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.
So list all the antibiotics they have, with year over year sales against the number of cases of bacterial illness as well as MDRO and how that is taking a cut away from the business and then investigaete all the vaccines where they stand to gain.
As well as all the vaccines they have int the pipeline and how a ruling could potentially bring them more business since a rubber stamp mandatory will open up the vaccine industry for profits that are unheard of.
If that's your assumption. Where are YOUR numbers? Isn't that what you asked MT to do?
And no, I have no doubts that GSK will profit. YOU do. So back it up. With numbers. Prove your assertion. You have zero problem posting at all hours of the day, comment after comment, link after line. IF this is so important to you and being so close to the pharma industry you can find the numbers right?
Not holding my breath. Moving on. Cha CHING.
You are addressing this to the wrong person. I am not the one making the claim that GSK would make "a lot" of money if new vaccines had been added to the Colorado school schedule. Terri is. I do not have to do her work for her. She needs to tell us what "a lot" is, specifically for the state of Colorado for the GSK vaccines that would have been added to the schedule, and only for those who would be vaccinated solely because of the mandate.
I am not "so close to the pharma industry." Never have been, never will be.
I have shown that, overall, vaccines save health care dollars. Links already provided.
I have no assertion to back up. I am asking her to show how she derives her claim that GSK stood to make "a lot" of money by adding vaccines to Colorado's school schedule. In order to say the figure is "a lot" she has to know what the figure is. She needs to share that number with us. Keep in mind that she can only use the number for children that would have the vaccines only because it was mandated, not those who already get them because their doctors recommend them, even if they are not mandated.
How could GSK not profit with the addition of having their vaccines added to Colorado’s required for school schedule? Rotavirus, Hep A, Mennicougal. Do you believe that GSK would be giving away these vaccines away for free out of the goodness of their hearts?
In addition do you believe rotavirus is a threat to school aged children? What about Hep A? Do you think legislators should be the ones to unilaterally decide what gets added to the schedule without a stakeholder process?
That boy is the poster child for the harm done by vaccine refusal. In the case of tetanus he is the only one who suffered from his parents' decision not to vaccinate, because the disease is not contagious. Their refusal to complete the vaccine series, when the first dose of vaccine was part of the process of saving his life, is unconscionable.
Any VPD can lead to hospitalization, a stay in the ICU and a big hospital bill, including charges for medications. You can put pennies in pharma's pockets for vaccines or megabucks for meds used in the hospital. Even an ER visit can result in a five figure bill.
The argument that greedy drug companies just want vaccines on school schedules to make money totally ignores the pain, suffering, and deaths vaccines prevent. The bottom line is that vaccines save a whopping amount of money in direct health care costs and lost productivity.
"And CDC estimates that for the vaccination of children born between 1994 and 2018 has saved the U.S. nearly $406 billion in direct medical costs and $1.88 trillion in total society costs."
"The CDC estimates that it costs approximately $140,000 to contain each individual case of measles, and every single measles case requires follow up. That adds up to more than $266 million spent by public health to stop the spread of measles just in the past several years."
Save your effort Suzie. The anti-vaxers are beyond; the ability to understand science, the ability to reason, and they put their stubborn principles ahead of their own childrens' welfare. Hopeless case.
The only way to get through to them is when health insurance refuses to pay for complications related to vaccine preventable illnesses. This will be coming if the trend continues of parents refusing to vaccinate their children.
So list all the antibiotics they have, with year over year sales against the number of cases of bacterial illness as well as MDRO and how that is taking a cut away from the business and then investigaete all the vaccines where they stand to gain.
As well as all the vaccines they have int the pipeline and how a ruling could potentially bring them more business since a rubber stamp mandatory will open up the vaccine industry for profits that are unheard of.
If that's your assumption. Where are YOUR numbers? Isn't that what you asked MT to do?
And no, I have no doubts that GSK will profit. YOU do. So back it up. With numbers. Prove your assertion. You have zero problem posting at all hours of the day, comment after comment, link after line. IF this is so important to you and being so close to the pharma industry you can find the numbers right?
Not holding my breath. Moving on. Cha CHING.
I would like to see those numbers as well. Since we have to back everything up with figures then surely Suzy can prove her assertion.
The anti-vaxers remind me of the stubborn people who refused to wear a seat belt in spite of the research showing that it saved lives. That was until it was made a law because some refuse to be responsible and when they fail, they expect others to pay.
I would like to see those numbers as well. Since we have to back everything up with figures then surely Suzy can prove her assertion.
It was YOUR assertion (it’s in post #32 in case you forgot). It’s up to YOU prove that GSK stands to make “a lot of money” and to define what amount that would be.
Save your effort Suzie. The anti-vaxers are beyond; the ability to understand science, the ability to reason, and they put their stubborn principles ahead of their own childrens' welfare. Hopeless case.
The only way to get through to them is when health insurance refuses to pay for complications related to vaccine preventable illnesses. This will be coming if the trend continues of parents refusing to vaccinate their children.
I agree. Measles outbreaks will continue and worsen. People will die, some of them small kids. The anti vax crowd thinks their waivers are under fire now, but they haven’t see nothin’ yet. The death of a child will send state legislators scrambling to tighten the rules and remove all but medical waivers.
First world nations with higher measles rates than ours are already taking drastic steps to curb the number of vaccines being skipped, it’s just a matter of time until the same happens here.
How could GSK not profit with the addition of having their vaccines added to Colorado’s required for school schedule? Rotavirus, Hep A, Mennicougal. Do you believe that GSK would be giving away these vaccines away for free out of the goodness of their hearts?
In addition do you believe rotavirus is a threat to school aged children? What about Hep A? Do you think legislators should be the ones to unilaterally decide what gets added to the schedule without a stakeholder process?
Rotavirus vaccine is given only to infants, so I guess we can scratch that one off the school mandate list.
Tell us how much GSK would make from additional kids being vaccinated for meningitis and hepatitis A. You say it is "a lot." How much is "a lot?" It is your assertion to prove, not mine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice
I find it amazing how posters run away from research when it doesn't fit the provaccine agenda. Seen this again and again and again.
Also, where did I say shill? No where. Funny how that's how you think you're perceived. Interesting. I'll keep it in mind, thanks.
You said:
"IF this is so important to you and being so close to the pharma industry you can find the numbers right?"
"And I can only guess why you won't post about this one. Cha CHING. Cha CHING. Cha CHING."
"Not holding my breath. Moving on. Cha CHING."
All of those are pharma shill references.
None of those Cha CHINGs are in my bank account.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
I would like to see those numbers as well. Since we have to back everything up with figures then surely Suzy can prove her assertion.
Well, you are the one who made a claim based on "those numbers," so show them to us. In order to say they are "a lot" you must know what they are, right?
State and local governments in the United States have mandated immunizations as a prerequisite for attending public schools for quite some time. The Supreme Court has heard several challenges to these mandates and has consistently ruled the mandates to be constitutional.
Quote:
Jacobson v. Massachusetts case from 1905 in which the Court upheld the authority of state governments to enforce laws that require their citizens to be immunized
Only a matter of time before a immunosuppressed person contracts a serious illness from an unvaccinated child and sues the parents. Stay tuned.
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.
