Anti-vaxxers

hcf500 · 11-12-2019 7:48pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

In your comment here for example (my comments in bold) There is so much wrong with that statement.

I didn't say I completely agreed with that statement but there is some truth in it.

Better fitting if it said "No wonder vaccine products, some of which have not been properly safety tested"

Vaccines are not solely being rejected because of "anti-vax disinfo and fearmongering". Trust has a part to play too

You keep talking about a "big pharma" conspiracy. I never mentioned anything about a conspiracy, only about government corruption!

Dohnjoe · 11-12-2019 8:28pm

hcf500 wrote: »

I
Better fitting if it said "No wonder vaccine products, some of which have not been properly safety tested"

Correction - very, very few of which. The dishonesty is extraordinary.

Vaccines are not solely being rejected because of "anti-vax disinfo and fearmongering". Trust has a part to play too

More playing with words.

There is no reason whatsoever to distrust vaccines in general. If there is a specific issue with a specific vaccine or a specific batch - that's a specific issue. Not a general one.

You keep talking about a "big pharma" conspiracy. I never mentioned anything about a conspiracy, only about government corruption!

You alluded to it when you posted an agreement with this wafer-thin nonsense

"because of the government’s self-inflicted loss of faith, coupled with its deep collusion with pharmaceutical companies where profits over people is their modus operandi."

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 10:07am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Correction - very, very few of which. The dishonesty is extraordinary.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

More playing with words.

You are the one playing with words

Dohnjoe wrote: »

There is no reason whatsoever to distrust vaccines in general. If there is a specific issue with a specific vaccine or a specific batch - that's a specific issue. Not a general one.

No there is no reason to distrust vaccines in general. I never said there was. For someone who was sitting on the fence regarding having their child vaccinated though, the actions of the government during the recent court case could have been enough to tip the scales. There must even be pro vaxxers who distrust the health services after this.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You alluded to it when you posted an agreement with this wafer-thin nonsense

"because of the government’s self-inflicted loss of faith, coupled with its deep collusion with pharmaceutical companies where profits over people is their modus operandi."

Conspiracy. No! I never even said the word. Collusion. Yes. The government protected GSKs profits and their interests when they completely covered GSKs legal defence costs. They would rather protect GSK than their own citizens.

Its very easy for you to argue points I didn't make. There is no conspiracy here.

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 10:10am

Im still waiting for someone to point out all of Clare Dalys lies in the link I posted!

ancapailldorcha · 12-12-2019 11:05am

hcf500 wrote: »

Im still waiting for someone to point out all of Clare Dalys lies in the link I posted!

Your tactic of dumping a link and proclaiming it gospel won't fly here I'm afraid. Can you link to a scientific study proving that Pandemrix causes Narcolepsy?

Dohnjoe · 12-12-2019 11:50am

hcf500 wrote: »

No there is no reason to distrust vaccines in general.

Good

Collusion. Yes. The government protected GSKs profits and their interests when they completely covered GSKs legal defence costs. They would rather protect GSK than their own citizens.

Isolated debatable example.

It's not policy. It's not inherent. Governments, regulators and pharmaceutical companies take safety extremely seriously. Unfortunately breaches, lapses and oversight can happen with anything - it doesn't mean it's systemic.

You might want to think about that the next time you agree with some garbage conspiracy statement that tenuously implies it is systemic.

CramCycle · 12-12-2019 12:34pm

Better fitting if it said "No wonder vaccine products, some of which have not been properly safety tested"

They were tested and the company themselves pointed out potential issues, hence the indemnity clause. They refused to sell it to Ireland on this basis. The HSE rightly or wrongly went on the balance of probabilities that the vaccine was the safer option. Hindsight is wonderful.

Vaccines are not solely being rejected because of "anti-vax disinfo and fearmongering". Trust has a part to play too

Mainly just fearmongering. Vaccines are safe. There are side effects for all medications. A reasonable and balanced person would weight up the risk vs reward. With almost all vaccines, the reward to society far outweighs the minute number of reactions. Great video earlier on in the thread explaining it. Here it is, this is for the Measles Vaccine, the numbers are different for different diseases but the principle is the same, I suggest starting just before the 5 minute mark to get the hard numbers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBkVCpbNnkU

You keep talking about a "big pharma" conspiracy. I never mentioned anything about a conspiracy, only about government corruption!

