|
|
|
|
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/27/2009 8:08:14 PM | Novascotialass..
Thanks for the thoughtful and balanced reply. It was very refreshing. I am not of the conspiratorial bent on the other side of this debate. And I do agree on the need to balance fear and science.
However, we are facing these new realities based more on the political and perceptual than science or conspiracy. When safeguards are let down, and previous standards are reduced for expediency to alleviate the panic induced by complicit media hype, shucksters will respond in kind and glom onto the highest profits, the best government bailouts, and force citizen compliance via multiple means. The pressure on health care providers is unscrupulous. The scientific method is increasingly failing in favor of the panic method. We have seen this with over-prescriptions of anti-biotics for sniffles, scrapes and bruises, and the hyper-advertising of drugs we never knew we could not live without until we saw it on TV. I've hear doctors and nurses admit that unless they submit to the pressure of patients' demands for the new and improved...whatever that they saw on the tube, they would lose their business...and they submit, knowing full well that these drugs would do no good. The same thing is happening among health care professionals who know flu progression and the need for natural immune response to prevail over quick fixes that may prove worse than the virus. The 1976 debacle is still a wake up call to many.
It would be great if we were ruled by science and methodical research these days, with an emphasis on the long term results and consequences. Unfortunately, instant gratification in placation of fears is now over-riding what common sense and methodology we previously had. There ARE leaps of faith being taken in these new radically developed and distributed concoctions, without adequate peer review, field trials, and long term evaluation. I am all for sound science. This stuff is sound-bite science though. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/27/2009 8:14:31 PM |
People should be allowed a choice based on the information available. To bully folks with differing opinions plays into all sorts of future mandates without sound science, merit, and proof of long term safety.
And this is a reasonable statement which is something rarely seen in some of these posts, especially when we start seeing mention of "Illuminati," "Big Pharma," etc.
By and large, people have the right to say no. And, regardless of whether or not your job is in healthcare, you still have a choice. But people have to realize what's at stake, which is the health of the people in their care.
Personally, I don't understand the problem. Flu vaccines are all made the same way. So healthcare workers aren't worried about the regular flu vaccine but, because there is an element of fear associated with H1N1, well now it's a problem?
The problem is the dicussion invariably gets hijacked from legitimate questions like "Can you have too many vaccines at once" to paranoid ramblings of "It's all Big Pharma/Illuminati/aliens trying to take over the world."
And I will repeat. If you are in healthcare but are opposed to getting "the jab" then quit. Find work somewhere else. It's your choice. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/27/2009 9:00:08 PM | Excellent logic.
This is all voluntary after all.
If you are a cab driver and refuse the jab. quit
A teacher, fast food worker, toll booth operator, convenience store worker, police officer, massage therapist, janitor, grocery clerk, or any other person who interacts with the public and you refuse to comply to voluntary jabs, YOU MUST QUIT. It's your choice after all. War is Peace. Quiting is victory. Compliance is Choice. Ficdep, Joycamp, Minipax, minitrue, upsub.
Firing half the physicians and over a third of the nurses who refuse the jab will surely make it all betta. and 90% more free, informed and democratic!...and chocolate covered to boot.
Excellent logic. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/27/2009 9:23:54 PM |
Excellent logic
Like the string of fallacy just provided? Non sequitur, cum hoc ergo propter hoc, argumentum ad metum?
Health care workers sign contracts frequently inclusive of vaccination, HIV testing, etc. These are people who work with public who are already sick or immune compromised. What kills HIV patients? Not AIDS. Usually pneumonia, which is a secondary infection! For the health of their patients, health care professionals MUST be healthy when working. They must be ABLE to work and not "off sick" if it can be avoided. Every one of them is trained in at least basic epidemiology, physiology, and related fields. They know the benefits and hazards associated with the medications they deliver or receive. They knew their responsibilities long before they finished school. If they wish to make their patients sick, they should be in another line of work.
