Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Virus |
| Jump to newest |  |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone else been floored with this flu that’s been doing its rounds I’m ill a week still no signs of getting better "Plenty of fluids and plenty of rest. Paracetamol for a high temperature. Get well soon. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always make a very spicy ginger curry and it works. Not for the feint hearted though" Ooh - I love a good bug-murdering spicy curry, and ginger, chillies, onions are turmeric are all chock-full of good stuff for warding off the flu. Any chance of a recipe share? 😉 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone else been floored with this flu that’s been doing its rounds I’m ill a week still no signs of getting better "Is there ?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up " Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up”  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up” ""40 % effective of not having to see a doctor" Dont miss details out you're as bad as the youtubers | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up” "And varies, as it can be phenomenally effective, if the estimated flu strains that are to be most dominant in the forthcoming winter, is more on target.
It's a tough call, based on the southern hemisphere s just finished winter and which types had been prevalent. There's then a short few months, to produce millions of doses, for the end of the northern hemisphere s summer. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up”
And varies, as it can be phenomenally effective, if the estimated flu strains that are to be most dominant in the forthcoming winter, is more on target.
It's a tough call, based on the southern hemisphere s just finished winter and which types had been prevalent. There's then a short few months, to produce millions of doses, for the end of the northern hemisphere s summer. "same as ive asked before though with another certain jab, how can it be physically possible to tell if its effective on humans, possibly slightly on rats but unless you can find 2 exact identical people and give one the flu jab and one not and then expose them both to the flu its just guess work with statistics that you could argue either way round, | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up”
And varies, as it can be phenomenally effective, if the estimated flu strains that are to be most dominant in the forthcoming winter, is more on target.
It's a tough call, based on the southern hemisphere s just finished winter and which types had been prevalent. There's then a short few months, to produce millions of doses, for the end of the northern hemisphere s summer. same as ive asked before though with another certain jab, how can it be physically possible to tell if its effective on humans, possibly slightly on rats but unless you can find 2 exact identical people and give one the flu jab and one not and then expose them both to the flu its just guess work with statistics that you could argue either way round, "If you've ever visited your GP and asked for an exact personal prediction on how a specific treatment will definitely work for you, you will have always been told that we are each unique and will respond differently from others, as well as differently at alternative points. Scientific analysis will largely look at quantitative and qualitative outcomes. To get quantitative understanding of things like this, statistical power is essential - we're benefitting from the luxury of looking at large volumes of data. Medically, there may be some anecdotal reports upon selected individuals. That almost certainly won't give you the wholly personalised predictions of effectiveness that you appear to be suggesting. Life's not certain. We've got much better at understanding human health but generally most things are going to be about the probability of something happening, rather than any certainties. Our immune systems change as we age too. They're generally less strong as we age. As referred to earlier, each annual flu jab currently will be different from the previous year's - it will have different target strains of flu, that it will build immunity for. This is because there are a large number of different flu virus variants and types and it can only target a small amount of them. We can and have produced effectiveness figures in several ways, over the decades that we've had flu vaccines. Analysis of population levels of severe illness and deaths, including hospital admissions, which can be split by demographics, etc, is one aspect that data can be crunched for. We know who's had vaccines, for example. Obviously, there are experts such as epidemiologists and many others, who are involved. Obviously this needs to be fairly brief and Mrs KinkycoupleNW (not her definite username) might add further clarity. The closest each of us will have us a statistical probability, of certain types of medical outcomes. New medicines are subject to much more stringent safety and efficacy testing, prior to approvals. Once medicines are out there, then population level analyses will be undertaken. The promising outlook for flu vaccines, is that research has been underway for some years, in order to develop a vaccine that is effective against whatever strains might be in circulation. There's no guarantees that this will all happen successfully but it's part of the beauty of medical research that goes on invisibly from our daily life. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up”
And varies, as it can be phenomenally effective, if the estimated flu strains that are to be most dominant in the forthcoming winter, is more on target.
It's a tough call, based on the southern hemisphere s just finished winter and which types had been prevalent. There's then a short few months, to produce millions of doses, for the end of the northern hemisphere s summer. same as ive asked before though with another certain jab, how can it be physically possible to tell if its effective on humans, possibly slightly on rats but unless you can find 2 exact identical people and give one the flu jab and one not and then expose them both to the flu its just guess work with statistics that you could argue either way round,
If you've ever visited your GP and asked for an exact personal prediction on how a specific treatment will definitely work for you, you will have always been told that we are each unique and will respond differently from others, as well as differently at alternative points.
