Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
Old 12-22-2013, 08:55 PM
 
524 posts, read 398,284 times
Reputation: 265

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Please post documentation. The flu season is just getting underway. I have seen no stats for this season yet. You are referring to last year's vaccine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
We also have a specialized knowledge base. Sort of like engineers know engineering. You don't see thread after thread here on CD telling engineers how to build bridges, or whatever.

NVIC is an anit-immunization organization with zero credibility. I have seen no stats from any professional source about the efficacy of this year's vaccine. Last year's vax was not as effective as some have been.
National Vaccine Information Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Just because someone thinks vaccines are dangerous, that doesn't make them so. Anyone who wants to send their kids to day care should get them vaccinated.



Hell, I've read many a package insert. I read them every flu season when we get the vaccine. I didn't need your link from an anti-vax site. Are you now going to do a Pakistan thing and try to make people fearful for their fertility if they get immunized?

Those package I inserts that you have read "many a time" have the efficacy rate listed. I guess you haven't read them thoroughly, which surprises me because you present yourself as so knowledgeable.

Fail.

 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:01 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,219,944 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowrimol View Post
Those package I inserts that you have read "many a time" have the efficacy rate listed. I guess you haven't read them thoroughly, which surprises me because you present yourself as so knowledgeable.

Fail.
I have seen no stats for this season yet, which was the topic under discussion. Since you are trying to discredit me, post the *(&^W^ stats for the 2013-14 vaccine! I'm waiting.
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:03 PM
 
26,648 posts, read 13,594,731 times
Reputation: 19104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Just because someone thinks vaccines are dangerous, that doesn't make them so. Anyone who wants to send their kids to day care should get them vaccinated.
I'm trying to understand what you mean when you say "should". Are you saying that you would strongly prefer that all children get vaccinated prior to attending daycare or that you think it should be a requirement mandated by the government and enforced by law.
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:04 PM
 
524 posts, read 398,284 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
I have seen no stats for this season yet, which was the topic under discussion. Since you are trying to discredit me, post the *(&^W^ stats for the 2013-14 vaccine! I'm waiting.
I already provided you a link, I can't read for you. Do you expect me to put the entire clinical study of each vaccine offered? How ridiculous.

Still a fail.
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:17 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,219,944 times
Reputation: 35920
No, you fail. Those package inserts describe clinical trials that were done in years past. There is no data on the efficacy of the 2013-14 vaccine.
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:29 PM
 
26,648 posts, read 13,594,731 times
Reputation: 19104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
No, you fail. Those package inserts describe clinical trials that were done in years past. There is no data on the efficacy of the 2013-14 vaccine.
With that argument we may as well throw out all previous research on the flu vaccine because it's from "years past" and therefore can not be relevant to the current 2013-2014 strain. Right?
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:33 PM
 
524 posts, read 398,284 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
No, you fail. Those package inserts describe clinical trials that were done in years past. There is no data on the efficacy of the 2013-14 vaccine.

I'll give you the link again:

Influenza Disease and Vaccines - National Vaccine Information Center

This is the insert for GSK Fluarix

Page one, paragraph two:
Fluarix Quadrivalent Alent
Suspension for Intramuscular Injection
2013-2014 Formula
Initial U.S. Approval: 2012

Just because you feel that you are right doesn't mean you are. Have a good night.
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:42 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,219,944 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowrimol View Post
I'll give you the link again:

Influenza Disease and Vaccines - National Vaccine Information Center

This is the insert for GSK Fluarix

Page one, paragraph two:
Fluarix Quadrivalent Alent
Suspension for Intramuscular Injection
2013-2014 Formula
Initial U.S. Approval: 2012

Just because you feel that you are right doesn't mean you are. Have a good night.
From that link:

Results obtained following vaccination with FLUARIX manufactured for the 2004-2005 season.

For children's studies:
Results obtained following vaccination with FLUARIX manufactured for the 2006–2007 season.

Now suppose you provide some 2013-14 efficacy rates. Surely NVIC has this data. If not, they can make it up.
 
Old 12-22-2013, 09:56 PM
 
524 posts, read 398,284 times
Reputation: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
From that link:

Results obtained following vaccination with FLUARIX manufactured for the 2004-2005 season.

For children's studies:
Results obtained following vaccination with FLUARIX manufactured for the 2006–2007 season.

Now suppose you provide some 2013-14 efficacy rates. Surely NVIC has this data. If not, they can make it up.
I'm going to take a page from your book and ask you where this came from. Is it from the Fluarix Quadrivalent Alent or one of the other ten package inserts. And what section? You do know that the current years formula contains previous year's vaccines, or a modification there of, right?

How can you attempt to use NVIC when you completely discredited them earlier? You are all over the place!
 
Old 12-23-2013, 08:18 AM
 
14,862 posts, read 8,480,415 times
Reputation: 7306
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowrimol View Post
I'm going to take a page from your book and ask you where this came from. Is it from the Fluarix Quadrivalent Alent or one of the other ten package inserts. And what section? You do know that the current years formula contains previous year's vaccines, or a modification there of, right?

How can you attempt to use NVIC when you completely discredited them earlier? You are all over the place!
To defend vaccines, you have to be "all over the place". You can't do it otherwise.

The hard cold fact is, no efficacy prediction can be anymore than speculation, based on assumptions rather than hard facts.

First, there is no way to assess how many people "should" get the flu in any particular season, or how many are even exposed to infection. Furthermore, no one really knows how many people actually do get the flu, and how many of those people were vaccinated and not vaccinated. Most people who get the flu do not suffer such complications that require medical attention, let alone hospitalization. People generally do what they've ALWAYS DONE ... that is, they take tylenol, and stay in bed and drink hot tea until the symptoms subside, and then they go on with life as usual.

The best way to illustrate the fraud is using myself as an example, just as others can do using themselves similarly. I'm 56, and I've had the flu perhaps 3 times in my life. And to be truthful, none of those events were clinically confirmed as influenza infections, I just had flu symptoms, which can be caused by other infections ..... I'm just granting the assumption that it was influenza. Moreover, I have never taken a flu vaccine! So, in my case, doing NOTHING was 95% effective. Of course I have no way of knowing whether or not I was exposed to flu virus in any of those 53 flu free years, or how many times my natural immune system defeated an infection!

By the same measure, had I taken a flu vaccine every year of my life, I couldn't make any valid claims about the vaccine's effectiveness because of the same unkown factors of exposure incidents, and natural immune system response.

All that said, it's obvious to those that exercise that lost art of "thinking" that no truthful claims can be made regarding vaccine efficacy at all.
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.


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