I typically have high regard for NPR. So I was perplexed by this article as it was EXTREMELY biased for getting the vaccine. I mean, I go to NPR for objective and independent news once in a while, but any proponent for objective journalism would know that this article is obviously a bias piece. So I went to the npr.com home page. There are 11 articles that are pro-vaccine and not one being objective on the subject. The credibility of NPR has just flown right out the window. How TRULY disappointing.
OR maybe NPR is still credible and it's just a good idea to get the vaccine.
DId you not read the article? It was blatant biasness. It REEKED of agenda.
Certainly you're not suggesting that the ones you just posted are unbiased, are you? And do you have links/sources for them, please?
I agree that the NPR article has an agenda: to preserve the public's health.
DId you not read the article? It was blatant biasness. It REEKED of agenda.
Certainly you're not suggesting that the ones you just posted are unbiased, are you? And do you have links/sources for them, please?
I agree that the NPR article has an agenda: to preserve the public's health.
OK, maybe I should mention that you go to the NPR homepage and search for H1N1 vaccinations, like I posted that I did so you can see how biased the site is about the issue. No objectivitiy whatsoever.
Oh, and NPR is national public radio...it's PUBLIC. It's not supposed to serve any agenda, it's supposed to be public.
By the way... for those who seem to prefer anecdotes to science... the chief resident on our maternal and child health service now has the H1N1 flu (thinks she got it from patients) and we're now trying to figure out who's going to deliver all the babies this week.
DId you not read the article? It was blatant biasness. It REEKED of agenda.
Certainly you're not suggesting that the ones you just posted are unbiased, are you? And do you have links/sources for them, please?
I agree that the NPR article has an agenda: to preserve the public's health.
OK, maybe I should mention that you go to the NPR homepage and search for H1N1 vaccinations, like I posted that I did so you can see how biased the site is about the issue. No objectivitiy whatsoever.
Oh, and NPR is national public radio...it's PUBLIC. It's not supposed to serve any agenda, it's supposed to be public.
So it shouldn't even serve a PUBLIC health agenda?? Should it be fair and balanced with an anti-public health agenda?
I agree that the NPR article has an agenda: to preserve the public's health.
OK, maybe I should mention that you go to the NPR homepage and search for H1N1 vaccinations, like I posted that I did so you can see how biased the site is about the issue. No objectivitiy whatsoever.
Oh, and NPR is national public radio...it's PUBLIC. It's not supposed to serve any agenda, it's supposed to be public.
So it shouldn't even serve a PUBLIC health agenda?? Should it be fair and balanced with an anti-public health agenda?
Why yes is should serve a public health agenda and that's serving ALL VOICES!! Do you not understand the point of being free speech? Do you not understand that there's more to this issue than your side? As your article mentioned, more and more people are not buying this H1N1 scare. That's the other voice you're not listening to.
OK, maybe I should mention that you go to the NPR homepage and search for H1N1 vaccinations, like I posted that I did so you can see how biased the site is about the issue. No objectivitiy whatsoever.
Oh, and NPR is national public radio...it's PUBLIC. It's not supposed to serve any agenda, it's supposed to be public.
So it shouldn't even serve a PUBLIC health agenda?? Should it be fair and balanced with an anti-public health agenda?
Why yes is should serve a public health agenda and that's serving ALL VOICES!! Do you not understand the point of being free speech? Do you not understand that there's more to this issue than your side? As your article mentioned, more and more people are not buying this H1N1 scare. That's the other voice you're not listening to.
I do understand that there are two sides. There's the scientific/epidemiologic/best medical evidence & advice side and there's the side that wants to ignore the preponderance of the evidence and think their anecdotes carry just as much validity.
Of course I understand the point of free speech. But, personally, I think NPR has an obligation to the public to not present any old nut's personal beliefs as fact.
ETA: Maybe you should write to them and tell them to present the "other" side, if you don't think it's been well-represented.
Friday, October 09, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews
Editor
(NaturalNews) Health freedom attorney Jim Turner is filing a lawsuit in
Washington D.C. mid-day Friday in an urgent effort to halt the distribution
of the swine flu vaccine in America. On behalf of plaintiffs Dr. Gary Null
and other licensed health care workers of New York State, the lawsuit
charges that the FDA violated the law in its hasty approval of four swine
flu vaccines by failing to scientifically determine neither the safety nor
efficacy of the vaccines.
"The suit will seek an injunction against the FDA from approving the
vaccine," attorney Jim Turner told NaturalNews on Thursday evening's Natural
News Talk Hour show. "And the core of the argument is that they have not
done the proper safety and efficacy tests on the vaccine to allow it to be
release at this time."
The suit seeks to not only nullify the FDA's unlawful "approval" of the four
H1N1 influenza vaccines, but to also ask the court to issue an injunction
that would halt any mandatory vaccination requirements.
"The FDA is required by law to establish that a vaccine is safe and
effective before it can be given to the public," said Turner. "We are
arguing that they did not establish that the vaccine was effective, and did
not establish that it was safe. They are trying to get it on the market by a
waiver."
Vaccine / adjuvant combination has never been properly tested
The vaccine / adjuvant combination being referred to as the "swine flu
vaccine" has apparently never been safety tested or approved by the FDA. In
fact, in many cases the vaccine is being sent to clinics, pharmacies and
other health establishments separately from the adjuvant chemical, leaving
it up to each local vaccine retailer to properly mix the vaccine with the
adjuvant, according to information provided by Turner. With hundreds of
millions of Americans potentially being targeted with this vaccine, the
potential for improper mixing, improper dosages, and human error is
alarming.
If the charges described in the lawsuit are true, it means the FDA has
blatantly abandoned medical science and violated its own regulations in
approving not only these four vaccines, but the potentially deadly adjuvant
chemicals as well. To date, the FDA has produced absolutely no scientific
evidence documenting safety tests for any of these swine flu vaccines. There
are no published studies, no records of any clinical trials, and no
publicly-available paper trail demonstrating that any safety testing was
done whatsoever. There is no researcher who has publicly put their name on
the record declaring the vaccines to be safe, and no FDA official has ever
stated that scientifically-valid safety testing has ever been conducted on
the vaccine / adjuvant combinations now being distributed across America.
Normally, when a pharmaceutical achieves "FDA approved" status, there is a
considerable paper trail of scientific scrutiny, peer review, clinical
trials and other supporting evidence. To our knowledge, no such documents
exist for the swine flu vaccines. The FDA's approval of these vaccines
appears to be based entirely on a whim.
"What has been tested?" asked attorney Jim turner. "Where has it been
tested? Who reviewed the test? Who looked at the test and said yes they
proved safety and efficacy? There is no record that we can find that shows
these things have been done."
By approving the four vaccines in the absence of such safety testing, the
FDA itself stands in direct violation of federal law. "There is a law that
they're supposed to follow and they are not following it," Turner added.
Billions of dollars are at stake
Why, then, did the FDA apparently violate the law and push these vaccines
into full public distribution without securing the safety testing required
by law? Turner suspects a profit motive may be involved: "They're charging
$24.95 to get a vaccine. Multiplied by 100 million people, that's a lot of
money. If you do the whole society, you're talking about several billion
dollars."
In fact, the U.S. vaccination push could ultimately target over 200 million
Americans, generating nearly $5 billion in vaccine-related revenues. Cashing
in on those revenues, however, requires three things:
1) Spreading fear about H1N1 swine flu by exaggerating its dangers.
2) Quickly making a vaccine available for sale, even if it has never been
thoroughly tested for safety and efficacy.
3) Aggressively marketing the vaccines before the H1N1 swine flu fizzles out
and can no longer be hyped up as "highly virulent."
All three of these conditions are now being pushed aggressively in the U.S.
by pharma-influenced health authorities at both the state and federal level.
There is a mad, cult-like rush under way to vaccinate American citizens with
an unproven, untested chemical that was thrust into distribution in apparent
violation of federal law. And if this vaccine is not stopped, the price that
may ultimately be paid in terms of lost lives could be quite dire.
It all harkens back to 1976 when a previous formulation of the swine flu
vaccine paralyzed and killed thousands of Americans. Turner was one of the
attorneys instrumental in halting that vaccine, and he fears a repeat
situation could potentially recur today. He told NaturalNews, "[In 1976]
they were intending to inoculate 200 million people. We stopped them... and
somewhere between 40 and 50 million people were vaccinated. What ultimately
brought it down is that a substantial number of people got 'French Polio'
[Guillain-Barre syndrome], a paralysis that goes... through the body, and if
it goes far enough you die."
