# H1N1/Swine Flu: Where do you stand?



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

I've been on the fence over the whole thing. I never got the flu shot until my children were born, but I'm finding it difficult to resolve my unease with the H1N1 vaccination. I'm sure most people here have seen the videos circulating the web:





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.










+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






Where do you stand on the whole issue? Are you going to be vaccinated?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

I think it is a balance. They are making a big heap out of this "Swine Flu" - and I remember when they had it in the 70's, when the vaccine killed far more people than the actual virus itself.

Not that I want the flu, but I am a bit put off by the fact they didn't bother testing the vaccine, and the whole sketchy, shify pack of public health "experts" that have said so many different things in conflict with each other. I am also suspicious that somehow, Hamilton is going to get the stuff first (they are already doling it out), weeks in advance of the rest of the country and a month ahead of the US. Looks like Hamilton is the "test subject" for a product that has notundergone any kind og quality control tests.

Of course, I think this whole H1N1 thing is blown right out of proportion, since they are freaking out about it while it has, in total, killed far fewer people than say, the number of people killed today by yellow fever or malaria. Those are diseases that they don't bother putting effort into because it affects people with different skin colours who happen to live in poverty in Africa, and hence, are not profitable for the big drug producting cartels.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MannyP Design said:


> I'm sure most people here have seen the videos circulating the web:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I loaded them for all to see here as the original post did not load.

EWIW, I will be getting both the normal flu shot and the H1N1 shot, as at 65 with a heart condition, I am in the high risk category.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

SINC: Can you tell me what you did differently to embed the videos? I'm not sure why mine aren't working properly.

EDIT: Figured it out! I guess this BBS handles Youtube links slightly different. Viva la difference. :lmao:


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I am getting it as soon as it is available here in NL, which, we are being told, will be early Nov.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

In Alberta, the H1N1 shots become available in three days on Monday.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

Manny:

Like you, I'm sitting on the fence. Unlike you, I've never had a flu shot.

I voted undecided.

I found this article very interesting.



> As evidence continues to mount that swine flu is more of a piglet than a raging razorback, why isn't curiosity mounting as to why the World Health Organization declared it a pandemic? And definitions aside, why does the agency continue to insist we're going to get hammered? The answers have far less to do with world health than with redistribution of world wealth.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

Interesting article, FeXL. But it serves to illustrate how bizarre this pandemic has become. We have the lefties blaming big pharma for blowing it out of proportion (some nutjobs even blame them for creating H1N1 in order to make drug sales). And now we have the righties' own conspiracy theory: that the pandemic scare is a diabolical UN/WHO scheme to re-distribute wealth. Fascinating.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

FeXL:

The article you quoted (or at least its author) is incredibly simple-minded. For a start, he clearly has NO idea what "pandemic" actually means -- only that it sounds scary.

Pandemic does not = "epidemic," it simply means that the virus is having no trouble spreading across countries. It's a very accurate term to describe the worldwide reach of this new strain of flu. If you have some grasp of what words actually mean, that is.

And as for H1N1 being a "piglet," yeah let's tell that to the families of the 5,335 people who have died. Stay classy, fake-tan Fumento!

Classic example of guy who has NO idea what he's talking about filling up column inches for nutjob Steve Forbes.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

I'm trying to figure my indecision on this one and having some difficulty doing so.

I'm not sure if I'm just tired of government/media/whatever crying wolf or if I still think I'm 25 and invisible. 

I seem to have some deep rooted trust issues that I have difficulty discarding. I don't know if it's the result of being more informed or just my natural tendency to distrust government at any level and media sensationalizing in order to sell papers or garner internet clicks.



chasMac said:


> Interesting article, FeXL. But it serves to illustrate how bizarre this pandemic has become. We have the lefties blaming big pharma for blowing it out of proportion (some nutjobs even blame them for creating H1N1 in order to make drug sales). And now we have the righties' own conspiracy theory: that the pandemic scare is a diabolical UN/WHO scheme to re-distribute wealth. Fascinating.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

No for a several of reasons.

This appears to be a relatively mild version.

Side effects from previous vaccines have proven to be as bad as the virus and some such as Guillam Barre scare me more than death itself.

The fact that it was available in our community last Tuesday which was a couple of days before what little testing they were doing was complete.

Use of an _adjuvant_ and Thimiserol (Mercury) in the vaccine.

The misleading hype promoting the vaccine. When some one tells me to be afraid it is usually the fear monger that should be feared. beejacon


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Swine Flu paranoia....


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

I am still undecided. Every one within my immediate family, including myself is considered "High Risk" and our GP has recommended all around vaccinations against the garden variety flu as well as the H1Ni strain. 

My gut instinct is to go AMA, not get vaccinated and practice a greater degree of preventative measures.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

Simply put, I believe the chances of having complications from the vaccine are lower than a member of my family having complications from H1N1.

So I decided I will get the shot.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

eMacMan said:


> Use of an adjutant and Thimiserol (Mercury) in the vaccine.


Just so you know, an "adjuvant" is used in most, if not all vaccines, and is there to both activate the immune system and help the antigen remain in the body longer. These are good things for a vaccine.

The thimerosal/merthiolate is in the vaccine as a preservative. It does have one atom of mercury in it, but it's present at such a vanishingly low concentration, especially after it's diluted in your body, that it's not something to worry about unless you're especially sensitive (e.g. young children with developing nervous systems).

Cheers


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

hayesk said:


> Simply put, I believe the chances of having complications from the vaccine are lower than a member of my family having complications from H1N1.
> 
> So I decided I will get the shot.


This is my feeling as well, along with my being in a high risk group due to problems with my lungs.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Do you eat pears? They help the lungs and respiratory system.


Yes, I eat a variety of good foods for various parts of my body. However, when I get a cold in my chest, it gets bad. The one time I did not have the regular flu shot, I got the flu and nearly ended up with a stay in the hospital.


----------



## danalicious (Nov 16, 2008)

We have no health issues in my family. If we did, I think our feeling would be different, but as it stands, we are not getting vaccinations for either flu.

My husband, who travels a great deal, got the flu shot a couple of years ago. Like MCB, he was violently ill for three weeks. That was the first and last time he got the shot.

As a mother to two young boys, I struggle with this decision every day. I feel that if I get the boys vaccinated and something happens, I would be more distraught than if we didn't vaccinate and they contracted h1n1. I have more faith in ongoing medical treatment for existing symptoms than in administering an under-tested vaccination.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Because H1N1 is expected to be more virulent than normal among young adults, and because I teach at a university and am therefore exposed to large numbers of young adults, I've decided to get the shot this year.

Normally I don't, because I'm not particularly prone to getting the flu (though I have had a few nasty bouts over the years), but it's a risk-analysis question. Does the risk of side-effects from the vaccination (negligible) out weigh the chance that vaccination will protect you from getting the flu (moderate), and does the consequence of getting the disease (potentially severe) justify the potential risk of getting vaccinated (negligible).

Most years the chances of getting the flu are (for me) lower, and the consequences of getting the flu are less severe. So most years the risk analysis comes down on the side of taking the usual precautions of washing hands and trying to get enough sleep/good nutrition. This year, the risk analysis says that the added protection of vaccination is probably a good bet.

But there's never any guarantee that vaccination will protect you, nor is there a guarantee that getting vaccinated won't harm you... you just have to play the odds.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

I was listening to a radio interview with the head of micro-biology and infectious diseases at the U of Calgary, and he was saying he considers the vaccine completely safe. He was especially dismissive of the whole fuss over adjuvants, which he likened to caffeine for the immune system, and has been added to vaccines for years. I don't know if I'll be getting the vaccine, but if don't it will not be because I am at all worried about it.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

bryanc said:


> Just so you know, an "adjuvant" is used in most, if not all vaccines, and is there to both activate the immune system and help the antigen remain in the body longer. These are good things for a vaccine.
> 
> The thimerosal/merthiolate is in the vaccine as a preservative. It does have one atom of mercury in it, but it's present at such a vanishingly low concentration, especially after it's diluted in your body, that it's not something to worry about unless you're especially sensitive (e.g. young children with developing nervous systems).
> 
> Cheers


Corrected thanks! 

Having had a reaction to a flu vaccine that had me feeling completely listless for about 3 months I am more than willing to take my chances with the actual virus. Death rate is much lower than for normal flu and most people recover fully within a week. Since the big risk group seems to be people much younger than me, I am willing to take my chances.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## ComputerIdiot (Jan 8, 2004)

I've heard horror stories of people getting sicker from the flu shot than the flu itself, including stories from reasonably sane people in my own family (ok, they are relatives by marriage, not blood, but still ... they're family ). I never used to get flu shots and then a couple of years ago I think I got a case of the flu (standard variety) and spent about a week whining and snivelling about how I was gonna die at any moment. I decided the shot was a better deal, so I will definitely get the regular flu vaccine and probably the H1N1 shot as well.


----------



## Sniper4u (Jun 25, 2008)

Number 1 flu vaccines do not stop you from getting the flu, they only reduce the chances of getting it and decrease the effects of it if you do catch one. Number 2 a flu vaccine is generated each year for the most likey flu's that will appear it that year, generally one year the A type and the next year the B type. The C type is also added in during one of those two years. Number 3 a flu vaccine actually protects you for two years. It takes two years of shots to have a complete flu vaccine. I get my shots every year and suffer very rarely from the flu or colds in general. I will be getting both shots as soon as they are available. People talk about the side effects and they are in deed a terrible thing. The thing that most people don't see is that if that level of prevention wasn't taken that hundreds of thousands of people would most likely have died. Yes there is a risk, but it is worth it to me to take that risk and not be a part of an epidemic.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

FeXL said:


> I seem to have some deep rooted trust issues that I have difficulty discarding.


Yeah, considering how badly the government f'd you over on all the previous vaccines they've forced on you ...

What's that? You say you avoided all those horrible childhood diseases and never knew the life-changing suffering or risk of dying a horrible death from smallpox, polio, mumps, measles, rubella, tentanus, chicken pox or hepatitis, all thanks to childhood immunizations?

Then I'd say the medical community has earned your trust when it comes to vaccines.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

I thought I should mention that I have now had three close friends (in the States) contract confirmed cases of H1N1. All are now fine, BUT they all said the same thing over and over to me: the media reports give you NO indication of how awful having it is.

It's not like a regular flu in terms of how you feel. They all described it as BY FAR the worst and most debilitating flu they've ever had.

So if you're in one of the high-risk categories, and that sounds like something you'd be willing to risk, then by all means skip the shot and let others have theirs. Personally, if I was in the high-risk group, this would be a no-brainer.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Personally, if I was in the high-risk group, this would be a no-brainer. " Sadly, I am in the "high-risk group", but luckily I have brains. So, for me at least, I shall be there at the public clinic comes the first week in Nov. for my shot. We shall see.


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

I'm not planning on getting the vaccination. Mainly because I've had bad reactions to 'egg propagated' injections before.

But, if I DO get the virus, I fully intend to quarantine myself. 

If people would just STAY HOME when they're sick, a lot of this pandemic nonsense would be stopped in its tracks.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MLeh said:


> I'm not planning on getting the vaccination. Mainly because I've had bad reactions to 'egg propagated' injections before.
> 
> But, if I DO get the virus, I fully intend to quarantine myself.
> 
> If people would just STAY HOME when they're sick, a lot of this pandemic nonsense would be stopped in its tracks.


Very wise, and socially responsible, MLeh. Paix, mon amie.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I have been getting flu shots ever since I became a member of the high risk group some nine years ago. Each and every time i have been given one, the first thing I am asked is, "Are you allergic to eggs?"

If you are, they will not give you the shot.

I am also in the no-brainer category and will get both flu shots this year.

In looking at the poll, it appears that half the people responding will not get the H1N1 shot. IMHO that is a sure fire way to expand the pandemic if it comes to that, and if it does, they will be the first to whine. And that is sad indeed.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

We here in NL have been told to wait with the regular flu shot until Dec. or Jan. This is fine with me, in that while I don't have any reactions to flu shots, I would like to give my body a chance to develop the H1N1 immunities. We shall see.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

One of the key reasons why I'm wary of getting vaccinated against the H1N1 is the belief that it will somehow protect you. There is no guarantee it will work. The past five years of getting regular flu shots had not protected me from getting the flu at all. In fact last year I got nailed with it twice.

And pointing the finger at those who choose not to be vaccinated is short sighted. There's no guaranteed protection with vaccination. If some people would practice basic hygene we wouldn't be worrying so much. You wouldn't believe how many people refuse to wash their hands after using the washroom. THEY are a problem, not those who choose against vaccination.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

chas_m said:


> Yeah, considering how badly the government f'd you over on all the previous vaccines they've forced on you ...
> 
> What's that? You say you avoided all those horrible childhood diseases and never knew the life-changing suffering or risk of dying a horrible death from smallpox, polio, mumps, measles, rubella, tentanus, chicken pox or hepatitis, all thanks to childhood immunizations?
> 
> Then I'd say the medical community has earned your trust when it comes to vaccines.


All of which were tested far more than the H1N1 vaccine has been...


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

MazterCBlazter said:


> ...
> To get immunized against the quoted above makes sense. Flu shots are another matter. There are schools of thought that indicate that immunization shots, especially the flu shots lead to other immune system disorders, especially allergies, cancer, and hormonal problems.
> *...*


Here is where the adjuvants enter the picture. Their purpose is to put the immune system into overdrive thus allowing the manufacture to make more doses with the same amount of vaccine. The two advantages to this are higher profits and faster to the market which also means higher profits. In most cases this is perfectly safe unless overclocking the immune system leads to some other problem. As to whether or not this should concern you consider the German governments stand. Ordinary citizens get the adjuvant version. Politicians and the military get the non adjuvant, non-live virus version. 

I am reasonably certain that the Canadian version does not use live virus. The US nasal spray version does.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

There is an amazing amount of confusion about the vaccine and the H1N1 virus. Our public health authorities (and the various levels of government) have done a very poor job of getting the message out. This has been exacerbated by the media.

Here are some facts:

1. The H1N1 vaccine is extremely effective. Unlike the seasonal flu vaccine, it is not a "best guess". This vaccine was generated to the antigens in the circulating virus. It has been genetically stable so far. If you get the vaccine and are not exposed in the time it takes for the vaccine to generate immunity (7-10 days) then you will *not* get the virus.

2. The H1N1 virus is the predominant circulating flu virus this year. For some unknown reason, each season a single virus tends to dominate although there are rarer additional flu viruses. While this is still very early in the season, the H1N1 strain is dominant. Getting the seasonal flu shot is still important if you are over 65 or have other respiratory conditions.

3. The vaccine was generated using the exact same methodology that's been used for 30 years. It is safe. The testing is for potential contamination during the manufacturing process. Allergies to eggs are a potential issue but even this is not a go/no go decision.

4. The vaccine cannot give you the flu. It contains no live virus (the nasal version provided in the US has an attenuated virus). The additional components in the vaccine are extremely unlikely to cause issues. There is an effect whereby people who get the shot and then come down with an illness naturally blame the shot. If you become ill after being vaccinated, either you were exposed to a virus not covered by the vaccine or you were infected before the vaccine had built up your immunity.

5. Vaccination is a natural process. This is how we build immunity to everything we encounter. Vaccination just cuts out the need to get ill before developing the immunity.

6. Vaccination is preventative. Because of this, people who don't fall ill are invisible. They don't make the news. There is no story. Prevention is so much better than cure. The cost/benefit ratio of an effective vaccine is about 10 to 1. Even with partially effective vaccines, it is usually still economically beneficial. Our ICU's have no spare capacity. They run at capacity and if they are filled with H1N1 patients, something else will give.

7. The incidence of Guillain-Barré syndrome in the population is about 1 in a million. It occurs in people who do not get vaccinated. The linkages with vaccination are correlative and statistically insignificant (physicians cannot rule it out because the incidence is so low and it is impossible to prove a rare incident was or was not caused by a procedure that is so common). Most people with Guillain-Barré syndrome fortunately recover fully. There are some people who do become genuinely sick. However, the mortality rate of flu is about one in a thousand or more. The relative risks are heavily in favour of vaccination (by 3-4 orders of magnitude). Likewise the linkage to autism is scientifically unproven and extremely unlikely. Unfortunately, scare-mongering, paranoia and rumours take their toll and parents of children with autism work hard to rationalise why their child is affected. However, the science that initially suggested a link was so flawed that researchers disproved the connection almost immediately in subsequent, peer-reviewed studies.

8. Adjuvants do reduce the amount of vaccine required but, more importantly, reduce the need for booster shots (in those with weaker immune systems such as children and the elderly) and also increase the coverage of genetically drifted virus. In short, it makes the vaccine more effective.

9. I have seen young adults with H1N1 in the ICU. There is a 10-20% mortality rate. This is *entirely* preventable for the sake of a needle prick.

10. Even if you do not want to get the vaccine and are prepared for the consequences, there should be some level of social responsibility to protect others. You will be infectious before knowing you are sick. You may infect people who may be far more vulnerable.

We do not live in a police state and it is left to the individual to make the choice. I have probably offended a bunch of people but I don't apologise for that. Lives are at stake. The H1N1 virus is not a regular flu. If you get it, you'll feel like hell for several days. The likelihood you'll be hospitalized (or worse) are quite small. But there's about a one thousand-fold difference in those risks (of hospitalization if you don't get the vaccine compared to vaccine complications) not even counting the 1 in 4 chance you will suffer a really lousy bout of flu without it.

Please get the shot as soon as you can. It's a no-brainer.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Please get the shot as soon as you can. It's a no-brainer. " An excellent overall synopsis, Jim, along with a valid conclusion. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

" Vaccination is preventative. Because of this, people who don't fall ill are invisible. They don't make the news. There is no story. Prevention is so much better than cure." This will be the most interesting point to remember when, and IF, there is no pandemic after a good percentage of people getting the vaccine. We shall see.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Please get the shot as soon as you can. It's a no-brainer.


Thanks for that wonderful post ubjw. :clap:

And I will go so far as to add, people have a responsibility to their fellow man (to prevent a pandemic), to get the shot.

Now, go out and get pricked, please.


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

Here's an excellent article regarding the H1N1 Vaccine:

CTV News | Frequently Asked Questions about the swine flu vaccine

FWIW, my family and I are all scheduled to get the vaccine on Wednesday.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MaxPower said:


> Here's an excellent article regarding the H1N1 Vaccine:
> 
> CTV News | Frequently Asked Questions about the swine flu vaccine
> 
> FWIW, my family and I are all scheduled to get the vaccine on Wednesday.


We have to wait until early Nov. for our shots here in NL.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

:clap: for Jim's post.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)




----------



## Chris (Feb 8, 2001)

I've taken the annual flu shot every year for the past 8 years. Haven't had the flu in all that time, and maybe 3 serious colds.

I'm linin' up as soon as it's available!


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> The mortality rate figures seem high though.
> The ctv article is also informative.


The mortality rate is for people with H1N1 who require ICU intervention. This is not everyone who requires hospitalization for flu. Things get complicated if the flu is accompanied by bacterial pneumonia (which is exacerbated by the flu-virus damaged lung epithelia). 

H1N1 is community-based, it's spread like wildfire and there is no hiding from it except through vaccination.


----------



## zlinger (Aug 28, 2007)

I will walk around town with a face mask before I get the flu shot... I do not trust this vaccine that has been rushed out of the lab.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

chas_m said:


> I thought I should mention that I have now had three close friends (in the States) contract confirmed cases of H1N1. All are now fine, BUT they all said the same thing over and over to me: the media reports give you NO indication of how awful having it is.
> 
> It's not like a regular flu in terms of how you feel. They all described it as BY FAR the worst and most debilitating flu they've ever had.
> 
> So if you're in one of the high-risk categories, and that sounds like something you'd be willing to risk, then by all means skip the shot and let others have theirs. *Personally, if I was in the high-risk group, this would be a no-brainer.*


So which pharmaceutical company that's producing H1N1 vaccine did you buy shares in?

I've never gotten the flu shot. I prefer taking my chances. Plus I wear a seat belt and try to avoid rush hour traffic.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

(original post deleted subject to reconsideration and rewriting)

But no I won't be getting the shot.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

used to be jwoodget said:


> There is an amazing amount of confusion about the vaccine and the H1N1 virus. Our public health authorities (and the various levels of government) have done a very poor job of getting the message out. This has been exacerbated by the media.
> 
> Here are some facts:
> 
> ...


Thanks for the insightful response, JW.

What are your thoughts on the issue that the H1N1 vaccine was rushed?


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

used to be jwoodget said:


> ... There is a 10-20% mortality rate .....


Where do these numbers come from?

New York City public health reports (out of a population in the particular catchment area of about 8 million) that about 10% of the population has been exposed to H1N1 - that being, give or take, 800,000 people. Of these 47 have died. This equals a mortality rate of about 0.006% (more than 5 orders of magnitude different from your numbers). I am in no way an epidemiologist but to me as a lifelong researcher (neurotoxicology) this seems (sic) like a massive difference in mortality.

However we need to suspect all numbers re H1N1. Here in eastern Ontario at least, only 1 in 10 suspected cases is submitted for lab testing and yet they are reported to public health as H1N1 positive. H1N1 is easily confused with ordinary flu and mononucleosis, the latter with potentially dangerous consequences, as well as certain other relatively common disorders.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Figures from the ICU at a GTA hospital where I work. To clarify, the 10-20% mortality is for people admitted into the ICU (see my second post, above). About 0.1% of H1N1 infected people are hospitalized. Of those, about a third require ICU care (intubation, etc). One in five of those who enter the ICU do not recover.

Using your NY numbers, 800 people are hospitalized, ~266 are admitted into the ICU. Of those, ~50 will die. Those numbers jive with what is seen in NY although I'd guess that their numbers do not necessarily include people who die before getting proper medical attention.

The numbers that don't add up are the ones regarding severe complications or deaths from the vaccine. These are less than one in 1 million and these are virtually never proven to be due to the vaccine (yes, there are various anecdotes, but if you are paranoid about needles, any excuse is good enough).

H1N1 vaccination reduces your risk of dying of the flu by 100 fold and your risk of hospitalization by even more. Your risk is small to start with, but with the numbers of people being infected, there will be thousands of deaths of people of all ages who didn't get vaccinated in time.



rgray said:


> Where do these numbers come from?
> 
> New York City public health reports (out of a population in the particular catchment area of about 8 million) that about 10% of the population has been exposed to H1N1 - that being, give or take, 800,000 people. Of these 47 have died. This equals a mortality rate of about 0.006% (more than 5 orders of magnitude different from your numbers). I am in no way an epidemiologist but to me as a lifelong researcher (neurotoxicology) this seems (sic) like a massive difference in mortality.
> 
> However we need to suspect all numbers re H1N1. Here in eastern Ontario at least, only 1 in 10 suspected cases is submitted for lab testing and yet they are reported to public health as H1N1 positive. H1N1 is easily confused with ordinary flu and mononucleosis, the latter with potentially dangerous consequences, as well as certain other relatively common disorders.


By the way, H1N1 is currently the predominant strain circulating. This is what happens with flu. One variant takes off. While people do confuse bad colds with the flu and the severity of even confirmed flu cases can vary, I don't think there is much exaggeration in the numbers. Some people (over 55) have some level of immunity but everyone else is a sitting duck. The reason the health labs are not exhaustively testing for H1N1 is because by the time the infection is confirmed, individuals are either in recovery or have progressed to more severe disease. The treatment is not affected by the strain, identification is only for epidemiological purposes and there is so much dissemination that it is no longer worthwhile tracking. It is essentially everywhere.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Personally, I don't think it was rushed enough (there seems to have been a lot of dithering which has caused understandable confusion among people). The vaccine has been tested for safety and in the southern hemisphere has been extensively tested in people. Given the initial warnings we had in April/May, the confirmed mortality rate, and the deaths that have occurred worldwide, we are only now distributing the vaccine. The second wave has hit the northern hemisphere and millions of people are sick. If you get a shot on Monday, you will not be protected for at least a week. A lot more people will therefore be hospitalized and some will not make it.

Vaccines are not like new drugs which need extensive clinical trials as their effects are unpredictable (and efficacy unproven). The "active" component that is different between each vaccine is the antigen(s) that is specific to the virus. Flu virus antigens are the haemaggluttinin and neuramidase components. Vaccines are made by producing fragments of these specific proteins by recombinant DNA technology in eggs (basically, the eggs are protein machines that produce oodles of the proteins). In of themselves, these proteins are inert.

The immunization process is very similar to what happens when you are infected with H1N1. Your own immune cells recognize the foreign antigens made by the virus and this triggers the expansion of a subset of T lymphocytes that recognize these proteins and attack the infected cells. This helps fight off the infection but a small number of these lymphocytes remain after the infection has resolved. If you are re-infected, these memory cells are re-activated and shorten the timeline of the response, removing the virus before its had a chance to spread in the body. A vaccine bluffs the immune system into mounting a response to the innocuous proteins (there are no infected cells) so that if you are later exposed to the real virus, your immune system has been primed already.

I really am not sure why people are so distrustful of vaccination. The X-files was fiction. There isn't even much money to be made in vaccines (unlike treating the result of not vaccinating). Why trust the common water supply? Why not drill your own well for water?



MannyP Design said:


> What are your thoughts on the issue that the H1N1 vaccine was rushed?


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Why trust the common water supply? Why not drill your own well for water?


You describe my lifestyle exactly. I am right at the edge of the area service by the water supply in my village. I had the option of drilling my own well or joining up to the municipal system. I drilled my own well. Why? We my well and the municipal well come from exactly the same aquifer. My water has been tested every way possible and is pure and clean if a little hard. The municipal supply water smells like bleach from the chlorine and god knows what else that is put in it "for my protection". WTF. Remember the feeds come from the same source.....


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Do you have a source for your own vaccine, too?



rgray said:


> You describe my lifestyle exactly. I am right at the edge of the area service by the water supply in my village. I had the option of drilling my own well or joining up to the municipal system. I drilled my own well. Why? We my well and the municipal well come from exactly the same aquifer. My water has been tested every way possible and is pure and clean if a little hard. The municipal supply water smells like bleach from the chlorine and god knows what else that is put in it "for my protection". WTF. Remember the feeds come from the same source.....


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Do you have a source for your own vaccine, too?


I have a funcional immune system - I think I'll just let it do its thing.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Potent ginseng....expensive energy pill


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

MazterCBlazter said:


>


I wouldn't buy a suit from that turkey, let alone medication....


