Got my high-dose "Old Geezer" flu shot today.

[Ms. Toad]

45. Oh - so you've decided I'm anti-vax

because I am sharing accurate information about the effectiveness of the influenza vaccine, so that people have information on which to base their own personal decisions?

So you appear to be suggesting the accurate information, which suggests that the flu vaccine is not as effective as the hype makes it appear should be suppressed? Were you, personally, aware that for individuals age 50 or over that gettig the vaccine was only 12% more effective than not getting it (which translates - to a difference between an average of 13.5% infection rate in that age range v. 11.7% infection rate in that age range). Don't you believe that is information that at least some individuals in making the decision whether to get the vaccination or not might find relevant?

Here I thought that progressives valued making decisions based on full and accurate information.

For the record, I am not anti-vax. I am for informed decision making - and information is in short supply because anyone who dares provide any information that might suggest the influenze vacccine is anything less than a miracle is labeled "anti-vax."

Personally, everyone in our family is vaccinated against the major, life-threatening, illnesses for which there are reasonably effective vaccine available (MMR, Tetanus, polio, Smallpox and -for our daughter with a liver disease - the relevant hepatitis vaccines & the HPV vaccine because she is sexually active).

As to the others, which are either prevalent only in limited circumstances (E.g. HiB - young age, primarily a risk in child care settings my daughter never experienced), we make an individual determination based on personal and family history with autoimmune diseases, risk of exposure, risk of the disease if contracted, use of adjuvants in the vaccine, and the effectiveness of the vaccine.