REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Manadatory vaccination (Part 3)

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Monday, September 5, 2022 19:16
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1982
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, December 29, 2006 6:05 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


The last couple psts went like this....

SIGNY:
Quote:

When making medical decisions, the first thing I look at is the risks and benefits of doing something versus the risks and benefits of doing nothing. (Most people don't realize that there are risks to doing nothing.) I look for ways to understand when risks are imminent (such as blood tests) and for ways to minimize them. If I initiate a treatment, I try to do so gradually. I keep a journal to help track long-term changes. But if there is no question whatsoever on the safety of a treatment- in this case, a vaccine- then my decision to vaccinate (or not) would be a pocketbook decision because there's no downside healthwise. At $10, it would be a no-brainer. At $1000 it would require some thought.
CTS
Quote:

Right, exactly. I've gambled plenty trying out different things in health food stores. They're cheap though, and I am relatively certain there are no health risks (low dose vitamins, minerals, foods). With herbs, I am a bit more careful.

So to answer your question directly, if vaccines were 100% safe, I would probably vaccinate if the cost per dose were about the same as dinner for two at a moderate restaurant (about $30 or less). But that would have to be the cost of the product, not my co-pay or the part not subsidized by government, or any partial price like that. Given what I have seen in the studies I've read, I personally and tentatively conclude (and I could very well be wrong because the data is so scanty and distorted) that vaccines are effective for some people, but for much fewer people than claimed--more like 20-45% rather than 80-95%. So for me, given my interpretation of the data, the questionable benefits are not worth a high price. I'll pay something for it, but not too much. I feel a price that is too high is a con exploiting parental fears, and is objectionable on principle.

www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=25661

My understanding is that the actual cost of the typical dose is fairly low, in the realm of $25-$40 for a routine vaccine like DTaP or MMR (altho newer ones like HPV cost $100+). Here is a price list: www.cdc.gov/nip/vfc/cdc_vac_price_list.htm

Cost does not appear to be a big issue. Although I'm sure that the pharmas are making SOME money on these products I don't think that they're big-ticket items like Viagra or Lipitor. To put this in context, I spend far more each year on fish oil, magnesium, and potassium (somewhere in the realm of $1000 for a family of three) than I do on vaccines.

---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 29, 2006 10:41 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


CTS,

I just wanted to carry over a few unresolved issues.

The first is your reversal on herd immunity; and the questions of whether or not you know what herd immunity is, how it is supposed to work, and what are the required vaccination rates for herd immunity to be in effect.

At issue are your straw-man arguments saying herd immunity 'doesn't work' the way 'people' say it does.

However, you don't come up with any links, or quotes, or even summaries of what 'people' say about herd immunity.

So, what do YOU think 'people' say about herd immunity?
Quote:

Those are the people protected by "herd immunity." Now I can go into detail about how exemptors do not threaten herd immunity and such, but that is a different thread.

Now there is debate on how exactly herd immunity works and if it works at all. But even assuming it works

the small percentage who experience vaccine failure should have been protected by herd immunity in a highly vaccinated population. They weren't.

Vaccines and/or herd immunity DO fail in unexpected ways.

herd immunity is unpredictable and doesn't work the way people think it does

People choosing not to vaccinate has never been in large enough numbers to threaten herd immunity.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 29, 2006 7:44 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
My understanding is that the actual cost of the typical dose is fairly low, in the realm of $25-$40 for a routine vaccine like DTaP or MMR (altho newer ones like HPV cost $100+). Here is a price list:

Thanks for the price list. So, IF vaccines were 100% safe, I'd probably get some of these and not others.

IF. I'll address vaccine risks next, when I have time. But I am having less and less time to spend in front of the computer, so I might not be reliable. I apologize ahead of time.

I wanted to share a link on Immunization Policy. I don't necessarily agree with everything this guy (a mathematician) says, but he summarizes some good points about conflicts of interest and other policy flaws. For example,...
Quote:

Do they have any monetary conflicts of interest?

Yes. There are laws against it, but they are routinely waived. Vaccine officials sometimes change their positions after payments from vaccine makers, as explained in the Money magazine article.

The US Congress (House Committee on Government Reform) recently held hearings on the subject, and discovered that those who voted for the rotavirus vaccine at the FDA and CDC had a financial stake in it. See the June 15, 2000 statements and staff report. Eg, ACIP member Paul Offit admitted under oath that he is actually a paid lobbyist in behalf of a vaccine manufacturer.

http://www.mindspring.com/~schlafly/vac/vaccfaq.htm



To jumpstart into potential vaccination risks, let's start with the ingredients of vaccines.

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/dailynews/June2001/VaccineIngredients.h
tm


http://www.informedchoice.info/cocktail.html

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/publications/pink/appendices/B/excipient-table-
1.pdf


Without going into correlations in human populations (which are horribly messy, scientifically speaking), we can start by looking at ingredients and their individual toxicities.

The question naturally arises, if these ingredients are not desirable by themselves, what are the risks of making a cocktail of them and injecting that cocktail directly into the bloodstream of infants? The amounts injected are minute, that is true, but what do we know of the cumulative effects of dozens of doses of these cocktails over the first years of a child's life?

Can't Take My Gorram Sky
----------
I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.
--Will Rogers (1879 - 1935), quoted in Saturday Review, Aug. 25, 1962


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 31, 2006 5:32 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Rue - Do us a favor and see if you can find a concise, simplified explaination of what "herd immunity" is and how it works, yadda yadda - so that the principles being discussed, agreed or disagreed on are fairly solid and we layman have some clue what the heck is being discussed ?

We talkin statistical averages or what ?

