-
1
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
If the gooberment is pushing it, you can bet your a$$ I'm not getting it!
-
2
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
With TXShelbyman's logic, it's good he's not getting the shot. The gene pool could use a little cleaning.
-
3
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
Frankly, at this point I'm happy to let anyone dumb enough to think
there's some sort of danger with vaccines wallow in their own
ignorance. They can take their star charts and tinfoil hats and die
quietly with their 14 cats. I'll call the Humane Society when they run
out of food (the cats).
-
4
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
Interesting juxtaposition of the words Millions and few since there are no statistics given to back them up. The first link to an article that has statistics is placed directly after a sentence about people dying now from H1N1 which implies that the article will be about people dying from H1N1. However if you read the article, its main thrust is about how 46% of previously healthy adults are now getting sick, not dying, from H1N1. The death statistics provided in the article says that reports say 600 people have died but doesn't say where those people are from whether globally or just US. It also doesn't state if that number is from April when the outbreak was detected or just from the newer recent wave. The article also states that 81 US children have died. I feel bad for the families who have lost loved ones but to conflate these numbers with an implied Millions dead, as this article seems to do, is not accurate. The author of this smartplanet article uses 'kill' in his title and that people are dying from H1N1; his thrust is that if vaccinations are not taken then Millions will DIE.
-
5
10/15/09 | Report as spam
Swine Flu deaths
Where does Blankenhorn get his numbers that swine flu will kill millions, or that it will kill large numbers of healthy people? It won't. He needs to lay off the fear mongering. This is the kind of technique control-freaks frequently use to manipulate others into doing their will.
Swine flu is on track to kill no more than any other seasonal flu. And those it does kill are the very young, the very old, those with other illnesses, and those with compromised immune systems. Healthy people suffer typical flu symptoms, are out for a few days, and bounce back.
Vaccines have numerous dangers. For one, I'm allergic to thimersol, a common presevative in numerous vaccines including Swine Flu. Aluminum has been traced to some forms of mental illnesses; adjuvants such as aluminum salts can accelerate this process.
It is not for Blankenhorn to dictate that we must get immunized even if it is against our will. Everyone must personally make their own decision. To dictate otherwise is borderline slander "People are too stupid to make the right decision so it must be forced down their throats".
-
6
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
Last time I checked, the mortality RATE for H1N1 was lower than the usual flu. So even though we've pumped up the scariness by calling it "THE SWINE FLU!!! dum dum DUMMM!" its really not that bad.
Of course there is a risk that it MAY become stronger, like the Spanish Flu did 90 or so years ago, but one occurrence does not make a pattern. For now, I'll take my risks with nature and my immune system, hedging my bets against potential instant death or long term side effects. The old or young may feel differently if their risk factors differ of course, and it would be more logical for them to choose the shot.
-
7
10/15/09 | Report as spam
personal choice
I look at as a Darwinian cleansing of the gene pool. I only feel sorry for the children with Luddite parents. I often wonder when prosecuters will show some spine and charge them with child endangerment for gambling with their children's lives and with holding a life saving technology.
-
8
10/15/09 | Report as spam
Distrust ALWAYS exists when propanganda pretends to be science
Adjuvants like squalene have been linked to Gulf War disease as well as sterility and possibly autism. The only peer-reviewed studies on the safety (there are none that prove efficacy) were funded by (drum roll please) Norvartis who recently bought Novavax.
On top of it these reports only documented MONOvalent vaccines (adjuanted and non-adjuvanted) when a large percentage of the vaccines administered are going to be MULTIvalent (which is why the notion of needing 2 or 3 shots has gone away recently).
Want to be a human guinea pig and "see what happens"? Be my guest. Just remember that the Amish do not vaccinate and there is not ONE documented instance of autism or any of the neurological "difficulties" that communities that do vaccinate experience.
Canada is not yet vaccinating because they have decided to conduct further studies to determine safety of aduvanted vaccines.
So the question is: do you feel lucky?
-
9
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
The problem with the anti-science Luddites who refuse to vaccinate themselves and their kids is that it creates an increased risk for the 5% or so of vaccinated folks for whom the vaccination doesn't provide immunity. Stupid herd behavior doesn't only impact the stupid.
-
10
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
it is a bit disheartening to listen to people making decisions because of some conspiracy theory they may have instead of trying to understand the results of scientific studies. science is not always right but the effort to determine cause and effect is at least rational. darwinism might help by removing those who prefer their tinfoil hat ideas to rational thought by slowly removing the characters who should not reproduce. this sounds about right.
-
11
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
test
-
12
10/15/09 | Report as spam
H1N1 reality
Several here have claimed that H1N1 is no worse than seasonal flu.
CDC figures say different. The death rate is higher. And it's killing different people. Many who have been hospitalized (and if you're hospitalized it means your chance of death may be as high as 14%) had no previous illness, no compromised immune system.
Seasonal flu kills the very young and the very old. This one is killing the young-and-healthy. That was the case with the 1918 pandemic.
The difference here may be antibiotics. Gina Kolata's book "Flu," based on a lot of research, said most of those who died in the 1918 panedmic died from opportunistic bacterial infections that followed the flu virus into their bodies. Well, we can knock out most of those infections now with antibiotics.
Bottom line. This flu is worse. If it spreads virulently, if everyone in the world comes down with it over the course of ayear, then yes millions die. IT's the law of numbers.
And right now, for every 100 who require hospitalization, about 14 are coming out in body bags.
-
13
10/15/09 | Report as spam
Stephen Feltmate
I take you at your word on Canada, and you're right concerning the adjuvant question.
But I haven't seen anything indicating that the death rate from adjuvant use in a flu vaccine would approach that of not getting a vaccine at all.
I did note at the top that all vaccines are risky.
-
14
10/15/09 | Report as spam
Facts are the only thing that matter
Dana,
Yes, you did note that all vaccines are risky; but not many people understand that there are very real risks involved. If somebody wants to roll up their sleeve after being made fully aware of the risks then they have the right to make that choice. Most will not do this (as we are seeing by the massive public resistence to the H1N1 vaccine).
There are no studies at this point that I am aware that conclusively demonstrate the likelihood of one's fatality whether they do or do not take this vaccine. It is all speculation at this point.
However, I did come across an excellent article in the Atlantic that you may find interesting - it argues that flu vaccines (as opposed to vaccines for polio, smallpox, etc) may not even work at all.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200911/brownlee-h1n1/2
If this is true and if you are right concerning the lethality of this particular flu virus then we have a very different problem on our hands.
-
15
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
According to the CDC, from April 2009 to mid July 2009 there were almost 44,000 cases of H1N1 flu reported. Of those cases, about 5,000 resulted in hospitalization (11.5%). Of those 302 died (about 6%). I'm not sure where your figure of 14% comes from. More recent data from Aug 2009 through early October still puts mortality rates for hospitalized patients where H1N1 was confirmed at about 6%. See http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/updates/us/#totalcases. Here is a quote for a CDC pamphlet for parents:
How serious is the flu?
Most people with 2009 H1N1 have had mild illness and have not needed medical care and the same is true of seasonal flu. However, the flu can be serious, especially for young children (risk is highest in children younger than 2 years) and children of any age who have certain chronic medical conditions.
It's hard to reconcile this outlook with millions of deaths worldwide.
-
16
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
Sorry. That quote got truncated. Here it is again:
How serious is the flu?
Most people with 2009 H1N1 have had mild illness and have not needed medical care and the same is true of seasonal flu. However, the flu can be serious, especially for young children (risk is highest in children younger than 2 years) and children of any age who have certain chronic medical conditions.
As I noted, hard to reconcile with your claim that H1N1 is significantly more serious than seasonal flu and that millions will die form it.
-
17
10/15/09 | Report as spam
Criminal behaviour by vaccine makers
Russell Blaylock, MD is a distinguished American brain surgeon. He wrote an article in 2008 that exposed the fact that vaccine makers like GlaxoSmithKline (who is manufacturing the H1N1 vaccine in Canada), Merck and others were KNOWINGLY exceeding the safety levels for mercury and Thimerosal set by the FDA, EDA and ATSDR. The CDC knew about this and covered it up.
Baxter and Bayer a number of years ago were caught KNOWINGLY shipping Factor 8 contaminated with HIV to Europe, Latin America and Asia.
Is it any wonder that the majority of the population no longer trusts these companies?
The article is entitled "The truth behind the vaccine cover up" and can be found on Dr. Blaylock's website.
-
18
10/15/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
In modern times the main CAUSE OF DISEASE is IRREGULAR FOOD habits and medicines THE NATURE HAS PROVIDED inbuilt IMMUNE SYSTEM in every living being Unless we follow/observe the natural system diseases are bound to occur.Artificial immunity can not be created.All creatures except humanity follow natures laws.Hence only human beings are subjected to diseases.WE CONDUCT RESEARCH HOW TO DEFEAT NATURE AND NOT to OBSERVE THE NATURAL PRINCIPLES AND EXISTENCE .The net physical visible results were as a result of different natural processes in millions of years.THERE IS A SUPER CONSCIOUSNESS behind this.-VENU
-
19
10/16/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
The backlash is the fault of incorrect, and hideously misleading reporting from the nedia internet complex. Not science.