So it shouldn't even serve a PUBLIC health agenda?? Should it be fair and balanced with an anti-public health agenda?
Why yes is should serve a public health agenda and that's serving ALL VOICES!! Do you not understand the point of being free speech? Do you not understand that there's more to this issue than your side? As your article mentioned, more and more people are not buying this H1N1 scare. That's the other voice you're not listening to.
I do understand that there are two sides. There's the scientific/epidemiologic/best medical evidence & advice side and there's the side that wants to ignore the preponderance of the evidence and think their anecdotes carry just as much validity.
Of course I understand the point of free speech. But, personally, I think NPR has an obligation to the public to not present any old nut's personal beliefs as fact.
ETA: Maybe you should write to them and tell them to present the "other" side, if you don't think it's been well-represented.
NPR has an obligation to the public to be public and objective, not biased and one-sided. That site/station just lost its credibility for being truly independent.
Have you not been reading where I'm stating that the scientific and medical world are not agreeable on this issue? That there's several doctors admitting that there has not been enough testing and it's not completely safe? Nor can it be determined to be completely effective, issues of side effects and the ability to catch the virus by taking the vaccine (which is common for the flu vac too)? Or the fact that it's not an emergency situation and the vaccine manufacturers have their asses covered hence someone dies from taking the vac and tries to sue? How about this last one about the attorney suing the FDA for violating federal law regarding the H1N1? Are you not reading any of what I've posted?? Do you really want me to show you more reasons to question this vaccine?
NPR has an obligation to the public to be public and objective, not biased and one-sided. That site/station just lost its credibility for being truly independent.
Have you not been reading where I'm stating that the scientific and medical world are not agreeable on this issue? That there's several doctors admitting that there has not been enough testing and it's not completely safe? Nor can it be determined to be completely effective, issues of side effects and the ability to catch the virus by taking the vaccine (which is common for the flu vac too)? Or the fact that it's not an emergency situation and the vaccine manufacturers have their asses covered hence someone dies from taking the vac and tries to sue? How about this last one about the attorney suing the FDA for violating federal law regarding the H1N1? Are you not reading any of what I've posted?? Do you really want me to show you more reasons to question this vaccine?
Yes, I'm reading what you're posting, but I question the validity of your sources. (Well, you haven't actually provided sources for some of the articles.)
I agree that the scientific/medical world doesn't agree 100% on this issue - they don't agree 100% on any issue. So we have to look to the data specifically and its validity, as well as consider what the experts have to say. I can tell you right now, I’m going to trust the opinion of someone who has devoted his/her career to studying the flu over someone whose career is focused on something else.
You say there are several doctors "admitting" that there hasn't been enough testing and it's not safe. But who are these doctors? How many of them are there compared to the ones who disagree? What is the source of their information? Has their data been peer-reviewed?
And of course it's not 100% effective - nothing is 100% effective. You're right to compare issues of effectiveness, side effects, and possibility of getting the flu to the regular flu vaccine. That has been studied and studied over many years and millions of cases. And the medical community as a whole believes that the risk/benefit analysis favors getting the flu vaccine. Are there a few outliers in the medical community? Sure. As I already said, there will always be outliers. But why should I trust them over the majority of the medical community and the preponderance of the evidence?
I don't know what you mean by "it's not an emergency situation". It is what it is - whether you consider it an emergency is subjective. The authorities describing the severity of the outbreak are reporting the hard data they are collecting. This is factual data. I have no understanding of how anyone could argue with simple counts, unless they accusing the flu experts of just making shit up.
In terms of how concerned we should be about it, I guess that depends on your perspective. I know my job requires me to be concerned about it. We know that our hospital will be overwhelmed (as the NPR article pointed out) with flu patients. We know that as we have more patients, we will have fewer providers because they and their families will get sick. We know we have an obligation to our patients to plan for this, and to determine the best way to keep the spread of flu within our hospital to a minimum. We have spent many hours reviewing the evidence and making these plans. Our hospital has already seen a dramatic increase in flu patients and decrease in providers as they’ve fallen ill to the flu.
I have to take it seriously. If you don’t have to and don’t want to, don’t. But then stay home if/when you get sick instead of infecting the rest of us and creating a burden for our healthcare system.
Friday, October 09, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews
Editor
You said previously that you got your data from legitimate medical sites and medical journals, as opposed to bogus sources like the CDC, but never did point me in the direction of these more legitimate sources. I've noticed that many of the articles you post have come from NaturalNews.com. I'm wondering: Is this the "legitimate" source of information to which you were referring?
If so, I'm wondering what makes this website so much more legit? Is it even a peer-reviewed medical journal?
I read some of the articles there - like the ones about how antibiotics are bad and how we shouldn't try to reduce high fevers, even if a child is having fever-induced convulsions - and noted that the "facts" in some of these articles weren't even cited and the articles were written by "citizen journalists". Is giving articles written by "citizen journalists" for a website equal/greater weight than the information provided by the researchers themselves what you mean by balancing the discussion with both "sides"?
Also, does this organization not have the same obligation as NPR to present unbiased, and not one-sided, information? Where is the "other" side on their website? (And why won't the United States allow them to have non-profit status?)
Friday, October 09, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews
Editor
You said previously that you got your data from legitimate medical sites and medical journals, as opposed to bogus sources like the CDC, but never did point me in the direction of these more legitimate sources. I've noticed that many of the articles you post have come from NaturalNews.com. I'm wondering: Is this the "legitimate" source of information to which you were referring?
If so, I'm wondering what makes this website so much more legit? Is it even a peer-reviewed medical journal?
I read some of the articles there - like the ones about how antibiotics are bad and how we shouldn't try to reduce high fevers, even if a child is having fever-induced convulsions - and noted that the "facts" in some of these articles weren't even cited and the articles were written by "citizen journalists". Is giving articles written by "citizen journalists" for a website equal/greater weight than the information provided by the researchers themselves what you mean by balancing the discussion with both "sides"?
Also, does this organization not have the same obligation as NPR to present unbiased, and not one-sided, information? Where is the "other" side on their website? (And why won't the United States allow them to have non-profit status?)
I hesitated to post the source of this article, because I don't post from just any source. But I went ahead and did it...because if you google this news story you will notice that it's not just from this natural health site (which I've never sourced before). It's being reported from MANY sources, yet you will not find it on any mainstream news because of the sensitive subject. A Fed agency being sued for what? Violating Federal Law? Like Hell will any gov't controlled mainstream media allow that released to the public, they protect any damaging news from being released about them. As if you didn't know, our MSM will only report what they want us to hear. I'm big into the media in general which is why I'm skeptical of any MSM sourced "news".
I also posted it because it's not made up. Jim Turner is filing a lawsuit against the FDA for the way the H1N1 has been released, which is unlawful.
Oh, and if you go back and look, I have sourced everything I post.
Yes, I'm reading what you're posting, but I question the validity of your sources. (Well, you haven't actually provided sources for some of the articles.)
Yes I have.
I agree that the scientific/medical world doesn't agree 100% on this issue - they don't agree 100% on any issue. So we have to look to the data specifically and its validity, as well as consider what the experts have to say. I can tell you right now, I’m going to trust the opinion of someone who has devoted his/her career to studying the flu over someone whose career is focused on something else.
You say there are several doctors "admitting" that there hasn't been enough testing and it's not safe. But who are these doctors? How many of them are there compared to the ones who disagree? What is the source of their information? Has their data been peer-reviewed?
And of course it's not 100% effective - nothing is 100% effective. You're right to compare issues of effectiveness, side effects, and possibility of getting the flu to the regular flu vaccine. That has been studied and studied over many years and millions of cases. And the medical community as a whole believes that the risk/benefit analysis favors getting the flu vaccine. Are there a few outliers in the medical community? Sure. As I already said, there will always be outliers. But why should I trust them over the majority of the medical community and the preponderance of the evidence?
The Medical Community as a whole is now divided on the subject. I've provided enough info, (and I'm sure there will be more in the coming weeks) to justify that the med. community and several doctors disagree that we all should be vaccinated with H1N1. So you're beating a dead horse at this point, the debate has been ripped wide open by the public being questionable about this vaccine. It's not just me, anymore.
I don't know what you mean by "it's not an emergency situation". It is what it is - whether you consider it an emergency is subjective. The authorities describing the severity of the outbreak are reporting the hard data they are collecting. This is factual data. I have no understanding of how anyone could argue with simple counts, unless they accusing the flu experts of just making shit up.