Scientific analysis will largely look at quantitative and qualitative outcomes. To get quantitative understanding of things like this, statistical power is essential - we're benefitting from the luxury of looking at large volumes of data. Medically, there may be some anecdotal reports upon selected individuals. That almost certainly won't give you the wholly personalised predictions of effectiveness that you appear to be suggesting.
Life's not certain. We've got much better at understanding human health but generally most things are going to be about the probability of something happening, rather than any certainties.
Our immune systems change as we age too. They're generally less strong as we age.
As referred to earlier, each annual flu jab currently will be different from the previous year's - it will have different target strains of flu, that it will build immunity for. This is because there are a large number of different flu virus variants and types and it can only target a small amount of them.
We can and have produced effectiveness figures in several ways, over the decades that we've had flu vaccines. Analysis of population levels of severe illness and deaths, including hospital admissions, which can be split by demographics, etc, is one aspect that data can be crunched for. We know who's had vaccines, for example. Obviously, there are experts such as epidemiologists and many others, who are involved. Obviously this needs to be fairly brief and Mrs KinkycoupleNW (not her definite username) might add further clarity.
The closest each of us will have us a statistical probability, of certain types of medical outcomes. New medicines are subject to much more stringent safety and efficacy testing, prior to approvals. Once medicines are out there, then population level analyses will be undertaken.
The promising outlook for flu vaccines, is that research has been underway for some years, in order to develop a vaccine that is effective against whatever strains might be in circulation. There's no guarantees that this will all happen successfully but it's part of the beauty of medical research that goes on invisibly from our daily life. "yep i understand all that but you still didnt answer the question so ill simplify it, 2 million people 1 million have the flu jab 4 of them people die from flu 1 million dont have the flu jab 4 of them die from flu Did the flu jab save them 999,996 people or is that data as usefull as the data and statistics that are available for us us to read, now i know them numbers are probably daft but realistically so is trying to use the statistics for teying to say the flu jab does when theres so many variables from person, sex, nationality age region ect ect ect | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up " The efficacy of the flu vaccine changes year on year because it is essentially an educated guess at which flu types will be most prevalent each year. They work on what is circulating in other parts of the world to work out which will be most likely to be circulating here in the winter. The flu vaccines contain the 3 or 4 (depending in the vaccine) most prevalent strains. Some years we get a rogue strain they were not expecting so the vaccines are less efficient other years they have been highly effective. The other point is the more people who are vaccinated the more protected the population as a whole is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up The efficacy of the flu vaccine changes year on year because it is essentially an educated guess at which flu types will be most prevalent each year. They work on what is circulating in other parts of the world to work out which will be most likely to be circulating here in the winter. The flu vaccines contain the 3 or 4 (depending in the vaccine) most prevalent strains. Some years we get a rogue strain they were not expecting so the vaccines are less efficient other years they have been highly effective. The other point is the more people who are vaccinated the more protected the population as a whole is."
think that's a very good point. It's far less for myself that I'll be getting vaccinated. But I come into a lot of contact with people at work, and then visit my mum who is 85,and very unwell. If me getting a jab improves her chances of not becoming more unwell. Then I'm all for it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've got the flu, hacking cough as well... Time to get the face masks out in public transport etc..and washing of our hands?" And stay away from others, when we have an infection. Definitely the steps we learned in the pandemic are helpful and fairly easy to dom The flu vaccine is being rolled out, as well as the autumn Covid booster. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up”
And varies, as it can be phenomenally effective, if the estimated flu strains that are to be most dominant in the forthcoming winter, is more on target.
It's a tough call, based on the southern hemisphere s just finished winter and which types had been prevalent. There's then a short few months, to produce millions of doses, for the end of the northern hemisphere s summer. same as ive asked before though with another certain jab, how can it be physically possible to tell if its effective on humans, possibly slightly on rats but unless you can find 2 exact identical people and give one the flu jab and one not and then expose them both to the flu its just guess work with statistics that you could argue either way round,
If you've ever visited your GP and asked for an exact personal prediction on how a specific treatment will definitely work for you, you will have always been told that we are each unique and will respond differently from others, as well as differently at alternative points.
Scientific analysis will largely look at quantitative and qualitative outcomes. To get quantitative understanding of things like this, statistical power is essential - we're benefitting from the luxury of looking at large volumes of data. Medically, there may be some anecdotal reports upon selected individuals. That almost certainly won't give you the wholly personalised predictions of effectiveness that you appear to be suggesting.
Life's not certain. We've got much better at understanding human health but generally most things are going to be about the probability of something happening, rather than any certainties.
Our immune systems change as we age too. They're generally less strong as we age.
As referred to earlier, each annual flu jab currently will be different from the previous year's - it will have different target strains of flu, that it will build immunity for. This is because there are a large number of different flu virus variants and types and it can only target a small amount of them.
We can and have produced effectiveness figures in several ways, over the decades that we've had flu vaccines. Analysis of population levels of severe illness and deaths, including hospital admissions, which can be split by demographics, etc, is one aspect that data can be crunched for. We know who's had vaccines, for example. Obviously, there are experts such as epidemiologists and many others, who are involved. Obviously this needs to be fairly brief and Mrs KinkycoupleNW (not her definite username) might add further clarity.
The closest each of us will have us a statistical probability, of certain types of medical outcomes. New medicines are subject to much more stringent safety and efficacy testing, prior to approvals. Once medicines are out there, then population level analyses will be undertaken.
The promising outlook for flu vaccines, is that research has been underway for some years, in order to develop a vaccine that is effective against whatever strains might be in circulation. There's no guarantees that this will all happen successfully but it's part of the beauty of medical research that goes on invisibly from our daily life. yep i understand all that but you still didnt answer the question so ill simplify it,
2 million people
1 million have the flu jab
4 of them people die from flu
1 million dont have the flu jab
4 of them die from flu
Did the flu jab save them 999,996 people or is that data as usefull as the data and statistics that are available for us us to read, now i know them numbers are probably daft but realistically so is trying to use the statistics for teying to say the flu jab does when theres so many variables from person, sex, nationality age region ect ect ect
"Dunno where you got your statistics from, probably an antivax group lol Anyways, dying from flu is pretty bad I'm sure, I haven't tried it but I did have (proper) flu twice and was in bed for a week and completely fucked for two weeks after both times, so since then I get the vaccine. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up”
And varies, as it can be phenomenally effective, if the estimated flu strains that are to be most dominant in the forthcoming winter, is more on target.
It's a tough call, based on the southern hemisphere s just finished winter and which types had been prevalent. There's then a short few months, to produce millions of doses, for the end of the northern hemisphere s summer. same as ive asked before though with another certain jab, how can it be physically possible to tell if its effective on humans, possibly slightly on rats but unless you can find 2 exact identical people and give one the flu jab and one not and then expose them both to the flu its just guess work with statistics that you could argue either way round,
If you've ever visited your GP and asked for an exact personal prediction on how a specific treatment will definitely work for you, you will have always been told that we are each unique and will respond differently from others, as well as differently at alternative points.
Scientific analysis will largely look at quantitative and qualitative outcomes. To get quantitative understanding of things like this, statistical power is essential - we're benefitting from the luxury of looking at large volumes of data. Medically, there may be some anecdotal reports upon selected individuals. That almost certainly won't give you the wholly personalised predictions of effectiveness that you appear to be suggesting.
Life's not certain. We've got much better at understanding human health but generally most things are going to be about the probability of something happening, rather than any certainties.
Our immune systems change as we age too. They're generally less strong as we age.
As referred to earlier, each annual flu jab currently will be different from the previous year's - it will have different target strains of flu, that it will build immunity for. This is because there are a large number of different flu virus variants and types and it can only target a small amount of them.
We can and have produced effectiveness figures in several ways, over the decades that we've had flu vaccines. Analysis of population levels of severe illness and deaths, including hospital admissions, which can be split by demographics, etc, is one aspect that data can be crunched for. We know who's had vaccines, for example. Obviously, there are experts such as epidemiologists and many others, who are involved. Obviously this needs to be fairly brief and Mrs KinkycoupleNW (not her definite username) might add further clarity.
The closest each of us will have us a statistical probability, of certain types of medical outcomes. New medicines are subject to much more stringent safety and efficacy testing, prior to approvals. Once medicines are out there, then population level analyses will be undertaken.