Any other employer should be simply sending sick employees home. Odds are, they're only miserable for 3-4 days, and only contagious for one. Most employers should have no right to fire someone for being sick - unless that's one of those illustrious American "freedoms". To suggest that this will be the outcome is simply paranoid fear-mongering.
Science and fear do not need to be "balanced". Fear and paranoia need to be replaced with facts, and only science will validate those. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/27/2009 9:40:19 PM | Have any of you heard of the case in Australia against Merck for intimidating MD's and researchers by cutting off their funding and 'neutralizing their career' for asking questions about the swine flu vaccine? Have you heard they are already priming the media so that 'collateral damage'-ie vaccine deaths goes un or under reported? Does knowing this help you feel you are participating in FULLY informed consent, knowing that the people whose profession it is to have an educated opinion about this vaccine are silenced?
link to Australian news articles about this and summary:
www.naturalnews.com/027116_Merck_doctors_vaccines.html
Docs and nurses are between a rock and a very hard place to be on this right now, forced to choose bw -'do no harm' and 'keep your job that you busted your butt and went into debt to study for so you too could help people' | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/27/2009 9:54:16 PM | I would not want to live in a society where we are forced to do something that could potentially represent a threat to the individual for the good of the whole.
You might want to take a look at senate bill 2028 .
http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/senate/186/st02/st02028.htm
today you have a choice to take the jab..
but...
just a little more confusion and misinformation
then you WONT have a choice .
Isnt that the next step here...
declaring a public health emergency ?
Seems the CT people kinda had an eye on that several years ago...just sayin.
others are just learning and yet others .....well....
have never even heard of bill 2028 . | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/27/2009 9:57:53 PM | Flu kills 500000 per year. A vaccine would have to be a whole lot worse to NOT be an improvement.
against Merck for intimidating MD's and researchers by cutting off their funding and 'neutralizing their career' for asking questions about the swine flu vaccine?
Sounds suspicious, but your source ALSO sounds a bit biased. In any case, how can Merck cut off funding unless they're providing it in the first place?? Either Merck is their employer, or they're receiving a bonus. In either case, it's Merck's money and their mutual contracts.
Back to the bias - the article provided is from a biased website. It's an EDITORIAL, which is also flagged as "opinion", and it's entirely INTERNALLY sourced - all the references are from the same website! You can be sure THAT's objective.
Now let's skip past the shoddy quality of the source, and give them some leeway. Assuming it's all accurate, so what? H1N1 is present and spreading worldwide. It's being studied worldwide. What is demonstrated is an example of localized corruption, which has little or no bearing on research or medical practice elsewhere. Research does not begin or end with Merck in Australia. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/27/2009 10:23:03 PM | Frog: I can see by your comments you didn't bother to read the articles in Australian newspapers-that were available links in that source you claim is biased tho YOU just couldn't be bothered to READ.
okeydokey ostrich-I only debate with debaters who familiarize themselves with the material-duh!
to above poster: yaa--woe unto Massachusetts! | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/27/2009 10:36:14 PM | I went to the site provided. I read the article. The article contained many links to related articles - EVERY ONE OF THEM was the same website! If you only cite yourself as a source, then you have no independent corroboration. What do you actually learn from someone who pats his own back?
In fact, I even went back and checked it AGAIN. EVERY link is internal. The ones I looked at came from two people, the editor and a "citizen reporter". They're opinion pieces. A few outside sources are mentioned. NONE are linked. NONE are cited - no title, no date. Internal substantiation is no substantiation.
Is there perhaps another agenda at work on this site? Let's see...
how about we buy some "Books from Truth Publishing"? A rule of thumb - anyone who claims to know the "truth", is probably lying.
how about we buy...
Listen to the complete 3.5 hour recording on 4 audio CDs of the Health Ranger's Swine Flu Advanced Preparedness Course, covering natural anti-virals, family safety, infrastructure disruptions, quarantine, preparedness gear and much more.