The authorities describing the so-called outbreak are resorting to using fear to get people to go out and get vaccinated. Yes, there are fatalities, but not enough to exactly call this an "emergency" situation. If you read my last few articles, one stated that between 30,000 and 40,000 die from the regular flu every winter. AND that's with those who received the flu vaccine! Yet, regular flu is not considered an emergency, and Swine Flu is? What's the number of reported fatalities w/ that?
In terms of how concerned we should be about it, I guess that depends on your perspective. I know my job requires me to be concerned about it. We know that our hospital will be overwhelmed (as the NPR article pointed out) with flu patients. We know that as we have more patients, we will have fewer providers because they and their families will get sick. We know we have an obligation to our patients to plan for this, and to determine the best way to keep the spread of flu within our hospital to a minimum. We have spent many hours reviewing the evidence and making these plans. Our hospital has already seen a dramatic increase in flu patients and decrease in providers as they’ve fallen ill to the flu.
I have to take it seriously. If you don’t have to and don’t want to, don’t. But then stay home if/when you get sick instead of infecting the rest of us and creating a burden for our healthcare system.
And you keep believing that this so called pandemic is going to kill everyone, if we don't accept an unsafe and limited tested drug up our nose of inserted into our bloodstream.
[And you keep believing that this so called pandemic is going to kill everyone, if we don't accept an unsafe and limited tested drug up our nose of inserted into our bloodstream.
oh my. nowhere in this thread did i get the idea that scb thinks the swine flu is going to kill everyone!
i didnt hear any sort of mass hysteria tone to her posts... idk...
[And you keep believing that this so called pandemic is going to kill everyone, if we don't accept an unsafe and limited tested drug up our nose of inserted into our bloodstream.
oh my. nowhere in this thread did i get the idea that scb thinks the swine flu is going to kill everyone!
i didnt hear any sort of mass hysteria tone to her posts... idk...
this is a crazy ass thread!
You're right, she didn't come out and say that the swine flu will kill everyone. She is on the pro-vaccine side though and believes we all should go out and inject or snort up a drug that has not been tested enough for safety.
[And you keep believing that this so called pandemic is going to kill everyone, if we don't accept an unsafe and limited tested drug up our nose of inserted into our bloodstream.
oh my. nowhere in this thread did i get the idea that scb thinks the swine flu is going to kill everyone!
i didnt hear any sort of mass hysteria tone to her posts... idk...
this is a crazy ass thread!
You're right, she didn't come out and say that the swine flu will kill everyone. She is on the pro-vaccine side though and believes we all should go out and inject or snort up a drug that has not been tested enough for safety.
1. I don't believe this flu is going to kill everyone & I don't believe there should be any hysteria about it.
2. I do believe it should be taken seriously.... no more or less seriously than warranted.
3. I do know, not just from scientific data but also from first-hand experience, that this flu is having a different impact than the regular flu (because young people don't have an immunity to it).
4. I do believe that science has proven again & again the value of vaccines & that, on a population level, it is more risky to not get vaccinated than to get vaccinated.
5. I do believe that this vaccine has been sufficiently tested.
6. I don't consider your sources to be more valid than the sources they claim to refute.
7. I admit that I'm losing my patience with the groups of people who want to give equal weight to pseudo-science & random opinion as is given to actual science. It's not their personal opinion that frustrates me as much as the fact that the are propagating such bullshit to others.
8. I also admit that I'm losing my patience with the all-or-none mentality that suggests that if something's not 100% good than it's 100% bad, instead of acknowledging the risks & benefits of everything and the inevitable limitations on all knowledge.
9. I'm sorry for losing my patience with you.
10. I want to now respectfully walk away from this conversation. But I have enough self-knowledge to realize that I probably won't be able to keep my mouth shut the next time someone posts something that seems misleading (for lack of a better adjective). Thankfully, I'll be going out of town soon & won't have Internet access.
oh my. nowhere in this thread did i get the idea that scb thinks the swine flu is going to kill everyone!
i didnt hear any sort of mass hysteria tone to her posts... idk...
this is a crazy ass thread!
You're right, she didn't come out and say that the swine flu will kill everyone. She is on the pro-vaccine side though and believes we all should go out and inject or snort up a drug that has not been tested enough for safety.
1. I don't believe this flu is going to kill everyone & I don't believe there should be any hysteria about it.
2. I do believe it should be taken seriously.... no more or less seriously than warranted.
3. I do know, not just from scientific data but also from first-hand experience, that this flu is having a different impact than the regular flu (because young people don't have an immunity to it).
4. I do believe that science has proven again & again the value of vaccines & that, on a population level, it is more risky to not get vaccinated than to get vaccinated.
5. I do believe that this vaccine has been sufficiently tested.
6. I don't consider your sources to be more valid than the sources they claim to refute.
7. I admit that I'm losing my patience with the groups of people who want to give equal weight to pseudo-science & random opinion as is given to actual science. It's not their personal opinion that frustrates me as much as the fact that the are propagating such bullshit to others.
8. I also admit that I'm losing my patience with the all-or-none mentality that suggests that if something's not 100% good than it's 100% bad, instead of acknowledging the risks & benefits of everything and the inevitable limitations on all knowledge.
9. I'm sorry for losing my patience with you.
10. I want to now respectfully walk away from this conversation. But I have enough self-knowledge to realize that I probably won't be able to keep my mouth shut the next time someone posts something that seems misleading (for lack of a better adjective). Thankfully, I'll be going out of town soon & won't have Internet access.
I wish you peace & health.
as to #10.....
if only we all could manage to do that from time to time.....hahahaha.
scb, i ALWAYS appreciate your posts - the information you share and your perspective. don't ever stop sharing...
10. I want to now respectfully walk away from this conversation. But I have enough self-knowledge to realize that I probably won't be able to keep my mouth shut the next time someone posts something that seems misleading (for lack of a better adjective). Thankfully, I'll be going out of town soon & won't have Internet access.
as to #10.....
if only we all could manage to do that from time to time.....hahahaha.[/quote]
I know, it's hopeless, no? :oops:
thanks for your kind words. I hope you're feeling better soon!
1. I don't believe this flu is going to kill everyone & I don't believe there should be any hysteria about it.
2. I do believe it should be taken seriously.... no more or less seriously than warranted.
3. I do know, not just from scientific data but also from first-hand experience, that this flu is having a different impact than the regular flu (because young people don't have an immunity to it).
4. I do believe that science has proven again & again the value of vaccines & that, on a population level, it is more risky to not get vaccinated than to get vaccinated.
5. I do believe that this vaccine has been sufficiently tested.
6. I don't consider your sources to be more valid than the sources they claim to refute.
7. I admit that I'm losing my patience with the groups of people who want to give equal weight to pseudo-science & random opinion as is given to actual science. It's not their personal opinion that frustrates me as much as the fact that the are propagating such bullshit to others.
8. I also admit that I'm losing my patience with the all-or-none mentality that suggests that if something's not 100% good than it's 100% bad, instead of acknowledging the risks & benefits of everything and the inevitable limitations on all knowledge.
9. I'm sorry for losing my patience with you.
10. I want to now respectfully walk away from this conversation. But I have enough self-knowledge to realize that I probably won't be able to keep my mouth shut the next time someone posts something that seems misleading (for lack of a better adjective). Thankfully, I'll be going out of town soon & won't have Internet access.
I wish you peace & health.
I apologize as well for losing my patience with you. You provided good info, I just realize that we're not going to budge on our opinions, and that's why I bowed out a while ago with this debate. But I couldn't resist coming back to it. And just for the record, I am considering getting my daughter, who's 6, vaxed, if cases of children fatalities rise. I'm not as stubborn as I may appear.
I have a few questions that hopefully you can help me answer:
1. Are there sources for the statements above?
2. Do the flu vaccine studies really claim to reduce the OVERALL death rate (from everything) by 50% or do they only claim to reduce the rate of death attributable to influenza by 50%? It's hard to tell since the article doesn't cite the studies.
3. Have the results of Jackson's study been reproduced?
4. Did flu cases increase in 2004?
Fuck it... this article is too long to read carefully while I'm at work... I'll have to finish reading it later.[/quote]
I found this on Natural News.
I knew all the rules, but the rules did not know me...GUARANTEED!
