Not Sure the Flu Vaccine Works? - Mothering Forums
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 9 Old 02-05-2013, 03:26 PM - Thread Starter
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sophia's Correction
Posts: 8,043
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 279 Post(s)

Neither are the manufacturers

 

 

http://www.anh-usa.org/not-sure-the-flu-vaccine-works/


Jupiter retrograde in the Crab - Release From Pretending
Mirzam is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 9 Old 02-05-2013, 03:41 PM
 
Jennyanydots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Cool poster! If copy the image and share it, but it seems to have a typo. Am I mistaken? It says "among vaccinated adults, only 1.2% did not catch the flu." That seems backwards.
Jennyanydots is offline  
#3 of 9 Old 02-05-2013, 03:47 PM - Thread Starter
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sophia's Correction
Posts: 8,043
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 279 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennyanydots View Post

Cool poster! If copy the image and share it, but it seems to have a typo. Am I mistaken? It says "among vaccinated adults, only 1.2% did not catch the flu." That seems backwards.

Well spotted, it does look like a typo.


Jupiter retrograde in the Crab - Release From Pretending
Mirzam is online now  
#4 of 9 Old 02-05-2013, 03:55 PM
 
Jennyanydots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,374
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Speaking of typos, my post contained one, too. Score one for irony smile.gif
Jennyanydots is offline  
#5 of 9 Old 02-06-2013, 06:32 AM
 
Dakotacakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 180
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)

First, in addition to the typo it is just incorrect to assume that because 2.7% of those not vaccinated for flu caught the flu and 1.2% of those that did vaccinate for the flue only 1.5 people were protected against the flu.  Because we don't know how many of each group were EXPOSED to the flu virus.    Without knowing exposure rates we cannot extrapolatethat only 1.5 people were protected against the flu.  I am also concerned they don't give more of a citation to back up this claim than "the lancet" I would like to read the actual article and see if they discuss exposure rates (my guess is they do).

 

As for the other issues of scary package inserts.  That is legalese and quite frankly they exist on everything including supplements and vitamens.  When we focus on vaccines and things then shouldn't we consider others as well?  For example:  Not sure that sodium ascorbate treats pertussis? ....Neither are the manufacturers.  From the insert

 

"These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. Consult your healthcare professionals before taking any dietary supplements." (bolding mine)

 

Concerned about scary side effects?  From the bottle of vitamin C

 

http://www.drugs.com/sfx/vitamin-c-side-effects.html

 

Swelling of the mouth and throat, dizziness, fainting, kidney stones.  Is

prosciencemum likes this.
Dakotacakes is online now  
#6 of 9 Old 02-06-2013, 07:49 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,474
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakotacakes View Post

First, in addition to the typo it is just incorrect to assume that because 2.7% of those not vaccinated for flu caught the flu and 1.2% of those that did vaccinate for the flue only 1.5 people were protected against the flu.  Because we don't know how many of each group were EXPOSED to the flu virus.    Without knowing exposure rates we cannot extrapolatethat only 1.5 people were protected against the flu.  I am also concerned they don't give more of a citation to back up this claim than "the lancet" I would like to read the actual article and see if they discuss exposure rates (my guess is they do).

 

As for the other issues of scary package inserts.  That is legalese and quite frankly they exist on everything including supplements and vitamens.  When we focus on vaccines and things then shouldn't we consider others as well?  For example:  Not sure that sodium ascorbate treats pertussis? ....Neither are the manufacturers.  From the insert

 

"These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. Consult your healthcare professionals before taking any dietary supplements." (bolding mine)

 

Concerned about scary side effects?  From the bottle of vitamin C

 

http://www.drugs.com/sfx/vitamin-c-side-effects.html

 