The promising outlook for flu vaccines, is that research has been underway for some years, in order to develop a vaccine that is effective against whatever strains might be in circulation. There's no guarantees that this will all happen successfully but it's part of the beauty of medical research that goes on invisibly from our daily life. yep i understand all that but you still didnt answer the question so ill simplify it,
2 million people
1 million have the flu jab
4 of them people die from flu
1 million dont have the flu jab
4 of them die from flu
Did the flu jab save them 999,996 people or is that data as usefull as the data and statistics that are available for us us to read, now i know them numbers are probably daft but realistically so is trying to use the statistics for teying to say the flu jab does when theres so many variables from person, sex, nationality age region ect ect ect
Dunno where you got your statistics from, probably an antivax group lol
Anyways, dying from flu is pretty bad I'm sure, I haven't tried it but I did have (proper) flu twice and was in bed for a week and completely fucked for two weeks after both times, so since then I get the vaccine. "probably an antivax group lol didnt expect anyless from you lol and im sure even the daftest of people would realise them statistics are just made up to simplify the question so just to clarify for you specifically "them statistics arent real i made them up as an example" sorry if they confused some people | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up”
And varies, as it can be phenomenally effective, if the estimated flu strains that are to be most dominant in the forthcoming winter, is more on target.
It's a tough call, based on the southern hemisphere s just finished winter and which types had been prevalent. There's then a short few months, to produce millions of doses, for the end of the northern hemisphere s summer. same as ive asked before though with another certain jab, how can it be physically possible to tell if its effective on humans, possibly slightly on rats but unless you can find 2 exact identical people and give one the flu jab and one not and then expose them both to the flu its just guess work with statistics that you could argue either way round,
If you've ever visited your GP and asked for an exact personal prediction on how a specific treatment will definitely work for you, you will have always been told that we are each unique and will respond differently from others, as well as differently at alternative points.
Scientific analysis will largely look at quantitative and qualitative outcomes. To get quantitative understanding of things like this, statistical power is essential - we're benefitting from the luxury of looking at large volumes of data. Medically, there may be some anecdotal reports upon selected individuals. That almost certainly won't give you the wholly personalised predictions of effectiveness that you appear to be suggesting.
Life's not certain. We've got much better at understanding human health but generally most things are going to be about the probability of something happening, rather than any certainties.
Our immune systems change as we age too. They're generally less strong as we age.
As referred to earlier, each annual flu jab currently will be different from the previous year's - it will have different target strains of flu, that it will build immunity for. This is because there are a large number of different flu virus variants and types and it can only target a small amount of them.
We can and have produced effectiveness figures in several ways, over the decades that we've had flu vaccines. Analysis of population levels of severe illness and deaths, including hospital admissions, which can be split by demographics, etc, is one aspect that data can be crunched for. We know who's had vaccines, for example. Obviously, there are experts such as epidemiologists and many others, who are involved. Obviously this needs to be fairly brief and Mrs KinkycoupleNW (not her definite username) might add further clarity.
The closest each of us will have us a statistical probability, of certain types of medical outcomes. New medicines are subject to much more stringent safety and efficacy testing, prior to approvals. Once medicines are out there, then population level analyses will be undertaken.
The promising outlook for flu vaccines, is that research has been underway for some years, in order to develop a vaccine that is effective against whatever strains might be in circulation. There's no guarantees that this will all happen successfully but it's part of the beauty of medical research that goes on invisibly from our daily life. yep i understand all that but you still didnt answer the question so ill simplify it,
2 million people
1 million have the flu jab
4 of them people die from flu
1 million dont have the flu jab
4 of them die from flu
Did the flu jab save them 999,996 people or is that data as usefull as the data and statistics that are available for us us to read, now i know them numbers are probably daft but realistically so is trying to use the statistics for teying to say the flu jab does when theres so many variables from person, sex, nationality age region ect ect ect
Dunno where you got your statistics from, probably an antivax group lol
Anyways, dying from flu is pretty bad I'm sure, I haven't tried it but I did have (proper) flu twice and was in bed for a week and completely fucked for two weeks after both times, so since then I get the vaccine. probably an antivax group lol didnt expect anyless from you lol and im sure even the daftest of people would realise them statistics are just made up to simplify the question so just to clarify for you specifically "them statistics arent real i made them up as an example" sorry if they confused some people "It's why validated data, using appropriate statistical analysis tools, is the global standard. It keeps everything clear and the data can be provided, for anyone to run the same analysis. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up”
And varies, as it can be phenomenally effective, if the estimated flu strains that are to be most dominant in the forthcoming winter, is more on target.
It's a tough call, based on the southern hemisphere s just finished winter and which types had been prevalent. There's then a short few months, to produce millions of doses, for the end of the northern hemisphere s summer. same as ive asked before though with another certain jab, how can it be physically possible to tell if its effective on humans, possibly slightly on rats but unless you can find 2 exact identical people and give one the flu jab and one not and then expose them both to the flu its just guess work with statistics that you could argue either way round,
If you've ever visited your GP and asked for an exact personal prediction on how a specific treatment will definitely work for you, you will have always been told that we are each unique and will respond differently from others, as well as differently at alternative points.
