Debunking Vaccine Myths

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    This was just sent to me from a mother who's infant son has been sick with the flu.... ever since receiving the doctor-recommended flu vaccine.


    9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims



    Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called "vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched with the following 9 questions.




    Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements, effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven in scientific and medical circles.

    Fact: The claim is completely false.

    1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind, placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of vaccines?

    2. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence on ANY study which can confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of vaccines?

    3. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence which can prove that disease reduction in any part of the world, at any point in history was attributable to inoculation of populations?

    4. What to ask: Could you please explain how the safety and mechanism of vaccines in the human body are scientifically proven if their pharmacokinetics (the study of bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of ingredients) are never examined
    or analyzed in any vaccine study?

    One of the most critical elements which defines the toxicity potential of any vaccine are its pharmacokinetic properties. Drug companies and health agencies refuse to consider the study, analysis or evaluation of the pharmacokinetic properties of any vaccine.

    There is not one double-blind, placebo-controlled study in the history of vaccine development that has ever proven their safety, effectiveness or achievements (unless those achievements have underlined their damage to human health).

    There are also no controlled studies completed in any country which have objectively proven that vaccines have had any direct or consequential effect on the reduction of any type of disease in any
    part of the world.

    Every single study that has ever attempted to validate the safety and effectiveness of vaccines has conclusively established carcinogenic, mutagenic, neurotoxic or fertility impairments, but they won't address those.



    **************************************************



    Claim: Preservatives and chemical additives used in the manufacture of vaccines are safe and no studies have been linked or proven them unsafe for use in humans.

    Fact: The claim is completely false.

    5. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how injecting a human being with a confirmed neurotoxin is beneficial to human health and prevents disease?

    6. What to ask: Can you provide a risk/benefit profile on how the benefits of injecting a known neurotoxin exceeds its risks to human health for the intended goal of preventing disease?

    This issue is no longer even open to debate. It is a scientifically established fact in literally hundreds of studies that the preservatives and chemical additives in vaccines damage cells. Neurotoxicity, immune suppression, immune-mediated chronic inflammation and carcinogenic proliferation are just a few of several effects that have been observed on the human body. See a list of chemicals in vaccines

    Fortunately, the drug companies still tell us the damage vaccines have on the human body. People just don't read them. All you have to do is look at the insert for any vaccine, and it will detail the exact ingredients, alerts and potentially lethal effects.

    See my latest analysis of the Arepanrix H1N1 vaccine for an example.

    Any medical professional who believes that it is justified to inject any type of neurotoxin into any person to prevent any disease is completely misguided, misinformed, deluded and ignorant of any logic regarding human health.



    **************************************************



    Claim: Once an individual is injected with the foreign antigen in the vaccine, that individual becomes immune to future infections.

    Fact: The claim is completely false.

    7. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning and prevents future infections?

    8. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how a vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating?

    9. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how a vaccination can target a virus in an infected individual who does not have the exact viral configuration or strain the vaccine was developed for?
    All promoters of vaccination fail to realize that the respiratory tract of humans (actually all mammals) contains antibodies which initiates natural immune responses within the respiratory tract mucosa. Bypassing this mucosal aspect of the immune system by directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream leads to a corruption in the immune system itself. As a result, the pathogenic viruses or bacteria cannot be eliminated by the immune system and remain in the body, where they will further grow and/or mutate as the individual is exposed to ever more antigens and toxins in the environment which continue to assault the immune system.

    Despite the injection of any type of vaccine, viruses continue circulating through the body, mutating and transforming into other organisms. The ability of a vaccine manufacturer to target the exact viral strain without knowing its mutagenic properties is equivalent to shooting a gun at a fixed target that has already been moved from its location. You would be shooting at what was, not what is!

    Flu viruses, may mutate, change or adapt several times over a period of one flu season, making the seasonal influenza vaccine 100% redundant and ineffective every single flu season. Ironically, the natural immune defenses of the human body can target these changes but the vaccines cannot.

    I have never encountered one pro-vaccine advocate, whether medically or scientifically qualified, who could answer even 1 let alone all 9 of these questions. One or all of the following will happen when debating any of the above questions:

    - They will concede defeat and admit they are stumped

    - They will attempt to discredit unrelated issues that do not pertain to the question.

