Not.

My friend's son, Danny, gets the flu. Only the flu doesn't affect him in the usual fashion. Instead of getting ill, he gets a slight fever and then... his legs stop working. He begins to lose feeling in his legs but simultaneously experiences severe pain deep in the muscles of his legs. Then his legs stop working altogether and he's an invalid. The virus, for whatever reason, attacks the muscles in his legs. Last Thursday he was hospitalized for the FIFTH time for this very thing. This time, they caught it early, and instead of the usual 2-week hospital stay, he was in for less than a week.

One of the questions asked of the physicians was whether or not he would benefit from having an annual flu shot. The doctors were all in agreement that he would not. The flu has so many different strains that mutate so rapidly that by the time they have obtained strains of the virus, replicated it in the lab, tested, manufactured, and distributed it, it has already mutated within the population so many times, that the shot itself is probably only effective against less than 50% of the existing strains running rampant.

Even as susceptible as he is to the virus, it probably wouldn't do any good to protect him when he's currently in school, and we all know schools are little super germ factories anyway. Basically, unless your immune system is somehow compromised (by age, disease, etc.), you're better off not getting a shot that likely will not protect you from the virus most of the time anyway. And most people get sick from the shot right after they get it.

Damn, poor Danny. :(
Does this mean that every time he gets the 'flu, he's going to be in hospital for a week or two with his legs out of action?
Bummer.
Still, we can look at the other 50 weeks a year when his legs are working properly, could be worse,

yup. every time. he's 9 years old next month, and this is his 5th round. seems to happen every Fall season between Aug and Oct. they pump him full of baking soda and potassium and that counteracts the effects, but it takes a long time unless, like this last time, they catch it right as it starts. freaky deaky.

That's a ton of info, Merc, Thanks!
I knew I'd heard something about eggs, but is that true about the mercury? Yikes!

There's tons of people out there trying to prove (not the mercury) that their infants went through considerable changes after the shots. Down Syndrome..etc.etc.

As far as I can tell it's true about the mercury. A co-worker demanded to know before getting a shot and it was confirmed by the clinicians. You have to ask for it without the Mercury if you want it that way. They will direct you to your other options. ie...Places to get it without the mercury content because that is available. (now)

I don't know how likely it is medically, but if it was a coincidence that my baby eczema exploded so badly within 2 days of having the shots, then it was a big one. The day after the shots was the last day I was 'well' for about four years. After that it was intermittently terrible and intermittently low-level well up to being in my late teens.

If it was the immunisation that did that, then it's entirely possible the baby eczema would have gone away within a year or so like it does in the majority of cases. Given the close link between eczema and the immune system, it has always made a kind of sense to me.

Sometimes I frighten myself by thinking of my shot record. So much travel to other countries as a kid made me a pin-cussion (my parents got more shots for me than mandated sometimes). I didn't get any horrible dieases in the other countries but I sometimes wonder what I did get.
I'm not sure why I figure out contents of so many things only after an alternative comes out. Sucks.

You're right Cicero, since the flu shot is not on the mandated vaccine schedule for children, it was not part of the mercury phase-out. Thimerosal (49% mercury) is added to multi-dose vaccine vials to prevent bacterial growth (a bunch of kids died from staph infection in the 20's from vaccines).

Any vaccine packaged in individual doses does not have thimerosal added as a preservative. They are more expensive.

God...Mercury is horrible even in trace amounts. I think that's the first thing I ever learned in elementary school science class. I wonder why people still don't get that.

Here's a link to a good article from CNN on "body burden" testing--the effect of chemicals on our children, specifically talking about flame retarders and plastic softeners. Not mercury (or vaccines, sorry), but like in toys and sleepwear. Scary. Has quotes from opposing viewpoints:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science...den/index.html

American Council on Science and Health

Methylmercury is the form of mercury that causes neurological damage. Ethylmercury is the form used in thimerosal. It is biologically inert. The big question is, are there any clinical (in vivo) conditions in which ethylmercury can be converted to the methyl form?

When I was young my first dentist gave me a bit of mercury to play with, which I did. In 7th grade they had a whole container of it, and we all floated a quarter on it to see what it was like.

our next door neighbour had a jar of it that he used to let my brother and me play with sometimes.

I probably should have my mercury levels checked.