At least a solid basic outline would be nice.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 1, 2007 12:16 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Hi Frem -

The idea behind herd immunity is that if enough people are immune, a disease won't be able to propagate through a population. That way those who aren't immune face little risk of catching that disease.

The numbers change depending on how 'catchy' a disease is. The more catchy, the higher a percentage of people need to be vaccinated, and the other way around.

For something very catchy, like measles, more than 95% have to be vaccinated for there to be herd immunity. For something a little less catchy, like polio, only 70 - 80% need to be vaccinated to prevent propagation.

I have a list of links but they're on my other computer. I'll post them when I get there some time tomorrow.

PS If I remember correctly, 'herd immunity' was dicovered by frugal farmers who realized they didn't need to vaccinate every animal to get good protection.

HAPPY NEW YEAR ALL !!! : silly hat, stringers, and noisemakers :

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 1, 2007 11:57 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Hi FremD

The first link is to a google search from edu sites on herd immunity. Almost any one of the sites has useful information.

The next three links are specific ones pulled from the search. The first is general and written for the public. The second is technical and fairly complete. The third is a power-point which just reiterates some information. To specifically find 'herd-immunity' just edit/search, grep or whatever you use and look for 'herd'.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%22herd+immunity%22+vaccinati
on+rate+polio+site%3A.edu&btnG=Search


http://www.hawaii.edu/medicine/pediatrics/parenting/c64.html

http://www.mansfield.ohio-state.edu/~sabedon/biol2080.htm

http://www.medmicro.wisc.edu/undergraduate/courses/554/ppt/10

http://www.rhodes.edu/biology/glindquester/viruses/vaccines.html


Information not found in the above sites:
Infectivity "is a measure of the ability of a disease agent to establish itself in the host."

As an example, if I were to take a ml of blood from a person infected with HepB and dilute it in a municipal-size swimming pool of water, and expose 100 people to the water, all 100 would become infected. If I did the same with HIV, no one would become infected (source: Laboratory Medicine - not available to the public). So HepB is more 'infective' than HIV.

So something which is highly infective infects nearly everyone who comes in contact with it. That's why vaccination rates have to be high to establish herd immunity in those cases, otherwise the disease will propagate through the population. But if there is a disease that has low infectivity, only a fraction of exposures will result in infection. So the chances of it propagating are lower, and vaccination rates can be lower to establish herd immunity.

Also, disease, infection, agent and other terms are sometimes used interchangeably. In common use, disease might mean the agent that causes that illness (like the measles virus), or the illness itself. But to be more accurate, causative agent should be used to talk about the bacteria, virus etc. Attachment is the start of any colonization or infection. Colonization is having that agent in or on you. Infection means having the pathogen persist in or on you. It's possible to be infected and not be sick (eg as a carrier). DISEASE means being infected and taking on damage from it.

One of the sites very clearly states that vaccines prevent DISEASE, not infection. That's an important distinction that gets lost in the shuffle.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 1, 2007 3:15 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


I think that there's waaaaaaay too many of us here as it is. We've thrown nature on it's bottom and we're bleeding the planet dry to support our insane, unchecked procreation rate. I'm all about space exploration and expansion, but until that happens, we're going to have some real problems here if we keep breeding at the rate we do without allowing nature's checks and balances.

The only people that aren't having any kids anymore, on a mass scale, is the white, public school educated demographic. We grow up wanting our toys and nice houses like our parents wanted, and pass up on having 5 or six kids like our parents or grandparents had. That will change, of course, and people of all color and background will have less offspring as we become more integrated as a species (probably the only pro I see about the inevitable One World Government we'll probably all see as a result of our "War" on terror).

I say let nature do it's job. I'm one of the ones that won't be vaccinated, so I feel entitled to say it. If I'm wrong and I'm not strong enough to survive on my own, then I will go with no regrets.

Aren't you scientists? Don't you believe in survival of the fittest?

I happen to be of the school of thought that God and Evolution and, subsequently, Survival of the Fittest can all work hand in hand. I haven't made up my mind what I actually believe in yet, but I see no reason that they all can't co-exist.

Still not going to get me to take a shot by law though.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 1, 2007 3:32 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"I think that there's waaaaaaay too many of us here as it is."
YES

"pass up on having 5 or six kids ... as we become more integrated as a species"
NO. That will probably happen as a result of the demographic transition. Though whether planet earth can wait for the haves to let sumthin sumthin trickle down to the have nots is in serious doubt.

"One World Government"
YES We may have that already in the form of elites at the head of multinationals.

"I say let nature do it's job."
Our rulers don't seem interested in long-term human survival anyway.

"Don't you believe in survival of the fittest?"
What scientists believe in is survival of the best adapted to the environment of the day. That might mean fast reproduction, high mutation rates plus short life-span, eating stuff nothing else eats, living under conditions nothing else lives under, cooperation, reasoning skills ... It doesn't mean head to head gladitorial competition, or brutish zero-sum scenarios. Not until we exhaust critical resources, anyway.

In which case neither of us is slated for survival as we are genetically cash-deficient. :ironic:

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 1, 2007 6:00 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
"I think that there's waaaaaaay too many of us here as it is."
YES



Hey look! We agree on something Rue!

Quote:

"pass up on having 5 or six kids ... as we become more integrated as a species"
NO. That will probably happen as a result of the demographic transition. Though whether planet earth can wait for the haves to let sumthin sumthin trickle down to the have nots is in serious doubt.{/B]



I think that's more or less what I was getting at, perhaps in a more round-about way. I'm assuming, of course, that your use of elipses were meant to include the statement in its entirity without reposting it, rather than omiting what you felt was unimportant.

Quote:


"One World Government"
YES We may have that already in the form of elites at the head of multinationals.

