[quote]HolyMacaroni wrote:
on edge wrote:
I’d hit it.
do you think she’s ok if she’s doing it doggy style?[/quote]
shes ok as long as she’s backing up
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Yep, I bet she is glad she took that flu shot. It’s disgusting what doctors are pushing off on people these days. I’m sure he told her it was very important.
A guy I know who is elderly, but still does construction work. Has never had the flu in his life. Now that he is getting up in years his doctor told him he should be getting the flu shots. One day after he got his first shot 3 years ago he came down with a severe respitory infection. He still has it today. Always coughing and wheezing, the antibiotics he has been given wont touch it.
There is shit in these flu shots that is not normal. How many people get paralyzed or have these bizzare problems when they encounter the flu naturally. I’m not saying someone is intentionally spiking the flu shots with bad shit, but it’s possible.
It’s also possible that they just don’t know what the fuck they are dealing with and due to big pharm making money off these, they just throw caution to the wind and push them on thier patients.
DO NOT GET THE FLU SHOT OR GIVE IT TO YOUR CHILDREN.
The flue shot in some studies has been 30% effective at reducing the flu occurances. Vitamin D is over 60% effective. One is safe, one can literally fuck you up for the rest of your life or even kill you.
V
So a guy who was moving into the age range where he had increased risk of respiratory disease saw his doctor who informed him of this. Shortly afterwards he got a respiratory disease and you say the doctor was bad?
There is nothing in these flu shots that is not normal. They took the existing flu shots and adapted them to the new strain.
Yea, I’m sure it was all just a big coincidence. He took the shot in the summer when there was no respitory illness flying around in preparation for the winter flu season by his doctors orders and one day after the shot he gets sick. Sure I could see how you would think the two things are entirely unrelated. Heh, man he really must just have bad luck then.
V[/quote]
A sample size of 1 is meaningless. That is the problem. It could be that the illness was caused by the injection but you cannot deduce that from the evidence available.
[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
Without going into too much detail, it does nothing but benefit pharmaceutical companies to make their drugs safer. They will get prescribed more, and more people will WANT to take them because of the low risk. It does absolutely nothing for profit to make an unsafe drug, it can actually lead to a net loss because of cost-to-market expenses and lawsuit potential. Safety = Money.
[/quote]
Touche!
I see your point.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
There is nothing in these flu shots that is not normal. [/quote]
LMAO!
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Lonnie123 wrote:
The flu vaccine is simply another tool in that arsenal, it is proven effective, and proven safe( again, in the VAST majority of people, much safer than if you actually get the flu or simply driving a car).
Show me where it is proven effective? If by effective you mean does not change the infection rate negatively? Then sure it’s effective. If your definition of effective is a statistically relavant reduction in the infection rate, then no it is not effective. But by all means inject yourself. I don’t care if it’s like playing russian roulette with a single bullet in a thousand chamber revolver, you still are taking a risk for no benefit.
V[/quote]
If you happen to catch one of the strains that are in the vaccine, than its very effective. I dont feel like digging up the material right now, but I’m sure you will grant me that as your main concern seems to be with the fact that there are a number of viruses out there and only a small number covered in the vaccine, which is a legitimate point and one that I agree with 100%.
However, as for something like the Swine flu, I believe the Swine Flu Vaccine (The regular flu vaccine is absolutely useless against the Swine Flu, something like 99.6% resistant)is being touted at 96% effective, or something close to that. There you have a very specific strain, not likely to mutate radically in a single season, with great coverage in the vaccine. Again, Pregnant women are 900% more likely to die from Swine than regular flu… So there you have very good risk v benefit in my opinion. Your opinion may differ.
[quote]Lonnie123 wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Here is the Data from 07-08 Peaked at 32% infection rate. I don’t need to adjust anything here.
Here is the data from 00-01 which also shows the three previous years peaks.
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/weeklyarchives2000-2001/00-01summary.htm
I think it’s safe to say that 10 years ago there were less people getting the flu vaccine? I can look up the statistics if you need me to. But 24% peak infection in 00-01 ans an average of 28-32% the three prior years is pretty overwhelming evidence that vaccines have not done much if any to the rate of getting infected.
Look the only evidence you have shown is a study where people were injected with a specific vaccine for a specific flu strain and then shot in the nose later with that flu strain and did not get sick.
When they make a seasonal flu vaccine which covers every flu virus and it’s possible mutations, we might see the efficiancy of the vaccine rise. Right now thay include defense against 3 viruses. Out of the hundreds or thousands which exist, this is never going to do much for preventing people from getting the flu. The rate has not gone down, and the 70% prevention rate is no better statistically to historical data when vaccines were not used.
