Swine Flu Vaccine
Discussion
In my local paper, it claims that Dudley council are going to encourage all of the residents in their borough to have the Swine flu vaccine.
Personally, I will not be having the vaccine as I am dubious as to how well tested this vaccine is. Plus it would not surprise me one bit if Winky & Co. wanted to wipe out half the population with a vaccine to reduce unemployment and pension payments
Would you have the vaccine if made available to you?
Personally, I will not be having the vaccine as I am dubious as to how well tested this vaccine is. Plus it would not surprise me one bit if Winky & Co. wanted to wipe out half the population with a vaccine to reduce unemployment and pension payments
Would you have the vaccine if made available to you?
It is a flu vaccine. The same as they make every year so the old and infirm have a better chance of surviving the winter. Why is it just because this year people know what one of the flus is called is it such a big deal. Not tested very well. Well shock horror probe no other flu vaccine is as otherwise by the time it was aproved it would be useless. Flu vaccine has been around for ages and no one bats an eyelid, why all the fuss now?
As a member of at at risk group I'll have it, same as every flu vaccine for god knows how long. If you don't want it fine, don't have it but why all the its a conspiracy b
ks?
As a member of at at risk group I'll have it, same as every flu vaccine for god knows how long. If you don't want it fine, don't have it but why all the its a conspiracy b
ks?Smart roadster said:
It is a flu vaccine. The same as they make every year so the old and infirm have a better chance of surviving the winter. Why is it just because this year people know what one of the flus is called is it such a big deal. Not tested very well. Well shock horror probe no other flu vaccine is as otherwise by the time it was aproved it would be useless. Flu vaccine has been around for ages and no one bats an eyelid, why all the fuss now?
As a member of at at risk group I'll have it, same as every flu vaccine for god knows how long. If you don't want it fine, don't have it but why all the its a conspiracy bks?
I think it may have been a joke....don't you? As a member of at at risk group I'll have it, same as every flu vaccine for god knows how long. If you don't want it fine, don't have it but why all the its a conspiracy b
ks?
Smart roadster said:
If you don't want it fine, don't have it but why all the its a conspiracy bks?
Because they have done this before over Swine Flu in 1976, and this time they've arranged for legal immunity if they kill lots of people? http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&...ks?esselte said:
Smart roadster said:
It is a flu vaccine. The same as they make every year so the old and infirm have a better chance of surviving the winter. Why is it just because this year people know what one of the flus is called is it such a big deal. Not tested very well. Well shock horror probe no other flu vaccine is as otherwise by the time it was aproved it would be useless. Flu vaccine has been around for ages and no one bats an eyelid, why all the fuss now?
As a member of at at risk group I'll have it, same as every flu vaccine for god knows how long. If you don't want it fine, don't have it but why all the its a conspiracy bks?
I think it may have been a joke....don't you? As a member of at at risk group I'll have it, same as every flu vaccine for god knows how long. If you don't want it fine, don't have it but why all the its a conspiracy b
ks?I wasn't actually responding to the bit about killing pensioners. Just the general hysteria about the vaccine being untested.
As for imunity if the vaccine ends up killing loads of people. It doesn't bother me, If I get swine flu I'm likely to die, kill my pregnant wife and young daughter. So for me the risk of possibly being killed by the vacine is outweighed by the almost certain death of me and mine by swine flu (if I catch it).
As for imunity if the vaccine ends up killing loads of people. It doesn't bother me, If I get swine flu I'm likely to die, kill my pregnant wife and young daughter. So for me the risk of possibly being killed by the vacine is outweighed by the almost certain death of me and mine by swine flu (if I catch it).
Smart roadster said:
Wife is pregnant so is at risk, she is a GP so may very well be the person who gives it to me. Her work are diverting anything that might be swine flu away from her, they are taking the risk seriously, so it would be foolish not to be mildly worried.
I still don't understand why you having the 'flu would kill your wife and daughter..or am I missing something..? What percentage of suffers up to now have died from it? Here is the second half of the article if you dont want to register,sorry if its a bit long.