"I say let nature do it's job."
Our rulers don't seem interested in long-term human survival anyway.



Man Rue... I think we agree on a lot more than we think we agree on.

Quote:

"Don't you believe in survival of the fittest?"
What scientists believe in is survival of the best adapted to the environment of the day. That might mean fast reproduction, high mutation rates plus short life-span, eating stuff nothing else eats, living under conditions nothing else lives under, cooperation, reasoning skills ... It doesn't mean head to head gladitorial competition, or brutish zero-sum scenarios. Not until we exhaust critical resources, anyway.



Point taken. Shame on me for being general about a topic which I'm sure you know much more than I do.

Human behaviour seems to follow that pattern you describe here. For example, my aunt who has chronic smokers cough and chest pains. She was hospitalized and wasn't allowed to smoke the entire two weeks she was admitted. While there, she visited the church area they had (it's a Catholic hospital), and she spoke with God several times in what I could imagine had been the first time in many many years. She swore up and down that she wouldn't smoke anymore, yet, when she was released, the very first thing she did was get a pack and light up.

On a broader scale, people won't actively protest the war like the 60's and 70's because there is so many pleasurable distractions for us everyday on top of the fact that our kids aren't being drafted. I think it's pretty safe to say that if they reconstituted the draft you would see protesters everywhere again.

I am positive we will deplete this wonderful planet of all of its resources and beauty before we make steps to conserve and protect or planet and even actively explore space for other habitable planets. I would love to lay all of this blame on BigGov, but the truth is, I enjoy things such as filling my tank with gas and driving wherever I want, and I'm sure I'd rather throw away dirty diapers rather than wash a cloth one if I ever had kids. We've had life made here, particularly in America, for quite a while now. I don't think it would be easy for most to adjust to life the way it was a 100 or so years ago. Of course there would be those who would adapt much quicker and more efficiently than others, and in a world like that the would make the most attractive mates. The "Metrosexual" would be dead.


Anyways.... given this much more specific definition of "survival of the best adapted to the enviornment of the day", where do you think this leaves the future of the planet when you're talking about preventing nature from taking it's course in a world which is already overpopulated, with no real prospects of voluntary population control on a world-wide scale any time in the near future? As the self proclaimed smartest species to have ever existed on planet Earth, wouldn't one suppose that maybe we would have more than a fleeting interest in what life will be like for our great grandchildren if we continue down this path?

I think I just discovered today that along with my arguements against legislated vaccinations I really believe that, in the long run, vaccines could potentially be much more detrimental to our standard of living and the well being of the planet as a whole.

It seems today Rue, all we do is make sure that every step is taken to ensure the least fittest to survive live on to procreate, and further damage our gene pool. Of course I don't mean anything about race or sex or even sexuality here. This is strictly from a genetic and physical and mental fitness standpoint. We've got life handed to us on a silver platter and we collectively bitch and moan more about everything and fill up more on pills than we ever did before. I suppose that's the luxuries that come with being spoon fed all of our lives.

Quote:

In which case neither of us is slated for survival as we are genetically cash-deficient. :ironic:


Are you saying I'm broke?

You got me. Am I really that transparent?

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 1, 2007 6:23 PM

FREMDFIRMA


You'd find this lil bit amusing, Jack...

Concerning survival of the fittest, in my youthful school days I read a story that left me wondering about something, and thus proceeded to duplicate the feat - that being, build a small, human-lethal catapult with naught more than one sharp rock to start with.

Took a while, but as long as the basic principles are understood well, you can build tools to build more tools to build just about any damned thing, the only limits being ingenuity, availability of materials and time.

One of my friends is a radical post-apocaplyicta (they call it TETOWAKI, I think ?) nutter of sorts, and I pointed out that one smart guy, with one sharp rock, is all it takes to rebuild society in time, and run it right down the hill into the same destructive social flaws which will wreck it again, and again, and again, because we humans never learn, it's just not in our nature - any study of history will show this.

Anyhows, while some of us like our creature comforts, not all of us are helpless without em, and it's really worth learning at least some simple basics... an amusing, interesting, and educational use of your time, I would think.

If you've got a back yard, go ahead and try, start with one sharp rock, build a forge, make some charcoal, and see if you can't make a decent hunting spear - get in touch with your primitive roots.. might help ya understand why humanity is so very muffed up, if ya think about it.

Thanks for the herd-immunity links, Rue...
I'll still with Jack on the whole legally mandated thing, and in all honesty, the more study put into this, it seems these things are less and less effective then they have been advertised as, really.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 1, 2007 9:47 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"... it seems these things are less and less effective then they have been advertised as, really."

If faced with either being 'exposed' to polio or the vaccine, I'd pick the vaccine any day.

I have some recent studies from the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) showing vaccinations to be both safe and effective but I'd need to find them.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 2, 2007 5:32 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Not my point Rue, my point was that the credibility of the folks pushin these things isn't so hot, and gets worse the more ya study it.

Do me the favor of askin a straight question, and i'll give a straight answer, just don't follow chit's example and deny i ever said it when i give it to you, please, cause that was just fuckin ludicrous.

Also, remember my employment and it's nature requires me to assume more risk in this matter than your average member of the public, so i don't exactly have as much choice there - but if i am to take such risks, some assurance of actual protection being worth it is important to me, so primarily my issues in this are pure risk/benefit analysis from a public/employment standpoint.

Personally, i'm with Jack about the whole concept, but in my work i bear a certain responsibility for other people, not only to not wreck the cab and injure them, but also to not catch anything from them, or pass anything to them, you see ?

