Articles

302 thoughts on “Swine Flu Vaccine Fearmongering

  1. Th1Th2 says:

    Scott,

    According to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, food, air and water are among man’s PHYSIOLOGIC NEEDS. Without them, man cannot survive since they are inherent part of all living things. Safety concerns only apply once they become toxic or polluted. Vaccines, however, do NOT belong to this category since they are made from toxins, viruses, bacteria and toxic substances let alone biologically modified and chemically denatured. They are inherently unsafe. They are just being modified to become less toxic.

    Ergo, it is not wise to compare a physiologic need to something which is not.

  2. Peter Lipson says:

    Our spam filter has been a bit over-enthusiastic. Please do not take it personally, folks. We release comments as soon as we can.

  3. Scott says:

    That’s really not any sort of argument, Th1Th2. Unless you mean to claim that nothing which isn’t a biological imperative can be permitted to carry any risk, in which case you can’t justify writing your post, owning a computer, or even sitting in a chair.

  4. Todd W. says:

    @Th1Th2

    At what point do food and water become toxic (without being polluted)?

  5. Th1Th2 says:

    Scott,

    Good health does not carry any risk.

  6. Th1Th2 says:

    Todd W.,

    “At what point do food and water become toxic (without being polluted)?”

    Simply add Triton X-100.

  7. Scott says:

    That is a truly ridiculous statement. There is NOTHING that any person has ever done that does not carry some risk. It’s all a matter of degree.

  8. Chris says:

    What constitutes “good health”? Are you implying that those who have contracted swine flu were not healthy before? Several pregnant women have died from swine flu, what evidence do you have that they were not healthy?

    Or are you one of those folks that does not believe in viruses? Which is one way to blame influenza victims because they did not follow what you would require to get “good health.”

  9. Todd W. says:

    @Th1Th2

    Good health does not carry any risk.

    hahahahaha! Sorry. Ahem. Exercise is considered part of good health, no? It most certainly carries risk – muscle tear, tendonitis, cardiovascular injuries, etc.

  10. Peter Lipson says:

    “good health does not carry any risk”? what does that mean? as one of my partners says, “you’re always well until the day you get sick.”

  11. Harriet Hall says:

    Th1Th2 said,
    “About the thimerosal, someone has already given you a link that proves thimerosal is in fact, teratogenic.”

    I asked you. Why didn’t you just post that information instead of waiting for someone else to do it?

    I acknowledge that thimerosal was shown to be teratogenic in that one study. I question whether we can trust the results of a single study that apparently was never replicated or confirmed. Neither the MSDS nor the “pregnancy category” ratings nor the WHO evaluation concluded that it was teratogenic. So there is certainly room for doubt.

    Giving it the benefit of the doubt, if topical thimerosal applied as merthiolate was teratogenic in the doses absorbed, that doesn’t mean that the tiny amounts in vaccine can cause any harm. The poison is in the dose.

    Your straw man definition of vaccine safety is ludicrous. Minor local reactions are a side effect of most vaccines and are a small price to pay. There is no such thing as “perfect” safety. It is safer to vaccinate than not to vaccinate.

  12. wales says:

    I hate to interrupt such a scintillating exchange, but here’s an interesting piece on the current swine flu situation

    http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/bmj.b3471?ijkey=tKcb8W6KUoHXzPC&keytype=ref

    Dr. Hall’s review of the 1918 flu ignores recent research showing that the vast majority of mortality was caused by secondary bacterial infections. Where’s the sense of urgency in stockpiling antibiotics?

    “The majority of deaths in the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic likely resulted directly from secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory–tract bacteria. If severe pandemic influenza is largely a problem of viral-bacterial copathogenesis, pandemic planning needs to go beyond addressing the viral cause alone (e.g., influenza vaccines and antiviral drugs).”

    Morens DM, Taubenberger JK, Fauci AS. Predominant Role of Bacterial Pneumonia as a Cause of Death in Pandemic Influenza: Implications for Pandemic Influenza Preparedness. The Journal of Infectious Diseases 2008; 198:962–70

    http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/591708

    An editorial commentary on the above article states:

    “The majority of pandemic preparation has centered around prevention or treatment of the virus itself by developing vaccines against pandemic candidates and stockpiling antiviral drugs. Little to no attention has been paid to prevention and treatment of potential bacterial superinfections, which, as Morens et al. remind us, have historically caused the great majority of deaths during pandemics.”

    McCullers, JA. Planning for an Influenza Pandemic: Thinking beyond the Virus. JID 2008:198 (1 October)

    http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/592165

    Also see:

    Brundage JF, Shanks GD. Deaths from bacterial pneumonia
    during 1918–19 influenza pandemic. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008 Aug

    And please, let’s stop with the misleading VAERS “incredible hulk” cherry picking. According to the VAERS website “The majority of VAERS reports are sent in by vaccine manufacturers (42%) and health care providers (30%). The remaining reports are obtained from state immunization programs (12%), vaccine recipients (or their parent/guardians, 7%) and other sources (9%).

  13. Harriet Hall says:

    Th1Th2 said vaccines are “inherently unsafe.”
    I say influenza is inherently more unsafe.

  14. Harriet Hall says:

    Th1Th2,
    Despite your info on Triton X-100, it HAS been used to prepare vaccines and 22,000,000 doses have been given over 10 years with no side effects except for local reactions.

  15. Th1Th2 says:

    Todd W., (repost)

    “At what point do food and water become toxic (without being polluted)?”

    Simply add Triton X-100.

  16. Th1Th2 says:

    Chris,

    “Are you implying that those who have contracted swine flu were not healthy before?Several pregnant women have died from swine flu, what evidence do you have that they were not healthy?”

    Yes. Some of them have pre-existing chronic diseases. Although swine flu is benign and self-limiting, death cases are mainly iatrogenic—meaning when a person becomes a patient in the hospital in the hands of allopathic doctors.