What specific corruption though, there were no benefits to politicians other than to be seen to act which is their job. This isn't corruption unless you are suggesting that they got brown envelopes to indemnify the company. That is quite a claim considering the risk to the company if it were ever shown or hinted at.

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 1:59pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Your tactic of dumping a link and proclaiming it gospel won't fly here I'm afraid. Can you link to a scientific study proving that Pandemrix causes Narcolepsy?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4266499/
There have been scientific studies carried out which show that Pandemrix had higher amounts of viral nucleoproteins and an increased response to these nucleoproteins in children with narcolepsy compared to Arepanrix, another swine flu vaccine which did not cause any increase in narcolepsy. There have been numerous epidemiological studies also which show a very strong link between the two. Although it is impossible for epidemiological studies to 100% prove that pandemrix caused the huge increase in narcolepsy, the studies were strong enough for the medical community to accept the connection and for most countries to accept and pay compensation to the victims.

What is your view on the promotional leaflet claiming that pandemrix was fully tested, which was distributed shortly after the IMB sent CMO Dr Tony Holohan a letter warning him of the lack of data and testing on the pandemrix vaccine?

Letter from the IMB

HSE Leaflet

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 2:08pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Good

Isolated debatable example.

It's not policy. It's not inherent. Governments, regulators and pharmaceutical companies take safety extremely seriously. Unfortunately breaches, lapses and oversight can happen with anything - it doesn't mean it's systemic.

You might want to think about that the next time you agree with some garbage conspiracy statement that tenuously implies it is systemic.

Looks like the Chief Medical Officer or the HPRA weren't too bothered about safety when they advised Doctors to use the vaccine as late as 2011!

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 2:22pm

CramCycle wrote: »

They were tested and the company themselves pointed out potential issues, hence the indemnity clause. They refused to sell it to Ireland on this basis. The HSE rightly or wrongly went on the balance of probabilities that the vaccine was the safer option. Hindsight is wonderful.

H5N1 was tested in mock up trials. Not H1N1

CramCycle wrote: »

What specific corruption though, there were no benefits to politicians other than to be seen to act which is their job. This isn't corruption unless you are suggesting that they got brown envelopes to indemnify the company. That is quite a claim considering the risk to the company if it were ever shown or hinted at.

Maybe they didn't benefit in the form of a brown envelope, but they put their own public image above the safety of the people. Their was a recession at the time and they did not want to dump a vaccine that they spent millions on, so they advised GPs to use it for the annual flu vaccination even though there were very strong safety concerns over the vaccine at the time. That is corruption!

ancapailldorcha · 12-12-2019 2:35pm

hcf500 wrote: »

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4266499/
There have been scientific studies carried out which show that Pandemrix had higher amounts of viral nucleoproteins and an increased response to these nucleoproteins in children with narcolepsy compared to Arepanrix, another swine flu vaccine which did not cause any increase in narcolepsy. There have been numerous epidemiological studies also which show a very strong link between the two. Although it is impossible for epidemiological studies to 100% prove that pandemrix caused the huge increase in narcolepsy, the studies were strong enough for the medical community to accept the connection and for most countries to accept and pay compensation to the victims.

What is your view on the promotional leaflet claiming that pandemrix was fully tested, which was distributed shortly after the IMB sent CMO Dr Tony Holohan a letter warning him of the lack of data and testing on the pandemrix vaccine?

Letter from the IMB

HSE Leaflet

A link is not causation. How many people per 1,000 who got this vaccine contracted narcolepsy?

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They HAVE side effects, some of them serious, some of them lethal. Just like any other drug.
But, risk/benefit is what matters.

Here's one study about Pandemrix. Relevant bit:

Of 1,446 possible cases identified, most had onset before 2009 or were clearly not narcolepsy. Of the 60 remaining cases, 20 were excluded after expert review, leaving 40 cases with narcolepsy; 5 had received Pandemrix between 3 and 18 mo before onset.

Graces7 wrote: »

Who are faced almost daily with their lethal negligence and errors .. cash compensation

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 3:29pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

A link is not causation. How many people per 1,000 who got this vaccine contracted narcolepsy?

The relevant bit to the study you posted is "We found a significantly increased risk of narcolepsy in adults following Pandemrix vaccination in England. The risk was lower than that seen in children using a similar study design."