If the protection offered is significantly less than claimed, and the credibility of those making said claims is utterly abysmal, i gotta factor that into consideration here.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 2, 2007 6:51 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


FremD,

I'm curious why you say the credibility of people making claims FOR vaccination is low.

For example, I'm reading the Simpsonwood pdf (not the story from Salon, but the actual transcript of the meeting). It was suppose to be the definitive expose about thimerosal in vaccines. The story painted it as a small secret meeting of government and industry to cover up the problem. The main CDC investigator 'mysteriously' changed his testimony a year later. And other similar claims.

I found nothing of the sort in the transcript. I found no caution to anyone to keep it secret. The list of attendees was quite large and stacked with independent doctors from hospitals all around the country, not secretive heads of corporations and government. The main investigator found a negative (but not statistically significant) correlation between the thimerosal levels and autism. And so on. (I'm not done reading it yet, but I did skim the balance of the transcript and found no substantive issue.)

While CTS has been painting this monstrous picture of anyone involved in vaccination policy, I find nothing like that in the actual data.

So if you could explain your opinion and what it's based on, I'd appreciate it.


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 2, 2007 7:06 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


As an afterthought, I want to point out that what CTS has done very effectively is spread misinformation about the topic and about people on this forum.

For example, I do not believe that vaccinations should be mandatory just because they're there. I've stated that many times. I've also never supported mandatory vaccination as a general rule. OTOH I don't think mandatory vaccination as a tool should be ruled out entirely either.

My main goal in posting has been to correct the lies she spreads about vaccinations, vaccinating, and the people involved, and replace them with something closer to the truth.

Does that make me the vaccination Nazi she has portrayed me as?

Oh, and may you "FARE" well in 2007 !!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 2, 2007 11:12 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Aren't you scientists? Don't you believe in survival of the fittest?
That survival of the fittest occurs is a scientific observation. Whether the survival of the fittest *should* occur is a moral question that has nothing to do with science.

Personally, I want ALL my kids, from the fittest to the most vulnerable, to survive. Likewise, I would like to see every human being, from the fittest to the most vulnerable, to survive (unless they have committed heinous crimes, which is a different moral dilemma altogether). I don't think this is a scientific question, but a ethical/moral/religious one. I believe in social responsibility as well as personal responsibility.

The difference between me and normal bleeding heart liberals is that I believe in VOLUNTARY social responsibility, as opposed to government enforced social responsibility. I am just not a big fan of force.

As far as vaccinations go, there are various ways to fulfill one's social responsibility to not infect others. For example, live a healthy lifestyle to boost immune system functions, take hygienic precautions in public, and quarantine yourself when necessary.

I have no problems with man fighting the darker side of "nature." I do have problems with someone drafting my children to fight a specific war with specific weapons at THEIR risk and expense.

And a holler to Frem * : )

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 2, 2007 2:31 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

I'm curious why you say the credibility of people making claims FOR vaccination is low.

Compare the claims, with the realities.

Bear in mind, I am speaking of the "Medical Establishment" in general, and if you check any of their claims in detail, welll...

So, Thaliomide (sp?) is safe, right ?
DDT is harmless, yes ?
SSRI's help depression, not cause it..

From my perspective, considering the source of those claims, damned right i am skeptical, and now with this topic thrashed out in detail, the facts from both sides do indeed show these vaccs as being in general significantly LESS effective than claimed.

Not makin no points over whether they're effective enough, herd immunity, what have you, the single, strident, ONLY point i am making here, is that the credibility of the medical establishment is nowhere near what it should be if you want a skeptic to trust them.

I've said my piece, in previous threads and post, despite the fiction that I never said half of it, it's present for the reading... I just don't see why there's an almost automatic trust in an establishment known to have credibility issues, you see ?

The word of a single scientist who's done his homework, that can be trusted, but when you get a collective of the "Medical Establishment" together, things get tetchy - at least, that's how i am seein it here.

And in all honesty, I have indeed seen misrepresentation from BOTH sides of the issue, and a lot of it, so if one is going to throw mud, remember it sticks to all parties involved.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 2, 2007 2:49 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Hi FremD,

Glad to see you around.

"The facts from both sides" are equally invalid?

Which facts do you find invalid when it comes to vaccination? I'm very curious about your thoughts.

I know I had many assumptions about vaccinations until I was about 15 years old. Then our cat had symptoms of rabies (though it wasn't). At that time we found out that vaccines weren't 100% (rabies ~ 95%) and so she had to be tested even though she was fully vaccinated. But we were never told by any public health official at any time in any way that vaccines were 100%, just that they were important in our area, b/c wildlife rabies was epidemic. So I never felt misled, or lied to, just embarrassed at making silly assumptions.

So anyway, thanks ahead of time for your reply.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 2, 2007 3:05 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Hi there 6-string !

Weird and good, yes we do agree on things, which I never would have expected.

I am in early mourning for this planet. As far as I'm concerned, the loss of the human species would be no tragedy. I guess that makes me a "homo"phobe where "homo" means the not so sapiens species. But to take this planet down with us - pisses me off no end.

So I hope, and work hard at, trying to keep this place; and pointing out that maybe, just maybe we can learn from societies that DID get it right. Presuming our fate is driven by some notion of human nature we are for sure doomed; and this planet with us.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 2, 2007 5:32 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


I used to spend a lot of time worrying about what we do to the planet, but I figure since that's probably out of our hands until we've made it so bad where we're forced to make changes I've stopped obsessing about it so much.

"homo"phobe was pretty funny. Gave me a laugh that I think I needed today.

