Is it possible HIN1 (Swine Flu) is back in Ireland?

Spring Onion

I think MadsL got some anger issues from the vaccine.

MadsL

Spring Onion wrote: »

I felt the vaccine was rushed without adequate testing in order to line the pockets of big pharma. I did get swine flu (doctor confirmed) but it was a mild dose (I got the real flu years ago and it nearly killed me). I await further side effects from the untested vaccine.

So it was rushed to meet the demands of a virus that will have mutated by next year, huh, wonder why they didn't wait another year to bring it out.

And was it untested, or not adequate tested? If it was untested, then how come it was not adequately tested?

El Guapo!

ShaneSheep555 wrote: »

Thank you Spring! This is the PURPOSE of this thread - People's OPINIONS

But the thing is, people's opinions mean sfa without some sort of scientific study to back it up. I could just as easily say I don't think taking vitamin supplements is a good idea because I don't know what's in them.
The fact is, vaccines save millions of lives and can be essential in today's world. People saying that the vaccines cause more harm etc is just uninformed pub talk.

Spring Onion

MadsL wrote: »

So it was rushed to meet the demands of a virus that will have mutated by next year, huh, wonder why they didn't wait another year to bring it out.

And was it untested, or not adequate tested? If it was untested, then how come it was not adequately tested?

Is that the best you can do?

Look I am happy in the knowledge that people like you are testing it for me.

Chucken

MadsL wrote: »

Nope. That's why we train people as doctors and scientist so that they can objectively figure this stuff out with the aid of facts rather than woo-doo.

Like they did with thalidomide?
Sorry but sometimes the cure can be worse than the disease.

MadsL

Spring Onion wrote: »

I think MadsL got some anger issues from the vaccine.

I get annoyed with people spouting pseudo-scientific opinion with no basis in fact when it potentially kills people. Did you miss the link about over 200 people dying in LA in the latest outbreak.

Spring Onion

El Guapo! wrote: »

But the thing is, people's opinions mean sfa without some sort of scientific study to back it up. I could just as easily say I don't think taking vitamin supplements is a good idea because I don't know what's in them.
The fact is, vaccines save millions of lives and can be essential in today's world. People saying that the vaccines cause more harm etc is just uninformed pub talk.

I have taken many other vaccines and would encourage people and children to do but not swine flu when it was first produced.
Pharma have made mistakes before and will again.

MadsL

Chucken wrote: »

Like they did with thalidomide?
Sorry but sometimes the cure can be worse than the disease.

Is the cure worse than the disease in this case? Serious question.

Thalidomide is still on the market and is used in leprosy and canncr treatment. The 50s and 60s example lead to more structured drug regulations and controls.

Science learns from its mistakes. Fear simply replicates without basis in fact.

MadsL

Spring Onion wrote: »

Is that the best you can do?

It is a legitimate question, what do you meant by suggesting it was "untested"?

Look I am happy in the knowledge that people like you are testing it for me.

Would you like to be more explicit about what you mean by that?

Spring Onion

MadsL wrote: »

Is the cure worse than the disease in this case? Serious question.

Thalidomide is still on the market and is used in leprosy and canncr treatment. The 50s and 60s example lead to more structured drug regulations and controls.

Big Money trumps regulations every time!

El Guapo!

Spring Onion wrote: »

I have taken many other vaccines and would encourage people and children to do but not swine flu when it was first produced.
Pharma have made mistakes before and will again.

So how did you come to the conclusion that the swine flu vaccine was the one to avoid while others were A-ok?

MadsL

Spring Onion wrote: »

Big Money trumps regulations every time!

Any evidence for that? What specific regulations were broken, by whom, when and where?

And you didn't answer my previous question.

Spring Onion

El Guapo! wrote: »

So how did you come to the conclusion that the swine flu vaccine was the one to avoid while others were A-ok?

Simple;
The speed of it's production and release to market. 2009 outbreak, 2009 cure...alarm bells!
The hype put on swine flu to enable the release.
I have trust issues and do not like to be the first to try anything!
I am young and healthy and knew I would survive it and get immunity the natural way.

Chucken

MadsL wrote: »

Is the cure worse than the disease in this case? Serious question.

Thalidomide is still on the market and is used in leprosy and canncr treatment. The 50s and 60s example lead to more structured drug regulations and controls.

Science learns from its mistakes. Fear simply replicates without basis in fact.

