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

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.

MadsL

Aspiring wrote: »

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.

There is a mercury compound in the flu jab...

*gasps of horror* OMG OMG OMG....post on facebook...OMG OMG...

Actually...

Single dose-shots of the flu vaccine and the flu vaccine nasal sprays do not contain any mercury compounds. The multi-dose flu shot does contain a preservative called thimerosal, which breaks down into 49% ethylmercury and used to prevent bacterial contamination of the vaccine container. Ethylmercury, as I’ve discussed before, is processed differently by the body than methylmercury, the neurotoxin that can build up in the body and is found in fish. (Keep in mind the difference a letter can make in chemistry: methanol is anti-freeze while ethanol is a Chardonnay.) Ethylmercury is made of larger molecules that cannot enter the brain andexits the body within a week.

Here are another 24 myths about the flu jab debunked whilst you are in a reading mood. http://gizmodo.com/setting-the-record-straight-debunking-all-the-flu-vacc-1455630807

Chemistry eh?

Aspiring

MadsL wrote: »

There is a mercury compound in the flu jab...

*gasps of horror* OMG OMG OMG....post on facebook...OMG OMG...

Actually...



Here are another 24 myths about the flu jab debunked whilst you are in a reading mood. http://gizmodo.com/setting-the-record-straight-debunking-all-the-flu-vacc-1455630807

Chemistry eh?

Honestly I was about 14 at the time this research was done so I apologise for any gaping holes in my knowledge, but thank you for informing me it was the thimerosal that rings a bell.

In all honesty the main reason for not getting the jab was because the flu virus itself seemed pretty harmless. Obviously if it was something extremely severe you'd want to get a jab but what's the point for less severe "pandemics"?

StinkyMunkey

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

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.

Who said Vaccines dont save lives????

I simply do not trust these people to put my health before their profits. If you do, nothing is stopping you from going out and getting every vaccination on the planet - have at it.

MadsL

Aspiring wrote: »

In all honesty the main reason for not getting the jab was because the flu virus itself seemed pretty harmless. Obviously if it was something extremely severe you'd want to get a jab but what's the point for less severe "pandemics"?

You provide a measure of protection for the whole community by not getting sick, people have a tendency to spread the virus as they go back to work before they should. Getting the jab protects more than just yourself.

MadsL

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

I simply do not trust these people to put my health before their profits.

Crux of it really. Which is why fear mongering is so damaging, vaccines only save lives if a large majority of people use them.

StinkyMunkey

MadsL wrote: »

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.

Wtf you talking about? I wouldnt trust the HSE to put a plaster on me.

Just wondering what HSE has to do with me not Trusting the swine flu vaccine or the fact Pharma companys putting profits before customers?

Sure who cares anyway, we have guinea pigs people such as yourself who love taking vaccines. Ill wait and see if you grow two heads, if not, ill know its safe.

StinkyMunkey

MadsL wrote: »

Crux of it really. Which is why fear mongering is so damaging, vaccines only save lives if a large majority of people use them.

Again Wtf you talking about???? Im talking about swine flu vaccine (singular, not plural, as in all vaccines).

what Scare mongering??? i dont trust the swine flu vaccine, im fine with you talking them all.

MadsL

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Wtf you talking about? I wouldnt trust the HSE to put a plaster on me.

Just wondering what HSE has to do with me not Trusting the swine flu vaccine or the fact Pharma companys putting profits before customers?

Sure who cares anyway, we have guinea pigs people such as yourself who love taking vaccines. Ill wait and see if you grow two heads, if not, ill know its safe.

So we either get big Pharma to develop our medicines or the State. It seems you trust neither.

Do you never get sick?

MadsL

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Again Wtf you talking about???? Im talking about swine flu vaccine (singular, not plural, as in all vaccines).

Same statement applies whether plural or singular. Problem?

MadsL

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

what Scare mongering??? i dont trust the swine flu vaccine, im fine with you talking them all.

You don't trust it because the Pharma companies make money, as I understand your argument, is that correct?