I think we had it right in our society up until a while before I was born in good ol' 1979. I can't say for sure, because I wasn't here, but I think there was a time where we weren't so materialistic and decadent as a society. Just another reason that I can't simply dismiss the writings of the Bible and believe in the Spagetti Monster. One of the few stories I have read was Job and he was closest to God when he had nothing. We've been living in surplus for such a long time here, as long as I've been alive at least anyhow, and according to the Book, that's the easiest way to find yourself in the Devil's pocket. Take a look around and tell me that the current state of affairs here wouldn't at least fit the basic structure of that story.

Like I've said before, I'm not sure where I throw my chips when it comes to that stuff, but it's getting harder and harder for me to just live life without consequence and pretend that that way of thinking doesn't at least hold some merit.

My Grandmother said that her preacher said something to her a few years back that kind of stuck with me. It was along the lines of "People need to follow something. People need to believe in something. If it's not God, they will find something else to believe in and follow." Even before she said that to me I had thought on several occasions that no matter what I believe in, it was always kind of nice that there were a lot of other people who had faith around me. (This was when the church first came under heavy fire for the Priest and altar-boy scandals, and started taking the media assult that it's been taking ever since). Right now I see a lot of people putting a lot of faith into BigGov and after reading 1984 and Brave New World, that kind of scares the crap out of me. Putting decisions like mandatory vaccine legislation in BigGov's hands and people just going along with it without any questions really unnerves me. There are, of course, many other examples of this type of thing that I see happening every day. I really believe that this collective way of thinking and doing wouldn't be allowed if we still had small communities who looked out for themselves still and we didn't have all of the good feelings and pretty lights and pill popping to distract us from the important things like we do today.

{/Preaching}

I wouldn't worry too much about the planet. I used to think that we would destroy the planet, but I don't think that anymore. I could be wrong, but I think we're pretty arrogant if we believe that we're going to be a force strong enough to do that. I think we'll be gone long before we do so much damage that she can't heal herself over an era's time.

Happy New Year, by the way. Maybe we'll actually get a few things right this year and we can put 2006 far behind us.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 2, 2007 8:11 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
So, Thaliomide (sp?) is safe, right ?
DDT is harmless, yes ?
SSRI's help depression, not cause it..


For me, the SV-40 contamination of the polio vaccines was a major credibility slayer. They knew about it, chose not to tell the public, and chose not to recall the contaminated product. They didn't want to undermine public confidence in the fledgling vaccine industry.

SV-40 is a known carcinogen in rodents, often given to experimental animals to cause cancer (brain tumors, bone tumors, lymphomas, and mesotheliomas) for research purposes.(1) It has been linked to mesotheliomas (1) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (2) in humans. All polio vaccines from 1954 and 1963 are now acknowledged to have been contaminated with SV-40. When they officially found out about the contamination in 1961, they (manufacturers and govt) chose to hush it up and allowed millions of Americans to continue taking a vaccine that was contaminated with a known carcinogen in lab animals and a possible carcinogen in humans.

Now their argument is that there is no hard scientific proof that SV-40 causes cancer in humans. Without being able to do unethical experiments in humans, that is correct. (Funny how they know all about confounders and scientific skepticism when it suits them.) However, there is hard scientific evidence it causes cancer in rodents. As soon as they found out, they really should have recalled the product, simply on precautionary principles. At the very least, the ethical thing to do is to immediately inform the public of the contamination and of currently known facts about SV-40, and allow the public to make an informed choice. But no. They simply and silently continued to administer a potentially carcinogenic contaminant into a public that trusted them.

It has been alleged that the manufacturers knew this as early as the 1955-57 clinical trials in Russia. I heard an audiotape of an alledged conversation of pharmaceutical decision makers who joked that the it was a good thing the clinical trials were taking place in Russia, because it would help the USA win the 1958 olympics when the Russians were too burdened with tumors to win. Now I don't know if this tape would pass mustard or not in court (probably not) but it certainly casts suspicion on these people.

Remember the ingredient list I posted earlier? That is just the ingredients they want you to know about. Given their history, should a vaccine become contaminated again, can I trust these people to let me know what exactly I am injecting into my children?

For more info:

http://www.sv40foundation.org/Chronology.html

http://www.thevirusandthevaccine.com/factsheet.html

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/concerns/cancer/default.htm

(1)Inhal Toxicol. 2006 Nov;18(12):995-1000. The role of SV40 in malignant mesothelioma and other human malignancies. Pershouse MA, Heivly S, Girtsman T.

(2)
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673602079503/
fulltext




Can't Take My Gorram Sky
-------
Cheat me once, shame on you. Cheat me twice, shame on me.
-- Source unknown

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 3, 2007 2:47 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


FremD,

I'm kinda tired of responding to CTS's histrionic and ever-shifting 'issues'.

What say you?

What would you like to discuss?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 3, 2007 3:10 AM

FREMDFIRMA


I think it's best on this one for folks to just agree to disagree, let others read what's gone before, do their own homework, and make their own decisions, really.

Anything further is just gonna devolve into a flamewar, and ain't no need for it, might as well just skip that, and move onto somethin else to butt heads about.

Study topic of the hour (for me) is Vedic translations and the possibility of pre-historic high technology... have a look, you'll find it fascination, also the paralells between them and Norse beliefs concerning the Ragnarock are downright eerie...

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 3, 2007 6:53 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Dang.

I was really interested in what your perspective was.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 3, 2007 7:23 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Frem,

I was ready to let it go at the end of Part 2 before Signy brought it here to Part 3. I am frankly tired of being flamed with bizarre distortions of what I said. It appears my posts aren't actually read anyway.

I keep saying that vaccination is a complex issue. There are many layers in the mandatory vaccination debate, including vaccine effectiveness, vaccine dangers, infectivity and public health threats, smallpox eradication, conflicts of interest, etc. I've tried to present arguments on each of these layers, backed with references, in one segment at a time. I still have many more segments to go. But clearly it has been a waste of my time thus far, so why bother putting in the time for the rest?

