H1N1 vaccine - Should we Leap before we Look?

_

Sludge Factory wrote:

scb wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

I just don't understand this mentality. That health care workers need to be immunized to protect the patients. Shouldn't the onus lie on each individual as to whether or not they should get vaccinated and that it is their own fault if they choose not to and became infected from someone else?

All those who believe the vaccines work can freely choose to get vaccinated, those who don't believe it shouldn't be forced to since those who do believe should have gotten it and will be protected from the unvaccinated. What am I missing here?

1. Vaccines are not 100% effective.

2. Not everyone is able to get the vaccine (e.g. people with serious allergies to chicken eggs).

Very good points. I could see the vaccines are not 100% effective being argued both ways, though and I still believe that they shouldn't be mandatory at all.

Although I think healthcare workers have a moral responsibility to get vaccinated (barring any personal exceptions, like egg allergies), I don't necessarily think they should have a legal one.

I think, however, that many people don't think of vaccinations for healthcare workers as a way for the providers to protect the patients, but rather as a way for the providers to not harm the patients. I guess it depends on where you define the neutral/baseline position. So one might argue that giving your patients the flu constitutes you causing harm to them and you (the provider) have an obligation to NOT inflict harm. An analogy (until you get to the question of the risk of the vaccine) would be doctors washing their hands before operations. They are not washing their hands to protect their patients, so much as they're doing it to avoid harming their patients. Personally, I think if the purpose of your job is to promote health in your patients and instead you cause them to be more sick, something's not right.

By the way, here's an example that I don't think fits your scenario: My great-grandmother is 95 years old and never leaves the house. She doesn't get flu shots because a) she'd have to leave the house to get one, and b) she shouldn't need to worry about becoming infected by the public because she doesn't go out into the public. But yesterday she fell and broke her hip and was taken, despite her protest, to the ER. So if she gets the flu from her ER doc is it just her own damn fault for trapsing about to the hospital without being vaccinated?

JR8805

Jeanwah wrote:

Commy wrote:

shouldn't people that have to be around the high risk patients be immunized from some of these strains?

why is this such a conspiracy? maybe some agency is making bank on a bs flu strain, and they're selling vaccines that we dont' need...but these are health professionals...they are around high risk individuals all day,,,the old and sick...they of all people should be immunized.

1. The H1N1 vaccine is still in testing phase. It's also been fast-tracked, with very limited research concerning the short term as well as long term side effects.
2. It has not been FDA approved. (It takes 7 years to approve a new drug for usage by the public)
3. It is not an emergency situation where it's spreading like wildfire.
4. There are safety issues. Formaldehyde and mercury have been found in several cases so far.
5. NYS Health Board does not entrust their medical professionals to "do the right thing" for the patient's health, but rather force them?
6. Health professionals are not the only people coming into contact with many sick people on a daily basis. What about teachers, students, grocery store clerks?
6. It's against our civil liberties. I know there's a bunch of Libs on here. How would you feel about getting forced by state gov't to be injected or YOU LOSE YOUR JOB?

1. The vaccine is almost identical to the seasonal shot which has tons of research behind it and an unparalleled safety record.
2. It has been FDA approved. http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/ ... 182399.htm
3. It's not spreading like wildfire? Then why do I only have 14 students in my class today when typically I have 23?
4. Found in several cases of what? Every vaccine I've ever gotten has very likely had thimeresol (sp?) in it...and I'm not autistic, etc. yet.
5. The right thing to do for health is to get the vaccine.
6. Yes. Why aren't teachers, especially, on the priority list? I have half my class out and I'm not a priority? My neighboring teachers are dealing with the same thing. In fact, my grade-level colleague has been out of work nearly a week with the swine flu. I really don't want it next.
7. I had to take a TB test to get this job. I had to have a background check to get my current job. I had to pee in a cup and have my background checked by the quasi FBI to get my last job. I haven't died from either. I couldn't have my job without undergoing quite a lot of rigamarole to get the two best jobs I've ever held. You want to be in certain professions, you do what it takes. If not, get some other kind of job.

JR8805

soulsinging wrote:

JR8805 wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

My suspicion is that you are correct about that. I don't recall anyone ever getting a flu vaccine when i was a kid. now even walgreen's gives them away. and every year there's a new panicked epidemic... avian flu, swine flu, SARS... and every year... like 10 people die in an impoverished country and that's it. this is all a huge hoax to drum up business. it's a flu people. i bet 99% of everyone on this forum do not even know anyone who knows anyone else that even heard of someone dying of a fucking flu.

and if i get it and go down, +1 for mother nature. a little natural selection might not be such a bad thing for this overpopulated planet.

What a nice thought. Why don't you write letters to the parents of the 76 American children that H1N1 has killed so far this year telling them what a great thing it was for the planet that their child died?

"The regular flu kills between 46 and 88 children a year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That SUGGESTS deaths from the new H1N1 virus COULD dramatically outpace children's deaths from seasonal flu, IF swine flu continues to spread as it has."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091009/ap_ ... _swine_flu

sure, do you have their addresses for me?

wow, a wopping 130 kids died of flu out of... how many million/billion born? how does that stack up to poverty and all the other diseases out there? the fact is, the odds of dying of a flu in america are so miniscule that it's absurd. this isn't about public health, it's about business.

and i capitalized the important parts of that quote you gave... when you notice those, you realize they don't know a damn thing. they're guessing. like they did with bird flu and sars and whatever was right before that. this is much ado about nothing.