    “Or are you one of those folks that does not believe in viruses? Which is one way to blame influenza victims because they did not follow what you would require to get “good health.””

    Vaccination is the antagonist of good health. It is NOT a physiologic need but a physiologic threat.

  17. Th1Th2 says:

    Peter Lipson,

    “you’re always well until the day you get sick.”

    True. Just like the newborns, they are always well, healthy and NON-DISEASED until the day they were vaccinated. Oh actually within the first 12 hours of life since the first disease they will be exposed to is Hepatitis B.

  18. the bug guy says:

    Good grief, Th1Th2.

    You’re confusing the regular legal boilerplate that the manufacture probably puts on all of their lab grade chemicals as an indication that the chemical itself is for laboratory use only?

    Try looking at sheets from other companies and you won’t always find that language.

  19. Todd W. says:

    @Th1Th2

    Todd W., (repost)

    “At what point do food and water become toxic (without being polluted)?”

    Simply add Triton X-100.

    Wouldn’t the addition of Triton X-100, under your definitions, be polluting it? So, I’ll ask again, since you did not answer my question: At what point to food and water become toxic, without being polluted?

  20. Th1Th2 says:

    Todd W.,

    *I thought someone said that Triton X-100 is safe.*

  21. tmac57 says:

    Just wondering when Th1Th2 would be deemed a ‘troll’ by the moderators of this blog? What is the cutoff point?

  22. Th1Th2 says:

    tmac57,

    Character assassination is not my forte. Could you teach me how, otherwise, try to get hold of yourself.

    Just a friendly reminder.

  23. Harriet Hall says:

    Th1Th2 said,
    “Vaccination is the antagonist of good health.”
    I thought vaccine-preventable diseases were the antagonists of good health.

    “Vaccines are inherently unsafe.”
    Catching vaccine-preventable diseases is inherently unsafer.

  24. wales says:

    Chris said “Several pregnant women have died from swine flu, what evidence do you have that they were not healthy?” This NY Times article states that 3 pregnant women in the US have died as a result of swine flu. One had asthma, any info on the health of the other two? Also, Dr. Anne Shuchat of the CDC states that few of the 20 confirmed US swine flu cases in pregnant women have resulted in severe complications.

    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E05EEDA133FF930A25756C0A96F9C8B63

  25. wales says:

    Here’s an interesting piece on the current swine flu situation

    http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/bmj.b3471?ijkey=tKcb8W6KUoHXzPC&keytype=ref

    Dr. Hall’s review of the 1918 flu ignores recent research showing that the vast majority of mortality was caused by secondary bacterial infections. Where’s the sense of urgency in stockpiling antibiotics?

    “The majority of deaths in the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic likely resulted directly from secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory–tract bacteria. If severe pandemic influenza is largely a problem of viral-bacterial copathogenesis, pandemic planning needs to go beyond addressing the viral cause alone (e.g., influenza vaccines and antiviral drugs).”

    Morens DM, Taubenberger JK, Fauci AS. Predominant Role of Bacterial Pneumonia as a Cause of Death in Pandemic Influenza: Implications for Pandemic Influenza Preparedness. The Journal of Infectious Diseases 2008; 198:962–70

    http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/591708

    An editorial commentary on the above article states:

    “The majority of pandemic preparation has centered around prevention or treatment of the virus itself by developing vaccines against pandemic candidates and stockpiling antiviral drugs. Little to no attention has been paid to prevention and treatment of potential bacterial superinfections, which, as Morens et al. remind us, have historically caused the great majority of deaths during pandemics.”

    McCullers, JA. Planning for an Influenza Pandemic: Thinking beyond the Virus. JID 2008:198 (1 October)

    http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/592165

    Also see:

    Brundage JF, Shanks GD. Deaths from bacterial pneumonia
    during 1918–19 influenza pandemic. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008 Aug

    And please, let’s stop with the misleading VAERS “incredible hulk” cherry picking. According to the VAERS website “The majority of VAERS reports are sent in by vaccine manufacturers (42%) and health care providers (30%). The remaining reports are obtained from state immunization programs (12%), vaccine recipients (or their parent/guardians, 7%) and other sources (9%).

  26. the bug guy says:

    Good grief, Th1Th2. You took the legal boilerplate about “for laboratory use only” that the manufacturer put at the top of the MSDS as part of the data? That is probably at the top of every labortory grade chemcial the company produces.

    Like looking at sheets from other companies. I bet you won’t find them all saying that.

  27. Chris says:

    That is one or three of the cases, what about the other, which is at least a dozen? I found this article:
    http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=104180 … where is says even healthy pregnant women have been hit hard by the swine flu:

    Although media reports have focused on deaths among pregnant women with underlying disease, most pregnant women who have died of swine flu were healthy when they caught the pandemic virus.

    Asthma is fairly common. So does this mean everyone with asthma is not in good health? Even when it is well controlled?

    Obviously this means that those with asthma should be first in line for a vaccine, like others with health issues.

    Many health issues are genetic. These include immune disorders, heart conditions, cystic fibrosis and others. Even if those are well controlled, are these people not in good health? Does Mercola’s magic suggestions do anything to make these people in good health without modern medicine.

    My son stays healthy as long as he takes his daily medication, and gets his annual flu shot. Seeing how Th1Th2 avoids answering questions, and has been shown to not understand the stuff he posts — I would much rather put my son’s health in the hands of real medicine than the likes of Mercola and his followers. Especially those that warn against ingredients like squalene… which our body produces because it is an essential part of our metabolism!

  28. weing says:

    wales,

    You misstated what she actually said. So, a few out of 20 had severe complications. At least 3 out of 20? Care to extrapolate if we don’t vaccinate?

  29. weing says:

    Now you are trying to say that those that died did so because they didn’t get antibiotics?