V
Fair enough, that all sounds very reasonable to me. The flu shot is often a “best guess” containing to 4-5 most “popular” strains predicted for that year. And maybe it misses them all and has 0% efficacy, thats a possibility for sure.
All I can really say is that its difficult to assess because the numbers of people who are vaccinated and do not get it do not show up, which may be driving the number down. Lets just say, for fun, that the Flu vaccine is 100% effective (its not), and that 30% of the population gets it (I have no idea of the real number)…
That would mean that 33% got the flu, and another 33% MIGHT have but didnt because of the vaccine, and 33% just didnt catch it. Of course these are inflated, but it just illustrates that the 32% number might be low BECAUSE of the vaccine, not in spite of it. Not to mention that the more people who get the vaccine, the less the flu is able to spread which benefits those that do not get vaccinated.
Its just a matter of risk v. benefit in the end. The vaccines are amazingly safe, one of the safest forms of medicine available… but are not entirely effective. Getting the flu can be dangerous to some groups of people (Particularly the Swine Flu and pregnant women, I would CERTAINLY get the swine vaccine if you are pregnant or live with a pregnant woman).
Of course this is mainly a moot point for a large percentage of the population on T-Nation (Healthy, Strong, good eating, young men). I mainly speak in terms of large populations, not specific ones that are typically “immune” by virtue of their age.
[/quote]
Here is my main problem. They cannot tell how effective the flu vaccines are, and there is solid evidence which I just posted that it is not any more effective than our own immune systems. What it does do is expose you to the virus. From there 70% of people create antibodies and 30% don’t or don’t create them fast enough to ward off a massive infection and the resultant flu symptoms.
SO… if there is a chance you do not encounter the flu, like you live and work in a rural area, you are actually increasing your chances of getting it. If you have a 50% chance of encountering it and then a 70% chance of fighting it off if you do encounter it. By making yourself encounter it in the vaccine, you effectively have increased your chances of getting the flu. And I don’t want to hear about vaccines containing dead viruses. I am not sold that the body is going to create antibodies against a dead thing. And if it’s weakened it can still infect and reproduce.
Doctors are selling this stuff and making people take it and it is not “proven” effective at anything. It is a scam, I would not advise anyone to take it and you should not either unless you can show me some good numbers on it’s effectiveness. Since those numbers don’t exist, you should at the very least refrain from telling people TO get the vaccine. God forbid you tell a loved one to get vaccinated and something like on the video happens, or like the guy I know who suffers now. If I tell someone to not get the vaccine and they do get the flu, well I can live with that because there is no evidence that the vaccine would have prevented it.
V
I blame our long life span and reproduction rate for all the new strains of viruses and all the disease in the world.
Nature is fighting back! We can’t keep over populating the world!
We’re like a plague on the Earth.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Yep, I bet she is glad she took that flu shot. It’s disgusting what doctors are pushing off on people these days. I’m sure he told her it was very important.
A guy I know who is elderly, but still does construction work. Has never had the flu in his life. Now that he is getting up in years his doctor told him he should be getting the flu shots. One day after he got his first shot 3 years ago he came down with a severe respitory infection. He still has it today. Always coughing and wheezing, the antibiotics he has been given wont touch it.
There is shit in these flu shots that is not normal. How many people get paralyzed or have these bizzare problems when they encounter the flu naturally. I’m not saying someone is intentionally spiking the flu shots with bad shit, but it’s possible.
It’s also possible that they just don’t know what the fuck they are dealing with and due to big pharm making money off these, they just throw caution to the wind and push them on thier patients.
DO NOT GET THE FLU SHOT OR GIVE IT TO YOUR CHILDREN.
The flue shot in some studies has been 30% effective at reducing the flu occurances. Vitamin D is over 60% effective. One is safe, one can literally fuck you up for the rest of your life or even kill you.
V
So a guy who was moving into the age range where he had increased risk of respiratory disease saw his doctor who informed him of this. Shortly afterwards he got a respiratory disease and you say the doctor was bad?
There is nothing in these flu shots that is not normal. They took the existing flu shots and adapted them to the new strain.
Yea, I’m sure it was all just a big coincidence. He took the shot in the summer when there was no respitory illness flying around in preparation for the winter flu season by his doctors orders and one day after the shot he gets sick. Sure I could see how you would think the two things are entirely unrelated. Heh, man he really must just have bad luck then.