I have a few questions that hopefully you can help me answer:
1. Are there sources for the statements above?
2. Do the flu vaccine studies really claim to reduce the OVERALL death rate (from everything) by 50% or do they only claim to reduce the rate of death attributable to influenza by 50%? It's hard to tell since the article doesn't cite the studies.
3. Have the results of Jackson's study been reproduced?
4. Did flu cases increase in 2004?
Fuck it... this article is too long to read carefully while I'm at work... I'll have to finish reading it later.
Natural news also put out stuff like this:
(NaturalNews) Everywhere in western medicine you find the Caduceus symbol: It's the staff entwined with two serpents, with wings at the top. You'll find it emblazoned on medical texts, medical school certificates, medical websites and even in hospitals and medical buildings.
But what does the symbol mean, exactly? I decided to conduct a bit of research to find out some possibilities.
The Caduceus, it turns out, was a staff carried by the Greek god Hermes. Hermes is best known as the messenger of the gods, but he is also well known as the protector of liars, gamblers and thieves. He's also prominently known as the guide of the dead.
According to Wikipedia, the name of the staff, Caduceus, is adapted from the Greek word kerukeion, which means "herald's wand" -- the staff of the public messenger. It's related to the words kerux and kerusso, which pertain to someone who announces information to the public.
From a Biblical point of view, the two serpents on the staff are, of course, symbols of evil and deception. There is a Greek myth about the two serpents on the staff which states that Tiresias found two snakes copulating and he beat to death the female snake with his staff.
So far, then, we have a staff carried by the Greek god Hermes, a protector of liars and thieves (who is also the guide of the dead), named as a staff or wand related to announcing information to the public, encircled by two serpents representing evil, and tied to yet another Greek myth about the female being beat to death.
This is the symbol of modern-day western medicine.
The evil of western medicine revealed
The part about the female being beaten to death is especially relevant, given how our male-dominated western medical system considers virtually all female physiology to be disease (pregnancy, menstruation, etc.). Women are treated like animals in many ways, through endless breast cancer screening and mandatory HPV vaccines. Female organs are considered useless or disease-ridden, such as when hysterectomies are performed to remove women's "hysteria" (madness). That's where the name "hysterectomy" actually comes from, of course.
That the two snakes representing evil would encircle the staff of public announcement could be an indication that the purpose of the staff is to announce evil (the propaganda of western medicine). At the same time, the mythological carrier of the staff is the protector of liars and thieves (the drug promoters and drug companies).
Once you understand the symbology, it becomes quite evident that this prominent symbol of western medicine was not chosen by chance: It sends a powerful subconscious message, much like the symbols of secret societies used on dollar bills, for example (the all-seeing eye floating above the pyramid on the back of the dollar bill). It might even be said that, through the repetition of this symbol which adorns the most important documents and texts used in the medical schools, doctors are, in a very true sense, being continuously indoctrinated with the powerful symbols of evil and death.
Once these impressionable young doctors graduate from their medical schools, they are given the tools of death to "treat" patients: Chemotherapy poisons, toxic pharmaceuticals, scalpels and radiation machines. They slice off women's breasts and call it "cancer prevention." They poison children's brains with chemicals and call it "medicine." They damage and destroy key organs like the heart, liver, kidneys and brain through the forced application of toxic chemotherapy agents, sometimes at gunpoint (as with the case of Daniel Hauser).
Pity I couldn't read the rest. I'm just holding my breath for the inevitable Bilderberg/Satan/Nazi pitch.
I know that for me, I will take the word of trained doctors over some conspiracy loons when it comes to medical advice.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
From Slate Magazine...
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
I just came across this today. I've never heard of the website before, but maybe someone from Sweden is on this board and they might have more information on how substantiated this news article is:
Nurses Got Sick From the Swine Flu Vaccine in Sweden • UPDATE - 190 Adverse Reactions 1 Suspected Death
Filed Under Pandemic, Vaccines
Yesterday 30 people had been reporting to the authorities in Sweden that they experienced such severe side effects that they felt the need to contact a hospital. Today the number is 140. The swedish newspaper Expressen is the only one in Sweden reporting on these cases and as usual this is most likely only the tip of a rather large iceberg. UPDATE: According to Dagens Nyheter, the number of reported side effects are now a few hours later 190. 1 person dies after the injection but “no direct relation with the injection has been established”. The biggest medical scandal in the history of Sweden has just started.
Even so, Annika Linde, director of The Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control (SMI) manages to spin this into something positive by stating “The vaccine has more side effects than the normal flu vaccine. It is a sign that proves that it gives an effective protection.”
Thousands of Swedes have been vaccinated so far and the reports of side effects are “flooding in” to The Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control (SMI). Annika Linde: “It is obviously so that the vaccine against the swine flu results in more side effects than the normal flu vaccines. That is because the swine flu vaccine contains adjuvants, shark liver oil, which triggers the immune defense to respond. That also results in that the protection against the virus becomes better.”
Several severe cases of allergic reactions are reported to the unit for medicinal safety. “So far the reported side effects are not unexpected”, says Gunilla Sjölin Forsberg. This unit has now asked some of the many units that vaccinate to report side effects to better get a grip on the situation. This statement alone is shocking since according to normal practice, all side effects should automatically be reported - right?
A nurse who took the shot on wednesday last week is still feeling sick. She got high fever and shivers from the swine flu shot. “-I was shaking in my whole body. It was so sever that I could not even hold a glass of water in my hand.”, Lotta Lindström says.
“- I am now thinking about what it is I have been injected with. I really was affected. It feels really unpleasant.”
De blev sjuka av vaccinet - Hälsa - Expressen.se
Maria Strindlund is not so sure she made the right choice to tae the shot. She also got a severe fever and shivering reaction. “- Since I work as a nurse, I decided it was the best thing to do.”, she says. At first she felt nothing from the vaccinaton, but a few hours later the side effects kicked in. “- I got a extreme pain in my arm. I could no longer lift it.” The came the fever and the shivering. ” _ I was lying in bed shivering and was feeling very cold and stood in a hot shower to get warm.” She says many colleguse who also took the vaccine have had similar reactons. She has been taking many vaccines in the past without any reactions whatsoever.
Rebecka Andersson was the first person to get the shot in Sweden. She became feverish and felt sick to her stomach from the shot. ” - I lost all energy”, she says. “-I am normally never sick so I understood it must be the vaccine.” Her class mates was vaccinated at the same time and she states that five out of nineteen also got sick from the swine flu vaccine.
Rebecka, 32: “Jag blev orkeslös” - Hälsa - Expressen.se
Lotta Lindström, a nurse, states that she got the shot a week ago and still is not well. “- It feels very worrying”, she says. “- I did not sleep anything the night after the shot since the pain in my arm was so severe.” The day after, at work, the fever came. She later had headaches. She still today, a week after the shot feels sick.
Lotta, 49: “Jag sov inte något på natten” - Hälsa - Expressen.se
Another nurse, Jennely, could hardly walk five meters after she got sick from the “swine flu” vaccination. She was completely healthy when she got the shot but the day after she had 39 degrees centigrade fever (102.2 F). “- I could hardly walk the five meters I had to the bathroom”, she says. The fever lasted for three days. sevreal of her colugueges at work had similar experiences. “- I know of at least ten that got fever , we are about 80 people at my workplace.”
Jennely, 26: “Orkade knappt gå fem meter” - Hälsa - Expressen.se
This is interesting as a lady at the office I work at was told she had H1N1 (she's healthy and back to work now) so it would be a bit interesting if she actually didn't have it and is still susceptible to getting it later on. We did just have our seasonal flu shots here and I know she got one. Sometimes people get sick right after getting one of those, but apparently they actually did a test on her from what I understand. I don't know the details, but it sounds like they did a swab of the tissue pretty far up in her nasal cavaties. Any of the doctors or nurses on this board know if that is how they test for the H1N1?
Anyway, onto the article about how apparently the CDC says it isn't necessary to even test for H1N1 anymore (personally I think it would be a good idea to track it)
CBS) If you've been diagnosed "probable" or "presumed" 2009 H1N1 or "swine flu" in recent months, you may be surprised to know this: odds are you didn’t have H1N1 flu.
In fact, you probably didn’t have flu at all. That's according to state-by-state test results obtained in a three-month-long CBS News investigation.