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


>


Works for my wife, but not me. I use Vitamins B, E and C, Echinacea and Ginseng. That seems to work for me.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Shouldn't we all be getting a pneumonia vaccination instead? It at least has a track record and it seems to be what is killing people who contract H1N1.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

In this case, the pneumonia is typically caused by a bacterial infection that rides on the back of the virus due to it's effect on depressing the immune system. Antibiotics are an appropriate treatment. However, by the time the pneumonia is detected, the damage to the airways is difficult to reverse and the bugs may be resistant. Moreover, there are many types of common bacteria that can induce pneumonia and vaccinating against them all would be prohibitively expensive (unlike dominant flu viruses which although being hypervariable are somewhat predictable, with H1N1 being entirely predictable). There are shots available for pneumonia (that cover the most common forms) but if someone is unwilling to get a flu shot, they probably will not line up for a pneumonia shot. Lastly, only a tiny number of people contract H1N1-associated pneumonia and if they are vaccinated against H1N1, they will not have weakened immunity and hence not contract pneumonia as a consequence. In that sense, the flu vaccine protects against not only the flu but all of its co-morbidities.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

used to be jwoodget said:


> In this case, the pneumonia is typically caused by a bacterial infection that rides on the back of the virus due to it's effect on depressing the immune system. Antibiotics are an appropriate treatment. However, by the time the pneumonia is detected, the damage to the airways is difficult to reverse and the bugs may be resistant. Moreover, there are many types of common bacteria that can induce pneumonia and vaccinating against them all would be prohibitively expensive (unlike dominant flu viruses which although being hypervariable are somewhat predictable, with H1N1 being entirely predictable). Lastly, only a tiny number of people contract H1N1-associated pneumonia and if they are vaccinated against H1N1, they will not have weakened immunity and hence not contract pneumonia as a consequence. In that sense, the flu vaccine protects against not only the flu but al of its associated morbidities.


But the pneumoni vaccinne is a known entity whereas the H1N1 vaccinne is not. Are you saying it is pointless to vaccinate against pneumonia? Would the vaccinne not cover the common forms of the bacteria?


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

No, its not pointless at all but the flu vaccine is also a known entity and the clinical trials have shown proven efficacy. It works. In Ontario, you are entitled to get a pneumonia vaccine and many do (probably true in other provinces). It works for the same reasons that the flu shot works.

Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care - Public Information - Publications - Immunization - Pneumococcal Vaccine (Polysaccharide - for age 2 years and over)

If you have been immunized against pneumococcus, then you should still get the H1N1 vaccine. It will protect against the actual flu bout and there are other morbidities.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

used to be jwoodget said:


> No, its not pointless at all but the flu vaccine is also a known entity and the clinical trials have shown proven efficacy. It works. In Ontario, you are entitled to get a pneumonia vaccine and many do (probably true in other provinces). It works for the same reasons that the flu shot works.
> 
> Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care - Public Information - Publications - Immunization - Pneumococcal Vaccine (Polysaccharide - for age 2 years and over)
> 
> If you have been immunized against pneumococcus, then you should still get the H1N1 vaccine. It will protect against the actual flu bout and there are other morbidities.


It seems to me that if you are at all hesitant to be a guinea pig with the H1N1 vaccinne your next best line of defence (besides eating well, hand washing etc.) is getting the pneumonia vaccination.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

I have no choice, I have to get it to travel this fall.

If they suspect you have H1N1 then you will be quarantined,
Not my idea of having a holiday down south.

Better to get the shot.

Dave


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

Vaccines that have nearly eradicated diseases like smallpox and polio have a proven track record over many years. The adverse effects have been worked through, the formulations and dosages dialed in with precision.

Seasonal flu shots have a really bad track record. Plenty of people get far more sick from the flu shot than from the flu itself, the vaccine is frequently ineffective anyway as it it's based on last year's flu, testing is rushed if not skipped, and the danger from just going through the flu is miniscule. 

The H1N1 flu shot was rushed even more. It wasn't even tested on pregnant women, the virus itself has proven to be far less serious than the seasonal flu anyway, and the manufacturers are demanding immunity from lawsuits/prosecution due to adverse effects.

For me, I can handle getting sick, but the flu shots are just not worth the risk.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

What ever happened to the Avian Flu that was a big thing a few years ago? Did it just fizzle out?


----------



## lara (Mar 15, 2009)

EvanPitts said:


> What ever happened to the Avian Flu that was a big thing a few years ago? Did it just fizzle out?


Shhhhh! Not so loud. 

L


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

bsenka said:


> Vaccines that have nearly eradicated diseases like smallpox and polio have a proven track record over many years. The adverse effects have been worked through, the formulations and dosages dialed in with precision.
> 
> Seasonal flu shots have a really bad track record. Plenty of people get far more sick from the flu shot than from the flu itself, the vaccine is frequently ineffective anyway as it it's based on last year's flu, testing is rushed if not skipped, and the danger from just going through the flu is miniscule.
> 
> ...


bsenka, this has to be one of most disingenuous posts I've read in a long, long time. 

People DO NOT get sick from the flu vaccine. You may have a shot and then get sick. That is not the vaccine. You would have gotten sick regardless. People associate their illness with the shot but its simply impossible to get flu from a shot. The shot may not be effective because the vaccine doesn't cover all strains of a circulating virus. That is a failure of coverage and you'd have gotten sick without the vaccine. People naturally correlate getting ill with something that happened to them and getting a shot is easy to blame. That doesn't mean they are correct.

The seasonal shot is predictive, it is not based on last years flu! The vaccine makers are not that stupid. The WHO scientists make a best guess based on the various flu strains that are percolating the globe. The virus is constantly changing and the dominant strain may derive from one of many. In the case of the H1N1 vaccine there is no guesswork. It works. The viral strain is entirely known and stable. This vaccine gives at least 90% protection. It is no different from small pox vaccines, polio vaccines, etc, etc, etc in its mechanism of action - except that those viruses don't mutate continuously. They are not moving targets like the flu. 

Testing has to be fast and efficient because of the consequences of delay and the short time line between setting up the vaccine and the time the virus circulates. No point releasing it after everyone is sick. It's preventative. However, it is not unsafe. It is tested for contamination during production. The vaccine is made in sterile and controlled environments. There have been well over a billion doses of seasonal flu vaccine produced over the years. It is one of the safest products in the world. The H1N1 vaccine is exactly the same as every other flu shot except that it is targeted at the H1N1 variant. Why on earth would a vaccine to that strain be any different from any other?

I don't know where you get the idea that the H1N1 flu is much less serious than the seasonal flu. I know 15 people who have had it and it knocked them for six. One colleague was out of action for 7 days, in bed for 4 of those. He'd never felt so ill. He is in his 40's and had three young kids who all came down, as did his wife. A lot of people think they have flu when in fact they have the common cold (caused by a totally different virus). The H1N1 virus is not killing as many people as the Spanish flu, but it is killing younger people than seasonal flu. It is rare for the seasonal flu to cause death in people under the age of 60. The median age of victims of the H1N1 virus is skewed to people in their 30's. Teenagers have died. This is not fear-mongering. We are simply not used to seeing healthy people die from the flu.

The vaccine may not have been tested in a large number of pregnant women, but they are a very high risk group. It's actually the adjuvanted vaccine that has not been well tested but this provides a quandary. If my daughter was pregnant, I'd strongly recommend she get the adjuvanted vaccine because the non-ajuvant vaccine is delayed for 2-3 weeks. It's all about relative risk.

The manufacturers claim immunity from prosecution because otherwise they would be on the hook for lawsuits from anyone with an adverse reaction. Given the vast numbers of doses, it is statistically and medically not possible to prove or disprove that a condition that developed within two weeks of a shot was due to the immunization. The science says there is essentially no connection but jury's see a victim who is ill and will assign blame in many cases without clear, direct evidence.

It is your personal choice whether to get the vaccine, but please don't spread such FUD. It is irresponsible.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

EvanPitts said:


> What ever happened to the Avian Flu that was a big thing a few years ago? Did it just fizzle out?


That was H5N1. It has not yet mutated into a form that is easily transmissible between humans. People have contracted avian flu but it requires close contact. It's still circulating among bird populations but hopefully will not become nasty to people. The H1N1 virus contains some parts from avian and swine strains. These viruses continuously shuffle their genes which is why vaccines have to be constantly generated to try to keep up. It's the nature of the beast. They encode only 11 proteins, most of which are invariant. The viruses are truly masters of disguise and dodge the immune system (which is itself a remarkable system for natural defences to agents the body has never seen before).

Influenza strains don't truly fizzle out. They live in pools of animal hosts around the world, happily exchanging their bits of DNA in an effort to concoct the perfect virus....


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

used to be jwoodget said:


> That was H5N1. It has not yet mutated into a form that is easily transmissible between humans.


I think this demonstrates my point, that our media outlets and public health system are both doing poor jobs in informing people, because there is a great deal of confusion. If what you say is true, and I have no reason to doubt you, then why hasn't the press or public health come out and told the people that Avian Flu has run it's course, has not been transfered to humans, and that we can move on to the next thing?

That is my question - why can't these people hire someone that knows how to communicate effectively, rather than just confusing people endlessly with crass statements intended to strike terror with those that might not think to call them out. I mean, Michael Bryant can afford one, Governments have entire staffs filled with them, so why can't the Swine Flu people hire one so they can have a clear and consistent message, rather than this hodge-podge of gorbachev they shovel out these days?

Our system is so utterly borked, I don't think it can be fixed...


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

used to be jwoodget said:


> happily exchanging their bits of DNA in an effort to concoct the perfect virus....


This not true and a fairly gross misunderstanding of both evolution and viral reproduction. To "exchange bits" would require sexual reproduction - viruses are non-sexual. The "happily" schtick is just plain condescending. Viruses reproduce by causing the host cell to make copies of itself and the virus. *There is no such thing as "effort to concoct"*, which erroneously implies that there is some sort of direction involved, or assembly of bits of various viruses. Any change in the strain of a virus is the result of random mutation. Each mutation has slightly different characteristics. One mutation may be cause more severe symptoms. Another may be more transmissible. Yet another mail fail altogether. Interestingly there is literature to suggest that, as far as viruses are concerned there seems to be a trade-off between severity of harm caused and transmissibility, which is to say that a more transmissible strain causes less severe symptoms, but that is still something of an open book. In any case variations in strains are the result of *random events*. To suggest that evolution has direction is to misunderstand evolution entirely.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

rgray said:


> This not true and a fairly gross misunderstanding of both evolution and viral reproduction.


UTBJW was obviously speaking loosely, and I'm sure he understands the basics of evolution, but you're obviously correct that there's no effort to concoct the perfect virus going on. However, I think he's right to imply that novel virus will continue to emerge until one that is optimized to exploit the human population arises. Which, while entirely directionless and and based on random change, has the same effect.



> To "exchange bits" would require sexual reproduction - viruses are non-sexual.


Recombination does occur between viruses. All it takes is for more than one viral genome to be present in a given cell at a time. 



> In any case variations in strains are the result of *random events*. To suggest that evolution has direction is to misunderstand evolution entirely.


Absolutely. But it's also important to keep in mind that evolution is a 'hill climbing algorithm'... variants that are more successful are preserved and serve as the foundation for more variation. So as long as there are billions and billions of metabolically active humans on earth, there will be a niche for viruses and other replicators to exploit. The better they can exploit us as a niche, the more successful they will be.

Cheers


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

bryanc said:


> However, I think he's right to imply that novel virus will continue to emerge until one that is optimized to exploit the human population arises. Which, while entirely directionless and and based on random change, has the same effect.


Absolutely, an optimised version can eventually occur - I did not discount the possibility. It will, as we agree, NOT be 'concocted'.




bryanc said:


> Recombination does occur between viruses. All it takes is for more than one viral genome to be present in a given cell at a time.


Indeed, I stand corrected.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

EvanPitts said:


> I think this demonstrates my point, that our media outlets and public health system are both doing poor jobs in informing people, because there is a great deal of confusion. If what you say is true, and I have no reason to doubt you, then why hasn't the press or public health come out and told the people that Avian Flu has run it's course, has not been transfered to humans, and that we can move on to the next thing?
> 
> That is my question - why can't these people hire someone that knows how to communicate effectively, rather than just confusing people endlessly with crass statements intended to strike terror with those that might not think to call them out. I mean, Michael Bryant can afford one, Governments have entire staffs filled with them, so why can't the Swine Flu people hire one so they can have a clear and consistent message, rather than this hodge-podge of gorbachev they shovel out these days?
> 
> Our system is so utterly borked, I don't think it can be fixed...


Evan, avian flu hasn't run its course. It simply hasn't developed into an easily transmissible (human to human) variant. There is no way of knowing when that may occur. The surveillance of avian populations continues and the virus constantly changes. If it does mutate and become human transmissible, its possible that it will be attenuated in its pathogenicity and won't be a problem. There again, it could become much more pathogenic.

I totally agree with the lack of effective communication. The public health agencies treat people as though they are children and this raises suspicion. One problem is that it is difficult to convey the relative risks. The odds of having a severe complication to a vaccine (any vaccine) are one in a million and even then it is impossible to prove it was due to the vaccine . Those sorts of odds are so minuscule that it is difficult to put into context. Meanwhile, the odds of getting seriously ill from the flu are a thousand times greater. 

Of course, people's inability to understand gargantuan odds against something is effectively exploited by casinos and our provincial lotteries to great effect!!


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

My apologies rgray, for employing anthropomorphisms and colloquialism to paint a picture of viral drift rather than the actual molecular mechanisms. I assumed everyone knew viruses lacked a brain.

RNA viruses have an intrinsic rate of mutation that is orders of magnitude greater than DNA-based organisms. Their reverse transcriptases are error-prone and the few proteins that are exposed on the infected cell surface are continuously shuffled as a consequence. If viruses were stable, our immune systems would be easily able to eradicate them. As it stands, there is a constant battle raging (I don't mean with guns and soldiers.....).


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

used to be jwoodget said:


> My apologies rgray, for employing anthropomorphisms and colloquialism to paint a picture of viral drift rather than the actual molecular mechanisms. I assumed everyone knew viruses lacked a brain.


I perhaps also owe an apology. My jumping on you like that was, admittedly, something of a knee jerk response that occurs pretty much every time I see evolution portrayed inaccurately. Please feel free to blame a certain subset of my students who seem to willfully refuse to grasp the fundamentals of evolution. As I tell them, they are going to have to understand evolution if they are going to get anywhere in psychology - like a passing grade in "psych101" - or any of the other life sciences. They don't have to 'believe' (that's between them and whatever special friend mythology they might subscribe to), but they do have to understand.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

bryanc said:


> Recombination does occur between viruses. All it takes is for more than one viral genome to be present in a given cell at a time.


Virus Porn! That's a new category for Larry Flynt to exploit... beejacon


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

EvanPitts said:


> Virus Porn!


Virus porn video...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Evan, avian flu hasn't run its course... I totally agree with the lack of effective communication.


They totally dropped the ball on communication. I am one who usually does get a flu shot - but with all of the hype and false information floating around, I think I'll skip it. I remember the last time they had Swine Flu, and the vaccine killed far more people than the Flu ever did. And communication is muddled, because on one hand, they are saying that they are just starting to ship the vaccine - while in Hamilton, vaccinations have been going on for two weeks. So it is suspicious, simply because either Hamilton has a special source of vaccine, or Hamilton is the guinea pig...



> The public health agencies treat people as though they are children and this raises suspicion.


I've been suspicious for a few years, ever since they dropped the ball on Legionella in Hamilton, where hundreds were ending up with that filthy disease, all caused by filthy conditions in various city owned buildings, but they spent months trying to find "another source", because all of us should know that sealed city buildings that are filthy, and where janitorial cash was spent on steak dinners while trying to get the NHL or some Games to town. Public Health never stood up and called the City out on it, nor did they blame the airlines for operating the filthy, unclean aircraft that shipped us SARS...



> Of course, people's inability to understand gargantuan odds against something is effectively exploited by casinos and our provincial lotteries to great effect!!


No, I think people would entirely get the message, if the message was consistent. As I said, I am one that normally gets a flu shot, but I will probably skip it this year because I am too suspicious about what is going on. It's not a lack of understanding, it is a lack of trust, and I just don't trust the scumbags who have lied to us all too often. Time to show them the door, and bring in some real public health people, people with actual qualifications and training who can make informed decisions based on scientific evidenc Their work is shoddy beyond belief, much like the shoddy work that the Red Cross did when they gave thousands of people the HIV in this country, which was a sad case where no one was punished for malfeasance.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

rgray said:


> Virus porn video...


Now only if they could make that explicit... beejacon


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

rgray, as a teacher evolutionary principles, I tip my hat to you. There are some parallels in the way the public perceives vaccination and their understanding of evolution, except evolution has been recognized as a direct threat by certain (but not all) religious organizations who are actively attempting to disprove the theory. There may be an anti-vaccination group, but it is less organized and built primarily of sceptics of governmental authority. It's an entertaining debate (at least for people who are not the subject of anti-evolution abuse) because it's illuminating to compare fossilized records, direct observation of sub-speciation and dynamic selection of the fittest examples of threatened species to arguments based on literal meaning of religious texts and the argument that life is just too complex to be explain to us without invoking a super-being. Species extinction is a loss to diversity and to the richness of our planet, but its somewhat ironic that "intelligent" design by human behaviour has outstripped the capacity of evolution to allow sufficient adaptation to the changing habitats.

Keep up the good work!


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

I firmly believe every one needs to think this one out on their own. 

For me it comes down to trusting my own immune system more than I trust Big Fartma. A lot of this has to do with the way they were promoting fear and massive vaccination plans long before they had a clue as to what this particular strain was likely to do. Now they are looking at older folks as a main priority even though everything we have been told says that those under 25 are likely to be hit the hardest.

However if I had a couple of kids at home my attitude might be completely different.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

The news media has a lot to answer for here. They seem to use swine flu as a filler so that there is some inaccurate an poorly (if at all) researched BS pretty much every day. I wouldn't be surprised if there were a measurable increase in clinical paranoia in the population at large over all of this - ironic in that higher stress levels are a risk factor for these kinds of opportunistic infections. A particular target of my rage in the matter is that idiot and utter embarrassment to science and medicine, the moronic Dr. Gupta on CNN who seems more concerned about face time with the camera and clothes than he does with the veracity of the fear-mongering he participates in. The man sends me into a purple fit every time I see him.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> tptptptp
> 
> Absolutely the biggest load of crap. People can and do get sick, they can die, all from the flu vaccine. Duh.
> 
> And the last time I had a vaccine for the flu I was strong and healthy and then I was wiped out for three months. I used to have some allergies, five years after stopping the flu vaccinations all of them are completely gone.


The risks of serious complications from *any* vaccine are less than one in a million. Your case and that of the tragic girl in the video is anecdotal and likely coincidental. You have no proof it had anything to do with the vaccine just like I have no proof it was not. It is an unfortunate correlation which is meaningless in the context of the tens of millions of vaccinations.

The chances of severe complications of the flu itself are orders of magnitude higher and easily proven compared to the risk of vaccination. Those are the medical facts but I am fully aware that those facts are meaningless to someone who has convinced themselves otherwise.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Screw this. Why I am trying to defend vaccination to people who reply by simply calling BS? Get the shot if you want to avoid infection of yourself or your family or your colleagues. Avoid it if you'd rather take the risk. You'll probably be OK and you'll never know if you passed on the virus to anyone else in any case. Life is far too short to waste time on such ignorance.

After all, vaccination hasn't saved millions of lives. It was all a fantasy.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Screw this. Why I am trying to defend vaccination to people who reply by simply calling BS? Get the shot if you want to avoid infection of yourself or your family or your colleagues. Avoid it if you'd rather take the risk. You'll probably be OK and you'll never know if you passed on the virus to anyone else in any case. Life is far too short to waste time on such ignorance.
> 
> After all, vaccination hasn't saved millions of lives. It was all a fantasy.


Sorry to see the frustration ubjw, but for the record, I think what you have done and this in other threads is important work and I for one thank you for doing so.

If you only changed the minds of a few people, you have done well. Keep the faith and please don't stop trying to educate folks because of the actions of a limited few.

Well done. :clap:


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> And the last time I had a vaccine for the flu I was strong and healthy and then I was wiped out for three months. I used to have some allergies, five years after stopping the flu vaccinations all of them are completely gone.


That's like saying "the other say I opened my umbrella outside and then it started raining. Therefore, it's clear that opening umbrellas causes rain to fall." 

Take heart, used to be j, it's clear that some are far more interested in what they *feel* to be true rather than doing a little research and forming an informed opinion based on what is *known* to be true. 

That said, much of the public's reluctance to get the shot points to a fascinating trait in human behaviour. People tend to be far more fearful of having to live with the consequences of acting (i.e., getting the shot and getting sick) than they are of leaving things to chance (i.e., not getting the shot and getting sick). 

There's a risk in all things in life, but it is a mistake to assume we can somehow mitigate the risk of getting sick by not taking every precaution that's available to us. The reality is that this thing *is* here and it's not to be treated lightly. And I say that as someone who can count on one hand the number of times he's been flat-out sick with anything. 

I generally put my trust in the advice of those who spend their entire careers devoted to public health. Far more than in pseudoscience and anecdotal mishmash of rumours on the internet, that's for certain.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Screw this. Why I am trying to defend vaccination to people who reply by simply calling BS? Get the shot if you want to avoid infection of yourself or your family or your colleagues. Avoid it if you'd rather take the risk. You'll probably be OK and you'll never know if you passed on the virus to anyone else in any case. Life is far too short to waste time on such ignorance.
> 
> After all, vaccination hasn't saved millions of lives. It was all a fantasy.


Please don't take it personally. Your input has been valuable. As I said from the beginning I've been unsure over the whole thing and you've given me a great deal of helpful information. In fact, one of the key reasons I started this thread is because of your posts from the past.

FWIW.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> How soon it has been forgotten that soldiers that were sent to Iraq and had to take a series of inoculations before they went. Gulf War Syndrome.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Do you form an informed opinion on things as complex as public health other than by just googling for youtube videos?

Let's look at what the Centre for Disease Control had to say in 2005 in hindsight about the '76 swine flu. I'm picking out highlights but I encourage you to read the full report: 

"Shortly after the national campaign began, 3 elderly persons died after receiving the vaccine in the same clinic. Although investigations found no evidence that the vaccine and deaths were causally related, press frenzy was so intense it drew a televised rebuke from Walter Cronkite for sensationalizing coincidental happenings."​
"...effective communication from scientifically qualified persons was lacking, and the perception prevailed that the program was motivated by politics rather than science."​
And...

"All policy decisions entail risks and benefits: risks or benefits to the decision maker; risks or benefits to those affected by the decision. In 1976, the federal government wisely opted to put protection of the public first."​
Unless you've been living in a cave for the past year, you will know that that, unlike the '76 experience, we *do* have a pandemic on our hands. We *do* have people getting sick and who have died from this. We do have 30 years under our collective belt in producing and testing flu vaccines. And unlike '76, we do have a public health system at the head of this thing this time, along with a pandemic response plan, rather than elected officials making it up as they go along.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

(( p g )) said:


> That said, much of the public's reluctance to get the shot points to a fascinating trait in human behaviour. People tend to be far more fearful of having to live with the consequences of acting (i.e., getting the shot and getting sick) than they are of leaving things to chance (i.e., not getting the shot and getting sick).


I don't think it has anything to do with any fear of the consequences of acting; but rather, just being witness to conflicting messages that are coming out of various sources. The root of the problem is that the Public Health industry has been fanning the flames for a few years now, pledging that if they didn't get special funding, that the Flu would go on the rampage and kill people like the Black Death did.

I don't want to belittle the dangers of Influenza, but rather, we have been subjected to fear mongering attitudes over the past few years. It was supposed to be the Avian Flu that was going to wipe humanity out, then some other stuff that was going to do the job, now it is Swine Flu. I think people are right to be suspicious, it really looks like a tale of crying wolf far too often.

I am surprised that no one chimed in about the experience right here in Hamilton, where inexplicable, we have had Swine Flu shots for two weeks, far in advance of last week's approval. It is something hard to deny, that Hamilton, of all places, has some large supply of vaccine that was unavailable anywhere else. So I would like to know where they got it, and whether it has ever been tested before or not.

I do not think people are opposed to vaccine, but rather, have learned to distrust any public officials, and any announcement, especially those announcements that are made in conflict with other announcements. It just looks like one big fight within the Public Health industry, just like the pathetic fight over rusted out reactors at Chalk River, and the pathetic pleas from hospital CEOs for massive funds to built new taj mahals, when they have proven that they can't handle what they currently have.



> The reality is that this thing *is* here and it's not to be treated lightly.


Is this really the thing that *is* - or is it another lark that will fizzle, only to be replaced by new fears and terror operations by the same decadent officials next year?



> I generally put my trust in the advice of those who spend their entire careers devoted to public health.


And that is good for you, if you feel the need to use dangerous, untested vaccines that are tainted with fillers in order to reap greater profit margins for big drug companies. I think I'll wait until they bring out the real vaccines, and perhaps wait to see which flu, if any, will be *the* flu. And then when this fiasco is over, maybe our system can go back to the old ways, where people have proper vaccines for the diseases that people will really get, rather than this lark of Swine Flu that came out of nowhere. I just can't trust these officials because they have done absolutely nothing about Avian Flu, which they promised would be the next Spanish Flu and kill billions. The officials are about as reliable as Environment Canada, which regularly mangles the weather forecasts beyond belief.

Once again, we need a major change to yet other mangled Government system. Seems to me the US does a far better job, because they have the CDC where they do these things, and they seem to have an excellent grasp on such things, whereas the Canadian system is little more than a perpetuation of fear mongering with the only goal is to stuff more cash into the pockets of corrupt and stupid officials.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

I just want to add my thanks to UTBJW and others who've done what they can here to combat ignorance and irrational fear.

I know how frustrating and thankless that task can be.

Be aware of the fact that there are many who read, but do no post, and some who post but do not think. The former benefit from the well-articulated science you've posted here.

Cheers


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

(( p g )) said:


> "...effective communication from scientifically qualified persons was lacking, and the perception prevailed that the program was motivated by politics rather than science."


I think it says it right there - the entire failing and indictment of our current Public Health system as we are watching it right now.



> Unless you've been living in a cave for the past year, you will know that that, unlike the '76 experience, we *do* have a pandemic on our hands.


It's a pandemic because they set the bar so low, that pretty much any illness is a pandemic. Plus, in '76, Swine Flu was predicted to be the next Spanish Flu and kill billions - the same fear mongering that has been going on now. What is worse is that we have massive weakness at the top, with no one stepping forward and saying anything authoritative. Rather, we get to try to figure things out on our own, from various conflicting sources, and it all smells so rotten all around.

To me, a pandemic is something big, with hundreds of thousands or millions getting it and things being wiped out like crazy - rather than what amounts to be a brief illness that people get over quickly with no long term consequences. The sad thing is that "Swine Flu" has become a catchword for all of those things that have failed in our system, like the fact our hospitals are filthy and disease ridden because of decades of cuts to janitorial staff, or that the mangy people that work in those places do not bother to wash their hands or practice any personal hygiene. People may have the flu, but it is the filth in the hospitals that do the killing, all with diseases that would be eradicated if they simply cleaned once in a while.



