Anti-vaxxers

ancapailldorcha

Carol25 wrote: »

As all the people replying well know, I’m not a big corporation and can’t come along and present you with ‘data’ and ‘evidence’. I’ve a job and a family.
What I’m telling you is the truth re vaccinations in 2015. I’m not trying to scaremonger, I’m making the point that I can’t even state what I saw without getting attacked.

This is as far as I got. Being disagreed with is not the same as getting attacked.

Carol25

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

This is as far as I got. Being disagreed with is not the same as getting attacked.

Glad you didn’t read anymore so if that’s your view. Are the ordinary middle class people of Ireland not allowed to have an opinion or concern in your view? Do they need to have multiple lawyers/evidence/data? Is it just the pro vaccine at any cost to us all sheep that are allowed free for all views?

ancapailldorcha

Carol25 wrote: »

Glad you didn’t read anymore so if that’s your view. Are the ordinary middle class people of Ireland not allowed to have an opinion or concern in your view? Do they need to have multiple lawyers/evidence/data? Is it just the pro vaccine at any cost to us all sheep that are allowed free for all views?

We all have jobs.

Quote me where I said middle class people are not allowed opinions please.

Paddy Cow

Carol25 wrote: »

That is one scary statement just there...who are you to tell others what to do.
If Vaccines become mandatory, parents shouldn’t have to sign forms when they’re about to inject their small babies with 6 different samples of diseases in one leg and another 1 or 2 in the other effectively letting State and Big Pharma off the hook regarding the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine, I find that ridiculous. The state should take responsibility for the safety and suitability of vaccines for all.
People have genuine concerns about the HPV vaccine...is that to be dismissed because money and power bought the investigations and outcomes In the EU?
Stop making all people out to be ‘loopy anti Vaaxers’. I’ve had myself and my kids vaccinated but I do share some concerns
For your information, I once witnessed a group of Junior Infants in 2015 getting their MMR boosters in Dec 2015. At least 10-12 in the class were extremely sick after it. Out for days, some for a whole week. Do you think that’s acceptable? Do you think that shouldn’t be investigated?

I don't get the Big Pharma argument (and this isn't directed solely at you). Big Pharma spend millions on research and development and they know they will get sued into bankruptcy if they knowing inject people with harmful chemicals. If you believe that Big Pharma is just a giant organisation that doesn't care about people and only profit, then vaccines don't even make sense. Vaccines stop people getting sick and healthy people don't need medical intervention so Big Pharma are actually shooting themselves in their bank balances by ensuring that most people live healthy lives.

If Big Pharma only cared about money, they would be doing everything to get rid of vaccines because sick people generate more money than healthy ones.

I was a weak, sickly child and despite getting all my vaccinations I still was sick on a regular basis. When I was in Junior Infants I got whooping cough. I was taken out of school in March for what we thought was a nasty cold and didn't return until the following September :eek: I was so sick there were times I went to bed in one pair of pj's and woke up in another. I was too tired to remember coughing so violently I vomitted everywhere and my mother had to wash and change me. This was a regular occurrence for the first six weeks of my illness.

Despite there being six other children in the house, I didn't spread it to anyone else and there were no other cases in my school, probably because they were all vaccinated. Herd immunity in this case was definitely a factor. I was just unlucky to have a weak immune system as a kid. I was lucky though that after a few months I recovered but young babies who contract whooping cough are not so lucky.

Big Pharma are definitely out to make money but first and foremost it's not some faceless organisation. It's made up of men and women who study science/medicine and put their skills to use trying to come up with ways of preventing disease. They have loved ones themselves and don't want to see them suffer.

There are people who need to be taken to task. We only have to look to the recent cervical smear scandal to see that. Big Pharma shouldn't be above reproach but I think on the whole they have done far more to advance medical care than inhibit it.

Ipso

Another big industry is the natural one that peddles supplements and water (homeopathic medicine), supposedly in recent year liver damage has increased massively in the US due to increased use in vitamins and supplements.

Carol25

Paddy Cow wrote: »

I don't get the Big Pharma argument (and this isn't directed solely at you). Big Pharma spend millions on research and development and they know they will get sued into bankruptcy if they knowing inject people with harmful chemicals. If you believe that Big Pharma is just a giant organisation that doesn't care about people and only profit, then vaccines don't even make sense. Vaccines stop people getting sick and healthy people don't need medical intervention so Big Pharma are actually shooting themselves in their bank balances by ensuring that most people live healthy lives.

If Big Pharma only cared about money, they would be doing everything to get rid of vaccines because sick people generate more money than healthy ones.

I was a weak, sickly child and despite getting all my vaccinations I still was sick on a regular basis. When I was in Junior Infants I got whooping cough. I was taken out of school in March for what we thought was a nasty cold and didn't return until the following September :eek: I was so sick there were times I went to bed in one pair of pj's and woke up in another. I was too tired to remember coughing so violently I vomitted everywhere and my mother had to wash and change me. This was a regular occurrence for the first six weeks of my illness.

Despite there being six other children in the house, I didn't spread it to anyone else and there were no other cases in my school, probably because they were all vaccinated. Herd immunity in this case was definitely a factor. I was just unlucky to have a weak immune system as a kid. I was lucky though that after a few months I recovered but young babies who contract whooping cough are not so lucky.

Big Pharma are definitely out to make money but first and foremost it's not some faceless organisation. It's made up of men and women who study science/medicine and put their skills to use trying to come up with ways of preventing disease. They have loved ones themselves and don't want to see them suffer.

There are people who need to be taken to task. We only have to look to the recent cervical smear scandal to see that. Big Pharma shouldn't be above reproach but I think on the whole they have done far more to advance medical care than inhibit it.

I agree with a lot of what you say but despite all the good these companies do, I get the impression they’re largely unregulated and unchecked. They’ve the lawyers, money and influence bought at the top table to ensure this. I’m not saying they’re not doing good jobs, some of them are of course. But this nonsense on here about them and the government being Godlike and should solely be trusted with our health and futures unchecked is both scary and ridiculous at the same time. One has to wonder at the intelligence of some of those arguments. Should we all just buy what we’re presented with without questioning and holding people to account?
It’s like in the tech industry, should Google/Apple and Microsoft be given free reign of what we see/do on the internet to suit all of their own agendas?

Carol25

Ipso wrote: »

Another big industry is the natural one that peddles supplements and water (homeopathic medicine), supposedly in recent year liver damage has increased massively in the US due to increased use in vitamins and supplements.

What has this got to do with the current point/debate? Are you trying to steer the current debate in a more ‘anti-vaax loopers’ direction by any chance?

Ipso

Carol25 wrote: »

What has this got to do with the current point/debate? Are you trying to steer the current debate in a more ‘anti-vaax loopers’ direction by any chance?

Because there is a big correlation with anti vaccine and alternative/natural/hollistic crowd, and if you dig deep enough many of them are loopers.

Martina1991

Carol25 wrote:

For your information, I once witnessed a group of Junior Infants in 2015 getting their MMR boosters in Dec 2015. At least 10-12 in the class were extremely sick after it. Out for days, some for a whole week. Do you think that’s acceptable? Do you think that shouldn’t be investigated?

So it wasnt the initial vaccination, it was a booster.

Were children from other schools effected? A group of children getting sick sounds like it was a bug/ flu going around. Correlation doesn't equal causation.

Carol25

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

We all have jobs.

Quote me where I said middle class people are not allowed opinions please.

Why? So you can try and justify why you stopped reading my post and tried to deter others from reading it also?

Martina1991

Carol25 wrote:

I get the impression they’re largely unregulated and unchecked.
.....
Should we all just buy what we’re presented with without questioning and holding people to account?

What gives you that impression? What vaccine research articles have you read?

You should "buy" the wealth of scientific research available from peer reviewed scientists. No vaccine is released for public use by going "unchecked".

Carol25

Martina1991 wrote: »

What gives you that impression? What vaccine research articles have you read?

You should "buy" the wealth of scientific research available from peer reviewed scientists. No vaccine is released for public use by going "unchecked".

As I already stated I’m not a professional involved in this field who’s peer reviewing vaccines, I’m just a normal layperson questioning what’s being shoved down our throats by some on here...
Should I accept these studies without question? As I said I wasn’t heavily invested in this debate until a couple of posts on here mentioned how we should make vaccines mandatory.
If these vaccines are so well checked and safe, why do I have to sign a form absolving these companies of all responsibility re what happens to my child following a vaccine? I tolerated this practice with unease prior to this. But if vaccines would no longer be a choice then why would we have to accept such responsibilities if all these peer reviews and pharmaceutical companies are so fantastic at safety checks.
And let’s not kid ourselves, if one of us was unlucky enough that our child had an adverse reaction to a vaccine, how on earth would they prove it? Are people here seriously suggesting the government or pharmaceutical companies wouldn’t try and bury such a case as it goes against their narrative? What leg would a parent have to stand on having signed prior consent form?

nthclare

Getting my flu vaccine tomorrow, can't wait.