I can't say I've ever met anyone with "normal" flu, let alone swine flu, bird flu or the next new flu BUT one of my best friends has no arms due to her mother being prescribed thalidomide in the 60s.

So excuse my scepticism that the great pharmaceutical companies have all the answers.

Spring Onion

MadsL wrote: »

Any evidence for that? What specific regulations were broken, by whom, when and where?

And you didn't answer my previous question.

I determined both of them stupid questions and I am immune to those.

MadsL

Chucken wrote: »

I can't say I've ever met anyone with "normal" flu, let alone swine flu, bird flu or the next new flu BUT one of my best friends has no arms due to her mother being prescribed thalidomide in the 60s.

So excuse my scepticism that the great pharmaceutical companies have all the answers.

That's not what I said. And if they had 'all the answers' they'd stop funding research now wouldn't they?

MadsL

Spring Onion wrote: »

I determined both of them stupid questions and I am immune to those.

So you cannot answer them. OK.

Where do you get your information from then about this 'untested' vaccine or the 'inadequate' nature of the testing.

You know, the facts that you base this opinion on. Where does that information come from?

Spring Onion

MadsL wrote: »

So you cannot answer them. OK.

Where do you get your information from then about this 'untested' vaccine or the 'inadequate' nature of the testing.

You know, the facts that you base this opinion on. Where does that information come from?

Post #64. I need to go now, the Mentalist is starting soon.

Do let me know if you grow a snout and curly tail.

El Guapo!

Spring Onion wrote: »

Simple;
The speed of it's production and release to market. 2009 outbreak, 2009 cure...alarm bells!
The hype put on swine flu to enable the release.
I have trust issues and do not like to be the first to try anything!
I am young and healthy and knew I would survive it and get immunity the natural way.

The speed with which it was released doesn't necessarily mean it's unsafe.
Personally, I'd rather base my opinion on scientific fact.

Spring Onion

El Guapo! wrote: »

The speed with which it was released doesn't necessarily mean it's unsafe.
Personally, I'd rather base my opinion on scientific fact.

Now you're thinking...:eek:;)

MadsL

Spring Onion wrote: »

Simple;
The speed of it's production and release to market. 2009 outbreak, 2009 cure...alarm bells!

2009 production is useless in 2010 as the virus mutates.
2010 production in 2009 is impossible due to temporal vortex malfunctions.

The hype put on swine flu to enable the release.

Yeah, all the people they killed to make it look like the flu is deadly.

I have trust issues and do not like to be the first to try anything!

If you were taking the vaccine in Ireland you are not the first by a long shot.

I am young and healthy and knew I would survive it and get immunity the natural way.

Epidemics do work that way, at the cost of killing off the old and vulnerable. We can reintroduce measles, mumps, chicken pox and plague if you prefer to do it "the natural way".

MadsL

Spring Onion wrote: »

Post #64. I need to go now, the Mentalist is starting soon.

Do let me know if you grow a snout and curly tail.

Your level of critical thinking is breathtaking.

StinkyMunkey

Never took the vaccine and have no intention of taking it. Unless its tried and tested im not putting my faith in the people who make these vaccines and just presume its going to work without side effects. Im quiet happy to let other members of the general public be guinea pigs.

Chucken

MadsL wrote: »

Any evidence for that? What specific regulations were broken, by whom, when and where?

And you didn't answer my previous question.

Well this is disturbing. http://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/j-j-pay-2-2b-end-drug-label-kickback-probes-f8C11518989

Don't you think?

It's all about the money.

MadsL

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Never took the vaccine and have no intention of taking it. Unless its tried and tested im not putting my faith in the people who make these vaccines and just presume its going to work without side effects. Im quiet happy to let other members of the general public be guinea pigs.

It is "tried and tested".

And you are quite happy to spread the virus to young children and the elderly and let them die are you? Almost 579,000 people could have been killed by it in 2009.

Thanks.

Birroc

What ever happened to the other flu epidemic which some suggested would wipe out half the world? For example, bird flu - were there vacines for bird flu? I know some of them caused panic in China and elsewhere and then just went away after killing a few old people. Shure wouldn't the "Irish" flu kill old people? Was the Spanish flu the one that killed loads after WW1?
I did not take the H1N1 vacine yet. I probably will not take it. I've heard it isn't that bad.

MadsL

Chucken wrote: »

Well this is disturbing. http://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/j-j-pay-2-2b-end-drug-label-kickback-probes-f8C11518989

Don't you think?

It's all about the money.

Regulators gonna regulate. They are doing their jobs. This is a good thing and will increase controls.

Where am I arguing for no controls on drug companies?

StinkyMunkey

MadsL wrote: »

It is "tried and tested".

And you are quite happy to spread the virus to young children and the elderly and let them die are you? Almost 579,000 people could have been killed by it in 2009.

Thanks.

It may come as a total shock, but side effects dont just happen over night. And id have to have to virus to start going around killing people.

Thanks.

Chucken

http://www.examiner.com/article/vaccine-scandal-did-kickbacks-push-who-scientists-to-declare-h1n1-flu-pandemic

http://www.naturalnews.com/028936_WHO_vaccines.html#

http://rabble.ca/babble/international-news-and-politics/h1n1-advisors-received-kickbacks-h1n1-vaccine-manufacturers

All about the money!!!


This is even more sickening :mad:
http://vactruth.com/2013/11/13/dangerous-vaccine-contamination/

ShaneSheep555

Chucken wrote: »

Well this is disturbing. http://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/j-j-pay-2-2b-end-drug-label-kickback-probes-f8C11518989

Don't you think?

It's all about the money.

I seen this a few minutes ago!
It's a money racket in MY OPINION (Caps because some people don't understand the word)

MadsL

Birroc wrote: »

What ever happened to the other flu epidemic which some suggested would wipe out half the world? For example, bird flu - were there vacines for bird flu? I know some of them caused panic in China and elsewhere and then just went away after killing a few old people.

It did not make a significant species jump. H5N1 simply killed millions of poultry, we got lucky.

Shure wouldn't the "Irish" flu kill old people?

Flu can kill anyone.

Was the Spanish flu the one that killed loads after WW1?

50 million to 100 million

I did not take the H1N1 vacine yet. I probably will not take it.

Why?

I've heard it isn't that bad.

Did you miss the part about the latest outbreak killing 200+ in LA?

MadsL

ShaneSheep555 wrote: »

I seen this a few minutes ago!
It's a money racket in MY OPINION (Caps because some people don't understand the word)

Based on what evidence? That drug companies get paid?

On that basis doctors are a money racket, so are dentists, so is the water in your tap.

Chucken

MadsL wrote: »

Based on what evidence? That drug companies get paid?

On that basis doctors are a money racket, so are dentists, so is the water in your tap.

Did you even glance at the links in post 80?

Kickbacks!!!!!

ShaneSheep555

MadsL wrote: »

Based on what evidence? That drug companies get paid?

On that basis doctors are a money racket, so are dentists, so is the water in your tap.

Have you not read the links Chucken posted? Maybe he should post them again?

MadsL

Chucken wrote: »

Did you even glance at the links in post 80?

Kickbacks!!!!!

Yes. Every single drug that is branded gives some form of incentive to doctors. That is how the patent system works.

Did you think drug companies do this out of altruism. Is this really news to you?

Once a patent expires we get generics which only have a place on the market because of the advertising of the original branded drugs.

MadsL

ShaneSheep555 wrote: »

Have you not read the links Chucken posted? Maybe he should post them again?

Yes I read them. I saw regulation working as it should.

Did you read the questions I posed to you, or should I post them again.

Chucken

MadsL wrote: »

Yes I read them. I saw regulation working as it should.

Did you read the questions I posed to you, or should I post them again.

You think that top scientists who convinced the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare H1N1 a global pandemic held close financial ties to the drug companies that profited from the sale of those vaccines.



Thats regulation working??

ShaneSheep555

MadsL wrote: »

Yes I read them. I saw regulation working as it should.

Did you read the questions I posed to you, or should I post them again.

I answered all your questions in full? What questions did I not answer?

Birroc

MadsL wrote: »

It did not make a significant species jump. H5N1 simply killed millions of poultry, we got lucky.
Flu can kill anyone.
50 million to 100 million
Why?
Did you miss the part about the latest outbreak killing 200+ in LA?

So a flu like Spanish flu I need to worry about. From all accounts, swine flu was over-hyped. No I did not hear about the LA 200. I am not going to worry about it. You are probably worrying enough for all of us.

MadsL

Chucken wrote: »

You think that top scientists who convinced the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare H1N1 a global pandemic held close financial ties to the drug companies that profited from the sale of those vaccines.



Thats regulation working??

I'd be more surprised if "top scientists" in the epidemiology field didn't work for companies producing vaccines.

But while you are there perhaps you might give me a figure on the numbers of children who died as a result of the totally spurious scare data about MMR and autism?

http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347

MadsL

Birroc wrote: »

So a flu like Spanish flu I need to worry about. From all accounts, swine flu was over-hyped. No I did not hear about the LA 200. I am not going to worry about it. You are probably worrying enough for all of us.

I'm not worrying, I'm presenting what the latest medical advice is. H1N1 killed over probably half a million people in 2009, I don't see a downside to getting a jab and protecting yourself and others.

MadsL

ShaneSheep555 wrote: »

I answered all your questions in full? What questions did I not answer?

MadsL wrote: »

Are you familiar at all with the concept of relative risk?

Your risk of dying from H1N1 is significantly higher than your risk of contracting narcolepsy from a flu jab.

So a tiny, tiny unproven risk of narcolepsy or a greater proven risk of death, what's it to be?

You quoted this but did not answer the actual question for one.

You are more likely to die in a road accident if you have a mobile phone than if you do not. Do you have a phone? If so why? It is likely to kill you.

See where pure risk avoidance gets you....

ShaneSheep555

MadsL wrote: »

You quoted this but did not answer the actual question for one.

You are more likely to die in a road accident if you have a mobile phone than if you do not. Do you have a phone? If so why? It is likely to kill you.

See where pure risk avoidance gets you....

Risk,risk,risk..
Why the hell should there be any risk in getting the flu jab?
The purpose of the jab is to protect you from flu's but then again you may develop narcolepsy?
Huh?

fr336

The swines

ProfessorPlum

ShaneSheep555 wrote: »

Risk,risk,risk..
Why the hell should there be any risk in getting the flu jab?
The purpose of the jab is to protect you from flu's but then again you may develop narcolepsy?
Huh?

Oh dear. Some people just have a lot of difficulty understanding.

MadsL

ShaneSheep555 wrote: »

Risk,risk,risk..
Why the hell should there be any risk in getting the flu jab?
The purpose of the jab is to protect you from flu's but then again you may develop narcolepsy?
Huh?

Oh dear. "Chemotherapy makes your hair fall out but is supposed to stop cancer, huh?"

So as to my original question, if you want no risk of side effects then do we take all drugs off the market as all drugs have potential side effects. You say you do not want this, so what level of risk is acceptable to you?

Now the problem is that fear-mongering about side effects reduces the uptake and thus the effectiveness of the vaccines in preventing the spread of the virus and hence the numbers of deaths go up. Fearmongering kills people in effect.

StinkyMunkey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine

One challenge in vaccine development is economic: Many of the diseases most demanding a vaccine, including HIV, malaria and tuberculosis, exist principally in poor countries. Pharmaceutical firms and biotechnology companies have little incentive to develop vaccines for these diseases, because there is little revenue potential. Even in more affluent countries, financial returns are usually minimal and the financial and other risks are great.[38]

Guess these people have our best interests at heart. Silly me for not wanting to trust them.

ProfessorPlum

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine

One challenge in vaccine development is economic: Many of the diseases most demanding a vaccine, including HIV, malaria and tuberculosis, exist principally in poor countries. Pharmaceutical firms and biotechnology companies have little incentive to develop vaccines for these diseases, because there is little revenue potential. Even in more affluent countries, financial returns are usually minimal and the financial and other risks are great.[38]

Guess these people have our best interests at heart. Silly me for not wanting to trust them.

Big Pharma is big business. It's a commercial enterprise, where they spend big money to make bigger money. Much like any other commercial enterprise that we buy goods and services from. It doesn't take away from the fact that vaccination has and will save millions of people. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

MadsL

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Guess these people have our best interests at heart. Silly me for not wanting to trust them.

Would you prefer the HSE investing the millions and millions to develop a vaccine specifically for Ireland so that you don't have to be contaminated by all this grubby money-making?

If so, please enclose your PPS number so that we can take it from your taxes.

Aspiring

This reminds me of the argument I often have with family/friends about why cancer will never be cured across the board. It would be the least profitable decision ever for hospitals and pharma alike. Sad really.

On to the swine flu:
I never got the jab because I had read there was mercury or something in the brand our school got haven't researched any of that stuff in a long time actually but I'm pretty sure it was mercury in some form, simply not worth it.