> We do have 30 years under our collective belt in producing and testing flu vaccines. And unlike '76, we do have a public health system at the head of this thing this time, along with a pandemic response plan, rather than elected officials making it up as they go along.


First is, most people will not ever get the real vaccine, just some cheap garbage filled with adjuvants that is nothing more than pap used to calm people's anxieties even though they are not protected at all from the real viruses, and to shovel more cash into big drug companies.

Second, from all of the stuff that has been happening over the past few weeks, I think we had a better system when we had elected politicians making decisions, because at least they cared about their voters; rather than the crass Jaguar drivers that are raking big money but accomplishing zero, and putting out one of the worst message campaigns this side of the Meth Clinic in Burlington...


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

EvanPitts said:


> It's a pandemic because they set the bar so low, that pretty much any illness is a pandemic. Plus, in '76, Swine Flu was predicted to be the next Spanish Flu and kill billions - the same fear mongering that has been going on now. What is worse is that we have massive weakness at the top, with no one stepping forward and saying anything authoritative. Rather, we get to try to figure things out on our own, from various conflicting sources, and it all smells so rotten all around.
> 
> To me, a pandemic is something big, with hundreds of thousands or millions getting it and things being wiped out like crazy - rather than what amounts to be a brief illness that people get over quickly with no long term consequences. The sad thing is that "Swine Flu" has become a catchword for all of those things that have failed in our system, like the fact our hospitals are filthy and disease ridden because of decades of cuts to janitorial staff, or that the mangy people that work in those places do not bother to wash their hands or practice any personal hygiene. People may have the flu, but it is the filth in the hospitals that do the killing, all with diseases that would be eradicated if they simply cleaned once in a while.
> 
> ...


Evan, there are now millions of people with H1N1 in just the USA. At what point would you declare it a pandemic? This is a disease of very big and very small numbers. Many will get sick, very few will die. But some will die (and are). Those deaths are preventable - for the sake of a jab in the arm. It would be utterly irresponsible not to offer people access to a vaccine. The Canadian vaccine is a real vaccine. The adjuvant amplifies the effectiveness of the antigen so that less is needed to be in the shot and therefore more shots can be produced. In the US they are not using adjuvant and they are running out of supplies. The two vaccines are equivalent in effectiveness.

Let me switch the question. How many people should be allowed to die before a vaccine against a disease is warranted? 10? 100? 1000? 10,000? 100,000?


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

GOOD NEWS: Tv news over the noon hour is reporting wait times of up to three hours for people getting the H1N1 shot due to massive lineups at every location in Edmonton. Pictures of the lines show people of every age group and parents with toddlers in tow. Way to go Alberta! :clap:


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

SINC said:


> GOOD NEWS: Tv news over the noon hour is reporting wait times of up to three hours for people getting the H1N1 shot due to massive lineups at every location in Edmonton. Pictures of the lines show people of every age group and parents with toddlers in tow. Way to go Alberta! :clap:


No wait times here in that only health care workers are able to get the shots this week. Other people are slated for their shots comes next week. I may not be first in line, but I shall be there comes day one.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

EvanPitts said:


> I think it says it right there - the entire failing and indictment of our current Public Health system as we are watching it right now.


Uh. No. Read it again. They were talking about 1976 and about how political decisions were being made ahead of public health. It's easy to just sit back and rant and rave at how everyone gets a big fail all the time. But look more closely at the problem at hand and entertain the possibility that maybe...just maybe your assumptions are flawed.


>>It's a pandemic because they set the bar so low, that pretty much any illness is a pandemic. 

Again, it's not about what you feel to be true. I invite you to look up the definition of pandemic. 


>>What is worse is that we have massive weakness at the top, with no one stepping forward and saying anything authoritative. 

Authoritative? Like what? Like "take precautions, get vaccinated." Like say declaring a national emergency, and doing so on the advice of people who have devoted their careers to tracking these things? What am I missing? 

>>Rather, we get to try to figure things out on our own, from various conflicting sources, and it all smells so rotten all around.

That's actually the real problem here. Too many people decide that they would rather trust the rumours, anecdotes or their own paranoid ideas than to look at the issue rationally based on facts. 

>>First is, most people will not ever get the real vaccine, just some cheap garbage filled with adjuvants that is nothing more than pap used to calm people's anxieties even though they are not protected at all from the real viruses, and to shovel more cash into big drug companies.

Do you actually read what you write? Seriously. Stop. This is embarrassing.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Evan, there are now millions of people with H1N1 in just the USA. At what point would you declare it a pandemic?


Millions would be a pandemic - but all they have been talking about is like 80 people or so, similar number to SARS and stuff like that.



> The Canadian vaccine is a real vaccine. The adjuvant amplifies the effectiveness of the antigen so that less is needed to be in the shot and therefore more shots can be produced. In the US they are not using adjuvant and they are running out of supplies. The two vaccines are equivalent in effectiveness.


You see, you are doing more in this Forum to explain things than the crowd of people that are making a half million a year that are supposed to explain these things. From what they said, we had the fake vaccine, and that the real thing was only for selected elites. But then, their message is just a big mess, but I don't expect any action to be taken to correct this since no scandals are ever acted upon in this day and age.



> Let me switch the question. How many people should be allowed to die before a vaccine against a disease is warranted? 10? 100? 1000? 10,000? 100,000?


One can pick any number, but when we get down to it, millions and upon millions die of diseases like Cholera, Malaria, Yellow Fever, etc. and we don't act on any of them because why should we spend money on fixing diseases in other countries. It's nothing more than racism. Now, they will do something about Flu simply because it is something that can affect the elites, the crowd that drives the big Jaguars around to their exclusive clubs and such.

We have witnessed a real lack of professionalism once again in the highest offices of power, from false pronouncements to shipping body bags to Reserves, all done in the crass pursuit of the almighty dollar, and done by people that have no credibility, no ability, and with no responsibility or accountability to the people of this nation.

No one should be dying of diseases like this - but then, no one should hold an office of authority that can not communicate or make decisions of importance. They dropped the ball, and people are entirely confused because we simply can not trust them because they are the ones that ran this off the rails. It is one big train wreck, one of a series that has made a mockery of our faux health care system.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

EvanPitts said:


> Millions would be a pandemic - but all they have been talking about is like 80 people or so, similar number to SARS and stuff like that.


You are talking about deaths (in Canada). Pandemics don't have to kill millions to bring society to its knees. If 20% of people contracted the flu at the same time, modern society would be highly disrupted. That is what the vaccine strategy is supposed to prevent - along with drastic reductions in mortality in the rare cases that progress. If 20% of people have flu, another 20% have to look after them. The ERs and ICUs overflow and medical staff are reassigned. Elective surgeries (hip replacements, fracture repair, etc.) are put on hold. The economic cost of even a few weeks of this disruption is enormous, nevermind the human side of the suffering.

If we do not put more effort into preventing disease, we will become bankrupt. We spend more than 40c of every dollar of tax on healthcare and we are getting older as a society. If we continue to only treat the outcome of disease instead of preventing it, our taxes will have to increase or other expenditures decrease. Unfortunately, intelligent people seem to prefer the idea of complex surgery or interventions over taking preventative measures. Vaccines are a significant component of prevention, along with healthy lifestyles and diagnostic testing for early stage disease (much more effective in treatment outcomes). Unfortunately for us, we seem to place a lot more faith (and dollars) in what we can see (expensive MRI machines, shiny operating theatres) than what we can't (the countless people who would have gotten sick but for preventative initiatives). Of course, we need to treat people who are sick, but we'll be in a better position to do so if we can reduce the numbers of these.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

(( p g )) said:


> Uh. No. Read it again. They were talking about 1976 and about how political decisions were being made ahead of public health.


And I am saying the exact thing has happened this time, with massive confusion at the top issuing confusing statements all around. All the people were left with is fear, and the sense that no one was doing their job.



> It's easy to just sit back and rant and rave at how everyone gets a big fail all the time.


It entirely seems to be something that Government keeps migrating back to - the big FAIL. They were the ones who took the ball and carried it, and who dropped it. It wasn't the doctors, since the doctors remain as confused as the citizen on the street. The root of all of these failings is the lack of accountability. The people at the top feast on riches, while the people at the bottom that have to do the work are left without any goals or reason.



> Again, it's not about what you feel to be true. I invite you to look up the definition of pandemic.


Sure, by that definition, there are a whole heap of diseases that kill millions every year, but we simply do nothing at all about them. When all is said and done, people will continue to die of cholera, yellow fever, dengue fever, malaria, and other potent killers, but will never be part of any effort because it will simply not be profitable for big drug concerns. Look, they keep feeding us the same pap, with a slightly different name each year; but at the same time, have done nothing to eradicate major killers like HIV and AIDS simply because of racism, bigorty and hatred. The reason why the Flu is being attended to is because it affects the white supremacists within the elite classes - while the other diseases are for the blacks, asians, and "degenerates".

If the point of coming out with terms like "pandemic" is to motivate people to action, then we failed because we have not taken any substantive steps to work towards solutions for the real killers.



> Authoritative? Like what? Like "take precautions, get vaccinated." Like say declaring a national emergency, and doing so on the advice of people who have devoted their careers to tracking these things? What am I missing?


You are missing the fact that none of these "authorities" ever bothered to say "take precautions, get vaccinated". Rather, they were glad handling for money by invoking terror, then spreading conflicting messages while staking out their turf. It's sure good to see the same confusion is still being spread, and the same lack of coordination or action still apparent. From what the public can see, these people had no devotion, and their "careers" were nothing more than a sham in order to score a new BMW and the giant house in elite neighbourhoods, where they can hob-nob with their golf club buddies while eating caviar on their toast for breakfast.



> That's actually the real problem here. Too many people decide that they would rather trust the rumours, anecdotes or their own paranoid ideas than to look at the issue rationally based on facts.


Some might, but the vast majority have had to rely on rumours and anecdotes because no one can trust any of these turkeys after their scandalous malfeasance. Listening to even one scrap of their "message" is about as comforting as being someone who got a blood transfusion in the 80's and got to listen to the Red Cross saying that the blood was thoroughly tested and is entirely safe. And that is about as smart as listening to that Walkerton dude tell everyone that the water was pure and entirely safe to drink. We can no longer trust public officials - none of them are ever held accountable for anything.



> This is embarrassing.


It's embarrassing perhaps for yourself, who is prepared to make a decision based on the pap the Government is shoveling out. When the doctors around here are basically telling people that they don't know, and they have no information or no idea of what is going down, I think it is foolish to go out and follow the instructions of someone who is clearly not accountable to anyone. At least if the doctor gives me bad information, I can sue him like crazy for malpractice. No one has ever sued the Government for malpractice.

It really is time to remove Government from the equation. Our system is a festering cesspool of stupidity. Health care should be turned over to professionals, like doctors, and be set up in order to provide actual health care, rather than being another colossal boondoggle operated by the anti-Midas touch of the Government.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

In this case the definition of pandemic was changed as the mortality rate was far too low to qualify by the older definitions.

Another note. Guillam Barre is the rarest complication of flu vaccines and is around a 1 in a million chance. However there are many other complications up to and including death so picking the Guillam Barre number as the total complication figure is totally irresponsible and one more reason for my distrust of Big Pharma.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

used to be jwoodget said:


> You are talking about deaths (in Canada). Pandemics don't have to kill millions to bring society to its knees.


My point is that we have what amounts to be a small handful of deaths caused by Flu, and we go around and hype it up as some pandemic; while millions of people in the world are dying of other diseased, never hyped up, and nothing that we bother to do anything about. It's time to call out our racist policies when it comes to these things, at least if we are going to get all uppity about flu as a pandemic, while diseases that kill millions every year are relegated to the basement because our greedy corporations can't rake in billions in profits from them.

If we think three days of the flu is going to affect us, then why do we deny any aid or assistance to the vast tracts of Africa, where virulent diseases are wiping out societies and peoples at an alarming pace?



> If we do not put more effort into preventing disease, we will become bankrupt.


Preventing disease is not profitable for the big corporates, nor is it profitable for the big-wigs that run their hospital empires, or the LHINs that remove heath care from millions in order to hand over more money to the elites that operate large hospital empires.



> We spend more than 40c of every dollar of tax on healthcare and we are getting older as a society.


We also squander an ever increasing proportion of that money on waste. Of course, when this money is tight, we still deny any reason for free enterprise to be involved in health care, claiming that health care should be only operated by the Government. We have seen what happens, with ever increasing money being wasted on executives and management, with massive layoffs of the staff that actually does the work, and without any actual competition that would deliver any kind of efficiency.

Once again, we have seen exactly what we have been wasting our money on - a scandal ridden Public Health service, operated by empire builders that are at war with each other, without any consistent message, and leaving a huge amount of doubt on the part of millions who are plain fed up with Government mismanagement and the mangling of something that is actually important into something unidentifiable.



> Unfortunately for us, we seem to place a lot more faith (and dollars) in what we can see (expensive MRI machines, shiny operating theatres) than what we can't (the countless people who would have gotten sick but for preventative initiatives). Of course, we need to treat people who are sick, but we'll be in a better position to do so if we can reduce the numbers of these.


And we could, and could easily, but those things are unpalatable for the elites because reforms would inconvenience them.

Our idea if "health care" runs off the tracks at the earliest ages: when physical education is sidelines or trivialized in grade school; when it is administered by dull barbarians in high school who prefer to spent their time pretending they were once jocks of some importance, but are reduced to mocking the students, and teaching the student that it is a waste of time. We also have a society by which everything has to be "fast", and that we can not get a grasp on the need to integrate employment into neighbourhoods so that people are forced to drive everywhere.

Our most basic health care need is to have sufficient exercise, and that is something that our society frowns down on. Our other problem is that we can not seem to provide appropriate health care in a timely manner - something already ruled on by the Supreme Court, and something that all Governments have saw fit to ignore with notwithstanding.

This is the tip of the iceburg - just one program of thousands that were carelessly run off the tracks simply because of the overwhelming need of Government to engage in malfeasance, and to build empires where some elites fight amongst themselves while in the public eye, while the regular doctors who actually have to dole out health care are left out in the cold, as uninformed as the rest of us.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Evan,

You are conflating two different issues. The rampant, preventable disease in the developing world and the pandemic outbreak globally. While we should be doing a lot more for the former, our selfish nature tends to look after ourselves first. But I do think its unfair to downplay the real misery inflicted by the H1N1 flu. It is not a mere inconvenience when hospital ICUs cannot take in severely ill people who have suffered a devastating accident at work or home.

I have more faith in public health. I work in health research but fully admit that more lives have been saved by clean sanitation policies and the sewer system than will ever be saved by a drug or procedure. We take this for granted. Indeed, if public health in the developing world was better resourced and managed, cholera and dehydration could easily be eradicated. 

I disagree that prevention is not profitable. It can be but the recipients and payers don't value a procedure prevented versus a procedure performed. If we assigned value to a preventative measure that included the costs saved by removing the need to spend the money on an expensive consequence of the disease occurring, there would be far more emphasis and attention paid to it. But it isn't going to happen for a variety of reasons. The safety requirement for treating healthy people compared to sick people is too high. People are willing to take risks to get healthy, not to stay healthy. Moreover, when you are treating so many healthy people, if they contract anything at all, they'll blame it on the prophylactic. We can see this perfectly in the vaccine debate. The relative risks are minuscule but anecdotal side-affects are amplified. Furthermore, our system is based on pay for procedure/performance. If I prevent the need for 50 liver transplants over 10 years, who pays me and when?

So, the status quo will prevail. Instead of embracing and investing in prevention, we'll continue to pour money into stop-gap, heroic interventions that buy people a few more years or months until we de-list so many procedures that we become similar to the US and people will need to pay for their therapies.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

bryanc said:


> I just want to add my thanks to UTBJW and others who've done what they can here to combat ignorance and irrational fear.
> 
> I know how frustrating and thankless that task can be.
> 
> ...


Agreed. +1 tho' I did cross swords on one or two points..


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Lemmings running to the end of the cliff...


You do know that that whole lemming schtick was a huge fraud don't you? 

See snopes.com: White Wilderness Lemmings Suicide. Just ol' Walt's camera crew tormenting and killing small animals.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Gerbill (Jul 1, 2003)

I guess I could have outsmarted myself and rationalized not getting vaccinated, but I'd feel pretty stupid just before I died if I got the flu anyway.

I got my swine flu shot this morning, so we'll see what happens. My doctor said to hold off getting the seasonal flu vaccine for a few weeks.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Just a reminder for the ill-informed:

_Epidemic_ and _Pandemic_ are two _different_ words that *mean different things*. Please do not conflate them.

Thanks!


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

*Still Want To Take Your Chances Without Shot?*

*Toronto teens dies; swine flu suspected*

TORONTO — A 13-year-old minor league hockey player from Toronto has died from what could be the H1N1 virus, according to media reports, just days after the death of an Eastern Ontario preteen girl.

Evan Frustaglio was admitted to hospital in Toronto Sunday after falling ill. He died Monday, his father told CityNews.

It is not clear if Frustaglio had any other underlying condition. An investigation continues.

On the weekend, a girl from Eastern Ontario was admitted to hospital in Ottawa and died of the H1N1 flu virus, according to Paul Roumeliotis, medical officer of health for the Eastern Ontario Health Unit.

The girl was admitted to hospital Friday, Roumeliotis said. Sunday morning, he confirmed she had died of a Type A influenza virus, and later Sunday confirmed that H1N1 was the cause of death.

The deaths coincided with the nationwide release of a vaccine for the virus.


Story here.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

used to be jwoodget said:


> The risks of serious complications from *any* vaccine are less than one in a million.


Adverse reactions to flu vaccines are common. Go read the CDC or Mayo Clinic sites. The rates vary from year to year, and between age groups, but between 5% and 12% of flu vaccine recipients experience serious side-effects directly caused by the vaccine. That's a big difference from "one in a million".


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

bsenka said:


> Adverse reactions to flu vaccines are common. Go read the CDC or Mayo Clinic sites. The rates vary from year to year, and between age groups, but between 5% and 12% of flu vaccine recipients experience serious side-effects directly caused by the vaccine. That's a big difference from "one in a million".


I don't know where you're getting your data from. Here's what the CDC has to say:

_"The flu shot: The viruses in the flu shot are killed (inactivated), so you cannot get the flu from a flu shot. Some minor side effects that could occur are:

Soreness, redness, or swelling where the shot was given
Fever (low grade)
Aches
If these problems occur, they begin soon after the shot and usually last 1 to 2 days. Almost all people who receive influenza vaccine have no serious problems from it. However, on rare occasions, flu vaccination can cause serious problems, such as severe allergic reactions."_​
Source

Your choices: 

A) Take a vaccine that has been shown to be effective and which carries the *rare* risk of side-effects (as noted) which *if* they should happen at all will show up within minutes of getting the shot (which is why you have to wait there for a few minutes after getting vaccinated). 

Or

B) Don't get a shot and take your chances on being infected by influenza virus that, unless you were born before 1957, you likely have no immunity against. And unlike the typical flu, this one is proving to be rather effective at killing otherwise healthy young people. They're not just making this up, people...









_H1N1 U.S. Deaths, By Age Group_
Source: CDC

Unless you're advised by your doctor otherwise, or you subscribe to some of the absurd tinfoil hat theories evidenced in this thread, the choice should be an obvious one. 

Is there risk? Sure there is. It's small, but it's there. But the risk of not taking every precaution is greater. That's why it's so important to make an informed choice based on facts and not on gut feeling or conjecture.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

*Where can you get vaccinated?*

Check here...H1N1 Special Edition of the Canadian Healthcare Newsletter


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

I will be lined up along with my daughter for the flu shot as soon as it's available to us. It was a no brainer for me long before a healthy young boy died. I worked in the health care field for 32 years. I've had just about every vaccine available. No side effects other than an occasional sore arm or slight headache. 

My daughter had been on the internet reading the nonsense that's been swirling around about this vaccine. If it wasn't such a serious situation it would be laughable. She had been gullible enough to believe some of the crap and was talking of not getting the shot. Never mind she's in her 30's, I threatened to grab her by the scruff and drag her down to the clinic with me. Thankfully I've talked sense into her and drastic action on my part won't be necessary. She's already had Twinrix vaccine which contains most of the so-called nasties that are supposed to be bad in the flu shot. Many of the tetanus vaccines are also similar. The only difference is the dead virus the vaccine contains. 

This is not an ordinary flu. H1N1 is striking down healthy people in the prime of their lives, not just sickies and old farts. Even though I'm in the age group less likely to get it, I will just in case. It's not just for my own health but also to protect those I love around me. Even if you don't give a damn about your own health think about those who you have contact with. I couldn't live with myself if I became ill then passed it on to someone who later died. 

BTW, H1N1 doesn't care if you're Conservative, Liberal, NDP or a Commie. No discrimination on it's part.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

KC4 said:


> Check here...H1N1 Special Edition of the Canadian Healthcare Newsletter


Interesting. The site leaves out Quebec, PEI, NB, NS and NL. Guess we don't count. :-(


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Dr.G. said:


> Interesting. The site leaves out Quebec, PEI, NB, NS and NL. Guess we don't count. :-(


Yeah - I noticed that too???? Maybe, like Saskatchewan - that info is currently being compiled and built and will be uploaded.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

People are getting their shots here as of yesterday. Strange.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Also try CTV.ca | CTV News, Shows and Sports -- Canadian Television for locations of H1N1 flu shot clinics in your area.

I notice that the Canadian Heathcare Newsletter site is jammed and lagging....may go down with the volume of people trying to access it.

Also just heard some reports of seniors needing assistance in line....Many seniors (we have a couple in our family) simply cannot stand for hours in a lineup....but they are among the highest risk group and should get their vaccinations sooner rather than later. So wait in line with a senior ...or wait for the lineups to die down to a reason level???? Either way it's a risk.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Dr.G. said:


> Interesting. The site leaves out Quebec, PEI, NB, NS and NL. Guess we don't count. :-(


Hah - There we go - try this...FightFlu.ca/H1N1 Flu Virus - Government of Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada

Seems to have them all.


----------



## Voyager (Aug 7, 2005)

Dr.G. said:


> Interesting. The site leaves out Quebec, PEI, NB, NS and NL. Guess we don't count. :-(


In Quebec's case, they have their own website which they have been advertising in the local media. It gives information on the H1N1 virus along with the locations and hours of the vaccination sites. We also received notification of the location of our vaccination site along with the mail today. 

In my area, the site was up and running on Monday, the 26th. My wife and I went this morning. In and out within an hour, including the mandatory 15 minute wait after the shot.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Voyager said:


> In Quebec's case, they have their own website which they have been advertising in the local media. It gives information on the H1N1 virus along with the locations and hours of the vaccination sites. We also received notification of the location of our vaccination site along with the mail today.
> 
> In my area, the site was up and running on Monday, the 26th. My wife and I went this morning. In and out within an hour, including the mandatory 15 minute wait after the shot.


Wow, you are able to get your shots indoors?!? Neat. We stand up outside and they come down the line. XX)


----------



## Voyager (Aug 7, 2005)

Dr.G. said:


> Wow, you are able to get your shots indoors?!? Neat. We stand up outside and they come down the line. XX)


We even get seats! The vaccination site is a former car dealership. You go in, get registered, and, in most cases, are given a number. You take a seat and wait for your number to be called. There is also an area for those with special needs. Altogether, a well organized effort.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Voyager said:


> We even get seats! The vaccination site is a former car dealership. You go in, get registered, and, in most cases, are given a number. You take a seat and wait for your number to be called. There is also an area for those with special needs. Altogether, a well organized effort.


Cool. We line up at the corner of Walk and Don't Walk, and then wait. The line stretches about 6km. The nurses come in a little Smart Car with the windows rolled down. The first car has the nurse who swabs your arm with alcohol, and the next car has the nurse that gives you the shot. That's it.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

Dr.G. said:


> Cool. We line up at the corner of Walk and Don't Walk, and then wait. The line stretches about 6km. The nurses come in a little Smart Car with the windows rolled down. The first car has the nurse who swabs your arm with alcohol, and the next car has the nurse that gives you the shot. That's it.



That's kinda neat...like drive-thru service.

...did you say the line was _6km long_???


----------



## Voyager (Aug 7, 2005)

Dr.G. said:


> Cool. We line up at the corner of Walk and Don't Walk, and then wait. The line stretches about 6km. The nurses come in a little Smart Car with the windows rolled down. The first car has the nurse who swabs your arm with alcohol, and the next car has the nurse that gives you the shot. That's it.


Yes, but Maritimers have always been a hardy bunch. Since I'm not so rugged, I'll take a not so soft chair in a nicely heated building any day.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

bsenka said:


> Adverse reactions to flu vaccines are common. Go read the CDC or Mayo Clinic sites. The rates vary from year to year, and between age groups, but between 5% and 12% of flu vaccine recipients experience serious side-effects directly caused by the vaccine. That's a big difference from "one in a million".


Back from lunch  I guess it all depends on what you term "serious".

From the Mayo Clinic:
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/vaccines/CC00014
Q and A: Swine flu vaccine - MayoClinic.com

From the CDC (this is a superb site for information - the CDC is a giant in pubic health and common sense).
CDC H1N1 Flu | 2009 H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Safety

The 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines are expected to have similar safety profiles as seasonal flu vaccines, which have very good safety track records. Over the years, hundreds of millions of Americans have received seasonal flu vaccines. The most common side effects following flu vaccinations are mild, such as soreness, redness, tenderness or swelling where the shot was given. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will be closely monitoring for any signs that the vaccine is causing unexpected adverse events and we will work with state and local health officials to investigate any unusual events.

It is very difficult to pin down precise numbers because most illnesses that occur within 10 days of the vaccination are due to underlying conditions and are not causally related to the shot. However, proving that disconnection to someone who has experienced such illness is typically futile and they'll be convinced it was the shot that was to blame. It is understandable, but doesn't undermine the actual efficacy and safety of vaccination.

I should correct a previous statement about the effectiveness of the vaccine. The H1N1 vaccine is "only" about 90% effective (in one shot). This is high for a flu vaccine because it was raised against the relevant antigens but it, like all vaccines, depends on the immune system to mount an appropriate response (if only all drugs were that effective.....) and we are swimming in H1N1 in the community so its possible to be exposed before the protection is achieved.

Here's a chart of incidence of influenza-like illness in the US. Note the premature spike in the latest numbers (from two weeks ago). Flu normally comes up in week 50 and later. Here it's higher than seasonal before week 40.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Back from lunch  I guess it all depends on what you term "serious".


Fever, seizures, vomiting, hives, anaphylaxis... I've been there. The side effects of the shot are worse than the flu any day.




> I should correct a previous statement about the effectiveness of the vaccine. The H1N1 vaccine is "only" about 90% effective (in one shot).


