<<
STILL: once you have had TM, choices are still individual, just the odds
change.
The medical field itself doesn't have consensus on that, as reflected by the
list. I've talked with two neurologuists. One said risks of
recurrance/increased
injury if my body respnded to the flu was enough to warrant the shot; one
said
the same about the injection causing a problem. They were saying that there
was
some risk each way, and they couldn't really be sure. We should talk w/our
healthcare providers and find out their best advice for us individually.
Be well,
Sam >>
Good, logical analysis, Sam! I agree with most of it.
But when you are thirty years old, in good help (with the exception of the
residuals from TM), have not gotten the flu in years, and they practically
bombard you with misleading information about the benefits of the shot (media,
work, hospitals in the area, placards on buses), its hard to say no,
particularly when they don't warn against a recurrence of TM. I relapsed
MASSIVELY after a shot (symptoms within two weeks), and spent three months in
a hospital bed. And when I asked the hospital for a copy of my consent form,
guess what? It included the catch all warning about neurological history in
the past, etc. But the original consent form (which we retained a copy of
through my employer) was different, and did not have this warning. In other
words, they cannot even figure out whether to warn us or not, and these are
the people who are being asked to stimulate our immune system with this
vaccination.
Extensive research is needed in this area. There are just too TMers, many
young people, relapsing after getting the influenza vaccination. I would
NEVER in a million years subject myself to that kind of risk after having gone
through TM at age 23.
Those are my feelings on the issue.
Kevin O'C