Care to guess the author? No? No suspense here - it's the very same "editor" responsible for most of the web articles!
Don't forget...Available NOW for immediate shipping. 100% satisfaction guarantee
Done yet? Not a chance!
NEW Product: Valley of Longevity Shampoo from the Health Ranger
• 98% Organic
• 100% Natural
• 100% Fragrance Free!
• No SLS
• No Parabens
• No synthetic chemicals
• FREE shipping in U.S. on orders over $75
Um...yeah. Honest, unbiased website. One author, no substantiated sources, and most of each webpage is promotion, half of that for his own profit. Nope, no vested interest in promoting fairy tales here!
My points stand. Research does not begin or end with Merck in Australia, for better or worse. The rest of the world will get along just fine either way. If you wish to deal with the monster under the bed, set a mousetrap. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/27/2009 11:49:34 PM | Frog-sorry buddy that net navigation is not your specialty. If you go to :
www.naturalnews.com/02716_Merck_doctors_vaccines (same link as before ) and then go ALL THE WAY TOO THE VERY BOTTOM OF THE PAGE-where you can't go any fuirther, the link from the australian news article (which is NOT written by the exact same author as you claim it is) :
www.theaustralian.news.comau/story/0,25197,2572600-2702,00.html, you will be able to read the article about how Merck got in trouble with the law by silencing doctors speaking out about the swineflu vaccine, as reported in the Australian news-No it was not legal what they have done, which will you see if you bother to read the article
thought I'd help you out since warehousers and medical researchers have different skill levels when it comes to researching information and making that extra little informed click-good night!  | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 12:20:10 AM | | hi... ya, while I do not take the popular road on a lot of things so far browbeating and mocking has not changed my opinions as of yet... pls just take a few moments and compare old ~cured~ diseases with current diseases... really look at the symptoms.... narrow it down to just one, compare polio with MS... I can claim that I cured something too if I rename it ... vaccines are dangerous, poisons do not cure anything, they attack an already compromised immune system, they saturate myelin tissue causing the body to turn on itself, most autoimmune diseases are all about that.... serious blessings for health | |
|
| |
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 1:08:16 AM | www.naturalnews.com/02716_Merck_doctors_vaccines (same link as before ) and then go ALL THE WAY TOO THE VERY BOTTOM OF THE PAGE-where you can't go any fuirther, the link from the australian news article (which is NOT written by the exact same author as you claim it is) :
Not there. Perhaps it's only visible if you sign up and log in? I had the courtesy to look - three times now. I have no interest in joining in order to indulge further conspiracy theories.
www.theaustralian.news.comau/story/0,25197,2572600-2702,00.html, you will be able to read the article about how Merck got in trouble with the law by silencing doctors speaking out about the swineflu vaccine, as reported in the Australian news-No it was not legal what they have done, which will you see if you bother to read the article
Dead link. I corrected the typo, still a dead link. Tracked down a bunch of related articles, though not this specific one. All the articles concerned were about Vioxx, NOT influenza. Illegal, unethical, and...relevant how? Vaccines are not drugs. They are not created or tested in the same ways as drugs. They don't work the same way as drugs. The biggest difficulty in producing a vaccine isn't in identifying or creating a particular chemical. The difficulty is anticipating the evolution of the virus, and then isolating and manufacturing antibodies which are actually effective at creating immunity. Those antibodies are created by the virus - they are right, or they are wrong. You can't tweak them for 10 years in order to obtain an "ideal" result, as you would when refining the effects of a potential heart medication, anaesthetic, appetite suppressant, etc.
Not. the. same. thing.
While one certainly has a right to be concerned about such illegal and unethical practices, extending this to a paranoia about substances of routine research and manufacture is still a non sequitur fallacy.
thought I'd help you out since warehousers and medical researchers have different skill levels when it comes to researching information and making that extra little informed click-good night!