It is very early in the season...and I believe it's 76 kids as of a couple of days ago. In an entire typical season, only a handful or two more children die. (I forgotten the exact #, to be honest.) But, it's only October and you're seeing nearly as many deaths as you'd see at the end of May. Three kids have died here in my state, one after 24 hours of being sick. If I had small kids, I would vaccinate. The fear of possible unknowns does not beat the fear of losing my child through inaction. Most of my personal regrets in life have always been centered around what I didn't do, rather than what I did do. I have urged my own daughter to get vaccinated, but the vaccine in injection form is not yet available even though she is in a high-risk group--young asthmatic adult. She wants the vaccination and will get it herself when it becomes available.

Jeanwah

JR8805 wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Commy wrote:

shouldn't people that have to be around the high risk patients be immunized from some of these strains?

why is this such a conspiracy? maybe some agency is making bank on a bs flu strain, and they're selling vaccines that we dont' need...but these are health professionals...they are around high risk individuals all day,,,the old and sick...they of all people should be immunized.

1. The H1N1 vaccine is still in testing phase. It's also been fast-tracked, with very limited research concerning the short term as well as long term side effects.
2. It has not been FDA approved. (It takes 7 years to approve a new drug for usage by the public)
3. It is not an emergency situation where it's spreading like wildfire.
4. There are safety issues. Formaldehyde and mercury have been found in several cases so far.
5. NYS Health Board does not entrust their medical professionals to "do the right thing" for the patient's health, but rather force them?
6. Health professionals are not the only people coming into contact with many sick people on a daily basis. What about teachers, students, grocery store clerks?
7. It's against our civil liberties. I know there's a bunch of Libs on here. How would you feel about getting forced by state gov't to be injected or YOU LOSE YOUR JOB?

1. The vaccine is almost identical to the seasonal shot which has tons of research behind it and an unparalleled safety record.
2. It has been FDA approved. http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/ ... 182399.htm
3. It's not spreading like wildfire? Then why do I only have 14 students in my class today when typically I have 23?
4. Found in several cases of what?
5. The right thing to do for health is to get the vaccine.
6. Yes. Why aren't teachers, especially, on the priority list? I have half my class out and I'm not a priority? My neighboring teachers are dealing with the same thing.
7. I had to take a TB test to get this job. I had to have a background check to get my current job. Big whoop. I had to pee in a cup and have my background checked by the quasi FBI to get my last job. Big whoop. I haven't died from either. I couldn't have my job without undergoing quite a lot of rigamarole to get the two best jobs I've ever held. You want to be in certain professions, you do what it takes. If not, get some other kind of job.

1. False. Read some past pages about Formaldehyde and variable mercury levels found in the vaccine. They are not nearly identical or you'd only need one to combat both flus.
2. It's been rushed through FDA approval without all checkmarks being done for safety and the FDA admits it. Check a couple pages back to read about it.
3. Do they have the Swine Flu? How many do you wanna bet will be back in school in a couple days. Hysteria has led you to believe that it's serious, but more than likely it's not a serious case. There are thousands of cases of non-serious cases with typical flu symptoms.
4.The H1N1 vaccine.
5 The right thing to do is entrust your medical professionals instead of treating them like children. These are respected medical personnel and the state of NY is the ONLY state to mandate. They start with the pros...then they mandate patients, teachers and children...then they move on to the general public. Forcing anyone to get a shot is wrong.
6. You have a choice. Go get it instead of complaining you're not being forced to..yet.
7. This is the first of its kind. We all have to take piss tests at some points, but getting vaccinated with a new and barely tested vaccination that's being questioned for safety is not regularly in the cards. You have a choice to get one. Go ahead. But don't tell someone else what they can and can't do.

Jeanwah

Published on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 by Albany Times Union
Nurses to Sue Over H1N1 Shots
They object to state mandating health workers be vaccinated
by Scott Waldman

ALBANY -- Lorna Patterson is willing to take on New York's top health official for her right to be flu vaccine-free.

The registered nurse in Albany Medical Center's emergency room is among a group of nurses who plan to file a lawsuit against state Health Commissioner Dr. Richard Daines to prevent the mandatory vaccination of New York's health care workers with the H1N1 flu virus.

"It takes away our freedom of choice," Patterson told reporters during a news conference Monday. "Our health is being affected."

The deadline for the state's health care workers to receive the swine flu vaccination is at the end of next month, though some employers have moved that up to the end of this month.

The four nurses will file a lawsuit against the state this week to prevent the forced vaccination, said their attorney, Terence L. Kindlon.

"This is a significant civil rights issue," Kindlon said. "We think people are being forced to do something by the government."

If Patterson and Kathryn Dupuis do not receive their shots within the next two weeks, they will likely lose their jobs in the emergency room at Albany Medical Center. Patterson said the vaccination was rushed into production in a matter of months and that its effect has not yet been properly studied.

Patterson said the vaccination could be dangerous for people, including pregnant women, and that more time is needed to understand its effectiveness. She said she is not willing to risk her health and does not think it is fair that she should lose her job.

Outside of New York City, 91,000 FluMist doses -- the inhalant form of the vaccine -- were delivered by the end of last week. Health care workers are at the front of the line for those to receive the first round.

A similar suit filed last week in New York City names Commissioner Daines and Jeffrey Kraut, chairman of the state Hospital Planning and Review Council, and contends it is beyond the state's authority to mandate getting the vaccines. Kindlon said the New York Civil Liberties Union and other groups may file similar legal action in the coming weeks.

Daines has said that vulnerable people and those who haven't been immunized come to hospitals and that they need to be protected from the possibility that medical workers carry the virus. The commissioner has said health workers in hospitals, clinics and other settings must be vaccinated by Nov. 30 or risk losing their jobs.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control estimates it will have provided states with 186 million doses of the H1N1 vaccine by January. New York officials expect the state to receive 6.7 million doses for upstate and 5 million doses for the city.

