Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-18-2009, 07:28 PM
 
3,886 posts, read 10,079,659 times
Reputation: 1486

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by renovating View Post
My entire family gets the seasonal flu shot every year. And, we have never had the flu or even a mild strain of it. Except...the one year that there were shortages...and only high risk could get the shot...so only 1 child received the vaccine that year and guess what??? Except for him, we all were sick with the flu that winter and it was truly awful.

So, for us, you bet it works!
Wow, you and your family truly beat all odds! Thats better than any trials I've read. Lucky!!!! The percentages aren't even that good.

It might be the placebo effect, think your not going to get it, you won't get it. So keep up the good thoughts, trying to adopt some of those my self lately.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-19-2009, 07:29 PM
 
5,644 posts, read 13,225,081 times
Reputation: 14170
Here you go:

1. A randomized, prospective, double blinded controlled study conducted over 3 years......Oh yeah, sorry to say it showed the flu vaccine to be effective. Mod cut: not necessary.

JAMA -- Abstract: Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccine in Health Care Professionals: A Randomized Trial, March 10, 1999, Wilde et al. 281 (10): 908

2. Another randomized, placebo controlled study, once AGAIN demonstrating the EFFICACY of flu vaccine.

Randomized, placebo-controlled double blind study on the eff... : The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal

3. Here is another randomized, double blind, placebo controlled study showing....surprise...surprise...the efficacy of flu vaccine even in a population of HIV infected individuals. Again, only from the Annals of Internal Medicine...not Mercola or one of "those" sites.

Efficacy of Influenza Vaccination in HIV-Infected Persons: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial -- Tasker et al. 131 (6): 430 -- Annals of Internal Medicine


So yes Virginia there "are" RCT to prove flu vaccine efficacy...

But meta analysis and retrospective studies are far from useless, suffice it to say there is OVERWHELMING statistical evidence to prove the efficacy of the flu vaccine.

And just because cold attenuated LAIV viruses like those used in the FluMist preparation are a relatively novel method of provoking an immune response it is blatantly false and irresponsible to state, as you have, that the immune response and "vaccine science" as a whole is some misunderstood "black box"

Here is a very elegant and informative, (as well as topically related to flu virus and vaccine,) paper on the immune response and how vaccines work.

Not sure what you are going on about, but in the real world, "Acquired Immunity" whether it occurs "naturally" or via "vaccination"...its the SAME thing....and contrary to your belief it IS well understood...

http://cmbi.bjmu.cn/news/report/2005/flu/54.pdf

Last edited by Viralmd; 10-20-2009 at 05:53 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2009, 09:25 PM
 
15,070 posts, read 8,629,287 times
Reputation: 7427
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevilz View Post
Here you go:

1. A randomized, prospective, double blinded controlled study conducted over 3 years......Oh yeah, sorry to say it showed the flu vaccine to be effective. Mod cut: not necessary.

JAMA -- Abstract: Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccine in Health Care Professionals: A Randomized Trial, March 10, 1999, Wilde et al. 281 (10): 908

2. Another randomized, placebo controlled study, once AGAIN demonstrating the EFFICACY of flu vaccine.

Randomized, placebo-controlled double blind study on the eff... : The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal

3. Here is another randomized, double blind, placebo controlled study showing....surprise...surprise...the efficacy of flu vaccine even in a population of HIV infected individuals. Again, only from the Annals of Internal Medicine...not Mercola or one of "those" sites.

Efficacy of Influenza Vaccination in HIV-Infected Persons: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial -- Tasker et al. 131 (6): 430 -- Annals of Internal Medicine


So yes Virginia there "are" RCT to prove flu vaccine efficacy...

But meta analysis and retrospective studies are far from useless, suffice it to say there is OVERWHELMING statistical evidence to prove the efficacy of the flu vaccine.

And just because cold attenuated LAIV viruses like those used in the FluMist preparation are a relatively novel method of provoking an immune response it is blatantly false and irresponsible to state, as you have, that the immune response and "vaccine science" as a whole is some misunderstood "black box"

Here is a very elegant and informative, (as well as topically related to flu virus and vaccine,) paper on the immune response and how vaccines work.

Not sure what you are going on about, but in the real world, "Acquired Immunity" whether it occurs "naturally" or via "vaccination"...its the SAME thing....and contrary to your belief it IS well understood...

http://cmbi.bjmu.cn/news/report/2005/flu/54.pdf
total nonsense. If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull.

I posted information TOS violationprovided by the vaccine manufacturer that stated that they don't understand the mechanisms that confer protection ... in either vaccine induced or naturally acquired immunity. The info also described enough possible situations that the vaccine might not work as to effectively declare them useless.

Secondly, I've reviewed the "tests" and they are as useless as the vaccines. They are not controlled studies that could produce legitimate results, they are uncontrolled, tailored studies to provide desired results.

And people are waking up. You're on the wrong side of this debate.

Last edited by Viralmd; 10-20-2009 at 05:54 AM.. Reason: No comments on moderator actions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2009, 06:08 PM
 
5,644 posts, read 13,225,081 times
Reputation: 14170
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
total nonsense. If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull.

I posted information TOS violationprovided by the vaccine manufacturer that stated that they don't understand the mechanisms that confer protection ... in either vaccine induced or naturally acquired immunity. The info also described enough possible situations that the vaccine might not work as to effectively declare them useless.

Secondly, I've reviewed the "tests" and they are as useless as the vaccines. They are not controlled studies that could produce legitimate results, they are uncontrolled, tailored studies to provide desired results.

And people are waking up. You're on the wrong side of this debate.
You posted the information from ONE insert, the insert for a relatively novel type of vaccine intranasal LAIV....because the EXACT mechanism of how cold attenuated viruses set up housekeeping in the nasal passages resulting in a systemic immune response hasn't been worked out doesn't prove any of your other points.

1. That doesn't mean the mechanism of action for ALL vaccines and in particular flu vaccine injectable forms are unknown. I posted an excellent overview of the immune response and how vaccines work.

2. It doesn't mean intranasal flu vaccines DON'T work....because they clearly DO.

How vaccines work IS well understood, well by those of us who have actually studied the subject anyway.

So glad to hear YOU reviewed the tests. Mod cut: not necessary.
Mod cut Those were CLEARLY controlled randomized studies. Because you don't agree with the results impugning the study designs would be the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming nah nah a boo boo....

Wrong side of the debate.....I don't think so.

The basic science behind immunology and acquired immunity is no more debatable than the shape of the earth.....

Of course, if you want to have a debate it helps to have some corroborating evidence....something you clearly haven't demonstrated.

Last edited by Viralmd; 10-20-2009 at 06:32 PM.. Reason: Please STOP the personal attacks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2009, 08:53 AM
 
Location: Pacific Northwest
1,075 posts, read 4,310,497 times
Reputation: 872
I just find it all so confusing.

My SO had the flu shot for a few years, and always seemed to get the flu a couple of times of year, regardless. Seems the flu shot is always just a flu behind.

I've never had one, and also don't get the flu. Each time he's sick, I still never get it, even though he's coughing in my face at night and so on. (but then, I wash my hands)

Just a few wks ago on the news and in our newspaper, new studies showed that having previously had flu shots, people were then twice as susceptible to getting H1N1 (B.C., Canada). Also that B.C. had the highest rate of H1N1.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2009, 01:36 AM
 
15,070 posts, read 8,629,287 times
Reputation: 7427
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevilz View Post
You posted the information from ONE insert, the insert for a relatively novel type of vaccine intranasal LAIV....because the EXACT mechanism of how cold attenuated viruses set up housekeeping in the nasal passages resulting in a systemic immune response hasn't been worked out doesn't prove any of your other points.
Love it. Information gleaned from a an article in a journal and sounds impressive. Mod cut: not necessary

The information in insert that I've posted several times that you are referring to, keeps getting conveniently removed citing copyright violation. But, it nevertheless states that the mechanisms conferring protection after the administration of the vaccine is not fully understood. But it also states that "likewise, naturally acquired immunity from wild type influenza infection has not been completely elucidated". This declaration by a flu vaccine manufacturer admits that the mechanisms involved in EITHER naturally acquired immunity OR vaccine induced immunity to influenza is either still being debated, or not fully understood.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevilz View Post
1. That doesn't mean the mechanism of action for ALL vaccines and in particular flu vaccine injectable forms are unknown. I posted an excellent overview of the immune response and how vaccines work.

2. It doesn't mean intranasal flu vaccines DON'T work....because they clearly DO.

How vaccines work IS well understood, well by those of us who have actually studied the subject anyway.
1) Again, since the mechanisms of action for naturally acquired immunity is still subject of debate, the artificial immunity allegedly invoked by the vaccines (of whatever variety) cannot be fully understood. As for your "excellent review" posted .. maybe you should send it to MedImmune .. they clearly need this valuable information.

2) Again, IF the vaccine actually does work as they "think" it does (antibody and or T cell action), they also admit that those who need protection the most (those with weakened or compromised immune systems) are not likely to respond to the vaccine. "They" call this a "slight medical irony". What they don't say is that the reverse is also true ... those with strong immune systems that are likely to produce the desired antibody response really don't need the vaccine. Bottom line ... for those that need it, it doesn't work, and for those in which the vaccine might work, really don't need it. So you can dance around that all you want. The flu vaccine quackery is akin to drilling holes in peoples heads that are suffering migraines. That too was an established practice at one time, you know?

It's all about asking questions and using common sense. Common sense being the rarity that it is today, and with a population who view medical professionals as some form of God/Genius combination, they simply do what they are told to do without asking questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevilz View Post
So glad to hear YOU reviewed the tests. Mod cut: not necessary.
Mod cut Those were CLEARLY controlled randomized studies. Because you don't agree with the results impugning the study designs would be the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming nah nah a boo boo....
Mod cut: not necessaryThe fact is that anyone remotely familiar with how these studies are conducted (never mind the conflict of interests in a company testing it's own products or paying a sub to do their testing) know full well that study design has EVERYTHING to do with the quality and legitimacy of the results. You can design a study to show any predetermined results you want to show. And when it comes to the huge amounts of money spent/earned in pharmaceutical testing .. you can bet your life that the testers are very well aware of the consequences of product failure. And you can easily find references to dozens of instances of studies not only designed in favor of "successful" results, but also many examples of outright fraud by exclusion of certain unfavorable results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevilz View Post
Wrong side of the debate.....I don't think so.

The basic science behind immunology and acquired immunity is no more debatable than the shape of the earth.....

Of course, if you want to have a debate it helps to have some corroborating evidence....something you clearly haven't demonstrated.
Sorry to inform you that the flat earth theory was disproved a while back. And the basic science of immunology is about as old as the flat earthers too. Not much has changed from then until now, and there is no scientifically sound, unbiased proof that ANY vaccine has ever eradicated a single disease. In the case of influenza, vaccines may in fact assist in speeding up the virus's already well adapted ability to mutate, rendering the vaccine useless to anyone, including those that may have acquired some degree of natural immunity. Though there is plenty of evidence to suggest that it's been one of the best ways to create greater epidemics, and mass death.

Every instance throughout the entire history of immunology shows wider spread and greater death tolls in the areas where mandatory vaccination programs were established, while the reverse was true regarding the unvaccinated populations. That vaccination programs even exist at all in this modern age is a testament to the dreadful state of education, and the lack of ethics within the industry.

That's the god's honest truth that anyone can research and verify for themselves.

Last edited by Viralmd; 10-23-2009 at 05:14 AM.. Reason: Personal attacks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2009, 05:04 AM
 
Location: Western Cary, NC
4,348 posts, read 7,355,255 times
Reputation: 7276
Looks like a bad fall and winter if these projections are correct. This is from the this weeks update in DC. and comes with the H1N1 vaccines running out every day in most NC clinics.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/08/24/us.swine.flu.projections/index.html

The H1N1 flu virus could cause up to 90,000 U.S. deaths, mainly among children and young adults, if it resurges this fall as expected, according to a report released Monday by a presidential advisory panel.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2009, 05:28 AM
 
Location: somewhere
4,264 posts, read 9,278,166 times
Reputation: 3165
Quote:
Originally Posted by cncracer View Post
Looks like a bad fall and winter if these projections are correct. This is from the this weeks update in DC. and comes with the H1N1 vaccines running out every day in most NC clinics.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/08/24/us.swine.flu.projections/index.html

The H1N1 flu virus could cause up to 90,000 U.S. deaths, mainly among children and young adults, if it resurges this fall as expected, according to a report released Monday by a presidential advisory panel.
What I don't get about this article it saying if it resurges, the truth of the matter it never went away, there were cases being seen in the summer. Definately more widespread now but that should have been expected with school now in session. Then I went back and looked at the date on the article and it was dated Aug 24, so it is alittle outdated and we now know it did resurge but for most people it is still mild virus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2009, 08:31 AM
 
3,763 posts, read 12,547,056 times
Reputation: 6855
There is a grand "unethical" experiment occuring right now. Many are getting vaccinated. When the illness (whatever illness: Flu, polio, smallpox, measels, etc..) hits, they feel they'll be protected.

Many others (apparently GuyNTexas among them) are against vaccines, and presumably will not be getting them. When the illness hits - they feel they'll be protected. Or that it won't hit? Or something....

One of these groups will be right about vaccine's protections. One will be wrong. See - they've just assorted themselves into two study groups: vaccinated and not. Didn't have to sign a informed consent form or anything.

There's your experiment. You've volunteered for it. Pick your side and take your chances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-23-2009, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Pacific Northwest
1,075 posts, read 4,310,497 times
Reputation: 872
Those are the best studies, the one's that become apparent over time. Unfortunately it seems to take about twenty or thirty years before we all see a common trend, IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top