    - They will formulate their response and rebuttal based on historical arguments and scientific studies which have been disproved over and over again.

    Not one pro-vaccine advocate will ever directly address these questions in an open mainstream venue.
    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCBlxqmOMKM"]YouTube - Flu Vaccine Exposed: Think Twice![/ame]
     

    6birds

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 15, 2008
    2,291
    36
    Fishers
    ... and they've been met by self serving "experts", making up factoids and information based on an afternoon on the computer.

    No matter how often it's explained that the benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risks, there is a chorus of disapprovers out there – fantasists, conspiratists, but also genuinely thoughtful critics – undermining the government message (which, in the case of H1N1, is rightfully accused of being confusing).
    "People make up the facts," Dr. David Butler Jones, head of Canada's Public Health Agency, said last week. "The worst thing that could happen is people listen to these claims. I just saw somebody on the news this morning claiming neurological damage from vaccines. That is just plain not true, but it persists.

    Have a safe Halloween folks.
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    No matter how often it's explained that the benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risks, there is a chorus of disapprovers out there – fantasists, conspiratists, but also genuinely thoughtful critics – undermining the government message (which, in the case of H1N1, is rightfully accused of being confusing).

    "People make up the facts," Dr. David Butler Jones, head of Canada's Public Health Agency, said last week. "The worst thing that could happen is people listen to these claims. I just saw somebody on the news this morning claiming neurological damage from vaccines. That is just plain not true, but it persists.

    If Canada's doctors have answered those questions and performed those studies, then I'd like to read about them. I personally know 3 people who have had bad reactions to vaccines. One had a seizure following a vaccine, and one spent 3 years relearning to walk. This guy saying "just plain not true" is not good enough. Where is the study?
     

    bigus_D

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Dec 5, 2008
    2,063
    38
    Country Side

    ... Where is the study?

    A Double-Blind, Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Safety and Immunogenicity Study of a Refrigerator-Stable Formulation of Zostavax -- Gilderman et al. 15 (2): 314 -- Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    Here is one.:laugh:

    Rambone,

    Sorry to hear that you know so many people who have experienced "bad reactions" to vaccines. Were any studies performed to prove that the reactions were due to the vaccines they took some indeterminate time before the "reaction" was experienced and not some other environmental factor? I'd be curious to read those.

    I'd love to read some CREDIBLE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that flu vaccines are unsafe today. Please provide links.

    Note: I'm not sure if a new thread is required on the flu vaccine topic every day... that's just me though.

    Bigus_D
     

    gund

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 28, 2009
    135
    16
    Some vaccines work better than others. Flu vaccine to me is quite pointless and cost ineffective. There are too many strains.

    There are hundreds if not thousands of studies that show vaccines work. Unless you believe there's some world wide conspiracy and the FDA and CDC are evil government entities, and they have been faking reports about scientific literature on this for decades and every scientist is too scared to conduct studies to disprove the usefulness of all vaccines.

    The problem is some vaccinations are mandated by law, on children. People start complaining because the government should stay out of decision making, especially medical ones. I agree. Vaccinations should be optional, and any parent whose kid gets a disease can be found guilty of a crime of child abuse, if it can be proven in a court of law that the vaccine had a good chance of preventing it. Also any other person who contacts said disease from that child, can sue the family for monetary damage and the parent can be charged with distributing a biological weapon.

    The main point is this. Vaccines have varying efficacy and have negative side effects. LIKE EVERY OTHER DRUG/MEDICATION. In general, the doctor informs you of the risks of taking a drug and you decide whether to take it. Unfortunately, for some diseases, your decision impacts others. Your right to decide whether to take a drug is balanced by the right of others to life and not get infected by you. This is a complicated situation and every drug and every case is different.
     
    Last edited:

    gund

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 28, 2009
    135
    16
    7. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning and prevents future infections?

    Is this a retarded question? I hope people who believe this never ever are allowed to take injections for any medication. For the second part of the question, the answer is called "read how vaccinations (supposedly) work".

    8. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how a vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating?

    It doesn't. Who said vaccines prevent viruses from mutating?