Where is the evidence for this claim? I keep reading that the testing has been done, but when challenged to provide the data for randomized, placebo controlled double-blind trials, they'll neither provide the data, nor submit it for peer-review and/or publication.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

So far, after two days of the H1N1 shots being administered across Newfoundland and Labrador, no adverse reactions. We shall see.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

For all the stuff that has been said in this thread, it still stands that those who are in charge of this whole program still haven't come out with one, clear, unified, authoritative message. This kind of poor management and poor communication has simply lead to infinite confusion, as it is apparent from all of the times on the news when they talk to the regular people on the street, who really are confused.

In the middle of it, they are trying to buy some of the real vaccine from Australia, while shelling out the adulterated garbage, again, with poor communication and poor management. This whole thing is yet another farce created by the government and those cling-ons who look to profit large from people's misery. It looks good on them.

Once again, other countries are doing it right, and proper, and people are informed - but not here in good old North America, where political profittering goes before anything else. If it wasn't for threads like this on the Internet, no one would be informed by these donkeys, ever. I have never seen such a bunch of weak people given so much responsibility, other than a typical Chretien Cabinet...


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Things are going well here in NL, with only one clinic reporting a 1 1/2 hour wait. We shall see.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Gerbill (Jul 1, 2003)

chas_m said:


> Just a reminder for the ill-informed:
> 
> _Epidemic_ and _Pandemic_ are two _different_ words that *mean different things*. Please do not conflate them.
> 
> Thanks!


Thank you Mr. Language Person. I think you mean "confuse", not "conflate."


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Gerbill said:


> Thank you Mr. Language Person. I think you mean "confuse", not "conflate."


I'd say score one for chas_m:


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Chas_m is right. "Conflate" is cool.
_________________________________

Well, after a few days' reflection, I'm changing up on my initial plans. Adagio's right! Though I don't fall into the immediate risk profile, I'm going to take the shot as soon as I can. I don't really need much convincing, you see. Though we have no children of our own, I do have a dear old friend who has two very young boys. I see my pal on a regular basis - friday night beers, don't you know - and I wouldn't want to be carrying something that could endanger his family.

I'm of fairly hardy stock and though I can't remember the last time I took a vaccination, I'm going to do it this time out. I don't expect to take it badly, although my wife does - she never does well with these shots.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Bizarre Methods Of Treatment


So sayeth the wiccan bodybuilding occultist.


----------



## Gerbill (Jul 1, 2003)

SINC said:


> I'd say score one for chas_m:


 Oh, really? The built-in dictionary that comes with OS X says:

*conflate |kənˈflāt|*
verb [ trans. ]
combine (two or more texts, ideas, etc.) into one : the urban crisis conflates a number of different economic and social issues.

*confuse |kənˈfyoōz|*
verb [ trans. ]
[...]
• identify wrongly; mistake : a lot of people confuse a stroke with a heart attack | purchasers might confuse the two products.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

re: the whole conflate/confuse debate, I have this to say. Why use a big word when a diminutive one would suffice?


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Saw on the news tonight that a 13 year old boy had died in TO. Everyone seemed surprised even though his is pretty much the highest risk group. 

Not quite sure why this group was not included in the risk groups for the vaccine as death rates so far are much higher for the under 25 set. Sounds like he was showing symptoms before the vaccine was released.

OTH His death is certainly getting far more attention than any of the 1000s of deaths that regular flu causes every year.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

eMacMan said:


> OTH His death is certainly getting far more attention than any of the 1000s of deaths that regular flu causes every year.


That is the real difference between H1N1 and the regular flu, reporting. SARS, Avian Flu, even Listeriosis all were significantly more mild than the fear mongering predicted too, but that didn't stop the media from reporting on every single case to make it appear that things were far worse than they really were.

Take Australia for instance. Their winter is over, their flu season is over, they never even had the vaccine available to them for most of it. They had less than 200 confirmed deaths due to H1N1, which sounds bad until you realize they usually get 2500-3000 deaths due to flu, which means H1N1 all by itself was a remarkable IMPROVEMENT over the regular flu. The media conveniently leaves out that last part, because it's not scary.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Max said:


> Chas_m is right. "Conflate" is cool.
> _________________________________


As I stated too. Thanks Max.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

My chance of contracting Hepatitis is REALLY slim but that didn't stop me from getting my shots. Chances of getting tetanus are very small but I make sure my inoculation is up to date. You younger folks no longer worry about getting polio, measles, mumps, rubella and some of the nasty serious consequences those viruses ravage on the body. My mother didn't need a government agency, and neither did I, to explain and tell me getting vaccinated made sense. There was no internet filled with nonsensical conspiracy theories. No stories about a new world order "out to get us". My only complaint is I wish this shot was available a month ago. 

I hate needles. In fact I've fainted at the sight of one in the past. I'll gladly roll up my sleeve and look the other way. I've had the flu which turned into pneumonia. Given a choice between enduring that again and having a sore arm for a while, my choice is clear. 

I see Toronto has moved up their dates. Good.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Standing in one of those long lineups in Canadian November weather around a bunch of paranoid people.
> 
> Great way to get the flu....
> 
> :lmao: :clap:


Yeah - it's full blown hysteria now, and panic is setting in. Time to sit back, watch, and prepare to say "I told you so" in a few months. So little information is available, and there is so little consistency, that many doctors are still suggesting to hold off. Not even the Public Health people can decide.

Even when the newscasts try to get the real story out, they can't get a straight answer from more than one doctor or "expert" at a time.

What a royal scam, entirely headed up by the clueless and the vainglorious...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Sonal said:


> re: the whole conflate/confuse debate, I have this to say. Why use a big word when a diminutive one would suffice?


Because such commentary adds to the post count - which is, in the end, the holy grail. Same with the endless comments when someone writes MAC.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> I am not a wiccan nor a bodybuilder


Hint: he's going by the look of your avatar... beejacon


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

adagio said:


> My chance of contracting Hepatitis is REALLY slim but that didn't stop me from getting my shots... My mother didn't need a government agency, and neither did I, to explain and tell me getting vaccinated made sense.


However, would you have taken the Hepatitis shot if it was untested, unapproved, and loaded with additives to "stretch the supply? Add to that, would you have taken the shot if various health officials could not decide if it was safe or not, or it is would even work? Would you have taken it if your doctor didn't even know if it was safe, or would even work at all?

That's the difference. The Hepatitis vaccine might have side effects or whatever, but it was actually tested, so all doctors either know or can easily find out such information, so you can make an informed decision.

Swine Flu, on the other hand, is a fiasco because: our agencies are in dissarray and issuing confusing statements; are using untested vaccines that do not meet any of our standards; with "approval" that was much like the "approval" given to the rusted out reactor at Chalk River; and the fact stands that they simply did not bother to inform or educate doctors, many of whom are simply not suggesting it until we get the real vaccine from Australia.

It's not that vaccination doesn't make sense, it is just that we are rolling the dice in a high stakes game, without clear leadership and without any basis in scientific methodology (that is, that we actually test the vaccine first before dishing it out to the masses). Your mother may not have needed a government agency, but she was assured that whatever vaccine was being given was actually safe, approved and would work against the diseases it was targetting. In this case, the government agencies have all issued conflicting statements, and have not got their act together, so no wonder why fear and hysteria has settled in.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

And this is what the media is good for:

Death fuels parents' fears - Canada - Canoe.ca

Cause panic and chaos. :clap:


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

EvanPitts said:


> However, would you have taken the Hepatitis shot if it was untested, unapproved, and loaded with additives to "stretch the supply?


Your Hepatitis vaccine had the same "additives" (adjuvants) and was tested and approved the same way as the H1N1 and every other flu vaccine.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

Evan, check out the ingredients in the hep shots. Guess what they contain....

The flu shot is not untested. It has been used extensively in Europe. Canada did not undergo much of their own testing because of the timeline and necessity of getting it to the front lines ASAP. I don't have any problem with Canada using European guidelines and testing. They are hardly a bunch of third world idiots. 

The reason we along with Europe decided to use the adjunct was to be able to prepare more doses with less. The H1N1 virus proved hard to grow and slow to produce. A decision had to be made early on whether to inoculate everyone or only a few. Health Canada decided it was best to have enough doses for everyone. Another problem we faced was being able to bottle millions of doses in a short period of time. Again decisions were made to go with multi dose vials which require a preservative. This preservative, thimerosal, contains ethyl mercury which clears rapidly from the body vs it's deadly cousin, methyl mercury.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

adagio said:


> The reason we along with Europe decided to use the adjunct was to be able to prepare more doses with less.


This is true, but it's not the only reason. Adjuvants increase the effectiveness of vaccines. By preventing the rapid clearing of the antigen from the body, they provide a longer and stronger stimulation of the immune system. Indeed, if you're using a Mac, you can mouse-over the word "adjuvant", press ctrl-apple-D, and get the definition (the second, noun form, is the one relevant here).

When we make antibodies for use in the lab, we always use adjuvants, regardless of the supply of antigen, because it works better.

Cheers


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Guys, there is no point in trying to convince the flat-earthers like bsenka, Evan and MazterCBlazter. It doesn't matter how many times you explain to them that the H1N1 vaccine is effective, safe and a good preventative strategy. Unless one of their loved ones is one of the rare unlucky people, they will not change their point of view - it is a free conuntry and vaccination is not mandatory. Moreover, there are limited supplies (50 million doses were ordered but there are logistics to deal with) and so the fact they are not in line perhaps will allow others more rapid access to the shot.

Evan is right about the mixed messages from the media (who are there to sell their media..... through attracting eye balls) and the unnecessary confused messages from our officials. There is considerable ignorance all around. (As an aside, Evan, I thought you understood about adjuvant - it is not a filler, it is an amplifier - it is why we will have more effective doses available than in the US - the unadjuvanted vaccine is not "purer" in the sense that the adjuvanted vaccine is "contaminated" - the US vaccine just needs 3X more of the virus antigens than the adjuvanted vaccine and its those antigens that are in very limited supply).

What is important is that people talk about this, debunk the conspiracy theories, etc.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"What is important is that people talk about this, debunk the conspiracy theories, etc. " Good point, Jim. Add to this the importance of actually getting the shot. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

In reply to my claim of 90% efficacy of the H1N1 vaccine:



bsenka said:


> Where is the evidence for this claim? I keep reading that the testing has been done, but when challenged to provide the data for randomized, placebo controlled double-blind trials, they'll neither provide the data, nor submit it for peer-review and/or publication.


Flu Data: H1N1 Vaccine Highly Effective - TIME (Sept 10, 2009)
"In the New England Journal of Medicine on Thursday, researchers in Australia and Britain reported the early findings of their H1N1 vaccine studies. Preliminary data from the Australian trial showed that 21 days after getting one shot, 96% of the 240 trial volunteers ages 18 to 64 generated an impressive amount of antibodies to the virus. The results were "unanticipated," according to the authors; health officials had expected that people would need two doses of the vaccine for full protection because H1N1 is a new flu virus to most of the population."

There are other clinical trial studies with claims of 92-100% protective antibody production in various countries with different populations (I've heard some naysayers even try to claim that it’s a "white man's" vaccine). I have not added up the numbers of tested individuals but they are in the thousands. The primary questions asked by these studies is to test safety and efficacy. 

Trials do take time and many are on-going. If you waited for the results of all trials, the flu wave would have passed and no protection would be afforded (like closing the barn door after the horse has bolted).


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

EvanPitts said:


> Because such commentary adds to the post count - which is, in the end, the holy grail. Same with the endless comments when someone writes MAC.


You missed my point, which was off-topic and minor anyway.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Guys, there is no point in trying to convince the flat-earthers like bsenka, Evan and MazterCBlazter. It doesn't matter how many times you explain to them that the H1N1 vaccine is effective, safe and a good preventative strategy.


I'm not interested in explanations, I want facts. All you are giving are ignorant opinions.

I'm not anti-vaccines at all. My kids' vaccinations are all up to date. I'm against the flu shot in particular, because officials routinely lie about what testing is done, how effective the vaccine is at preventing the flu, and how common the side effects are. They're now lying even more about how serious H1N1 is in particular. I tend not to trust people who lie to me.


----------



## lara (Mar 15, 2009)

bryanc said:


> Your Hepatitis vaccine had the same "additives" (adjuvants) and was tested and approved the same way as the H1N1 and every other flu vaccine.


The adjuvant in the H1N1 vaccine Canada is using (made by Glaxo/Quebec) is AS03. It has never been used in any mass public/commercial vaccine before.

Regular flu vaccines don't have adjuvants.

L


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

bsenka said:


> I'm not interested in explanations, I want facts. All you are giving are ignorant opinions.








used to be jwoodget said:


> In reply to my claim of 90% efficacy of the H1N1 vaccine:
> 
> Flu Data: H1N1 Vaccine Highly Effective - TIME (Sept 10, 2009)
> "In the New England Journal of Medicine on Thursday, researchers in Australia and Britain reported the early findings of their H1N1 vaccine studies. Preliminary data from the Australian trial showed that 21 days after getting one shot, 96% of the 240 trial volunteers ages 18 to 64 generated an impressive amount of antibodies to the virus. The results were "unanticipated," according to the authors; health officials had expected that people would need two doses of the vaccine for full protection because H1N1 is a new flu virus to most of the population."
> ...


This looks an awful lot like a bunch of facts to me.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

Sonal said:


> This looks an awful lot like a bunch of facts to me.


Hardly. It's a Time magazine Op-Ed that never even comes close to actually telling you what it tries to imply that it says. It's full of unsubstantiated claims.

"96% of the 240 trial volunteers ages 18 to 64 generated an impressive amount of antibodies to the virus".

How much is "impressive"? Where does it show that an immediate production of antibodies in reaction to getting a shot results in lower numbers of flu contraction? How long do they last? Where does it explain the design of the trial or the methodologies used? What were the adverse reactions? By what criteria do they believe that only 240 people is anywhere close to a large enough sample to give them any usable statistical data?


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

bsenka said:


> Hardly. It's a Time magazine Op-Ed that never even comes close to actually telling you what it tries to imply that it says. It's full of unsubstantiated claims.
> 
> "96% of the 240 trial volunteers ages 18 to 64 generated an impressive amount of antibodies to the virus".
> 
> How much is "impressive"? Where does it show that an immediate production of antibodies in reaction to getting a shot results in lower numbers of flu contraction? How long do they last? Where does it explain the design of the trial or the methodologies used? What were the adverse reactions? By what criteria do they believe that only 240 people is anywhere close to a large enough sample to give them any usable statistical data?


The Time article quotes the New England Journal of Medicine... if you need further details, why wouldn't you start by searching there?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Except for the fact that the flu vaccine HAS NOT BEEN TESTED. They may have "approved" it, but there were no tests, and the vaccine has not met any of the safety standards or regulations that all vaccines are supposed to go through.

And if "adjuvants" are so great - then why is the government spending large cash to by the real, untainted vaccine from Australia?

Again, it is my point - that the system has completely failed. The message, well, what message? There is no message, except for what we see as a muddle from a variety of "authorities" and "experts" that contradict each other. It is so bad that regular doctors do not know what to think. All of the clinics they are setting up are ad hoc, and the lack of a message has lead the public into a frensy and panic.

When it comes down to it, far more people are going to die just driving to a clinic, because they can't put their cell phones down - and we do nothing at all about that.

So until an actual official steps forth with an actual message, all that you and others say in this thread is simply heresay that feeds the cycle of fear and cynicism.

Hopefully when this is over, we will have judicial hearings to look into the malfeasance that fed this fiasco; though I expect nothing will be done, and these people will continue to score huge money for a job badly done, just like the rest of the government. It's time to get government out of health care - they simply can not do it, no skill, no ability.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

*Why I'm still on the fence...*

Linky.



> Amid growing fears of a possible global flu pandemic, the German government prepared for its mass-vaccination campaign earlier this year by ordering 50 million doses of the Pandemrix vaccine, enough for a double dose for 25 million people, about a third of the population. The vaccine, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, contains an immunity-enhancing chemical compound, known as an adjuvant, whose side effects are not yet entirely known. *Then, after a report was leaked to the German media last week, the Interior Ministry confirmed that it had ordered a different vaccine, Celvapan, for government officials and the military. Celvapan, which is made by U.S. pharmaceutical giant Baxter, does not contain an adjuvant and is believed to have fewer side effects than Pandemrix.*


Emphasis mine.


----------



## medic03 (Aug 2, 2005)

My family has recently asked my opinion on the H1N1 vaccination. As a flu vaccination I have no problem with it. It is the adjuvant that I am concerned about. AS03 contains squalene which is naturally occuring in humans. It is when it is injected that it becomes problematic (it is fine when injested) in fact there are some claims that squalene can actually boost your immune system and act as an anticarcinogenic but and this is the big but(t?) when injected it bypasses the IgA cells and can cause your body to fight against all the squalene in your body - this can cause an autoimmune response like lupus, rheumatoid arthritis... So the adjuvant has the potential to overstimulate your immune system. 
MF59 has been used for many years in Europe (this too has squalene in it). I have read that anywhere from 22 million to 40 million doses have been given over a number of years. The FDA won't approve it MF59 (even though they give it to their military). 
This has lead to sooo much confusion. I want to give my family an informed decision but I am not convinced of the long term effects on the other hand I am a huge believer of mass vaccinations. I agree that it saves lives and prevents disease. 
The Americans have the nasal version of H1N1 vaccination and even though it contains an attenuated (live virus but not active) I would opt for that one if given the choice. I may ask for the unadjuvanted version. This is not an east decision.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

bsenka said:


> i'm not interested in explanations, i want facts. All you are giving are ignorant opinions.
> 
> I'm not anti-vaccines at all. My kids' vaccinations are all up to date. I'm against the flu shot in particular, because officials routinely lie about what testing is done, how effective the vaccine is at preventing the flu, and how common the side effects are. They're now lying even more about how serious h1n1 is in particular. I tend not to trust people who lie to me.


+1


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> This year anyone that dies from flu automatically gets publicized in the media frenzy. Whereas last years deaths no one cared about. People are at far greater risk from many other things no one cares about.


Exactly. No one seems to care that this country had some of the filthiest, deadliest hospitals on the go, and that years have literally flew by without anyone caring. The same people that are trumpeting the massive achievements of the big wigs in charge of the current flu scamdemic, the same people who robbed us of millions of dollars when they cried wolf about Avian Flu - are the ones that remain entirely mum when it comes down to the low standards of sanitation in our hospitals.

Sure, the death of a few children is a tragedy; but what about the endless tragedies of people maimed and killed by the filth in our public institutions. Just one local hospital dished out more death while their CEO ate massive steak dinners on the public dime, than any flu outbreak will ever dish out.

The ignorant and flippant attitudes of the public heath quasi-professionals within our system is grievous, and has lead to a panic - a panic entirely caused by fear mongering, bad planning, and even worse communication. Not only were they "unprepared" - they simply were not in the league.

Scandals like this point to the fact that we need serious whistle-blower protection in this country; because the truth is there, just the people that know the truth live in fear that if they say something against their superiors, they will have their lived ruined by our perverted system.



> It is not at all the same vaccine everywhere. There is a rush to get their goo to the market so they can all cash in before the rush is over. Speed is of the utmost importance so that it can be profiteered from quickly before the public clues in to what is really going on.


Just like all of the other drugs our illustrious drug companies concocted, like Thalidimide, which ruined lives in order to score big profits. We are supposed to have a system of inspection - really, it's a system all based on scientific principles of empirical testing and demonstrating safety, all stuff that was thrown out the door in the mad rush to score big money, and foment terror and panic among the people of this nation.



> I can't wait to cash in on the next load of BS they try to sell the world.


I bet it will be yet some other influenza simply because the elites do not get malaria, yellow fever, dengue fever, cholera, etc. They like to cash in on fear, rather than cash in on something worth cashing in on.

The sad thing about this affair is that it is still a scandal ridden fiasco - they almost had a riot at the local clinic in town yesterday, and they had to call in all kinds of extra cops. Not to mention that in the mad rush, there was a serious accident that maimed people that were so afraid of the flu, they forgot that they can't drive their car through other people's cars.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Screw this. Why I am trying to defend vaccination to people who reply by simply calling BS? Get the shot if you want to avoid infection of yourself or your family or your colleagues. Avoid it if you'd rather take the risk. You'll probably be OK and you'll never know if you passed on the virus to anyone else in any case. Life is far too short to waste time on such ignorance.
> 
> After all, vaccination hasn't saved millions of lives. It was all a fantasy.


UTBJ, I've only got as far in the thread as this post. 

Just wanted to say that so far, I have TREMENDOUSLY enjoyed reading yours and several others post. :clap:

Your point of view and effort posting all the information is greatly appreciated! :clap:


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

ehMax said:


> UTBJ, I've only got as far in the thread as this post.
> 
> Just wanted to say that so far, I have TREMENDOUSLY enjoyed reading yours and several others post. :clap:
> 
> Your point of view and effort posting all the information is greatly appreciated! :clap:


I agree, Mr. Mayor. UTBJ has presented an educated and intelligent point of view on this matter. Accept what he says or not (I do), he has still elevated this discussion to a relevant level.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Lemmings running to the end of the cliff...


MB... I understand you are passionate about your point of view on this debate, but this is getting close to crossing the line.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

FeXL said:


> Linky.
> 
> Emphasis mine.


FeXL - that's a very interesting and disturbing article. The German government should be drawn over the coals for ordering a non-adjuvanted vaccine for politicians. It's unconscionable. It's also likely to have been due to someone in authority believing garbage on the Internet about the dangers of adjuvants and ordering it. In Canada, non-adjuvanted vaccine has been ordered for pregnant women only. This is not because of the adjuvanted vaccine is known to be dangerous to these women, it hasn't been adequately tested on pregnant mothers. This is because, these people are typically not part of any clinical testing. Our docs are recommending our pregnant workers get the adjuvanted vaccine because expected the delay in getting access to the non-adjuvanted vaccine puts them at risk of exposure to the flu and these are the most vulnerable people for H1N1 complications. This sort of political trickery is precisely what fuels the naysayers and results in people not trusting what anyone says. It's shameful. 

Adjuvant is not a "taint" (emphasis on *Evan* - no matter how many times you say it - it doesn't make it true). It amplifies the immune response to the antigen and increases the likelihood of producing neutrilizing antibodies.

I had the adjuvanted shot on Monday.


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

The family and I just received our vaccinations. My wife is starting to get chills and achy, no doubt the body's reaction to fighting the antigens. There is no side effects from my kids yet. My arm is a little sore but that just from the needle itself.

Friends of ours received the vaccination yesterday and they reported that whole family had fevers, but no vomiting etc. They are feeling better today.

These are just normal reactions to any vaccination from what I can tell.


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

BTW, I never thanked you UTBJ for your posts. You certainly helped educate me and my family.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Sonal said:


> The Time article quotes the New England Journal of Medicine... if you need further details, why wouldn't you start by searching there?


Sonal, we clearly do not only have to lead the horse to water, we must insert a pipe down his throat and hook him up to a pump. He'd still likely clench his teeth. However, since there are more open-minded people reading this thread, here are links to two of the articles (one adjuvanted vaccine, the other non-adjuvanted) published on September 10th in the New England Journal of Medicine. There are others since but these are the ones the Time article referred to.

NEJM -- Trial of Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent MF59-Adjuvanted Vaccine -- Preliminary Report
NEJM -- Response after One Dose of a Monovalent Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Vaccine -- Preliminary Report

They are tersely written (no bull).

As to the threat of a repeat of the thalidomide tragedy, vaccines are not new entities. They are the most widely used and tested medical interventions in the world. Moreover, unlike most drugs, they are given to healthy people so the margin of safety is extremely high.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

used to be jwoodget said:


> FeXL - that's a very interesting and disturbing article.


That's what I thought. 

I've never had any issues with standard vaccinations, neither mine or our children's. I've never had a flu shot and my spice & I were talking last night, trying to remember when was the last time I had flu. In the 19 years we've been together, I recall having 2 very mild cases, despite working in either a production environment with hundreds of other workers or being in the front line of a retail environment where hundreds of customers are met on a face to face basis every week.

My spice has occasionally had the flu shot and has occasionally had the flu (although I don't recall that they ever went hand in hand).

We've been debating this amongst ourselves for weeks now, trying to weigh what we feel are the legitimate pros & cons (sifting the wheat from the chaff, as it were). We're still sitting on the fence, undecided. We get to the point where we're almost swayed to get the inoculation and then run across a news article like the one I posted and swing back the other way.

I believe it was bryanc who noted that you need to weigh the odds. I rarely get sick and when I do, it seldom stretches more than a day or two. I feel fairly confident. My spice seems to be somewhat less resistant but is usually healthy. The children? Who knows? They can be fragile as glass and tougher than hell.

I just don't know. Perhaps I'm just making it bigger than it really is. Perhaps not.

However, I do want to thank you for your input. Your posts have been part of the education process.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Load of BS. Things like tetanus and polio were deadly, now eradicated. Get immunized against these? Absolutely. The overblown hyped up hini flu? Waste of time. Less deaths will result from it than the regular flu.
> 
> This year anyone that dies from flu automatically gets publicized in the media frenzy. Whereas last years deaths no one cared about. People are at far greater risk from many other things no one cares about.


'Tis true that the regular seasonal flu kills a lot of people. The seasonal flu vaccines are not as effective due to the best guess predictions required every year. The majority of the deaths are in the elderly and many are preventable. Clearly, society doesn't value the elderly and the media don't see a story. It's very sad but it isn't an argument against the H1N1 vaccine (nor is the fact that you are more likely to die from a traffic accident).

By the way, tetanus has not been eradicated. There are thousands of deaths annually, unfortunately. Only a few of these are in North America, but its still worth getting a shot if you are cut and exposed to soil or water.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

FeXL - you are doing exactly the right thing. Discuss and make up your own mind. The outbreak has been entirely predictable so far - even including the horrible loss of two young children. Those children could only have been saved by access to vaccine three weeks ago. But it had to be tested. Everything is a compromise and when lives are at stake, that just isn't good enough. When we criticise the health profession for snafus and try to second-guess their decisions, we should remember that their advice is measured and based on what they know - which is not everything! That is why it is up to the individual to weigh their options - hopefully giving more weight to facts rather than fiction.


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

used to be jwoodget said:


> 'Tis true that the regular seasonal flu kills a lot of people. The seasonal flu vaccines are not as effective due to the best guess predictions required every year. The majority of the deaths are in the elderly and many are preventable. Clearly, society doesn't value the elderly and the media don't see a story. It's very sad but it isn't an argument against the H1N1 vaccine (nor is the fact that you are more likely to die from a traffic accident).


It also appears that the H1N1 is attacking seemingly healthy young adults and children by targeting the respiratory system and in more recent reports specific organs. This is not your average run of the mill flu.