Here’s an even more interesting brain buster for you: If each vaccine shot generates $25 in revenue for drug companies, and the U.S. government orders the production of 160 million vaccines, how much money is Big Pharma making off the pandemic? That answer is roughly $4 billion in net revenues.
But even that doesn’t count all the repeat business from the future victims who suffer neurological side effects from the vaccines and have to be institutionalized and subjected to high-dollar medical care for years on end. In all, a mass vaccination program could end up generating over ten billion dollars in revenues for drug companies.
These numbers just don’t add up
Now let’s look at some serious statistics: If one million people have already been infected with swine flu, and 500 have died, that’s a fatality rate of 1 out of 2000 people. Depending on which research you believe, vaccines might at most be credited with preventing 1% of flu deaths during any given flu season (and that’s being very generous to the vaccine). So here’s the question:
How many people have to be vaccinated with the new swine flu vaccine to save ONE life from a swine flu fatality?
(Notice, carefully, this question has never been asked in the mainstream media. That’s because the answer isn’t exactly what most people want to hear…)
This question is easy to answer, actually. If the vaccine were 100% effective (that is, they prevented every death that would have otherwise occurred), they could be credited with saving 1 life out of 2000, right? Because that’s the normal death rate for this particular virus (these figures are widely quoted by AP, Reuters and the White House, by the way).
But no vaccine is 100% effective. As I mentioned above, seasonal flu vaccines might — at a stretch — be credited with preventing 1% of the deaths that might otherwise have occurred. With this 1% effectiveness factor calculated back into the formula for swine flu (assuming the same 1% effectiveness factor), it turns out that you would have to vaccinate 200,000 people to save ONE life from swine flu.
That puts a whole new perspective on the vaccine push, doesn’t it? 200,000 vaccines costs taxpayers roughly $5,000,000, and it subjects 200,000 people to the potential side effects of these vaccines which have never been subjected to any long-term testing whatsoever.
It all begs the question: Is it really worth it?
Is it worth spending $5 million and exposing 200,000 people to potentially dangerous vaccine side effects in order to prevent ONE death from swine flu? And why isn’t anybody breaking down the numbers on this issue and providing a serious cost / benefit analysis as I’m doing here?
Let’s be generous to the vaccine…
Vaccine pushers might argue that the vaccine is far more than 1% effective at preventing swine flu deaths. In their wildest dreams, they might imagine a death reduction rate of, say, a wildly optimistic 10%. But even considering that, is it worth it? If the vaccine stops 10% of deaths that would have otherwise occurred, that still means you’d have to vaccinate 200,000 people to prevent the deaths of ten people.
I’m going to throw out a wild guess here and suggest that far more than 10 people will be killed by the vaccine itself, completely nullifying any net reduction in total deaths. Mathematically, you see, mass swine flu vaccinations make absolutely no sense given the very low rate of fatalities being observed right now.
Just do something!
Of course, public health policy is never based on sense. It’s based on politics. And the politics demand that “they DO something!” That’s what the public wants: Do something! It doesn’t matter if doing something is worse than doing nothing… they just want to see some action.
It’s the same story with breast cancer screenings (almost completely useless), prostate cancer screenings (now proven to be far more harmful than helpful) and of course ADHD screening tests (which are only designed to trick parents into drugging their kids). Much of western medicine, it turns out, is complete hokum. We would all be better off without the screenings and without the vaccinations altogether.
There’s a highly credible book on this subject by authors Gerald E. Markle and Frances B. McCrea. It’s called What if Medicine Disappeared? ( www.amazon.com...…)
This book argues quite persuasively (and with the citation of many convincing studies) that western medicine offers virtually no net gain in quality of life to the very people it claims to serve. Doctors, hospitals, vaccines and cancer clinics could all disappear tomorrow and most people would actually be far better off. Of course, no one disputes the value of having emergency rooms to handle acute trauma and accidents, but when it comes to preventive medicine and protecting quality of life, western medicine is a near-total failure.
