vaccine shot

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by Chris SUI JURIS

Researchers found that:
1.the vaccine prevented only 1.5 of every 100 adults from getting sick.
2.Reliable evidence on vaccine efficacy is thin
3.Vaccines do not affect the transmission of disease, even though their stated purpose is to reduce transmission of disease
4.doctors and pharmacies fail to divulge what harmful additives are found in vaccines and the side effects that can result( additives include aluminum, formaldehyde etc/
side effects include narcolepsy etc)

What researchers? Please name them. The two you've named are fruitcakes.Perhaps they're anti-vaccine freaks.
I don't think the claim is that the flue vaccine stops you getting sick or transmitting or picking up the infection. The claim is that in most cases it stops it developing and making you very ill because your body already has antibodies ready to fight it.
In post 29 you seem to be advocating that we go back to the medical treatments of the early 1900's when the life expectancy for men was about 45, for women about 50. What a silly idea.
As for medical marijuana helping to keep you healthy and live longer- that's not a claim made even by its advocates on here!

[Margaret Pilkington]

This is the first time I have been offered the 'flu' jab....and I would also get the pneumonia one as well if I took them up on the offer.
The Pneumonia vaccination is a one off.
I don't want the flu jab because I have a choice. My husband used to be offered the jab and he used to have it....except that every time he had it he was laid low for as long as six weeks.......since not having the jab, he hasn't had flu.
As we get older, surely we must have come into contact with many of these viruses, and have developed our own natural acquired immunity. I don't get flu......and even when I was exposed to people with flu(when working in hospital) I didn't get it. I sometimes get a head cold, but that is vastly different from real honest to goodness 'flu'.

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

As we get older, surely we must have come into contact with many of these viruses, and have developed our own natural acquired immunity. I don't get flu......and even when I was exposed to people with flu(when working in hospital) I didn't get it. I sometimes get a head cold, but that is vastly different from real honest to goodness 'flu'.

But doesn't the flue virus change almost every year ,Margaret, so that this years vaccine helps you against the latest known versions which you haven't had chance to get immunity to?

I've had flue a couple of times only but every winter without fail I had very severe colds, coughs and chest infections- until starting to have the flu vaccine. Since then I've been fine so I'll stick with it.

[susie123]

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

What researchers? Please name them. The two you've named are fruitcakes.Perhaps they're anti-vaccine freaks.
I don't think the claim is that the flue vaccine stops you getting sick or transmitting or picking up the infection. The claim is that in most cases it stops it developing and making you very ill because your body already has antibodies ready to fight it.
In post 29 you seem to be advocating that we go back to the medical treatments of the early 1900's when the life expectancy for men was about 45, for women about 50. What a silly idea.
As for medical marijuana helping to keep you healthy and live longer- that's not a claim made even by its advocates on here!

Wahay Gordon, tell it like it is!

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

What researchers? Please name them. The two you've named are fruitcakes.Perhaps they're anti-vaccine freaks

No perhaps about it!

Originally Posted by Chris SUI JURIS

Researchers found that:
1.the vaccine prevented only 1.5 of every 100 adults from getting sick.
2.Reliable evidence on vaccine efficacy is thin
3.Vaccines do not affect the transmission of disease, even though their stated purpose is to reduce transmission of disease
4.doctors and pharmacies fail to divulge what harmful additives are found in vaccines and the side effects that can result( additives include aluminum, formaldehyde etc/
side effects include narcolepsy etc)

OK I've found those figures referred to in (1):

In a study published in The Lancet, 2.7 percent of over 13,000 unvaccinated adults while 1.2 percent of vaccinated adults caught the influenza virus . That means that the vaccine prevented 1.5 of every 100 adults from getting sick—a far cry from the 60% efficacy claim the media touts. (Flu Shot Worsens H1N1 Symptoms, New Research Reveals)

Presumably the 1.5 of every 100 referred to is arrived at by subtracting 1.2 from 2.7. Surely what we should be doing is saying the vaccine prevented 1.5 fewer people getting the disease in every hundred so its efficacy is 1.5 divided by 2.7 - the number of unvaccinated per 100 who got ill. As a percentage that is 55.55 - not far from the "60% efficacy claim the media touts".

[susie123]

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

But doesn't the flue virus change almost every year ,Margaret, so that this years vaccine helps you against the latest known versions which you haven't had chance to get immunity to?

Yes that's why it's offered every year. And if older people had built up more natural immunity then the jab should be offered to the young rather than the old...

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

I've had flue a couple of times only but every winter without fail I had very severe colds, coughs and chest infections- until starting to have the flu vaccine. Since then I've been fine so I'll stick with it.

The trouble is you usually only hear from those who have had an adverse reaction to the vaccine, not those for whom it has been a benefit.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Yes, of course it does Gordon....the strains of flu that are considered by the pharma companies(possibly guided by info from WHO) to be the biggest risk are the ones incorporated into the vaccine...so if you have the vaccine and get the flu, then you must have got a strain that wasn't covered by the vaccine.
And the viruses can mutate over the 'Flu season' as well, which is also one of the reasons why you may still get flu even if you had the vaccination.

[Chris SUI JURIS]

Originally Posted by susie123

In (1) which vaccine are you referring to?

No additives are there just for show, there is a very good reason for their presence. Aluminium compounds are there to help the vaccine do its job better. Formaldehyde is used to kill unwanted viruses and bacteria that might contaminate the vaccine during production. Most formaldehyde is removed from the vaccine before it is packaged.

Vaccines: Vac-Gen/Additives in Vaccines Fact Sheet

i'm referring to the flu vaccine with this1 sue.

Aluminum enhances the immune response — But aluminum has also been linked to Parkinson’s,Alzheimer’s disease etc

Formaldehyde is used to kill and preserve bacterial toxins and make viruses unable to reproduce. Its also listed as a carcinogen by government scientists and warnings are issued about formaldehyde exposure from fumes emanating from plywood and particle board and for workers exposed to it in funeral homes,salons etc. But yet formaldehyde and its chemical brother, formalin, is still in alot of vaccines.maybe your right and it is removed before packaging i dunno

my point is there's to much controversy surrounding vaccines for me just to pop up an get my jab/s just because my GP says its 'vaccine time' especially considering my good health status (touch wood)

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by susie123

Wahay Gordon, tell it like it is!

No perhaps about it!

OK I've found those figures referred to in (1):

[I]In a study published in

Presumably the 1.5 of every 100 referred to is arrived at by subtracting 1.2 from 2.7. Surely what we should be doing is saying the vaccine prevented 1.5 fewer people getting the disease in every hundred so its efficacy is 1.5 divided by 2.7 - the number of unvaccinated per 100 who got ill. As a percentage that is 55.55 - not far from the "60% efficacy claim the media touts".

Correct, susie. If these so called experts can misrepresent simple statistics so badly to support their claims how can anyone believe them?

Also chrisSJ, your figures are from a report by a moron who tested on 42 ferrets and came to these shattering conclusions -valid experiment, do you think? So far the only 'controversy surrounding vaccines' you've shown so far has come from the lunatic fringe- show us some serious studies from a reputable medical body which support your claims and we may listen.

As for aluminium and formaldehyde- have you seen how much fluid is in a flue vaccine? You'd probably have to have the whole countries flue jabs before you got a significant amount.

[MargaretR]

Some people have bad reactions to peanuts.
Some people have bad reactions to vaccines.
Just because you don't, doesn't give you the right to regard those that do as foolish/ignorant/liars.

[Chris SUI JURIS]

maybe they are friutcakes,morons etc but fact is Every year they guess which flu bug might crop up, and we’re all supposed to line up arms at the ready(sod that for a game of soldiers). A few years ago didnt they said whoops, we got it wrong, come in for another jab of a different mix.A couple of years ago they said were all going to die a horrible nasty deaths if we didn’t get that ‘human, pig, bird’ flu jab. I didn’t see anyone die or get sick.did any get sick and die from the vaccine?
Is it true these drug manufacturers pay out to exempt them from any damage liability for these vaccines? i wonder why

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by MargaretR

Some people have bad reactions to vaccines.
Just because you don't, doesn't give you the right to regard those that do as foolish/ignorant/liars.

Addressed to me?
We're not discussing bad reactions to vaccines, MargaretR, we're discussing whether they work or not! So why bring a different line of discussion up? No-one has made an issue of bad reactions.
I know you, like chrisSJ, have a fondness for quoting from the lunatic fringe but just because two of you do it doesn't make it acceptable or believable to the majority on here!
I never suggested anyone was foolish, ignorant or a liar but as they say-'If the cap fits'.

[Chris SUI JURIS]

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

Also chrisSJ, your figures are from a report by a moron who tested on 42 ferrets and came to these shattering conclusions -valid experiment, do you think?

British Columbia Centre for Disease Control researcher Dr Skowronski experimented with 32 ferrets that showed that the symptoms in vaccinated animals were worse than those in unvaccinated animals.
Skowronski said.
“The findings were consistent with the increased risk that we saw in the human studies,”

valid experiment? i think not

[susie123]

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

Correct, susie. If these so called experts can misrepresent simple statistics so badly to support their claims how can anyone believe them?

Also chrisSJ, your figures are from a report by a moron who tested on 42 ferrets and came to these shattering conclusions -valid experiment, do you think? So far the only 'controversy surrounding vaccines' you've shown so far has come from the lunatic fringe- show us some serious studies from a reputable medical body which support your claims and we may listen.

As for aluminium and formaldehyde- have you seen how much fluid is in a flue vaccine? You'd probably have to have the whole countries flue jabs before you got a significant amount.

Thanks Gordon, I forgot to mention the ferrets... and I was just about to make the same point about aluminium and formaldehyde when I saw your post - thanks for saving me the trouble!

[jelly baby]

Originally Posted by MargaretR

Under 60s can qualify if you already have illness serious enough to render you into the 'useless eater' category.

At least in abattoirs they kill quick - prescription drugs have 'slow kill' so that you die expensively.

Am I missing something here? What do you mean by 'useless eater'?

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by Chris SUI JURIS

valid experiment? i think not

I'm glad you agree with me, chrisSJ.
And there were only 32? Even worse.