MattPie Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 Not to derail the thread, but then why do people who get the shot still get the flu? And wouldn't that, for whatever reason, still categorize the shot as "a coin flip"? It's only a coin flip if the coin has 20 sides and only a couple sides are "you get the flu". People in the know (of which is sounds like there are a couple here) try to determine what the most common flu strains are going to be each year and add thevaccine to the shot. They generally do a good job but sometimes other strains will make a Cinderella run out of nowhere and that's the year lots of people get the flu anyway.
biodork Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 Not to derail the thread, but then why do people who get the shot still get the flu? And wouldn't that, for whatever reason, still categorize the shot as "a coin flip"? Multiple strains of influenza out there, and the annual vaccination is only against a few strains that are predicted to be most prevalent that season. Sometimes they're right, and sometimes they're wrong, but either way if you contract a strain against which you were not vaccinated and it's different enough from the ones you were, you'll still get sick. Edit: And not strictly a coin flip because it's an educated guess more than a 50/50 crapshoot.
LGR4GM Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 The shot can also make the course of your illness easier, if you do contract it, I believe. This is also true. It does appear my number was high and that 63% roughly don't get the flu if they have had the shot. If you average out and ignore age ranges 43% don't get the flu without taking the shot. So roughly speaking you have a 20% better chance of going flu free with the shot. Just note those numbers ignore AGE, Health, and other factors that should be taken into account if you truly wanted to hammer out is the Influenza Vaccine efficient.
billsrcursed Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 ^Ya I got that, but then what you two are saying is that the strains that are vaccinated against are 100% protected against? And nice job with the "cinderella run" reference, that made me laugh!
That Aud Smell Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 And thank you for that. you're quite welcome. i'm a word-guy, not a scientist. even so, the misuse and misunderstanding of the term "flu" is a huge pet peeve of mine. The shot can also make the course of your illness easier, if you do contract it, I believe. QFT. i contracted what i infer must have been the swine flu in 2009 -- oh, christ, it was terrible -- but i got through the worst of it in less than 72 hours. i attributed that to the fact that i'd been immunized. It's only a coin flip if the coin has 20 sides and only a couple sides are "you get the flu". D&D! :w00t:
MattPie Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 QFT. i contracted what i infer must have been the swine flu in 2009 -- oh, christ, it was terrible -- but i got through the worst of it in less than 72 hours. i attributed that to the fact that i'd been immunized. I got something in I think 2010 that was brutal. I did nothing for a few days other than sleep, eat something small, and go back to sleep. I think I was out of the office for two weeks (although the second I worked from home). D&D! :w00t: You made your saving throw against the flu! I lost the first copy of my post, which did mention 1d20.
Doohicksie Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 Not to derail the thread, Too late.
Claude_Verret Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 ^Ya I got that, but then what you two are saying is that the strains that are vaccinated against are 100% protected against? And nice job with the "cinderella run" reference, that made me laugh! Essentially yes if you have a well functioning immune system, which most healthy adults do. But for the young, elderly and otherwise immunocompromised patients, they are at much higher risk for severe cases of the flu that could kill them even if they get the shot during a flu season where there is a good match.
LGR4GM Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 Well this has been an interesting side discussion but... It sounds like Grigorenko will return after his conditioning assignment. I wonder if that gives them 14 days to figure out what to do in Buffalo with him. It seems that if anyone could make this kid perform up to snuff it would be Nolan and LaFontaine. I just hope that he gets a ton of time playing in Rochester. I still refuse to call a 19yr old kid a bust, especially one like Grigorenko. There is just too much talent and pride there for him to fail. I think 14 days from now he will start to reemerge as a guy who can play in the NHL and will only get better.
nfreeman Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 Well this has been an interesting side discussion but... It sounds like Grigorenko will return after his conditioning assignment. I wonder if that gives them 14 days to figure out what to do in Buffalo with him. It seems that if anyone could make this kid perform up to snuff it would be Nolan and LaFontaine. I just hope that he gets a ton of time playing in Rochester. I still refuse to call a 19yr old kid a bust, especially one like Grigorenko. There is just too much talent and pride there for him to fail. I think 14 days from now he will start to reemerge as a guy who can play in the NHL and will only get better. We have no idea how much pride he has. As far as that goes, it's quite reasonable that he doesn't have enough pride -- if he does, it hasn't motivated him to play better.
Derrico Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 I'm not sure 14 days is going to do a whole heck of a lot but I think everyone agrees the AHL is the best spot for him so atleast he'll get a couple of weeks there.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 WTF??? This is a thread about Ted Nolan and roster moves. All this flu shot talk is disgusting. At least make it relevant and discuss the Smallpox Vaccine......
MattPie Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 At least make it relevant and discuss the Smallpox Vaccine...... Is there a vaccine for Staff Infection? :)
billsrcursed Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 Sorry everyone (and thanks to those that answered).
nobody Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 Is there a vaccine for Staff Infection? :) The Drew will never go away and can be very contagious.
buffalohsix Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 The Drew will never go away and can be very contagious. :worthy:
MattPie Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 The Drew will never go away and can be very contagious. We need to draft/trade/breed a player named Cipro.
HopefulFuture Posted November 19, 2013 Author Report Posted November 19, 2013 Thank you! I almost started a thread the other day to forbid that word. I think we live in such a mamby-pamby PC world now that people are just scared to call-out slackers. It's lawyer speak. Just say..."The effort wasn't there. That guy has no grit. He didn't work hard." I want that word and analytics put into an outhouse with a brick of explosives and let it scatter in the woods. I must say GoDD, several of us are impressed with your compete level in this thread........over the bias on the term "compete level" :P
theesir Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 Paul Hamilton made some kind of comment on Twitter earlie that he wanted to follow up on about in the past sending players down on a 14 day conditioning assignment and then saying they needed another 14 days and so on until a player has been down there quite a while... CBA seems to say that you can send someone multiple times, but not more than 14 days consecutive. It looks as though they would be able to call him up for a game after 14 days and then send him for more conditioning. I guess the conditioning loans are subject to review by the league, so they probably could not circumvent the rules for too long.
Assquatch Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 Why don't they immunize for Marfan?
Nitro60 Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 Who, besides Grigorenko, has been shown up nightly? That is my point. The young guys were brought in too early. Not ready for prime time.
darksabre Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 That is my point. The young guys were brought in too early. Not ready for prime time. :huh: I'm not sure you understood my question.
LGR4GM Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 I just want to say it is absolutely RIDICULOUS that the Junior Canadian Leagues dictate to the NHL what they can do. The more I think about it the more angry it makes me. There should be some exception or way to make that a reality. The NHL is a billion dollar league being jerked around and Bettman allows it. Grigorenko should just keep doing conditioning stints in Rochester because I still think he can make it.
Nitro60 Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 :huh: I'm not sure you understood my question. They did not show up because, while physically they may seem ready, they were not ready for the pace and the mental rigors of the game. These 4 guys need at least a year before they are ready for the demands of NHL hockey beyond the physical.
Hawerchuk Posted November 19, 2013 Report Posted November 19, 2013 I just want to say it is absolutely RIDICULOUS that the Junior Canadian Leagues dictate to the NHL what they can do. The more I think about it the more angry it makes me. There should be some exception or way to make that a reality. The NHL is a billion dollar league being jerked around and Bettman allows it. Grigorenko should just keep doing conditioning stints in Rochester because I still think he can make it. Totally agree.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.