I for one feel better that I have the vaccination now. And FWIW, I never had a flu shot in my life.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

My concern now isn't about getting the flu shot. I'd already made up my mind ages ago. It's about the distribution. I've checked out the location of clinics in Toronto. There aren't near enough places to go. They certainly need to set up more sites in Toronto. I wish they'd let places like Shopper's give out the shot. Pharmacists in Alberta are allowed, why not here? It would certainly help to alleviate pressure on the other public health clinics. Another problem I see is the clinic opening times. Most folks work. How in the world can they get home, bundle the kids up, take the TTC (because nearly all these flu clinics are in places with next to no parking), and get in and out before 7 PM? Their only option is going during the limited Saturday opening times. People who should be getting vaccinated will take one look at those lines and say forget it. There has to be a better way of going about mass inoculation.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

adagio said:


> My concern now isn't about getting the flu shot. I'd already made up my mind ages ago. It's about the distribution. I've checked out the location of clinics in Toronto. There aren't near enough places to go. They certainly need to set up more sites in Toronto. I wish they'd let places like Shopper's give out the shot. Pharmacists in Alberta are allowed, why not here? It would certainly help to alleviate pressure on the other public health clinics. Another problem I see is the clinic opening times. Most folks work. How in the world can they get home, bundle the kids up, take the TTC (because nearly all these flu clinics are in places with next to no parking), and get in and out before 7 PM? Their only option is going during the limited Saturday opening times. People who should be getting vaccinated will take one look at those lines and say forget it. There has to be a better way of going about mass inoculation.


The main problem isn't the vaccine or the flu - it is the system that goes unchecked and is unaccountable. Too many decisions are being made on an ad hoc basis, quite often because people are both cynical and angry at a situation where, once again, some government agencies go off the rail. Now that it is all borked all around, still no one bothers to step up to the plate to show any leadership.

Next to this thread, the only real information I have heard was on the radio this morning, where they were talking about this whole situation with an actual doctor, who treats actual patients. He expressed many of the things that were my concerns as well, like the fact that people were duped, and that confusion levels are so bad, the regular doctors have no idea what to think.

He also said what I expected, that the massive paperwork that doctors would face if they were dishing out the shots are so overwhelming that they can not do it on a cost recovery basis, so doctors are simply not offering it. It's all about OHIP billing, once again, where lives arte trivialized in order to attain some bureaucratic nirvana.

He also explained how this virus works. It isn't the influenza that is doing the killing, but rather, the cascade of an autoimmune response that fills the lungs up with fluid. He went on to say that if one contracts this flu, treat it like a flu, no problem. But if one has trouble breathing, then that is the time to seek medical attention. So how come the none of the Public Health turkeys in Ottawa or Queens Park could just explain that?

You see, the Flu isn't causing the panic and hysteria - it is the malformed message that lacks consistency or congruity that is the font of that.

As for Adjutants, the jury is out because there is so much conflicting research, and the fact stands that the way adjutants work is poorly understood, and the long term effects are also not understood or quantified. However, some of them are relatively safe - but that does not excuse the medical establishment from their malfeasance, were they should have been putting effort into effective communication (rather than just fanning panic and confusion), with one point man (like the Surgeon-General or the CDC in the US), and should have had ample stock of the real vaccine, since Australia has an ample supply and is now out of their flu season altogether.

Clinics should have been coordinated long ago, you know, planning ahead. This is something the doctor on the radio mentioned, that there is quite a heap of confusion because they have special H1N1 clinics running at the same time as seasonal flu clinics; and that they are not at the same places, and quite often, not even at convenient places. It would have been better if each neighbourhood had a prearranged clinic, where people know where to go, and can avoid panic or lineups. Like Elections! Yes, the politicians already know how to do this. I know, for instance, if an election is coming up, where I will be going to. If it is Municipal, then I am going to the Synagogue, if it is Provincial, the local School, and if Federal, the Unitarian Church. It's been like that for years, is easy-peasy, and no problems and no confusion.

Instead, we had a pack of turkeys all looking like fools on TV, and even when they were called out, they continue to look like fools. For myself, the main information has been from three sources: from this thread, where things were first published by a number of users; from the doctor on the radio this morning, that was clear, easy to understand (and who suggested that it is ok to use the Adjuvated vaccine, but he recommends holding off for the real stuff unless one is in a high risk group), and was clear on solutions as well; and finally, the Wikipedia, that has tons of information on all of these topics.

It's sad when our vastly overpaid authorities can't make things even a quarter as clear or understandable as the Wikipedia...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> If I were to get this flu shot, I would try to get the one that the rich and elite are getting. It may be different from the ones given out at clinics for the masses.


It is different, same with the military that will get the real vaccine.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

> Originally Posted by MazterCBlazter
> If I were to get this flu shot, I would try to get the one that the rich and elite are getting. It may be different from the ones given out at clinics for the masses.





EvanPitts said:


> It is different, same with the military that will get the real vaccine.


You two are not being funny. There is no "real" vaccine other than what is being provided and it is real. Indeed, the only vaccine available now is the adjuvanted vaccine (and we know very well how and why adjuvant works - it's been used for over 50 years to bolster weak immunogens). You can wait till the non-adjuvanted vaccine arrives in about two weeks. That is targeted to pregnant women who want to wait. If you aren't pregnant, you could try faking it, I guess.

The real problem (as noted by adagio) is that the vaccine clinic network looks like it is awful - at least in the GTA. The hospital where I work was giving it to anyone who lined up earlier in the week. Today, they limited it to healthcare staff and people in the risk groups (inc. pregnant women). The reason given for the limitation was that their supply was running low. I think this is also why the clinics are less than optimal. Yet the message to everyone has been "get the shot". Initially, it was tough to persuade people. That is no longer a problem..... What a mess. There will be vaccine available, but this stuff is currently harder to get than an iPhone 3GS was this Summer. Meanwhile, you may have noticed that the virus is currently not limited by supply.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

"Real" vaccine? huh????

Whatever you guys are smoking... pass some on to me.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## shooting_rubber (Mar 22, 2008)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Are there are not many companies making the vaccine, all in a rush to get it to the market?
> 
> Does it come out of several different manufacturing facilities or not?
> 
> If there are, there will be variations.


AFAIK, it is only coming from one company...

"What is Canada's new H1N1 swine flu vaccine called?

The vaccine is being called Arepanrix and is manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline at its facility in Ste. Foy, Que. The vaccine was given official approval by Health Canada on Oct. 16, 2009, and is being recommended to almost all Canadians over the age of six months" (CTV News | Frequently Asked Questions about the swine flu vaccine).

At first I was wary of getting the vaccine. I am 17 years old. I have been reading online and weighing out all of the pros and cons. I have, in the end, decided to get the vaccine.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

The only con's I can see are (in order of importance):

1) It may be a hassle (depending on where you live and how lucky you are WRT lineups).
2) Needles hurt
3) you may get in a car accident on the way to the clinic
4) you may get hit by lightning on the way home
5) you may get killed by a rabid zombie pig before you can get to the clinic
and... by far a distant 6th) there is a remote chance of complications.

So, unless you are a hermit who lives in under a rock where you never have contact with other human beings (or pigs), it's probably worth the effort to get vaccinated.

Cheers


----------



## hhk (May 31, 2006)

I'm going to make a prediction - TDSB will close schools for a couple of weeks. Already, my son's school (private) has about a 25% absentee rate. Plus, they are sending home everyone with even a sniffle. I heard TDSB is at 10%. I'm guessing Humber Valley, where the 13 year old fatality attended, is a ghost town.

I'm not saying it's justified but I think it will happen.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Are there are not many companies making the vaccine, all in a rush to get it to the market?
> Does it come out of several different manufacturing facilities or not?
> If there are, there will be variations.


Yes, there are different companies producing the vaccine for different countries. They are using the same antigens and largely the same methodology. There is one significant difference for the nasally administered vaccine (similar to flu-mist) in that the antigen used in that case is an attenuated, live virus (nasal administration is less efficient). It's attenuation is so drastic that it will not transmit flu. There are other small differences such as the colour and shape of the vial, the origin of the eggs (although they all use the same species of chicken) and the actual names. There may be some variations in production methodology too (which are proprietary but disclosed to the FDA, etc.). All vaccine facilities are inspected and there have been cases where plants have been shut down for failing these inspections. All vaccine is made and distribute from Ste. Foy aside from 200,000 doses of non-adjuvanted vaccine intended for pregnant women that is being procured from Australia.

Since the composition, antigen and process are essentially identical, the trials results are extrapolatable to all sources. DIfferent clinical trials are performed for the adjuvant and non-adjuvant preparations and for the flu-mist. In addition, there are batch-tests for each source for safety (no idea of the details, but these are for tests for potential pyrogen contamination).


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

bryanc said:


> The only con's I can see are (in order of importance):
> 
> 2) Needles hurt
> 
> ...


Got my regular shot today and it did not hurt one little bit. It hasn't hurt in the past 10 years either. I got it from my family doctor who is so good that I never know when the needle is in or out unless I watch and I do. H1N1 is next on Monday for me. 

Anyone afraid of this tiny needle is a sissy. I've had worse mosquito bites.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

used to be jwoodget said:


> ...non-adjuvanted vaccine intended for pregnant women...


I'd also like to add that the non-adjuvanted version of the vaccine is not "better" or more "pure"... we just don't use adjuvants on pregnant women because we don't want pregnant women's immune systems hyped up and attacking all non-self antigens (hint: the embryo, as a genetically different organism, is a source of non-self antigens). So, while it's a good idea to avoid the adjuvant if your pregnant, it's not good to avoid it otherwise.

Cheers


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Personally this thing is getting all blown out of proportion. Really the regular flu probably will take more people than the H1N1, or car accidents, plane crashes, drug overdoses, heart attack .... you get the idea.

However I will be getting both shots [ regular flu and H1N1 ] as I work with ESL students and as a teacher you seem to get as many colds and such as you have pupils.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Sonal, we clearly do not only have to lead the horse to water, we must insert a pipe down his throat and hook him up to a pump. He'd still likely clench his teeth. However, since there are more open-minded people reading this thread, here are links to two of the articles (one adjuvanted vaccine, the other non-adjuvanted) published on September 10th in the New England Journal of Medicine. There are others since but these are the ones the Time article referred to.
> 
> NEJM -- Trial of Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent MF59-Adjuvanted Vaccine -- Preliminary Report
> NEJM -- Response after One Dose of a Monovalent Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Vaccine -- Preliminary Report
> ...


Did you even read them? They are nothing but bull. Very small sample sizes, very short duration, preliminary findings, *no randomized double-blind placebo controlled testing*, summary filled with weasel words such as "likely to" and "may". 


You want people to stop calling BS, stop spreading it.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

MACinist said:


> And this is what the media is good for:
> 
> Death fuels parents' fears - Canada - Canoe.ca
> 
> Cause panic and chaos. :clap:


And if you have other non-H1N1 related health issues, you will have to go to the back of the line..

Sick Kids ER seeing double the usual number - Canada - Canoe.ca

All from this one article. Get your damn flu shots people! And prevent the crippling of public health facilities caused by media fear mongering.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

What's amazing to me is that the media has been pounding the Big Pharma drum for several months. So the vaccine is released and Calgary has 5 clinics available to handle the load. Assuming the typical Canadian 50-50 split, that works out to 100,000+ people per clinic. Math is pretty simple and our Premier is surprised they couldn't handle the load.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


> I went to see my pharmacist friend, with the printed copies and pictures of the documentation of what happened with the last flu shot, plus printouts of a few things mentioned here and some other things I found online.
> 
> He did convince me that I would be safe, he forwarded some stuff to my GP, and I now have the direct emergency line of my GP and my Pharmacy guy just in case I do get a reaction.
> 
> ...


Good for you, MCB. If something happens, we will be with you. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

Glad to hear, MCB. I hope you don't have any complications this time.

If only I could convince my dear friend to get his shot.... it's his call though.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Way to go MCB! :clap:


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Dr.G. said:


> Good for you, MCB. If something happens, we will be with you. Paix, mon ami.


+1:clap::clap:


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Wife got H1N1 shot today (Early than rest of Kitchener area) as she works at a hospital. 
She always gets the flu shot working at the hospital, but H1N1 is still optional. She said its amazing how much different views there are, even among nurses. 

I think the Canadian Government is doing a lousy job of getting proper information out there. 

I am taking kids to the first clinic that is open next week in the area. Hoping line isn't too crazy, but I'm not afraid of lines.  That's what iPhones and iPods are for.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

ehMax said:


> I think the Canadian Government is doing a lousy job of getting proper information out there. .


I agree, they are really overhyping the hysteria, grossly overstating the risks, and putting far too much false confidence in vaccinations.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

*Government of Canada H1N1 Flu Vaccine Information*

*Government of Canada H1N1 Flu Vaccine Information*

*Backgrounder: Vaccine Myths*

The most effective way to protect yourself and your loved ones from flu viruses, including the H1N1 flu virus, is to get immunized.

It is important to know what is myth and what is fact. The following are among the more common myths surrounding flu vaccines, including both the seasonal and the H1N1 flu vaccines.

*Myth 1: Vaccines don't work.*
Fact 1: It is true that when there is an outbreak of a disease, some people who have been immunized get sick. This leads to the idea that vaccines don't work. Because each individual is different, about 10 to 15 per cent of people vaccinated will not develop immunity to the disease. Nevertheless, immunization reduces the risk of severe disease. In the case of the H1N1 flu virus, since very few people are immune, it is predicted that without interventions like a vaccine and antivirals, close to 25 to 35 per cent of the population could become ill over the period of a few months. Immunization is the most effective way to prevent illness and to reduce the risk of transmitting the flu to those around you. 

*Myth 2: There are many serious side effects from vaccines.*
Fact 2: We acknowledge that there are concerns with respect to immunization. There are some risks association with flu vaccine, but the potential risk for serious adverse events, like Guillan-Barré Syndrome, is low.

For regular seasonal influenza, about 5 to 10 percent of the population will get sick and on average about 4000 people die every year. The risks of serious side effects from the flu are far greater than the risk of experiencing an adverse event after receiving the flu shot. The risk of suffering Guillan-Barré as a complication from the flu is greater than the risk of getting it as a reaction to the flu shot.

Vaccines are among the safest tools of modern medicine. In Canada, serious side effects from the flu vaccine occur very rarely – about one for every million shots distributed. The vast majority of side effects from vaccines are minor and temporary, like a sore arm or mild fever. These are much less severe than influenza infection, and last for a much shorter time. No long-term effects have been associated with any vaccine currently in use.

*Myth 3: Because the H1N1 flu vaccine is new, it is untested and unsafe.*
Fact 3: Careful research into the safety of any vaccine is done prior to its widespread use. The requirements for vaccines approved for sale in Canada are stringent. Every vaccine lot is safety-tested by the manufacturer and by the Biologics and Genetic Therapies Directorate at Health Canada. Health Canada will review all available test results, including international data, to ensure the vaccine is safe and effective before it is authorized for use in Canada. The dangers of vaccine-preventable diseases are much greater than the risk from a serious reaction to a vaccine.

The use of an adjuvanted vaccine is not new. The adjuvant used in the H1N1 flu vaccine although new in Canada, has been widely used safely in Europe in other vaccines. This adjuvant has already been evaluated by Health Canada, and no safety concerns have been found.

*Myth 4: Taking the regular flu shot puts me at risk of becoming very ill with H1N1*
Fact 4: Preliminary findings from some Canadian studies indicate that those healthy adults that tested positive for H1N1 were twice as likely to have received seasonal vaccine. More research is needed to establish whether or not there is a causal relationship between these factors. What is important is that there is no association with receiving seasonal vaccine and experiencing serious illness from H1N1.

Studies in Canada and the U.S. have shown that there appears to be no increased risk of severe disease from the H1N1 flu virus among people who received seasonal flu shots. Studies in the U.S., Australia and Britain have not shown an association between the seasonal flu shot and getting the H1N1 flu virus. 

*Myth 5: The influenza vaccine can give you influenza.*
Fact 5: The influenza vaccine cannot give you influenza. The influenza vaccine contains dead influenza viruses and they cannot cause infection.

*Myth 6: Getting an influenza vaccine every year overwhelms and weakens the immune system.*
Fact 6: The influenza vaccine gives you a high level of immunity to the virus. People who get the influenza vaccine every year are better protected against influenza than those who do not get it.

*Myth 7: The influenza vaccine contains thimerosal (mercury), which is harmful, especially for young children.*
Fact 7: The amount of thimerosal used in the influenza vaccine is very small and has not been shown to cause any harm. Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization (which includes recognized experts in the fields of paediatrics, infectious diseases, immunology, medical microbiology, internal medicine and public health) has reviewed the latest science and concluded, "there is no legitimate safety reason to avoid the use of thimerosal-containing products for children or older individuals." The vaccines that Canadian children and adults receive are safe.

*Myth 8: Pregnant women should not get the influenza vaccine.*
Fact 8: The influenza vaccine is safe during pregnancy. Being immunized is the best way to protect yourself and those around you, including your unborn infant. It is also safe for babies to breastfeed after mothers receive the influenza vaccine.

Although women who are pregnant are not more likely to get the H1N1 flu virus, they are more likely to suffer complications if they do get infected. This is particularly true in the second and third trimester of the pregnancy.

If you have any questions about getting an influenza shot during your pregnancy, speak with your doctor or health care provider.

*Myth 9: My child got the influenza vaccine (flu shot) last year so there is no need to give him the shot again. He is still protected against the virus.*
Fact 9: It is important for children over the age of six months to be immunized every year to make sure their body forms antibodies against the most common strains of influenza viruses circulating that year. Because the flu viruses may change from year to year, the vaccine is updated annually, so your child should get the flu shot every year.

These are only a few of many myths circulating about immunization and the influenza vaccine (regular seasonal flu and H1N1). When seeking information on such vital issue as your health, it is important to refer to official sources such as Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada, and your provincial and territorial departments of health.

You can access current, updated information through FightFlu.ca/H1N1 Flu Virus - Government of Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada or by calling toll-free 1 800 O-Canada (1-800-622-6232).


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

bsenka said:


> Did you even read them? They are nothing but bull. Very small sample sizes, very short duration, preliminary findings, *no randomized double-blind placebo controlled testing*, summary filled with weasel words such as "likely to" and "may".
> 
> You want people to stop calling BS, stop spreading it.


bsenka, I give in with you. You are clearly incapable of understanding scientific process, precision or rationale. Of course I read them and understood them. Please enjoy your life and wonder at the amazing things in the world that just happen by magic.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

This fiasco is proof that we need to abolish the Public Health Agency Of Canada; and really, it is entirely proof that we need the rights to proper representation, and the right to have accountability. This thing is now a full blown panic, with cops shutting streets off - and still they say nothing except to stoke the panic even further through inaction. The radio this morning is entirely filled with a mass of confused people looking for answers, and at least in Hamilton, we are lucky to have the second in command at our public health (no idea where the overpaid head has disappeared to, probably in hiding after the Legionella Scandal, in which she dropped the ball like Bill Buckner did). This guy actually had his clues all in one place, and explains it all.

I still think it is terrible that regular people have to depend on threads in the Forums, the Wikipedia, and perhaps the luck of driving though Hamilton with the radio on to hear the real news from the small handful of doctors that seem to have it all together - because we are not getting any of that from our Federalis.

Where is King Harpo in the middle of this mess, out coiffing his hair, or is he just learning how to fiddle?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I was at my family physician's office yesterday to get my flu shots. I did get the regular shot, but not the H1N1. The doc informed me that Alberta Health would not ship him any serum.

I don't get it. They have thousands and thousands lined up at only four locations in Edmonton and a thousand a day at the one here in our city of 60,000 but they won't give it to clinics when it is clinics who administer the bulk of the regular flu shots and could do them simultaneously? I now have to go stand in line to get the second shot and that is pee poor management indeed.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

^^^
All I can say is that it is a case of a broken bureaucracy at work. Most doctors offices around here are not doling it out, and have refused to because of the massive amounts of paperwork involved for each patient - something like 20 minutes of work for a clerk for each shot. But the same requirements are leading most doctors to not doling out the regular flu shot as well. That leaves people with few options: either line up for hours at some filthy, unhygenic location and participate in the struggles of the panic; or go without.

I think I'll skip the panic - and I'll go in a week or so when they get the real vaccine in from Australia - as that is the recommendation that my doctor has made.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

EvanPitts said:


> I think I'll skip the panic - and I'll go in a week or so when they get the real vaccine in from Australia - as that is the recommendation that my doctor has made.


Your doctor's name, it's not Dr. Nick by any chance?


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

used to be jwoodget said:


> bsenka, I give in with you. You are clearly incapable of understanding scientific process, precision or rationale. Of scourse I read thenm and uderstood them. Please enjoy your life and wonder at the amazing things in the world that just happen by magic.


I perfectly understand the scientific process, and it's actual science I want to see. You are the one taking unmitigated bull-crap as dogma. It's precisely because I refuse to take things on faith and insist on actual science that I don't believe the ridiculous claims public health agencies are telling us.

After Vioxx, Fen-phen, Baycol, etc, etc, we certainly should be at least a little skeptical when a pharmaceutical company tells us one of their products has been tested and found safe/effective.

After Avian Flu, West Nile, SARS, etc, etc, we certainly should be at least a little skeptical when a public health agency tells us we are all in danger.

There is far too much scare-mongering, and far too many declarations of absolute certainty for any discerning person to just take what they are being told at face value. Anyone who believes the propaganda about H1N1 and the associated vaccine(s) is incredibly naive.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

chasMac said:


> Your doctor's name, it's not Dr. Nick by any chance?


No.

My doctor recommended the non-adulterated vaccine for me, so when it comes in, that is what I'll get. I see no reason to be part of the panic because even if I don't bother with the shot, I had the flu last year so I probably won't get it again. Plus, I take the usual steps, like washing my hands, etc. Most of this could be curbed if people just washed their hands once in a while. It is much like when they studied filth years ago, and found the filtiest place in the Hospital was the tie the doctor wears, and the mints at the restaurant counter has way more urine than the bathroom...


----------



## MLeh (Dec 23, 2005)

I find this whole debate interesting, because of the panic (same root as pandemic interestingly enough) that is apparently infecting people far more quickly than the virus itself.

I guess I'm in a fairly unique position in that there is no choice for me (having reactions to egg-propagated inoculations makes this a 'no' for me without debate), but I'm watching all the emotional actions and reactions with a sense of wonder.

First, there is a limited supply of the vaccine right now. So, perhaps people who AREN'T in the high risk groups shouldn't be queueing up for a shot right now.

So ... QUIT PANICKING.

It's the flu. Apparently it's a pretty bad flu, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. But MOST people will survive. There are certain groups who are at higher risk of complications - Pregnant women, people UNDER 65 with chronic conditions - who should get the vaccine first.

Everyone else - practice the same things you should be practising even when there isn't some new flu virus running around: stay home if you're sick, increase your 'personal space' if you're not. Wash your hands. Don't share utensils or drinking bottles. Stay away from buffets. Carry some clean kleenex and give it to someone who's sneezing or coughing when you suggest that they go home.

Learn a little patience. What an impatient society we live in ...


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

EvanPitts said:


> No.
> 
> My doctor recommended the non-adulterated vaccine for me, so when it comes in, that is what I'll get. I see no reason to be part of the panic because even if I don't bother with the shot, I had the flu last year so I probably won't get it again. Plus, I take the usual steps, like washing my hands, etc. Most of this could be curbed if people just washed their hands once in a while. It is much like when they studied filth years ago, and found the filtiest place in the Hospital was the tie the doctor wears, and the mints at the restaurant counter has way more urine than the bathroom...


Just teasin'. Whatever puts one's mind at ease is the way to go.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

I haven't seen anyone in this thread panicking. I have for the most part read legitimate questions and seen answers. I also think some criticism of the way it's being handled and the distribution process itself is warranted from the federal level right down to the local health authorities.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

MLeh said:


> First, there is a limited supply of the vaccine right now. So, perhaps people who AREN'T in the high risk groups shouldn't be queueing up for a shot right now.


That's apparently been the problem here in Alberta: the clinics aren't turning anyone away. I dare say, it strikes me as somewhat selfish that 30 year old healthy singles are queueing in line for the shot. Perhaps they might justify it to themselves that by getting vaccinated they reduce the chance of passing on the virus (though I think in the majority of these cases they are just concerned with their own health). Better to wait and leave their spot for someone truly in an at-risk group.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

chasMac said:


> Just teasin'. Whatever puts one's mind at ease is the way to go.


I tend to agree - but I have a high level of suspicions about what is going on in the offices of Government. But then, that is my status quo, because it is a rare day that the Government does something that can be considered adequate... beejacon


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

bsenka said:


> I perfectly understand the scientific process, and it's actual science I want to see. You are the one taking unmitigated bull-crap as dogma. It's precisely because I refuse to take things on faith and insist on actual science that I don't believe the ridiculous claims public health agencies are telling us.
> 
> After Vioxx, Fen-phen, Baycol, etc, etc, we certainly should be at least a little skeptical when a pharmaceutical company tells us one of their products has been tested and found safe/effective.
> 
> ...


If you perfectly understand the scientific process why do you rely on conjecture and twisting of words and meanings? Science doesn't provide unequivocal answers. Its all relative weighting. Scientists and physicians use language that is precise and techniques that are rigorous but not miraculous. No one can predict the future but we can mitigate adverse consequences. There is nothing wrong with being sceptical and we should use open minds and question what we are being told - always. But you repeatedly fail to counter my cited information with evidence-based arguments of your own. Your reliance instead on ad hominum attacks says it all.

As it happens, it looks like events have overtaken rational evidence in any case. It is ironic that the death of two children has lead to mass line-ups because these children could not have been protected unless they'd gotten the vaccine two weeks before it was available. The public health officials cannot cope - after mounting a multi-million dollar ad campaign for people to get a shot that they cannot provide. This is a horrible failure because it serves the critics. Fear is a powerful motivator and, unfortunately, it is often misplaced. It is essential to earn public confidence because the next pandemic may encounter an utterly indifferent population due to the mistakes made.

I hope that the next few days will see better organization and logistics so that the vaccine gets into arms rather than sitting uselessly in fridges.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

adagio said:


> I haven't seen anyone in this thread panicking. I have for the most part read legitimate questions and seen answers. I also think some criticism of the way it's being handled and the distribution process itself is warranted from the federal level right down to the local health authorities.


Exactly. Those that have access to Forums can get things sorted out quickly. But the panic is with the regular folk who are not on this thread, or do not have scientific knowledge, or live in an area where the information has not been competently put forth. It is a bad situation, and for the second day in a row, they had to call the cops out in this city to keep rioters at bay. Things turned ugly in Oakville, where they had to close entire streets down because of the disruptions. It's about a big of a panic as the stuff that went down at The Mandarin last Christmas.

None of this ever needed to happen - but we have seen what happens when overpaid bureaucrats are put into decision making situations.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> If I get sick for a year again like I did years ago and my allergies and skin rashes come back from this I will not be a happy camper.