New York is the first state to mandate flu vaccinations for health care workers. The nurses preparing to file the lawsuit have already collected more than 400 signatures of health care workers against the forced vaccinations and are helping plan at rally scheduled for this Wednesday at the Capitol.

Sludge Factory

scb wrote:

By the way, here's an example that I don't think fits your scenario: My great-grandmother is 95 years old and never leaves the house. She doesn't get flu shots because a) she'd have to leave the house to get one, and b) she shouldn't need to worry about becoming infected by the public because she doesn't go out into the public. But yesterday she fell and broke her hip and was taken, despite her protest, to the ER. So if she gets the flu from her ER doc is it just her own damn fault for trapsing about to the hospital without being vaccinated?

Yes, I would say that it is her fault for not leaving the house to get a vaccine. She is 95 years old and that is an age where it is common for broken hips to happen. She should know this, and knowing this she should take any of the necessary precautions regarding her health and if she feels there is a potentional to get the flu at the ER she should then take the steps necessary to prevent that. It isn't the ER's fault that she decided not to get vaccinated because she didn't have the forsight to realize that she just might eventually end up in the ER someday.

yahamita

Flu vaccines revealed as the greatest quackery ever pushed in the history of medicine
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) Prepare to have your world rocked. What you're about to read here will leave you astonished, inspired and outraged all at the same time. You're about to be treated to some little-known information demonstrating why seasonal flu vaccines are utterly worthless and why their continued promotion is based entirely on fabricated studies and medical mythology.

If the whole world knew what you're about to read here, the vaccine industry would collapse overnight.

This information comes to you courtesy of a brilliant article published in The Atlantic (November 2009). The article, written by Shannon Brownlee and Jeanne Lenzer, isn't just brilliant; in my opinion it stands as the best article on flu vaccines that has ever been published in the popular press. Entitled Does the vaccine matter?, it presents some of the most eye-opening information you've probably ever read about the failure of flu vaccines. You can read the full article here: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/2009...

Perhaps its impressive narrative shouldn't be too surprising, though, since writer Shannon Brownlee is also the celebrated author of a phenomenal book on modern medicine entitled Overtreated: Why Too Much Medicine Is Making Us Sicker and Poorer (http://www.amazon.com/Overtreated-M...) (http://www.naturalpedia.com/book_Ov...).

While I've never done this before, I'm going to summarize this article point by point (along with some comments) so that you get the full force of what's finally been put into print.

This information is so important that I encourage you to share the following summary I've put together. Email it to family, friends and coworkers. Or post it on your blog or website (with a link and proper credit to both NaturalNews and The Atlantic, please). Get this information out to the world. People need to know this, and so far the mainstream media has utterly failed to make this information known.

(The really good information begins after around a dozen bullet points, so be sure to keep reading...)


Does the vaccine matter?
What follows is my point-by-point summary of this groundbreaking article by Shannon Brownlee, originally published in The Atlantic. My opinion statements are shown in brackets and italics.

• Vaccination is the core strategy of the U.S. government's plan to combat the swine flu.

• The U.S. government has spent roughly $3 billion stockpiling vaccines and anti-viral drugs.

• The CDC is recommending that 159 million Americans receive a swine flu vaccine injection (as soon as possible).

• What if vaccines don't work? More and more researchers are skeptical about whether they do.

• Seasonal flu (that's the regular flu) currently kills an estimated 36,000 people each year in the United States. [But most people who die are already suffering from existing diseases such as asthma.]

• Most "colds" aren't really caused by the flu virus. As few as 7 or 8 percent (and at most, 50 percent) of colds have an influenza origin. There are more than 200 viruses and pathogens that can cause "influenza-like" illnesses (and therefore be easily mistaken for the flu).

• Viruses mutate with amazing speed, meaning that each year's circulating influenza is genetically different from the previous year.

• The vaccine for each upcoming flu season is formulated by health experts taking a guess [a wild guess, at times] about what strain of influenza might be most likely to circulate in the future.

• The 1918 Spanish Flu infected roughly one-third of the world population and killed at least 40 million.

• In the U.S., the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology predicted that H1N1 influenza could infect up to one-half of the U.S. population and kill 90,000 Americans.

[Keep reading, the good part is coming...]

• Of those who have died from the Swine Flu in the U.S., roughly 70 percent were already diseased with some serious underlying condition such as asthma or AIDS.

• Public health officials consider vaccines to be their first and best weapon against influenza. Vaccines helped eradicate smallpox and polio. [I don't agree with that assessment. Vaccines did relatively little compared to improvements in public sanitation.]

• Each year, 100 million Americans get vaccinated, and vaccines remain "a staple" of public health policy in the United States.


Why the research is bogus
• Because researchers can't exactly pin down who has influenza and who doesn't, the research conducted on the effectiveness of vaccines simply calculates the death rate from all causes among those who take the vaccine vs. those who don't. [This includes deaths from accidents, heart attacks, medications, car wrecks and everything.]

• These studies show a "dramatic difference" between the death rates of those who get the vaccines vs. those who don't. People who get vaccinated have significantly lower death rates [from ALL causes, and herein lies the problem...].

• Flu shot propaganda cites these studies, telling people that if they get their flu shots every year, they will have a significantly reduced chance of dying. But this is extremely misleading...

• Critics question the logic of these studies: As it turns out, compared to the number of deaths from all causes, the number of people killed by influenza is quite small. According to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, deaths from influenza account for -- at most -- 10 percent of the total deaths during the flu season (and this includes all indirect deaths aggravated by the flu).

• This brings up a hugely important dilemma: If influenza only accounts for roughly 10 percent of all deaths during the flu season, how could an influenza vaccine reduce total deaths by 50 percent? (As is claimed by the vaccine manufacturers.) [It doesn't add up. Even if the vaccines were 100% effective, they should only reduce the total death rates by 10%, given that only 10% of the total deaths are caused by influenza.]