    9. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how a vaccination can target a virus in an infected individual who does not have the exact viral configuration or strain the vaccine was developed for?

    It doesn't, if the immune system cannot recognize that the two strains are similar. That's why flu vaccines only work on particular strains, and are yearly. Each shot contains multiple vaccines for different strains, and doesn't cover all strains. Only what the CDC thinks is the most important strains to immunize against for that year.
     

    6birds

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 15, 2008
    2,291
    36
    Fishers
    7. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning and prevents future infections?

    Is this a retarded question? I hope people who believe this never ever are allowed to take injections for any medication. For the second part of the question, the answer is called "read how vaccinations (supposedly) work".

    8. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how a vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating?

    It doesn't. Who said vaccines prevent viruses from mutating?

    9. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how a vaccination can target a virus in an infected individual who does not have the exact viral configuration or strain the vaccine was developed for?

    It doesn't, if the immune system cannot recognize that the two strains are similar. That's why flu vaccines only work on particular strains, and are yearly. Each shot contains multiple vaccines for different strains, and doesn't cover all strains. Only what the CDC thinks is the most important strains to immunize against for that year.

    (sarcasm on)

    Don't you dare bring you facts and data into this! What a buzz-kill! My brothers neighbor had an uncle who took tamiflu and burst into flames!! And after my wife got her shots this year, I lost my best huntin dog the
    next day to a bad cough. It had to be related to those darned shots!!

    (sarcasm off)

    Good post. Have a safe Halloween folks.
     

    redneckmedic

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    8,429
    48
    Greenfield
    Polio
    Small Pox

    :+1:

    Good Read Rambone, everyone should know all the information out there before moving forward with treatments. BTW there has been no double blind studies on water either.

    If you don't trust medicine, the FDA, Doctors, and so forth, no bother calling 911 if you get hurt/sick or coming to my Trauma Class. Its just going to end up in evidence based medicine. As a paramedic I give people medication all the time that aren't 100% proven. Medications I gave just a few years ago have either been removed or swapped out with something new. BTW there has been no double blind studies on water either.

    Most people don't understand that practicing medicine is just that. All people have the possiblity of reacting differently to each treatment pattern. But we play the % rule. Do the best for the most amount of people.

    With that said... I am not getting a H1N1 vaccine, however I will get the standard influenza shot this year, as it has killed more people this year than pig flu.
     

    Fargo

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Mar 11, 2009
    7,575
    63
    In a state of acute Pork-i-docis
    "People make up the facts," Dr. David Butler Jones, head of Canada's Public Health Agency, said last week. "The worst thing that could happen is people listen to these claims. I just saw somebody on the news this morning claiming neurological damage from vaccines. That is just plain not true, but it persists.
    Hmmm, the unilateral deafness from nerve damage that I sustained immediately after receiving a vaccination at age 10 must not actually exist. Also, the diagnosis of it being caused by the MMR vaccine by the Mayo Clinic in Rochester MN must also have never happened.

    Funny also that the federal gov't has established a no-fault settlement system for those injured by vaccines. See Below"

    HRSA - National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

    Additionally, it is astounding that they specifically compensate for neurological conditions like "Brachial Neuritis." See Below:

    HRSA - National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

    I'm not trashing all vaccines or even saying you should not get them. I still get them but only when I consider it truly necessary. However, pretending that this isn't an issue or doesn't happen is IMO willful blindness.

    Joe
     

    public servant

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    23   0   0
    :+1:

    Good Read Rambone, everyone should know all the information out there before moving forward with treatments. BTW there has been no double blind studies on water either.

    If you don't trust medicine, the FDA, Doctors, and so forth, no bother calling 911 if you get hurt/sick or coming to my Trauma Class. Its just going to end up in evidence based medicine. As a paramedic I give people medication all the time that aren't 100% proven. Medications I gave just a few years ago have either been removed or swapped out with something new. BTW there has been no double blind studies on water either.

    Most people don't understand that practicing medicine is just that. All people have the possiblity of reacting differently to each treatment pattern. But we play the % rule. Do the best for the most amount of people.

    With that said... I am not getting a H1N1 vaccine, however I will get the standard influenza shot this year, as it has killed more people this year than pig flu.
    :+1: Use credible information to make informed decision. Internet forums, in my opinion don't qualify as such for medical advice. They are however, great sources of opinions.

    If you trust your family doctor...ask their advice. But know there is always the possibility of a negative reaction to any medication. How many people each year die from a reaction to simple aspirin or other NSAID meds? Approximately 20 to 25 per million.
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    Relax folks, nobody is taking away your vaccines. Just trying to raise the wool a little bit.

    I'd love to read some CREDIBLE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that flu vaccines are unsafe today. Please provide links.

    The simple fact is that the "credible" sources are the ones that want you to get vaccines for everything. The "credible" sources are the backed by the patent holders and the companies standing to make billions of dollars. You can base your decisions off what the Government tells you, or on things you read on the internet. It's a personal decision. If you want to hear more than what is shown on the back of a prescription label, then read on.

    Vaccines, in my opinion, should only even be considered for the most dire of diseases. If you want to get a vaccine for the chicken pox, the annual flu, genital warts, skinned knees, and hurt feelings, then you are opening up a larger window for problems to you and your family.

    Everybody keeps saying that all medicines are dangerous.
    :orly: Are you the type of person who takes a drug for everything and anything under the sun, or are you guys the kind who go to the doctor when you are actually sick? Do you try out dozens of prescription medications on yourself to see when one of them will finally have a reaction on you? I'm guessing you guys are relatively normal folks who just take meds when something is wrong. Vaccines work the opposite way. And when they fail, it is usually blamed on your genetics.

    How long do you reckon a new medicine takes to develop? CNN reports that human trials of the H1N1 vaccine began in August 2009. So we have the comfort of knowing that our loving Government caretakers diligently spent a couple weeks testing their new moneymaker. These are the credible sources that have verified all the other vaccines you continue to have faith in as well.


    "People make up the facts," Dr. David Butler Jones, head of Canada's Public Health Agency, said last week. "The worst thing that could happen is people listen to these claims. I just saw somebody on the news this morning claiming neurological damage from vaccines. That is just plain not true, but it persists.

    The "credible" sources say that neurological damage is just not true. But I have seen numerous cases that speaks the contrary. Yes guys, even sources that were from offline!

    My own sister had a seizure after taking the Gardasil vaccine. Within seconds of getting injected she started having violent spasms and blacked out. The doctors blamed the episode on what she ate for breakfast.... :wtf:

    Also, I have a friend who spent time in the Air Force. Being in the military, she has no say as to what she received in terms of vaccines, they are used as guinea pigs. She received a set of vaccines that gave her 3 years of misery and forced her to change her career. Within days of receiving her required vaccine cocktail she had a seizure and lost all use of her body. It was determined that she developed Guillain-Barre Syndrome (a common syndrome that coincidentally shows up after taking vaccines). She spent the next 3 years slowly regaining control of her body, relearning to walk, relearning to write, relearning to do everything we take for granted. She will never fully recover, and still has lost sensation in her feet and hands. She stumbles a lot and slurs her speech if she doesn't make an effort to overcome the lack of feeling in her body. She was an air-traffic controller, and due to physical requirements placed on the job-title, she will never qualify for her chosen career-choice again, thanks to vaccines. Oh, and they gave her an experimental pneumonia vaccine, which ironically, gave her a nasty strain of viral-pneumonia for a full 12 months - as she was bedridden and paralyzed. Of course, her Government doctors denied that the vaccines caused these things. Must be genetics.

    Oh, and Fargo spoke up and told us of his reaction to vaccines as well. There are plenty of recent newspaper headlines as well. None of these articles were formally approved by the CDC or President Obama, so I don't know if they are worth posting.





    This is the chemical structure of Thimerosal, a preservative that is used in the majority of all vaccines used today. The symbol "Hg" stands for Mercury, a toxic heavy metal element.

    Nobody has a problem admitting that Mercury is a toxin, a poison, a carcinogen. But for some reason,
    the "credible" sources have trouble condemning the use of Thimerosal in vaccines. Someone tell me why you would want to inject your infant child with a dose of mercury to prevent them from getting an sexually-transmitted disease?!?

    You guys can mock and naysay all day long. It surely isn't going to put me or my loved ones in line to get our Government-recommended injections. I'm just here to provide a little info to those who aren't too threatened by hearing the un-approved side of the issue.

    Talking vaccines is as touchy as talking politics. Things change when you get "mugged."
     
    Last edited:

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    Its curious how nowadays, 1 in 150 kids have autism. I wonder if it could be linked to our obsession with vaccinating kids for everything imaginable....


    New Study Finds: Thimerosal Induces Autism-like Neurotoxicity
    (15.07.2009)

    A new study published in the June issue of the peer-reviewed journal of Toxicology & Environmental Chemistry, finds cytotoxic effects of Thimerosal that are similar with pathophysiological findings observed in patients diagnosed with autistic disorders (ADs).
     

    LPMan59

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 8, 2009
    5,560
    48
    South of Heaven
    This was just sent to me from a mother who's infant son has been sick with the flu.... ever since receiving the doctor-recommended flu vaccine.

    YouTube - Flu Vaccine Exposed: Think Twice!

    lolz.

    rambone, youre posts are hilarious. i wont even bother to attempt to counter any of it or interject logic; its much more fun just to read the crap you post. a naturopathic doctor and cancer researcher? lmfao

    this crap is so funny, i almost want to rep you.
     

    gund

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 28, 2009
    135
    16
    You mentioned Thimerosal. It is not a vaccine. It is used in vaccines, and other uses. It was first discovered in 1927.

    used as a preservative in vaccines, immunoglobulin preparations, skin test antigens, antivenins, ophthalmic and nasal products, and tattoo inks
    The CDC in 1999 asked vaccine makers to remove Thimerosal as a precaution because of some evidence it was dangerous. They removed it soon after.

    Thiomersal controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    How does this show vaccines are bad inherently? Your first post questions the effectiveness of vaccines, not that their delivery could be coupled with a dangerous agent.
    [STRIKE]
    The other person asked for links showing the flu vaccine is unsafe today.

    Unfortunately there's no Thimerosal in them.[/STRIKE]

    But you are right, the government can make mistakes. They do approve drugs that are later found to be dangerous. Not just in vaccines but other medication too. One recent famous one is Vioxx.

    Medicine should not be mandatory. I agree. But don't say vaccines are useless as justification. They shouldn't be mandatory because we should be able to decide what we do with our bodies. If the other guy doesn't want a precautionary rabies vaccine after being bitten, well that's his problem. If someone doesn't want the hepatitis vaccine and gets infected, too bad, but at least let us know so we can take precautions to prevent infection from them.

    A side note. A lot of people seem to have firsthand vaccine related problems. If true, I'm sorry to hear that and I hope you can get reparation from the vaccine makers.
     
    Last edited:

    bigus_D

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Dec 5, 2008
    2,063
    38
    Country Side
    Thimerosal... bad.

    I got a seasonal flu vaccine this year. I believe it contained Thimerosal. They offered Thimerosal free vaccines, but they were more expensive.

    My pregnant wife will get an H1N1 vaccine as soon as possible (probably wednesday at the marion county clinic). We will double check that the vaccines are Thimerosal free before she gets it (as thimerosal is not approved for pregnant women).

    When I asked for some credible studies, I wasn't asking for the CDC or presidential sign off... just something credible. I think everybody agrees that Thimerosal has negative effects, so that link doesn't really provide much additional information.
     

    gund

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 28, 2009
    135
    16
    My mistake. There is still some flu vaccines with thimerosal.

    I'm sure the recent 2009 study will further hasten the disuse of thimerosal. From the FAQ it seems until recently there has still been no evidence of causal linkage between thimerosal and autism.

    Thimerosal in Vaccines Questions and Answers
    What progress has been made towards the goal of eliminating thimerosal from vaccines?
    Great progress has been made in removing thimerosal from vaccines. Manufacturers have been able to accomplish this goal through changing their manufacturing processes, including a switch from multi-dose vials, which generally require a preservative, to single-dose vials or syringes. Since 2001, all vaccines manufactured for the U.S. market and routinely recommended for children ≤ 6 years of age have contained no thimerosal or only trace amounts (≤ 1 microgram of mercury per dose remaining from the manufacturing process), with the exception of inactivated influenza vaccine. In addition, all of the routinely recommended vaccines that had been previously manufactured with thimerosal as a preservative (some formulations of DTaP, Haemophilus influenzae b conjugate (Hib), and hepatitis B vaccines) had reached the end of their shelf life by January 2003.
    In the past, prior to the initiative to reduce or eliminate thimerosal from childhood vaccines, the maximum cumulative exposure to mercury via routine childhood vaccinations during the first six months of life was 187.5 micrograms. With the introduction of thimerosal-preservative-free formulations of DTaP, hepatitis B, and Hib, the maximum cumulative exposure from these vaccines decreased to less than three micrograms of mercury in the first 6 months of life. With the addition of influenza vaccine to the recommended vaccines, an infant could receive a thimerosal-containing influenza vaccine at 6 and 7 months of age. This would result in a maximum exposure or 28 micrograms via routine childhood vaccinations. This level is well below the EPA calculated exposure guideline for methylmercury of 65 micrograms for a child in the 5th percentile body weight during the first 6 months of life.
    Currently, all hepatitis vaccines manufactured for the U.S. market contain either no thimerosal or only trace amounts. Also, DT, Td, and Tetanus Toxoid vaccines are now available in formulations that contain no thimerosal or only trace amounts (see Table 3).
    Furthermore, all new vaccines licensed since 1999 are free of thimerosal as a preservative. Inactivated influenza vaccine was added to the routinely recommended vaccines for children 6 to 23 months of age in 2004. FDA has approved thimerosal–preservative free formulations (containing either no or only trace amounts of thimerosal) for the inactivated influenza vaccines manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur and Chiron. These influenza vaccines continue to be marketed in both the preservative free and thimerosal-preservative containing formulations. In addition, in August 2005, FDA licensed GlaxoSmithKline's inactivated influenza vaccine, which contains 1.25 micrograms mercury per dose. Of the three licensed inactivated influenza vaccines, Sanofi Pasteur's Fluzone is the only one approved for use in children down to 6 months of age. Chiron's Fluvirin is approved for individuals 4 years of age and older, and GSK's Fluarix is approved for individuals 18 years of age and older. The live attenuated influenza vaccine (FluMist, manufactured by MedImmune), which contains no thimerosal, is approved for individuals 5 to 49 years of age. For the 2005-2006 season, Sanofi Pasteur was able to manufacture up to 8 million doses of thimerosal-preservative free influenza vaccine. Based on an estimated annual birth cohort in the United States of 4 million, there are 6 million infants and children between the ages of 6 and 23 months, most of whom would need two doses each. Thus, the amount of thimerosal-preservative-free vaccine that is available based on current manufacturing capacity is well below the number of doses needed to fully vaccinate this age group. FDA is in discussions with manufacturers of influenza vaccine regarding their capacity to further increase the supply of preservative-free formulations.
     

    6birds

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 15, 2008
    2,291
    36
    Fishers
    "Its curious how nowadays, 1 in 150 kids have autism. I wonder if it could be linked to our obsession with vaccinating kids for everything imaginable...." or obesity, or cell phones, or lead in the chocolate, or soft drinks. Are we losing more kids to FAT than drugs?

    "Rambone- I'm just here to provide a little info to those who aren't too threatened by hearing the un-approved side of the issue."

    "RNMedic- Most people don't understand that practicing medicine is just that. All people have the possiblity of reacting differently to each treatment pattern. But we play the % rule. Do the best for the most amount of people."

    Two sides of the same story, you keep digging for the flyers, but please remember that this does not have to be all-or-nothing.
     

    SavageEagle

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 27, 2008
    19,568
    38
    Rambone, it's a losing battle with these people. Let them say what they will. People are going to take the shot. No matter that most people who do get sick anyway. It doesn't matter to them because they trust the FDA. :rolleyes:

    I would love to argue with you all in this thread but I know that no matter what I say you will come back with some internet based response and not prove to me that Natural Cures are a waste of time or less effective than man-made drugs. It doesn't matter to you that people's immune systems are being annihilated due to man-made drugs and that people beat these diseases for centuries using NATURAL MEANS. :facepalm:

    Believe what you want. Take the shots. Take the drugs. It's your body.
     
    Top Bottom