[exDemMom]

Influenza is a very special case where vaccines are involved.

For most diseases, antibody mediated immunity decreases over time. This is the case with influenza, as well. In addition, influenza mutates a lot through various mechanisms, so that even if you are immune to a particular strain of H1N1, you are not necessarily completely immune to the strain that circulates the following season. While there is, as you noted, some cross-immunity, that does not substitute for a fresh dose of (hopefully more targeted) immunity conferred by vaccine.

[Shethink13]

This is the case with influenza, as well. In addition, influenza mutates a lot through various mechanisms, so that even if you are immune to a particular strain of H1N1, you are not necessarily completely immune to the strain that circulates the following season. While there is, as you noted, some cross-immunity, that does not substitute for a fresh dose of (hopefully more targeted) immunity conferred by vaccine.

Would you mind answering a question? In your practice, have you ever recommended a pregnant woman receive the annual flu vaccine? If you have, would you mind telling me the vaccine brand that would be used?

[Shethink13]

For most diseases, antibody mediated immunity decreases over time. This is the case with influenza, as well. fully more targeted) immunity conferred by vaccine.

How could you possibly know this if no one is tested before they are given the vaccine? Isn't it just an assumption based incorrectly on vaccine-acquired immunity which indeed is much shorter lived. I believe I read somewhere on the CDC website that the maximum length of immunity from the vaccine is 126 days.

I ask again, why would you not first find out if someone retains their immunity before shooting them up with a quadrivalent vaccine cocktail?

Are you of the belief that vaccine-acquired immunity is superior to naturally acquired immunity?