> I've received the flu shot three times in my life. I've been hospitalized for influenza three times in my life.
> Please tell me more about how I've deceived myself.
Here you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
> Please tell me more about how I've deceived myself.
Here you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
It's not bias. It's a fact. My GP is the one that has specifically told me to avoid the shot because I have a history of complications with it.
If you're capable, I'd love for you to diagnose me with some other mental disorder or logical fallacy, but please look at my medical history before you start dismissing my experiences as idiotic.
> I'm very much aware of evidence and studies stating that its "impossible" to get the actual flu from the flu shot, yet I am walking proof of contrary evidence.
This is the famous "anti-tiger rock" argument from the Simpsons. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Much_Apu_About_Nothing)
You have evidence you got the flu.
You do NOT have evidence you got it from the shot.
> My GP is the one that has specifically told me to avoid the shot.
Anti-vaccine cranks exist even amongst medical professionals. Hell, the whole movement was started by one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield
> the flu shot is not 100% effective or 100% side effect free
This is a strawman. Vaccine proponents agree with these specific statements. It's well known that the effectiveness varies from year to year, and that side effects are possible.
Can you point me to a study stating that the flu vaccine is 100% safe and effective? Not mostly effective, or mostly safe, but 100% honest-to-god safe for 100% of the population to get?
edit: really? calling my GP an anti vaccine crank? fuck you.
No, because that's a totally different claim.
The flu shot can't give you the flu.
The flu shot can have side effects, and no one with any knowledge claims it's 100% effective.
> edit: really? calling my GP an anti vaccine crank? fuck you.
I'm saying "my GP says so" isn't sufficient to contest the wealth of scientific evidence we have on the safety and efficacy of the flu shot.
edit: You've since edited it to say he recommended due to complications, which is fine, but doesn't sound like the same claim you made originally. There are absolutely people who can't take the shot for various reasons (egg allergies, for example!) and depend on herd immunity as a result. I simply contested the claim that you can get flu from the shot, as every bit of scientific data we have disputes that particular claim.