The HSE panel set up to investigate found a 13 fold increase

Do you have an opinion on the promotional leaflet claiming that pandemrix was fully tested

ancapailldorcha · 12-12-2019 4:21pm

hcf500 wrote: »

The relevant bit to the study you posted is "We found a significantly increased risk of narcolepsy in adults following Pandemrix vaccination in England. The risk was lower than that seen in children using a similar study design."

The HSE panel set up to investigate found a 13 fold increase

Do you have an opinion on the promotional leaflet claiming that pandemrix was fully tested

A link, yes.

I've no idea what happened with the HSE. You could ask your TD to look into it.

hcf500 · 12-12-2019 5:05pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

A link, yes.

I've no idea what happened with the HSE. You could ask your TD to look into it.

Yes. A very very strong link!

I provided two links, a letter from the IMB to Chief Medical Officer Dr Tony Holohan and a promotional leaflet for the pandemrix vaccine. Ill explain seeing as you didnt bother reading them. The IMB warned the CMO that there was very limited data available on the vaccine. Shortly after the HSE released a leaflet claiming the vaccine was fully tested. Proof that they lied about the safety of the vaccine. This damages public confidence and trust. Just wanted to know what you thought about this.

ancapailldorcha · 12-12-2019 5:09pm

hcf500 wrote: »

Yes. A very very strong link!

I provided two links, a letter from the IMB to Chief Medical Officer Dr Tony Holohan and a promotional leaflet for the pandemrix vaccine. Ill explain seeing as you didnt bother reading them. The IMB warned the CMO that there was very limited data available on the vaccine. Shortly after the HSE released a leaflet claiming the vaccine was fully tested. Proof that they lied about the safety of the vaccine. This damages public confidence and trust. Just wanted to know what you thought about this.

I haven't had a chance to properly read them. I'm at work.

I have no idea what happened nor why. However, there is a big difference between a link and causation. For starters, you need a mechanism.

Seth Brundle · 12-12-2019 9:04pm

Saw this on YOLO thread and thought of this thread...

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Capt'n Midnight · 12-12-2019 10:32pm

hcf500 wrote: »

I understand that drug companies bottom line is to make profit and please the shareholders. I don't hold that against them.

Some of us do hold it against them big time given how little of the cost actually goes back into R&D or production.

Please don't try to manufacture a narrative. Profits and effectiveness of vaccines are two separate issues.

Unless you have specific evidence, per product, you can take it that the cost of generic vaccines to the NHS or the HSE and it's buying partners is reasonably close to the production cost.

In a similar manner you can take it that a lot of the cost while under patent protection goes to marketing and profit than R&D.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-28212223 look at the numbers for Pfizer (US)
Profits were over three times R&D spend and marketing was nearly twice the R&D spend.

Look at the UK election claim that the NHS would have to spend £500m a week EXTRA if drugs were purchased at the going US rate.

https://www.badscience.net/ is a good place to start if you want to see a little of big pharma being held to account

paul71 · 13-12-2019 12:09am

Since the only thing the anti vaccers have to rely on is ancedotal, I will give my anecdote. It is entirely true. My younger cousin was not vaccinated as a child because of Immunodeficiency. At the age of 6 he contracted measels, the complications started to manifest shortly after measels itself had run its course. I was a child and remember myself playing with him and my other cousins, as kids we were probably the first to notice things, using words in wrong order, not holding toys properly, not able to run as fast as before. It was slow, agongising to watch your cousin friend and playmate decline. It went on for 3 years, when he eventually passed I think he was about 2 stone back in nappies had not spoken for 6 months. That was 1981, it was before the days of anti vaxers but was due to lack of herd immunity that would have protected him, today anti vaxers are murdering children like my cousin.

paul71 · 13-12-2019 12:31am

I have been reading this tread for years and abstained from comment on it until now, probably because even after 30 years I feel nothing but anger and contempt for the anti vaxxers, but in the last week I have had to tell someones children they are not welcome in my home because they are anti vaxxers and I refuse to risk exposing my wife to grief and pain I saw my aunt endure. My 2 boys are now at the age my cousin was when contracted the easily preventable illness that killed him.

