No Jab - No Pay!

Forums › Off topic › No Jab - No Pay!

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282817 14-Apr-2015 11:56

networkn:
nunz:
joker97:
nunz:
richms: IMO the govts job is to run the most affordable healthcare system possible. If getting a jab for all reduces the overall cost of the system then do it. People are too wound up about individual rights forgetting that they are part of a society.

IMHO it is the govts job is to run the most affordable healthcare system possible. If NOT getting a jab for all reduces the overall cost of the system then do it. People are too wound up about THE LATEST SCARES AND FADS forgetting that they have a brain and should use it.

if only it were that simple. people who think they know stuff actually don't know stuff.

your statement already shows that. how can it be cheaper for the govt not to vaccinate - does anyone think for ONE SECOND that governments will do something that is more expensive, ie enforce vaccination?

i propose that vaccinating everyone is cheaper for the govt, if there is no other reason for doing it than laughing at protestors' kids getting scarred for life.

Again - I am not arguing against vaccination - I am primarily arguing against the discrimination the govts suggestion entails.

Secondly I am not arguing for no vaccination - but certainly removing the vaccinations that are not required such as HPV.

As an example of using your brain - Education reduced the incidences of HIV / Hepititus world wide - no vaccine required. When I was young there was an advert about how when you have sex with one person you have sex with all their partners potential diseases. 35 years later i still remember it.

TB is another good case in point. TB was almost eradicated in NZ as an educationally driven policyy was put in place which discouraged spitting - one of the major vectors for transmission. Now we have the Crusadaers, Blues, Sharks and every other team spitting and hawking all over the place. Not only is it gross but TB is on the rise again - and spitting has become popular, not just amongst immigrant asians where the social norm doesn't condem spitting in public but amongst all races.

If Tb gets more prevelent we will probably see them introduce a vaccine program for it - which would not be required as it can be eradicated at a social level like it was before - ditto HPV and other non-essential vaccines which would get my dole removed if I was on the dole in aus and they brought in this policy.

The methods used previously as you have claimed as less effective now because of the popularity of the internet and social media where any half wit can make a post that has a few facts and figures and get people worked up into a lather.

You might not be arguing against vaccination but when you are incorrectly quoting figures you obtained from a site without context and use kids being hurt as a result of vaccinations it's hard to feel you aren't against them.

Your numbers were disputed and context added to the sites you got the information from. If you read them you will see your opinions on how many people are actually having problems with vaccinations are in the magnitudes of factors, wrong.

The more I thought about the Govt penalizing through benefits the more it bothers me despite being more open to it initially.

Something needs to be done to combat the muppets who can get on facebook and spout absolute nonsense with figures that make no sense.

1 - My figures were sited from the CDC - I never used non cited figures. - See my initial post re the figures.

2 - I used USA figures . Not Nz figures, which is the ones you are comparing my numbers to.

3 - I am not anti vaccine - My arguments, as I continue to point out repeatedly, is against the biggotry and discrimination that proposal entails. My arguments for choice of choosing vaccines to let my children have are around the fact I would be penalised for making a choice re at least one vaccine I know to be un-necessary but still inflicted on children for no good reason - other than probably to enrich the vaccine makers. let me be really clear. My childreen had all their MMR, tetnus, whooping cough etc shots. they have had flu shots over he last couple of years as I got bird flu and am vulnerable to certain infections and that may put my kids at risk. They would never be exposed to media beat up immunisations like Tami Flu and HPV is completely not required for children who are not having sex or those who practice safe sexual practices. That they can choose as adults if they want to. I will see a few pins stuck in my kids as safely possible. I am pro-vaccine - but not pro sheep mentality on all vaccines and defintely anti the discrimination this proposed legislation entails.

4 - The methods used ie advertising are still effective - ref seatblets and smoking - both used education - including social media. Muppets will always be muppets and other than the media beating up the weirdos to make news, they are generally ignored. Other example, Drunk driving, is down in young people, the majority users of social media but barely touched in late middle age males, the least likely to use social media. Despite the adverts on TV.