I have a segment in my head that I want to write eventually. It is called, "Vaccinationism: America's State-Sponsored Religion." I would draw parallel's between the fervor of anti-choice vaccination proponents and the fervor of religious fundamentalists. Similarly, I would draw parallel's between the bitterness of anti-vaccination proponents and the bitterness of some atheists. But I will have to let that one go.

I will end with a few stories of what this is all about. These stories illustrate why it is paramount that PARENTS make informed choices for their children, not the government. Whether you vaccinate or not, you are either risking dangers of the diseases or dangers of the vaccines. Parents and the children they love are the ones who will live (or die) with the consequences of these decisions. No one should be FORCED or COERCED to take these risks.

Quote:

http://www.thinktwice.com/stories.htm

I recently took our only children, Harley (2 months) and Ashlee (2 years), to the doctor for their well-baby appointments. Harley had the sniffles and Ashlee had a cold, otherwise both were in perfect health.

Harley was given his first DPT, oral polio, and Hib shots. Ashlee received her first Hib and MMR shots, as well as her third DPT and fourth oral polio shots.

After the vaccinations I laid the children down for their naps. Harley woke first; his thighs were red. I heard Ashlee wake and then I heard a 'THUMP!' Ashlee fell flat on the floor. She cried out `Mommy, me no walk!' I checked her over and stood her up; there was no strength in either leg.

...Harley was high-pitched screaming. The babysitter said it started more than one-and-a-half hours before. He was inconsolable. He finally screamed himself into exhaustion two hours later. I called the emergency ward. They recommended a warm bath and told me it was 'nothing to worry about.'

For ten days Harley's behavior changed. He barely slept, hardly ate, and seemed to be getting worse. On May 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., my husband got up, checked on Harley, and yelled out, `Bonnie, get up, call the ambulance. Harley is dead!'

-------------

When I did allow Vicki to be vaccinated at 4 months, she got very sick that night. She screamed nonstop in a high-pitched scream. She wouldn't nurse and couldn't be comforted. Her temperature was quite high...

Today, Vicki has seizures all the time. Doctors say she has an `attention deficit.' She is extremely distractible and has difficulty concentrating. When she tries to express her thoughts and feelings her eyes flutter and she stutters. It causes her deep frustration and anger. As a result, she is about two years behind in school because she has to learn in small increments.

----------
http://www.metrokc.gov/health/immunization/newsstories.htm

When Maddy was 2 1/2 months old she contracted pneumoccocal meningitis.

That morning she had been very lethargic and I could not get her to nurse. I called our doctor's office and told them her symptoms. I was told to come in mid-morning. By 10:00, she was moaning as I lifted her in or out of her car seat. This seemed strange and confusing. I took her to the appointment and seemed to get right in to be seen. The nurse took her vitals, and said, "I don't like the way she is moaning". The doctor came in, touched the top of her head, left the room, quickly came back and said, "I think she has meningitis and I have an ambulance coming to take you to the hospital."

Our poor little baby, 2 1/2 mo old, lay in that bed, with ART lines in her chest and groin, on a respirator, IVs, and she had to have a blood transfusion. She stayed in that hospital for 12 days. Twelve long sleepless nights of waiting, hoping, and praying for her to get better and strong enough to go home.

Two days after she was released from the hospital, we went to the follow-up with her pediatrician. That is where we learned that she was deaf. The results of the ABR test done in the hospital showed no signs of hearing. That was the start of the journey that we are on now. Physical therapy to strengthen her muscles, sign language classes and speech therapy 4 days a week for communication needs.

-------------

My life changed forever on June 30, 1988, when I had to stand by helplessly as an infectious disease claimed the life of my oldest child, Christopher Aaron Chinnes, at the age of 12...

But on June 16, 1988, four years after he was diagnosed, he suffered his first and only severe asthma attack...

On June 23, exactly one week after the asthma attack, he broke out with the chickenpox. "Don’t worry, you’ll get over it," I told him...

What I didn't know was that the corticosteroid had lowered his body's immune response and he could not fight the disease. The chickenpox began to rampage wildly through his young body. As I drove him to the emergency room on June 27, my four younger children watched silently in shock and horror as their brother went into seizures, went blind, turned gray, and collapsed due to hemorrhaging in his brain...

On June 30, 1988, exactly one week after breaking out with chickenpox, Christopher passed away. He died.



All right, I'm gone.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky
----------
I believe that all government is evil, and that trying to improve it is largely a waste of time.
--H. L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 3, 2007 5:05 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Please, spare me the drama.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 4, 2007 6:24 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I believe that all government is evil, and that trying to improve it is largely a waste of time.
I've been too busy to participate much. But CTS, first you say that vaccination is complex- which I grant- and then you quote this extremely global, all-encompassing, no-room-for-exceptions statement. If you really agree with Mencken, then it doesn't matter how complex ANY issue is because you've already made up your mind: government is always wrong. Right?

---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 4, 2007 6:31 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
then you quote this extremely global, all-encompassing, no-room-for-exceptions statement. If you really agree with Mencken,

It's just a quotation. I thought it was amusing, and maybe a little relevant because we were both talking about wasting time. And no, I don't agree with Menken.

I agree with Thoreau.

Quote:

I heartily accept the motto, "That government is best which governs least"; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe--"That government is best which governs not at all"; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.

To speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.