I'll be able to enjoy the Christmas, working outside with chainsaws and hacking away for the winter isn't good for the body when it decides to recharge over the Christmas.
That's when the flu virus can attack.
Always the Christmas break.

Got the flu nearly every Christmas since I was around 21

Got the flu jab last year, only missed 3 days off work in the last 12 month's.

I can handle colds and back ache, but the flu virus knocks the **** out of me.

The benefits of an outdoorsy state job free flu jab s

ancapailldorcha

Carol25 wrote: »

Why? So you can try and justify why you stopped reading my post and tried to deter others from reading it also?

To prove your assertion. Unless of course it's false.

Carol25

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

To prove your assertion. Unless of course it's false.

Maybe I just want to focus on the actual debate instead of people trying to derail the discussion.

ohnonotgmail

Carol25 wrote: »

Maybe I just want to focus on the actual debate instead of people trying to derail the .

derail a discussion by introducing actual facts?

maxwell smart

Very emotive subject.

I've had my kids vaccinated with no ill effects. But does that mean I fully trust what the government and Pharma are pushing? Of course not.

I read somewhere that the HPV vaccine Gardasil (which my daughter got, after an open discussion with myself and Mrs.Smart) costs less than €1 to make, while the cost to the HSE is €600 per 2 doses. Part of the issue, if you look into the HPV situation, is that Gardasil is the more prevalent due to marketing by Merck. Plenty of doctors junkets etc in the USA.
The GSK version, Cervarix, which is the only vaccine approved in China after extensive tests, wasn't as well marketed (i.e. they didn't give enough kickbacks) so it's not available here, But it seems like there are less side affects.
The real question is, how much are the HSE getting kicked back by Merck?
And has anyone in the HSE top level been to any of these 'conferences' abroad at the expense of Merck?

The thing that I have a problem with is Merck. They make a drug called Vioxx, half a million Americans died, and not a lot was heard about it here. They rushed the trials, paid doctors to prescribe it and marketed the hell out of it. (Its worth checking out the sales reps commission on this). This is exactly the model they have used for Gardasil.

What we can never forget is that Pharma are here to make money. not make people better

rawn

Carol25 wrote: »

If these vaccines are so well checked and safe, why do I have to sign a form absolving these companies of all responsibility re what happens to my child following a vaccine?

Because no one claims that vaccines are 100% effective, and because antivax fruitbags would be constantly suing vaccine manufacturers when their kid so much as sniffles after getting a shot. It saves both the manufacturer and the tax payer a lot of money.

blanch152

Carol25 wrote: »

As all the people replying well know, I’m not a big corporation and can’t come along and present you with ‘data’ and ‘evidence’. I’ve a job and a family.
What I’m telling you is the truth re vaccinations in 2015. I’m not trying to scaremonger, I’m making the point that I can’t even state what I saw without getting attacked. I’m not even that invested in this debate to be honest but statements like mandatory vaccination and people being jumped on for voicing genuine concerns should be enough to make everyone sit up and listen. We should be about making vaccines safer, and more controls and independent oversight to the drug companies test models, not giving Big Pharma a huge amount of power and control over us.
As I said if all if all of these vaccines are so safe, take away the form I’ve signed numerous times letting both Big Pharma and the Government off the hook if something does go wrong or happens to my child. It’s not good enough to say get it, but we the people who made it will not take any responsibility for anything that happens to your child afterwards.

7


People like you and Graces7 need to read websites like this:

https://nrvs.info/posters-and-graphics/

YFlyer

nthclare wrote: »

Getting my flu vaccine tomorrow, can't wait.

I'll be able to enjoy the Christmas, working outside with chainsaws and hacking away for the winter isn't good for the body when it decides to recharge over the Christmas.
That's when the flu virus can attack.
Always the Christmas break.

Got the flu nearly every Christmas since I was around 21

Got the flu jab last year, only missed 3 days off work in the last 12 month's.

I can handle colds and back ache, but the flu virus knocks the **** out of me.

The benefits of an outdoorsy state job free flu jab s

How do you know it was the flu every year?

YFlyer

Ipso wrote: »

Because there is a big correlation with anti vaccine and alternative/natural/hollistic crowd, and if you dig deep enough many of them are loopers.

What you mean by natural? Herbalist, yoga, meditation, diet?

gctest50

Martina1991 wrote: »

What gives you that impression? What vaccine research articles have you read?

You should "buy" the wealth of scientific research available from peer reviewed scientists.


No vaccine is released for public use by going "unchecked".

That's what did happen though



In 2009, GlaxoSmithKline had a vaccine in the pipeline, Pandemrix.

The problem was that it wasn't fully tested. As it was subsequently offered for use, the Irish public was never told it had not completed the normal medical trials.

To fast-track it into service in 2009, Ireland granted GSK the full indemnity the firm insisted upon.
If there was a future problem or side-effect from Pandemrix, it would be the taxpayer who footed the bill.

- https://bit.ly/2FFTWe8




Focetria made by Novartis didn't leave the same trail of destruction in its wake

Carol25

rawn wrote: »

Because no one claims that vaccines are 100% effective, and because antivax fruitbags would be constantly suing vaccine manufacturers when their kid so much as sniffles after getting a shot. It saves both the manufacturer and the tax payer a lot of money.

Oh look calling me an anti-vax ‘fruit bag’. Is this what the sheep on here have to resort to when things don’t go their way? I’m not actually anti vaccine if you’d read my posts. But the companies are getting a free ride, and free ticket by the current set up. I’ve concerns over safety and trials also.

Carol25

rawn wrote: »

Because no one claims that vaccines are 100% effective, and because antivax fruitbags would be constantly suing vaccine manufacturers when their kid so much as sniffles after getting a shot. It saves both the manufacturer and the tax payer a lot of money.

‘It saves money to the manufacturer and tax payer’. Therein lies the problem. Why on earth would the tax payer have to foot the bill firstly when it’s the drugs companies making and wining and dining that HSE top brass to use their vaccine...
Why are you happy to give same companies whose sole objective is to profit a completely free pass and zero responsibility for the vaccine they have had the full responsibility of manufacturing and testing? In any other field, this sounds ridiculous and worrying.

ancapailldorcha

Carol25 wrote: »

Oh look calling me an anti-vax ‘fruit bag’. Is this what the sheep on here have to resort to when things don’t go their way? I’m not actually anti vaccine if you’d read my posts. But the companies are getting a free ride, and free ticket by the current set up. I’ve concerns over safety and trials also.

If you're going to play the victim card, you might want to refrain from name calling.

Igotadose

Carol25 wrote: »

‘It saves money to the manufacturer and tax payer’. Therein lies the problem. Why on earth would the tax payer have to foot the bill firstly when it’s the drugs companies making and wining and dining that HSE top brass to use their vaccine...
Why are you happy to give same companies whose sole objective is to profit a completely free pass and zero responsibility for the vaccine they have had the full responsibility of manufacturing and testing? In any other field, this sounds ridiculous and worrying.

How are they getting a free pass? They in fact do have full responsibility for testing and, in fact, can be held liable for malfeasance.

As I see it, your objection's not against vaccinating, but the laws. Easy - lobby your TD to change the laws. The trouble is, if you drive Glaxo out of Ireland, you lose access to the vaccines. So, which would you prefer - signing a waiver to reduce your chances to sue, versus more dead and disabled children and adults?

*any* pharmecutical has inherent risk. Vaccines, however, prevent wildly *communicable* diseases versus, say, insulin for diabetics. Your choice when it comes to the latter, but by not vaccinating, you're imposing your choice on others, which is why the Government should mandate them. I want *them* to protect me from *you*.

gctest50

Igotadose wrote: »

How are they getting a free pass? They in fact do have full responsibility for testing and, in fact, can be held liable for malfeasance.
.......

To fast-track Pandremix into service in 2009, Ireland granted GSK the full indemnity the firm insisted upon.
If there was a future problem or side-effect from Pandemrix, it would be the taxpayer who footed the bill.

Igotadose

gctest50 wrote: »

To fast-track Pandremix into service in 2009, Ireland granted GSK the full indemnity the firm insisted upon.
If there was a future problem or side-effect from Pandemrix, it would be the taxpayer who footed the bill.

So the issue was with the law. Fix the law. No excuse for this, inept government but the only one we have.

gctest50

Igotadose wrote: »

So the issue was with the law. Fix the law. No excuse for this, inept government but the only one we have.

Then to make it worse, some got a double dose of Pandremix :


The vaccine Pandemrix, developed by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) in Germany, was first used in Ireland in 2009-2010 during a threatened swine flu pandemic.

But it was re-issued in Ireland amid fears of a shortage of the usual winter flu vaccine in 2011


So you weren't really getting the 2011-season vaccine, you were getting Pandremix

gctest50

The problem is of course Pandremix seems to ( in a good few cases ) accidently teach your immune system to attack hypocretin - the flu itself can make ribbons of the hypocretins n stuff tho




Have to laugh i suppose at the "but the correlllationz don't mean causation" 'tards at the time