Scientific analysis will largely look at quantitative and qualitative outcomes. To get quantitative understanding of things like this, statistical power is essential - we're benefitting from the luxury of looking at large volumes of data. Medically, there may be some anecdotal reports upon selected individuals. That almost certainly won't give you the wholly personalised predictions of effectiveness that you appear to be suggesting.
Life's not certain. We've got much better at understanding human health but generally most things are going to be about the probability of something happening, rather than any certainties.
Our immune systems change as we age too. They're generally less strong as we age.
As referred to earlier, each annual flu jab currently will be different from the previous year's - it will have different target strains of flu, that it will build immunity for. This is because there are a large number of different flu virus variants and types and it can only target a small amount of them.
We can and have produced effectiveness figures in several ways, over the decades that we've had flu vaccines. Analysis of population levels of severe illness and deaths, including hospital admissions, which can be split by demographics, etc, is one aspect that data can be crunched for. We know who's had vaccines, for example. Obviously, there are experts such as epidemiologists and many others, who are involved. Obviously this needs to be fairly brief and Mrs KinkycoupleNW (not her definite username) might add further clarity.
The closest each of us will have us a statistical probability, of certain types of medical outcomes. New medicines are subject to much more stringent safety and efficacy testing, prior to approvals. Once medicines are out there, then population level analyses will be undertaken.
The promising outlook for flu vaccines, is that research has been underway for some years, in order to develop a vaccine that is effective against whatever strains might be in circulation. There's no guarantees that this will all happen successfully but it's part of the beauty of medical research that goes on invisibly from our daily life. "Think I just got a bit turned on reading this.  I'm so delightfully qeird  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Haha, another one that pays no attention, simple researchable fact here, the efficiency of the flu Vax has now fallen below 10% wake up Utter rubbish, it’s + 40 % effective. Perhaps it’s you who needs to “wake up”
And varies, as it can be phenomenally effective, if the estimated flu strains that are to be most dominant in the forthcoming winter, is more on target.
It's a tough call, based on the southern hemisphere s just finished winter and which types had been prevalent. There's then a short few months, to produce millions of doses, for the end of the northern hemisphere s summer. same as ive asked before though with another certain jab, how can it be physically possible to tell if its effective on humans, possibly slightly on rats but unless you can find 2 exact identical people and give one the flu jab and one not and then expose them both to the flu its just guess work with statistics that you could argue either way round,
If you've ever visited your GP and asked for an exact personal prediction on how a specific treatment will definitely work for you, you will have always been told that we are each unique and will respond differently from others, as well as differently at alternative points.
Scientific analysis will largely look at quantitative and qualitative outcomes. To get quantitative understanding of things like this, statistical power is essential - we're benefitting from the luxury of looking at large volumes of data. Medically, there may be some anecdotal reports upon selected individuals. That almost certainly won't give you the wholly personalised predictions of effectiveness that you appear to be suggesting.
Life's not certain. We've got much better at understanding human health but generally most things are going to be about the probability of something happening, rather than any certainties.
Our immune systems change as we age too. They're generally less strong as we age.
As referred to earlier, each annual flu jab currently will be different from the previous year's - it will have different target strains of flu, that it will build immunity for. This is because there are a large number of different flu virus variants and types and it can only target a small amount of them.
We can and have produced effectiveness figures in several ways, over the decades that we've had flu vaccines. Analysis of population levels of severe illness and deaths, including hospital admissions, which can be split by demographics, etc, is one aspect that data can be crunched for. We know who's had vaccines, for example. Obviously, there are experts such as epidemiologists and many others, who are involved. Obviously this needs to be fairly brief and Mrs KinkycoupleNW (not her definite username) might add further clarity.
The closest each of us will have us a statistical probability, of certain types of medical outcomes. New medicines are subject to much more stringent safety and efficacy testing, prior to approvals. Once medicines are out there, then population level analyses will be undertaken.
The promising outlook for flu vaccines, is that research has been underway for some years, in order to develop a vaccine that is effective against whatever strains might be in circulation. There's no guarantees that this will all happen successfully but it's part of the beauty of medical research that goes on invisibly from our daily life.
Think I just got a bit turned on reading this.
I'm so delightfully qeird "You're in good company! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 kisses Everyone, Deeds X | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