• Here's a direct quote from the story: Tom Jefferson, a physician based in Rome and the head of the Vaccines Field at the Cochrane Collaboration, a highly respected international network of researchers who appraise medical evidence, says: "For a vaccine to reduce mortality by 50 percent and up to 90 percent in some studies means it has to prevent deaths not just from influenza, but also from falls, fires, heart disease, strokes, and car accidents. That's not a vaccine, that's a miracle." [Emphasis added.]


The failure of cohort studies
• So how do the vaccine companies come up with this "50% reduction in death rate" statistic? Through cohort studies.

• Cohort studies compare the death rates of large groups of people who received the vaccine to large groups of people who did NOT receive the vaccine. But there's a fatal flaw in this approach: People self-select for vaccinations. And what kind of people? As it turns out: People who take more precautions with their health!

• [Thus, you automatically have a situation where the more health-cautious people are getting the vaccines because they THINK it's good for them. Meanwhile all the masses of people who don't give a darn about their health tend to skip the seasonal flu vaccines. And these people tend to not take very good of their health in lots of other ways. In other words, in terms of the masses, people who get vaccines are more likely to avoid junk food and live a more health-cautious lifestyle. This explains the differences in the death rates between the two groups! It has nothing to do with the vaccine...]

• There is extreme "cult-like" peer pressure put on doctors and researchers to swallow the vaccine mythology without question. Quoted from the story: Lisa Jackson, a physician and senior investigator with the Group Health Research Center, in Seattle, began wondering aloud to colleagues if maybe something was amiss with the estimate of 50 percent mortality reduction for people who get flu vaccine, the response she got sounded more like doctrine than science. "People told me, 'No good can come of [asking] this,'" she says. "'Potentially a lot of bad could happen' for me professionally by raising any criticism that might dissuade people from getting vaccinated, because of course, 'We know that vaccine works.' This was the prevailing wisdom." [In other words, don't dare question the vaccine, and don't ask tough scientific questions because the vaccine industry runs on dogma, not science... and if you ask any questions, you might find yourself out of a job...].

[Here's where the really good part begins...]

• Lisa Jackson was not deterred. She and three other researchers began to study the widely-quoted vaccine statistics in an attempt to identify this "healthy user effect," if any. They looked through eight years of medical data covering 72,000 people aged 65 or older and recorded who received flu shots and who didn't. Then they compared the death rates for all causes outside the flu season.


The vaccine made no difference in mortality
• What she found blows a hole right through the vaccination industry: She found that even outside the flu season, the death rate was 60 percent higher among those who did not get vaccines than among those who do. [In other words, even when you take the flu season completely out of the equation, elderly people who don't get vaccines have other lifestyle factors that makes them far more likely to die from lots of other causes.]

• She also found that this so-called "healthy user effect" explains the entire apparent benefit that continues to be attributed to vaccines. This finding demonstrates that the flu vaccine may not have any beneficial effect whatsoever in reducing mortality.

• How well done were these particular studies? Quoted from the story: Jackson's papers "are beautiful," says Lone Simonsen, who is a professor of global health at George Washington University, in Washington, D.C., and an internationally recognized expert in influenza and vaccine epidemiology. "They are classic studies in epidemiology, they are so carefully done."

• Many pro-vaccine experts simply refused to believe the results of this study [because it conflicts with their existing belief in vaccine mythology]. The Journal of the American Medical Association refused to publish her research, even stating, "To accept these results would be to say that the earth is flat!" [Which just goes to show you how deeply ingrained the current vaccine mythology is in the minds of conventional medical practitioners. They simply cannot imagine that vaccines don't work, so they dismiss any evidence -- even GOOD evidence -- demonstrating that fact. This is what makes the vaccine industry a CULT rather than a science.]

• Jackson's papers were finally published in 2006, in the International Journal of Epidemiology.

[And here's the really, really juicy part you can't miss...]


Vaccine shortage proves it never worked in the first place
• The history of the flu vaccine reveals some huge gaps in current vaccination mythology, essentially proving they don't work:

• For example: In 2004, vaccine production was low and there was a shortage in vaccines (a 40 percent reduction in vaccinations). And yet mortality rates did not rise during the flu season. [Clearly, if vaccines actually worked, then a year when the vaccine wasn't even administered to 40% of the people who normally get it should have resulted in a huge and statistically significant increase in mortality. It should have spiked the death rates and filled the morgues... but it didn't. You know why? Because flu vaccines don't work in the first place.]

• In the history of flu vaccines, there were two years in which the formulated flu vaccine was a total mismatch to the widely-circulating influenza that made people sick. These years were 1968 and 1997. In both of these years, the vaccine was a completely mismatch for the circulating virus. In effect, nobody was vaccinated! [Knowing this, if the vaccine itself was effective at reducing death rates, then we should have once again seen a huge spike in the death rates during these two years, right? Seriously, if the vaccine reduces death rates by 50% as is claimed by vaccine manufacturers, then these two years in which the vaccine completely missed the mark should have seen huge spikes in the winter death rates, right? But what really happened was... nothing. Not a blip. Not a spike. Nothing. The death rates didn't rise at all.]

• If vaccines really worked to save lives, then the more people you vaccinate, the lower death rates you should see, right? But that's not the case. Back in 1989, only 15 percent of over-65 people got vaccinated against the flu. But today, thanks to the big vaccine push, over 65 percent are vaccinated. And yet, amazingly, death rates among the elderly have not gone down during the flu season. In fact, they've gone up!

• When vaccine promoters (and CDC officials) are challenged about the "50 percent mortality reduction" myth, they invoke dogmatic language and attack the messenger. They are simply not willing to consider the possibility that flu vaccines simply don't work.