Swelling of the mouth and throat, dizziness, fainting, kidney stones.  Is

this made me chuckle. These types of comparisons always do. orngbiggrin.gif


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#7 of 9 Old 04-17-2013, 08:16 PM
 
newvillemom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

As far flu vaccines, there are no documented studies that prove that flu vaccines reduce the number of flu cases each year. In addition. the CDC admits its a gamble. They look at last years flu, and guess which one will come back around, and thats what they use to make their vaccines. Fact: There is a documented study that shows that those who received the flu vaccine had a higher mortality rate for H1N1 flu, than those that did not. Fact: There have been documented cases of CDC officials found to be taking kickbacks for promoting the flu vaccine. FACT: there are toxic metals in these vaccines. -mercury and aluminum. There is also formaldehyde.There is a study that shows that those who receive the flu vaccine in 10 consecutive does have a higher risk of developing Alzheimers by a factor of 10. There is a report out there that states teh flu vaccine has 5x the acceptable level of one of these toxic metals. Companies keep denying the link to autism after children receive their vaccines, but if you look at actions and results, it would seem otherwise. Many hospitals are now instituting mandatory vaccination policies.Congratulations! they have now created a hostile environment for their loyal employees, who, must either seek new jobs (I wonder how that's going to benefit the hospital), or submit unwillingly to having a toxic substance injected into their bodies.

newvillemom is offline  
#8 of 9 Old 04-18-2013, 08:36 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,951
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 627 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakotacakes View Post

First, in addition to the typo it is just incorrect to assume that because 2.7% of those not vaccinated for flu caught the flu and 1.2% of those that did vaccinate for the flue only 1.5 people were protected against the flu.  Because we don't know how many of each group were EXPOSED to the flu virus.    Without knowing exposure rates we cannot extrapolatethat only 1.5 people were protected against the flu.  I am also concerned they don't give more of a citation to back up this claim than "the lancet" I would like to read the actual article and see if they discuss exposure rates (my guess is they do).

 

This is very similar to numbers given by other studies - including Cochrane (which does meta analysis).  Whether or not people have been exposed is not really the issue - the issue is my chances of getting the flu with the vaccine is 1.2 and without it is 2.7. Exposure would be relevant if we were discussing vaccine efficacy, but we are not, we are discussing chance of disease in different populations.  

 

As for the other issues of scary package inserts.  That is legalese and quite frankly they exist on everything including supplements and vitamens.  When we focus on vaccines and things then shouldn't we consider others as well?  For example:  Not sure that sodium ascorbate treats pertussis? ....Neither are the manufacturers.  From the insert

 

"These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. Consult your healthcare professionals before taking any dietary supplements." (bolding mine)

 

Concerned about scary side effects?  From the bottle of vitamin C

 

http://www.drugs.com/sfx/vitamin-c-side-effects.html

 

Swelling of the mouth and throat, dizziness, fainting, kidney stones.  Is

 

Don't care.  First off, I think it is pretty lame for people to try and explain away package inserts by saying it is "legalese".  Secondly, if someone wants to avoid sodium ascorbate due to the package insert, have at it. It is your right - and you will not be kept out of schools, asked to leave a doctor's practice, or lose your job over it (all potential consequences for declining vaccines)

km


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#9 of 9 Old 04-18-2013, 03:21 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,343
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 109 Post(s)

That's really funny that the vaccine manufacturers "aren't sure how the flu shot works," because according to the Cochrane Review's lead author, Dr. Tom Jefferson (an M.D. AND an epidemiologist, specializing in upper respiratory diseases), the flu shot DOESN'T work!

 

 

In his Nov. 2 letter to The Vancouver Sun, Dr. Perry Kendall, the provincial health officer for British Columbia, misquotes our work suggesting that our Cochrane review in healthcare workers “reports that vaccinating health care workers protects patients from influenza, pneumonia (a complication of influenza), doctor’s visits, hospitalizations, and even death”.

 

Our 2010 review concludes no such thing. It is worth reporting a verbatim extract from our conclusions to show just how things can be distorted:

 

'No effect was shown for specific outcomes: laboratory-proven influenza, pneumonia and death from pneumonia.'



 http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Cochrane+review+vaccine+definitive+health+officer+suggests/7543272/story.html#ixzz2Qr8xW1EI

BeckyBird likes this.
Taximom5 is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

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



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not 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