  30. wales says:

    Weing: Regarding the reduction of swine flu mortality via antibiotic treatment, read the articles yourself. Morens et al, p. 968 “The issue of the pathogenesis of fatal influenza-associated pneumonia remains important; the fact that even severe, virus-induced tissue damage is normally followed by rapid and extensive repair suggests that early and aggressive treatment, including antibiotics and intensive care, could save most patients and also underscores the importance of prevention and prophylaxis.”

    Regarding your claim that I misquoted the NY Times article: “The agency knows of 20 confirmed or probable swine flu infections in pregnant Americans, and ”a few have had severe complications,” said Dr. Anne Schuchat, the interim deputy director for public health.”

  31. weing says:

    Wales,
    1. I’m asking about the current cases.
    2. Thanks for providing the proper quotation.

  32. qetzal says:

    wales,

    I don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. Do you realize that “a few” out of 20 means at least 10% of pregnant women with H1N1 2009 had severe complications. If 3 died, that’s a 15% fatality rate for that group.

    You citing those numbers as if they show that swine flu in pregnant women isn’t a big deal! Those are enormous rates, regardless of whether there were contributing factors like asthma.

    I certainly hope I’m misunderstanding you. Otherwise, what the bleep is wrong with you?

  33. Th1Th2 says:

    Todd W.,

    “hahahahaha! Sorry. Ahem. Exercise is considered part of good health, no? It most certainly carries risk – muscle tear, tendonitis, cardiovascular injuries, etc.”

    Your argument is illogical and fallacious. It’s the exercise that carries the risk. Newborns obviously don’t require exercise and yet they remain healthy and non-diseased until the time they were vaccinated since vaccines negate good health. Exercise is also important for the obese, patients who underwent surgery and rehab, etc. but don’t tell me they were healthy and vital to begin with.

  34. weing says:

    You are wrong. It’s life/living that carries the risk. Once you’re dead, you never get sick.

  35. weing says:

    And it appears that you don’t know anything about babies either.

  36. Th1Th2 says:

    Harriet,

    “I say influenza is inherently more unsafe.”

    How about vaccine-induced influenza, vaccine-induced parotitis, VAPP, vaccine-induced otitis media, vaccine-induced GBS, vaccine-induced meningitis, vaccine-induced warts etc. ? Yes, from I/OPV to Gardasil, you will find all the diseases in vaccines?

  37. Th1Th2 says:

    Weing,

    “You are wrong. It’s life/living that carries the risk. Once you’re dead, you never get sick.”

    No, it’s the unhealthy living and lifestyle that carries the risk.

    “And it appears that you don’t know anything about babies either.”

    Of course I do. They are intentionally being exposed to at least 13 diseases by the time they reached first year of life.

  38. Th1Th2 says:

    the bug guy,

    “Good grief, Th1Th2. You took the legal boilerplate about “for laboratory use only” that the manufacturer put at the top of the MSDS as part of the data? That is probably at the top of every labortory grade chemcial the company produces.

    Like looking at sheets from other companies. I bet you won’t find them all saying that.”
    ———————————————————————————

    Either you don’t know what Skull and Crossbones stands for or you simply don’t trust MSDS. Which is which?

  39. Chris says:

    Wow, you really don’t know anything about babies and actual exposure to infectious agents in the real world. You probably think babies are completely immobile until they are over a year old, and that they cannot use their hands to grasp things to bring to their mouth (hint: keeping a child strapped to a carrier and not allowing them to use their arms before they are a year old is not a good thing… they actually have to move in order to develop!).

  40. nitpicking says:

    Th1Th2: you are either trolling or seriously confused. Do you really want to claim that exercise is IN GENERAL A BAD THING?

    Can you cite one single actual case of “vaccine-induced influenza” caused by the current flu vaccines WHICH CONTAIN NO ACTUAL VIRUS PARTICLES?

    Are you a germ theory denier after all?

  41. Chris says:

    (I seem to have a comment in moderation for some random reason, so a shorter version)… but he must be a germ theory denier if he thinks the only diseases babies are exposed to come from vaccines!

  42. Th1Th2 says:

    nitpicking,

    You must be dyslexic. I did not say exercise is a bad thing in general.

    Since when did vaccines become placebos?

    Listen to what the CDC says about the Flu:

    “Be Aware of Common Flu Symptoms

    Influenza usually starts suddenly and may include the following symptoms:

    * Fever (usually high)
    * Headache
    * Tiredness (can be extreme)
    * Cough
    * Sore throat
    * Runny or stuffy nose
    * Body aches
    * Diarrhea and vomiting (more common among children than adults)”
    http://www.cdc.gov/flu/symptoms.htm

    Now if you open a vaccine package insert you will find this:

    ADVERSE REACTIONS
    “Fever, malaise, myalgia, and other systemic symptoms can occur following vaccination and most often affect persons who have had no prior exposure to the influenza virus antigens in the vaccine (eg, young children).

    Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders: Dyspnea, pharyngitis, rhinitis
    General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions: Fever, pain, pruritis, asthenia/fatigue, pain in extremities, chest pain”
    https://www.vaccineshoppe.com/image.cfm?doc_id=10205&image_type=product_pdf

    Again, when did vaccines become placebos?

  43. wales says:

    weing: I don’t have enough information about the current H1N1 mortality rate to know if/when the deceased received antibiotics. Do you?

  44. wales says:

    Qetzal: “Because only a small proportion of persons with respiratory illness are tested for novel H1N1, at this time, confirmed and probable case counts represent a significant underestimation of the true number of novel H1N1 flu cases in the U.S., so the true benefit of reporting these numbers to track the course of the epidemic is questionable. In addition, because of the extensive spread of novel H1N1 flu within the United States, it has become extremely resource-intensive for states to count individual cases.”

    http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/reportingqa.htm

    It appears that we don’t have accurate and timely data regarding laboratory confirmed cases of H1N1. Without this data we don’t know how many pregnant women have contracted H1N1 and what the CFR might be for pregnant women. If you have more detailed information please share it. My point is that because cases are vastly underreported the mortality rate you cite is overstated.