MCB, please share your experience with the flu shot here. I think such information will be useful to others who are contemplating getting the vaccination. My experience was a sore arm for two days (like a deep bruise). It was only painful to the touch and it dissipated after two days. But as I'm a protagonist of the shot, I think sceptics might rather hear from you.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

EvanPitts said:


> Exactly. Those that have access to Forums can get things sorted out quickly. But the panic is with the regular folk who are not on this thread, or do not have scientific knowledge, or live in an area where the information has not been competently put forth. It is a bad situation, and for the second day in a row, they had to call the cops out in this city to keep rioters at bay. Things turned ugly in Oakville, where they had to close entire streets down because of the disruptions. It's about a big of a panic as the stuff that went down at The Mandarin last Christmas.
> 
> None of this ever needed to happen - but we have seen what happens when overpaid bureaucrats are put into decision making situations.


Yes, but that's Oakville  You Hamiltonians are much more civilized....

I am not sure what the advice should be in terms of lining up. I assumed that the freaking 50 million vaccine shots were available since that was what was being ballyhooed by our politicians. Clearly, they are not since we are now being told that only 2-3 million doses are being delivered per week, nationally. My hospital gave 3500 shots in 3 days. To anyone. Now it's restricted to staff. The slow roll out in Ontario (only two clinics are open today in the GTA for high risk groups - only 10 or so from the weekend) suggests to me that demand has massively outstripped supply and its being dripped out. Some regions seem much better organized than others. This isn't rocket science.... Drop the advertising. Spend the money to get the vaccine to where its needed.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

chasMac said:


> That's apparently been the problem here in Alberta: the clinics aren't turning anyone away. I dare say, it strikes me as somewhat selfish that 30 year old healthy singles are queueing in line for the shot.


Actually the risk of death is much higher than usual in the so called normally safe group that is young men and particularly young women.

Those that chose not to get the vaccine need to be very aware of the possibility of pneumonia as a possibly fatal complication to any flu. The vaccine for this is well proven and failing that be prepared to seek immediate attention if breathing issues develop.


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

SINC said:


> I don't get it. They have thousands and thousands lined up at only four locations in Edmonton and a thousand a day at the one here in our city of 60,000 but they won't give it to clinics when it is clinics who administer the bulk of the regular flu shots and could do them simultaneously? I now have to go stand in line to get the second shot and that is pee poor management indeed.


Where we live it was great. I phoned last week to book an appointment which was yesterday at 9:10 for the entire family. We were in and out in about 30 - 45 minutes.

It wasn't a perfect system, a lot of confusion from the staff on how to operate the new program for the vaccine, but from what I have seen on the news and from reports here it was better than the rest of Canada.

Booking appointments seems like a no brainer to me. Saves the long line ups.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

eMacMan said:


> Actually the risk of death is much higher than usual in the so called normally safe group that is young men and particularly young women.


I have heard this too. Perhaps this 'safe group' is more susceptible to H1N1 than a usual flu, however we are consistently told by the public service messages and media reports that it is still the very young and elderly who are most at risk, and that the traditionally 'healthier' group ought to remain patient and yield their spots to the aforementioned. From reports, the majority of victims do appear to be over 50, and usually with a pre-existing condition. The last 3 to succumb here in Alberta were all over 50.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Drop the advertising. Spend the money to get the vaccine to where its needed.


I was struck by that thought too yesterday while passing by the long queue of people waiting to get their shot. Granted, it's not as if we've had lots of pandemics to help work out the bugs of a mass-vaccination campaign, but I don't think anyone at this point really needs more public-service ads about the importance of coughing into your sleeve.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> So far no bad reactions. Just a sore spot on the arm from the shot. Nothing else.


Cool. Three of my colleagues reported in today with flu symptoms. They hadn't gotten shots yet - but even if they had, I doubt they'd have generated protection in time.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I dropped by the only H1N1 flu shot clinic in our city today to take a look at day four. A guy who was getting his shot when I was there at 2:30 p.m., had been in line since 8:00 a.m. this morning, a 6 1/2 hour wait. I think I will wait another week before I try again. The line up was still very long and it was obvious many would not get to be done today.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Our clinics to the general public open up tomorrow. Sadly, there are only 30,000 doses for our province until next week, when we get another 30,000 doses. At that rate, we will have enough for the whole province .......... by Groundhog Day ............. give or take about 4 weeks.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Wow! My sister-in-law took my Mother-in-law to the clinic with the reputation for the fastest moving line today. My MIL cannot stand for very long and sister was lucky enough to find a chair near the front of the line for my mom to sit. So the plan was for Mom to wait while sister went to the back of the line and when the lineup reached Mom, Mom could rise to join it and hopefully it would be fairly quick from that point.

Well sis said she walked down the long hall, and walked outside and walked down the block and around the corner and walked....until she finally got to the end of the line. After about fifteen minutes the line had moved about 5 feet. At that rate, she knew she wasn't going to get in today and there was no sense for Mom to sit in a chair for what could be hours and hours ...which actually wouldn't work for longer than 4-5 hours anyways because she's a diabetic and needs to eat on a regular basis...so, we'll have to try again at a later date. 

Why can't the health care system expedite some vaccine to doctors for their highest risk patients?..at least the ones that are too frail to stand in line?


----------



## Gerbill (Jul 1, 2003)

I must be living right. I went to see my doctor early Monday morning about a prescription renewal. He said I fell into the initial priority group, and asked me if I wanted an H1N1 shot. I said sure, so I got it then and there. No waiting.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

Several cases of serious adverse reactions here in Winnipeg, and they've only been giving the shot for a few days. The niece of one of my co-workers had an immediate reaction so bad that they rushed her to hospital. They haven't released her yet, or really been able to tell the family very much.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

The hospital I work at in the GTA has given over 4,000 shots so far this and there have been no reports of adverse reactions aside from sore arms and muscle aches. Several people have reported they have flu-like symptoms but we'd expect that since there is widespread community spread and it takes a week or so to generate immunity.

Post links to the news bsenka. Those are potentially important cases.

By the way, here's an interesting article in Wired dealing with the impact of anti-vaccination campaigns:
An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All | Magazine


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Listening to CKUA radio this morning I heard reports of rampant line jumping resulting in minor (mostly verbal) skirmishes here in Calgary. Wow. No wonder the back of the line barely moved for my sister. People have been asking that a "take a number" system be implemented. 

I was hoping that the lineups would quickly dissipate, but the news also reported that we should expect the line-ups to worsen over the next few weeks because the general vaccine supplies will tighten a little because suppliers are being asked to manufacture only the non-adjuvant form for pregnant women for the next little while - perhaps until that "market" is saturated.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

^
Kind of odd, I think: when the gov expected that only moderate numbers of people would show up, we had enough vaccine for double the population (60 million doses I believe they said). Now that participation is "better than expected", there is a shortage. 

I believe not enough is being done to ensure that children, the elderly and the sick are a priority.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

50 million doses were ordered but whoever it was in Ottawa who announced that number failed to point out that production is "only" 2 million or so a week. The non-advuvanted vaccine for pregnant mothers is being shipped in from an Australian manufacturer so will not directly dent the Canadian production of adjuvanted vaccine in St. Foy (it may have an indirect effect on distribution).

Part of the problem is that physicians can't get the vaccine to give to their highest risk patients because it is only available in 500 dose lots which require a large refrigerator for storage (which many do not have). These big packs are now being broken down into smaller lots but its another example of poor planning.

Why aren't we using the federal/provincial voting infrastructure? One day, 10 million votes. Rhetorical question - we don't have enough vaccine to give out.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

Just to clear up some misconceptions. 

Firstly, the Federal government has contracted to purchase 50-60 million doses ONCE IT HAS BEEN MANUFACTURED. The company making the flu shot only recently got the go ahead to start manufacturing. The vials could not be filled until the product had been approved. It takes time in the vial filling process. I've read they are going full tilt 24/7. They can't fill any faster. 

The product is shipped to each province based on residency numbers. Healthcare in Canada is a provincial matter. It's up to the provincial officials to decide distribution to the local health authorities. Obviously some areas seem to have better planning than others. I give Toronto a big fat "F". You'd think after SARS they'd have some plan in place. Obviously not and heads should roll. I suspect there were too many over educated dimwits with zero common sense involved. I suppose a few of them read suggestions from the public on the news comment boards and have finally installed a numbering system.

I do have a few questions. Why aren't schools targeted and have mass inoculations in school? Kids are the worst carriers of every kind of virus. If you nail them you could slow down the spread of the flu. How about nursing homes? The idea of making old and frail people stand in a long line-up is revolting.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## lara (Mar 15, 2009)

adagio said:


> I give Toronto a big fat "F". You'd think after SARS they'd have some plan in place. Obviously not and heads should roll.


Do you think heads rolled after the SARS debacle? You think heads will roll after this one? Nope and nope.

L


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Found the ingredients list for the Canadian vaccine. 

Besides the afore mentioned adjuvant it also contains some amount of formaldehyde.

For me this now becomes a no-brainer as I have had reactions to vaccines with formaldehyde or formalin in the past. From the sounds of MCBs previous reactions he possibly shares this sensitivity along with a lot of other people.

Actually a common ingredient in vaccines but AKAIK it is not used as a preservative. Formaldehyde and formalin are generally used to kill the active virus and removing them completely does require additional time and expense.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Formaldehyde is noted as being present in trace amounts. You will be exposed to far more formaldehyde from smoking one quarter of a cigarette or being in a smoky room for 10 mins.

The site with all of the composition of matter, product information, efficacy, etc. of the Canadian adjuvanted vaccine is here:
Product Information Leaflet Arepanrix™ H1N1 AS03-Adjuvanted H1N1 Pandemic Influenza Vaccine


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Formaldehyde is noted as being present in trace amounts. You will be exposed to far more formaldehyde from smoking one quarter of a cigarette or being in a smoky room for 10 mins.
> 
> The site with al of the composition of matter, product information, efficacy, etc. of the Canadian adjuvanted vaccine is here:
> Product Information Leaflet Arepanrix™ H1N1 AS03-Adjuvanted H1N1 Pandemic Influenza Vaccine


Or from some shampoos. I avoid all three of those things for that very reason. (Shampoos with Formalin not shampoos in general.)

Also it is being injected directly into the blood stream. Any one with a sensitivity to Formaldehyde or Formalin needs to be aware that there is at least some chance of a reaction. 

As near as I can find out the Aussie vaccine is not only adjuvant free but contains no Formaldehyde or Formalin, so anyone who is aware of a sensitivity and wishes to be vaccinated should look into getting that one instead.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> So far so good on my end. Lucky my pharmacist chemist friend got me in line with something better than what the general public is getting. He said that stuff people are lining up for he wouldn't touch himself nor give it to his friends and family. He got his special supply in and I'm sure glad to have this connection at this point in time. He told me he remembers how I was one of the healthiest people he knew before my last flu shot fiasco, and the rash that I had all over my body for months and the extreme fatigue I endured.


What do you mean "something better"? There are only 2 types of vaccine that are/will be available in Canada.

1. Adjuvanted vaccine from GlaxoSmithKline Canada (Arepanrix) - the only shot being dispensed in Canada currently.
2. Non-adjuvanted vaccine - from CSL in Australia, not available for a week and when it arrives it will be targeted at pregnant women who choose not to get the adjuvanted vaccine.

There are non-adjuvanted vaccines produced in the US but these are not available in Canada. You can buy or volunteer for them in the US if available, where, like here, supplies are very low.

Why did you have to insert the comment about this friend disparaging the available vaccine? How did he get his special supply? What is the name of the elixir he dosed you with? Gee MCB, you got the shot, have no adverse reactions and now give this rationale that its because you got some secret potion from a "pharmacist chemist". The rest of us are presumably idiots for lining up to get injected with government-funded poison. Way to go for your credibility.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Uh-huh!?! Perhaps you could actually answer my queries directly?


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Because you blow off all the other things that have been pointed out and you only want to hear what you want to hear.


MCB, seriously? All I can hear is your echo. I called you out on this because, yet again, you appear to be deliberately spreading innuendo with nothing to back it up (aside from mysterious black market drug trades). Whatever floats your boat, I guess. What is your "special" vaccine called? Isn't that an easy one to answer?

bsenka wrote about significant adverse reactions in Winnipeg but there's been zero reports of that anywhere in Canada, let alone Winnipeg. Perhaps there is a conspiracy among the press? If bsenka is right, this information should be out there and I'd imagine there is at least one reporter who'd see the value in checking it out. Heck, it might be the only way to quell the lines and panic now that next weeks supplies are reduced by 800,000 doses in Ontario alone.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Got my shot today ............... after a 6 hour wait. Still, while things were hectic because of the huge lines of people, it was orderly and there was no panic. Just a long, long wait. So, I am done for this year.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

So far, NL has had no adverse reactions to the shot yet.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

The only immediate adverse reactions in Ontario have been from people in response to being turned away from the clinics when they were overwhelmed with demand for the vaccine.

Glad to hear that NL has things together in this case (compared to the breast cancer misdiagnosis).


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

used to be jwoodget said:


> The only immediate adverse reactions in Ontario have been from people in response to being turned away from the clinics when they were overwhelmed with demand for the vaccine.
> 
> Glad to hear that NL has things together in this case (compared to the breast cancer misdiagnosis).


Sadly, there is no adjuvant vaccines here yet, so pregnant women are stressed. As well, our supply will run out by Sunday morning.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


> That's the whole thing, I really was expecting a lot of immediate bad reactions to the hini shot, and they don't seem to be happening. Which is a pleasant surprise.


True. My arm is not sore .... yet ...... and I was amazed at how easy the shot was. I am a real baby when it comes to shots. :-(


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

That's what Tamiflu is for. Like McB, the only time in the past ten years that I got sick with the flu was a month after I got vaccinated against the flu. No thanks.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

dona83 said:


> That's what Tamiflu is for. Like McB, the only time in the past ten years that I got sick with the flu was a month after I got vaccinated against the flu. No thanks.


To be completely fair it is extremely unlikely that a flu shot could cause the flu. However there is ample evidence that it is not always effective in preventing the flue. Time will tell how effective the H1N1 vaccine really is.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

All influenza viruses are highly mutagenic ... every so many replications, there is a mutation. This may appear as a new variant that your immune system does not recognize immediately ... it will recognize it eventually; the infection triggers the recognition and your body goes about producing antibodies.

But, a fast replicating influenza is dangerous because it works so quickly. You are better off being immunized than not, because you have a chance to attack the infection as soon as it arrives, not a few hours later. We really are talking about a few hours, by the way.

Normally a "regular" vaccine is prepared 6 or more months before flu season arrives; they have to guess which variety will be most prevalent come November. Sometimes they get it wrong, because the flu virus has mutated, which it is pretty much guaranteed to do. But, even if you end up with the "wrong" vaccine, at least you won't get the less common variety. Every little bit helps.

The H1N1 vaccine is fairly well targeted to the actual virus. But, the more people get sick, the more mutation happens, and the more likely a different strain will emerge that the vaccine is ineffective on. So, we want people to be vaccinated, so that any infection is lessened, which means fewer virus mutations occur, and there is a better chance of reducing infecting others.

While your body is fighting the flu, it's ability to fight off other infections is lessened. It's these secondary infections that usually kill people; if you have, perhaps, some tooth decay, but your body has been doing a good job battling any minor infection, getting the flu will stop it's ability to deal with the pre-existing infection.

That could lead to a brain infection, which is life-threatening. That is just one example; but it's a illustrative one; it broadly describes how influenza kills otherwise reasonably healthy people, and it succinctly describes why the flu is dangerous to those already ill or whom have compromised immune systems.

Children have relatively immature immune systems; they just haven't been around long enough to be exposed to many bugs, which is how the immune system learns what to attack. If they were not breast fed long enough after birth, their immune systems are probably less strong than even the other children around them.

As you grow older, your immune system naturally becomes less effective.

If someone has a suppressed immune system, such as children and the elderly, or someone who is already battling a bacterial or viral infection, the risk is amplified; less sever flu infections can overwhelm the immune system more quickly, and again, a manageable infection can become life threatening much more quickly than with healthy adults.

Generally healthy people should become immunized to prevent those around them from being infected as much as they may be without an immunization program in place.

The truth is, with all flu vaccines in the past, those most likely to be susceptible are rarely vaccinated to any large extent, for various reasons (eg mobility). By far the most likely people to voluntarily vaccinate are healthy adults of working age; they have the ability to get themselves to the clinic without help; they are more active; they are aware; they watch the news, they talk over coffee.

Overall there is very little measurable benefit to the health of these healthy people. Where there is measurable benefit, though, is amongst the most vulnerable, even those, in fact especially those, who are not vaccinated.

It is healthy adults who agree to take the vaccine who are responsible for any benefit vaccination has on overall mortality in the general population; their vaccinations reduce the likelihood of infecting other, more vulnerable people, with whom they interact, since they are the caregivers, family members, and chauffeurs of the vulnerable.

If you are healthy and an adult, you should get vaccinated. Never mind whether you get a little weezy from the shot; it ain't about you.


----------



## gwillikers (Jun 19, 2003)

Good post Gord.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

gordguide said:


> All influenza viruses are highly mutagenic ... every so many replications, there is a mutation. This may appear as a new variant that your immune system does not recognize immediately ... it will recognize it eventually; the infection triggers the recognition and your body goes about producing antibodies.
> 
> But, a fast replicating influenza is dangerous because it works so quickly. You are better off being immunized than not, because you have a chance to attack the infection as soon as it arrives, not a few hours later. We really are talking about a few hours, by the way.
> 
> ...


Well said. 

But how do you know that the vaccine for H1N1 is "is fairly well targeted to the actual virus"? Where's this information coming from?

Second, your last line would be great if we actually knew that getting the vaccine did some good. But first we have to know how you know that getting the H1N1 vaccine is benefitting all these vulnerable people. Again, where does this information come from?


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

I've read several articles that claim Australia, while not out of the woods yet, has gone through it's flu season without any significant increase in flu related deaths:

H1N1 flu peaking in Australia

EDIT: I believe their H1N1 vaccine wasn't available until late in the season.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

" ... But how do you know that the vaccine for H1N1 is "is fairly well targeted to the actual virus"? Where's this information coming from? ..."

Because the tests we use to detect if people "really" have H1N1 show it hasn't mutated significantly. The vaccine is targeted at the variant that people test positive for.

" ... Second, your last line would be great if we actually knew that getting the vaccine did some good. But first we have to know how you know that getting the H1N1 vaccine is benefitting all these vulnerable people. ..."

Do you really? I tell you what ... if you promise, with all your heart, that at the first sign of a sniffle until the last kleenex sits unused in the box for three days, you will stay home, wash your own dishes separately from your family's, and truly avoid spreading whatever it is you have to anyone, I will agree you don't need to take the HiN1, or any variant of a flu vaccine.

But, if you are like most of us, who are under pressure from a whole host of areas to get out and work or go to school, and can't really afford to take 10 days off whatever it is you do, I would really wish you would consider doing what health professionals ask you do. You have to trust someone; I in turn will trust you to do the right thing.

I know of no research that says "regular" flu vaccines do not protect against influenza; in fact they show the opposite. The researchers cited in the Atlantic magazine's recent article (1), which I'm sure we both would have to agree, is "Anti-Vaccination", have published papers in peer-reviewed journals that say as much; even when the infecting strain is not the immunized strain, they remain effective to a significant degree (2).

H1N1 is not a "regular" influenza virus, and one could argue that protection against "regular" flu is no argument for the effectiveness of this particular variant. One could also point out that the Altantic article is about "regular" flu studies exclusively and presents nothing regarding H1N1 either, except conclusions based on belief of the authors, despite the Atlantic's choice of title and front cover banner.

I could tell you about a client of mine, a former head of the Centre for Disease Control in Atlanta, and George Bush's point man on biological threats after 9/11, whom I've had the luxury of speaking at length and at leisure about not just H1N1 but bird flu and other threats. I won't tell you his name, simply because I try to keep some parts of my life somewhat confidential on the web, and he has no idea I'm even mentioning him in any way on a public forum, but I am confident his advice was sincere and intended to look out for my own personal well-being. He hopes I get vaccinated.

I'm not particularly interested in playing a game of Whack-A-Mole with those who have no intention of becoming vaccinated; if you think you will get "Gulf War Syndrome" or whatever from the vaccine, then far be it from me to dispute it. I wish you good health regardless of your personal choices, whether they are similar or opposite of mine.

I know what I will do.

I've included a link the the Atlantic article, which certainly is well written; if you are inclined to avoid the vaccine and want some ammunition, I'm sure you'll find it there, so feel free to read on. The problem, of course, is Ms Brownlee and Ms Lenzer are writing an opinion piece, and don't worry a great deal about contrary opinion, even when it comes from the very people she cites as supporting her position in the article itself.

(1) 'Health: Does the vaccine matter?'; The Atlantic; Shannon Brownlee and Jeanne Lenzer; November 2009
'Swine Flu: Does the vaccine really work?' is the cover banner; it refers to the above article, which isn't about H1N1 at all, but conventional flu vaccines. Note that even the URL goes to .../brownlee-h1n1
(2)a " ... as vaccinating the elderly in institutions reduces the complications of influenza and vaccinating healthy persons under 60 reduces cases of influenza, those with the responsibility of caring for the elderly in institutions may want to increase vaccine coverage and assess its effects in well-designed studies. ..."
 Thomas RE, Jefferson T, Demicheli V, Rivetti D, Influenza vaccination for healthcare workers who work with the elderly, Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19;3:CD005187
(2)b " ... Inactivated parenteral vaccines were 30% effective (95% CI 17% to 41%) against influenza-like illness, and 80% (95% CI 56% to 91%) efficacious against influenza when the vaccine matched the circulating strain and circulation was high, but decreased to 50% (95% CI 27% to 65%) when it did not. ..."
Jefferson TO, Rivetti D, Di Pietrantonj C, Rivetti A, Demicheli V., Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults, Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(3):CD001269

"Jefferson, T/Jefferson, TO" who co-authored the peer reviewed journal papers I quoted in footnotes (2)a,b, is/are Tom Jefferson of the Cochrane Collaboration, cited frequently in the Atlantic article.

Brownlee and Lenzer write, for example:
" ... THE MOST vocal—and undoubtedly most vexing—critic of the gospel of flu vaccine is the Cochrane Collaboration’s Jefferson, who’s also an epidemiologist trained at the famed London School of Tropical Hygiene, and who, in Lisa Jackson’s view, makes other skeptics seem “moderate by comparison.” ..."

MS Brownlee's most recent book is entitled "Overtreated: Why Too Much Medicine Is Making Us Sicker And Poorer". She has lectured on such topics as "The Overtreated American" and "Be Careful What You Wish For: Medical Envy and the Canadian Health Care System."


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Woke up this morning with no ill-effects of my H1N1 shot yesterday, other than the site is a bit sore, as if I bumped it on my dresser (as I am prone to do). So far, so good. We shall see.


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

Yesterday my oldest son got a rash at the injection site. Nothing serious though and something some Benedryl can't fix.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Jeez Gordguide, good to see the reinforcements have arrived! We sent smoke signals days ago! You left it a bit late this time, but as is your habit, have added enormously to the debate. Welcome!

The front page of the G&M has pictures of 9 Canadian celebrities and a Yes/No/Undecided graphic as to whether they are getting the shot. So its come to this.... Maybe these people can run the country as well as free the Afghani people next? Margaret Atwood for PM (I guess she can play the piano).

I've another correction to something I replied earlier to adagio. I thought because the non-adjuvanted vaccine for pregnant women was being bought from an Australian company, it would have no impact on the production in Quebec of the adjuvanted vaccine. That assumption was wrong because Glaxo Smith Kline diverted the antigens from the adjuvanted vaccine into the production of non-adjuvanted vaccine (no idea what happened to the Aussie material). Since you need substantially more antigen in a non-adjuvanted vaccine, one dose of the latter prevents production of multiple doses of the former (which was the entire rationale for using adjuvant). It seems there was no new antigen stock brought in, hence production of adjuvanted vaccine is down by 1.5 million doses next week in order to produce 225,000 non-adjuvanted doses. The following week, production will be back to 2 million adjuvanted vaccines as no more non-adjuvant vaccine will be produced.

The adjuvant is proven safe to the general population. However, it simply has not been specifically tested on enough pregnant women to gain the same level of confidence. As it turns out, many pregnant women chose to get the adjuvanted vaccine this week because of the relative risk of waiting for a supply of the adjuvant-free shots. Therefore, there will be actual data on safety of adjuvants in these women. BTW, for those that think the trace amounts of formaldehyde and egg proteins in the vaccine is important, the non-adjuvanted vaccine, due to its higher concentration of viral antigens, actually has more of these. That said, we're talking of 3-5X something that is so very small it is very difficult to measure as it is. 10X a miniscule number is still a minuscule number.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

Gordguide,

That was interesting but I'm still looking for the quote that tells me that H1N1 vaccine is producing results against a variation of the flu called "swine flu" that is significantly worse than the typical flu. Did I miss it? I did see a lot of the same "should", "maybe", "might", and "just do it because I told you so" rhetoric. Anyway, I'll wait until the pandemonium is over and the numbers come in to see if anything was worth getting excited about. If I'm still alive. Boy, wouldn't that be ironic? End up dead and all I had to do is get a shot and look both ways before I cross the street.





> Do you really? I tell you what ... if you promise, with all your heart, that at the first sign of a sniffle until the last kleenex sits unused in the box for three days, you will stay home, wash your own dishes separately from your family's, and truly avoid spreading whatever it is you have to anyone, I will agree you don't need to take the HiN1, or any variant of a flu vaccine.



I don't think that guilt is a great motivator to do anything. Besides, after years of observing how people on this patch of the earth operate I would imagine most are chanting this "think of the other guy" mantra more to create a safety buffer for their own hides than being truly worried about their fellow man's health. If not, then maybe this is the sign of a turnaround in mankind's mentality that we've all been waiting for.

And yes, no point arguing the point endlessly. You do the "right thing" and I'll do the "right thing" and we'll live in harmony like ebony and ivory.


----------



## Elric (Jul 30, 2005)

Wow, WAY too much reading lol so I'll just chime in with my own thoughts. (based on excessive reading and discussion...)

Neither I or my family are getting it.


The Cons far outweigh the Pros...

And no testing? That's a no brainer for me...


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Elric said:


> And no testing? That's a no brainer for me...


Not really fair. This is the test. beejacon

Really expected the numbers to be much closer to the traditional Canadian 50-50 split.

Good news is that by mid-to-late December if you have not become immune in the more traditional manner you will be able to receive a fully tested vaccine with zero delays.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

He's doing fine. The reaction is going down. Thanks for your concern though.

I have very little faith in our Family Doctor. He would just give him Benedryl anyway.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

CBC News - Calgary - Calgary H1N1 clinics turn people away Amazing number of people being turned away in Calgary. People were upsets as dozens were turned away here in St.John's. I guess it is a matter of perspective with Calgary population being 10 times that of St.John's.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Yes, this sure seems to be poorly planned/managed. I hope when the clinics finally reopen - they have a much more workable solution - especially for those that are high risk. 


In the meantime - better know how best to take care of ourselves and others...
Influenza Self Care Document


----------



## sharonmac09 (Apr 10, 2009)

*H1N1 shot less than one hour?*

In Brantford or Sault Ste. Marie, you can make an appointment on the internet or on the phone! No line ups!

In and out in 30 minutes or less - Healthzone.ca


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

" ... That was interesting but I'm still looking for the quote that tells me that H1N1 vaccine is producing results against a variation of the flu called "swine flu" that is significantly worse than the typical flu. Did I miss it? ..."

I'm not sure I, or anyone else, can help you with that question. Pretty much everything we know (and that includes those who REALLY know about flu vaccines ... the researchers, the clinic staff, the vaccine pharma's, the front line medical staff, the guys who get tenure by writing papers in peer reviewed journals) is based on either the experiences with conventional flu vaccines, or with the last pandemic flu variant, from around 30 years ago.

What we know about that last pandemic (you may not even be aware of that one) is that those who were vaccinated against it have a higher survival rate against this one than those who were not; the difference according to current reports is around 30%.

You may have been vaccinated if you were in a Canadian public school at the time ... people aged around 47 or so to around 35 or so today.

The short answer would go something like "we'll know more next summer", at the earliest.

Ppersonally, for me, it goes something like this:

We have a pandemic flu in the wild. If there is nothing to it, then there is nothing to it.

If there is something to it, then early prevention saves lives down the road in a cascading manner. It does not mean you won't get sick from H1N1.

The most deadly modern flu pandemic (1918 or so) was quite serious, but what I find more important about it is that it lasted for years, not just one winter. Travel was much more limited at that time, and took much longer ... weeks to go from England to Canada, for example. So, the flu spread more slowly, but no less deliberately.

Countries at that time who restricted travel had a death rate in the 1 or 2% range. Japan is one example ... you could not travel to, or from, Japan during the epidemic, without passing a quarantine (in essence, a friendly jail).

Countries who did not restrict travel or quarantine carriers (people who showed symptoms) had death rates in the range of 10% or so. Some island communities, particularly those administered by New Zealand, had death rates in the 10~30% region (eg: Fiji, Western Samoa).

In some countries military commanders took matters into their own hands and prevented ships from landing on shore; they had little or no infection and death rates below 1% were typical.

The "first wave" was not so serious; people died, but it was restricted to the obvious candidates. The "second wave", usually a few months later, was much more deadly. People felt they had survived it, and discovered otherwise.

Roughly every third male in Western Samoa died; every fifth woman, every tenth child.

At that time, vaccines were not known. I guess what I'm saying is if you are cavalier about it, something bad might happen. Use the tools available to you would be my advice.

Once you're sick, it's too late to enjoy that protection of a vaccination. Your body is already doing what the vaccine would have done; good luck and have a speedy recovery.

In Saskatoon right now one high school is reporting roughly 10% of the student body has a flu or flu-like symptoms.

I won't be panicking or standing in line on day one when the vaccine becomes available for me; probably in a few weeks (right now, it's "at risk only" in Saskatoon; children, pregnant or recently pregnant women, those over 60. Health Care workers and facility staff are already vaccinated).

But, I will get the shot.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

My family and I got the vaccine on Thursday. We had to wait about three hours, start to finish. It felt about as painful as a mosquito bite, maybe less. My arm hurt the next day, which means it's working. I don't really see a lot of reasons for someone _not_ to get the vaccine, to be quite honest, especially since it's free. You can debate the merits and who profits and is the threat real until you're blue in the face, but the long and short of it is, what do you have to lose?


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

*Flu avoidance strategy #1*

Instead of running around at the mall and door-to-door doing the trick or treat thing with the kids, like I usually do, I opted instead to replace the radiator in my Gramp's old car. 

Now I'm killing any potential bugs that may have somehow snuck up on me when I was pullin' wrenches with a couple stiff gin'n'tonics. That oughta do it.

BTW, this "vaccine" of mine has been well tested.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

gordguide said:


> " ... That was interesting but I'm still looking for the quote that tells me that H1N1 vaccine is producing results against a variation of the flu called "swine flu" that is significantly worse than the typical flu. Did I miss it? ..."
> 
> I'm not sure I, or anyone else, can help you with that question. Pretty much everything we know (and that includes those who REALLY know about flu vaccines ... the researchers, the clinic staff, the vaccine pharma's, the front line medical staff, the guys who get tenure by writing papers in peer reviewed journals) is based on either the experiences with conventional flu vaccines, or with the last pandemic flu variant, from around 30 years ago.
> 
> ...


I enjoy reading your posts, really I do. But I'm going to stay the course until I see reason to do otherwise. Don't think I'm being cavalier rather I'm just being me.


----------



## ErnstNL (Apr 12, 2003)

Got my vaccination as health care worker last Monday.

Public Health Agency of Canada latest figures for reported H1N1 Deaths 
Jan to Oct 27 2009 : *95*

Oct 1 to Oct 27:* 6 total*, 3 in Ontario and 3 in Alberta.

These are reported deaths due to confirmed H1N1. 

How many deaths due to secondary staph infections caused by H1N1? Unknown, my guess is many more. You are more susceptible to secondary infections with H1N1.


(My) Reasons to get vaccinated:

This is a new flu, humans haven't been exposed to it before, there will be no immunity if you are younger than 60. 

You'll be 99% sure you won't have to go to the hospital with H1N1.
You are also at risk of hospital acquired infections if you get admitted.

It's really prevalent, more so than "regular flu", which usually disappears during the summer. What is really worrying Public Health officials is that this summer, H1N1 was reported in North America during non-flu season. Spreading _unlike_ a regular flu. Not good.

Calling it a pandemic was not a trivial decision on the part of the WHO and Public Health agency of Canada.

You may save the life of someone who is at high risk.

Cheers


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

I know of three people that have H1N1. My Buddy's wife and his daughter and the the little boy across the street. All confirmed cases.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Wow, that is close Maxpower. Good thing you got those shots.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

ErnstNL said:


> Got my vaccination as health care worker last Monday.
> 
> Public Health Agency of Canada latest figures for reported H1N1 Deaths
> Jan to Oct 27 2009 : *95*
> ...


Kudos, ErnstNL. Not sure if anyone will be getting their shots today here in St.John's. Word on the street is that supplies are either very low or have run out. We shall see. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## ErnstNL (Apr 12, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> Kudos, ErnstNL. Not sure if anyone will be getting their shots today here in St.John's. Word on the street is that supplies are either very low or have run out. We shall see. Paix, mon ami.


There has been such a positive response, the existing supplies are almost exhausted. There has been a re-allocation of the supply to all Provinces, based on need.
Our shipment for this week is smaller than expected, there will be stricter criteria for immunizations put in place.

Cheers


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

ErnstNL said:


> There has been such a positive response, the existing supplies are almost exhausted. There has been a re-allocation of the supply to all Provinces, based on need.
> Our shipment for this week is smaller than expected, there will be stricter criteria for immunizations put in place.
> 
> Cheers


This is what I read on the CBC.com website as well, ErnstNL. I was on the MacDonald Drive JHS lineup at 1130AM, and stayed for just over 6 hours on Friday. Luckily, there was no bad weather nor major problems .......... just a long lineup. Once in, it was chaotic but organized. I ended up giving my number to a mother with a young child who was getting cranky and hungry. I did have to wait an additional half-hour, but I had no pressing need to get home at 530PM rather than 6PM. The grateful look in the eyes of the mom made my day.


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

SINC said:


> Wow, that is close Maxpower. Good thing you got those shots.


We have been playing it extremely safe (my wife is a germaphobe - I call her Howie - not to the excessive though) and it has played out well for us so far. Fortunately, we have very little contact with our neighbour and my buddy lives far from us. The sad thing though is our neighbour, after giving the kids their candy said her son has H1N1.  . Uh. Thanks for telling us.

We spread all of the candy on the table and sprayed Lysol over the entire haul.


----------



## ErnstNL (Apr 12, 2003)

Dr. G, you are the best! I bet that mom was at the end of her rope!



The trickle down effect of the pandemic is already hitting our workplace. Eastern Health is documenting the impact of absenteeism due to Influenza Like Illness. (ILI)

2 of my 26 staff are home taking care of extremely sick family members. Staff are staying at home when ILI symptoms start. 
The impact causes delays in reporting lab results. It's causing a shortage of temporary staff available to replace absent staff. 
It's affecting every department in our hospitals from shipping and receiving to IT to Human Resources to Cancer Care.

Hundreds of staff have been re-allocated to support the people that perform vaccinations. 

The vaccine itself has a specific procedure to get it ready for injection. 
Here's the Glaxo insert for the vaccine:
http://www.gsk.ca/english/docs-pdf/Arepanrix_PIL_CAPA01v01.pdf
You have mix 2 vials, carefully! and then it's only good for 24 hours.
It's not like a can of pop that you just open and pour. 

The staff performing the vaccinations came from Health and Community Services and other programs like Breast Screening, Pre-Natal care, every program that can allocate qualified staff This will probably continue until the end of November.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

MaxPower said:


> We spread all of the candy on the table and sprayed Lysol over the entire haul.


Why do I have the feeling the 'cure' might be more dangerous than the disease.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

MaxPower said:


> I know of three people that have H1N1. My Buddy's wife and his daughter and the the little boy across the street. All confirmed cases.


So might have the person who used the shopping cart before you, opened the door before you, used the loonie you got as change before you etc. etc. etc. I think guessing where it is coming from will lead to tremendous anxiety and paranoia. Be aware and cautious but try to relax and expect to find this everywhere.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Bottom line:
> 
> No significant or verifiable reports of h1n1 flu vaccine severe reactions. I was very worried when I got mine a long time ago and was very sick for a long time afterwards.
> 
> ...


Hmm, I wouldn't call 1 in 10,000 very rare. 1 in 1.5 million indeed.


----------



## RC51Pilot (Mar 26, 2004)

After 39 years of eating healthy foods, not smoking and exercising, I ended up being diagnosed with stage 4 bladder cancer earlier this year. The bottom line is it's a crap shoot at best, and the only thing that saved my life was the medical community, surgery and chemo-therapy which in itself is a pretty nasty concoction of chemicals, combined with positive thinking.

I think the benefit of getting the shot out weigh the risk - me and my family will be getting it, despite not being high risk. When my doctor speaks, I listen. They know far more about it than I or probably most on this board.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

MCB, the adjuvanted shot solution looks white when emulsified. After 24 hours or so, it begins to separate and this is visible. Is there harm from injection of an older preparation? Probably not, although the immune stimulation would probably not be as effective which would undermine the point of having the shot. However, the clinics match the production of the mix to the expected number of people. They don't carry over material from one day to the next. There is hardly any waste because the mixed vials only hold enough for 10-20 shots. At clinics, a pair of people prepare the vaccine for the people who do the injections throughout the day. Your family physician/practice will estimate the amount needed in a day and prepare that amount.

Gordguide, you said vaccines were not known at the time of the 1918/19 flu pandemic. Not quite true. Vaccines have been in widespread use for 150 years or so (Jenners first cowpox "vaccine" was used in the 1790's). In 1918, though, the cause of influenza was not known. They'd have had trouble making an effective vaccine even if they had known about it given the genetic drift. Moreover, even today, it's proven difficult to produce enough antigen.

I linked to a Wired article (in the current issue) in an earlier post. It's long but is right down your street.
An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All | Magazine
Here's another on squalene (one of the primary components of the adjuvant): Shattering the Myths About Squalene in Vaccines | Magazine


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

A note on the GSK vaccine document previously posted. This is a good read but it is a document that is very carefully worded. In essence, it goes to extreme lengths to avoid making statements that could be used against the company. In this respect, its like the disclaimer associated with forward looking financial information. The side-effects are noted at the lowest frequency of "up to" one in one thousand because the initial clinical trials of this specific vaccine only had about 1000 people. The severe adverse side effects included metastatic ovarian cancer. Obviously, this was pre-existing but they cannot state the obvious. Moreover, there was exactly the same incidence of adverse side effects in placebos. These data do not mean that 1 in 1000 people will have a severe adverse reaction. Based on flu vaccines in general (which are the same as the H1N1 vaccine in all but name and a few amino acid variations in the antigens), the incidence of severe adverse reactions is one in a million or less. The wording of the documentation is scientifically accurate, but more importantly, is legally accurate.

From the document: "None of the serious adverse events was considered related to the study drugs by the investigators."


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

" ... We spread all of the candy on the table and sprayed Lysol over the entire haul. ..."

Be very careful with products like Lysol around food. Lysol does make products specifically for surfaces that are in contact with food, but they also make many products that are not.

An example is the common spray can of Lysol disinfectant, the one your mom used. It has a PCPA number; look for it on the can itself (in fine print somewhere). That stands for Pesticide Control Products Act (of Canada). (If you buy it from the US, it will be registered by the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency]; in the UK it's registered by COSHH-UK [Control of Substances Hazardous to Health].

I can't say for sure what chemicals are in the Lysol product you used, since like all "branded" products, the chemical composition changes from time to time, and Lysol has dozens of products that differ from each other. "lysol" (the word, not the brand) refers to Carbolic Acid, although Lysol the brand removed that chemical from the common Lysol spray can formula at one time, replacing it with orthophenyl phenol amongst other chemicals; apparently it uses a different formula today.

As far as I know, only a few specific Lysol products are safe on surfaces that contact food; I know of none that are recommended for application directly on food, and at least some products in the food surface safe catalog are only for sale to industrial clients, not consumers at the grocery store. Industrial clients are supposed to train their staff in the product's use; there is often nothing on the label itself regarding proper use.

Lysol makes claims about disinfecting, but they _always say_ "when used as directed". That means as much about what not to do as it does about what you should do, and it definitely does not mean "if some is good, then more should be better". Don't take the instructions on the product lightly; only use it on the surfaces it specifically says you can use it on, in the quantity it specifically says to apply.

You might want to explore other alternatives for use around food; sometimes you can mix up simple products like vinegar or lemon juice and water that work for the job you need.

I won't go too deep into the stuff about how killing all bacteria all the time is probably not a good idea; it sounds like your wife would be unconvinced. But, it isn't a good idea, and can lead to both poorer health overall and to strains that no longer can be killed by the products normally used for the job.

I am always reminded of the story of DDT: a product so safe for humans (the only known fatality is a single male in Italy who mistook it for an ingredient in pancake batter; he literally ate spoonfuls of it repeatedly over a period of time) that it was widely miss-applied, so often re-applied, over such wide areas and in such quantity that it became an environmental problem. It was effective and safe in quantities a thousand times or more smaller than it was actually used; a level that poses no risk to animals.

DDT saved the lives of more civilians during and in the few years after WWII than were killed in the war itself; it almost wiped malaria off the map as a disease.

Unfortunately, because if it's callous and wanton "works for everything" misuse, DDT is effectively banned worldwide, and 7 million people a year today pay the ultimate price from malarial infections.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

I'm assuming MaxPower sprayed the candy in its wrappers but even so, this is not very safe since there will be transfer of Lysol residue when the kids open the wrappers. There's no need to be paranoid about the flu though. The virus does not remain viable for long on dry surfaces (24 hours at most). The most common places to pick it up are from frequently touched surfaces such as handles, escalator handrails, etc. Washing your hands properly is good, as is wearing gloves when out. But, our daily habits give viruses and other bugs lots of opportunity to transfer and try getting a child to minimize their exposures! It's just not possible or fair on the child.

I wonder if it would make better sense to give "tokens" instead of treats to kids on Halloween. These could be worth 25c say. If retail stores allowed kids to add up their tokens and to exchange them for candies or other things. This year another razor blade was found in a bag. There are sick people around plus I'm sure the candy companies make so much money from these over-wrapped mini-candies.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Here's a question I've been pondering..

Can vaccinated people still carry the virus in their system? I realize they can "carry" it as physical contact transfer risk from one person to another. 

I would assume that yes, they could carry it in their system (at least for a while), but would not "grow" it.

Perhaps it depends upon how long it has been since they were vaccinated. (i.e if they have built up a sufficient immunity to prevent the virus from growing)


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Order your Tamiflu directly from manufacturers. - Vancouver Health & Special Needs Items - Kijiji Vancouver
> 
> Saw this ad on Kijiji.


Youch - now that is how to profit from panic (not too surprising)! Tamiflu is not in restricted supply but requires a prescription from a doctor. BTW, it's effective shelf life is 20 years or so even though it is date-stamped for only 2-3 years on the box. The gelatin capsule does breakdown but the active ingredient doesn't.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

Tamiflu, like all drugs, is damaging to the body, and carries side effects and risks that are not to be taken lightly. It is an order of magnitude less safe than the influenza vaccine. Tamiflu should not be taken soon before, or after, you have had a flu shot, just for starters.

See your doctor; don't self-medicate. You should only use pharmaceuticals to solve problems where the health risk of not treating the problem justifies the "bigger hammer". "Might get the flu" doesn't qualify, nor does "might have the flu". "Have a confirmed life-threatening case of the flu" does, and only your doctor should make that determination.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

KC4 said:


> Here's a question I've been pondering..
> 
> Can vaccinated people still carry the virus in their system? I realize they can "carry" it as physical transfer risk from one person to another.
> 
> ...


The viral load in vaccinated people (those that have vaccine-induced immunity - about 90-95% of those who got the vaccine) rarely achieves sufficient levels for them to be infectious. Some diseases are associated with unaffected carriers who show no symptoms but are highly infectious. This is not the case with vaccination against any disease. On the other hand, someone who is not vaccinated may show few symptoms of the flu (and may not realise they have the flu) yet be infectious. This is because the sequelae of flu symptoms vary greatly among people.

As you note, it takes 7-10 days to acquire sufficient immunity from the vaccine. If you are exposed to the virus before then, your immune system will not be fully primed and the virus will likely get the upperhand. If you show symptoms of coughing and sneezing, you'll be infectious.

As the winter approaches, the incidence of common colds will increase. You can't tell whether the guy sneezing next to you on the bus has the flu or a cold.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

used to be jwoodget said:


> The viral load in vaccinated people (those that have vaccine-induced immunity - about 90-95% of those who got the vaccine) rarely achieves sufficient levels for them to be infectious. Some diseases are associated with unaffected carriers who show no symptoms but are highly infectious. This is not the case with vaccination against any disease. On the other hand, someone who is not vaccinated may show few symptoms of the flu (and may not realise they have the flu) yet be infectious. This is because the sequelae of flu symptoms vary greatly among people.
> 
> As you note, it takes 7-10 days to acquire sufficient immunity from the vaccine. If you are exposed to the virus before then, your immune system will not be fully primed and the virus will likely get the upperhand. If you show symptoms of coughing and sneezing, you'll be infectious.
> 
> As the winter approaches, the incidence of common colds will increase. You can't tell whether the guy sneezing next to you on the bus has the flu or a cold.


Thanks UTBJW, I appreciate your help.



> You can't tell whether the guy sneezing next to you on the bus has the flu or a cold.


...Or (like me) is simply allergic to the aftershave or cologne you are wearing ...


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

mrjimmy said:


> So might have the person who used the shopping cart before you, opened the door before you, used the loonie you got as change before you etc. etc. etc. I think guessing where it is coming from will lead to tremendous anxiety and paranoia. Be aware and cautious but try to relax and expect to find this everywhere.


As I mentioned these are people I _know_. The risk is still very much there with the unknowns.


MazterCBlazter said:


> XX) yuck.


All of the candy was in their wrappers. the Lysol didn't come in contact with the Goodies.

Just because we received our shot, doesn't mean we aren't still taking precautions.


----------



## ErnstNL (Apr 12, 2003)

If anyone wishes to keep track of the numbers in Canada:
2009-2010 FluWatch: October 18, 2009 to October 24, 2009 (Week 42)

The data includes all influenza numbers, including H1N1.

There is an update every week. All public, no one hiding any information here. 
The data speaks for itself. It`s going to get worse.

UTBJW, the Wired articles are well done.

MCB, look at the map about the sale of anti virals in Canada. Vancouver area singled out.


----------



## Puccasaurus (Dec 28, 2003)

used to be jwoodget said:


> I wonder if it would make better sense to give "tokens" instead of treats to kids on Halloween. These could be worth 25c say. If retail stores allowed kids to add up their tokens and to exchange them for candies or other things.


I think these tokens are called 'quarters' :lmao:

Written as I sit here eating the stack of leftover candy; last night was very slow. Flu fears, perhaps?

I do plan on getting the shot as being locked in a building with a thousand teenagers places me at Ground Zero as far as I'm concerned


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


> :clap:
> 
> Someone told me they had been hearing stories of "scalpers" getting numbers in the early morning and coming back later in the day trying to sell them off to the highest bidder at the end of the line? tptptptp


Not here, MCB. People were given numbers when they initially got on line yesterday here in St.John's and then returned near the time they were admitted in to the clinics. This avoided what I went through with standing in line from 1130AM until 5PM. 

I just gave my number to the mom since I could empathize with her situation and the cranky child.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

" ... All of the candy was in their wrappers. the Lysol didn't come in contact with the Goodies. ..."

I have just found a better description of the typical ingredients in Lysol products: in most, they are 60 to 80% alcohol (ethyl alcohol). Pesticides and fungicides are added in quantities typical of these products, ie small amounts that none the less are effective and dangerous. It's these latter ingredients that I would be concerned about.

I've had a kind of hate on for Lysol for quite a while and never buy it; it's because at one time, during the 50's, I kid you not, it was marketed to women as what we now would call a "feminine hygiene" product.

There's a few examples here; but I've seen many more in magazines. They're simply offensive, period, and that's just the ad copy. I don't have words to describe how I feel about the health implications of using it as they helpfully recommended, especially considering that the Lysol of that time had different, more dangerous chemicals in it's formula.

Since alcohol is a very effective germ killer, you could just get some denatured alcohol (ethanol, like booze, with just enough methanol added so you can't drink it), dilute it a bit with water, and pop it into a spray bottle. Voila: Lysol without the lawn chemicals, and it _will_ kill 99.95% of bacteria, just like the label says.

You could use Vodka, but it's kind of expensive; still it's 40% ethanol.

Denatured alcohol is pure, roughly 95% (a certain amount of water gets into alcohol from the atmosphere, and there's nothing you can do about it), and it will kill germs just as well (same active ingredient) as Lysol, costs much less, and evaporates completely in a short period of time, leaving no residue.

Rubbing alcohol leaves a residue and is relatively weak compared to all of the above; it's not the ideal choice and in the quantities sold at drug stores, costs about as much as Vodka anyway.

I can buy 5 liters of denatured alcohol in Saskatoon for a few dollars; I get it at agriculture supply stores.

I use it in certain cleaning tasks, since it mixes with both oil and water. Add alcohol to any petrochemical-based mess, oil, grease, asphalt, whatever, and you can then add soap, water, and elbow grease, leaving a clean surface with zero residue.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

It would seem not just Canada but the US as well are having production problems. I know there are those all too willing to bring politics into this but the truth is the vaccine makers are doing the best they can, the fastest they are able, to meet the demand. Leaders can be upset but nothing is going to make things go any faster. It was known from the beginning that this strain of flu was proving difficult to grow. No doubt health officials both sides of the border were given best case scenarios as to production volumes. heh heh

Obama frustrated with companies over flu vaccine - Yahoo! News


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Here in NL, a 36 year old woman from Bishop Falls died due to H1N1. She had the form of asthma that I have had since I was 8 years old. I feel all the more grateful that I was able to get my shot on Friday.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Alberta has suspended flu shots all but for high risk people. There are no persons over 60 who are considered high risk. (I'm 65) Even though I have only the use of 65% of my heart and a history of pneumonia after three heart attacks, I do not qualify. If I get a shot, it will be a long time into the future now. I did get my regular flu shot as I have been considered high risk for the past 10 years. Not so with H1N1.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

SINC said:


> Alberta has suspended flu shots all but for high risk people. There are no persons over 60 who are considered high risk. (I'm 65) Even though I have only the use of 65% of my heart and a history of pneumonia after three heart attacks, I do not qualify. If I get a shot, it will be a long time into the future now. I did get my regular flu shot as I have been considered high risk for the past 10 years. Not so with H1N1.


Strange situation, Sinc. There were changes here in NL as well. No one in the high risk category over the age of 25 can now get the shot, so I would not qualify today, even though I got the shot on Friday.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

SINC said:


> Alberta has suspended flu shots all but for high risk people. There are no persons over 60 who are considered high risk. (I'm 65) Even though I have only the use of 65% of my heart and a history of pneumonia after three heart attacks, I do not qualify. If I get a shot, it will be a long time into the future now. I did get my regular flu shot as I have been considered high risk for the past 10 years. Not so with H1N1.


SINC, you should call your family physician. He/she will know your overall health status and you can bet they'll be less likely to overlook you. It is true that you are likely to have some level of natural immunity due to your age but this is by no means a guarantee of anything. Given the significant reduction of available vaccines this week, I can understand the restrictions to priority groups, but this seems to be so fluid in definition that people are understandably confused and frustrated. BTW, you might ask your physician for the pneumococcal vaccine. This would help reduce your risk of future pneumonia.

All the best.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

SINC said:


> Alberta has suspended flu shots all but for high risk people. There are no persons over 60 who are considered high risk. (I'm 65) Even though I have only the use of 65% of my heart and a history of pneumonia after three heart attacks, I do not qualify. If I get a shot, it will be a long time into the future now. I did get my regular flu shot as I have been considered high risk for the past 10 years. Not so with H1N1.


I wonder if the Stelmach regime is thinking you are not high risk or if they think you are not worth saving.beejacon

Sorry Don I really couldn't resist. 

Another thought here. Those with flu symptoms really should isolate themselves even if it isn't H1N1. One of the checkout gals at the supermarket today could hardly stand. Needless to say I picked the slightly longer line and happily waited an extra couple of minutes.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Been watching 16:9s story which seems remarkably balanced. I doubt if 1% of cases suffer severe complications but other than that story seems unbiased.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

used to be jwoodget said:


> SINC, you should call your family physician. He/she will know your overall health status and you can bet they'll be less likely to overlook you. It is true that you are likely to have some level of natural immunity due to your age but this is by no means a guarantee of anything. Given the significant reduction of available vaccines this week, I can understand the restrictions to priority groups, but this seems to be so fluid in definition that people are understandably confused and frustrated. BTW, you might ask your physician for the pneumococcal vaccine. This would help reduce your risk of future pneumonia.
> 
> All the best.


