foodconsumer.org

What the Inventor of the Flu Shot NOW Thinks of the Vaccine...

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:12:00 +0000

Posted by: Dr. Mercola November 17 2009 President Obama and his top health officials are engaging in a major public relations effort to divert attention away

Art Kocsis

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:58:24 +0000

What kind of spurious argument are you trying to make with a TWO YEAR OLD quote from Dr. Graeme Laver? Of course the vacine wasn't effective. It hadn't even been developed yet!!! Statement like that totally destroy your credibility.

Bob Dog

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 06:02:18 +0000

Dr. Mercola is a bit of a nut-job himself, seeing a massive conspiracy behind every little sniffle or twinge. I would be more inclined to believe what he says if not for all the talk about "the government." I'm definitely not an Obama fan, but Mercola's brand of paranoia long predates this administration. If it were up to the good doc, we would all be living out in the woods (sans camp fires of course, as the government doesn't want us to know how harmful those are).

John Casanova

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 06:05:29 +0000

Thanks for an enlightening article. I have heard the same thing stated but without the statistical verification. My biggest question is why would so many governments of the world push so hard for these almost useless and certainly potentially inoculations?

I would strongly suggest that an established journalist dig to find out the motivation behind these actions. Is it a desire to control the masses to establish more power?

I would sincerely like to know the real reason for their actions? Any takers?

John

AH

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 06:22:58 +0000

Good question, John. Why would they? After all, do remember the United States government is paying for this vaccine. As a matter of fact, why is it that the CDC, American Medical Association, American College of Nurse Midwives, Society for Maternal and Fetal Medicine, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Family Physicians and so many other groups have, in one way or another, advocated for routine H1N1 vaccination.

Think really hard. Maybe the greedy nurse midwives are pushing for vaccination so their multi-million dollar portfolios in vaccine companies makes them enough to retire early. Maybe that pediatrician likes seeing little kids die from H1N1 (yes, 158 kids have died from laboratory confirmed H1N1 since April).

They don't seem to reasonable.

Wait! Maybe its because it works! Imagine that. Health care professionals advocating for health policy that keeps us safer.

What's next? Airline pilots supporting laws that improve air safety?

celinda norvelle

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:46:24 +0000

I suggest perhaps the establishment will once agaian have yet another pandemic scare. Those who recieved the first vaccination will potentially find themselves infected if the second vaccine is not immediaately given, and so on for as long as it takes to declare martial law due to mass hesteria. Then again there may be a suggestion of payment, that will surely set the madness off. Stay smart America. Remember anything that has to be done immediately, most likely, not true. Look at this administrations track record. GOD BLESS ALL OF US

zeke

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:57:56 +0000

It should be pretty clear what the motive is here when one knows where certain people in political power have their assets invested. Art, the vaccine Tamiflu (Gilead) that is currently being used to combat N1H1 was approved by the FDA in 1999. Rumsfeld invested large amounts of money into Gilead Pharmaceuticals shortly before the Government invested 1.8 billion dollars into purchasing a stockpile of the vaccine. The value of stock immediately rose 50%. And AH, why would small-time practitioners know anything about the effectiveness of this vaccine? I understand why they would advocate, but not why their opinion matters about the specific effectiveness of this vaccine, (or about the economic issue.) Do some research. Most of this information is available to the public. I personally have some very close-hand experience with the military's biological weapons program so it's pretty hard to be quiet about this.

AH

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:33:41 +0000

Zeke: Science works through observable outcomes. Physicians and, to an extent, other practitioners (like nurse-midwives and nurse practitioners) are trained to observe such data and make decisions based on that data.

In this instance, they came together as a scientific community and analyzed the evidence available to them. Using their backgrounds in medicine, pharmacology, biology, immunology and related fields, they decided that it would be best if most people in the country were vaccinated. That's why their opinion matters.

If you are on an airplane, does your pilot's opinion about the safety of the aircraft matter? Of course it does. He or she has been trained to assess it. Just like those aforementioned organizations are ran by people who are trained to assess health and well being.

By the way, your comment discredits itself as soon as you refer to Tamiflu as a "vaccine." Tamiflu is an anti-retro viral agent. It is a drug, not a vaccination. Furthermore, it was licensed and marketed by Roche Labs after being developed by Gilead. Also, Rumsfeld was Secretary of Defense. His role in formulating public health policy was, I imagine, quite limited.

Not sure what your last claim is supposed to mean. If you had biological knowledge, you would never had referred to Tamiflu as a vaccine. I'd also suggest if you had in depth knowledge (which you clearly don't) of such material you wouldn't be running around bragging about it on the Internet.

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 20:39:15 +0000

The experience I refered to was this: I was in the NAVY nuclear engineering program. (propulsion systems not weapons) during the period of time that the Anthrax vaccine was being tested. I along with 217 other men became very sick. My white blood cell count dropped to 5% and I spent a month in a vacuum sealed room fighting for my life. You're response doesn't address the point at all. You can check the 5 year stock history of Gilead Pharmaceuticals and who the major investors are for yourself. Your right, the drug Tamiflu is an anti-retro viral agent (for use after the fact.) I don't believe the statistics support the hype this thing has generated. And after checking into the financial end of thing, I think I understand why. There's a LOT of money being made off the sale of vaccines (and anti-retro viral agents :) I don't "run around on the internet" this is only time I've posted anything. Your primary argument for why we should buy into this is that nurses advocate the vaccine. Maybe pilots should be designing avionics instead of aerospace engineers then.

L. Standish

Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:11:32 +0000

Someone needs to find out whether the H1N1 epidemic in the United States began as, and continues as, a massive research study of biostatisticians M. Elizabeth Halloran and Ira M. Longini. See Halloran and Longini's paper "Community studies for Vaccinating Schoolchildren Against Influenza." (Science Vol. 311, 3 Feb. 2006) at www.scharp.org/pdf_files/papers/fluvac.pdf. Longini has been one of the "experts" advising WHO and the CDC about the spread of the Swine Flu, and about the procedures for dealing with it. He has been advising these organizations about H1N1 for at least a couple of years.
If our country is in a nationwide swine flu research study, that could explain the scare tactics being used to get people jobbed. Since the study would be so massive, Longini probably would have set it up with someone in HHS sometime in 2007 or 2008.
‹

ErrorCon

Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:15:40 +0000

I find this article very interesting in light of recent studies linking schizophrenia and autism spectrum disorders with influenza: http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/content/abstract/23/1/297
http://www.physorg.com/news110641743.html
and the apparent offending protein appearing as an IMMUNE RESPONSE to certain proteins associated with the influenza virus and not necessarily the virus itself. While some individuals in the scientific community attribute supposedly correlated increases in autism spectrum disorders and changes in vacination types/techniques to better screening for autism, I wonder if better screening makes a plausible explanation for documented increases in autoimmune diseases. (What, if anything are we to make of recent discoveries like PANDAS for example?)