V
A sample size of 1 is meaningless. That is the problem. It could be that the illness was caused by the injection but you cannot deduce that from the evidence available.[/quote]
Which is why I also linked to the seasonal flu rates from the CDC. Notice how they have not dropped over time yet the vaccination rate is certainly higher now than it was in the late 90’s.
V
[quote]mrw173 wrote:
It’s not safe at all to come to the conclusions that you are coming to. You’re simply looking at infection rates over time. How many variables could affect something like that, in addition to flu shots? To answer the question, you’d need to know what the rates of flu would be during those years with AND without flu shots.[/quote]
This is a great point, I deleted a large portion of text because of its length, but this is basically what I was trying to say.
The percentage of people who got flu per the CDC website is impacted by the fact that a number of people get vaccines. To know the “true” number of people who got the flu you would need multiple samples, preferably double blinded (unethical), or at least a more rigorous reporting on patients who got it and were vaccinated/unvac’d.
Also you cant count the number of people who dont get counted because they just stay at home for a few days, which I’m sure is at least a few percentage points, maybe significant (8-10%)
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Here is my main problem. They cannot tell how effective the flu vaccines are, and there is solid evidence which I just posted that it is not any more effective than our own immune systems. What it does do is expose you to the virus. From there 70% of people create antibodies and 30% don’t or don’t create them fast enough to ward off a massive infection and the resultant flu symptoms.
SO… if there is a chance you do not encounter the flu, like you live and work in a rural area, you are actually increasing your chances of getting it. If you have a 50% chance of encountering it and then a 70% chance of fighting it off if you do encounter it. By making yourself encounter it in the vaccine, you effectively have increased your chances of getting the flu. And I don’t want to hear about vaccines containing dead viruses. I am not sold that the body is going to create antibodies against a dead thing. And if it’s weakened it can still infect and reproduce.
Doctors are selling this stuff and making people take it and it is not “proven” effective at anything. It is a scam, I would not advise anyone to take it and you should not either unless you can show me some good numbers on it’s effectiveness. Since those numbers don’t exist, you should at the very least refrain from telling people TO get the vaccine. God forbid you tell a loved one to get vaccinated and something like on the video happens, or like the guy I know who suffers now. If I tell someone to not get the vaccine and they do get the flu, well I can live with that because there is no evidence that the vaccine would have prevented it.
V[/quote]
You need to brush up on your immunology if you dont “believe” the fact that the body DOES make antibodies to attenuated and dead viruses. Its a fact, its nothing you get to “believe in.” More and more vaccines are going the route of simple using specific enzymes to trigger the effect instead of the virus itself, often times the full virus is not even needed any more.
The idea that getting the vaccine will give you the flu is totally false: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/misconceptions.htm
Several studies are linked in the article above. Of course its coming from the CDC website, so I’m sure a few of you guys will call Foul on it, but there it is. The studies are from independent sources.
Gotta go to bed everyone, I’ll respond later if possible.
[quote]on edge wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
There is nothing in these flu shots that is not normal.
LMAO![/quote]
So you think they have added things to this years flu shots that is not in seasonal flu shots that have been being given for years? If so what, and how did they get the shots authorised for use in humans?
I’m probably going to hell for laughing at one part
Ok,so is this a result of the flu shot in itself…or the fact that she was already predisposed to this neurological disorder?
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Yep, I bet she is glad she took that flu shot. It’s disgusting what doctors are pushing off on people these days. I’m sure he told her it was very important.
A guy I know who is elderly, but still does construction work. Has never had the flu in his life. Now that he is getting up in years his doctor told him he should be getting the flu shots. One day after he got his first shot 3 years ago he came down with a severe respiratory infection. He still has it today. Always coughing and wheezing, the antibiotics he has been given wont touch it.
There is shit in these flu shots that is not normal. How many people get paralyzed or have these bizarre problems when they encounter the flu naturally. I’m not saying someone is intentionally spiking the flu shots with bad shit, but it’s possible.
It’s also possible that they just don’t know what the fuck they are dealing with and due to big pharm making money off these, they just throw caution to the wind and push them on thier patients.
DO NOT GET THE FLU SHOT OR GIVE IT TO YOUR CHILDREN.
The flue shot in some studies has been 30% effective at reducing the flu occurrences. Vitamin D is over 60% effective. One is safe, one can literally fuck you up for the rest of your life or even kill you.
V
So a guy who was moving into the age range where he had increased risk of respiratory disease saw his doctor who informed him of this. Shortly afterwards he got a respiratory disease and you say the doctor was bad?
There is nothing in these flu shots that is not normal. They took the existing flu shots and adapted them to the new strain.
Yea, I’m sure it was all just a big coincidence. He took the shot in the summer when there was no respiratory illness flying around in preparation for the winter flu season by his doctors orders and one day after the shot he gets sick. Sure I could see how you would think the two things are entirely unrelated. Heh, man he really must just have bad luck then.
V
A sample size of 1 is meaningless. That is the problem. It could be that the illness was caused by the injection but you cannot deduce that from the evidence available.
Which is why I also linked to the seasonal flu rates from the CDC. Notice how they have not dropped over time yet the vaccination rate is certainly higher now than it was in the late 90’s.
V[/quote]
I was referring to your old man case. It is totally irrelevant.
Flu vaccination rates are well below a third of the population (I have seen reported figures as low as 5% for non priority groups).
To be effective for a population as a whole a vaccination rate has to hit a critical level. The US is still below that level for the flu vaccine. Mainly due to stupid ill informed propaganda put out by people who do not have sufficient education in the area to make an informed comment.
[quote]Vegita wrote:
http://www.uvadvantage.org/portals/0/pres/
Watch this presentation.
Also as anecdotal evidence for Vitamin D preventing the flu, we can look to a couple factors. Namely, exactly when does the flu season start? It’s not to say there is no flu when it is out of season, but the infection rate is very low. The flu season is directly opposite of when natural Vit D production is highest. It hits when many people do not naturally make VIT D from the sun. Also Flu typically does not hit regions near the equator.
You can do what you want, but don’t tell me I am irresponsible. Just because you want to believe in the propoganda of the flu vaccine, does not make me stupid. I don’t get the flu shot and have yet to die from the flu. Pretty amazing I can take such a risk eh?
V[/quote]
Vaccination is, indeed, a scam. Clean water and central heating have eradicated most of our troubles like this.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
I’m probably going to hell for laughing at one part[/quote]
when she stopped running?
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
on edge wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
There is nothing in these flu shots that is not normal.
LMAO!
So you think they have added things to this years flu shots that is not in seasonal flu shots that have been being given for years? If so what, and how did they get the shots authorised for use in humans?[/quote]
From the CDC (I’m afraid the format is going to suck when I paste it. Sorry if it’s tough to read);
Influenza (Afluria) Beta-Propiolactone, Calcium Chloride, Neomycin, Ovalbumin, Polymyxin B,
Potassium Chloride, Potassium Phosphate, Sodium Phosphate, Sodium
Taurodeoxychoalate.
Influenza (Fluarix) Egg Albumin (Ovalbumin), Egg Protein, Formaldehyde or Formalin,
Gentamicin, Hydrocortisone, Octoxynol-10, á-Tocopheryl Hydrogen Succinate,
Polysorbate 80, Sodium Deoxycholate, Sodium Phosphate, Thimerosal*
Influenza (Flulaval) Egg Albumin (Ovalbumin), Egg Protein, Formaldehyde or Formalin, Sodium
Deoxycholate, Phosphate Buffers, Thimerosal
Influenza (Fluvirin) Beta-Propiolactone , Egg Protein, Neomycin, Polymyxin B, Polyoxyethylene 9-
10 Nonyl Phenol (Triton N-101, Octoxynol 9), Thimerosal (multidose
containers), Thimerosal* (single-dose syringes)
Influenza (Fluzone) Egg Protein, Formaldehyde or Formalin, Gelatin, Octoxinol-9 (Triton X-100),
Thimerosal (multidose containers)
Influenza (FluMist) Chick Kidney Cells, Egg Protein, Gentamicin Sulfate, Monosodium Glutamate,
Sucrose Phosphate Glutamate Buffer
I don’t see much here that I’d call normal, especially for injecting into the human body. I’d also like to add lots of people are allergic to egg and they are routinely given vaccines at an age before they find out by eating them.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
jehovasfitness wrote:
I’m probably going to hell for laughing at one part
when she stopped running?[/quote]
yeah lol
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Ok,so is this a result of the flu shot in itself…or the fact that she was already predisposed to this neurological disorder? [/quote]
Well all it said was it “triggered” a predisposed neurological disorder (so a number of things could have set it off)! Damn shame, she is hot as hell to.
Fuck it, just give her some bubbly 7-UP. In my culture that cures everything from hangovers, to diarrhea and cancer even!
Oh and fuck the flu vaccines!! Yeah I SAID IT!!!
I was thinking she should become a x-country runner.