The ramifications of this finding are important. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Britain's National Health Service, once you have H1N1 flu, you're immune from future outbreaks of the same virus. Those who think they've had H1N1 flu -- but haven't -- might mistakenly presume they're immune. As a result, they might skip taking a vaccine that could help them, and expose themselves to others with H1N1 flu under the mistaken belief they won't catch it. Parents might not keep sick children home from school, mistakenly believing they've already had H1N1 flu.
Why the uncertainty about who has and who hasn't had H1N1 flu?
CBSNews.com report on H1N1
In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?
Some public health officials privately disagreed with the decision to stop testing and counting, telling CBS News that continued tracking of this new and possibly changing virus was important because H1N1 has a different epidemiology, affects younger people more than seasonal flu and has been shown to have a higher case fatality rate than other flu virus strains.
CBS News learned that the decision to stop counting H1N1 flu cases was made so hastily that states weren't given the opportunity to provide input. Instead, on July 24, the Council for State and Territorial Epidemiologists, CSTE, issued the following notice to state public health officials on behalf of the CDC:
"Attached are the Q&As that will be posted on the CDC website tomorrow explaining why CDC is no longer reporting case counts for novel H1N1. CDC would have liked to have run these by you for input but unfortunately there was not enough time before these needed to be posted (emphasis added)."
When CDC did not provide us with the material, we filed a Freedom of Information request with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). More than two months later, the request has not been fulfilled. We also asked CDC for state-by-state test results prior to halting of testing and tracking, but CDC was again, initially, unresponsive.
Watch CBS News Videos Online
Video above: A CBS News producer asks the director of the CDC, Dr. Thomas Frieden, for this information at a press conference on Sept. 19.
While we waited for CDC to provide the data, which it eventually did, we asked all 50 states for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico.
(CBS)
It’s unknown what patients who tested negative for flu were actually afflicted with since the illness was not otherwise determined. Health experts say it’s assumed the patients had some sort of cold or upper respiratory infection that is just not influenza.
With most cases diagnosed solely on symptoms and risk factors, the H1N1 flu epidemic may seem worse than it is. For example, on Sept. 22, this alarming headline came from Georgetown University in Washington D.C.: "H1N1 Flu Infects Over 250 Georgetown Students."
H1N1 flu can be deadly and an outbreak of 250 students would be an especially troubling cluster. However, the number of sick students came not from lab-confirmed tests but from "estimates" made by counting "students who went to the Student Health Center with flu symptoms, students who called the H1N1 hotline or the Health Center's doctor-on-call, and students who went to the hospital's emergency room."
Without lab testing, it's impossible to know how many of the students actually had H1N1 flu. But the statistical trend indicates it was likely much fewer than 250.
CDC continues to monitor flu in general and H1N1 through "sentinels," which basically act as spot-checks to detect trends around the nation. But at least one state, California, has found value in tracking H1N1 flu in greater detail.
"What we are doing is much more detailed and expensive than what CDC wants," said Dr. Bela Matyas, California's Acting Chief of Emergency Preparedness and Response. "We're gathering data better to answer how severe is the illness. With CDC's fallback position, there are so many uncertainties with who's being counted, it's hard to know how much we're seeing is due to H1N1 flu rather than a mix of influenza diseases generally. We can tell that apart but they can't."
After our conversation with Dr. Matyas, public affairs officials with the California Department of Public Health emphasized to CBS News that they support CDC policy to stop counting individual cases, maintaining that the state has the resources to gather more specific testing data than the CDC.
Because of the uncertainties, the CDC advises even those who were told they had H1N1 to get vaccinated unless they had lab confirmation. "Persons who are uncertain about how they were diagnosed should get the 2009 H1N1 vaccine."
That's unwelcome news for a Marietta, Georgia mom whose two children were diagnosed with "probable" H1N1 flu over the summer. She hoped that would mean they wouldn't need the hastily developed H1N1 flu vaccine. However, since their cases were never confirmed with lab tests, the CDC advises they get the vaccine. "I wish they had tested and that I knew for sure whether they had it. I'm not anxious to give them an experimental vaccine if they don't need it."
Speaking to CBS' "60 Minutes," CDC Director Dr. Frieden said he has confidence that the vaccine will be safe and effective: "We're confident it will be effective we have every reason to believe that it will be safe."
However, the CDC recommendation for those who had "probable" or "presumed" H1N1 flu to go ahead and get vaccinated anyway means the relatively small proportion of those who actually did have H1N1 flu will be getting the vaccine unnecessarily. This exposes them to rare but significant side effects, such as paralysis from Guillain-Barre syndrome.
It also uses up vaccine, which is said to be in short supply. The CDC was hoping to have shipped 40 million doses by the end of October, but only about 30 million doses will be available this month.
The CDC did not response to questions from CBS News for this report.
In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?
In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?
that is all kinds of fucked up.
That's what I was thinking. It just screams to me that they want to be able to cover things up just in case it really isn't the epidemic they now say it is. I would think if we are in an epidemic it would be a good idea to track things.
a married couple that we are friends with have two kids the same age as us; one 3 year old and one 2 month old. Her father is a respected physician in Toronto. She called him for his opinion on this. He said "Health Canada tells me I have to tell all my patients to get the vaccine for H1N1, but speaking as a father/grandfather, I would not let anyone give that to my grandkids. It has quite simply not been sufficiently tested for me to be confident in its safety".
I was already somewhat apprehensive about it (as I'm always leary of taking any pharmaceuticals-I prefer my body to work it out on its own if it's not definitively life-threatening), but if a doctor of 30 years tells his own kid not to vaccinate herself or her children, then it kind of tells me I'm on the right track.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
a married couple that we are friends with have two kids the same age as us; one 3 year old and one 2 month old. Her father is a respected physician in Toronto. She called him for his opinion on this. He said "Health Canada tells me I have to tell all my patients to get the vaccine for H1N1, but speaking as a father/grandfather, I would not let anyone give that to my grandkids. It has quite simply not been sufficiently tested for me to be confident in its safety".
I was already somewhat apprehensive about it (as I'm always leary of taking any pharmaceuticals-I prefer my body to work it out on its own if it's not definitively life-threatening), but if a doctor of 30 years tells his own kid not to vaccinate herself or her children, then it kind of tells me I'm on the right track.
Yeah I hear you...but more importantly....I'm amazed at how well you handle a computer at your age.
a married couple that we are friends with have two kids the same age as us; one 3 year old and one 2 month old. Her father is a respected physician in Toronto. She called him for his opinion on this. He said "Health Canada tells me I have to tell all my patients to get the vaccine for H1N1, but speaking as a father/grandfather, I would not let anyone give that to my grandkids. It has quite simply not been sufficiently tested for me to be confident in its safety".
I was already somewhat apprehensive about it (as I'm always leary of taking any pharmaceuticals-I prefer my body to work it out on its own if it's not definitively life-threatening), but if a doctor of 30 years tells his own kid not to vaccinate herself or her children, then it kind of tells me I'm on the right track.
Yeah I hear you...but more importantly....I'm amazed at how well you handle a computer at your age.
a married couple that we are friends with have two kids the same age as us; one 3 year old and one 2 month old.
:evil:
to be fair towards the topic tho, many a doctor will have a differing opinion on the topic. does not make one less educated or respecte, but it is definitely a topic with divisive opinions, even amongst some physicians. there usually is.
a married couple that we are friends with have two kids the same age as us; one 3 year old and one 2 month old. Her father is a respected physician in Toronto. She called him for his opinion on this. He said "Health Canada tells me I have to tell all my patients to get the vaccine for H1N1, but speaking as a father/grandfather, I would not let anyone give that to my grandkids. It has quite simply not been sufficiently tested for me to be confident in its safety".
I was already somewhat apprehensive about it (as I'm always leary of taking any pharmaceuticals-I prefer my body to work it out on its own if it's not definitively life-threatening), but if a doctor of 30 years tells his own kid not to vaccinate herself or her children, then it kind of tells me I'm on the right track.
Yeah I hear you...but more importantly....I'm amazed at how well you handle a computer at your age.
Comments
Certainly you're not suggesting that the ones you just posted are unbiased, are you? And do you have links/sources for them, please?
I agree that the NPR article has an agenda: to preserve the public's health.
OK, maybe I should mention that you go to the NPR homepage and search for H1N1 vaccinations, like I posted that I did so you can see how biased the site is about the issue. No objectivitiy whatsoever.
Oh, and NPR is national public radio...it's PUBLIC. It's not supposed to serve any agenda, it's supposed to be public.
So it shouldn't even serve a PUBLIC health agenda?? Should it be fair and balanced with an anti-public health agenda?
