1N1 vaccination, but I can't fault your reasoning.

Didn't you folks make that movie "Jesus of Montreal?" (Oops, there I go again, meandering off-thread.)

In part crazyheart if you mean not getting a shot and being a christian that should get you thrown out of the club, then I agree.  It should not be used to beat people over the head.

However, behind the issue is the question of whether faith has anything to do with how we act?  If faith means anything then it should help us make decisions about pragmatic issues - how we relate to the issues of the world, like paying taxes, or dealing with the poor, or how we use our power.  Of course there will be some debate about method - for example some would suggest capitalism is the best way to help, others socialism, others a combination of both economic systems.  Faith should help us question the implicate value system grounding the economic view.  But one cannot claim one is 'christian' and the others are not.  

So in this case the care of the common good is christian value ( and is shared with others) so that should help us make a decision.  It is not that this is the christian thing - to get the shot - and you are not a christian if you don't.... but faith should make a difference to how we act.  And none of our acts are pure only the best we can do.

Yes humans make decisions but they are always based on some worldview or value system.  For some the christian worldview should make the world a better place and guide us helping us to make our 'human decisions.'