or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Are Americans Giving Up Health Freedoms?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Are Americans Giving Up Health Freedoms? - Page 3

post #81 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Saw this today.
It lays out why conservatives feel that this has less to do with health, and more to do with a sneaky corporate bailout.

And which part of that do you buy, exactly?

It's highly misleading on a number of points, but this one jumped out at me:

Quote:
This is not a vaccine against cervical cancer; rather it is a vaccine against HPV, which is contracted through sexual relations. Merck admits in its own literature that it did not prove that the vaccine would prevent cancer. The HPV vaccine only protects against four of the 127 strains of HPV.

Those 4 strains cause 70% of the cancer.

Don't you think that's an important fact he failed to disclose?

And isn't it obvious that if you protect against a virus strain that causes cancer-- you won't get cancer from that virus strain....
post #82 of 95
I see your point, but his point of view is at least factually correct - if not complete.

However that still doesn't answer why a Big Pharma company is getting such an easy time of having its products mandated by this Republican governor. The fact that it's opposed by the Texas MA jumped out at me.

And when I made my previous comments about my being prescribed Vioxx, I was linking the issue in general terms. I had not realized that Merck was the company responsible for paying for the huge legal settlement.

I see enough smoke here to warrant calling the fire department.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #83 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship sheepishly in another thread

Save it Shawn

I just wanted to toss for your consideration that arguments such as:

"You are way off base"

and

"It is to "save lives" so it is ok NO MATTER the other surrounding details.

are

WEAK arguments no matter the topic.

Fellows

I didn't say we should do anything that purports to "save lives."

You're the only one making that frankly cartoonish assertion.

What gives, Fellows?
post #84 of 95
I think that the real subject of this discussion, is not the interest of this particular vaccination, but wether or not any vaccination should be mandatory.

We all should be aware that a vaccination work at two levels :
- the individual one
- the collective one

What is the collective one ?
it's the fact, that with vaccination the number of microbiological agent in circulation is decreasing, thus the chance of getting one even if you are not protected will decrease. This is the case of pox, that has been eridicated (except in labs) from the earth. It's almost the case of polyomyelitis.

An another subject of discussion, dealing with personal safety and rules, is :
- why fasten your seat bell is mandatory in many countries (at least in France) ?
post #85 of 95
Here are two hypotheticals:

If the Gates foundation comes up with a cure for malaria, should every kid in sub-Saharan Africa be vaccinated whether they want to be or not?

Should every child in India be vaccinated against cholera?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #86 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Here are two hypotheticals:

If the Gates foundation comes up with a cure for malaria, should every kid in sub-Saharan Africa be vaccinated whether they want to be or not?

Should every child in India be vaccinated against cholera?

Well that depends. Is the licensing as restrictive as Vista's?

Your hypotheticals have already been dealt with in the thread. This isn't some raging health epidemic that has implications well beyond the patient. Read the numbers that Trumpt brought into the thread.

Aside from my Vioxx experience, I just have to question the pace at which something like this is happening. Proper research takes time. Our generation seems to rush headfirst into solutions (Kyoto? ) before assessing the entire situation properly.

While many young people (like Shaun) are at the forefront of the modern "ban all trans-fats" movement, older folks remember that those trans-fats weren't initially part of the fast food recipe. They were added in the 80's, when the "ban the saturated fats" movement kicked in. A couple of years of extra research into the safety of trans-fats would have saved a lot of lives.

All I'm saying is that there should be a careful process in approving drugs, given the profits that can be achieved and the known problems that are bound to manifest afterward.

It makes sense to have vaccines be voluntary, unless there is a serious public interest involved, such as an outbreak of an easily communicable disease.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #87 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post


It makes sense to have vaccines be voluntary, unless there is a serious public interest involved, such as an outbreak of an easily communicable disease.

That's absolutely right.
For info, this vaccination is absolutely not mandatory in France. Not to say that France is better, but to point out, that other experts don't think that this vaccination is mandatory. They do not say that this vaccination is a waste either. The expert just agree with your points
post #88 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

It makes sense to have vaccines be voluntary, unless there is a serious public interest involved, such as an outbreak of an easily communicable disease.

I think I agree with your sentiment. But, we need to gauge public interest, absent imminent danger.
post #89 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

Shawn Let me ask...

Not sure you will think about this and actually answer but let me ask anyway.

What if a study found that if the Government shut down all McDonalds we could save 45,000 lives a year that otherwise would be slated to premature deaths due to heart disease from foods consumed at McDonalds.

If that study was found to be sound and accurate should the government wait even a day to impose the shutdown of McDonalds?

I mean the idea here is that we are reducing the numbers of deaths here right?

Anything goes? no?

I mean it is not like the people who used to eat at McDonalds could not start to eat Salads.

And the workers at McDonalds can find other better jobs No? Yes?

Please address this.

I want to see if you have any intellectual honesty to you or just empty arguments for debate sake which it seems at times.

Please forgive me if I am wrong about this.

Because if saving lives is your gig then you would have McDonalds shut in less than one day.

Forget Freedom.