I do understand that there are two sides. There's the scientific/epidemiologic/best medical evidence & advice side and there's the side that wants to ignore the preponderance of the evidence and think their anecdotes carry just as much validity.
Of course I understand the point of free speech. But, personally, I think NPR has an obligation to the public to not present any old nut's personal beliefs as fact.
ETA: Maybe you should write to them and tell them to present the "other" side, if you don't think it's been well-represented.
Urgent lawsuit filed against FDA to halt swine flu vaccines; claims FDA violated federal law
Friday, October 09, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews
Editor
(NaturalNews) Health freedom attorney Jim Turner is filing a lawsuit in
Washington D.C. mid-day Friday in an urgent effort to halt the distribution
of the swine flu vaccine in America. On behalf of plaintiffs Dr. Gary Null
and other licensed health care workers of New York State, the lawsuit
charges that the FDA violated the law in its hasty approval of four swine
flu vaccines by failing to scientifically determine neither the safety nor
efficacy of the vaccines.
"The suit will seek an injunction against the FDA from approving the
vaccine," attorney Jim Turner told NaturalNews on Thursday evening's Natural
News Talk Hour show. "And the core of the argument is that they have not
done the proper safety and efficacy tests on the vaccine to allow it to be
release at this time."
The suit seeks to not only nullify the FDA's unlawful "approval" of the four
H1N1 influenza vaccines, but to also ask the court to issue an injunction
that would halt any mandatory vaccination requirements.
"The FDA is required by law to establish that a vaccine is safe and
effective before it can be given to the public," said Turner. "We are
arguing that they did not establish that the vaccine was effective, and did
not establish that it was safe. They are trying to get it on the market by a
waiver."
Vaccine / adjuvant combination has never been properly tested
The vaccine / adjuvant combination being referred to as the "swine flu
vaccine" has apparently never been safety tested or approved by the FDA. In
fact, in many cases the vaccine is being sent to clinics, pharmacies and
other health establishments separately from the adjuvant chemical, leaving
it up to each local vaccine retailer to properly mix the vaccine with the
adjuvant, according to information provided by Turner. With hundreds of
millions of Americans potentially being targeted with this vaccine, the
potential for improper mixing, improper dosages, and human error is
alarming.
If the charges described in the lawsuit are true, it means the FDA has
blatantly abandoned medical science and violated its own regulations in
approving not only these four vaccines, but the potentially deadly adjuvant
chemicals as well. To date, the FDA has produced absolutely no scientific
evidence documenting safety tests for any of these swine flu vaccines. There
are no published studies, no records of any clinical trials, and no
publicly-available paper trail demonstrating that any safety testing was
done whatsoever. There is no researcher who has publicly put their name on
the record declaring the vaccines to be safe, and no FDA official has ever
stated that scientifically-valid safety testing has ever been conducted on
the vaccine / adjuvant combinations now being distributed across America.
Normally, when a pharmaceutical achieves "FDA approved" status, there is a
considerable paper trail of scientific scrutiny, peer review, clinical
trials and other supporting evidence. To our knowledge, no such documents
exist for the swine flu vaccines. The FDA's approval of these vaccines
appears to be based entirely on a whim.
"What has been tested?" asked attorney Jim turner. "Where has it been
tested? Who reviewed the test? Who looked at the test and said yes they
proved safety and efficacy? There is no record that we can find that shows
these things have been done."
By approving the four vaccines in the absence of such safety testing, the
FDA itself stands in direct violation of federal law. "There is a law that
they're supposed to follow and they are not following it," Turner added.
Billions of dollars are at stake
Why, then, did the FDA apparently violate the law and push these vaccines
into full public distribution without securing the safety testing required
by law? Turner suspects a profit motive may be involved: "They're charging
$24.95 to get a vaccine. Multiplied by 100 million people, that's a lot of
money. If you do the whole society, you're talking about several billion
dollars."
In fact, the U.S. vaccination push could ultimately target over 200 million
Americans, generating nearly $5 billion in vaccine-related revenues. Cashing
in on those revenues, however, requires three things:
1) Spreading fear about H1N1 swine flu by exaggerating its dangers.
2) Quickly making a vaccine available for sale, even if it has never been
thoroughly tested for safety and efficacy.
3) Aggressively marketing the vaccines before the H1N1 swine flu fizzles out
and can no longer be hyped up as "highly virulent."
All three of these conditions are now being pushed aggressively in the U.S.
by pharma-influenced health authorities at both the state and federal level.
There is a mad, cult-like rush under way to vaccinate American citizens with
an unproven, untested chemical that was thrust into distribution in apparent
violation of federal law. And if this vaccine is not stopped, the price that
may ultimately be paid in terms of lost lives could be quite dire.
It all harkens back to 1976 when a previous formulation of the swine flu
vaccine paralyzed and killed thousands of Americans. Turner was one of the
attorneys instrumental in halting that vaccine, and he fears a repeat
situation could potentially recur today. He told NaturalNews, "[In 1976]
they were intending to inoculate 200 million people. We stopped them... and
somewhere between 40 and 50 million people were vaccinated. What ultimately
brought it down is that a substantial number of people got 'French Polio'
[Guillain-Barre syndrome], a paralysis that goes... through the body, and if
it goes far enough you die."
NPR has an obligation to the public to be public and objective, not biased and one-sided. That site/station just lost its credibility for being truly independent.
Have you not been reading where I'm stating that the scientific and medical world are not agreeable on this issue? That there's several doctors admitting that there has not been enough testing and it's not completely safe? Nor can it be determined to be completely effective, issues of side effects and the ability to catch the virus by taking the vaccine (which is common for the flu vac too)? Or the fact that it's not an emergency situation and the vaccine manufacturers have their asses covered hence someone dies from taking the vac and tries to sue? How about this last one about the attorney suing the FDA for violating federal law regarding the H1N1? Are you not reading any of what I've posted?? Do you really want me to show you more reasons to question this vaccine?
Yes, I'm reading what you're posting, but I question the validity of your sources. (Well, you haven't actually provided sources for some of the articles.)
I agree that the scientific/medical world doesn't agree 100% on this issue - they don't agree 100% on any issue. So we have to look to the data specifically and its validity, as well as consider what the experts have to say. I can tell you right now, I’m going to trust the opinion of someone who has devoted his/her career to studying the flu over someone whose career is focused on something else.
You say there are several doctors "admitting" that there hasn't been enough testing and it's not safe. But who are these doctors? How many of them are there compared to the ones who disagree? What is the source of their information? Has their data been peer-reviewed?
And of course it's not 100% effective - nothing is 100% effective. You're right to compare issues of effectiveness, side effects, and possibility of getting the flu to the regular flu vaccine. That has been studied and studied over many years and millions of cases. And the medical community as a whole believes that the risk/benefit analysis favors getting the flu vaccine. Are there a few outliers in the medical community? Sure. As I already said, there will always be outliers. But why should I trust them over the majority of the medical community and the preponderance of the evidence?
I don't know what you mean by "it's not an emergency situation". It is what it is - whether you consider it an emergency is subjective. The authorities describing the severity of the outbreak are reporting the hard data they are collecting. This is factual data. I have no understanding of how anyone could argue with simple counts, unless they accusing the flu experts of just making shit up.
In terms of how concerned we should be about it, I guess that depends on your perspective. I know my job requires me to be concerned about it. We know that our hospital will be overwhelmed (as the NPR article pointed out) with flu patients. We know that as we have more patients, we will have fewer providers because they and their families will get sick. We know we have an obligation to our patients to plan for this, and to determine the best way to keep the spread of flu within our hospital to a minimum. We have spent many hours reviewing the evidence and making these plans. Our hospital has already seen a dramatic increase in flu patients and decrease in providers as they’ve fallen ill to the flu.
I have to take it seriously. If you don’t have to and don’t want to, don’t. But then stay home if/when you get sick instead of infecting the rest of us and creating a burden for our healthcare system.
You said previously that you got your data from legitimate medical sites and medical journals, as opposed to bogus sources like the CDC, but never did point me in the direction of these more legitimate sources. I've noticed that many of the articles you post have come from NaturalNews.com. I'm wondering: Is this the "legitimate" source of information to which you were referring?
If so, I'm wondering what makes this website so much more legit? Is it even a peer-reviewed medical journal?