When it comes to swine flu vaccines, any honest look at the math reveals that 200,000 people will have to be vaccinated with a largely untested experimental vaccine in order to prevent the death of one person (or ten people, if you really believe in vaccines). Remembering that more than one person in 200,000 will almost certainly be killed by the vaccine itself, it really makes you wonder: What’s the point of all this?
The point, of course, is to sell vaccines. It’s the one math problem that everybody understands: To make money, you have to sell a product, and there’s no better way to sell vaccines to 160 million people than to scare them into begging for injections that are statistically opposed their own self interests. But I suppose anything is possible in a country where state governments can punitively tax the poor by convincing them to play the lottery. People who play the lottery are very likely to be the same people getting vaccine shots: It’s like a lottery on your health, except that your odds of “winning” are far worse than your odds of winning something in a state lotto.
Let’s see: You have a 1 in 1 chance of being injected with foreign viral matter, and yet you only have a 1 in 200,000 chance of your life being saved by it.
Allow me to put this into perspective: You have a 40 times greater chance of being struck by lightning at some point in your life than having your life saved by the swine flu vaccine. (Source: National Weather Service statistics.)
Mathematically speaking, getting a swine flu injection and hoping it will save your life is more foolish than buying a lotto ticket with your last dollar and hoping you’ll scratch off a multi-million dollar winning ticket.
And buying a lotto ticket doesn’t risk the health of your nervous system, by the way. You can always earn back a buck, but restoring your nervous system after it’s attacked by a rogue vaccine can take years or decades. Some never recover. (Thousands died from the 1976 vaccines.)
Pop quiz: What’s the actual cost of vaccinating 160 million Americans with an unproven, experimental swine flu vaccine?
Answer: $1.6 billion plus countless victims with strange neurological disorders, comas and sudden death — all of which will be written off as “coincidence” by the vaccine pushers.
Free flu shots for the unemployed
As this article was about to go to press, I couldn’t help but notice a new announcement by CVS and Walgreens pharmacies. The powers that be are so desperate to get all Americans injected with this experimental vaccine that CVS and Walgreens are now offering free swine flu vaccine injections to anyone who doesn’t have a job!
That’s right: Just show up, prove you’re unemployed, and you get jabbed at no charge. (Who said losing your job didn’t have some benefits, huh?) Conspiracy theorists might suggest this is a clever way to clear the streets of “useless eaters.” Just lure the jobless into some experimental vaccine program, inject them and send them on their way. Next, will retailers start handing out free Soylent Green too?
Here’s an even more interesting brain buster for you: If each vaccine shot generates $25 in revenue for drug companies, and the U.S. government orders the production of 160 million vaccines, how much money is Big Pharma making off the pandemic? That answer is roughly $4 billion in net revenues.
But even that doesn’t count all the repeat business from the future victims who suffer neurological side effects from the vaccines and have to be institutionalized and subjected to high-dollar medical care for years on end. In all, a mass vaccination program could end up generating over ten billion dollars in revenues for drug companies.
These numbers just don’t add up
Now let’s look at some serious statistics: If one million people have already been infected with swine flu, and 500 have died, that’s a fatality rate of 1 out of 2000 people. Depending on which research you believe, vaccines might at most be credited with preventing 1% of flu deaths during any given flu season (and that’s being very generous to the vaccine). So here’s the question:
How many people have to be vaccinated with the new swine flu vaccine to save ONE life from a swine flu fatality?
(Notice, carefully, this question has never been asked in the mainstream media. That’s because the answer isn’t exactly what most people want to hear…)
This question is easy to answer, actually. If the vaccine were 100% effective (that is, they prevented every death that would have otherwise occurred), they could be credited with saving 1 life out of 2000, right? Because that’s the normal death rate for this particular virus (these figures are widely quoted by AP, Reuters and the White House, by the way).
But no vaccine is 100% effective. As I mentioned above, seasonal flu vaccines might — at a stretch — be credited with preventing 1% of the deaths that might otherwise have occurred. With this 1% effectiveness factor calculated back into the formula for swine flu (assuming the same 1% effectiveness factor), it turns out that you would have to vaccinate 200,000 people to save ONE life from swine flu.
That puts a whole new perspective on the vaccine push, doesn’t it? 200,000 vaccines costs taxpayers roughly $5,000,000, and it subjects 200,000 people to the potential side effects of these vaccines which have never been subjected to any long-term testing whatsoever.
It all begs the question: Is it really worth it?
Is it worth spending $5 million and exposing 200,000 people to potentially dangerous vaccine side effects in order to prevent ONE death from swine flu? And why isn’t anybody breaking down the numbers on this issue and providing a serious cost / benefit analysis as I’m doing here?
Let’s be generous to the vaccine…
Vaccine pushers might argue that the vaccine is far more than 1% effective at preventing swine flu deaths. In their wildest dreams, they might imagine a death reduction rate of, say, a wildly optimistic 10%. But even considering that, is it worth it? If the vaccine stops 10% of deaths that would have otherwise occurred, that still means you’d have to vaccinate 200,000 people to prevent the deaths of ten people.
I’m going to throw out a wild guess here and suggest that far more than 10 people will be killed by the vaccine itself, completely nullifying any net reduction in total deaths. Mathematically, you see, mass swine flu vaccinations make absolutely no sense given the very low rate of fatalities being observed right now.
Just do something!
Of course, public health policy is never based on sense. It’s based on politics. And the politics demand that “they DO something!” That’s what the public wants: Do something! It doesn’t matter if doing something is worse than doing nothing… they just want to see some action.
It’s the same story with breast cancer screenings (almost completely useless), prostate cancer screenings (now proven to be far more harmful than helpful) and of course ADHD screening tests (which are only designed to trick parents into drugging their kids). Much of western medicine, it turns out, is complete hokum. We would all be better off without the screenings and without the vaccinations altogether.
There’s a highly credible book on this subject by authors Gerald E. Markle and Frances B. McCrea. It’s called What if Medicine Disappeared? ( www.amazon.com...…)
This book argues quite persuasively (and with the citation of many convincing studies) that western medicine offers virtually no net gain in quality of life to the very people it claims to serve. Doctors, hospitals, vaccines and cancer clinics could all disappear tomorrow and most people would actually be far better off. Of course, no one disputes the value of having emergency rooms to handle acute trauma and accidents, but when it comes to preventive medicine and protecting quality of life, western medicine is a near-total failure.
When it comes to swine flu vaccines, any honest look at the math reveals that 200,000 people will have to be vaccinated with a largely untested experimental vaccine in order to prevent the death of one person (or ten people, if you really believe in vaccines). Remembering that more than one person in 200,000 will almost certainly be killed by the vaccine itself, it really makes you wonder: What’s the point of all this?
The point, of course, is to sell vaccines. It’s the one math problem that everybody understands: To make money, you have to sell a product, and there’s no better way to sell vaccines to 160 million people than to scare them into begging for injections that are statistically opposed their own self interests. But I suppose anything is possible in a country where state governments can punitively tax the poor by convincing them to play the lottery. People who play the lottery are very likely to be the same people getting vaccine shots: It’s like a lottery on your health, except that your odds of “winning” are far worse than your odds of winning something in a state lotto.
Let’s see: You have a 1 in 1 chance of being injected with foreign viral matter, and yet you only have a 1 in 200,000 chance of your life being saved by it.
Allow me to put this into perspective: You have a 40 times greater chance of being struck by lightning at some point in your life than having your life saved by the swine flu vaccine. (Source: National Weather Service statistics.)
Mathematically speaking, getting a swine flu injection and hoping it will save your life is more foolish than buying a lotto ticket with your last dollar and hoping you’ll scratch off a multi-million dollar winning ticket.
And buying a lotto ticket doesn’t risk the health of your nervous system, by the way. You can always earn back a buck, but restoring your nervous system after it’s attacked by a rogue vaccine can take years or decades. Some never recover. (Thousands died from the 1976 vaccines.)
Pop quiz: What’s the actual cost of vaccinating 160 million Americans with an unproven, experimental swine flu vaccine?
Answer: $1.6 billion plus countless victims with strange neurological disorders, comas and sudden death — all of which will be written off as “coincidence” by the vaccine pushers.
Free flu shots for the unemployed
As this article was about to go to press, I couldn’t help but notice a new announcement by CVS and Walgreens pharmacies. The powers that be are so desperate to get all Americans injected with this experimental vaccine that CVS and Walgreens are now offering free swine flu vaccine injections to anyone who doesn’t have a job!
That’s right: Just show up, prove you’re unemployed, and you get jabbed at no charge. (Who said losing your job didn’t have some benefits, huh?) Conspiracy theorists might suggest this is a clever way to clear the streets of “useless eaters.” Just lure the jobless into some experimental vaccine program, inject them and send them on their way. Next, will retailers start handing out free Soylent Green too?
Er......... Didn't I read that it's not we old and infirm that at risk from Swiney Flu, but the young and callow. We veterans of several exposures to proper flu have built up a bit of resistence to the Porky Virus. I don't mind taking preference over the Micky Dee generation, but if they all get wiped out, who's going to pay for my pension?
JandJ
You know that the people who have died are the ones with underlying medical conditions, well that is me I am seriously imuno surpressed. I am just as likely to die of normal flu which is why I have the normal flu jab. I'm not panicing as I have no control over if I get it or not. However I will take any vaccine offered if it means I have a greater chance of not contracting it.
You know that the people who have died are the ones with underlying medical conditions, well that is me I am seriously imuno surpressed. I am just as likely to die of normal flu which is why I have the normal flu jab. I'm not panicing as I have no control over if I get it or not. However I will take any vaccine offered if it means I have a greater chance of not contracting it.
Smart roadster said:
JandJ
You know that the people who have died are the ones with underlying medical conditions, well that is me I am seriously imuno surpressed. I am just as likely to die of normal flu which is why I have the normal flu jab. I'm not panicing as I have no control over if I get it or not. However I will take any vaccine offered if it means I have a greater chance of not contracting it.
Ah, that is a different issue.You know that the people who have died are the ones with underlying medical conditions, well that is me I am seriously imuno surpressed. I am just as likely to die of normal flu which is why I have the normal flu jab. I'm not panicing as I have no control over if I get it or not. However I will take any vaccine offered if it means I have a greater chance of not contracting it.
In which case, can the doctors not provide a slightly lower dosage for you as a vaccine?
recall reading some poll of nhs workers of who was going to get the swine flu vaccination, unlike the yearly swine flu jabs that are carefully tested, this has been rushed thru with minimal testing
got no issues with the regular vaccine, not sure will bother with this offering
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/ar...
5 days from being developed to being used in people...
got no issues with the regular vaccine, not sure will bother with this offering
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/ar...
5 days from being developed to being used in people...
Scraggles said:
recall reading some poll of nhs workers of who was going to get the swine flu vaccination, unlike the yearly swine flu jabs that are carefully tested, this has been rushed thru with minimal testing
got no issues with the regular vaccine, not sure will bother with this offering
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/ar...
5 days from being developed to being used in people...
Quite. As has been previously posted, the 1976 US flu 'vaccine' claimed more lives than the disease itself. got no issues with the regular vaccine, not sure will bother with this offering
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/ar...
5 days from being developed to being used in people...
Saddle bum said:
Er......... Didn't I read that it's not we old and infirm that at risk from Swiney Flu, but the young and callow. We veterans of several exposures to proper flu have built up a bit of resistence to the Porky Virus. I don't mind taking preference over the Micky Dee generation, but if they all get wiped out, who's going to pay for my pension?
What about people who pick up everything going? Surely we'll be ok? (achoo)
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff