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.
If you watch nothing else, watch the first 10 min. of this, more if you can.
The money is made in all the side effects subsequent to the vaccines. They are guaranteed repeat business because you are compromising your immune system thus opening the door to disease.
32% of the CDC budget is for vaccines, a good portion of that for flu vaccinations. It's all about the money! The sicker you are, the more treatments they can sell you.
"Many"? Do you have supporting data for this? How many is "many"? I would surmise that "many" use it once in awhile but not routinely.
"Serological Testing for Influenza
Serological tests, including virus NT, HI, complement fixation,
EIA, and indirect immunofluorescence microscopy, are based
on the presence of influenza-specific antibodies that first appear
¡«2 weeks after initial infection and that reach peak levels 4¨C7
weeks after initial infection. These tests are not widely available
and are rarely used for patient management......
.....Test selection is governed by multiple factors outlined in table
3. The size and capacity of the laboratory have a major impact.
Small laboratories associated with physician offices or small
hospitals are usually restricted to the use of rapid POC tests,
which require minimal infrastructure and can be performed by
staff with limited knowledge of virology."
You don't know, even though you listen to the "experts". The topic is the flu vaccine, which supposedly triggers your immune system, because you just exposed yourself to several virus's, plus the additional chemicals included in the injection. Plus whatever else you give them consent to jab you with, for convenience sake.
Now listen to this. In all the studies reviewed in 2004 and again in 2006, conclusion: The flu vaccine is no more effective than a placebo!!!! The marketing is highly successful, the vaccine, not so much.
Twenty-four(13.4%) of 179 control subjects and 3 (1.7%) of 180 influenza vaccine recipients had serologic evidence of influenza type A or B infection during the study period. Vaccine efficacy against serologically defined infection was 88% for influenza A (95% confidence interval [CI], 47%-97%; P=.001) and 89% for influenza B (95% CI, 14%-99%; P=.03). Among influenza vaccinees, cumulative days of reported febrile respiratory illness were 28.7 per 100 subjects compared with 40.6 per 100 subjects in controls (P=.57) and days of absence were 9.9 per 100 subjects vs 21.1 per 100 subjects in controls (P=.41).
Get that? The unvaccinated group was almost 8 times more likely to get flu. That's not the same as placebo.
Very seldom is a swab taken to determine if what the patient has is some type of influenza or something else. It is, therefore, very misleading and unscientific to report a "large", "medium", "small" or "bad" etc. outbreak. Yes, it could be reported for the patients who were actually tested but we seldom hear this statistic. We hear, instead, basically that a number of people are coughing, sniffling, and aching in Emergency rooms and physicians offices.
Patient's reports are subjective and depend on their perception of symptoms and what other conditions they might have. Without lab testing physicians are relying on anecdotal information, how the patient presents (general appearance, vital signs, ENT exam, lung sounds, etc.)- the usual cursory exam. Fever, muscle aches, malaise, and cough are symptoms of many diseases including a severe common cold. Nobody knows how many cases of bonafide flu there are because lab testing is done in only the most dire cases.
The bold is untrue. This has already been answered, but tests using nasal swabs are available and many doctors' offices are using them. I know this b/c I work in one that uses them, and b/c we don't treat adults, our parents are going to their own doctors and getting the tests there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostrider275452
No, it doesn't, but it does have to do with immunity building.
But not to flu. Flu viruses do not live in dirt. It's funny, there are many people who are opposed to immunizations (not you) who yap all the time about how we should "challenge our immune systems" which is exactly what immunization does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DifferentDrum
"Many"? Do you have supporting data for this? How many is "many"? I would surmise that "many" use it once in awhile but not routinely.
"Serological Testing for Influenza
Serological tests, including virus NT, HI, complement fixation,
EIA, and indirect immunofluorescence microscopy, are based
on the presence of influenza-specific antibodies that first appear
¡«2 weeks after initial infection and that reach peak levels 4¨C7
weeks after initial infection. These tests are not widely available
and are rarely used for patient management......
.....Test selection is governed by multiple factors outlined in table
3. The size and capacity of the laboratory have a major impact.
Small laboratories associated with physician offices or small
hospitals are usually restricted to the use of rapid POC tests,
which require minimal infrastructure and can be performed by
staff with limited knowledge of virology."
We can know about death rates in years when the wrong virus(es) were chosen for the vaccine. They remained the SAME as any other years.
We cannot know the efficacy of the flu vaccine because appropriate double blind studies have never been done using placebo vs. actual vaccine.
Claudhopper posted an EXCELLENT article and, being blessed with great curiosity and a wonderful attention span, I actually read it the whole way through! Highly recommended reading:
I'm not dead -- I've never missed a day of work or college from illness -- in my whole life and I've never had a flu vaccine. I'll probably retire someday without ever having called in sick to work. If I've had the flu, it was so mild that I didn't even know I had it.
Twenty-four(13.4%) of 179 control subjects and 3 (1.7%) of 180 influenza vaccine recipients had serologic evidence of influenza type A or B infection during the study period. Vaccine efficacy against serologically defined infection was 88% for influenza A (95% confidence interval [CI], 47%-97%; P=.001) and 89% for influenza B (95% CI, 14%-99%; P=.03). Among influenza vaccinees, cumulative days of reported febrile respiratory illness were 28.7 per 100 subjects compared with 40.6 per 100 subjects in controls (P=.57) and days of absence were 9.9 per 100 subjects vs 21.1 per 100 subjects in controls (P=.41).
Get that? The unvaccinated group was almost 8 times more likely to get flu. That's not the same as placebo.
Many who get the vaccine get the flu also but figure it must not be the important kind of flu and don't go to the doctor.
How many people actually go running to a doctor when they have the flu? Don't most people just head to bed early and figure it will be gone in a day or two? It's impossible really for the "experts" to say how many flu cases there actually are.
I think when people are in panic mode like they are because of all the media hype, if they meant to get the vaccine and suddenly get a sniffle, they're more likely to run to an emergency room in fear for their lives. If I should get the flu, I'll do what seems the most sensible thing to do -- maybe buy some honey and whisky and lemon and make that old-time treatment of all that ails you, and head under a pile of blankets and be cured by morning.
Many who get the vaccine get the flu also but figure it must not be the important kind of flu and don't go to the doctor.
How many people actually go running to a doctor when they have the flu? Don't most people just head to bed early and figure it will be gone in a day or two? It's impossible really for the "experts" to say how many flu cases there actually are.
I think when people are in panic mode like they are because of all the media hype, if they meant to get the vaccine and suddenly get a sniffle, they're more likely to run to an emergency room in fear for their lives. If I should get the flu, I'll do what seems the most sensible thing to do -- maybe buy some honey and whisky and lemon and make that old-time treatment of all that ails you, and head under a pile of blankets and be cured by morning.
You should read post 119 in this thread. Maybe you missed it.
You should read post 119 in this thread. Maybe you missed it.
Who is to say? Whatever works is what works. You have to wonder why people in other countries aren't dropping dead in large numbers from this influenza like people in the are. Most likely they just turn to the traditional remedies and survive.
I'm not going to have messed up pieces of RNA injected into my body, if you want that, go right ahead. I'd rather just get the real thing and build up my immune system.
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.
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.