StinkyMunkey

MadsL wrote: »

So we either get big Pharma to develop our medicines or the State. It seems you trust neither.

Do you never get sick?

Who cares who makes them, as long as we have people like you to jump first, ill just sit back and see what happens, if you dont fall over dead ill know its safe.

StinkyMunkey

MadsL wrote: »

Same statement applies whether plural or singular. Problem?

Problem being im talking about the swine flu vaccine, not vaccines in general.

MadsL

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Problem being im talking about the swine flu vaccine, not vaccines in general.

And the same statement holds true, one vaccine or many.

StinkyMunkey

MadsL wrote: »

You don't trust it because the Pharma companies make money, as I understand your argument, is that correct?

I simply dont trust it because in my opinion it wasnt tested enough. Im all for people like you having blind faith in money making organisations.

Its my choice not to take it, im indifferent to you taking it.

StinkyMunkey

MadsL wrote: »

And the same statement holds true, one vaccine or many.

Thats BS in its purest form. I dont trust the swine flu vaccine, i never said i didnt trust vaccines as a whole.

MadsL

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Thats BS in its purest form. I dont trust the swine flu vaccine, i never said i didnt trust vaccines as a whole.

Oh dear. Let's back track.

I said

vaccines only save lives if a large majority of people use them.

you said you were only talking about the H1N1 vaccine and I said my statement was true if talking about one vaccine or many. Again, problem?

As to singling out your distrust only on the H1N1, can I ask why you trust the MMR jab but not the H1N1 jab. With science if possible.

Turtwig

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Thats BS in its purest form. I dont trust the swine flu vaccine, i never said i didnt trust vaccines as a whole.

There's no difference. All flu vaccines are manufactured the same. You pick the strain of flu, then grow the vaccines the same way you do all others. The testing standard is identical.

Identify virus.
(Very often vaccines for this virus will be mostly identical ingredients wise.Why? Because they're deemed safe and understood. The adjuvant for most flu vaccines is identical.)
Identify strain.
Construct vaccine.
Test it.

All vaccine for each flu season are more or less the same process. All that varies is the strain and any minor changes it will entail.

Finally, the flu can cause narcolepsy. So unfortunately that means that some vaccines carry the risk of it too. Worth pointing out though that a banana is generally safe for everyone too. Unfortunately you're also at risk of an allergic reaction.

Now, your question is how likely? My answer is 300 times more likely than being killed by Jose Mourinho. My point?
Why do people say something is X times more likely to kill you?
Why can't they say it is has Y chance of killing you?
Because generally if they use Y it doesn't sound scary at all. Especially when compared to everyday risks.

MadsL

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

people like you having blind faith in money making organisations.

Blind faith? Or science. Blind faith indeed...

Its my choice not to take it, im indifferent to you taking it.

My choice affects you, your choice affects me on a global scale.

StinkyMunkey

MadsL wrote: »

Oh dear. Let's back track.

I said



you said you were only talking about the H1N1 vaccine and I said my statement was true if talking about one vaccine or many. Again, problem?

As to singling out your distrust only on the H1N1, can I ask why you trust the MMR jab but not the H1N1 jab. With science if possible.

I don't need to use science, I'm not trying to persuade anyone not to take the vaccine. It's simply my choice not to take the swine flu vaccine. You can back up your view with all you want, I'm still not going to take it until I personally feel its safe to do so.

In my mind, any new vaccines are a bit like a minefield. If you and me are standing at the edge of a minefield, ill quiet happily let you go first, if you make it through without stepping on a mine, I'll know its safe.

I don't need to prove anything, it's my choice not to take it, I'm not trying to persuade you not to. OP asked people's opinions, I gave mine. I'm not here trying to prove anything.

StinkyMunkey

MadsL wrote: »

Blind faith? Or science. Blind faith indeed...


My choice affects you, your choice affects me on a global scale.

Ofc your choice affects me, how else am I gonna know its safe to take if people like you don't have blind faith in science and money making organisations.

I'll try not start a global pandemic, promise.