  45. Todd W. says:

    @Th1Th2

    Todd W.,

    *I thought someone said that Triton X-100 is safe.*

    Why don’t you want to answer my question? You said earlier that

    According to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, food, air and water are among man’s PHYSIOLOGIC NEEDS. Without them, man cannot survive since they are inherent part of all living things. Safety concerns only apply once they become toxic or polluted.

    So, I want to know, without being polluted (and that’s according to whatever definition you use to consider it polluted, which I assume is adding anything to it), at what point does food become toxic?

  46. the bug guy says:

    [facepalm]

    Th1Th2, if you’re trying to be funny, you’re doing a good job.

    Yes, I do have good confidence in the MSDS, but then, I also understand it.

    Do you want something scary? Look up the MSDS for capsaicin, something that we not only eat, but breed peppers to contain more of it.

    Routes of Entry: Inhalation. Ingestion.
    Toxicity to Animals:
    Acute oral toxicity (LD50): 47.2 mg/kg [Mouse (CAS no. 404-86-4)].
    Acute dermal toxicity (LD50): >512 mg/kg [Mouse].
    Chronic Effects on Humans: MUTAGENIC EFFECTS: Mutagenic for bacteria and/or yeast.
    Other Toxic Effects on Humans: Hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant, sensitizer), of ingestion, of inhalation (lung
    irritant, lung sensitizer).
    Special Remarks on Toxicity to Animals: LD50 [Rat] – Route: Intraperitoneal; Dose: 9500 ug/kg

    Mmm, I loves my hot sauces…

  47. BrianTani says:

    The entry read:
    Thimerosal Merthiolate

    The relative risk for congenital anomalies among 56 children whose mothers used this antiseptic topically during the first 4 months was 2.69 (p;0.05) (Heinonen et al., 1977). Gasset et. al (1975) gave intraperitoneal injections 1.0 ml of a 0.2% solution to rats on the 6-18th days of pregnacy and found no adverse reproductive effects. At dose level 2.0% there were increased fetal deaths.

    Gasset, A.R.; Motokazu, I.; Ishii, Y. and Ramer, R.M.: Teratogenesis of ophthalmic drugs II teratogenicities and tissue accumulation of thimerosal. Arch. Opthalmol 93: 52-55, 1975.

    Heinonen, O.P.; Slone, D. and Shapiro, S.: Birth Defects and Drugs in pregnancy. John Wright Publishing Sciences Group, Inc., Littleton, Mass. 1977.

    I couldn’t get to the original article by Heinonen, but I found that it’s being cited quite a lot. And this review appears proeminently when searching on scholar.google.com

    Geier, D.A.; Sykes, L.K. and Geier M.R.: A review of Thimerosal (Merthiolate) and its ethylmercury breakdown product: specific historical considerations regarding safety and effectiveness. Journal of Toxicology and environmental health. Part B. Critical Review: 10(8):575-96, 2007.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18049924

    O noticed, however, that the doses the article cited seemed quite higher than found on vaccines. And quite speculatory…

    Not surprising when I googled the authors… though.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Geier (The Author of the review is his son, David Geier)

  48. weing says:

    wales,

    I didn’t think you did. Based on the ICUs I have worked in I doubt that they didn’t receive antibiotics. What could that mean? Another beautiful theory ruined by ugly reality? You admit you don’t have enough data but appear to be willing to sacrifice others as you are certain the cases are vastly under-reported and the mortality overstated. Define vastly. What is the magnitude of overstatement?

  49. Th1Th2 says:

    Todd W.,

    Someone also said that formaldehyde is naturally occurring in the environment and that everyone is exposed through air inhalation and some FOODS and products. So there goes my answer.

  50. Th1Th2 says:

    the bug guy,

    I don’t think babies can eat chili peppers. Scary? Yes

  51. Todd W. says:

    @Th1Th2

    You’ve sufficiently proven to me that you are incapable of answering a question.

  52. Th1Th2 says:

    Todd W.,

    No. You just don’t know how to ask a question properly. Enough said.

  53. Th1Th2 says:

    nitpicking,

    “Can you cite one single actual case of “vaccine-induced influenza” caused by the current flu vaccines WHICH CONTAIN NO ACTUAL VIRUS PARTICLES?”
    ————————————————————————————-

    AFLURIA®
    Influenza Virus Vaccine
    Suspension for Intramuscular Injection

    ADVERSE REACTIONS
    General disorders and administration site conditions

    Influenza-like illness (e.g., pyrexia, chills, headache, malaise, myalgia),
    http://www.afluria.com/docs/pi.pdf

    Ayayayaaayyyy…..Now tell me, is there a reason as to why someone shouldn’t be getting polio, warts, otitis media, measles, pertussis etc. in the flu shot? Hmmm…there must be something in the flu shot that causes the flu-like symptoms.

    What’s in your vaccine?

  54. Todd W. says:

    @Th1Th2

    Reading comprehension doesn’t seem to be your strong suit. When asked for a single case, you provide the package insert. The package insert is not a case. Further, the adverse reactions listed in a package insert must include any reported adverse events, even if a causal connection has not been shown.

    So, the package insert for a flu vaccine would include not only AEs that have a causal connection, but also symptoms reported by people who received the vaccine and contracted a different strain of influenza or who were already infected before they received the vaccine.

  55. the bug guy says:

    Th1Th2,

    Thanks for missing the point about capsaicin.

    I should thank you. I have a presentation to make next month and now I’m going to add some information on reading and understanding an msds.

  56. wales says:

    weing: “significant underestimation” is the CDC’s phrase, why don’t you ask them? Your “doubts” about treatment received do not provide factual information. Your attempt to assign nefarious “sacrificial” motives to my comments are laughable.

  57. Todd W. says:

    @wales

    Where’s the sense of urgency in stockpiling antibiotics?

    While I agree that there should be effort to ensure adequate supplies of antibiotics to treat secondary infections, would it not be better to have the main focus on prevention?

