@tan235 There is no reason for the pharmaceutical industry to market the flu shot as they don’t make money on it. In fact, several years ago, the government had to find a way to encourage them to make more vaccine, as there was a shortage. I really don’t think there is a marketing ploy.
Rather, I believe this is driven by the medical establishment which is seeking to protect patients, especially the most vulnerable, those in utero.
Are they trying to make you feel guilty? Perhaps. I don’t know what their marketing strategy is. I don’t think you should feel guilty. I think you should make the decision based on the most recent scientific data available. This means scientific data, not anecdotal data. No individual story should be the basis for a decision. Studies of many people should help you decide.
It sounds like you are confused about something, but I didn’t understand what you were confused about.
Here’s an anecdotal story—your question reminded me to get a flu shot, and I just got it an hour ago. I’ve gotten it every year for a decade or so now. Yes, it had a little mercury in it. I remember investigating that in past years and deciding it was a decent risk.
I can’t tell you with 100% surety what will best protect your baby. No one can. Neither pro nor con. I can tell you that the flu vaccine increases your chances of health for both of you, compared to not having it. How much it increases, I don’t know. I don’t know what your chances of getting the flu are normally, nor how much with the vaccine, nor how much of an improvement that is.
I never got a flu before I got the vaccine. I never got one after. I hope it stays that way.