* Analysts say Obama risks credibility over delays
* Obama frustrated with vaccine delays (Adds analyst assessment of political risk)
By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor
WASHINGTON, Oct 30 (Reuters) - Only half of the people in the United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu are actually seeking it, even as the virus spreads at unprecedented speed, U.S. health officials said on Friday.
The latest count shows 114 children have been killed by the virus in the United States since April, during a time when there is usually virtually no influenza, said U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Thomas Frieden.
And while President Barack Obama expressed frustration over vaccine delays, analysts said his credibility was at risk if vaccination did not start to go more smoothly.
Frieden said H1N1 is widespread, and case counts continue to rise in most states.
"One of the things that we have been surprised to see is even among people who have underlying conditions such as asthma, heart disease or lung disease, only half sought care," Frieden told reporters in a briefing.
At the same time, emergency departments were crowded but often with people who did not need medical care, he said.
CDC researchers estimated this week that as many as 5.7 million people in the United States have been infected so far, with at least 1,300 deaths.
Frieden said the CDC had a cumulative 26.6 million doses of vaccine available -- far short of the 40 to 80 million that had been forecast for the end of October. Lines have formed outside clinics as people seek the vaccine.
The Health and Human Services Department had predicted 20 million doses would roll out every week but just 10 million have been produced in the past seven days.
CREDIBILITY GAP
"Frustration over swine flu vaccine availability has created a growing credibility gap for governments in the U.S., Canada, western Europe, Hong Kong and Japan attempting to vaccinate large portions of their population," Scott Rosenstein of political risk consultancy Eurasia Group said in a note.
"To date, the political fallout from this situation has been relatively minor," he added.
"Going forward, the failure to deliver on previous vaccine availability projections will make managing the swine flu message and communicating the threat an increasingly difficult challenge for President Obama and leaders in other countries that are rolling out large vaccination programs ... in the coming weeks."
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has said she relied on estimates from the five contracted vaccine makers for the U.S. market -- MedImmune, a unit of AstraZeneca (AZN.L), Sanofi-Aventis (SASY.PA), Australia's CSL (CSL.AX), GlaxoSmithKline (GSK.L) and Novartis (NOVN.VX).
"I think we certainly had hoped that their predictions on this would be correct," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters. [ID:nN30125745]
"The president has been and is frustrated with ensuring that this vaccine is delivered on time and won't be satisfied until those that want to be vaccinated from H1N1 have the opportunity through the vaccine to do so."
Frieden said the situation was slowly improving.
"We are seeing more schools doing vaccine clinics. We are seeing more healthcare workers being vaccinated but it is still not nearly as available as we would like," he said.
School-based vaccine clinics were hard work, he said.
"It's hard to get the consent forms back," Frieden said. "It is hard to arrange the logistics."
But he said all the work would pay off.
"In future years as we try to increase seasonal flu vaccination, that's the kind of infrastructure and experience that's being established, that is an investment and will help us to address seasonal flu," he said.
Fuck Obama and his scare tactics. Fuck his shit eating sheep too.
CBS Propaganda wrote: > ... Only half of the people in the > United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine > flu are actually seeking it,
That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of the herd. ;-)
On Oct 31, 7:34 am, "CBS Propaganda" <propaga...@cbs.com> wrote:
> Fuck Obama and his scare tactics. Fuck his shit eating sheep > too.
That's right. Do you YOURSELF personally know any relative or friend who's been medically diagnosed with swine flu - as in not just having cold-type symptoms - despite Obama calling it a "crisis?" The lack of many Americans ill with swine flu is proof Obama's calling it a "crisis" is just a hoax to stampede both the sheeple and congress into supporting Obamacare.
> CBS Propaganda wrote: >> ... Only half of the people in the >> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu are >> actually seeking it,
> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of the > herd. ;-)
Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold. The ones not getting the shot are the smart ones. It's the retards who are getting it.
> a hoax to stampede both the sheeple and congress > into supporting Obamacare.
And "Younameitcare" in "Younameitcountry"? No: It's a perfect example of very good pharmaceutical marketing. Worldwide. Take a common disase, give it a nice new name and shout PANDEMIC! Result: Zillions on your bank account!
Me, personally, no. I'd have to ask around. But even in my work, and church, I can't say as I know anyone.
On the radio (Rochester NY) the news guys say that the hospital maternity wards are closed to anyone under 18, due to risk of flu. Risk to the kids, and to the birth moms. I've heard of a couple schools closed, but can't remember which one.
-- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
That's right. Do you YOURSELF personally know any relative or friend who's been medically diagnosed with swine flu - as in not just having cold-type symptoms - despite Obama calling it a "crisis?" The lack of many Americans ill with swine flu is proof Obama's calling it a "crisis" is just a hoax to stampede both the sheeple and congress into supporting Obamacare.
Al Smith wrote: > On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>> ... Only half of the people in the >>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu >>> are actually seeking it,
>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of the >> herd. ;-)
> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold. The ones not > getting the shot are the smart ones. It's the retards who are getting it.
Last I heard, over a thousand Americans, and 117 mostly previously healthy children, have died. It has a mortality pattern of atypical demographics, and we're just getting started. It's well below even average annual seasonal influenza deaths so far, but shows potential as, inter alia, a kid-killer. All in all, it's much worse than a "bad head cold." The risk of this vaccination is much less than the risk of going without, so there really isn't much reason to forego it.
On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 03:02:19 -0400, Al Smith <inva...@address.com> wrote:
>On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>> ... Only half of the people in the >>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu are >>> actually seeking it,
>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of the >> herd. ;-)
>Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold.
Whens the last time a healthy 13 year old died of a bad headcold?
edi...@netpath.net wrote on Sat, 31 Oct 2009 18:26:16 -0700 (PDT):
> On Oct 31, 7:34 am, "CBS Propaganda" <propaga...@cbs.com> wrote: >> Fuck Obama and his scare tactics. Fuck his shit eating sheep >> too. > That's right. Do you YOURSELF personally know any relative or > friend who's been medically diagnosed with swine flu - as in > not just having cold-type symptoms - despite Obama calling it > a "crisis?" The lack of many Americans ill with swine flu is > proof Obama's calling it a "crisis" is just a hoax to stampede > both the sheeple and congress into supporting Obamacare. > http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/ is > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
The word "crisis" is inappropriate but the President's proclamation was really only a technicality to deal with the situation. As someone over 65, how do I get the vaccination? I'm not really convinced by soothing words that I won't need it.
--
James Silverton Potomac, Maryland
Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
On Oct 31, 11:02 pm, Al Smith <inva...@address.com> wrote:
> On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote:
> > CBS Propaganda wrote: > >> ... Only half of the people in the > >> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu are > >> actually seeking it,
> > That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of the > > herd. ;-)
> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold. The ones > not getting the shot are the smart ones. It's the retards who are > getting it.
> -Al-
*Obama Administration Launches Deceptive Swine Flu Propaganda Blitz * *To Counter Growing Criticism from Scientific and Medical Community* * * *by Richard Gale and Dr. Gary Null*
President Obama and his top health officials are engaging in a major public relations effort to divert attention away from whether its swine flu vaccine is effective and safe – to whether there is enough of it to go around. And the media, as always, is cooperating fully. This echoes the way media debate was manipulated during the Vietnam and Iraq Wars. Instead of debating whether we should even be fighting those wars, the media debated only whether we were using the correct military strategy.
Increasing numbers of scientists and doctors are issuing harsh criticisms of the Government’s plan to vaccinate (forcibly if necessary) virtually the entire U.S. population with what they claim is a poorly tested vaccine that is not only ineffective against swine flu, but could cripple and even kill many more people than it helps.
The CDC’s public relations campaign has been running “scare” ads that portray swine flu as a full-blown “pandemic” responsible for snuffing out countless lives, and which, unless stopped by universal vaccination, could kill millions of American citizens. But scientists and health officials throughout the world have called the governments claims unjustified and deliberately misleading.
For example, Dr. Anthony Morris, a distinguished virologist and former Chief Vaccine Office at the U.S. Federal Drug Administration (FDA), states that “There is no evidence that any influenza vaccine thus far developed is effective in preventing or mitigating any attack of influenza” and that “The producers of these vaccines know they are worthless, but they go on selling them anyway.”
And in November 2007, the UK newspaper The Scotsman, made public warnings by the inventor of the “flu jab,” Dr. Graeme Laver. Dr. Laver was a major Australian scientist involved in the invention of a flu vaccine, in addition to playing a leading scientific role in the discovery of anti-flu drugs. He went on record as saying the vaccine he helped to create was ineffective and [that] natural infection with the flu was safer. “I have never been impressed with its efficacy,” said Dr. Laver.