    And please, let’s stop with the misleading VAERS “incredible hulk” cherry picking. According to the VAERS website “The majority of VAERS reports are sent in by vaccine manufacturers (42%) and health care providers (30%). The remaining reports are obtained from state immunization programs (12%), vaccine recipients (or their parent/guardians, 7%) and other sources (9%).

    If an individual contacted the manufacturer and reported that their vaccine turned them into the incredible hulk, as silly as it may seem, they are required by law to report it. So, I’m not sure what your point was there.

  58. Todd W. says:

    @Th1Th2

    (reposting) You were asked to cite a case of an individual contracting influenza from the vaccine. Instead, you cite the package insert. The package insert lists all adverse events that were reported to the manufacturer, whether there is a causal relationship or not. An individual could very easily contract a different strain of influenza shortly after being vaccinated and report the flu symptoms. The package insert, therefore, cannot be used as evidence of a causal relationship.

    What you would need to do is cite a case where an individual was vaccinated for the flu, developed flu symptoms within a short period after getting the shot, and the strain that was isolated from the individual matched the strain that was in the vaccine.

  59. weing says:

    wales,
    Is “vast” also the word they used? I used the term doubt for that very reason. You however have no doubts about vastness and significant underestimations. What kind of a person laughs at the death of others?

  60. daedalus2u says:

    How about the MSDS for this hazardous material?

    alpha-D-glucopyranosyl-beta-D-fructofuranoside

    http://grice.cofc.edu/pdf/MSDS/Rm205/Plante/SUCROSE.pdf

    Oral rat LD50: 29700 mg/kg

    Intraperitoneal Mouse LD50: 14000 MG/KG

    CHRONIC EXPOSURE – TERATOGEN
    Species: Rat Dose: 1548 GM/KG
    Route of Application: Oral
    Exposure Time: (21D PRE/1-22D PREG)
    Result: Specific Developmental Abnormalities: Central nervous system.

    Wow, it actually is a teratogen! Look at how they say to dispose of it.

    APPROPRIATE METHOD OF DISPOSAL OF SUBSTANCE OR PREPARATION
    Contact a licensed professional waste disposal service to dispose of this material. Dissolve or mix the material with a combustible solvent and burn in a chemical incinerator equipped with an afterburner and scrubber. Observe all federal, state, and local environmental regulations.

  61. wales says:

    weing: Your accusations are laughable. Who is laughing about death? Get your facts straight. As for semantics, vast v. significant, what’s the difference? According to Webster’s – Significant: of a noticeably or measurably large amount; Vast: very great in size. If you have nothing more substantive to say and cannot stay on topic let’s bid each other adieu for now.

    Todd W: My point is at least 84% of VAERS reports are from reputable sources. Cherry picking the same old “incredible hulk” anecdote is tiresome and misleading.

  62. Calli Arcale says:

    Hmmm…there must be something in the flu shot that causes the flu-like symptoms.

    Actually, Th1Th2 does have a point in that you can indeed get flu-like symptoms as a result of getting a flu shot. This is not the same thing as getting the flu, of course. Flu-like symptoms are associated with lots of things.

    In particular, they’re associated with the action of your immune system. In fact, most of the flu’s symptoms come not from the virus directly damaging your body but from your immune system fighting it. Fever, malaise, achiness…. Anything that triggers your immune system can trigger these symptoms. Obviously, that include vaccines, since triggering an immune response is the whole point of the exercise. (Less clear, at least to me, is whether the severity of symptoms correlate to successful seroconversion.)

    The difference is that the flu-like symptoms triggered by the vaccine will be vastly milder than those triggered by actual influenza, will not last very long, and will not be contagious.

  63. Todd W. says:

    @wales

    The point of the “incredible hulk” bit is merely to illustrate what the VAERS page states quite plainly: it is a voluntary reporting system, and the events listed should not be taken at face value as having been caused by the potentially offending product. In other words, anything that is reported on there is unreliable without further investigation to establish causality.

  64. Th1Th2 says:

    daedalus2u,

    That’s why people should avoid the use of table sugars as much as possible. So what’s your point?

  65. Th1Th2 says:

    Todd W.,

    1. I think you have to explain first why a vaccinated individual should not manifest any flu-like symptoms after a flu shot which according to you, “CONTAIN(s) NO ACTUAL VIRUS PARTICLES”?

    2. Since you deny “vaccine-induced influenza”, tell me why do you think flu shots are just placebos?

    3. What is the difference between an “antigen” and an “influenza virus antigen” in the vaccine or you really don’t know what they are?

    Have you ever heard of vaccine-induced swine flu? It will come pretty soon don’t worry.

  66. trrll says:

    I couldn’t help laughing when I saw this guy freaking out about Triton X-100. He obviously has the notion that because it is used in laboratories, it is some horribly dangerous substance.

    The reality is that the reason it is used in research is that it is a remarkably gentle detergent–much milder than the ones routinely used in things like toothpaste, cosmetics, and dishwashing liquids. Researchers like it because (at high concentrations) it can dissolve membranes without denaturing (screwing up the shape of) proteins.

  67. wales says:

    Todd W said: “While I agree that there should be effort to ensure adequate supplies of antibiotics to treat secondary infections, would it not be better to have the main focus on prevention?”

    If by prevention you mean vaccines, 1) we don’t have them yet and 2) not all countries will receive an adequate supply when we do.

  68. Todd W. says:

    @Th1Th2

    1. Show me where I said that the vaccine contains no actual virus particles. Methinks you have me confused with someone else.

    2. Show me where I stated that I think flu shots are just placebos.

    3. According to the CDC, “the ‘flu shot’ is an inactivated vaccine (containing killed virus)”. That means that the virus cannot spread or replicate and cannot cause “the flu”. Contrast this with OPV, which utilizes the live virus and which has that chance (though small) that the recipient can actually develop polio.

    Now that you, hopefully, understand the difference between a live virus and a dead one, answer the question that was posed to you: provide a citation of an individual contracting influenza from the vaccine.

  69. daedalus2u says:

    Th1Th2, If you knew anything about the immune system and disease, you would know that “flu-like symptoms” come from immune system activation, not from an infection with a virus. An antigen that has no capacity to be infective can still cause “flu-like symptoms” because it stimulates the immune system. There is no chance of “catching the flu” from something that causes “flu-like symptoms”, unless that something contains viable flu virus, which killed vaccines do not.

    “Flu-like symptoms” are a generic way of describing certain groups of symptoms because they mimic the symptoms that one gets when one has the flu. Here are 141 conditions that cause “flu-like symptoms”.

    http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/symptoms/flu_like_symptoms/causes.htm

    Some of them are not even infections, such as metal fume fever.

  70. weing says:

    wales,
    Significant means greater than expected by chance alone. Vast, I have no idea how you quantify that. Your attempts at obfuscation are obvious.

  71. Th1Th2 says:

    daedalus2u,

    Killed, inactivated or attenuated vaccines are designed in a way to mitigate the symptoms of the disease. They are not placebos, they contain the pathognomonic evidence of the disease. People who experienced adverse reactions to the vaccine are actually manifesting sub-clinical form of the disease let alone some are asymptomatic (asymptomatic infection). In short, vaccines are made to transmute an infectious disease to become a NON-INFECTIOUS DISEASE. So how many more symptoms would it manifest if it were live vaccines?

    Answer this, can a flu shot cause warts?

  72. Archangl508 says:

    Awwwww….Daedalus….that’s what I was just going to write. No fair, you beat me to it.

    I’m new to this website and am just curious….is it always this wacky or has this post elicited an unusual amount of responses?

    “3. What is the difference between an “antigen” and an “influenza virus antigen” in the vaccine or you really don’t know what they are?”

    This question is like asking what is the difference between a tree and an elm tree. “Influenza virus antigen” is simply referring to a more specific antigen. All influenza virus antigens are antigens, but not all antigens are influenza virus antigens.

    An antigen is a substance that can prompt generation of antibodies and cause an immune response. Mostly this refers to proteins and polysaccharides, but lipids and nucleic acids can be antigenic under the appropriate circumstances.

    From my understanding, the influenza virus proteins neuraminidase and hemagluttinin are the major antigens within the influenza virus vaccine. I would be happy to detail their roles in viral pathogenesis and why they are appropriate targets for vaccines.

  73. weing says:

    What’s the pathognomonic evidence of the flu after vaccination?

  74. Th1Th2 says:

    weing,

    When you get the shot, you get all these:

    1. Each 0.5 mL dose contains 15 mcg of influenza virus hemagglutinin (HA)
    from each of the three strains: A/Brisbane/59/2007, IVR-148 (H1N1), A/
    Uruguay/716/2007, NYMC X-175C (H3N2), (an A/Brisbane/10/2007-like strain),
    and B/Brisbane/60/2008. (3, 11)
    http://www.afluria.com/docs/pi.pdf

    2. Each 0.2 mL dose contains 106.5-7.5 FFU (fluorescent focus units) of live attenuated influenza
    virus reassortants of each of the three strains for the 2009-2010 season: A/South Dakota/6/2007
    (H1N1) (an A/Brisbane/59/2007-like), A/Uruguay/716/2007 (H3N2) (an A/Brisbane/10/2007-like), and B/Brisbane/60/2008. (3)
    http://www.medimmune.com/pdf/products/flumist_pi.pdf

    PLUS the symptoms of the disease:

    General disorders and administration site conditions
    Influenza-like illness (e.g., pyrexia, chills, headache, malaise, myalgia),
    http://www.afluria.com/docs/pi.pdf

    ADVERSE REACTIONS
    “Fever, malaise, myalgia, and other systemic symptoms can occur following vaccination and most often affect persons who have had no prior exposure to the influenza virus antigens in the vaccine (eg, young children).

    Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders: Dyspnea, pharyngitis, rhinitis
    General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions: Fever, pain, pruritis, asthenia/fatigue, pain in extremities, chest pain”
    https://www.vaccineshoppe.com/image.cfm?doc_id=10205&image_type=product_pdf

    Don’t tell me this is polio, or hepatitis or measles, or whatever.

  75. daedalus2u says:

    Th1Th2, no, an infection requires replicating microorganisms by definition, either viruses or bacteria or other organisms. Symptoms produced by non-replicating antigens are not “infections” of any sort.

    No, a flu shot can’t cause warts. Warts are caused by a different virus.

  76. Th1Th2 says:

    Todd W.,

    1 & 2. My apologies. It wasn’t you who said that, it was “nitpicking”. No wonder he/she never showed up.

    3. Let me enlighten you for awhile. In the case of killed vaccines, replication is obviously irrelevant. But what determines the symptomatology in post-vaccinated individual is the amount of antigen load in the killed vaccine. This is the reason adjuvants are added to the vaccine to lessen the amount of antigen load while enhancing immunogenicity. It will only lessen the symptoms of the disease. Understood?

    Do you know that measles virus vaccines are considered effective if the injected virus replicates in the body?

  77. Harriet Hall says:

    Th1Th2 asked “Answer this, can a flu shot cause warts?”

    !? Where did that come from?

    No, it can’t cause warts, or influenza either.

  78. Th1Th2 says:

    Harriet,

    Try to read my previous posts.

    Since you answered, could you enlighten us as to why flu shots cannot possibly cause warts?

  79. wales says:

    weing: are you quoting the “dictionary of weing”? Since when is quoting Webster’s Dictionary obfuscating? You’ll have to speak to Mr. Webster about those obfuscating definitions. Too hilarious.

  80. weing says:

    wales,
    So you stop reading when you get to the definition you want? That explains a lot. Try reading all that Mr. Webster says about a word and its uses. You just may learn something.