• Scientists who question the vaccine mythology are routinely shunned by the medical establishment. Tom Jefferson from the Cochrane Collaboration is an epidemiologist who questions the claimed benefits of flu vaccines. "The reaction [against Jefferson] has been so dogmatic and even hysterical that you'd think he was advocating stealing babies" said a colleague (Majumdar).

• Jefferson is one of the world's best-informed researchers on the flu vaccine. He leads a team of researchers who have examined hundreds of vaccine studies. To quote directly from the article: The vast majority of the studies were deeply flawed, says Jefferson. "Rubbish is not a scientific term, but I think it's the term that applies [to these studies]."

[And here's the real kicker that demonstrates why flu vaccines are useless...]


Flu vaccines only "work" on people who don't need them
• Vaccines supposedly "work" by introducing a weakened viral strain that causes the immune system to respond by building influenza antibodies. However, as Jefferson points out, only healthy people produce a good antibody response to the vaccine. And yet it is precisely the unhealthy people -- the ones who have a poor immune response to the vaccine -- who are most at risk of being harmed or killed by influenza. But the vaccines don't work in them!

• [In other words -- get this -- flu vaccines only "work" in people who don't need them!]

• [At the same time, it's also accurate to say that vaccines don't work at all in the very people who theoretically could benefit from them. They only produce antibodies in people who already have such a strong immune response that they don't need the vaccine in the first place.]

• Jefferson has called for randomized, placebo-controlled studies of the vaccines. But vaccine pushers are resisting these clinical trials! They call the trials "unethical" [but, in reality, they know that a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study would reveal the complete failure of flu vaccines, and they will do anything to prevent such a trial from happening. Don't you find it amazing that drug pushers and vaccine advocates claim they have "science" on their side, but they won't submit their vaccines to any real science at all?]

• [No placebo-controlled studies have ever been conducted on flu vaccines because the industry says they would be "unethical." So where do these people get off claiming their vaccines work at all? The whole industry is based on fabricated statistics that are provably false... and the injections continue, year after year, with absolutely no benefit to public health whatsoever...]


Why anti-viral drugs don't work either
• On the anti-viral drug front, hospitals are urged to hand out prescriptions for Tamiflu and Relenza to almost anyone who is symptomatic, whether they actually have swine flu or not. Concern is growing about the emergence of drug-resistant strains of swine flu. " Flu can become resistant to Tamiflu in a matter of days..." says one researcher.

• In 2005, the U.S. government spent $1.8 billion to stockpile antiviral drugs for the military. This decision was made during the time when Donald Rumsfeld was Defense Secretary. Rumsfeld also held millions of dollars worth of stock in Gilead Sciences, the company that holds the patent on Tamiflu. That company saw its stock price rise 50 percent following the government's stockpiling purchase of Tamiflu.

• The evidence supporting Tamiflu's anti-viral benefits is flimsy at best. Even worse, as many as one in five children taking Tamiflu experience neuropsychiatric side effects including hallucinations and suicidal behavior. [In other words, your kid might be "tripping out" on some bad Tamiflu...]

• Tamiflu is already linked to 50 deaths of children in Japan.

• The evidence supporting Tamiflu is based on cohort studies, just like the vaccines, which may distort or exaggerate the apparent benefits of the drug.

• Even supporters of Tamiflu admit it's never been proven to help. A CDC official says that randomized trials to determine the effectiveness of Tamiflu would be "unethical."

• In all, neither vaccines nor anti-viral drugs have any reliable evidence that they work against influenza at all. Both are being promoted based entirely on pure wishful thinking, not hard science.

• The history of pharmaceutical medicine is littered with other examples of drugs that doctors "knew worked" but which later turned out to harm or kill patients. [All along, the proper scientific studies were avoided because, hey, if you already know everything, why bother conducting any actual science to prove anything?]

• The hype about vaccines provides a false sense of security, taking away attention from other things that really do work to prevent influenza deaths. That's why, except for "hand washing," virtually no advice has been offered to the public on preventing influenza beyond vaccines and anti-viral drugs.

• Concluding quote from the author: "By being afraid to do the proper studies now, we may be condemning ourselves to using treatments based on illusion and faith rather than sound science."


A recap of these astonishing points
Let's recap what we just learned here (because it's just mind-boggling):

• There have been no placebo-controlled studies on flu vaccines because the vaccine pushers say such clinical trials would be "unethical." Thus, there is actually no hard scientific evidence that they work at all.

• The "50 percent reduction in mortality" statistic that's tossed around by vaccine pushers is a total fabrication based on "rubbish" studies ("cohort" studies).

• Scrutinizing the existing studies that claim to support vaccines reveals that flu vaccines simply don't work. And when vaccines aren't available or the formulation is wrong, there's no spike in death rates, indicating quite conclusively that these vaccines offer no reduction in mortality.

• Flu vaccines only produce antibodies in people who don't need vaccines. At the same time, they fail to produce antibodies in people who are most vulnerable to flu. Thus, vaccines only work in people who don't need them.

• The entire flu vaccine industry is run like a cult, with dogma ruling over science. Anyone who asks tough, scientific questions is immediately branded a heretic. No one is allowed to question the status quo. (So much for "evidence-based medicine," huh?)

As you can see from all this, the flu vaccine is pure quackery. Those who administer vaccines are, by inference, QUACKS. They claim to have scientific minds, and yet they are the most gullible of all: They will believe almost anything if it's published in a medical journal, even if it's complete quackery.

Today, countless doctors, nurses and pharmacists across North America and around the world are pushing a medically worthless, scientifically-fabricated chemical injection that offers absolutely no benefit to public health... and yet they're convinced it's highly effective! It just goes to show you how easy it is to brainwash people in the field of conventional medicine.

They've abandoned real science long ago, you know. Now the whole industry is just run on the momentum of dogmatic arrogance and the illusion of authority. From the CDC and FDA on down to the local pharmacist at the corner store, the American medical system is run by some seemingly smart people who have been brainwashed into become full-fledged members of the Cult of Pharmacology where vaccine mythology overrules real science.

The vaccine industry is perhaps the greatest medical scam ever pulled off in the history of the world. Don't fall for it.

And don't forget to read the full article in The Atlantic by Shannon Brownlee: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/2009...


Why people get vaccinated: Superstition
Reading everything you've read here, you might wonder: Why do people get vaccinated at all?

The reason is because no one knows whether they work or not, so people keep on taking them "just in case." It's exactly the kind of superstitious ritual that "science-minded skeptics" rail against on a regular basis... unless, of course, it involves their vaccines, in which case superstition is all okay.

People take vaccines for the same reason they rub a rabbit's foot. It's a good luck ritual that may or may not work, but no one really knows. And besides, what's the harm in it? (They think...)

Personally, I'd rather get some vitamin D and have a healthy, functioning immune system. But for those who prefer to play the lotto, gamble in Vegas or bet their lives on medical superstitions, flu vaccines are readily available.

So what are you waiting for? Shoot up a few flu vaccines, rub your lucky rabbit's foot, then spin around clockwise seven times and you, too, may be able to generate enough luck to avoid the flu this winter.

GTFLYGIRL

Sludge Factory wrote:

scb wrote:

By the way, here's an example that I don't think fits your scenario: My great-grandmother is 95 years old and never leaves the house. She doesn't get flu shots because a) she'd have to leave the house to get one, and b) she shouldn't need to worry about becoming infected by the public because she doesn't go out into the public. But yesterday she fell and broke her hip and was taken, despite her protest, to the ER. So if she gets the flu from her ER doc is it just her own damn fault for trapsing about to the hospital without being vaccinated?

Yes, I would say that it is her fault for not leaving the house to get a vaccine. She is 95 years old and that is an age where it is common for broken hips to happen. She should know this, and knowing this she should take any of the necessary precautions regarding her health and if she feels there is a potentional to get the flu at the ER she should then take the steps necessary to prevent that. It isn't the ER's fault that she decided not to get vaccinated because she didn't have the forsight to realize that she just might eventually end up in the ER someday.

this is sarcasm... yes? :?

decides2dream

GTFLYGIRL wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

scb wrote:

By the way, here's an example that I don't think fits your scenario: My great-grandmother is 95 years old and never leaves the house. She doesn't get flu shots because a) she'd have to leave the house to get one, and b) she shouldn't need to worry about becoming infected by the public because she doesn't go out into the public. But yesterday she fell and broke her hip and was taken, despite her protest, to the ER. So if she gets the flu from her ER doc is it just her own damn fault for trapsing about to the hospital without being vaccinated?

Yes, I would say that it is her fault for not leaving the house to get a vaccine. She is 95 years old and that is an age where it is common for broken hips to happen. She should know this, and knowing this she should take any of the necessary precautions regarding her health and if she feels there is a potentional to get the flu at the ER she should then take the steps necessary to prevent that. It isn't the ER's fault that she decided not to get vaccinated because she didn't have the forsight to realize that she just might eventually end up in the ER someday.

this is sarcasm... yes? :?

honestly, it makes me think of the hippocratic oath all doctors take, which in part says "first, do no harm...." so imo, yes, it does indeed suggest that it is up to the healthcare professionals to protect their patients. again, not saying it should be 'forced' on healthcare professionals, but i do believe they hae that obligation.

_

yahamita wrote:

• Of those who have died from the Swine Flu in the U.S., roughly 70 percent were already diseased with some serious underlying condition such as asthma or AIDS.

• Vaccines did relatively little compared to improvements in public sanitation.

• Because researchers can't exactly pin down who has influenza and who doesn't, the research conducted on the effectiveness of vaccines simply calculates the death rate from all causes among those who take the vaccine vs. those who don't. [This includes deaths from accidents, heart attacks, medications, car wrecks and everything.]

• Here's a direct quote from the story: Tom Jefferson, a physician based in Rome and the head of the Vaccines Field at the Cochrane Collaboration, a highly respected international network of researchers who appraise medical evidence, says: "For a vaccine to reduce mortality by 50 percent and up to 90 percent in some studies means it has to prevent deaths not just from influenza, but also from falls, fires, heart disease, strokes, and car accidents. That's not a vaccine, that's a miracle." [Emphasis added.]

• So how do the vaccine companies come up with this "50% reduction in death rate" statistic? Through cohort studies.

• [Thus, you automatically have a situation where the more health-cautious people are getting the vaccines because they THINK it's good for them. Meanwhile all the masses of people who don't give a darn about their health tend to skip the seasonal flu vaccines. And these people tend to not take very good of their health in lots of other ways. In other words, in terms of the masses, people who get vaccines are more likely to avoid junk food and live a more health-cautious lifestyle. This explains the differences in the death rates between the two groups! It has nothing to do with the vaccine...]

• the vaccine industry runs on dogma, not science... and if you ask any questions, you might find yourself out of a job.

• In 2004, vaccine production was low and there was a shortage in vaccines (a 40 percent reduction in vaccinations). And yet mortality rates did not rise during the flu season.

• In the history of flu vaccines, there were two years in which the formulated flu vaccine was a total mismatch to the widely-circulating influenza that made people sick. These years were 1968 and 1997. In both of these years, the vaccine was a completely mismatch for the circulating virus. In effect, nobody was vaccinated! [Knowing this, if the vaccine itself was effective at reducing death rates, then we should have once again seen a huge spike in the death rates during these two years, right? Seriously, if the vaccine reduces death rates by 50% as is claimed by vaccine manufacturers, then these two years in which the vaccine completely missed the mark should have seen huge spikes in the winter death rates, right? But what really happened was... nothing. Not a blip. Not a spike. Nothing. The death rates didn't rise at all.]

• If vaccines really worked to save lives, then the more people you vaccinate, the lower death rates you should see, right? But that's not the case. Back in 1989, only 15 percent of over-65 people got vaccinated against the flu. But today, thanks to the big vaccine push, over 65 percent are vaccinated. And yet, amazingly, death rates among the elderly have not gone down during the flu season. In fact, they've gone up!

• When vaccine promoters (and CDC officials) are challenged about the "50 percent mortality reduction" myth, they invoke dogmatic language and attack the messenger. They are simply not willing to consider the possibility that flu vaccines simply don't work.

• Scientists who question the vaccine mythology are routinely shunned by the medical establishment. Tom Jefferson from the Cochrane Collaboration is an epidemiologist who questions the claimed benefits of flu vaccines. "The reaction [against Jefferson] has been so dogmatic and even hysterical that you'd think he was advocating stealing babies" said a colleague (Majumdar).

• [In other words -- get this -- flu vaccines only "work" in people who don't need them!]

• The whole industry is based on fabricated statistics that are provably false... and the injections continue, year after year, with absolutely no benefit to public health whatsoever...]

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.

_

Sludge Factory wrote:

scb wrote:

By the way, here's an example that I don't think fits your scenario: My great-grandmother is 95 years old and never leaves the house. She doesn't get flu shots because a) she'd have to leave the house to get one, and b) she shouldn't need to worry about becoming infected by the public because she doesn't go out into the public. But yesterday she fell and broke her hip and was taken, despite her protest, to the ER. So if she gets the flu from her ER doc is it just her own damn fault for trapsing about to the hospital without being vaccinated?

Yes, I would say that it is her fault for not leaving the house to get a vaccine. She is 95 years old and that is an age where it is common for broken hips to happen. She should know this, and knowing this she should take any of the necessary precautions regarding her health and if she feels there is a potentional to get the flu at the ER she should then take the steps necessary to prevent that. It isn't the ER's fault that she decided not to get vaccinated because she didn't have the forsight to realize that she just might eventually end up in the ER someday.

But she doesn't go out because she's trying to be careful to not break her hip. So, she could go out, get the flu shot, and increase her risk of breaking her hip and of getting the flu, or she could stay home, decrease her risk of breaking her hip and of getting the flu, and not get a flu shot. I think a risk/benefit analysis favors staying home.

Sludge Factory

scb wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

scb wrote:

By the way, here's an example that I don't think fits your scenario: My great-grandmother is 95 years old and never leaves the house. She doesn't get flu shots because a) she'd have to leave the house to get one, and b) she shouldn't need to worry about becoming infected by the public because she doesn't go out into the public. But yesterday she fell and broke her hip and was taken, despite her protest, to the ER. So if she gets the flu from her ER doc is it just her own damn fault for trapsing about to the hospital without being vaccinated?

Yes, I would say that it is her fault for not leaving the house to get a vaccine. She is 95 years old and that is an age where it is common for broken hips to happen. She should know this, and knowing this she should take any of the necessary precautions regarding her health and if she feels there is a potentional to get the flu at the ER she should then take the steps necessary to prevent that. It isn't the ER's fault that she decided not to get vaccinated because she didn't have the forsight to realize that she just might eventually end up in the ER someday.

But she doesn't go out because she's trying to be careful to not break her hip. So, she could go out, get the flu shot, and increase her risk of breaking her hip and of getting the flu, or she could stay home, decrease her risk of breaking her hip and of getting the flu, and not get a flu shot. I think a risk/benefit analysis favors staying home.

Clearly it didn't matter since she ended up breaking her hip anyway. I thought some states had laws against forcing people to go to an ER if they don't want to though? At least I'm sure it was that way in Minnesota because when my Grandma fell they wouldn't bring her until she said they could. Is it different where your great grandma lives?

Also, do doctor's not do housecalls anymore? Is it not possible to have one come visit your great grandma to administer a shot?

soulsinging

Sludge Factory wrote:

Also, do doctor's not do housecalls anymore? Is it not possible to have one come visit your great grandma to administer a shot?

In my 27 years on this earth, I've never heard of a doctor doing a house call.

Sludge Factory

soulsinging wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

Also, do doctor's not do housecalls anymore? Is it not possible to have one come visit your great grandma to administer a shot?

In my 27 years on this earth, I've never heard of a doctor doing a house call.

I don't know...looks to me like it does happen:

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnf ... _db037.htm

http://www.ohio.com/lifestyle/health/46583302.html

http://doctorsmakinghousecalls.com/

_

Sludge Factory wrote:

Clearly it didn't matter since she ended up breaking her hip anyway. I thought some states had laws against forcing people to go to an ER if they don't want to though? At least I'm sure it was that way in Minnesota because when my Grandma fell they wouldn't bring her until she said they could. Is it different where your great grandma lives?

Also, do doctor's not do housecalls anymore? Is it not possible to have one come visit your great grandma to administer a shot?

Well, she was "forced" by my uncle, who threatend to call an ambulance and she conceded because she didn't want there to be a scene.

I don't know of any docs in her area who do house calls. She would be really upset by a stranger coming to her house anyway, and it seems worse to get her all upset and force her to get a shot than to just let her live her remaining few days in the safety of her own house without being bothered.

I still don't think it would be right for a healthcare professional to give her the flu.