In the name of health..

Right? or Wrong?

Please reply to this in depth. If you do not I will completely understand...

Fellows

McDs is an f/n cancer. Shacks like that should be 'regulated' into nonexistence.

Perhaps Texas should look into possible governor - pharmaceuticals connection.
Else, let god-fearing woman of TX use the old and proving method instead.
MA700LL/A arrived.
---
Latitude D600, PowerEdge 1600SC, OptiPlex GX520
Reply
MA700LL/A arrived.
---
Latitude D600, PowerEdge 1600SC, OptiPlex GX520
Reply
post #90 of 95
The Governor of Texas does not have the power to issue executive orders. This order is illegal.

However, there are bills in the Legislature that would have the same effect, and unless Speaker Craddick and his minions block access to the floor (possible given how stacked the major committees are in the House), at least one will likely pass.
post #91 of 95
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mydo View Post

Oh god? Not the whole "autism vs vaccination" troupe.

Someone one time told me at the Quickie Mart that he rented a house to someone that had to do autistic CPR on their kid 4.2 seconds after getting a shot that the doctor was paid millions from Big Pharma to kill children.


With such proof how could I doubt it.

February 9, 2004 - The Institute of Medicine held a meeting to review research that has been found, which links thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative in vaccines, and neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism. The panel used data from the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions (CDC) Vaccine Datalink, which concluded that children who are given three thimerosal-containing vaccines are 27 times more likely to develop autism than children who receive thimerosol-free vaccines.

Thimerosal has been gradually removed from vaccines since 1999, however it is still present in some vaccinations, including virtually all flu shots. During the review, medical experts discussed the results from a study that showed urinary mercury concentrations were six times higher in children with autism, as opposed to normal-age/vaccine matched controls. They also said that they found evidence that suggested the link between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism had a higher risk than that between lung cancer and smoking cigarettes.

Thimerosal contains a related mercury compound called ethyl mercury. Mercury is a toxic metal that can cause immune, sensory, neurological, motor, and behavioral dysfunctions. The Food and Drug Administration suggested that some infants, depending on which vaccines they receive and the timing of those vaccines, may be exposed to levels of ethyl mercury that could build up to exceed one of the federal guidelines established for the intake of methyl mercury. Symptoms of mercury toxicity in young children are extremely similar to those of autism. This can explain the recent increase in the numbers of children diagnosed with autism since the early 1990's. The numerous amount of children diagnosed with autism seems to directly correlate with the recommendation of both the hepatitis B and HIB vaccine to infants in the early 1990s. Autism is a neurological disorder that is characterized by impairments in language, cognitive and social development."

The hours, days and months following birth are undoubtedly the most critical phases in the life of human beings. Health and medical officials long ago decided that they knew best what should be done to children and many have made fortunes and careers out of this work. It is not by chance that infants are routinely disturbed physiologically and psychologically by medical interventions administered from the first moments of life. The incidence of childhood asthma, diabetes, and autoimmune diseases has doubled during the past 20 years; Attention Deficit Disorder has tripled, Autism has increased 600%. What part have vaccines played? Stanley Monteith, M.D.

Delay of DPT immunisation until 2 years of age in Japan has resulted in a dramatic decline in adverse side effects. In the period of 1970-1974, when DPT vaccination was begun at 3 to 5 months of age, the Japanese national compensation system paid out claims for 57 permanent severe damage vaccine cases, and 37 deaths. During the ensuing six year period 1975-1980, when DPT injections were delayed to 24 months of age, severe reactions from the vaccine were reduced to a total of eight with three deaths. This represents an 85 to 90 percent reduction in severe cases of damage and death."

A childs chances of a serious adverse reaction to the DPT vaccine are one in 1750, while his chances of dying from pertussis are one in several million. Decades of studies published in the worlds leading medical journals have documented vaccine failure and serious adverse vaccine events, including death. Dozens of books written by doctors, researchers, and independent investigators reveal serious flaws in immunization theory and practice. Yet, incredibly, most pediatricians and parents are unaware of these findings. This has begun to change in recent years, however, as a growing number of parents and healthcare providers around the world are becoming aware of the problems and questioning mass mandatory immunization.

"A great number of babies now die within days or within two to four weeks of birth after hepatitis B vaccination, as documented by the records of the VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] in the USA.) So, the baby stops progressing, starts deteriorating, and usually develops signs of respiratory tract infection. Then comes the second and third injections, and tragedy strikes: the child may cry intensely and inconsolably, may stop feeding properly, vomit, have difficulty swallowing, become irritable, stop sleeping, and may develop convulsions with accelerating progressive deterioration of its condition and mainly its brain function.

This deterioration may be fast, or may slowly inch in until the parents notice that something is very wrong with their child and then rush it to the doctor or hospital. Interestingly, they are invariably asked when the baby was immunised. On learning that the baby was indeed "immunised", the parents may be reassured that its symptoms will all clear up. They are sent home with the advice, "Give your baby Panadol". If they persist in considering the baby's reaction serious, they may be labelled as anxious parents or trouble-makers. So the parents go home, and the child remains in a serious condition or dies.

Until recently, the vaccine death would have just been labelled "sudden infant death", particularly if the symptoms and pathological findings were minimal. However, nowadays, with an alarmingly increasing frequency, the parents (or at least one of them, usually the father) may be accused of shaking the baby to death" Viera Scheibner, PhD.

In fall 1997, two influential professional magazines featured articles asking the question: Has the decrease of infectious diseases in childhood through the mass use of vaccines been replaced with an increase in chronic diseases such as diabetes and asthma? The Economist, a prestigious international magazine read by world leaders in government, business and public policy, and Science News, a magazine read by both health care professionals and the general public, explored the reported links between vaccines and chronic diseases in their November 22, 1997 issues. Learn more about vaccine and diabetes connection --- asthma and vaccine connection --- SIDS and autism and vaccine connection --- "Shaken Baby Syndrome": the vaccination link Law suit One hundred years ago, children received 1 vaccine (the smallpox vaccine). Forty years ago, children received 5 vaccines routinely (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio, and smallpox vaccines) and as many as 8 shots by 2 years of age. Children now receive 52 vaccines, in the form of 15 shots, by the time they are 6 months of age if they receive all the recommend shots, including the Prevnar pediatric pneumonia shot.

Fellowship
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #92 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

In fall 1997, two influential professional magazines featured articles asking the question: Has the decrease of infectious diseases in childhood through the mass use of vaccines been replaced with an increase in chronic diseases such as diabetes and asthma? The Economist, a prestigious international magazine read by world leaders in government, business and public policy, and Science News, a magazine read by both health care professionals and the general public, explored the reported links between vaccines and chronic diseases in their November 22, 1997 issues. Learn more about vaccine and diabetes connection --- asthma and vaccine connection --- SIDS and autism and vaccine connection --- "Shaken Baby Syndrome": the vaccination link Law suit One hundred years ago, children received 1 vaccine (the smallpox vaccine). Forty years ago, children received 5 vaccines routinely (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio, and smallpox vaccines) and as many as 8 shots by 2 years of age. Children now receive 52 vaccines, in the form of 15 shots, by the time they are 6 months of age if they receive all the recommend shots, including the Prevnar pediatric pneumonia shot.

Fellowship

I dont think personnaly that vaccination are leading to more auto immune illness or more allergia. For me, but that's not my field of expertise, the increase of auto immune disease (such as diabetes) and allergia are related, to a microbiologically clean environnement.

It looks like, that our immune system is bored, because he has nothing to do, and thus he decide to do some actions. Unfortunately, these actions arm us and lead to auto destruction. A vaccination, give some actions, but the lack of microbiological agents give zero action.

Following this logic, shoud we live in a dirty environnement ?

That's said it's a very intersting subject. On a more philosophical note, there isn't a perfect way of being healthy. For any diet, or any way of living, there will be pro and cons.
post #93 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

February 9, 2004 - The Institute of Medicine held a meeting to review research that has been found, which links thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative in vaccines, and neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism. ... During the review, medical experts discussed the results from a study that showed urinary mercury concentrations were six times higher in children with autism, as opposed to normal-age/vaccine matched controls. They also said that they found evidence that suggested the link between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism had a higher risk than that between lung cancer and smoking cigarettes.

Fellowship, I don't know where you copied this article from, but it uses some very sneaky language to hang dubious claims on the mantle of an eminent institution (the Institute of Medicine). Nowhere does it say what the IoM experts thought of the studies they "reviewed" and "discussed". And the "they" clearly should refer to the study authors, but is implied to refer to the IoM.

I do know that there were some very large, peer-reviewed studies undertaken as a result of the growing public concern, which conclusively showed no link between vaccines and autism. I suspect the IoM discussion above reviewed these studies, too, and came to the conclusion that they were the better science.

Edit: Actually, the report in question is easy to find:
IoM Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism
The executive summary states the conclusions:
Quote:
The committee concludes that the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism. The committee also concludes that the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.
post #94 of 95
A new and informative opinion piece in the LA Times adds some very relevant information.

Quote:
But just because critics of the vaccine argued their case on the wrong grounds does not mean they were wrong. Now, after all the early hoopla, it has become less clear that Gardasil will succeed in nearly eliminating HPV. A recent study in the New England Journal of Medicine indicated that blocking the two primary HPV strains might create an opportunity for other strains to flourish, so that the overall reduction in cancers would be relatively small. In addition, safety in the general population over time often differs from experimental safety — as the Merck painkiller Vioxx tragically illustrated.

Public health officials have not yet grappled with complex issues surrounding Gardasil. If the vaccine prevents only a couple of virus strains, how best to make patients aware that they lack full protection? Given the high cost, is the public getting the best preventive-medicine bang for its buck? Is it right to use schools to force the issue when, unlike polio, the disease cannot be caught through casual contact?

I guess my secret writing gig for the LA Times has been uncovered.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #95 of 95
Thread Necromancy... on the next... GERALDO.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Are Americans Giving Up Health Freedoms?