I read some of the articles there - like the ones about how antibiotics are bad and how we shouldn't try to reduce high fevers, even if a child is having fever-induced convulsions - and noted that the "facts" in some of these articles weren't even cited and the articles were written by "citizen journalists". Is giving articles written by "citizen journalists" for a website equal/greater weight than the information provided by the researchers themselves what you mean by balancing the discussion with both "sides"?
Also, does this organization not have the same obligation as NPR to present unbiased, and not one-sided, information? Where is the "other" side on their website? (And why won't the United States allow them to have non-profit status?)
I also posted it because it's not made up. Jim Turner is filing a lawsuit against the FDA for the way the H1N1 has been released, which is unlawful.
Oh, and if you go back and look, I have sourced everything I post.
The Medical Community as a whole is now divided on the subject. I've provided enough info, (and I'm sure there will be more in the coming weeks) to justify that the med. community and several doctors disagree that we all should be vaccinated with H1N1. So you're beating a dead horse at this point, the debate has been ripped wide open by the public being questionable about this vaccine. It's not just me, anymore.
The authorities describing the so-called outbreak are resorting to using fear to get people to go out and get vaccinated. Yes, there are fatalities, but not enough to exactly call this an "emergency" situation. If you read my last few articles, one stated that between 30,000 and 40,000 die from the regular flu every winter. AND that's with those who received the flu vaccine! Yet, regular flu is not considered an emergency, and Swine Flu is? What's the number of reported fatalities w/ that?
And you keep believing that this so called pandemic is going to kill everyone, if we don't accept an unsafe and limited tested drug up our nose of inserted into our bloodstream.
oh my. nowhere in this thread did i get the idea that scb thinks the swine flu is going to kill everyone!
i didnt hear any sort of mass hysteria tone to her posts... idk...
this is a crazy ass thread!
1. I don't believe this flu is going to kill everyone & I don't believe there should be any hysteria about it.
2. I do believe it should be taken seriously.... no more or less seriously than warranted.
3. I do know, not just from scientific data but also from first-hand experience, that this flu is having a different impact than the regular flu (because young people don't have an immunity to it).
4. I do believe that science has proven again & again the value of vaccines & that, on a population level, it is more risky to not get vaccinated than to get vaccinated.
5. I do believe that this vaccine has been sufficiently tested.
6. I don't consider your sources to be more valid than the sources they claim to refute.
7. I admit that I'm losing my patience with the groups of people who want to give equal weight to pseudo-science & random opinion as is given to actual science. It's not their personal opinion that frustrates me as much as the fact that the are propagating such bullshit to others.
8. I also admit that I'm losing my patience with the all-or-none mentality that suggests that if something's not 100% good than it's 100% bad, instead of acknowledging the risks & benefits of everything and the inevitable limitations on all knowledge.
9. I'm sorry for losing my patience with you.
10. I want to now respectfully walk away from this conversation. But I have enough self-knowledge to realize that I probably won't be able to keep my mouth shut the next time someone posts something that seems misleading (for lack of a better adjective). Thankfully, I'll be going out of town soon & won't have Internet access.
I wish you peace & health.
as to #10.....
if only we all could manage to do that from time to time.....hahahaha.
scb, i ALWAYS appreciate your posts - the information you share and your perspective. don't ever stop sharing...
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
as to #10.....
if only we all could manage to do that from time to time.....hahahaha.[/quote]
I know, it's hopeless, no? :oops:
thanks for your kind words. I hope you're feeling better soon!
Peace and good health to you as well.
Interesting read.
I have a few questions that hopefully you can help me answer:
1. Are there sources for the statements above?
2. Do the flu vaccine studies really claim to reduce the OVERALL death rate (from everything) by 50% or do they only claim to reduce the rate of death attributable to influenza by 50%? It's hard to tell since the article doesn't cite the studies.
3. Have the results of Jackson's study been reproduced?
4. Did flu cases increase in 2004?
Fuck it... this article is too long to read carefully while I'm at work... I'll have to finish reading it later.[/quote]
I found this on Natural News.
Hail Hail HIPPIEMOM
Wishlist Foundation-
http://www.wishlistfoundation.org
info@wishlistfoundation.org
Hahaha... figures! This thread is too much!
(NaturalNews) Everywhere in western medicine you find the Caduceus symbol: It's the staff entwined with two serpents, with wings at the top. You'll find it emblazoned on medical texts, medical school certificates, medical websites and even in hospitals and medical buildings.
But what does the symbol mean, exactly? I decided to conduct a bit of research to find out some possibilities.
The Caduceus, it turns out, was a staff carried by the Greek god Hermes. Hermes is best known as the messenger of the gods, but he is also well known as the protector of liars, gamblers and thieves. He's also prominently known as the guide of the dead.
According to Wikipedia, the name of the staff, Caduceus, is adapted from the Greek word kerukeion, which means "herald's wand" -- the staff of the public messenger. It's related to the words kerux and kerusso, which pertain to someone who announces information to the public.
From a Biblical point of view, the two serpents on the staff are, of course, symbols of evil and deception. There is a Greek myth about the two serpents on the staff which states that Tiresias found two snakes copulating and he beat to death the female snake with his staff.
So far, then, we have a staff carried by the Greek god Hermes, a protector of liars and thieves (who is also the guide of the dead), named as a staff or wand related to announcing information to the public, encircled by two serpents representing evil, and tied to yet another Greek myth about the female being beat to death.
This is the symbol of modern-day western medicine.
The evil of western medicine revealed
The part about the female being beaten to death is especially relevant, given how our male-dominated western medical system considers virtually all female physiology to be disease (pregnancy, menstruation, etc.). Women are treated like animals in many ways, through endless breast cancer screening and mandatory HPV vaccines. Female organs are considered useless or disease-ridden, such as when hysterectomies are performed to remove women's "hysteria" (madness). That's where the name "hysterectomy" actually comes from, of course.
That the two snakes representing evil would encircle the staff of public announcement could be an indication that the purpose of the staff is to announce evil (the propaganda of western medicine). At the same time, the mythological carrier of the staff is the protector of liars and thieves (the drug promoters and drug companies).
Once you understand the symbology, it becomes quite evident that this prominent symbol of western medicine was not chosen by chance: It sends a powerful subconscious message, much like the symbols of secret societies used on dollar bills, for example (the all-seeing eye floating above the pyramid on the back of the dollar bill). It might even be said that, through the repetition of this symbol which adorns the most important documents and texts used in the medical schools, doctors are, in a very true sense, being continuously indoctrinated with the powerful symbols of evil and death.
Once these impressionable young doctors graduate from their medical schools, they are given the tools of death to "treat" patients: Chemotherapy poisons, toxic pharmaceuticals, scalpels and radiation machines. They slice off women's breasts and call it "cancer prevention." They poison children's brains with chemicals and call it "medicine." They damage and destroy key organs like the heart, liver, kidneys and brain through the forced application of toxic chemotherapy agents, sometimes at gunpoint (as with the case of Daniel Hauser).
Pity I couldn't read the rest. I'm just holding my breath for the inevitable Bilderberg/Satan/Nazi pitch.
I know that for me, I will take the word of trained doctors over some conspiracy loons when it comes to medical advice.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
http://blogs.healthfreedomalliance.org/ ... ted-death/
Nurses Got Sick From the Swine Flu Vaccine in Sweden • UPDATE - 190 Adverse Reactions 1 Suspected Death
Filed Under Pandemic, Vaccines
Yesterday 30 people had been reporting to the authorities in Sweden that they experienced such severe side effects that they felt the need to contact a hospital. Today the number is 140. The swedish newspaper Expressen is the only one in Sweden reporting on these cases and as usual this is most likely only the tip of a rather large iceberg. UPDATE: According to Dagens Nyheter, the number of reported side effects are now a few hours later 190. 1 person dies after the injection but “no direct relation with the injection has been established”. The biggest medical scandal in the history of Sweden has just started.
Even so, Annika Linde, director of The Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control (SMI) manages to spin this into something positive by stating “The vaccine has more side effects than the normal flu vaccine. It is a sign that proves that it gives an effective protection.”
Thousands of Swedes have been vaccinated so far and the reports of side effects are “flooding in” to The Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control (SMI). Annika Linde: “It is obviously so that the vaccine against the swine flu results in more side effects than the normal flu vaccines. That is because the swine flu vaccine contains adjuvants, shark liver oil, which triggers the immune defense to respond. That also results in that the protection against the virus becomes better.”
Several severe cases of allergic reactions are reported to the unit for medicinal safety. “So far the reported side effects are not unexpected”, says Gunilla Sjölin Forsberg. This unit has now asked some of the many units that vaccinate to report side effects to better get a grip on the situation. This statement alone is shocking since according to normal practice, all side effects should automatically be reported - right?
A nurse who took the shot on wednesday last week is still feeling sick. She got high fever and shivers from the swine flu shot. “-I was shaking in my whole body. It was so sever that I could not even hold a glass of water in my hand.”, Lotta Lindström says.
“- I am now thinking about what it is I have been injected with. I really was affected. It feels really unpleasant.”
De blev sjuka av vaccinet - Hälsa - Expressen.se
Maria Strindlund is not so sure she made the right choice to tae the shot. She also got a severe fever and shivering reaction. “- Since I work as a nurse, I decided it was the best thing to do.”, she says. At first she felt nothing from the vaccinaton, but a few hours later the side effects kicked in. “- I got a extreme pain in my arm. I could no longer lift it.” The came the fever and the shivering. ” _ I was lying in bed shivering and was feeling very cold and stood in a hot shower to get warm.” She says many colleguse who also took the vaccine have had similar reactons. She has been taking many vaccines in the past without any reactions whatsoever.
Maria, 27: “Fick fruktansvärt ont” - Hälsa - Expressen.se
Rebecka Andersson was the first person to get the shot in Sweden. She became feverish and felt sick to her stomach from the shot. ” - I lost all energy”, she says. “-I am normally never sick so I understood it must be the vaccine.” Her class mates was vaccinated at the same time and she states that five out of nineteen also got sick from the swine flu vaccine.
Rebecka, 32: “Jag blev orkeslös” - Hälsa - Expressen.se
Lotta Lindström, a nurse, states that she got the shot a week ago and still is not well. “- It feels very worrying”, she says. “- I did not sleep anything the night after the shot since the pain in my arm was so severe.” The day after, at work, the fever came. She later had headaches. She still today, a week after the shot feels sick.
Lotta, 49: “Jag sov inte något på natten” - Hälsa - Expressen.se
Another nurse, Jennely, could hardly walk five meters after she got sick from the “swine flu” vaccination. She was completely healthy when she got the shot but the day after she had 39 degrees centigrade fever (102.2 F). “- I could hardly walk the five meters I had to the bathroom”, she says. The fever lasted for three days. sevreal of her colugueges at work had similar experiences. “- I know of at least ten that got fever , we are about 80 people at my workplace.”
Jennely, 26: “Orkade knappt gå fem meter” - Hälsa - Expressen.se
Johan Niklasson
Anyway, onto the article about how apparently the CDC says it isn't necessary to even test for H1N1 anymore (personally I think it would be a good idea to track it)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/ ... 4829.shtml
CBS) If you've been diagnosed "probable" or "presumed" 2009 H1N1 or "swine flu" in recent months, you may be surprised to know this: odds are you didn’t have H1N1 flu.
In fact, you probably didn’t have flu at all. That's according to state-by-state test results obtained in a three-month-long CBS News investigation.
The ramifications of this finding are important. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Britain's National Health Service, once you have H1N1 flu, you're immune from future outbreaks of the same virus. Those who think they've had H1N1 flu -- but haven't -- might mistakenly presume they're immune. As a result, they might skip taking a vaccine that could help them, and expose themselves to others with H1N1 flu under the mistaken belief they won't catch it. Parents might not keep sick children home from school, mistakenly believing they've already had H1N1 flu.
Why the uncertainty about who has and who hasn't had H1N1 flu?
CBSNews.com report on H1N1
In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?
Some public health officials privately disagreed with the decision to stop testing and counting, telling CBS News that continued tracking of this new and possibly changing virus was important because H1N1 has a different epidemiology, affects younger people more than seasonal flu and has been shown to have a higher case fatality rate than other flu virus strains.
CBS News learned that the decision to stop counting H1N1 flu cases was made so hastily that states weren't given the opportunity to provide input. Instead, on July 24, the Council for State and Territorial Epidemiologists, CSTE, issued the following notice to state public health officials on behalf of the CDC:
"Attached are the Q&As that will be posted on the CDC website tomorrow explaining why CDC is no longer reporting case counts for novel H1N1. CDC would have liked to have run these by you for input but unfortunately there was not enough time before these needed to be posted (emphasis added)."
When CDC did not provide us with the material, we filed a Freedom of Information request with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). More than two months later, the request has not been fulfilled. We also asked CDC for state-by-state test results prior to halting of testing and tracking, but CDC was again, initially, unresponsive.
Watch CBS News Videos Online
Video above: A CBS News producer asks the director of the CDC, Dr. Thomas Frieden, for this information at a press conference on Sept. 19.
While we waited for CDC to provide the data, which it eventually did, we asked all 50 states for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico.
(CBS)
It’s unknown what patients who tested negative for flu were actually afflicted with since the illness was not otherwise determined. Health experts say it’s assumed the patients had some sort of cold or upper respiratory infection that is just not influenza.
With most cases diagnosed solely on symptoms and risk factors, the H1N1 flu epidemic may seem worse than it is. For example, on Sept. 22, this alarming headline came from Georgetown University in Washington D.C.: "H1N1 Flu Infects Over 250 Georgetown Students."
H1N1 flu can be deadly and an outbreak of 250 students would be an especially troubling cluster. However, the number of sick students came not from lab-confirmed tests but from "estimates" made by counting "students who went to the Student Health Center with flu symptoms, students who called the H1N1 hotline or the Health Center's doctor-on-call, and students who went to the hospital's emergency room."
Without lab testing, it's impossible to know how many of the students actually had H1N1 flu. But the statistical trend indicates it was likely much fewer than 250.
CDC continues to monitor flu in general and H1N1 through "sentinels," which basically act as spot-checks to detect trends around the nation. But at least one state, California, has found value in tracking H1N1 flu in greater detail.
"What we are doing is much more detailed and expensive than what CDC wants," said Dr. Bela Matyas, California's Acting Chief of Emergency Preparedness and Response. "We're gathering data better to answer how severe is the illness. With CDC's fallback position, there are so many uncertainties with who's being counted, it's hard to know how much we're seeing is due to H1N1 flu rather than a mix of influenza diseases generally. We can tell that apart but they can't."
After our conversation with Dr. Matyas, public affairs officials with the California Department of Public Health emphasized to CBS News that they support CDC policy to stop counting individual cases, maintaining that the state has the resources to gather more specific testing data than the CDC.
Because of the uncertainties, the CDC advises even those who were told they had H1N1 to get vaccinated unless they had lab confirmation. "Persons who are uncertain about how they were diagnosed should get the 2009 H1N1 vaccine."
That's unwelcome news for a Marietta, Georgia mom whose two children were diagnosed with "probable" H1N1 flu over the summer. She hoped that would mean they wouldn't need the hastily developed H1N1 flu vaccine. However, since their cases were never confirmed with lab tests, the CDC advises they get the vaccine. "I wish they had tested and that I knew for sure whether they had it. I'm not anxious to give them an experimental vaccine if they don't need it."
Speaking to CBS' "60 Minutes," CDC Director Dr. Frieden said he has confidence that the vaccine will be safe and effective: "We're confident it will be effective we have every reason to believe that it will be safe."
However, the CDC recommendation for those who had "probable" or "presumed" H1N1 flu to go ahead and get vaccinated anyway means the relatively small proportion of those who actually did have H1N1 flu will be getting the vaccine unnecessarily. This exposes them to rare but significant side effects, such as paralysis from Guillain-Barre syndrome.
It also uses up vaccine, which is said to be in short supply. The CDC was hoping to have shipped 40 million doses by the end of October, but only about 30 million doses will be available this month.
The CDC did not response to questions from CBS News for this report.
that is all kinds of fucked up.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
That's what I was thinking. It just screams to me that they want to be able to cover things up just in case it really isn't the epidemic they now say it is. I would think if we are in an epidemic it would be a good idea to track things.
I was already somewhat apprehensive about it (as I'm always leary of taking any pharmaceuticals-I prefer my body to work it out on its own if it's not definitively life-threatening), but if a doctor of 30 years tells his own kid not to vaccinate herself or her children, then it kind of tells me I'm on the right track.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Yeah I hear you...but more importantly....I'm amazed at how well you handle a computer at your age.
:evil:
to be fair towards the topic tho, many a doctor will have a differing opinion on the topic. does not make one less educated or respecte, but it is definitely a topic with divisive opinions, even amongst some physicians. there usually is.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014