-
20
10/16/09 | Report as spam
Just to correct almost all of you here...
So we have quotes from articles that are 5 years old, mention of the old tale that thimerasol is still used in vaccines & that vaccines cause autism & death. Wow, even with the internet, no one bothers to look up any recent information. Let me set the record straight. First, thimerasol is not used in vaccines as a preservative anymore. I have 3 kids under 3 years old & I am a very protective "father bear", so I've spent countless hours on vaccine research - not only on the web (where you should believe everything you read...) - but with several GP doctors & pediatricians. Bottom line - you're much much safer getting vaccinated for xxx disease than not. Second, it was thought that thimerasol was the main cause of autism in children, but this was never conclusively proven. That point is moot now anyway (see my first point). Finally, quotes from 5-year old articles should NEVER be used, because in most cases, they are irrelevant today. So let's use our heads instead of our oudated ideas from childhood.
-
21
10/16/09 | Report as spam
All dead in BC had unerlying condition
"People are dying now from H1N1. Healthy people, young people, people who may have never been sick before." Another "fact" you got wrong. The B.C. Centre for Disease Control has stated that all people that died of the H1N1 flu in BC (all 7 of them) had underlying conditions. Also Canada does allow the use of Thimerosal in vaccines. According to the CDC, thimerosal will be in the multi-dose H1N1 vaccines. Thimerosal contains mercury!
-
22
10/16/09 | Report as spam
My Bias
I have a bias in favor of reporting on scientific studies from reputable journals rather than, say, The Atlantic Magazine. This does not mean I won't quote from other sources, but I'm often more persuaded by what I read from authorities in authority than those outside it as well. That's why I linked extensively here to CDC resources.
-
23
10/17/09 | Report as spam
The only people who should no reproduce are the stupid
commies who suck government anti-freedom prick. The only reason the 1918 h1n1 was so bad was because it was after the first world war when everything was in state of destruction and shambles and people in general were living in squalor. Much more so then than today. Fear mongering by commy freedom haters who want gooberment to steal all your freedoms. Stupid luddite commies should remove themselves from the gene pool and do the whole world a favor.
-
24
10/19/09 | Report as spam
Katrillionaire
I'm afraid you're wrong on the science. It was a lack of antibiotics, not squalor or "bad humours," that led to the high death rate. The death rate was just as high in non-squalid wealthy precincts as in the most squalid and poor ones.
Historical epidemiology has shown this to be so.
-
25
10/19/09 | Report as spam
cmatrix
I wish science were as simple as you make out. BC is not the world. The key source of environmental mercury is not vaccines, but coal-fired power plants.
-
26
10/19/09 | Report as spam
pjsvalli
You've read all the comments here. They're all the fault of bad Internet reports? I don't think those who wrote the anti-vaccine comments would agree with that.
I suspect it more likely that people believe what they wish to believe. Ignorance was around long before the Internet.
-
27
10/20/09 | Report as spam
RE: How many might the vaccine backlash kill?
Mr. Blankenhorn, I agree with your last post as it applies to both sides of the fence. You rationalized your trusted source as because they were in an authoritarian position. How do the people there get placed in those positions and where do they go when they leave?
Why do you consider the humans at that organization more noble, honorable or less apt to promote an agenda than anyone at the Atlantic?
Can you explain why the CDC thinks it's OK for me to get more mercury in a vaccine than the EPA would permit?
No black helipcopter theory but it just might have to do with whom they hang around with. And, with whom their future lies... the drug companies. Is it plausible that unconsciously they are creating their future they've become cozy with their needs rather than ours.
The CDC gets no free pass from me on the authority front. I've got my own forebrain and use it frequently.
-
28
10/21/09 | Report as spam
Rethinking Fearmongering
The US CDC reported that 54% percent of people hospitalized or who died had a underlying condition. Oddly though they don't classify obesity as an underlying condition. Very odd since it is well known that obesity weakens the immune system. In Canada, researchers reported that 33% of people hospitalized or who died were obese. Note that obesity rates tend to be higher in the US. So it hardly sounds like H1N1 is mainly affecting healthy people. It is affecting younger people since those over 60 tend to have immunity due to previous exposure. Therein lies the skewed clue to the spin and disinformation.
Let’s say this upfront. Vaccines carry risks.