  81. wales says:

    weing: No, I stop when I get to the accurate definition. Good thing you’re not an english teacher. I suppose one could debate about which meaning the CDC intends, but since the context in which the CDC is using the word is with regard to the number of cases underestimated it seems obvious that the correct definition is “noticeably or measurably large amount”, example given by Webster’s “a significant number of layoffs”. The context of case underestimation has nothing to do with the concept of “chance” as in the Webster’s example “a statistically significant correlation”, it has to do with estimating an amount. Enough english lessons for today.

  82. weing says:

    So, that’s how you delude yourself. You know what they are thinking.

  83. weing says:

    I get it. To you, significant means vast and at least 3 out of 20 pregnant women with the flu dying is not significant.

  84. Archangl508 says:

    “Since you answered, could you enlighten us as to why flu shots cannot possibly cause warts?”

    Because warts are caused by the human papilloma virus (HPV) not the influenza virus.

  85. Archangl508 says:

    “This is the reason adjuvants are added to the vaccine to lessen the amount of antigen load while enhancing immunogenicity. It will only lessen the symptoms of the disease.”

    You are not talking about symptoms of the disease. Individuals who get the flu vaccine develop a general immune response in response to the vaccine, which is some cases exhibits similar symptoms to flu infection, including fever and body aches. But this doesn’t mean that they develop the actual disease itself.

    “Do you know that measles virus vaccines are considered effective if the injected virus replicates in the body?”

    Yes, as is the attenuated polio vaccine. The reason for this is that it allows for a different kind of immunity. This allows the vaccine to induce not just a humoral, or antibody response, but also a cellular immunity as well that can then not only prevent entry of viruses into cells, but also prevent future replication of the virus upon exposure. By giving a weaker form of the disease that is not virulent and does not induce symptoms, it enables protective immunity against the normal form of the disease. Ask Edward Jenner who discovered that milk maids who had cowpox never developed smallpox and his inoculation of people with cowpox prevented smallpox.

  86. Todd W. says:

    @Th1Th2

    I see you still have not produced a citation of an individual being infected with the influenza virus after receiving the vaccine. Remember, such a citation would show that the individual received the vaccine, developed symptoms of influenza, was diagnosed with the flu, had a live, virulent virus isolated from a blood sample and had that virus match the strain used in the vaccine.

  87. Harriet Hall says:

    Th1Th2 said,

    “Try to read my previous posts.”

    I have tried, but it is painful to read ignorance coated with arrogance.

    “Since you answered, could you enlighten us as to why flu shots cannot possibly cause warts?”

    q.e.d.

  88. Th1Th2 says:

    Archangl508 and Harriet,

    1. Do you mean to say that these INFLUENZA VIRAL STRAINS in the vaccine cannot cause warts?

    A/Brisbane/59/2007, IVR-148 (H1N1), A/
    Uruguay/716/2007, NYMC X-175C (H3N2), (an A/Brisbane/10/2007-like strain), and B/Brisbane/60/2008
    http://www.afluria.com/docs/pi.pdf

    2. And EXPOSURE to these strains also cannot cause influenza?

    These strains are for real, so get serious with your answers please. Stop arguing like they don’t exist in the vaccine amid the evidence of flu-like symptoms post-vaccination.

  89. Th1Th2 says:

    Archangl508,

    1. “Individuals who get the flu vaccine develop a general immune response in response to the vaccine, ”

    So what’s in the vaccine that is capable of developing a general immune response in the body?

    2. “By giving a weaker form of the disease that is not virulent and does not induce symptoms, it enables protective immunity against the normal form of the disease.”

    Vaccine-induced disease, that’s what you mean right? So your logic says, that you are going to inoculate a child with live MV who, in the first place, has never been exposed to natural MV. Nice way to becoming DISEASED but as you said, it’s just a “weaker form of the disease” and still protected? What??? You mean VIOLATED?

    Protection is RESISTANCE. Vaccines are not vitamins for children. Don’t be confused.

  90. weing says:

    “So what’s in the vaccine that is capable of developing a general immune response in the body?”

    I am sorry to tell you this, but you have amply demonstrated here that you are totally incapable of understanding the explanation to this question. So, it would be a complete waste of time. Enjoy your ignorance and arrogance.

  91. Th1Th2 says:

    weing,

    No wonder most of these vaccine apologists deny the existence of any pathologic agents in the vaccines and always enjoy claiming “no causal relationship” myth.

    (Hint: Read the package insert)

  92. Harriet Hall says:

    Th1Th2,

    I read the package insert. It says nothing about subjects getting influenza or warts. And those of us who understand the science know it is impossible for them to get either from the vaccine.

  93. wales says:

    Weing: You are amusing. First you speculate that I believe I am omniscient then in your next post you make assumptions about my thought processes.

    Weing said: “At least 3 out of 20 pregnant women dying from flu.” The numbers from the early May, 2009 NY Times are outdated as the CDC estimates that between April and June at least 1 million people in the US contracted H1N1.

    From the CDC website: “Individual case counts were used in the early stages of the outbreak to track the spread of disease. As novel H1N1 flu became more widespread, individual case counts became an increasingly inaccurate representation of the true burden of disease. This is because many people likely became mildly ill with novel H1N1 flu and never sought treatment; many people may have sought and received treatment but were never officially tested or diagnosed; and as the outbreak intensified, in some cases, testing was limited to only hospitalized patients. That means that the official case count represented only a fraction of the true burden of novel H1N1 flu illness in the United States. “ Only a fraction of the true burden of illness. Hmmm.

    http://www.cdc.gov/H1N1FLU/surveillanceqa.htm

    The same CDC page states “it is estimated that more than one million people became ill with novel H1N1 flu between April and June 2009 in the United States.” This estimate is based upon modeling, not confirmed cases. Weing, do you have any updated and more accurate data for us? Care to estimate how many people have become infected since June and how many pregnant women?

    Here’s one way to guesstimate the H1N1 pregnancy mortality rate between April and June using the CDC’s estimate of 1 million cases. Since about 4 million children are born each year in the US, there must be 4 million pregnant women at any given time. That equates to 1.33% of the US population of 300 million (I am using round numbers here). Let’s extrapolate: pregnant women make up 1.33% of the US population. 1.33% of the CDC’s estimated 1 million H1N1 cases equates to a guesstimate of 13,300 cases in pregnant women between April and June. Admittedly a guesstimate, but then again the CDC’s 1 million estimate is itself based on modeling. Anyone with a more recent and accurate H1N1 mortality rate for pregnant women between April and June could likely calculate a more accurate case fatality rate than 3 out of 20. I do not have that information, do you?

    Someone posted here that a dozen US pregnant women have died to date. That would result in a CFR guesstimate of 0.09% (12 out of 13,300 cases). One could make the argument that a higher percentage of pregnant women contract H1N1 due to immune supression in pregnancy, in which case this CFR guesstimate would be an overstatement.

  94. wales says:

    Weing: You are amusing. First you speculate that I believe I am omniscient then in your next post you make assumptions about my thought processes.

    Weing said: “At least 3 out of 20 pregnant women dying from flu.” The numbers from the early May, 2009 NY Times are outdated as the CDC estimates that between April and June at least 1 million people in the US contracted H1N1.

    From the CDC website: “Individual case counts were used in the early stages of the outbreak to track the spread of disease. As novel H1N1 flu became more widespread, individual case counts became an increasingly inaccurate representation of the true burden of disease. This is because many people likely became mildly ill with novel H1N1 flu and never sought treatment; many people may have sought and received treatment but were never officially tested or diagnosed; and as the outbreak intensified, in some cases, testing was limited to only hospitalized patients. That means that the official case count represented only a fraction of the true burden of novel H1N1 flu illness in the United States. “ Only a fraction of the true burden of illness. Hmmm.

    http://www.cdc.gov/H1N1FLU/surveillanceqa.htm

    The same CDC page states “it is estimated that more than one million people became ill with novel H1N1 flu between April and June 2009 in the United States.” This estimate is based upon modeling, not confirmed cases. Weing, do you have any updated and more accurate data for us? Care to estimate how many people have become infected since June and how many pregnant women?

    Here’s one way to guesstimate the US H1N1 pregnancy mortality rate between April and June using the CDC’s estimated case count of 1 million. Since about 4 million children are born each year in the US, there must be 4 million pregnant women at any given time. That equates to 1.33% of the US population of 300 million (I am using round numbers here). Let’s extrapolate: pregnant women make up 1.33% of the US population. 1.33% of the CDC’s estimated 1 million H1N1 cases equates to a guesstimate of 13,300 cases in pregnant women between April and June. Admittedly a guesstimate, but then again the CDC’s 1 million estimate is itself based on modeling. Anyone with a more recent and accurate H1N1 mortality rate for pregnant women between April and June could likely calculate a more accurate case fatality rate than 3 out of 20. I do not have that information, do you?

    Someone posted here that a dozen US pregnant women have died to date. That would result in a CFR guesstimate of 0.09% (12 out of 13,300 cases). One could make the argument that a higher percentage of pregnant women contract H1N1 due to immune supression in pregnancy, in which case this CFR guesstimate would be an overstatement.

  95. wales says:

    correction: first sentence of paragraph 5 should read “here’s one way to guesstimate the US H1N1 case fatality rate”

  96. Archangl508 says:

    Th1Th2,

    I would first like to suggest you change your screen-name as recent advances in immunology have shown that the immune responses are much more complex than “TH1 vs. TH2″ responses. You know also should include TH17 and Treg cells as well. So a more appropriate name would be Th1Th2Th17Treg.

    “So what’s in the vaccine that is capable of developing a general immune response in the body?”

    Proteins. As I said earlier, the vaccine is made up of viral proteins including neuraminidase and hemagluttinin. But any protein would have the potential to elicit the same response. I could inject you with ovalbumin, a chicken egg product, and your body could have a similar general immune response including fever depending on the severity of the response.

    “Vaccine-induced disease, that’s what you mean right? So your logic says, that you are going to inoculate a child with live MV who, in the first place, has never been exposed to natural MV. Nice way to becoming DISEASED but as you said, it’s just a “weaker form of the disease” and still protected? What??? You mean VIOLATED?”

    Did you read my above comment using the example of smallpox and cowpox? The basis of vaccines and your whole immune system is memory. Your immune system is designed not just to repel threats, but to remember those threats and then to provide stronger responses upon later exposure in order to prevent infection. The whole point of exposing children to a live, attenuated virus is to allow their immune systems to practice and then be able to easily repel the actual virulent, deadly virus. If you don’t want your child to get a vaccine, don’t, but good luck when he/she dies from measles. You really didn’t combat this idea at all, just simply used scary words in capital letters, like DISEASED and VIOLATED. The really scary things are the diseases that used to kill lots of children. Are there risks in vaccination, yes, but are those risks higher than the risk of death from actually getting those diseases, hell no.

  97. Archangl508 says:

    “Vaccines are not vitamins for children. Don’t be confused.”

    No, vaccines are not vitamins, but they are just as important to keeping children, and all of us, healthy. I’m not even remotely confused. I have training in both immunology and virology so the confusion about vaccination if definitely not mine.

  98. wales says:

    This article states that between April 15 and June 15 six H1N1-related deaths in pregnant women were reported to the CDC. Using the 6 fatalities rather than 12 would revise our H1N1 pregnancy CFR estimate to 6 in 13,300 or 0.045%, based upon the CDC’s estimated 1 million cases between April and June.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19643469

  99. Th1Th2 says:

    Harriet,

    Flu shot does not cause warts for obvious reason that it LACKS any etiologic agents in the vaccine that causes warts.

    Now, does Gardasil cause warts?

    Do you deny the presence any influenza viral antigens in the flu shot? Aren’t they the causative agents for influenza?

Comments are closed.