Vaccinations; recent developments

[sarkeizen]

Item B explains their use of the phrase "not likely to help prevent".

That still results in lives saved and sick-days unspent.

Item C does not concern me as I don't really care what most people do.

Your question was "why would you spend...". I assume you meant "Why would a rational person spend".  When an action is more rational than what people would otherwise use their time/money for the end result over a large enough population will be positive.  This is, at least in broad strokes a rational goal.

Item A tells me that they are spending

Very little, for a product which does protect people.

to promote a product made by a private company

Probably not.  They are spending money to help consume a perishable product they already purchased which will have zero effect if it's never administered.  So the question is simply one of the cost to achieve an advantage.  Administration of the vaccine and the cost of the PSA are probably very low.  While the advantage of the vaccine isn't high it's not implausible to think that this confers some advantage or is at least break even.  Making it the rational thing for the government to do.

[Pirate88179]

That still results in lives saved and sick-days unspent.Your question was "why would...". When an action is more rational than what people would otherwise use their time/money for the end result over a large enough population will be positive.  Your concern is probably not necessary for what the government is doing to be rational.Very little, for a product which does protect people.Probably not.  They are spending money to help consume a perishable product they already purchased which will have zero effect if it's never administered.  So the question is simply one of the cost to achieve an advantage.  Administration of the vaccine and the cost of the PSA are probably very low.  While the advantage of the vaccine isn't high it's not implausible to think that this confers some advantage or is at least break even.  Making it the rational thing for the government to do.

Ah, I see, they (gov.) had already purchased X amount of doses from a private company and...they are attempting to get rid of them before they go bad.  This actually makes more sense.  They have already spent our tax dollars and, they did not want them to go to waste so, a little radio marketing helps them get folks to use them, even though it may, or may not help them.

In this light, i do agree that it was a rational thing for the gov. to do.

Bill

[sarkeizen]

This actually makes more sense.  They have already spent our tax dollars and, they did not want them to go to waste so, a little radio marketing helps them get folks to use them, even though it may, or may not help them.

I'll just stress that I have no inside knowledge of the US or other government purchasing but as the US administered 140 million vaccine doses in 2014 it's doubtful that it was all on a cash-and-carry basis.  As the Canadian government is a single-payer system virtually all of their insured expenses are done with some negotiation up front. i.e. We will buy X artificial hips @ $Y and be able to purchase more at $Z. It's also well publicized that the US and Canada had significant surplus H1N1 vaccine.  Some of which was donated and some was destroyed.  Other medications have known government stockpiles i.e. Tamiflu

[joel321]

I heard a radio public service announcement today that said...(paraphrasing) Even though this year's flu shot will not likely prevent you from getting the flu...we strongly urge everyone to get the shot anyway.  There MAY be some benefit in lessening the symptoms of the other strains of flu virus."

We have read about a female with maybe a weak immune system, die because she was forced to take one! Due to work policy!

That is not the right thing to do!

A lot of more thinking needs to be done by these "experts".

There needs to be a lot of NEW WORLD ORDER because obviously the top people don't know what to do! (=GREED?)

I'm going to tell you 100% truth! KNOWLEDGE is the PILL! No pill/shot will ever cure the flu. NEVER! So this will continue on, people die by taking the flu shot and people live by taking it! It is simple!

In my house 3 people have the flu and I don't care which strain, all I know is that I'm not sick and I will not get sick unless the sick person coughs in my face, etc. you may ask why am I not sick? Well EDUCATION/KNOWLEDGE! I don't need no flu shot when I know hot to prevent it! That is the answer!

And you have to remember we are talking ONLY about a flue virus that only is deathly to a genetically born person that their immune system cannot cope with some strains but it's obvious that most healthy people only will be sick for 1-2 weeks. But this is the same scenario with other viruses.

The IGNORANCE is taken to viruses that there are no vaccinations too! Like AIDS. Now is where things start to make sense that PREVENTION is ONLY THE CURE! AND THAT IS TRUTH!

So why is "preventing" the flu virus is via a flu show and PREVETING for aids is by KNOWLEDGE? Care to tell me why? Money! = GREED!

Scientists kill a lot of people due to IGNORANCE. I mean there are some doctors that operate on the wrong side of the leg! Or leave operating tools in the human body! = GREED! I'm 100% sure they would never operate on the wrong side of the limb nor leave a tool inside the body if they where operating their own body! Plain and simple.

The whole world needs some "MAINTENANCE" for the better good! In all parts, in this case we are talking about medicine but we can talk about pollution, money, politics, science, electricity, it's just way tooo out of hand!

[orbut 3000]

So why is "preventing" the flu virus is via a flu show and PREVETING for aids is by KNOWLEDGE? Care to tell me why?

Because the HIV virus is born with gills and fins and the flue virus is born with wings and legs. 300% TRUTH.