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282822 14-Apr-2015 12:00

networkn:
nunz:
NZtechfreak:
Sideface:
NZtechfreak: ... Between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2009, the Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring received 4,757 reports of adverse events following immunisation of which 174 (3.6%) were considered to be serious, as set out in table 2. More than one vaccine may be given at the same time. Therefore some reports appear more than once in table 2. ...

Interesting. Can we have an image or link to "table 2" please.

Sure, once my fully vaccinated children are down to sleep and I'm not on mobile.

Just wanted to point out, in case anyone missed it: nunz math on serious adverse effects is orders of magnitude incorrect. Just to be crystal clear on that. For me the question is why? Bad data? Bad math? Deliberate misrepresentation? I presume it's probably an error.

1700 severe reactions. 5% reported cases of reactions estimated - puts severe reactions as between 1700 and 35000 per year - My original statistic of 48 000 should be reduced to around 7000 because i transposed 1700 for 7100.

Realistically what is the likelyhood that even 30000 cases of severe reactions went unreported, by doctors, patients, parents, or administrators? Not very likely, and to suggest otherwise IS misrepresentation.

To say it could represent up to - is not - it is only mis-representation when quoted out of context of the rest of the argument / calculations.

The only mis-represenation here is you trying to corner me as a radicalist. :)

networkn

Networkn
32355 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282824 14-Apr-2015 12:01

1 - My figures were sited from the CDC - I never used non cited figures. - See my initial post re the figures.

2 - I used USA figures . Not Nz figures, which is the ones you are comparing my numbers to.

3 - I am not anti vaccine - My arguments, as I continue to point out repeatedly, is against the biggotry and discrimination that proposal entails. My arguments for choice of choosing vaccines to let my children have are around the fact I would be penalised for making a choice re at least one vaccine I know to be un-necessary but still inflicted on children for no good reason - other than probably to enrich the vaccine makers. let me be really clear. My childreen had all their MMR, tetnus, whooping cough etc shots. they have had flu shots over he last couple of years as I got bird flu and am vulnerable to certain infections and that may put my kids at risk. They would never be exposed to media beat up immunisations like Tami Flu and HPV is completely not required for children who are not having sex or those who practice safe sexual practices. That they can choose as adults if they want to. I will see a few pins stuck in my kids as safely possible. I am pro-vaccine - but not pro sheep mentality on all vaccines and defintely anti the discrimination this proposed legislation entails.

4 - The methods used ie advertising are still effective - ref seatblets and smoking - both used education - including social media. Muppets will always be muppets and other than the media beating up the weirdos to make news, they are generally ignored. Other example, Drunk driving, is down in young people, the majority users of social media but barely touched in late middle age males, the least likely to use social media. Despite the adverts on TV.

I disagree with every point made here for various reasons but it's clear to me you aren't even paying attention to what others including myself are writing (or aren't prepared to accept any viewpoint except your own), so very little point in continuing. It's unlikely HPV would be made mandatory the same way the MMR would be as it's not an epidemic illness.

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282831 14-Apr-2015 12:07

joker97:
nunz:
nunz:
Doctors are bombarded by the medical profession and are as humanly vulnerable to influence as the rest of us.

joker97:
vaccines don't make drug companies rich. PERIOD. they prevent illnesses, how is that of any benefit to the drug companies?

will give an example. nobody wants to make a vaccine for ebola. what's the benefit in there for drug companies? they concentrate on making super expensive anti cancer treatment that doesn't work that pharmac won't pay for that gets social media buzzing like crazy .... now that's called profiteering

One word: Tami Flu - argument won - Game set and match.

explain? coz i actually don't understand Tamiflu.

Tamiflu was a brand of Flu vaccine that the media promoted to save us from a horrendous pandemic of the bird flu - or was it swine flu, or was it chicken flu? I don't remember any more .

All I know is that there were stories about low stocks of vaccine, calls for the govt to do something, panic buying and immunisation.
The behavours were driven by the medias story about this horrendous pandemic sweeping the globe (which killed bugger all people btw) and you need to get TamiFlu jabs to save yourselves from it- and also jab your
kids otherwise you are bad parents.

long story cut short - storm in a tea cup. the media made money from advertising nad kept their sales high.
Tamiflu became a household name and sold a heck of a lot more vaccines than the otherwise would have and this PANDEMIC!!! was hardly that. The ebola scare recently was far more dangerous but no one innoculated us against that. :)

Who benefitted? the media and the vaccine makers.