--Henry David Thoreau, On Civil Disobedience

But this is a different thread, and it is likewise a complex issue.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, January 7, 2007 6:16 AM

CANTTAKESKY


One last post on ingredients. You just gotta see this movie about how mercury affects neurons. A picture's worth a thousand words.

http://movies.commons.ucalgary.ca/mercury/



Can't Take My Gorram Sky
----------
Compassion is the basis of all morality.
--Arthur Schopenhauer


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, January 7, 2007 11:52 PM

SASSALICIOUS


"do their own homework and make their own decision"

YES! (though I am still of the opinion that certain basic vaccinations are good to get, especially if you plan on going to college and living in the dorms--disease spreads like wildfire).

And for me, living x number of years in the tropical 3rd world? The benefits definitely outweigh any potential risks.

Which reminds me, I need to call the doctor and start scheduling my next vaccinations.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wisconsin sucks. I don't want to be here.

~Forsaken Forever

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 11:25 AM

DANFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Sassalicious:
And for me, living x number of years in the tropical 3rd world...

...Wisconsin sucks. I don't want to be here.



I'm no fan of the cold up north, but I wouldn't characterize Wisconsin as "3rd world."

The juxtaposition of those two statements tickled me. Either they refer to different times in your life, or you take a pretty harsh view of Wisconsin ;-)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 1:39 PM

SASSALICIOUS


Quote:

Originally posted by danfan:
Quote:

Originally posted by Sassalicious:
And for me, living x number of years in the tropical 3rd world...

...Wisconsin sucks. I don't want to be here.



I'm no fan of the cold up north, but I wouldn't characterize Wisconsin as "3rd world."

The juxtaposition of those two statements tickled me. Either they refer to different times in your life, or you take a pretty harsh view of Wisconsin ;-)



That's funny.

I travel a lot and in August, I'm moving to Vietnam for the next couple of years or so. That's what I was referring to.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wisconsin sucks. I don't want to be here.

~Forsaken Forever

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 2:25 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


I just thought I'd do a back of the envelope calculation -

They used mercury salt HgCl2, not organic mercury (methyl- or ethyl- mercury) at 10 ^ -7M or 0.1ppm. They applied it directly to neurons, presumably without dilution by the surrounding media. A typical vaccination contains 25ug of Thimerosal or about 12.5ug of mercury. A typical newborn weighs 7.5 lbs or 3402000000ug. That makes the body-wide concentration of mercury after a single injection 0.0037ppm, or 1/27 of the concentration they used on the nerve cells.

Not that anyone disputes mercury in certain forms is toxic to varying degrees. And I've already stated that Thimerosal should have been eliminated years ago just on suspicion. However it's best not to use inappropriate examples unless of course you're looking to shock rather than inform your audience.


Inhalation of mercury vapor (Hg0) inhibits binding of GTP to rat brain tubulin, thereby inhibiting tubulin polymerization into microtubules. A similar molecular lesion has also been observed in 80% of brains from patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) compared to age-matched controls. However the precise site and mode of action of Hg ions remain illusive. Therefore, the present study examined whether Hg ions could affect membrane dynamics of neurite growth cone morphology and behavior. Since tubulin is a highly conserved cytoskeletal protein in both vertebrates and invertebrates, we hypothesized that growth cones from animal species could be highly susceptible to Hg ions. To test this possibility, the identified, large Pedal A (PeA) neurons from the central ring ganglia of the snail Lymnaea stagnalis were cultured for 48 h in 2 ml brain conditioned medium (CM). Following neurite outgrowth, metal chloride solution (2 μl) of Hg, Al, Pb, Cd, or Mn (10-7 M) was pressure applied directly onto individual growth cones. Time-lapse images with inverted microscopy were acquired prior to, during, and after the metal ion exposure. We demonstrate that Hg ions markedly disrupted membrane structure and linear growth rates of imaged neurites in 77% of all nerve growth cones. When growth cones were stained with antibodies specific for both tubulin and actin, it was the tubulin/microtubule structure that disintegrated following Hg exposure. Moreover, some denuded neurites were also observed to form neurofibrillary aggregates. In contrast, growth cone exposure to other metal ions did not affect growth cone morphology, nor was their motility rate compromised. To determine the growth suppressive effects of Hg ions on neuronal sprouting, cells were cultured either in the presence or absence of Hg ions. We found that in the presence of Hg ions, neuronal somata failed to sprout, whereas other metalic ions did not affect growth patterns of cultured PeA cells. We conclude that this visual evidence and previous biochemical data strongly implicate Hg as a potential etiological factor in neurodegeneration.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 12, 2007 8:16 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Sassalicious:
"do their own homework and make their own decision"

YES! (though I am still of the opinion that certain basic vaccinations are good to get, especially if you plan on going to college and living in the dorms--disease spreads like wildfire).

And for me, living x number of years in the tropical 3rd world? The benefits definitely outweigh any potential risks.

And I respect your belief that vaccines are beneficial and your decision to vaccinate. It is YOUR decision to make.

This thread is not a debate about whether vaccines are good or bad. The question of this thread is whether people who do not vaccinate (me for example) should be forced or coerced to vaccinate against our wills.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 12, 2007 4:28 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


CTS,

"This thread is not a debate about whether vaccines are good or bad." But you did a great job taking it in that direction.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 12, 2007 9:49 PM

FREMDFIRMA


And CTS was alone in this ?

Form shame Rue, don't stoop to cheap shots, everyone find a neutral corner and let it die - we've agreed to disagree, leave it at that, please.

Got enough flames scorchin up RWED without addin one more.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 4, 2007 12:51 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


I was merely replying to CTS's misstatements. I don't like people being misled on basic information. I don't like it when Bush does it, I don't like it when CTS does it.

speaking of basic information:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070129155146.htm

Measles Deaths Fall By 60 Percent Globally

... and is largely due to an unprecedented decline in measles deaths in the African region.

