Is this for real or an onion? Anthrax vaccine trials in children? - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 44 Old 10-27-2011, 05:19 PM
 
carmel23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 5,156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I haven't read this entire thread, but I just wanted to add that I heard this on the way home on NPR!

 

Here is a link as to why/what: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2011/10/27/how-to-test-the-anthrax-vaccine-in-children/

 

I am usually okay with vaccines, but this really freaks me out.  I would not participate in something like this. 


 hh2.gif  ~~~~~~~~~~hh2.gif
 

carmel23 is offline  
#32 of 44 Old 10-27-2011, 05:36 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 2,007
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)

People who have been on the "inside" and know what is really going on. Those who have retired, or left to work elsewhere, who have the knowledge about certain organizations. I find them to be more credible than the controlled media, full of catchy talking points.

 

Gwen Olson, a former pharmaceutical sales rep: http://www.gwenolsen.com/

 


 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
#33 of 44 Old 10-27-2011, 07:46 PM
 
Imakcerka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)


You have to look around really.  Sometimes I use outside media such as other countries.  What vested interest do they have in some of our news.  Not much unless it's related to "other" things.  The other means would be historical data.  Trends things like that.  I will use mainstream because there could be truth in what they say.  I don't automatically discount anything, but I do question.  I think everyone should.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zinemama View Post


But what are those ten sites that you trust? Or do you mean that you look at ten different media/government sites in general, in order to suss out inconsistencies and such? And once you find them, what are the "other means" you use to fact-check?


 

Imakcerka is offline  
#34 of 44 Old 10-28-2011, 07:25 AM
 
AsYouWish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the dark without a sidewalk
Posts: 702
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

 

Yeah, actually I think of it as more like a malicious prank than an attack.  Sorry to confuse you, but I do appreciate the condescension. 
 

 


Wow, the implications of this statement are really racist and xenophobic. So, what, only brown foreign people perform terrorist attacks on the American population? I bet the Oklahoma City bombing was merely a prank too, huh?

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Imakcerka View Post

Problem is, I was working Intel during 9/11.  There is no evidence that supports your claim.  As far as Anthrax being deadly.  Yes it is.  However the first set of Americans that got the Anthrax vaccine will not tell you it's harmless.  My brother will not tell you it's harmless.  Pick and choose I say.  Now of course we can all hope they have made some advances in that department.  Hope.  I will not be fear mongered.  I spent my time in the military world and I'm well aware of how to read between the lines. 
 



 


Yes, this is very believable. If the 2001 anthrax attacks were all a hoax, former "Intel" would totally be blabbing that information on a public forum in casual conversation.

 

D_McG likes this.
AsYouWish is offline  
#35 of 44 Old 10-28-2011, 08:38 AM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Asyouwish....do you have children?  Are you Ok with them being part of anthrax vaccine trials?

 

I think a lot of this thread is so OT, and is really more involved in trying to discredit posters rather than discuss the topic at hand - which is whether or not Anthrax vaccine trials on children are appropriate for children.  Sad.

 

Antrax does not seem like a huge threat.  Pers noted 5 people died, what, 10 years ago?  Imakcerka is questionning that.  Either way - it is somewhat moot.  Antrax is not a huge threat as far as I can tell.  If someone has further info on possible upcoming threats on Antrax I would like to see it.  

 

 

I would really like to know if anyone posting or lurking is pro anthrax vaccines trials on children - and if they would be willing to put their money where their mouth is and sign up their children.

 

 

 

Bokonon likes this.
purslaine is offline  
#36 of 44 Old 10-28-2011, 08:51 AM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by AsYouWish View Post


Wow, the implications of this statement are really racist and xenophobic. So, what, only brown foreign people perform terrorist attacks on the American population? I bet the Oklahoma City bombing was merely a prank too, huh?

 

 

 



What?  Wow, you're really reading a lot into it.  No, it doesn't matter who was the culprit for the anthrax mailings - I just don't see it as an attack.  And no, I don't see Oklahoma City as being a prank.  The point I was trying to make was that anthrax is being touted as a concern because of the boogeyman - AKA al Qaeda and such, when the last time anthrax was a concern, it had nothing to do with al Qaeda at all, though at first, the government and media tried to scare us into believing that it did.  Yeah, but *I'm* racist and xenophobic?  Hardly.

BeckyBird likes this.

A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#37 of 44 Old 10-28-2011, 12:32 PM - Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Well my earlier question stands, I would like to know who enrolls their children into this trial. I really, really do. Cause it's pretty insane to me and I wonder who would sign up their children or if as suggested by some posters kids in institutions who have no choice are force-volunteered. I will keep my ears open at the local military base to see if it is given to kids there.

nia82 is offline  
#38 of 44 Old 10-28-2011, 01:24 PM
 
carmel23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 5,156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by nia82 View Post

Well my earlier question stands, I would like to know who enrolls their children into this trial. I really, really do. Cause it's pretty insane to me and I wonder who would sign up their children or if as suggested by some posters kids in institutions who have no choice are force-volunteered. I will keep my ears open at the local military base to see if it is given to kids there.



Yes, I think that this is a fair question. If it weren't for all the adjuvants and poor track record with adults I might consider this, although my kids would have to make the choice for themselves. They were talking about a similar subject on NPR today-- and cities and emergency response people are more concerned about biological warfare then a dirty bomb because it is easier to obtain. 

 

In the CBS article above it asserts that people who work in intelligence and know that this is a real threat--and not just political fear mongering-- should sign their kids up. 

 

Because the general population will have to trust the same people who told us that there were WMD in Iraq... which their clearly were not. 

 

I am fairly pro-vax, and *would not* sign my kids up for this.  If they try to take advantage of poor people or military families, I would be MAD! 


 hh2.gif  ~~~~~~~~~~hh2.gif
 

carmel23 is offline  
#39 of 44 Old 10-28-2011, 06:06 PM
 
graceomalley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 755
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

I would really like to know if anyone posting or lurking is pro anthrax vaccines trials on children - and if they would be willing to put their money where their mouth is and sign up their children.

 

 

 



No, of course not. But there's a lot of room between signing your kids up for a vaccine trial and the idea that anthrax doesn't exist and the government is behind some hoax that keeps people believing in it (as said by former 'intel' who doesn't do conspiracy theories).

graceomalley is offline  
#40 of 44 Old 10-28-2011, 06:39 PM
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,666
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)

No testing for now....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45081236/ns/health-health_care/#.TqtZMvSECk4

emmy526 is offline  
#41 of 44 Old 10-29-2011, 04:26 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Personally, I'm not interested in vaccinating my children for anthrax, even though I generally consider vaccination a useful and rational public health measure and my kids are fully vaxed.  (Actually, that's not true right now - they're a little behind and are overdue for a doctor's visit, but they will be fully vaxed again soon.)  The vaccine is there for emergencies, and if there were an emergency and my children were close to it, I would consider it, but they're not and this particular vaccine has more risks than the ones in common use.  

 

I AM really interested in diseases.  When I have a question about a disease, its prevalence, its impacts, or the number of deaths it has caused, I turn to Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, a publication of the CDC.  Which is how I know that while anthrax has been rare in the US, there were cases of the disease and even human fatalities from it between 1940 and the anthrax attacks (which I'm going to persist in calling attacks, because that's what I call it when someone deliberately does something that injures or kills someone else).   Anthrax has historically been a cause of concern for people who work with cows and sheep, like the man this this case in North Dakota in 2000: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5032a1.htm.  

 

This demonstrates to me that clinicians in the US had, at the very least, easy access to case reports of anthrax in the US that were much more recent than 1940 when the anthrax attacks took place in 2001.  Was there hysteria in 2001-02 and in many cases since?  Certainly.  There were also cases of anthrax among postal workers and victims of the anthrax attacks.  

 

If I wanted to ruin my personal credibility on the internet while making myself the center of attention, I might start by claiming to have a security clearance that gave me access to super-secret information that no one else on the board has.  I like my credibility (such as it is) and I don't feel the need for that much attention, so rather than making ridiculous claims, I'm just going to point out that a number of the ridiculous claims made in this thread can be easily refuted by examining a variety of the reputable sources that will appear when one runs a quick google search on anthrax.  

 

 

stik is offline  
#42 of 44 Old 10-29-2011, 08:29 PM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

 

If I wanted to ruin my personal credibility on the internet while making myself the center of attention, I might start by claiming to have a security clearance that gave me access to super-secret information that no one else on the board has.  I like my credibility (such as it is) and I don't feel the need for that much attention, so rather than making ridiculous claims  

 

 


I don't think anyone who made interesting claims has ruined their credibility, and it is quite the leap  to assume they did it for attention.    People can make claims you find  "interesting " in one area, and still be credible in others.shrug.gif

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

purslaine is offline  
#43 of 44 Old 10-29-2011, 08:35 PM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

nm

 

 

 
purslaine is offline  
#44 of 44 Old 10-30-2011, 05:54 AM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

It is a leap to assume that they did it for attention.  However, the following claims have been made:

 

- There have been no anthrax deaths in the US since the 1940s

- The sending of anthrax through the mail does not constitute an attack

- Anthrax has never been used as a biological weapon

- The government and the media have joined hands in a massive conspiracy to freak you out

 

Those are all ludicrous.  There is plenty of evidence to refute those claims.  

 

I'm not losing sleep over the possibility of a second round of attacks in which my children (or anyone else's) might be victims.  Even if such an attack does occur, I would rather work to prevent exposure and treat it if it occurs than test the anthrax vaccine in children.  I think that as government officials look for solutions to these problems, they should remember that anthrax is common in livestock, and that people who work with livestock in the US and elsewhere have been working with protocols to manage exposure to anthrax for a long time.  How do ranching families handle this concern?  What are the treatment protocols for anthrax and anthrax exposure in children in the US?  What about in New Zealand?  

stik is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off