Any discussion re vaccines and who is pushing them has to always be tempered by the fact that in 2012 vaccines were worth over 25Billion profit ( http://www.fiercevaccines.com/special-reports/top-5-vaccine-companies-revenue-2012 ). and growing every year. For that sort of money to be made - believe me there is some pressure going on and vested interests wanting to keep it going.

tamiflu - excellent example of bs and hype over safe parenting practice.

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282832 14-Apr-2015 12:11

networkn:

1 - My figures were sited from the CDC - I never used non cited figures. - See my initial post re the figures.

2 - I used USA figures . Not Nz figures, which is the ones you are comparing my numbers to.

3 - I am not anti vaccine - My arguments, as I continue to point out repeatedly, is against the biggotry and discrimination that proposal entails. My arguments for choice of choosing vaccines to let my children have are around the fact I would be penalised for making a choice re at least one vaccine I know to be un-necessary but still inflicted on children for no good reason - other than probably to enrich the vaccine makers. let me be really clear. My childreen had all their MMR, tetnus, whooping cough etc shots. they have had flu shots over he last couple of years as I got bird flu and am vulnerable to certain infections and that may put my kids at risk. They would never be exposed to media beat up immunisations like Tami Flu and HPV is completely not required for children who are not having sex or those who practice safe sexual practices. That they can choose as adults if they want to. I will see a few pins stuck in my kids as safely possible. I am pro-vaccine - but not pro sheep mentality on all vaccines and defintely anti the discrimination this proposed legislation entails.

4 - The methods used ie advertising are still effective - ref seatblets and smoking - both used education - including social media. Muppets will always be muppets and other than the media beating up the weirdos to make news, they are generally ignored. Other example, Drunk driving, is down in young people, the majority users of social media but barely touched in late middle age males, the least likely to use social media. Despite the adverts on TV.

I disagree with every point made here for various reasons but it's clear to me you aren't even paying attention to what others including myself are writing (or aren't prepared to accept any viewpoint except your own), so very little point in continuing. It's unlikely HPV would be made mandatory the same way the MMR would be as it's not an epidemic illness.

How can you disagree with me saying I am not antivaccine - you make no sense at all. Are you telling me you know me more than i know myself?
do you disagree i used USa figures?
do you disagree i cited my figures from the CDC>

Seriously - if you disagree with every point made here then you need your head read.

You are arguing using propganda type techniques to sway emotion not using any form of logic.

networkn

Networkn
32355 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282835 14-Apr-2015 12:14

nunz:
networkn:

1 - My figures were sited from the CDC - I never used non cited figures. - See my initial post re the figures.

2 - I used USA figures . Not Nz figures, which is the ones you are comparing my numbers to.

3 - I am not anti vaccine - My arguments, as I continue to point out repeatedly, is against the biggotry and discrimination that proposal entails. My arguments for choice of choosing vaccines to let my children have are around the fact I would be penalised for making a choice re at least one vaccine I know to be un-necessary but still inflicted on children for no good reason - other than probably to enrich the vaccine makers. let me be really clear. My childreen had all their MMR, tetnus, whooping cough etc shots. they have had flu shots over he last couple of years as I got bird flu and am vulnerable to certain infections and that may put my kids at risk. They would never be exposed to media beat up immunisations like Tami Flu and HPV is completely not required for children who are not having sex or those who practice safe sexual practices. That they can choose as adults if they want to. I will see a few pins stuck in my kids as safely possible. I am pro-vaccine - but not pro sheep mentality on all vaccines and defintely anti the discrimination this proposed legislation entails.

4 - The methods used ie advertising are still effective - ref seatblets and smoking - both used education - including social media. Muppets will always be muppets and other than the media beating up the weirdos to make news, they are generally ignored. Other example, Drunk driving, is down in young people, the majority users of social media but barely touched in late middle age males, the least likely to use social media. Despite the adverts on TV.

I disagree with every point made here for various reasons but it's clear to me you aren't even paying attention to what others including myself are writing (or aren't prepared to accept any viewpoint except your own), so very little point in continuing. It's unlikely HPV would be made mandatory the same way the MMR would be as it's not an epidemic illness.

How can you disagree with me saying I am not antivaccine - you make no sense at all. Are you telling me you know me more than i know myself?
do you disagree i used USa figures?
do you disagree i cited my figures from the CDC>

Seriously - if you disagree with every point made here then you need your head read.

You are arguing using propganda type techniques to sway emotion not using any form of logic.

Did you actually read what others including NZTechFreak wrote?

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282865 14-Apr-2015 12:29

networkn: It's all well and good saying you want to be able to make choices that affect you and your family, but are you ok making those choices at the expense of those who don't have those choices at all?

You might choose to non Vax your Kid because you are worried about the risk, which has been proven time and time again to be completely minimal, but there are kids around for whom the vaccination is a death sentence (likelyhood 100%) who can only rely on herd immunization.

I don't mind free choice, so long as the only person who are hurting (potentially) is yourself.

I wonder if you could look the parent of a child killed by a disease your kid gave them, because you were worried about the %0.00009% chance of a reaction.

Obviously the most extreme outcome.

Again - I am not anti vaccine - the only people who have said I am have totally ignored my arguments, answers and the fact i keep stating this is aobut discrimination not vaccination. See my answers where I list how we have vaccinated our kids. Hardly an anti-vax action for me to take.

What I am very clear on is the right to choose and anti discrimination - this is the whole thrust of my argument.

HPV is just an example of a vaccine being pushed that is not required but could end up on the list like the one the Abbott crew advocate enforcing. It is also an example where no child is going to die of a disease as Cervical cancer is a) long term to develop, b) requires sexual transmission and c) my kids wont inflict on ayone - at least not as kids. :) - so my choice is reasonable and non-harming while avoiding possible complications.

It is a good example to pick on as one reason that forcing vaccinations is not always good policy and in the long run is driven by social agenda, not health policy.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282883 14-Apr-2015 12:44

wasabi2k: The whole taking away your rights thing doesn't really fly with me when you are receiving money from the government.
If you take out the vaccine activity - does the government have any rights to expect beneficiaries to do things to qualify for their benefit?
I believe they do - but I have never been remotely close to needing a benefit.

Yes and no.

I for example am pro working for the dole in some size shape or form. Like you I believe that a benefit requires some qualification.

However, the reason the benefit comes into this discussion is that the govt is proposing discriminating against a section of society in matter tangential to requirements to get a benefit and intruding on the rights of a parent to parent and make decisions for their kids.

If they looked at turning this into a law that imposed the same penalties on all parents - then I would have one less argument - however:

Imagine this as a law.

Any parent / family who does not get their children immunised according to the Health board's immunisation schedule will have their wages removed or their benefit removed until such time as they comply with this Govt edict.

There would be screams of it being illegal etc but because it is limited in scope to benficieries, who are politically expedient compared to Wages earners there is less out-cry.

Again imagine this law:

Any person who drives a car without at least 2 passengers or to destinations less than 2km away will have their wages removed or their benefit removed until such time as they comply with this Govt edict.

This law is of more benefit to society as it reduces petrol / fuel consumption - lowering overseas deficit.
It reduces carbon dioxide emissions, lead emissions, carbon monoxide etc.
It reduces smog and lung polllutents.
It fosters health by increasing exercise.
It reduces car accidents
etc etc etc

This law is of far greater good to more of society than immunisation health cost reduction - but couched in terms of the overt coercion it would be howled down immediately as facism, govt interferance etc.

Take out either the targets of the proposed legislation and insert all peoples, or change the targeted goal of the legislation and it is seen as the discriminatory piece of bigotry it is.

As it stands, we are more interested in the Pro-anti vac debate than the implications of this legislation - not for health but for the way we treat people. It also exposes our own biases towards beneficiaries as somehow being worth less than 'normal' people.

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282888 14-Apr-2015 12:48

networkn:
nunz:
networkn:

1 - My figures were sited from the CDC - I never used non cited figures. - See my initial post re the figures.

2 - I used USA figures . Not Nz figures, which is the ones you are comparing my numbers to.

3 - I am not anti vaccine - My arguments, as I continue to point out repeatedly, is against the biggotry and discrimination that proposal entails. My arguments for choice of choosing vaccines to let my children have are around the fact I would be penalised for making a choice re at least one vaccine I know to be un-necessary but still inflicted on children for no good reason - other than probably to enrich the vaccine makers. let me be really clear. My childreen had all their MMR, tetnus, whooping cough etc shots. they have had flu shots over he last couple of years as I got bird flu and am vulnerable to certain infections and that may put my kids at risk. They would never be exposed to media beat up immunisations like Tami Flu and HPV is completely not required for children who are not having sex or those who practice safe sexual practices. That they can choose as adults if they want to. I will see a few pins stuck in my kids as safely possible. I am pro-vaccine - but not pro sheep mentality on all vaccines and defintely anti the discrimination this proposed legislation entails.

4 - The methods used ie advertising are still effective - ref seatblets and smoking - both used education - including social media. Muppets will always be muppets and other than the media beating up the weirdos to make news, they are generally ignored. Other example, Drunk driving, is down in young people, the majority users of social media but barely touched in late middle age males, the least likely to use social media. Despite the adverts on TV.

I disagree with every point made here for various reasons but it's clear to me you aren't even paying attention to what others including myself are writing (or aren't prepared to accept any viewpoint except your own), so very little point in continuing. It's unlikely HPV would be made mandatory the same way the MMR would be as it's not an epidemic illness.

How can you disagree with me saying I am not antivaccine - you make no sense at all. Are you telling me you know me more than i know myself?
do you disagree i used USa figures?
do you disagree i cited my figures from the CDC>

Seriously - if you disagree with every point made here then you need your head read.

You are arguing using propganda type techniques to sway emotion not using any form of logic.

Did you actually read what others including NZTechFreak wrote?

Um yes - and responded to them - in order to respond i had to know what they wrote - ipso facto - I read their posts.

Your point is? - Hang on I've just got it. You are telling me i am not responding to pro-vaccine arguments - and that is correct - I am not - deliberately.

Have you read what I wrote? My argument is about discrimination - i don't give a fig about the vaccine debate as there are too many radicals on BOTH sides, who get stuck on one point that was never made and don't actually respond to the main thrust of what I am trying to say which is about discrimination..

so let me summarise.
I believe vaccines are good - up to a point.
I believe I should make informed decision on all aspects of my kids health care, not just be a sheep.
I believe that some vaccines are not necessary and will act accordingly - in an informed manner. And please note those vaccines that are considered not necessary don't include killers like MMR etc but dumb stuff like HPV.
I make my decisions as a responsible member of a community factoring in what is good not only for me and my family but the impact on my whanu, hapu, whaka and country and hopefully the world.
I have made no pro or ant vaccine stance arguments as i am not interested in that argument / duscussion
My discussions are about discrimination and the removal of responsible free choices for people to make.

Now that I have explicitly stated I believe some vaccines are good, and my children are vaccinated, and I made an error transposing a 1 and a 7 - will you please get off my back about not listening to you?

And for the record - my use of the word belief is the variant of belief which means conviction leading to action based on the conviction, not religious faith, pie eyed wishful thinking or other version of belief that isn't manifested in action.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282899 14-Apr-2015 13:02

nunz:
joker97:

explain? coz i actually don't understand Tamiflu.

Tamiflu was a brand of Flu vaccine that the media promoted to save us from a horrendous pandemic of the bird flu - or was it swine flu, or was it chicken flu? I don't remember any more .

it was introduced when swine flu (influenza caused by the H1N1 virus) was pandemic and was killing people, and there was no cure. it can be used for any form of influenza virus.

All I know is that there were stories about low stocks of vaccine, calls for the govt to do something, panic buying and immunisation.

there were no vaccines for H1N1 when it was introduced, AFAIK. so no vaccine, no cure, wonder drug -> $$$

The behavours were driven by the medias story about this horrendous pandemic sweeping the globe (which killed bugger all people btw) and you need to get TamiFlu jabs to save yourselves from it- and also jab your
kids otherwise you are bad parents.

1) Tamiflu was never available as a jab, still isn't (I think). in the ICU it had to be given as a crushed tablet into a tube into the stomach. (by the way, stomach is not the area between the nipples and the groin, it is an organ that connects the oesophagus and the duodenum).

2) The media jumped on the bandwagon and caused panic, correct. Bugger all died, because bugger all got the disease. But those who got the disease the death rate is similar to other influenza. It kills mainly old, ill, or pregnant people. Can't tell you the rate, sorry. But healthy people can die from it. Like any other influenza, but yes it did cause panic because it was a new strain of influenza.

long story cut short - storm in a tea cup. the media made money from advertising nad kept their sales high.
Tamiflu became a household name and sold a heck of a lot more vaccines than the otherwise would have and this PANDEMIC!!! was hardly that. The ebola scare recently was far more dangerous but no one innoculated us against that. :)

Who benefitted? the media and the vaccine makers.

Tamiflu is not a vaccine

Any discussion re vaccines and who is pushing them has to always be tempered by the fact that in 2012 vaccines were worth over 25Billion profit ( http://www.fiercevaccines.com/special-reports/top-5-vaccine-companies-revenue-2012 ). and growing every year. For that sort of money to be made - believe me there is some pressure going on and vested interests wanting to keep it going.

tamiflu - excellent example of bs and hype over safe parenting practice.

Tamiflu is not a vaccine

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282905 14-Apr-2015 13:06

nunz:
nunz:
Doctors are bombarded by the medical profession and are as humanly vulnerable to influence as the rest of us.

joker97:
vaccines don't make drug companies rich. PERIOD. they prevent illnesses, how is that of any benefit to the drug companies?

will give an example. nobody wants to make a vaccine for ebola. what's the benefit in there for drug companies? they concentrate on making super expensive anti cancer treatment that doesn't work that pharmac won't pay for that gets social media buzzing like crazy .... now that's called profiteering

One word: Tami Flu - argument won - Game set and match.

didn't I say people don't understand vaccines? Tamiflu is not a vaccine. it is a touted cure to an incurable disease that didn't work and the drug companies made money from it.

Tamiflu is not a vaccine.

I bet that didn't make anyone believe me, even if I wrote that 4 times. (see earlier post of someone who posted a line about 20 times or more)

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282907 14-Apr-2015 13:08

joker97:
nunz:
joker97:

explain? coz i actually don't understand Tamiflu.

Tamiflu was a brand of Flu vaccine that the media promoted to save us from a horrendous pandemic of the bird flu - or was it swine flu, or was it chicken flu? I don't remember any more .

it was introduced when swine flu (influenza caused by the H1N1 virus) was pandemic and was killing people, and there was no cure. it can be used for any form of influenza virus.

All I know is that there were stories about low stocks of vaccine, calls for the govt to do something, panic buying and immunisation.

there were no vaccines for H1N1 when it was introduced, AFAIK. so no vaccine, no cure, wonder drug -> $$$

The behavours were driven by the medias story about this horrendous pandemic sweeping the globe (which killed bugger all people btw) and you need to get TamiFlu jabs to save yourselves from it- and also jab your
kids otherwise you are bad parents.

1) Tamiflu was never available as a jab, still isn't (I think). in the ICU it had to be given as a crushed tablet into a tube into the stomach. (by the way, stomach is not the area between the nipples and the groin, it is an organ that connects the oesophagus and the duodenum).

2) The media jumped on the bandwagon and caused panic, correct. Bugger all died, because bugger all got the disease. But those who got the disease the death rate is similar to other influenza. It kills mainly old, ill, or pregnant people. Can't tell you the rate, sorry. But healthy people can die from it. Like any other influenza, but yes it did cause panic because it was a new strain of influenza.

long story cut short - storm in a tea cup. the media made money from advertising nad kept their sales high.
Tamiflu became a household name and sold a heck of a lot more vaccines than the otherwise would have and this PANDEMIC!!! was hardly that. The ebola scare recently was far more dangerous but no one innoculated us against that. :)

Who benefitted? the media and the vaccine makers.

Tamiflu is not a vaccine

Any discussion re vaccines and who is pushing them has to always be tempered by the fact that in 2012 vaccines were worth over 25Billion profit ( http://www.fiercevaccines.com/special-reports/top-5-vaccine-companies-revenue-2012 ). and growing every year. For that sort of money to be made - believe me there is some pressure going on and vested interests wanting to keep it going.

tamiflu - excellent example of bs and hype over safe parenting practice.

Tamiflu is not a vaccine

I get it - tamiflu is not a vaccine - I am a lay person who like every other lay person was bombarded by the media to force the Govt to get mroe tamiflu meds into the country nad the dangers for not having it.

We were also lead to believe by the media that it was a cure - wrong obviously.

However - my point still stands - media lead mass hysteria leading to dumb decsion making or forcing changes in policy is not unheard of. i personally didn't give a fig about tami flu or getting it for my kids - not required for what was not a global pandemic.

nunz

1421 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1282914 14-Apr-2015 13:13

joker97:
nunz:
nunz:
Doctors are bombarded by the medical profession and are as humanly vulnerable to influence as the rest of us.

joker97:
vaccines don't make drug companies rich. PERIOD. they prevent illnesses, how is that of any benefit to the drug companies?

will give an example. nobody wants to make a vaccine for ebola. what's the benefit in there for drug companies? they concentrate on making super expensive anti cancer treatment that doesn't work that pharmac won't pay for that gets social media buzzing like crazy .... now that's called profiteering

One word: Tami Flu - argument won - Game set and match.

didn't I say people don't understand vaccines? Tamiflu is not a vaccine. it is a touted cure to an incurable disease that didn't work and the drug companies made money from it.

Tamiflu is not a vaccine.

I bet that didn't make anyone believe me, even if I wrote that 4 times. (see earlier post of someone who posted a line about 20 times or more)

I believe you - its not a vaccine. But it was a media beat up and as such stands as a good example of people manipulating public sentiment in the areas of health and health policy.

I see you too missed my sense of humour - read the line before the repeated lines. then the repeated lines make sense. Put it in context please before commenting on what I did. :)

joker97:
vaccines don't make drug companies rich. PERIOD.

And again - vaccines were a 25 billion dollar industry in 2012. worth more today - and that means pressure and influence on decision making which means we need to engage brain and choose wisely for our kids and not just be sheep.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1282917 14-Apr-2015 13:16

I get it - tamiflu is not a vaccine - I am a lay person who like every other lay person was bombarded by the media to force the Govt to get mroe tamiflu meds into the country nad the dangers for not having it.

We were also lead to believe by the media that it was a cure - wrong obviously.

However - my point still stands - media lead mass hysteria leading to dumb decsion making or forcing changes in policy is not unheard of. i personally didn't give a fig about tami flu or getting it for my kids - not required for what was not a global pandemic.

a vaccine is a disabled Rambo for a person to figure out how to kill. once the body figures it out, when a real Rambo arrives they have a GODMODE button to remove the Rambo behind the scenes. a bit like antivirus on the computer.

So does it work, of course it does. Usually. Some people cannot figure out how to kill the disabled Rambo so does not develop immunity but that doesn't harm them, the disabled Rambo with no arms and legs is dumped in the rubbish bin.

[Some people have no immunity and must not be exposed to even a Rambo with no limbs [vaccines] because that Rambo will kill them, so they rely on other people not to pass the Rambo to them]

The only question a lay person has to consider, is the risk of a serious reaction. Which I can't tell you because I don't work for CARM. Note CARM presents numbers that only scientists can understand, but even then it is missed the target of getting people to actually understand. I believe that risk of a serious reaction to be very low, so I vaccinate myself against every Rambo I remotely might encounter so that when those thugs arrive, my "antivirus" will sort them out without me lifting a finger.

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1282926 14-Apr-2015 13:39

nunz:1700 adverse effects, around 80% of vaccinations to those under 16, and possibly only 5% reported - according to CDC. Definition of serious is the one agreed by FDA / CDC. and includes death - a serious result indeed :)

Those vaccinations are for all vaccinations in all age groups, flu vaccination in adults will be around a third of those if the NZ statistics presented earlier are at least ballpark generalisable to the US situation. The definition of serious will be similar if not identical to ours, meaning the majority of those cases will be adverse reactions like fever. As in NZ death will be a vanishingly small number, and as the CDC states that surveillance data does not demonstrate causality at all regardless.

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10