We hear the assumption being made by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) that the number of deaths from the H1N1 virus is at pandemic levels and now a “national emergency.” One would assume that with all of its resources, the New York Times’ October 26 front page story on the CDC’s statistics would be accurate: 20,000 hospitalizations and 1,000 deaths due to the swine flu. However, this is all fiction. And it is a fiction solely based upon the CDC’s own contradictory statements and actions.
Our independent investigations into the clinical trials and statistical studies of influenza vaccines reveal glaring discrepancies. Let us not forget that it is this same New York Times, with its “star” reporter Judith Miller, who led America into believing that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, tried to purchase yellow cake uranium from Niger, and had dealings with al-Qaeda. And let us also remember that it is the same CDC and health officials in Washington, including President Ford and his top health advisor F. David Matthews, who pushed through and propagandized an untested vaccine during the 1976 swine flu scare, which resulted in thousands of severely neurologically damaged Americans and about 500 reported deaths. Aside from permanent paralysis, many of these vaccine victims also underwent torturous processes for many years to get the government to recognize their illnesses and help cover their costs. Not only was the CDC’s prediction and vaccination campaign for the 1976 flu season a total disaster, it also turned into a deadly scandal, witnessed across the United States on 60 Minutes when Dr. David Sencer, then head of the CDC, confirmed that the vaccine was never field tested, that there were only several reported incidents of H1N1 infection and none of these had been officially confirmed, and then lied about the CDC having no prior evidence that the swine flu vaccine could cause severe and permanent neurological damage. The end result from the 1976 debacle cost the government $3.5 billion in damages, two-thirds were for severe neurological injury and death directly due to the CDC’s vaccination campaign.
Therefore, being anti-vaccine or pro-vaccine is not the most urgent issue. What is critical is whether or not there is legitimate, sound science to support either position; in this regard, the vaccine manufacturers and our federal health agencies have failed in the past, and continue to fail today. And they fail dismally. There is absolutely no evidence for sound-scientific protocol or anything resembling a gold-standard behind the swine flu infection statistics and vaccine efficacy and safety clinical trials to support Obama’s and his health advisors’ claims. Instead, the reports on hospitalizations and deaths due to the H1N1 virus are grossly distorted. What we are really witnessing is “official” science and statistics that are little more than propaganda.
One unfortunate development over the years is the notion that there is such a thing as a “flu season.” The truth is that we move annually into periods where there are dramatic increases in flu-like causing pathogens, however, the majority of these are unrelated to any strain of influenza virus. There can between 150 and 200 different infectious pathogens—adenovirus, rhinovirus, parainfluenza, the very common coronavirus and, of course, pneumonia—that produce flu-like symptoms, and worse, during a “flu season.” For example, how many people have heard of bocavirus, which is responsible for bronchitis and pneumonia in young children, or metapneumovirus, responsible for more than 5 percent of all flu-related illnesses? This is true during every flu season and this year is no different. Furthermore, all flu vaccinations, including the swine flu, are useless for protecting people from these many prevalent infectious organisms.
If we take the combined figure of flu and pneumonia deaths for the period of 2001, and add a bit of spin to the figures, we are left believing that 62,034 people died from influenza. The actual figures determined by Peter Doshi, then at Harvard University, are 61,777 died from pneumonia and only 257 from flu. Even more amazing, among those 257 cases only 18 were confirmed positive for influenza. A separate study conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics for the flu periods between 1979 through 2002 revealed the true range of flu deaths were between 257 and 3006, for an average of 1,348 per year.
The recent CBS Investigative Report, published on October 21, is one example. After the CDC refused to honor CBS’s Freedom of Information request to receive flu infection data for each individual state, the network performed independent outreach to all fifty states to get their statistics. Their report contradicts dramatically the CDC’s public relations blitz. For example, in California, among the approximate 13,000 flu-like cases, 86 percent tested negative for any flu strain. In Florida, out of 8,853 cases, 83 percent were negative. In Georgia and Alaska, only 2.4 percent and 1 percent respectively tested positive for flu virus among all reported flu-like cases. If the infectious-rate ratios obtained by CBS are accurate, the CDC’s figures are significantly reduced and agree with earlier predictions that the H1N1 virus will be simply an unwelcomed annoyance. So we are in the midst of an enormous medical hoax, a design and purpose that has yet to unfold completely, that will nevertheless reap huge revenues for the vaccine industrial complex.
Another example is a recent alarmist report issuing from Georgetown University, also usurped by federal health officials and their multimedia comrades to fuel a campaign of fear and panic. The report announced that over 250 students were infected by swine flu when in fact none of these students were tested for H1N1 infection. The university’s figure was based solely on a count of student visits to the health clinic and calls into an H1N1 hotline.
This is not the first time the CDC’s predictions for influenza strains have been overstated and miscalculated. In an interview on Swedish television, Dr. Tom Jefferson, head of vaccine studies at the prestigious international Cochrane Database Collaboration, after reviewing hundreds of influenza studies and statistical analyses, has said the WHO’s and CDC’s “performance is not very good.” And in an ITN News interview last month, Jefferson called the swine flu pandemic a “juggernaut they [the WHO, government agencies and vaccine makers] created.” For the 1992-1993 season, the prediction was off by 84 percent. For the 1994-1995 season, it was off 43 percent for the primary strain and off 87 percent and 76 percent for two other strains. The Laboratory Center for Disease Control’s study comparing vaccine strains with the strains appearing during the 1997-1998 season found the match was off by 84 percent. Again Dr. Jefferson in a Der
...
> Al Smith wrote: >> On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >>> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>>> ... Only half of the people in the >>>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu >>>> are actually seeking it,
>>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of >>> the herd. ;-)
>> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold. The ones not >> getting the shot are the smart ones. It's the retards who are getting it.
> Last I heard, over a thousand Americans, and 117 mostly previously > healthy children, have died. It has a mortality pattern of atypical > demographics, and we're just getting started. It's well below even > average annual seasonal influenza deaths so far, but shows potential as, > inter alia, a kid-killer. All in all, it's much worse than a "bad head > cold." The risk of this vaccination is much less than the risk of going > without, so there really isn't much reason to forego it.
No, it isn't much worse than a bad headcold. Try looking up the statistics of how many people die by slipping in the shower, or from infection contracted by stubbing their toes. For most people swine flu is nothing. It isn't even worth talking about, it is so minor an illness. For a small percentage there are going to be complications or circumstances that make the effects of the disease more severe, but this is true of everything in life. The swine flu hysteria is something no sensible person will pay any serious attention to. It is good for amusement, to watch and see how many other people fall into the nonsense.
> On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 03:02:19 -0400, Al Smith <inva...@address.com> > wrote:
>> On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >>> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>>> ... Only half of the people in the >>>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu are >>>> actually seeking it, >>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of the >>> herd. ;-)
>> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold.
> Whens the last time a healthy 13 year old died of a bad headcold?
It happens all the time, through infections and complications, or due to existing weaknesses ... which is how people die from swine flu.
Al Smith wrote: > On 11/1/2009 12:18 PM, Jeff M wrote: >> Al Smith wrote: >>> On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >>>> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>>>> ... Only half of the people in the >>>>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu >>>>> are actually seeking it,
>>>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of >>>> the herd. ;-)
>>> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold. The ones not >>> getting the shot are the smart ones. It's the retards who are getting >>> it.
>> Last I heard, over a thousand Americans, and 117 mostly previously >> healthy children, have died. It has a mortality pattern of atypical >> demographics, and we're just getting started. It's well below even >> average annual seasonal influenza deaths so far, but shows potential >> as, inter alia, a kid-killer. All in all, it's much worse than a "bad >> head cold." The risk of this vaccination is much less than the risk >> of going without, so there really isn't much reason to forego it.
> No, it isn't much worse than a bad headcold. Try looking up the > statistics of how many people die by slipping in the shower, or from > infection contracted by stubbing their toes. For most people swine flu > is nothing. It isn't even worth talking about, it is so minor an > illness. For a small percentage there are going to be complications or > circumstances that make the effects of the disease more severe, but this > is true of everything in life. The swine flu hysteria is something no > sensible person will pay any serious attention to. It is good for > amusement, to watch and see how many other people fall into the nonsense.
Al, you're right, it is nothing to become hysterical over, but it is a serious and largely preventable illness. I've seen it already. Moreover, it defies the typical influenza pattern, which kills primarily the elderly, and instead kills mostly kids and young adults in the prime of life. Even if it doesn't kill you, getting vaccinated and other infection control measures help reduce the spread of this disease that will kill others. The real hysteria in this case belongs to those who panic over the thought of getting vaccinated.
Al Smith wrote: > On 11/1/2009 12:18 PM, Jeff M wrote: >> Al Smith wrote: >>> On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >>>> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>>>> ... Only half of the people in the >>>>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu >>>>> are actually seeking it,
>>>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of >>>> the herd. ;-)
>>> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold. The ones not >>> getting the shot are the smart ones. It's the retards who are getting >>> it.
>> Last I heard, over a thousand Americans, and 117 mostly previously >> healthy children, have died. It has a mortality pattern of atypical >> demographics, and we're just getting started. It's well below even >> average annual seasonal influenza deaths so far, but shows potential >> as, inter alia, a kid-killer. All in all, it's much worse than a "bad >> head cold." The risk of this vaccination is much less than the risk >> of going without, so there really isn't much reason to forego it.
> No, it isn't much worse than a bad headcold. Try looking up the > statistics of how many people die by slipping in the shower, or from > infection contracted by stubbing their toes. For most people swine flu > is nothing. It isn't even worth talking about, it is so minor an > illness. For a small percentage there are going to be complications or > circumstances that make the effects of the disease more severe, but this > is true of everything in life. The swine flu hysteria is something no > sensible person will pay any serious attention to. It is good for > amusement, to watch and see how many other people fall into the nonsense.
Al, you're right, it is nothing to become hysterical over, but it is a serious and largely preventable illness. I've seen it already. Moreover, it defies the typical influenza pattern, which kills primarily the elderly, and instead kills mostly kids and young adults in the prime of life. Even if it doesn't kill you, getting vaccinated and other infection control measures help reduce the spread of this disease that will kill others. The real hysteria in this case belongs to those who panic over the thought of getting vaccinated.
> Al Smith wrote: >> On 11/1/2009 12:18 PM, Jeff M wrote: >>> Al Smith wrote: >>>> On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >>>>> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>>>>> ... Only half of the people in the >>>>>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu >>>>>> are actually seeking it,
>>>>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of >>>>> the herd. ;-)
>>>> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold. The ones >>>> not getting the shot are the smart ones. It's the retards who are >>>> getting it.
>>> Last I heard, over a thousand Americans, and 117 mostly previously >>> healthy children, have died. It has a mortality pattern of atypical >>> demographics, and we're just getting started. It's well below even >>> average annual seasonal influenza deaths so far, but shows potential >>> as, inter alia, a kid-killer. All in all, it's much worse than a >>> "bad head cold." The risk of this vaccination is much less than the >>> risk of going without, so there really isn't much reason to forego it.
>> No, it isn't much worse than a bad headcold. Try looking up the >> statistics of how many people die by slipping in the shower, or from >> infection contracted by stubbing their toes. For most people swine flu >> is nothing. It isn't even worth talking about, it is so minor an >> illness. For a small percentage there are going to be complications or >> circumstances that make the effects of the disease more severe, but >> this is true of everything in life. The swine flu hysteria is >> something no sensible person will pay any serious attention to. It is >> good for amusement, to watch and see how many other people fall into >> the nonsense.
> Al, you're right, it is nothing to become hysterical over, but it is a > serious and largely preventable illness. I've seen it already. > Moreover, it defies the typical influenza pattern, which kills primarily > the elderly, and instead kills mostly kids and young adults in the prime > of life. Even if it doesn't kill you, getting vaccinated and other > infection control measures help reduce the spread of this disease that > will kill others. The real hysteria in this case belongs to those who > panic over the thought of getting vaccinated.
I don't think it is irrational to wish to avoid having a substance injected into one's body the ultimate effects of which are unknown. We know that if we contract the swine flu, we will probably get over it just fine in a couple of weeks. We can't be sure that the vaccine won't have some ill effects twenty years into the future. It probably won't, but we can't be sure. Personally, I avoid letting others inject strange substances into my body, when it is not necessary, and in the case of this present swine flu hysteria, it is not necessary. I will not be getting vaccinated.
Al Smith wrote: > On 11/1/2009 3:16 PM, Jeff M wrote: >> Al Smith wrote: >>> On 11/1/2009 12:18 PM, Jeff M wrote: >>>> Al Smith wrote: >>>>> On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >>>>>> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>>>>>> ... Only half of the people in the >>>>>>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine >>>>>>> flu are actually seeking it,
>>>>>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of >>>>>> the herd. ;-)
>>>>> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold. The ones >>>>> not getting the shot are the smart ones. It's the retards who are >>>>> getting it.
>>>> Last I heard, over a thousand Americans, and 117 mostly previously >>>> healthy children, have died. It has a mortality pattern of atypical >>>> demographics, and we're just getting started. It's well below even >>>> average annual seasonal influenza deaths so far, but shows potential >>>> as, inter alia, a kid-killer. All in all, it's much worse than a >>>> "bad head cold." The risk of this vaccination is much less than the >>>> risk of going without, so there really isn't much reason to forego it.
>>> No, it isn't much worse than a bad headcold. Try looking up the >>> statistics of how many people die by slipping in the shower, or from >>> infection contracted by stubbing their toes. For most people swine >>> flu is nothing. It isn't even worth talking about, it is so minor an >>> illness. For a small percentage there are going to be complications >>> or circumstances that make the effects of the disease more severe, >>> but this is true of everything in life. The swine flu hysteria is >>> something no sensible person will pay any serious attention to. It is >>> good for amusement, to watch and see how many other people fall into >>> the nonsense.
>> Al, you're right, it is nothing to become hysterical over, but it is a >> serious and largely preventable illness. I've seen it already. >> Moreover, it defies the typical influenza pattern, which kills >> primarily the elderly, and instead kills mostly kids and young adults >> in the prime of life. Even if it doesn't kill you, getting vaccinated >> and other infection control measures help reduce the spread of this >> disease that will kill others. The real hysteria in this case belongs >> to those who panic over the thought of getting vaccinated.
> I don't think it is irrational to wish to avoid having a substance > injected into one's body the ultimate effects of which are unknown. We > know that if we contract the swine flu, we will probably get over it > just fine in a couple of weeks. We can't be sure that the vaccine won't > have some ill effects twenty years into the future. It probably won't, > but we can't be sure. Personally, I avoid letting others inject strange > substances into my body, when it is not necessary, and in the case of > this present swine flu hysteria, it is not necessary. I will not be > getting vaccinated.
The H1N1 vaccine is just another flu vaccine, of the type we have extensive experience with over time. Vaccination is statistically far safer than the risk of the disease. Your choice, but it's like driving across the country because of a misplaced fear of flying. Odds are you'll be fine either way, but driving is statistically the more dangerous option.
>On 11/1/2009 12:56 PM, David Johnston wrote: >> On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 03:02:19 -0400, Al Smith <inva...@address.com> >> wrote:
>>> On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >>>> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>>>> ... Only half of the people in the >>>>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu are >>>>> actually seeking it, >>>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of the >>>> herd. ;-)
>>> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold.
>> Whens the last time a healthy 13 year old died of a bad headcold?
>It happens all the time, through infections and complications,
Cite.
or
>due to existing weaknesses ... which is how people die from swine flu.
Right. So then people who have absolutely no weaknesses are safe. Know anyone who has no weaknesses?
> Al Smith wrote: >> On 11/1/2009 3:16 PM, Jeff M wrote: >>> Al Smith wrote: >>>> On 11/1/2009 12:18 PM, Jeff M wrote: >>>>> Al Smith wrote: >>>>>> On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >>>>>>> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>>>>>>> ... Only half of the people in the >>>>>>>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine >>>>>>>> flu are actually seeking it,
>>>>>>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning >>>>>>> of the herd. ;-)
>>>>>> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold. The ones >>>>>> not getting the shot are the smart ones. It's the retards who are >>>>>> getting it.
>>>>> Last I heard, over a thousand Americans, and 117 mostly previously >>>>> healthy children, have died. It has a mortality pattern of >>>>> atypical demographics, and we're just getting started. It's well >>>>> below even average annual seasonal influenza deaths so far, but >>>>> shows potential as, inter alia, a kid-killer. All in all, it's >>>>> much worse than a "bad head cold." The risk of this vaccination is >>>>> much less than the risk of going without, so there really isn't >>>>> much reason to forego it.
>>>> No, it isn't much worse than a bad headcold. Try looking up the >>>> statistics of how many people die by slipping in the shower, or from >>>> infection contracted by stubbing their toes. For most people swine >>>> flu is nothing. It isn't even worth talking about, it is so minor an >>>> illness. For a small percentage there are going to be complications >>>> or circumstances that make the effects of the disease more severe, >>>> but this is true of everything in life. The swine flu hysteria is >>>> something no sensible person will pay any serious attention to. It >>>> is good for amusement, to watch and see how many other people fall >>>> into the nonsense.
>>> Al, you're right, it is nothing to become hysterical over, but it is >>> a serious and largely preventable illness. I've seen it already. >>> Moreover, it defies the typical influenza pattern, which kills >>> primarily the elderly, and instead kills mostly kids and young adults >>> in the prime of life. Even if it doesn't kill you, getting >>> vaccinated and other infection control measures help reduce the >>> spread of this disease that will kill others. The real hysteria in >>> this case belongs to those who panic over the thought of getting >>> vaccinated.
>> I don't think it is irrational to wish to avoid having a substance >> injected into one's body the ultimate effects of which are unknown. We >> know that if we contract the swine flu, we will probably get over it >> just fine in a couple of weeks. We can't be sure that the vaccine >> won't have some ill effects twenty years into the future. It probably >> won't, but we can't be sure. Personally, I avoid letting others inject >> strange substances into my body, when it is not necessary, and in the >> case of this present swine flu hysteria, it is not necessary. I will >> not be getting vaccinated.
> The H1N1 vaccine is just another flu vaccine, of the type we have > extensive experience with over time. Vaccination is statistically far > safer than the risk of the disease. Your choice, but it's like driving > across the country because of a misplaced fear of flying. Odds are > you'll be fine either way, but driving is statistically the more > dangerous option.
Even so, I'm going to take my chances with the disease.
> On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 14:33:40 -0400, Al Smith <inva...@address.com> > wrote:
>> On 11/1/2009 12:56 PM, David Johnston wrote: >>> On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 03:02:19 -0400, Al Smith <inva...@address.com> >>> wrote:
>>>> On 10/31/2009 6:16 PM, TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote: >>>>> CBS Propaganda wrote: >>>>>> ... Only half of the people in the >>>>>> United States who most need immediate treatment for H1N1 swine flu are >>>>>> actually seeking it, >>>>> That's called "natural selection" - you know, like the thinning of the >>>>> herd. ;-)
>>>> Swine flu isn't much more dangerous than a bad headcold. >>> Whens the last time a healthy 13 year old died of a bad headcold?
>> It happens all the time, through infections and complications,
> Cite.
> or >> due to existing weaknesses ... which is how people die from swine flu.
> Right. So then people who have absolutely no weaknesses are safe. > Know anyone who has no weaknesses?
It's pointless to make an extra effort to protect ourselves against something that isn't dangerous, and in the process risk a potential side effect that may be much worse than the effect of the disease. I do not trust what the government and so-called experts say about vaccines. Not at all. These people are caught being flat out wrong on science issues every day. When it comes to my own body, they don't get to say, "Ooops, sorry, my mistake."
> It's pointless to make an extra effort to protect ourselves against > something that isn't dangerous, and in the process risk a potential side > effect that may be much worse than the effect of the disease.
Continuing to repeat the claim that H1N1 isnt dangerous doesn't make it true. While most people have mild symptoms a number of people are hit very hard. Intensive care systems in Australia and New Zealand have been put under heavy strain by the number of cases which required support.In the UK the load is already heavy and the NHS is conducting an emergency expansion of ICU capacity.
65% of those admitted required mechanical ventilation to help them breathe. What is worrying is that the most vulnerable groups were not the usually vulnerable groups of children and the elderly. In Australia 92% were under 62 and serious cases involved adults between the ages of 25 and 65 with pregnant women being particularly vulnerable. Children under the age of 1 year seem to be very vulnerable as well.
> Even so, I'm going to take my chances with the disease.
...which might be a good choice: http://www.tagesspiegel.de/zeitung/Die-Dritte-Seite-Schweinegrippe;ar... (In German): At a Geneva WHO meeting an american scientist points out an interesting observation. In China and some other countires with high H1N1 rates, the far more dangerous H3N2 infecion rate is significantly low, suggesting that H1N1 perhaps keeps the H3N2 strain at bay.
...the rest of the article is very interesting as well.
>> It's pointless to make an extra effort to protect ourselves against >> something that isn't dangerous, and in the process risk a potential side >> effect that may be much worse than the effect of the disease.
> Continuing to repeat the claim that H1N1 isnt dangerous doesn't > make it true. While most people have mild symptoms a number > of people are hit very hard.
I have my opinion, and you have the propaganda talking points you've picked up in the media and from government mouthpieces. Let's just leave it at that, shall we?
|