Sludge Factory

scb wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

Clearly it didn't matter since she ended up breaking her hip anyway. I thought some states had laws against forcing people to go to an ER if they don't want to though? At least I'm sure it was that way in Minnesota because when my Grandma fell they wouldn't bring her until she said they could. Is it different where your great grandma lives?

Also, do doctor's not do housecalls anymore? Is it not possible to have one come visit your great grandma to administer a shot?

Well, she was "forced" by my uncle, who threatend to call an ambulance and she conceded because she didn't want there to be a scene.

I don't know of any docs in her area who do house calls. She would be really upset by a stranger coming to her house anyway, and it seems worse to get her all upset and force her to get a shot than to just let her live her remaining few days in the safety of her own house without being bothered.

I still don't think it would be right for a healthcare professional to give her the flu.

Well, I still don't think it would be right for someone to force another person to unwillingly inject a substance into their body regardless of what profession they work in. It seems apparent to me that your Great-Grandma is more worried about going outside/having strangers coming into her home than she is contracting the flu and that's her prerogative. It just doesn't seem to be an issue for her.

GTFLYGIRL

Sludge Factory wrote:

Well, I still don't think it would be right for someone to force another person to unwillingly inject a substance into their body regardless of what profession they work in.

You do realize that vaccinations are mandatory for entering school and in order to hold many jobs in the US, right?

Others are mandatory for travel to different parts of the world, and therefore, if your job requires you to travel to these destinations, and you refuse the vaccine, you would, most likely, be putting your job in jeapordy.

Im not arguing for or against H1N1 vaccinations

I'm just reading and learning... but your above stated point is pretty much moot. in the US vaccinations ARE mandatory in MANY situations

meme

Jeanwah wrote:

scb wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

scb - just to show that not all docs are behind recommending the H1N1 vaccine...

Swine Flu Vaccine: What To Do?
posted by Dr. Frank Lipman Oct 11, 2009 5:00 pm

Summer is over and the question I am being asked most frequently in my practice is, “what do I do about Swine flu?” My patients are wondering whether or not they should get vaccinated and the simple answer I give most of the time is ..NO!

From what you may have read, you might think that the swine flu vaccine is the answer to swine flu. Unfortunately this is not true and until we know that the vaccine is safe, I cannot in good conscience recommend it to most of my patients.

From the outset, let me say, I am not anti all vaccinations, rather I am pro vaccine safety and freedom of choice.

This is why am I not recommending the swine flu vaccine:

1. At this stage, for the most part the swine flu seems benign.

Over a million people in the US have already come down with swine flu, many of them without even knowing that they had it. The vast majority of people who get the swine flu recover after a week or so of high fever, aches, and respiratory distress. It’s not pleasant, but except in rare circumstances, it is not fatal. Most people who’ve been infected by swine flu think so little of it, they believe they just had a really bad cold or a regular flu. So unless the swine flu evolves to a much more virulent form, there’s no need for mass vaccination.

2. We don’t know if the vaccine will be effective.

Vaccines are only useful against the specific viral strain that was available at the time of their manufacture. But influenza viruses mutate quickly, and as the WHO has already said, the real concern with H1N1 swine flu is that it will combine with seasonal flu in the Fall, creating a new strain that will of course be immune to all available vaccines.

I know that not every single doctor agrees, but what about the medical profession as a whole? What about those expert researchers you speak of? I don't even know who this guy is or where this article came from.

Listen, we'll have to agree to disagree here. I don't rely on gov't to tell me what's best for my health. I also have shown points how the H1N1 is not proven safe. You seem to want to believe that the medical community as a whole think it's wisest to get the vaccine and I disagree. But what do I care what doctors say? They make mistakes all the time. I'm done.

You don't rely on government, you don't rely on most doctors, but you'll rely on google?
I am at a loss reading your comments.

I almost lost my husband TWICE due to medical errors. As you said, doctors are human, but your argument about a corporate conspiracy is really, really weak.

_

GTFLYGIRL wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

Well, I still don't think it would be right for someone to force another person to unwillingly inject a substance into their body regardless of what profession they work in.

You do realize that vaccinations are mandatory for entering school and in order to hold many jobs in the US, right?

Others are mandatory for travel to different parts of the world, and therefore, if your job requires you to travel to these destinations, and you refuse the vaccine, you would, most likely, be putting your job in jeapordy.

Im not arguing for or against n1h1 vaccinations

I'm just reading and learning... but your above stated point is pretty much moot. in the US vaccinations ARE mandatory in MANY situations

Plus, "force" is relative. They have an option to not get vaccinated - there are just consequences to that decision. Just sayin'...

Sludge Factory

GTFLYGIRL wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

Well, I still don't think it would be right for someone to force another person to unwillingly inject a substance into their body regardless of what profession they work in.

You do realize that vaccinations are mandatory for entering school and in order to hold many jobs in the US, right?

Others are mandatory for travel to different parts of the world, and therefore, if your job requires you to travel to these destinations, and you refuse the vaccine, you would, most likely, be putting your job in jeapordy.

Im not arguing for or against H1N1 vaccinations

I'm just reading and learning... but your above stated point is pretty much moot. in the US vaccinations ARE mandatory in MANY situations

And you do realize that there are exemptions that can be made for children who have not received vaccinations to enter school? And you do realize that just because something is mandatory that doesn't make it correct, right?

Please inform me on what occupations there are that require vaccinations. All I can think of right now is the military.

Traveling to other parts of the world is irrelevant to this discussion because we weren't talking about the policies of other countries, we were talking about the policies of the United States where we are supposed to be free of the government mandating and forcing its citizens to purchase a product or enter foreign substances into their body.

To say that my point is moot is pretty ignorant. You have only outlined one case where vaccinations are actually mandatory and that is foreign travel.