flu shot

[RickD]

My wife works for a hospital that wants 100% of its employees to accept the h1n1 flu shot this year. Her boss told her that anyone that refuses to have the toxic poison injected into his/her body will have to wear a mask at work. Her boss also said that next year the mask won't be an option. Either take the toxic poison or be fired. Anyone that has done any research on the dangers of vaccines, knows what could possibly happen as a result of being injected with this toxic crap. Formaldehyde, and mercury are just 2 of the toxins that are ingredients in this poison. One other interesting item I came across is this:

To reduce how virulent the viruses would be once injected into the body, the viruses are strained through animal tissue or human fetal tissue, especially from late term abortions. Other tissues that have been used are chicken embryo, calf serum, monkey kidney, embryonic guinea pig cells and cells from the dissected organs of aborted human fetus.

Read more at Suite101: Cancer Causing Agents Added to the Flu Vaccine http://www.suite101.com/content/researc ... z11AjR5IAA

This forced vaccination issue is really getting me riled up. Thanks for letting me rant.

[zoegirl]

I respectfully disagree about their toxicity and danger.

To be honest, during flu epidemics any health worker should wear a mask, both to protect themselves and others, I would think even with the flu shot. I think that's only fair.

The main issue with regards to its effectiveness with the elderly....that's a simple matter of the reduced activity of the immune system. Naturally any infection will have a stronger affect among the elderly. Considering the dangers of a serious flu infection, it would be prudent to provide any protection.

[Canuckster1127]

There's no path through this situation that doesn't carry risk. No vaccine carries the risk of an epidemic. Taking vaccine runs the risk that some who might otherwise not be harmed by flu will be harmed more by the vaccine. I choose to take the vaccine. Health care workers are in a unique role in that they are more susceptible to getting ill and spreading it due to exposure. Managing that risk is job related and it may well mean that workers who will not cooperate with policy face consequences. That's true to varying degrees within all jobs with this and other elements. There's not a perfect world or a perfect solution. We can only work with what we know and how best to manage the risk.

[RickD]

I respectfully disagree about their toxicity and danger.

To be honest, during flu epidemics any health worker should wear a mask, both to protect themselves and others, I would think even with the flu shot. I think that's only fair.

The main issue with regards to its effectiveness with the elderly....that's a simple matter of the reduced activity of the immune system. Naturally any infection will have a stronger affect among the elderly. Considering the dangers of a serious flu infection, it would be prudent to provide any protection.

zoe, have you done any research on this subject? Or, do you just take the word of doctors that say the vaccines are harmless? All one has to do is a search for the ingredients in the vaccine to see what toxic chemicals are in them. Formaldehyde, mercury, etc. There is NO safe amount of mercury that can be ingested. I somewhat understand the part about wearing a mask. But, her boss said next year that it would either be 1) accept the shot or 2) lose job. Do a search and you will see these toxins have connections to add, adhd, Guillain-Barre syndrome, etc. I challenge anyone who wants to see the truth about the dangers to just do a simple google search of "flu vaccine dangers". See for yourself. Don't take the word of doctors who make their living off the money of big pharmaceutical companies.

[RickD]

There's no path through this situation that doesn't carry risk. No vaccine carries the risk of an epidemic. Taking vaccine runs the risk that some who might otherwise not be harmed by flu will be harmed more by the vaccine. I choose to take the vaccine. Health care workers are in a unique role in that they are more susceptible to getting ill and spreading it due to exposure. Managing that risk is job related and it may well mean that workers who will not cooperate with policy face consequences. That's true to varying degrees within all jobs with this and other elements. There's not a perfect world or a perfect solution. We can only work with what we know and how best to manage the risk.

Bart, there is no epidemic. More people die from the swine flu vaccination than the swine flu itself. The problem is that the people that are told are at the highest risk to get the swine flu(people with immune system deficiency) are the people who are going to be harmed the most by the toxins in the vaccine. There is not a single person that I've talked to about this that has come to the conclusion that vaccines are safe, if the people have actually done their own research on the subject. The only people who say the vaccines are safe, are the people that have taken someone else's word for it. The thing that bothers me the most about my wife possibly being forced to take this poison, is that she's healthy. She knows the risk of exposure to sick people that her job has. Her healthy immune system is capable of fighting off the flu. She doesn't need poisons forced into her body.

I choose to take the vaccine.

That's fine. If you choose to take it. She may have to choose to lose her job, if she doesn't take it.

[RickD]

Educate yourselves:http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0616-31.htm andhttp://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/ ... ccine.html Keeping our heads buried in the sand about this will not help!

[Canuckster1127]

Rick,

I have examined the data and it hasn't been solely from advocasy-based, non-peer reviewed sources.

Obviously this is an emotional issue for you and I don't represent that I have complete knowledge of everything involved with it. I don't believe however in the conspiracy theories that circulate around vaccines.

http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4026.pdf

Here's the stats for the deaths surrounding swine flu

http://www.flucount.org/

Please show me the stats to support your claim that the vaccine has killed more people than the illness. Be specific.

Thanks,

Bart

[RickD]

Rick,

I have examined the data and it hasn't been solely from advocasy-based, non-peer reviewed sources.

Obviously this is an emotional issue for you and I don't represent that I have complete knowledge of everything involved with it. I don't believe however in the conspiracy theories that circulate around vaccines.

http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4026.pdf

Here's the stats for the deaths surrounding swine fly

http://www.flucount.org/

Please show me the stats to support your claim that the vaccine has killed more people than the illness. Be specific.

Thanks,

Bart

http://www.examiner.com/us-intelligence ... -swine-flu,http://www.theflucase.com/index.php?opt ... ine-fluq-v,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJiTStZtrlE,http://organichealthadviser.com/archive ... ver-europe,http://anovelspot.wordpress.com/2009/05 ... swine-flu/,http://www.politicolnews.com/n1h1-vaccine-dangerous/

I don't represent that I have complete knowledge of everything involved with it.

Bart, it doesn't take complete knowledge on the subject. It just takes a willingness to look at the facts, and opinions from all sides. Even the ingredients on the vaccines tell what the side effects are. Bart, I'm not one to jump on the conspiracy bandwagons, just for the sake of it. But, my research has led me to believe that Big Pharmaceutical profits are behind the poisoning of the people with toxic vaccines. Bart, just do some research on your own. You will come to your own conclusions. I don't have to convince anyone of the dangers of H1N1 vaccines. People can see for themselves if they open their eyes.

[RickD]

Bart, the link you posted is from a website that wants you to be immunized.
http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4026.pdfThat's not exactly an objective website.

[Canuckster1127]

It's not difficult to find speculative articles on the net from sources designed to create controversy and generate attention to an issue that benefits them in different ways.

I agree it's important to look at things from all sources. None of the sources I'm seeing from you are peer reviewed. The original article from Lancet (which is peer reviewed) that raised the question of autism to vaccines was subsequently retracted by 10 of the 13 contributors. Of the medical journals in the recent past, 25 have determined there is no link between the two to 3 who suggest it is possible.

Yes I know that that doesn't settle the matter. Far from it. And it's right and healthy to continue to test examine and look to these issues. Yes, it's possible that pharmaceutical companies will suppress information but we're not talking here about solely pharmaceutical companies doing the testing. We're talking about independent studies.

I'll continue to try to keep an open mind and look at things with some healthy skepticism. I'd suggest you apply the same standard to the popular material you're throwing up and try looking at the direct studies without the filter of these opinion sources that you're relying on above them.

blessings,

bart

[Canuckster1127]

Bart, the link you posted is from a website that wants you to be immunized.
http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4026.pdfThat's not exactly an objective website.

If by objective you mean it doesn't give equal weight to non-peer reviewed and populist sites that profer conspiracy theories you're right.

Here's who they are. They are from the medical profession, work with the CDC, and monitor and work with the peer reviewed sources to get information out to the medical community and to the public that gives basic information including the mortality statistics of those who are immunized versus those who are not.

Are you aware of an organization that works on a similar basis within the health care industry and works with the current statistics and peer reviewed studies that advocates a different position?

http://www.immunize.org/aboutus/

About Us

The Immunization Action Coalition




IAC Mission Statement


The Immunization Action Coalition (IAC) works to increase immunization rates and prevent disease by creating and distributing educational materials for health professionals and the public that enhance the delivery of safe and effective immunization services. The Coalition also facilitates communication about the safety, efficacy, and use of vaccines within the broad immunization community of patients, parents, health care organizations, and government health agencies.

For more than a decade, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has worked in concert with and provided financial support to IAC for the purpose of educating health professionals about U.S. vaccine recommendations. CDC recognized IAC's accomplishments in 1997 by awarding it the prestigious Partners in Public Health Award for efforts "instrumental in achieving high levels of routine infant hepatitis B immunization."

Physicians, nurses, and other healthcare professionals at every level of the immunization community, including both the public and private sectors, rely on many of the following projects in their daily work to increase immunization rates across the lifespan.



IAC Websites


Website for Health Professionals www.immunize.org
Launched in 1994, one of the earliest websites devoted to immunization, www.immunize.org is the largest resource for practical, user-friendly immunization information available today, serving almost 14,000 visitors per day. The website houses all of IAC's informational handouts, which are available free of charge, and users are encouraged to reproduce and redistribute the materials. This website also makes available all Vaccine Information Statements (VISs) published in the United States in up to 50 languages and some alternative formats. In the past twelve months, users downloaded more than three million ready-to-copy (PDF) documents from the website.

IAC makes daily additions and updates to the content of www.immunize.org. In the past year, we completed new home pages for the "Diseases & Vaccines" and "Immunization Topics" sections; created a new web page called "Providing Vaccination Services" and populated it with links to other sections of the website; enhanced our "Handouts" section by offering readers the ability to sort the materials by Clinic Procedure, by Vaccine, or by Topic; created a new web section titled "Honor Roll for Patient Safety" to recognize healthcare organizations with stellar employee influenza vaccination policies and to share the details of model policies; launched a new web section to accommodate H1N1-influenza-related materials, including VISs, Ask the Experts questions and answers, and print materials; added new content to our Vaccine Concerns web section countering "Dr. Sears' Alternative Schedule;" developed a dynamic reference tool called the "Language Locator" to associate languages with the countries where they are spoken; and developed a Video of the Week feature and archive.

Chiefly as a result of the thousands of authoritative links to the website from across the Web, www.immunize.org continues its longstanding high ranking in search engines. For example, it is currently ranked #1 on Google when using the word "immunize" and #5 when using the word "immunization."

IAC expert staff continually review the recent immunization literature and select articles dealing with practical topics such as parental concerns about vaccines, providing vaccination services, immunization exemptions, and many others, and present links to those articles on the website. These selected articles, currently numbering more than 3,500, provide IAC's professional audience with the ability to quickly keep up-to-date with the literature, finding the latest articles on topics of importance to them.

IAC staff maintain and post (www.immunize.org/laws) a roster of state mandates for various vaccines (e.g., varicella, PCV) and policy issues (e.g., states that authorize pharmacists to administer vaccines). This information, obtained from news clippings, health department newsletters, and direct from state staff, is validated by checking with legislative websites and contacts with program managers. As a result, it is the most up-to-date listing of state immunization requirements.

Another useful and continually updated feature of www.immunize.org is its Calendar of Events. IAC staff maintain a listing of government meetings related to immunization, professional education courses, conferences, awareness days and weeks, and other events of interest.


Website for the Public and Health Professionals www.vaccineinformation.org
Developed in consultation with CDC, this website for patients, parents, providers, and the media presents straightforward information about vaccine-preventable diseases and their vaccines. Launched in August 2002 with sole funding from CDC, it currently serves about 7,500 visitors per day. The website contains information about vaccine safety and the overall importance of immunization; it currently features 262 vaccine-preventable disease photos and 118 video clips. The site also has links to VISs, immunization and disease statistics, state immunization laws, state health department websites, and other topics.

Online Database of Immunization Coalitions www.izcoalitions.org
Launched in 2001, this website provides access to an online database of local, state, regional, national, and international immunization coalitions. The database allows healthcare professionals, parents, and other immunization advocates to contact immunization coalitions for resources, ideas, or volunteering. Currently, 183 immunization coalitions have entered information about their structure and activities.



IAC Publications


Needle Tips (NT)
From its first issue in 1994 through the December 2008 issue, IAC distributed more than 4.25 million paper copies of NT-as many as 235,000 copies per issue, delivered to virtually every pediatrician, family physician, and pediatric nurse practitioner nationwide, as well as to every local and state health department. A move to online-only publication occurred with the first issue of 2009. NT was traditionally a 24-page, CDC-reviewed publication that came out twice each year; going forward we plan to publish six issues annually. Frontline healthcare professionals rely on NT for its up-to-date, practice-oriented information on the recommendations for childhood, adolescent, and adult immunization. NT is the only publication of its kind in the United States. Current and past issues are available on our website at www.immunize.org/nt.

Vaccinate Adults (VA)
Like NT, VA converted to online publication in 2009. It was first published in 1997, and more than 2.8 million paper copies have been distributed to an average of 160,000 adult medicine specialists per issue. VA has been a 12‑page, semiannual publication targeted at internal medicine specialists, cardiologists, pulmonologists, infectious disease specialists, occupational medicine specialists, nephrologists, and geriatricians; in accordance with our plans for NT, the frequency of VA will increase. Every issue is CDC-reviewed and provides succinctly written descriptions of adult immunization recommendations. Current and past issues are available on our website at www.immunize.org/va.

IAC Express (IACX)
Currently emailed free of charge to more than 36,000 opt-in subscribers every Monday, IACX provides up-to-date information about FDA vaccine approvals, new ACIP and AAP vaccine recommendations, newly released Vaccine Information Statements, new immunization resources and current events, and journal articles. "Front-line" healthcare professionals, as well as local and state health departments, rely on IACX for the critical information they need in their day-to-day work. The current issue as well as the more than 850 issues published since IACX's inception in 1997 are available online at www.immunize.org/express.

Unprotected People (UP) Reports
Since 1998, IAC has collected and published personal stories and case reports of people who have suffered or died from vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). We believe that UP reports are extremely important in providing parents, the media, and clinicians the information they need to help balance discussions on the value of vaccines. These reports can be particularly effective in countering stories claiming harm from vaccines. Currently, 104 reports are available online at www.immunize.org/reports.

Handouts
IAC is the most relied-upon source of CDC-reviewed immunization materials for healthcare professionals and their patients, providing over three million downloads in the past year. We create, update, and distribute more than 250 separate educational pieces including such widely used and reprinted items as:

Summary of Recommendations for Childhood and Adolescent Immunization
Summary of Recommendations for Adult Immunization
Screening Questionnaire for Child and Teen Immunization
Screening Questionnaire for Adult Immunization
How to Administer IM and SC Injections
Immunizations for Babies: A Guide for Parents
When do Children and Teens Need Vaccinations?
Vaccine Administration Record for Children and Teens
CDC's 2009 The Pink Book (Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases) includes 12 reprinted IAC pieces as well as links to IAC's resources. All educational materials are available online free of charge at www.immunize.org/handouts. We have translated 22 of our patient/parent pieces into Spanish and some into six additional languages: Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, Russian, Arabic, and French.

[zoegirl]

Rick, Respectfully, much of the information out there is unfortunately based in fear and paranoia.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=1296

Check out some information...

Thimerosal is added in ridiculously low amounts an an antimicrobial agent to prevent contamination from bacteria

Formaldehyde, while certainly toxic is large doses, is easily handled by the body (children detox faster than adults) and in fact, many basic chemical metabolic functions in the cells can produce formaldehyde

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... ool=pubmed

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... ool=pubmed

Now as to the worries of conspiracy or ignoring data, remember that these are the same scientific methods that we are trusting our Old Earth beliefs on. I don't understand the dichotomy in trust. If scientists are trustworthy in something such as OEC, other medical procedures, other medications, then why the sudden shift in trust when it comes to medicine?

I rely on Remicade, a biological medicine made by creating a chimeric mouse/human antibody. If I goggle Remicade, I could easily find the fear-mongering websites proclaiming the dangers of the medicine. But those sources do not provide me with any evidence, merely fear tactics and anecdotes. In the development of any medicine, plenty of steps are taken to create, preserve, aid in, and stabilize the molecules involved.

If we are going to start fearing vaccines, then we need to transfer this anxiety to ALL medications we take, even vitamins, since we don't necessarily trust what the manufacturers say.

However, all that being said, you and your wife are certainly within your rights to decline the flu shot. However, as a hospital that is trying to maintain a low a threat to the general population from the flu/other diseases, I can certainly understand them saying that any worker not getting the shot is posing a potential threat of carrying and infecting patients. Losing a job is rather a strong reaction.

Just out of curiosity, do you take any other medications? Have you given them the same scrutiny in their manufacturing process, the chemicals used in the processing? (chemicals which might not even end up in the end-product?)

There is a lot of scare put there in the supposed "toxicity" of chemicals but much of the scare is in the lack of understanding.

For instance: Dihydrogen monoxide... http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

[BavarianWheels]

.
.
I, for one, refuse to take flu shots.

When I was in the military a few years back, I had to take the shots. I didn't have a choice. Every year I got the flu, one year I had it twice! Since getting out of the military, I've not had the flu, but simple colds. As for H1N1... No way! That vaccine is for the birds.
.
.

[RickD]

zoe, I don't understand the correlation between old earth scientists, and doctors who are bought and paid by big pharm. companies. Many doctors are trained and funded by big pharm. dollars. Some doctors don't know that what they're being taught is wrong. Some do. Those that do are speaking out against it.

I rely on Remicade, a biological medicine made by creating a chimeric mouse/human antibody. If I goggle Remicade, I could easily find the fear-mongering websites proclaiming the dangers of the medicine. But those sources do not provide me with any evidence, merely fear tactics and anecdotes. In the development of any medicine, plenty of steps are taken to create, preserve, aid in, and stabilize the molecules involved.

Zoe, Remicade, just like any other drug, may relieve the symptoms of a problem. These drugs do nothing to solve the problem that caused the symptoms in the first place. All drugs do is put a "band-aid" on the problem, and put large sums of money in the pharmaceutical companies pockets.

If we are going to start fearing vaccines, then we need to transfer this anxiety to ALL medications we take, even vitamins, since we don't necessarily trust what the manufacturers say.

Zoe, if one knows the truth about something(vaccines), there is no need to fear them. I'm not saying that some people don't fear vaccines. That is not my point. There is a lot to be said about being very cautious about any medication we take. Like I said before, medications may relieve symptoms, but do NOTHING to stop the cause of those symptoms.

Just out of curiosity, do you take any other medications? Have you given them the same scrutiny in their manufacturing process, the chemicals used in the processing? (chemicals which might not even end up in the end-product?)

No, I don't take any medications. I will admit that I rarely take something for a headache. Maybe once every couple of months. If you or I have symptoms, for example, arthritis, wouldn't it make sense to find the cause of those symptoms instead of just trying to alleviate the symptoms?

There is a lot of scare put there in the supposed "toxicity" of chemicals but much of the scare is in the lack of understanding.

There may be those who just want to scare people in regards to vaccinations. And, then there are people who have actually studied the effects on humans of vaccines and chemicals, and have found them to be harmful. Zoe, if you're taking Remicade for arthritis, wouldn't you rather find out what causes the arthritic symptoms, and stop the cause? Or, would you rather just keep taking possibly harmful medications while not doing anything to stop what is causing the symptoms? That's the problem with many doctors and mainstream medicine. The focus is on relieving the symptoms, and not getting to the cause of those symptoms.

[RickD]

.
.
I, for one, refuse to take flu shots.

When I was in the military a few years back, I had to take the shots. I didn't have a choice. Every year I got the flu, one year I had it twice! Since getting out of the military, I've not had the flu, but simple colds. As for H1N1... No way! That vaccine is for the birds.
.
.

Actually Bav, the H1N1 vaccine is for swines. They have a vaccine for Birds. It is the H5N1, for the avian flu. the flu, and the common cold are both the human body's mechanism to eliminate toxins. The human body has certain ways to get rid of toxins. Urination, defecation, perspiration, and respiration. When the body has an excess buildup of acidic waste, one way it gets rid of the waste is to have flu-like symptoms. This fever, and sweating is the body's way of eliminating toxins through perspiration. The body needs to keep the blood's alkalinity level at around 7.365. Any excess acids in the blood are released into the tissues. If the body can't get rid of the wastes by urination, respiration, defecation or perspiration, then there is a risk of the person having latent tissue acidosis.