Igotadose · 13-12-2019 8:41am

paul71 wrote: »

I have been reading this tread for years and abstained from comment on it until now, probably because even after 30 years I feel nothing but anger and contempt for the anti vaxxers, but in the last week I have had to tell someones children they are not welcome in my home because they are anti vaxxers and I refuse to risk exposing my wife to grief and pain I saw my aunt endure. My 2 boys are now at the age my cousin was when contracted the easily preventable illness that killed him.

You did absolutely the right thing. Keep it up. We do the same - no antivax allowed in our house. No children here, but as I've never had mumps, as an adult male I don't want them. Plus, anti-vaxers need to feel some pain for their hateful decision perhaps a few will come to their senses. One can always hope.

paul71 · 13-12-2019 9:06am

Amantine wrote: »

Measles causes death in malnourished populations, in the UK even though more than 500,000 children are still not vaccinated, I can't seem to find any deaths for 2019 but I could be wrong, if anyone wants to give me a figure.

There was 35 for the whole of Europe which includes countries where children are poor like Romania
source:https://www.bmj.com/content/360/bmj.k795.full

My cousin was not malnourished.

hcf500 · 13-12-2019 7:16pm

Looks like there might be plans for the government to open a vaccine damage compensation scheme. They probably settled the last case to give themselves time to roll it out to cover the other hundred claims.

https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2019-12-12a.403&s=swine#g404.q

paul71 · 13-12-2019 7:30pm

I hope the government open a discussion on criminalizing anonymous anti vaxxers who deliberately mislead people online and directly cause the deaths of children. Now that would be real progress.

There will be a new year election and I will bring it up with election canditates.

Track down the websites, the trolls who repost the lies from those websites and lock them up.

VicMackey1 · 13-12-2019 7:42pm

hcf500 wrote: »

Looks like there might be plans for the government to open a vaccine damage compensation scheme. They probably settled the last case to give themselves time to roll it out to cover the other hundred claims.

https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2019-12-12a.403&s=swine#g404.q

Even if they were to introduce such a scheme, it would be too late for the remaining cases. The amounts of compensation would be far to low through a vaccine compensation scheme anyway.

VicMackey1 · 13-12-2019 7:45pm

paul71 wrote: »

I hope the government open a discussion on criminalizing anonymous anti vaxxers who deliberately mislead people online and directly cause the deaths of children. Now that would be real progress.

There will be a new year election and I will bring it up with election canditates.

Track down the websites, the trolls who repost the lies from those websites and lock them up.

We are not living in China! Mandatory vaccination would be easier and more effective.

paul71 · 13-12-2019 7:54pm

VicMackey1 wrote: »

We are not living in China! Mandatory vaccination would be easier and more effective.

We are living in a country where criminal acts are legislated against, tried before a judge and jury and guilt decided upon therein, the sentence prescribed in legislation.
We have an Electorate, an executive, a legislator, a judiciary all independant of one another. When criminal acts contrary to the good of society are newly identified, not only do we have a moral and legal right based on the principles of free society to legislate against them, I would argue we have a duty to do so.

TheRepentent · 13-12-2019 7:54pm

VicMackey1 wrote: »

Mandatory vaccination would be easier and more effective.

Yep...no access to childcare or schools till the children are vaccinated.

VicMackey1 · 13-12-2019 8:07pm

paul71 wrote: »

We are living in a country where criminal acts are legislated against, tried before a judge and jury and guilt decided upon therein, the sentence prescribed in legislation.
We have an Electorate, an executive, a legislator, a judiciary all independant of one another. When criminal acts contrary to the good of society are newly identified, not only do we have a moral and legal right based on the principles of free society to legislate against them, I would argue we have a duty to do so.

You really think that is a good idea? If I were to say I was damaged by a vaccine online, I should be tracked down and jailed?

paul71 · 13-12-2019 8:11pm

VicMackey1 wrote: »

You really think that is a good idea? If I were to say I was damaged by a vaccine online, I should be tracked down and jailed?

What is an online vaccine?

paul71 · 13-12-2019 8:16pm

VicMackey1 wrote: »

You really think that is a good idea? If I were to say I was damaged by a vaccine online, I should be tracked down and jailed?

Misinterupted your question sorry. Obviously not. I am aware of the issue with the swine flu vaccine. That is not what I am talking about, I am talking about the continued bull**** people spout about proven safe vaccine, the drivel posted about measels not being dangerous.

Anti-vaxxers

Comments