A strategy to reduce measles mortality, consisting of four components, has been key to ensuring the massive global decrease in measles deaths. The strategy calls for

the provision of one dose of measles vaccine for all infants via routine health services;
a second opportunity for measles immunization for all children, generally through mass vaccination campaigns;
effective surveillance for measles; and
enhanced care, including the provision of supplemental vitamin A.

There is still some way to go in the fight against one of the world's most contagious diseases. Of the estimated 345 000 measles deaths in 2005, 90% were among children under the age of five -- many dying as a result of complications related to severe diarrhoea, pneumonia and encephalitis.

and ...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070119144353.htm

Billions Of Dollars Saved In United States By Polio Vaccination

Science Daily — A new study by researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) finds that polio vaccination in the United States has resulted in a net savings of over $180 billion, even without including the large, intangible benefits associated with avoided fear and suffering. This first study to retrospectively demonstrate the enormous benefits of polio vaccination appears as part of a special issue on polio in the December 2006 issue of Risk Analysis.

and ...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/11/061116091036.htm

Vaccination Of Nursing Home Staff, Residents, Key To Reducing Flu Outbreak
Science Daily — Potentially deadly influenza outbreaks in nursing homes are less likely to occur when large numbers of staff and residents get flu shots, according to a study issued today by the RAND Corporation.

The study by the nonprofit research organization found that nursing homes were 60 percent less likely to have a cluster of influenza-like illness cases if more than 55 percent of the staff and more than 89 percent of the residents were vaccinated for influenza.



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 4, 2007 3:04 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


This is about mandatory confinement of people with nearly uniformly fata TB, in order to keep it from spreading:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070123093509.htm


Detaining Patients Is Justified To Contain Deadly TB Strain In South Africa, Say Experts
This strain of XDR-TB in Kwazulu-Natal proved to be particularly deadly: 52 of the 53 patients died (within a median of 16 days of the initial collection of sputum for diagnostic purposes).



NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 4, 2007 3:16 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


This is just part of the larger topic of government authority, or lack thereof, in various situations. Here we have another medical situation where government (in this case, SA) says the seriousness of TB transmission warrants involuntary confinement.

But in the larger scheme, what I find strange is the near silence of the local anarchists on topics like government spying on phone calls and bank transactions, and the development of large databases. OTOH when it comes to smoking and vaccination, they're all over it.

Any comments on this article? Any comments about relative outrage over government intrusions?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 4, 2007 7:32 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Different issue, needs it's own thread.

Lotsa bitchin and quite a few ideas to jam up the works on that front.

Not discussing the original topic anymore, folks stated their piece and in the words of Crow prior to his engine adventure..
"There is no mind changing.."[/]

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 4, 2007 8:17 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Hey Frem,

Do you suppose you could formulate a new thread?

The reason being the whole anarchy v public health is interesting to me and I wonder where you and others would draw lines of acceptable or not.

For example, TB is an issue in the US. There is only 1 facility in the US for treating multiply resistant TB (National Jewish Medical & Research Center in Denver). TB is something you can get just from being in the same room that an infected person had been in.

Some stories below:

"Once known for academic and athletic excellence, La Quinta High School has gained a troubling distinction: it has experienced what state officials say is the worst outbreak of drug-resistant tuberculosis in a high school ever reported in the United States.

Two-hundred-ninety-two of La Quinta's students, or 23 percent, tested positive for TB in September 1993. Another 84 students, who had not previously been tested or had had negative results the first time, tested positive last month.

Twelve of those students are being treated for active cases of drug-resistant TB, and more than 70 other students who were exposed to drug-resistant strains of the disease are receiving similar treatments. One student with an active case has lost part of her lung."

--------------

"A homeless patient with highly infectious pulmonary tuberculosis was a regular patron of a neighborhood bar during a long symptomatic interval before diagnosis. We investigated 97 other regular customers and employees of the bar through interviews, tuberculin skin testing, and chest roentgenography. We performed DNA fingerprinting on isolates from the index patient and 11 other patients.

Results The index patient apparently infected 41 of 97 contacts (42 percent), resulting in 14 cases of active tuberculosis ..."

-----------------

Limited data suggest that measures to reduce tuberculosis transmission should be based on locations rather than on personal contacts.

-------------------

For 2005, a total of 14,093 tuberculosis (TB) cases (4.8 cases per 100,000 population) were reported in the United States, representing a 3.8% decline in the rate from 2004. ...(but) the number of multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB cases in the United States increased 13.3%, with 128 cases (up from 113 in 2003) of MDR TB in 2004 ...




NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 5, 2022 7:16 PM

JAYNEZTOWN


Vaxxed NCIS Actress?
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1565717425022050304
Quote:

It’s 9/2
One year ago I had a massive stoke.
Before that I lost so many beloved family and friends,
And daddy
And then
Cousin Wayne

Yet still a survivor after this traumatic life I’ve been given so far…

And still so grateful,
Still so full of faith,
And STILL HERE!




NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, November 28, 2024 17:10 - 4778 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:32 - 1163 posts
Trump, convicted of 34 felonies
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:10 - 45 posts
Salon: How to gather with grace after that election
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:04 - 1 posts
End of the world Peter Zeihan
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:59 - 215 posts
Another Putin Disaster
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:58 - 1540 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:46 - 650 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:41 - 4847 posts
Dubai goes bankrupt, kosher Rothschilds win the spoils
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:31 - 5 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:29 - 7515 posts
Jean-Luc Brunel, fashion mogul Peter Nygard linked to Epstein
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:27 - 14 posts
All things Space
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:17 - 270 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL