Legit Reasons Not to Get a Flu Vaccine

Off Topic
61

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:
It’s much more difficult to find out (maybe impossible under the guise of proprietary) the components of a vaccine.[/quote]

Two second Google search yields:

(This information can be obtained from the FDA website, too, but these pages are easier to read)

But, come on… you are talking like no supplement company has ever made use of “proprietary” labeling.

[quote]on edge wrote:
I’m pretty sure there are ingredients in vaccines that would not be permitted in supplements.[/quote]

Well, yeah… that’s why it is a prescription drug and not an OTC product.[/quote]

When people buy a supplement, usually before actually, they read the label. Supplement companies are required to state what is in the product, they can’t be mysterious about it.

How many people read what’s in a vaccine? Very few do your two second search. Those who do the two second search learn there are ingredients that sound like embalming fluid and sunscreen. I’m sure that makes them feel real comfortable. As does leaning the vaccines haven’t been studied for carcinogenic or mutagenic activity.

Thanks for posting the links.

62

Seriously, read those links Anonym posted. Especially about the adverse affects.

LOFL at their “placebo”. Brilliant plan, use a poison as your placebo too make your results look, well, not so horrendous.

63

[quote]on edge wrote:
Seriously, read those links Anonym posted. Especially about the adverse affects.

LOFL at their “placebo”. Brilliant plan, use a poison as your placebo too make your results look, well, not so horrendous.[/quote]

The thimerosal, you mean? They included it because the multi-dose vials contain it as a preservative.

Some random trivia:

By comparison, let’s consider the case of canned Atlantic albacore tuna. At 0.47 milligrams per kilogram, canned Atlantic albacore tuna contains about 13.35 micrograms of mercury per ounce.

(the actual source is listed at the bottom, but since they’re not numbered I’m not gonna dig it up)

One OUNCE of albacore tuna contains about half the mercury of one flu shot. Granted, it gets eaten and not injected, but you only get a flu shot once per year… how many ounces of tuna does the Average Joe eat per year?

Not that it even matters, really, since it is extremely easy to find a “poison”-free shot nowadays.

64

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
To everyone that complains about not knowing what is in the vaccine. REALLY.

However you will buy “supplements” that have NO regulation and could contain bat guano for all you know and are fine with that.

Wow[/quote]

I’m very concerned about what I ingest however I’m much more concerned with something injected into my body than I am something ingested. Supplements ARE regulated. Any supplement you get has to have the ingredients stated so the consumer knows what they are taking. It’s much more difficult to find out (maybe impossible under the guise of proprietary) the components of a vaccine. I’m pretty sure there are ingredients in vaccines that would not be permitted in supplements.[/quote]
Sorry but they are not regulated of course they have to put the ingredients but that is just putting shit on a label. They have fat free label on fucking pixie sticks.

Vaccines along with all RX. medications sold in the US are under federal regulations. Jesus Christ the amount of litigation in dealing with medications in this country is ludicrous.

I know your view on this and I can respect the decisions you make for yourself, HOWEVER IMO it is conspiracy theory bullshit. I have been in this field all my life and medications have been pulled off the shelf for a very, very, very small % of people who had adverse reactions. General public never hears about this unless it makes it to a law firm commercial looking to rape the pharma

65

In regards to your view on why they do not put the ingredients on the label of Prescription medications, is again because a company has spent Millions of dollars to develop that medication. To put it on the label would give a competitor the ability to reproduce it, that is why they are so federally regulated.

I am stopping now, this argument has occurred forty thousand times on this site.

66

uhh pretty sure us tinfoil hat conspirists have a better understanding of vaccines than medical professionals

67

[quote]browndisaster wrote:
uhh pretty sure us tinfoil hat conspirists have a better understanding of vaccines than medical professionals[/quote]

68

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
In regards to your view on why they do not put the ingredients on the label of Prescription medications, is again because a company has spent Millions of dollars to develop that medication. To put it on the label would give a competitor the ability to reproduce it, that is why they are so federally regulated.[/quote]

Most pill bottles/packages come with folded packets or inserts that outline, amongst other things, the ingredients. I can, for instance, Google “Cialis package insert pdf” and see what the ingredients are.

So, secrecy doesn’t necessarily matter because their competitors wouldn’t legally be able to sell it in the first place (as I’m sure you know). Pharmacy companies in countries with “loose” regulations have been known to utilize reverse-engineering to churn out generic forms of patented medication.

The ingredients aren’t put on the label as both a matter of practicality (there really isn’t any room left over on a typical prescription bottle after the Rx and warning labels) and relevance (most people either don’t care or wouldn’t even be able to READ the name of, say, a binding agent, much less understand its significance). Why the general population would want to know the inactive ingredients in the first place is beyond me, though.

69

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
In regards to your view on why they do not put the ingredients on the label of Prescription medications, is again because a company has spent Millions of dollars to develop that medication. To put it on the label would give a competitor the ability to reproduce it, that is why they are so federally regulated.[/quote]

Most pill bottles/packages come with folded packets or inserts that outline, amongst other things, the ingredients. I can, for instance, Google “Cialis package insert pdf” and see what the ingredients are.

So, secrecy doesn’t necessarily matter because their competitors wouldn’t legally be able to sell it in the first place (as I’m sure you know). Pharmacy companies in countries with “loose” regulations have been known to utilize reverse-engineering to churn out generic forms of patented medication.

The ingredients aren’t put on the label as both a matter of practicality (there really isn’t any room left over on a typical prescription bottle after the Rx and warning labels) and relevance (most people either don’t care or wouldn’t even be able to READ the name of, say, a binding agent, much less understand its significance). Why the general population would want to know the inactive ingredients in the first place is beyond me, though.[/quote]

Well you dont wear a tinfoil hat and think the Govt is trying to plant listening devices in your rectum.

However some fly by night company that opened last week and is now selling BCCA’s of course they are legitimate I mean they have to put on the label what is in the product. I mean nobody verifies that but its on the label.

70

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
However some fly by night company that opened last week and is now selling BCCA’s of course they are legitimate I mean they have to put on the label what is in the product. I mean nobody verifies that but its on the label. [/quote]

Honestly, I thought it was common knowledge that in the supplement industry of all places, you get what you pay for… particularly for things like herbal supps.

So, that $8/bottle tribulus (from a new, discount-supp company) claiming a standardized X/Y saponin/protodioscin content might not be the bargain it claims to be compared with the same stuff for $20 more (coming from a larger, long-standing brand).

Wasn’t it only a few years ago that protein powder from CHina was shown to be spiked with melamine? FOr some reason, I don’t recall seeing that on the ingredient label of my supps.

71

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
I think I have the flu right now.

I haven’t been sick in over a decade, but with recent late nights working, 3 parties last weekend (I’m sure I picked it up at one of them), back doing DC workouts, I’m probably a bit taxed in the immune department.

Feel sluggish, tired, and achy… but not severely. I’ve been on a lot of fish oils, D3 and C.[/quote]

That’s not the flu. Maybe over trained, pushed it to hard (you ain’t no spring chicken, ya know) but you don’t have a 102 fever and feel like absolute shit, you don’t have the flu.

72

[quote]Mateus wrote:
Everyone tells me that it was coincidental but the worst FLU of my life was in 2005, 2 days after having my first and last FLU shot. GTFO[/quote]

That exact thing happened to a friend of mine. Got the vaccine, two days latter he was sicker then he’s ever been. You never know when one of those bastards survive the the pasteurization process. And if they do, it’s a good one.

73

[quote]imhungry wrote:

[quote]niksamaras wrote:
Because you don’t know what the fuck there is on that vaccine.[/quote]

Test Cyp. duh.

Where do you think “test flu” comes from? :)[/quote]

I prefer propionate.

74

I think anonym works for a vaccine making company lol

75

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Mateus wrote:
Everyone tells me that it was coincidental but the worst FLU of my life was in 2005, 2 days after having my first and last FLU shot. GTFO[/quote]

That exact thing happened to a friend of mine. Got the vaccine, two days latter he was sicker then he’s ever been. You never know when one of those bastards survive the the pasteurization process. And if they do, it’s a good one. [/quote]

Well, vaccine preparation actually involves inactivating the virus by chemical means, but that’s more of a casual remark for everyone’s edification (in the event it comes in handy the next time y’all play Trivial Pursuit or Jeopardy) rather than a criticism of your comment since I’m sure it was meant informally.

It’s typically a two step process for these sorts of vaccines: the virus is first inactivated by one chemical and then disrupted by a second (forming a “split-virion” vaccine).

After the chemically-sliced-and-diced viruses are purified, other stuff is added to preserve the sample and prevent growth of bacteria and fungi.

So, the question that needs to be asked is: what is the likelihood that live viruses continually slip through all of these steps and make people sick, particularly considering the universal consensus across multiple major health agencies the world over that these sorts of vaccines DO NOT cause the flu?

Are all these medical professionals and researchers incorrect? Are all these pharmaceutical companies REALLY this inept? Because we aren’t talking about one or two people here and there claiming the vaccine “gave them the flu”; everyone knows a guy who knows a guy who claims that this happened to them at one time or another.

I mean, I work in a pharmacy and have received this response dozens of times. Literally, dozens. Where is the lawsuit?

Is it perhaps MORE likely that a vast majority of these cases can be chalked up to people not recognizing what flu symptoms actually are (hint: “getting sick” doesn’t mean you have the flu, even if it happens a day or two after your flu shot)? Can some be chalked up to shit luck (perhaps getting the shot during the incubation period)? Can some be chalked up to getting infected with a different strain (remember, the vaccine is based on a PREDICTION of what the most prevalent/serious threats will be that season; it is no guarantee you won’t still get the flu from a different viral strain).

76

[quote]gregron wrote:
I think anonym works for a vaccine making company lol[/quote]

Ugh… while I DID get roped into doing research in my school’s micro lab for graduate credit (where I worked as an undergrad), I really only signed on because it gives me the opportunity to hopefully publish a journal paper as the primary author. Plus, it hooked me up with a position as a TA that lets me mack ditzy, dipshit sophomores.

But I’d rather suck start a shotgun than even CONSIDER doing anything related to that for a living.

77

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
To everyone that complains about not knowing what is in the vaccine. REALLY.

However you will buy “supplements” that have NO regulation and could contain bat guano for all you know and are fine with that.

Wow[/quote]

I’m very concerned about what I ingest however I’m much more concerned with something injected into my body than I am something ingested. Supplements ARE regulated. Any supplement you get has to have the ingredients stated so the consumer knows what they are taking. It’s much more difficult to find out (maybe impossible under the guise of proprietary) the components of a vaccine. I’m pretty sure there are ingredients in vaccines that would not be permitted in supplements.[/quote]
Sorry but they are not regulated of course they have to put the ingredients but that is just putting shit on a label. They have fat free label on fucking pixie sticks.

Vaccines along with all RX. medications sold in the US are under federal regulations. Jesus Christ the amount of litigation in dealing with medications in this country is ludicrous.

I know your view on this and I can respect the decisions you make for yourself, HOWEVER IMO it is conspiracy theory bullshit. I have been in this field all my life and medications have been pulled off the shelf for a very, very, very small % of people who had adverse reactions. General public never hears about this unless it makes it to a law firm commercial looking to rape the pharma [/quote]

It cracks me up when the pro-vaccine crowd uses an argument that in my opinion just strengthens my case against flu vaccine. When ‘they’ tell me “vaccines get pulled from the market when adverse reactions are discovered” I’m not reassured like they expect me to be. I’m not about to conclude they got the last bad vaccine and its all clear sailing from here on out.

Are you also expecting me to be reassured reassured by large amounts of medical litigation and adverse reactions the general public never hears about?

It’s bullshit to call out conspiracy theory at this point, I haven’t said anything remotely CT. I’ve stated that there are dangerous substances in vaccines and that is supported by the vaccine literature posted. That literature also shows adverse reactions so we know some harm is common even if those substances are in at very small amounts. The literature also indicates they don’t really know what the long term effects might be. There may be more mercury in a can of tuna but people don’t get a headache 26% of the time when they eat a can of tuna. I also told of MY experience of only being sick with the flu once or twice in my adult life.

I urge people who might not normally give it a second thought to consider such things for themselves before mindlessly rolling up their sleeves with the doctor knows best mentality. I’m not keeping a tally or any thing but I do get the impression the pro-vaccine crowd spends a lot of time trying to instill fear rather than thought. They also spend more time calling the other side stupid than they spend trying to make a rational argument.

78

IMO, you’re either going to get the flu or you’re not going to get it… Doest matter if you get the shot or not.

I haven’t gotten a flu shot in as long as I can remember and have never had the flu. If I had been getting the shots all these years I would have thought “wow, this vaccine really works cause I haven’t ever ya the flu!” When in reality I would have never had it even without the shot.

I feel like this probably applies to others as well. Some people never get the shot and never get sick, some people get the shots and get really sick even though they are supposedly vaccinated.

This is my opinion and is based on zero medical research whatsoever.

79

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
I think anonym works for a vaccine making company lol[/quote]

Ugh… while I DID get roped into doing research in my school’s micro lab for graduate credit (where I worked as an undergrad), I really only signed on because it gives me the opportunity to hopefully publish a journal paper as the primary author. Plus, it hooked me up with a position as a TA that lets me mack ditzy, dipshit sophomores.

But I’d rather suck start a shotgun than even CONSIDER doing anything related to that for a living.[/quote]

^^thats exactly what someone who works in that field would say in an attempt to throw me off the trail.

80

[quote]on edge wrote:
That literature also shows adverse reactions so we know some harm is common even if those substances are in at very small amounts. The literature also indicates they don’t really know what the long term effects might be. There may be more mercury in a can of tuna but people don’t get a headache 26% of the time when they eat a can of tuna.[/quote]

You do understand that the reported local adverse events can be chalked up to simply getting a sharp piece of metal stuck into your arm, while the systemic ones are fairly common occurrences during an immune response (which is exactly what the vaccine is designed to provoke)? You don’t get a headache from tuna because you aren’t injecting it into your body with the goal of ticking off your immune system.

I mean, 87% of the subjects in that study reported all of their listed adverse events as “mild”, right? And most of MILD these issues didn’t last longer than 2 days?