Ad hominem
Rules violation - inclusion of profile details
AND, your own research skills are once again shown to be weak, since you assume that my listed occupation has ANYthing to do with my actual expertise.
One of us has a history of scientific translation, translating papers from Russian, German, Italian, Spanish, and French.
One of us has been cited in both books and scientific papers.
One of us has been cited by international agencies.
One of us has hundreds of scientific papers in multiple languages at his fingertips ALL THE TIME, plus thousands more on the book shelves, plus hundreds of texts. These might be considered research materials or recreational reading, according to the needs of the moment.
One of us communicated with researchers at the NIH-NIDDK for a number of years and has a small stack of reprints to show for it, largely on the identification, dietary origins, synthesis, and medical applications of a wide array of natural alkaloid toxins [mainly pumiliotoxins, batrachotoxins, epibatidines, histrionicotoxins, gephyrotoxins, decahydroquinolines, and their various "kin"].
One of us has spent a great deal of time in the field on his own time and expense, attempting to obtain evidence to confirm anecdotal claims.
I submit that ONE of us does, in fact, know how to research. I submit further that the one concerned has enough critical thinking and research skills to 1) not depend on clearly biased sources, 2) look for actual evidence, and 3) NOT rely on extensive use of fallacy and unsubstantiated claims in an argument.
I'll let our audience work out who this "one" is.
compare old ~cured~ diseases with current diseases... really look at the symptoms.... narrow it down to just one, compare polio with MS
Smallpox is gone. By vaccination.
Polio and MS have different symptoms, and BOTH diseases were recognized SEPARATELY over 150 years ago. Polio is largely gone - by vaccination. The root cause of MS is still unknown.
vaccines are dangerous, poisons do not cure anything, they attack an already compromised immune system, they saturate myelin tissue causing the body to turn on itself, most autoimmune diseases are all about that.... serious blessings for health
Fairly firm evidence that you have no idea what a vaccine actually is or does.
And that would include you?
Want to substantiate that, or are you sticking to fallacies today? I'm arguing in favor of evidence and logic over biased sources, fallacies, and unsubstantiated claims. I'm not willing to claim "truth" in absence of evidence. That might be because I've been duped by the invisible alien illuminati conspiracy - I'm just not "enlightened" to the "Great Trut...er...Fact". | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 9:08:47 AM | I just heard on our local talk radio this morning, a request from a listener to find a physician that will be willing to see his kids if they have opted out of the jab. Apparently the "voluntary" nature of the jab is becoming incrementally less voluntary.
I would like someone to address why the manufacturers of the H1N1 vaccine have been granted legal immunity from future actions if the vaccines are so safe?
Dr. Marc Girard released his paper yesterday on questions to be asked before submitting to the jab.
http://www.rolandsimion.org/IMG/pdf/To_vaccinate_or_not.pdf
Dr. Mae-Wan Ho and Prof. Joe Cummins have also discussed aspects of corporate immunity given malpractice in the past.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14869 | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 9:59:33 AM | | Epuppy: there is a provision that was written into the usa patriot act that in the case of a pandemic, vaccine makers would be exempt from related injury claims for the ensuing vaccine. the National vaccine injury compensation program taxes vaccines to compensate the vaccine injured. I do not know if this tax will be added to the swine flu vax, and I think it will not be approved in the list of included vaccines which are compensatable. I don't have the link for the above, but I do know the info is researchable, as I read the applicable portion of the law about this a few years ago. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 10:28:45 AM |
I would like someone to address why the manufacturers of the H1N1 vaccine have been granted legal immunity from future actions if the vaccines are so safe?
Because lawyers think ahead. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 12:16:39 PM | | Earth puppy-those are excellent links written by totally objective sources whose very job it is to remain objective with no biased ties to drug companies or even the anti-vaccine orgs-well cited too! How much you wanna wager certain among the sheeple will have trouble clicking on the link or understanding medical terminology? HAHAHA! It was interesting to note they also did indeed mention the issue of fast- tracking and leg immunity as of '01 in the Cochrane report too. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 12:37:04 PM |
My condolescences to you. That's horrific news. Where did he receive the inoculation? Was he part of the population being tested?
haha i was just joking around. My dad died of cancer before swine flu even hit the shelves. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 1:55:43 PM | How much you wanna wager certain among the sheeple will have trouble clicking on the link or understanding medical terminology?
How much you wanna wager that you're unclear on the concept?
What I; for one, have disputed, is the nature of particular arguments. I'm not actually all that interested in the subject of debate, but the quality. Thus, I have no real interest in arguments which are rational. If I were interested in the subject matter, objective papers would certainly be worth reading. I will, however, have a look at them. I will note right off that the first paper looks good at a glance, but it's from a personal site and there's no indication of it ever being published in an objective journal. It is a considerable step up from editorial features without citations. It also contains a conflict of interest disclaimer. Fair warning - objectivity in question. The second site is also of questionable objectivity, but the article itself is rational and well-sourced. It's a far cry from alternatives previously offered us.
Biased sources do NOT establish the claim.
Arguments based on fallacy do NOT establish the claim.
Arguments without evidence do NOT establish the claim.
When you can eliminate the above problems, you will have an argument worth looking at. Earthpuppy has potentially done that. YOU have not. Why not? Couldn't find anything more than biased news pieces with those research skills of yours?
certain among the sheeple will have trouble clicking
And just to reiterate my point, this comment demonstrates an especially weak debating position. It's an argument based on ridicule, an ad hominem. It's a fallacy, and one which is normally invoked when the person using it has nothing rational or substantive to back themselves up. Anyone with a modicum of critical thinking skills should be happy to see this fallacy appear in a debate, as it tends to indicate they've won. The only more obvious indication is when the opponent starts frothing at the mouth!
or understanding medical terminology?
Riiiiight - more ridicule from the doesn't-do-her-homework department. Rock-solid stance you have there. If you can ever support your claims or innuendo, do get back to us. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 2:37:36 PM |
My condolescences to you. That's horrific news. Where did he receive the inoculation? Was he part of the population being tested? haha i was just joking around. My dad died of cancer before swine flu even hit the shelves.
And in my books, my dear sir, that makes you a cad | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 4:03:53 PM |
Want to substantiate that, or are you sticking to fallacies today?
What I'm saying is truth is NOT absolute. If the CDC "says" we need swine flu that is ONLY one source. There are others who indicate otherwise. You hang on "science" so much, you must consider that, even among scientists and medical professionals, there is a school that says the opposite. And scientific "truths" (medical ones particularly) change ALL THE TIME. No one, not even you, have a lock on the truth. you only have an opinion and, like armpits, everyone has their own. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 5:00:33 PM |
What I'm saying is truth is NOT absolute.
Of course not. Your implication was that I was dictating a truth, which you did not substantiate. What I have done is point out that many of the arguments presented are highly flawed and add up to little more than declarations of truth. I advocate looking at actual evidence, listening to and making rational arguments, and drawing conclusions accordingly. NOT "Here's the only valid conclusion. I'm right".
If the CDC "says" we need swine flu that is ONLY one source
I think you're at least partly right, though I'm pretty sure you dropped a word or two in this sentence.
I would suggest that, although the CDC is nominately "one source", it IS a source backed by references and scientific scrutiny. It's not strictly speaking, an organization for scientific study, but one for disease control. Thus, drawing conclusions are part and parcel of its existence. Otherwise, the Center for Disease Study and Analysis would be basically useless - it would be in the hands of a largely ignorant public to read the studies and decide whether a trip to the doctor is worthwhile. It's quite clear that most of the public are neither that informed, nor that motivated. Some think you can't get pregnant the "first time". These are the same people who would ultimately be "typhoid Mary", spreading their untreated illnesses through the population.
You hang on "science" so much, you must consider that, even among scientists and medical professionals, there is a school that says the opposite.
Again, of course. Again, I think maybe you dropped a word or two, probably the word "vaccine" in the previous statement?
And scientific "truths" (medical ones particularly) change ALL THE TIME.
Conclusions are not "truths". Laws, principles, and theories are not "truths". Whether a conclusion is scientific or not, it is only the unscientific and uncritical thinking process which treats ANYTHING as "truth". Laws, principles, and theories may all be overturned at some point, although any explanation which reaches such status in the first place, is already well-substantiated and not likely to be refuted. Be that as it may, "truth" is doctrinal, not pragmatic, and not an element of science.
No one, not even you, have a lock on the truth.
Again, never claimed I did. If you want valid and objective information on quantum physics, you don't go to the Church of Scientology. If you want valid and objective information on a vaccine, you don't go to an internet blogger. Yet, all too often in these fora, these are EXACTLY the kinds of "authorities" chosen. All these will give you is "truth", not "facts".
you only have an opinion and, like armpits, everyone has their own
All opinions are not equal. I try to substantiate mine with facts and reason. I generally don't voice my opinion UNLESS I see someone preaching irrational and unsubstantiated "truths". An opinion without basis is worthless in the real world. | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 5:50:42 PM | | I don't know if this is exactly relevant, but a girl in the UK died shortly after being given the new vaccine against the viruses that cause cervical cancer. It might be a good idea to make sure the "swine flu" vaccine is fully tested, before rolling it out, as the vast majority of deaths due to swine flu in the UK have had underlying health problems, that would have made them likely to die of many infections anyway, and so they should be discounted before we start screaming "killer pandemic". | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 6:25:37 PM |
What I'm saying is truth is NOT absolute.
So then you're saying the swine flu vaccine may not be "dangerous business" after all? Or is it only some truths? | |
|
| New Swine Flu vaccine is dangerous business
Posted: 9/28/2009 6:27:54 PM | It's a balancing act, to be sure. Vaccines have been "improved" in ways which also increase the hazards they pose. Normally, the benefits far outweigh the risks, and that's clearly one of the balancing acts.
The testing process is another, although this is a bit different. For vaccines, the main concern should be whether or not it works. The other concern is additives, which need to be evaluated for their own effects. It's apparent that the latter is much in question.
However, this is all complicated by influenza. Influenza exists in multiple forms, and they are all constantly evolving. Average "seasonal" influenza kills 500000 people per year. Virulent strains of H1N1 are known to kill millions, and also have the potential to devastate livestock industries, due to destruction of infected livestock and avoidance by the public of their products. It's a race to vaccinate before the next killing strain spreads. The race is worsened by the need to predict the characteristics of a strain which does not exist yet. There's the rush - always playing catch up, and once a viable vaccine is found, it needs to be tested and enough produced to treat hundreds of millions.
For other virii, the rush is more questionable. Although the goal of innoculation against HPV is reasonable, does it need to be pushed into mass usage? Has sufficient testing taken place? Certainly some are likely to suffer undesirable side-effects, but the questions come down to, does it provide maximum benefit with minimum harm? Will there be concrete benefits by using it NOW, rather than waiting?
With the current strain of H1N1, yes, many of the fatalities appear to have had other medical issues. The strain appears to be relatively mild - appears. Being flu, it evolves rapidly. Despite the small numbers of deaths overall, drug-resistant cases are popping up around the world. We've had 8 deaths in this province and already, one of those was a resistant strain. That alone is a concern. The ability to treat greatly reduces death rates. How many will die because there's no longer an effective treatment? How else is the virus adapting? Back to the goal of vaccination - stop the spread before we're compelled to find out the hard way how bad it can get. The goal itself is worthy, but it's open to question how necessary it actually is. Much of the "official" panic has declined in light of relatively tame results, but the concern remains real. | |
|
|
| Page 4 of 25
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 |
|
Home
login 