Thanks for your concern Jim, but my family doc says I can wait a few weeks without any real fear, so that is comforting. I will however inquire re the pneumonia shot.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

eMacMan said:


> I wonder if the Stelmach regime is thinking you are not high risk or if they think you are not worth saving.beejacon
> 
> Sorry Don I really couldn't resist.


And no thanks for your concern Bob.

But it was a hell of a zinger. :lmao: :clap:


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

eMacMan said:


> I wonder if the Stelmach regime is thinking you are not high risk or if they think you are not worth saving.beejacon
> 
> Sorry Don I really couldn't resist. ....





SINC said:


> And no thanks for your concern Bob.
> 
> But it was a hell of a zinger. :lmao: :clap:


Glad you took that the right way. Seriously this world needs newsmen that have been around long enough to remember how things should be and have the courage to holler loudly when they get a strong whiff of BS. So do whatever it takes to stick around awhile.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

emacman said:


> so do whatever it takes to stick around awhile.


+1.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Sometimes raw data is quite informative.

Found the stats for Wisconsin from day h1n1 was discovered or released through Oct 27th. Roughly 750 confirmed cases, 25 hospitalizations, 0 deaths. 

These are confirmed cases, that is cases that were severe enough to send people to a doctor. Given the lack of health insurance in the US and that milder cases will not go to the doctor at all it is reasonable to assume that Wisconsin had at least 2500 cases in total. So the 1/100 hospitalization rate would seem to be accurate. However no deaths would clearly indicate that the 1 in 5 chance that those hospitalized will die is greatly exaggerated. Either that or Wisconsin's hospitals are a whole lot better than the rest of the nations. 

Realistically it seems quite likely that the mortality rate will fall in the .5 to 1 deaths per 1000 that is found with seasonal flu. 

The panic seems to come from two entirely separate sources. With almost no previous exposure people are considerably more likely to contract this flu. Beyond that Big Pharma has been pounding the fear drum in the hopes of selling massive quantities of vaccine. I base that last statement on the fact that every network runs identical fear mongering clips. Since the networks obviously are not doing their own reporting I am assuming someone is feeding them ready to run tape. No one but Big Pharma has any reason to do so and they certainly have the resources.

There has been a four month campaign of terror whose main purpose was to sell h1n1 flu vaccine. Even a provincial health minister should have sufficient intellect to con that one out. Therefore it is entirely unacceptable for them to say at this point that they had no idea that demand would be so high. Clearly since it was no secret that supplies would be trickled out over several months early recipients should have been limited to health care workers and those most at risk.

Politicians could and should have been used for the preliminary vaccine trials as the loss of 1 or 2 politicians could hardly be considered detrimental and it would show that they actually believe in the vaccination campaign.beejacon


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

ErnstNL said:


> If anyone wishes to keep track of the numbers in Canada:
> 2009-2010 FluWatch: October 18, 2009 to October 24, 2009 (Week 42)
> 
> The data includes all influenza numbers, including H1N1.
> ...


Just for perspective, how many people died in car accidents during the same time periods?


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

hayesk said:


> Just for perspective, how many people died in car accidents during the same time periods?


Not sure about that same period exactly, but according to my pack of du Mauriers car accidents kill 2900 people a year. More striking is that suicides come second (after smoking of course) at 3900. No mention of the flu on there.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Vehicle fatalities in Canada average about 2,500 a year. Many of these people are not wearing seat belts (some are and the crash is simply not survivable like the case of the 200 km/hr car that T-boned a van and killed 2 of the belted occupants the other week in Toronto). The number of people who survive a significant collision while wearing a seat belt is more than 20,000.

The point is that if you can do something to mitigate your likelihood (not to mention the likelihood of someone else) having a bad outcome, would you not do that something? Just like putting on a seatbelt.....


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"There will be an emergency debate in the House of Commons Monday at 7 p.m. ET on the government's handling of swine flu vaccine distribution." Thank God. Now the politicians will come to our rescue. We have been delivered.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

used to be jwoodget said:


> The point is that if you can do something to mitigate your likelihood (not to mention the likelihood of someone else) having a bad outcome, would you not do that something? Just like putting on a seatbelt.....


I agree, but I'm not going to get panicky about it. I'm also not going to wait in the cold rain for several hours to get the shot either.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

hayesk said:


> I agree, but I'm not going to get panicky about it. I'm also not going to wait in the cold rain for several hours to get the shot either.


Absolutely. No one should have to line up for hours (in side or out). Funny how the infrastructure is there when it comes to voting for MPs, but not when you are voting for your health.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Dr.G. said:


> Now the politicians will come to our rescue. We have been delivered.


Yeah..in a handbasket...beejacon


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Funny how the infrastructure is there when it comes to voting for MPs, but not when you are voting for your health.


I've noted the same thing; your employer must give you time off to vote if you have trouble doing so after work hours. For the vaccine, they don't even give school children a free pass (say, an absence that doesn't count), let alone those of us who are working all day. Talk about priorities.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Good Point chasMac....

I personally think the vaccinations staff should go TO the schools like they do for routine vaccinations. They already have the infrastructure in place for such paperwork to be handled, the students do not have to miss much class time and there is no need for any unnecessary additional exposure to the virus that may be the result of waiting in public lineups.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

KC4 said:


> I personally think the vaccinations staff should go TO the schools like they do for routine vaccinations.


That would require some semblance of forethought. We are consistently told that classrooms are ideal for the transmission of flu and cold viruses. 

So.... the vaccination program will target and prioritize schools right? ...Right?


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Now in Alberta they have announced that the H1N1 clinics will re-open tomorrow - only for pregnant woman and children between the ages of 6 months and 5 years (age as of Nov 1/09)...proof of age required for the child; proof of pregnancy not required. 

So, the parents who have a child under 5 and others over 5 will have to stand in line a second time?


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

MazterCBlazter said:


> If it was a real emergency they wouldn't let you go to school or work until after you got the shot.
> 
> This whole thing is so bogus. The sky isn't really falling. The scientists, government, media, and big pharma all crying wolf (again). People will remember this and then at a time when a real epidemic is happening nobody will show up for the vaccination.


Actually H1N1 is just a diversion. Drug companies are diverted into manufacturing H1N1 non-stop and BTW collecting large quantities of the cash in the process. Nice gig as H1N1 is somewhat less deadly than plain old ordinary flu. Meanwhile somewhere in India or China or Africa a really deadly virus is about to be released. With all of Big Pharma profitably diverted the evil ones can cure over-population and greatly reduce CO2 emissions all in one quick cruel stroke.beejacon


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

I don't know about it being bogus.

I have a friend who is an elementary school teacher in a small town just outside of Boston. At the moment, they have 72 kids home sick with the flu--which is 10% of the entire school--and even more kids whose parents are sending them to school even though they are sick which is going to lead to further absenses as more kids come down with flu. She had to send one kid home because he was running a fever of 102F... parents knew this when they sent him to school, don't ask me what they were thinking.

It's not so much that we're all about to die from swine flu, but having a large number of your workforce simultaneously staying home sick (or needing to stay home to take care of sick children) will likely get difficult to cope with.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Some schools here in central NL, which just reported its second H1N1 death, are reporting attendance at 50%. One of my students who is taking a web course with me and is a sub reports that she and 9 other subs have been in this week, out of a school of 14 teachers in total.


----------



## danalicious (Nov 16, 2008)

Well, the flu has hit us here. Hubby has been sick for two days, I took my boys to be vaccinated yesterday and now my oldest has a fever, a cough and is vomiting. My youngest and I are free from symptoms. 

I am going to be a responsible parent and keep both boys home from school. The flu has been spreading like crazy at my boys' school. While parents have not been sending their sick children to school, they have been sending the siblings who have not had symptoms. Two or three days later, the sibs get sick, and have already spread the virus.

So, I am heading to the video store to stock up for the week. I am hoping my oldest is only having a reaction to the vaccine and will be fine by Monday. Even so, I think we are housebound at least until Wednesday.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Good luck, danalicious.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

After 40 million H1N1 vaccinations so far (globally), there has yet to be a single confirmed case reported of a severe adverse reaction. The real problems are in bureaucratic mismanagement of the information, inconsistencies of supply and delays in getting what has been produced into arms.

We're in the midst of the second wave. If you are an adult and come down with the flu and do not begin to improve within a couple of days (that is, still feeling bad, just less so), then get yourself to either your doctor or an ER who will listen for deep respiratory distress (as an indicator of pneumonia). Don't sit this out at home if your fever is persistent for more than 36 hours (it will vary between people). You should seek medical attention. I know of three people who encountered this. All had good outcomes and were not hospitalized. It only happens in maybe 1-2% of cases (a guess based on numbers). Early intervention is very important to check possible complications.

By the way, in Ontario, why the heck are there two full page adverts in the Globe and Mail saying exactly the same thing about risk groups? One from Dr. David Butler-Jones and one from Dr. Arlene King (chief public health officers at the fed and prov levels). When I saw this I thought it was a perfect example of the lack of coordination between these authorities. These ads typically cost about $50,000 a piece.


----------



## lara (Mar 15, 2009)

used to be jwoodget said:


> By the way, in Ontario, why the heck are there two full page adverts in the Globe and Mail saying exactly the same thing about risk groups? One from Dr. David Butler-Jones and one from Dr. Arlene King (chief public health officers at the fed and prov levels). When I saw this I thought it was a perfect example of the lack of coordination between these authorities.


It is not a lack of coordination. Both of these people have to justify their overlapping, redundant and overpaid jobs.

L


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

100,000 of the 515,000 people here in NL have been vaccinated. However, we have run out of vaccines. If everyone in the province wants the vaccine, some will have to wait until Groundhog Day for their shot. Seems like some people who thought that they might have had the H1N1 flu never had it confirmed, so they will be getting the vaccine even though they might be immune. We shall see.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Dr.G. said:


> 100,000 of the 515,000 people here in NL have been vaccinated. However, we have run out of vaccines. If everyone in the province wants the vaccine, some will have to wait until Groundhog Day for their shot. Seems like some people who thought that they might have had the H1N1 flu never had it confirmed, so they will be getting the vaccine even though they might be immune. We shall see.


While there is no danger in getting the shot if you've had H1N1 there is also no point since you'll have generated immunity. Since H1N1 is by far the predominant flu strain in circulation, its highly likely that anyone who experienced true flu has had H1N1. There's also a lot of cold viruses around. Some of the symptoms overlap, but its rare for a cold to give you a fever.

By the way, there are no efficient tests for determining whether you have had H1N1 once the infection has resolved. While you can theoretically be tested for antibodies, these tests cost a lot more than a shot, hence make no sense and are therefore not available.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

used to be jwoodget said:


> While there is no danger in getting the shot if you've had H1N1 there is also no point since you'll have generated immunity. Since H1N1 is by far the predominant flu strain in circulation, its highly likely that anyone who experienced true flu has had H1N1. There's also a lot of cold viruses around. Some of the symptoms overlap, but its rare for a cold to give you a fever.
> 
> By the way, there are no efficient tests for determining whether you have had H1N1 once the infection has resolved. While you can theoretically be tested for antibodies, these tests cost a lot more than a shot, hence make no sense and are therefore not available.


True. The problem is that there are still many people in the high risk group who are waiting for their shots. If I had not had my shot at the end of October, when they first opened it up to people in the high-risk groups with no restrictions, I would still be waiting for the shot because of my age. 

I see your point re the test for the antibody, but there is just not enough to go around. NL, based on its population, gets 1.5% of the Canadian share, but we are having a large acceptance of the shot, so many want the vaccine but have to wait their turn. My son, who does not really want the shot, would be at the end of the line and could, if he changed his mind, get the shot by late Jan/early Feb.. We shall see.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

There's a germaphobe at my company who got H1N1.

There is such a thing as too much Purell.

Had she come into contact with more people, maybe opened a few door handles less carefully or used the office coffee carafe instead of boiling her own in her office, she might have actually immunized herself naturally, at least against other flus and colds and so on.

Irony is god.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

HowEver said:


> There's a germaphobe at my company who got H1N1.
> 
> There is such a thing as too much Purell.
> 
> ...



"Irony is god." Sad, but all too true, HowEver. Hopefully, you shall stay healthy.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

MazterCBlazter said:


> You have to expose yourself to various germs and dirt to build up immunity. The immune system needs a workout just like your muscles and cardio system.


Which is what the vaccination is.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## sharonmac09 (Apr 10, 2009)

For all of those who are dismissing the seriousness of H1N1, if you come in contact with it, you will be very sick, in fact possibly the sickest you have ever felt in your life. A good friend's two kids came down with it and the symptoms are very nasty!!!!! You will be very miserable for approximately one to two weeks if not more. Get inoculated when the shots become available!!!!


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

I'd rather suffer the sting of a needle than have to deal with the virus over a week or so.


----------



## sharonmac09 (Apr 10, 2009)

delete


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

sharonmac09 said:


> You are gonna be sorryyyyyyy if you come down with it!!!!!


I'd like to get inoculated, but I'm not eligible yet... despite the fact the no clinic has been able meet demand. I can't even get my kids in.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MannyP Design said:


> I'd like to get inoculated, but I'm not eligible yet... despite the fact the no clinic has been able meet demand. I can't even get my kids in.


Luckily, I was able to get vaccinated, after waiting in line from 11:30AM until nearly 6PM, on the first day the clinics were open to at risk groups. A few days after that experience, our province closed it to at-risk people in my age group. So, I would still be waiting for the shot had I not stood on line.

I am helping out neighbors by doing the shopping and some babysitting for them so they don't have to go out into crowds, or run the risk of a babysitter getting their unvaccinated child sick.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Did some searching on Squalene. Ignoring the blogs I did come up with this.

Vaccines May Be Linked to Gulf War Syndrome | chiroweb.com

This is the meat of the article. Please note as well that Squalene antibodies are not definitely caused by injecting Squalene. That is still being studied.



> In February, the peer-reviewed journal _Experimental and Molecular Pathology_6 published a study written by Garry's team at Tulane University and Dr. Pamela Asa, an immunologist from Tennessee. Dr. Asa was one of the first health professionals to advance the theory that Gulf War syndrome might be an autoimmune disorder caused by experimental vaccinations.
> 
> The research included blinded and unblinded studies. In the blinded study, 56 Gulf War-era veterans and military personnel who were on active service in 1990-91 were tested for squalene. Of those 56, 38 had been deployed to the Persian Gulf and had GWS-type symptoms; 12 had been deployed but were healthy; and six had not been deployed but were nevertheless ill.
> 
> ...


Note: DOD has consistently denied that Squalene was used in Gulf War vaccines right up until they admitted that they did not know for sure. Aluminum Hydroxide was used as an adjuvant. Also check out this link on a study on both adjuvants and the combined effects of the 2:

Aluminum adjuvant linked to Gulf War illness induc... [Neuromolecular Med. 2007] - PubMed result


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

sharonmac09 said:


> For all of those who are dismissing the seriousness of H1N1, if you come in contact with it, you will be very sick, in fact possibly the sickest you have ever felt in your life. A good friend's two kids came down with it and the symptoms are very nasty!!!!! You will be very miserable for approximately one to two weeks if not more. Get inoculated when the shots become available!!!!


People I know have had reactions to the vaccine far more serious than when I had what my doctor says was "most likely" H1N1 in August.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

C'mon guys, there is no cover up. Where is the incentive? Jeez, in Canada, the public health labs might kill to discourage the line-ups by pointing out the odd severe adverse reaction. Given the number of anti-vaccination web sites, you'd think one of them would report a solid, proven case of a severe effect of H1N1 vaccination. I am not denying some adverse reactions such as sore arms, aches, etc. These are fairly common and dissipate after 2-3 days and are nothing as bad as the illness associated with true H1N1 flu. But there have been zero validated instances of severe adverse reactions.

Hasn't happened, period. There is no cover up. Back to regular broadcasting......


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Just over 100,000 people here in NL have been vaccinated (me included), and no adverse reactions reported. 5 deaths have been confirmed, however, as a result of the H1N1 virus.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Years ago when myself and many others got very sick from the flu shot distributed then we reported it. The official word from the government afterwards was there were no adverse reactions reported, period.
> 
> If there are any reactions to h1n1 vaccine they will probably get covered up and silenced again. Business as usual?


The fundamental difference between now and then is that it's very hard to silence people these days. If there was an issue with the vaccination, you WOULD hear about it: via the internet.

So far the only thing making the rounds on the web is the same 60 minutes from from the 70s. And that appears to be it.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Hasn't happened, period. There is no cover up..


It absolutely has happened, I know people that it has happened to. I've met nurses who administer the shots who have seen plenty of it. 

They knew people were dying from Vioxx for years before they admitted it and pulled it off the market. Similar situations for Fen-Phen, Baycol, etc. The published testing results were fabricated to overstate both the efficacy and the safety. This *is* business as usual.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Much less than the average flu.


No reported deaths from the regular flu this year, MCB, at least here in NL.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

The "average flu" isn't new. It isn't average either. It's a number of different flus that make a number of people sick, and kill people, each and every year. Many thousands of them in Canada, so seemingly more serious, right?

Swine flu, on the other hand, is making people sick and killing them, in new and added numbers. Not a lot, but spreading fast enough to be considered dangerous. Not an epidemic, but a pandemic--meaning it is appearing everywhere.

Next year's "average flu shot" will include H1N1 vaccine. Let's hope that there's nothing new and spreading fast enough and everywhere that justifies its own flu shot.





MazterCBlazter said:


> Much less than the average flu.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Next year's "average flu shot" will include H1N1 vaccine. Let's hope that there's nothing new and spreading fast enough and everywhere that justifies its own flu shot." Yes, let us hope for this combo vaccine being all we need. We shall see.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Here's a link to an article in the G&M about 36 reported adverse reactions to the H1N1 shot. Adverse reactions seen in 36 Canadians after H1N1 shot: official - The Globe and Mail
These are currently being investigated and have not yet been directly linked to the vaccine.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Alberta Health has just announced that seniors between 65 and 74 will be vaccinated beginning Thursday (That's me). Seniors over 75 began yesterday.

They also announced the vaccine would begin being shipped to doctors offices next week. Had they done this from day one, hundreds of thousands more people would have been vaccinated by now. But that's what you get when you hire an Australian citizen "expert" to head up Alberta Heath, who knows dick all about using the existing system to his advantage. Idiots I say!

I will likely wait now and get it at my doctors office next week.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Get the seasonal shot too SINC. Got mine done today.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

*And now we have Ukraine Flu!! - Million hit by 'plague worse than swine flu'*

Daily Express | World News :: Million hit by 'plague worse than swine flu'



> A cocktail of three flu viruses are reported to have mutated into a single pneumonic plague, which it is believed may be far more dangerous than swine flu. The death toll has reached 189 and more than 1 million people have been infected, most of them in the nine regions of Western Ukraine.


And this: Ukrainian pandemic flu outbreak virus genetic material "similar" to H1N1, according to WHO analysis


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I'm likely going to sit this one out for a couple of reasons.

Staff had it and from the two day aches pains and headaches I got a few days later ( staff was out for 10 days and his brother as well and was in the target range for H1N1 ) it was likely H1N1 and I've not had traditional flu for a long while.

My age range has some established immunity anyway and is not a target for severe form of H1N1.

Despite being _at risk_ as a not long ago cancer treatment survivor I work from home and rarely ever go out in areas where I might contact others.

I won't even sit in the waiting rooms when I do need to hit the doctor's office lately and doing my shopping off hours to reduce crowd contact.

I'd be more concerned about the risk of the clinic setting than the flu.

I mentioned that to the cancer doc that it would have been a smart move for the regional cancer centre to offer the flu shots there for patients undergoing therapy as their immune systems are really at risk and standing in line is both risky and given the impact of chemo very tiring.


That said - any young person really has some serious risk in this and I'd certainly advise a shot for them.
Our staff was really hammered. Fortunately he did not have complications.

••

That Ukraine beast sounds vicious.
JW what's the efficacy of pneumonia vaccine?

Just noticed this



> WHO: Swine flu samples from Ukraine showed no significant mutation
> Tuesday, November 17, 2009
> Wires
> WHO-Ukraine Flu Samples
> ...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

used to be jwoodget said:


> Get the seasonal shot too SINC. Got mine done today.


Been there, done that. Got it from my family doctor three weeks back. Thus my rant about the A-Hole Aussie running our health care. Had he used the health care system as it is currently set up, I would have had it long ago. Instead he opened public clinics and from there it was a disaster.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Part of the problem in the Ukraine is that there was zero vaccine bought by the government, zero immunity and virtually zero public health surveillance. Rumours ran rampant and no one knows the truth of the situation. While you can say that the authorities here were disorganized and demonstrated a lack of planning and created general confusion, the Ukraine serves as an example of no planning. Prevention is always better than cure - and is usually cheaper.

Macdoc said: "I mentioned that to the cancer doc that it would have been a smart move for the regional cancer centre to offer the flu shots there for patients undergoing therapy as their immune systems are really at risk and standing in line is both risky and given the impact of chemo very tiring."

Beats me why this isn't standard practice. The best place to get a vaccine is from your physician. The pneumococcal vaccine is effective and available from your doc. It's a good idea if you've any underlying chest issues (susceptibility to coughs and colds, emphysema, etc).


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

Took the kids in to get immunized the other day. Once inside there was all these friendly smiling people directing us here and there. Then we sat and watched a video where this gigantic emotionless female head spoke to us. Then it was off to the needle factory. The whole scene reminded me of Orwell's 1984.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

Remember the sad story about the cheerleader who developed dystonia from an H1N1 shot?

Sorry antivax folks, it's false.

Desiree Jennings "cured" of her "vaccine-induced dystonia"? : Respectful Insolence





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






_However, now Jennings herself, and Dr. Buttar, report that Jennings began to improve while still sitting in the chair and receiving her chelation therapy, and within 36 hours her symptoms were completely gone. First, let me say that I am very happy Ms. Jennings' symptoms have resolved. Hopefully now she can just go on with her life. But to me, this impossibly rapid recovery is a dramatic confirmation that her symptoms were psychogenic to begin with. It is simply implausible that brain injury from mercury toxicity could be reversed so quickly - especially when you consider that Dr. Buttar had Jennings at death's door.​
Indeed. The story being spread by Dr. Buttar about her dramatic improvement is excellent evidence that Desiree Jennings' dystonia was almost certainly psychogenic all along. Her recovery was too miraculously fast to be plausible especially if she appeared as sick as is being reported, even if the snake oil Dr. Buttar administered had a real physiological effect on her nervous system._​


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## ComputerIdiot (Jan 8, 2004)

Okay, Ontarians, start lining up ... H1N1 vaccine is now available to the general public.

Hoo-ray.

Ontario's health minister says don't rush to get swine flu shot - but do get it. - Yahoo! Canada News


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

ComputerIdiot said:


> Okay, Ontarians, start lining up ... H1N1 vaccine is now available to the general public.
> 
> Hoo-ray.


General public=

not rich
not famous
not sports figure
not etc. etc. etc.


----------



## ComputerIdiot (Jan 8, 2004)

mrjimmy said:


> General public=
> 
> not rich
> not famous
> ...


Health Minister says do get it but don't rush to get it ... refresh my memory, please, haven't we been told repeatedly that this is a huge health issue, could become a worldwide pandemic, etc., etc.,?


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

ComputerIdiot said:


> Health Minister says do get it but don't rush to get it ... refresh my memory, please, haven't we been told repeatedly that this is a huge health issue, could become a worldwide pandemic, etc., etc.,?


See, there you go again - remembering what these politicians say! After all, it's not like they themselves remember their own utterances or so it would seem.

While we're remembering stuff, wasn't the peak of this panic-demic supposed to pass about the middle of November? And doesn't it take about 10-14 days for immunity to build after the shot to a point where it actually protects? So what's the point of having the shot now?

That all adds up to a fairly big *WTF ?????*  XX)


----------



## Elric (Jul 30, 2005)

rgray said:


> See, there you go again - remembering what these politicians say! After all, it's not like they themselves remember their own utterances or so it would seem.
> 
> While we're remembering stuff, wasn't the peak of this panic-demic supposed to pass about the middle of November? And doesn't it take about 10-14 days for immunity to build after the shot to a point where it actually protects? So what's the point of having the shot now?
> 
> That all adds up to a fairly big *WTF ?????*  XX)


So the wallets of Pharma employees grow..... and then they spend in our economy! It's a great "stimulus package" if you ask me


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

Wow! It just took me 20 minutes to get my shot and that includes 15 mins observation time to make sure I didn't react. Calling all [High Risk and age limited for today and tomorrow] Calgarians to Stampede Park Grandstand.... Absolutely no lineup! Free Parking, coffee and Hot Chocolate.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

KC4 said:


> Wow! It just took me 20 minutes to get my shot and that includes 15 mins obaevation time to make sure I don't react. Calling all Calgarians to Stampede Park grandstand.... Absolutely no lineup!


Good for you, KC4. I was in line from 1130AM until I walked out of the clinic here in St.John's at 545PM. Of course, that was a few weeks ago.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

The reason to get the shot now is simply that if you haven't gotten the flu by now doesn't mean you won't. The virus is different in that people tend not to have natural immunity (especially if younger than 55-60). The virus will wind it's course for months.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Batch of H1N1 vaccine recalled for severe reactions - Healthzone.ca


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Also from The Star:

How they larded H1N1 facts with fear - Healthzone.ca


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

There was no cover-up of the vaccine composition. In fact, I'd say that there was out of context information. Earlier in the thread there is a link to a product data sheet that outlines everything in the vaccine. But it doesn't note that the amount of many of these components is vanishingly small. Why? Partly because it's difficult to tell what level is a safe level so there is simply declaration of presence. You might say a safe level is zero but that is all relative. You can find some level of anything in everything if your test is sensitive enough.

The whole H1N1 episode has been characterised by incomplete information, over-simplification and over-reaction from all sides. The simple fact is that this vaccine is safer than the vast majority of all medications including over the counter drugs and supplements. Natural extracts are particularly difficult to classify in terms of their content. But vaccines have to be incredibly safe since they are given to healthy people in the millions. The recalled batch (7A) was noted to cause a 5 fold increase in anaphylactic shock in Manitoba (1 in 20,000). This increase has not been observed in other jurisdictions. That is was flagged demonstrates that surveillance is effective (no cover up and a very low trigger point).


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Like I had stated before, I knew there would be quality control problems in the rush to get this vaccine to market.
> 
> Doctors didn't know until after the fact that formaldehyde was in the batch? Incompetence once again rears it's ugly head in the medical profession.


Like I said before, I know first hand that bad reactions are common. The people manning the H1N1 vaccination clinics were specifically instructed in advance not to document them so that the official reports would not include any such information. Kids having seizures immediately after getting the shot are a daily occurrence. I've met nurses that said they refuse to vaccinate children for H1N1 anymore.

At least some of this is starting to come out. Now we know why GSK insisted on immunity from prosecution for adverse reactions before they'd agree to deliver the vaccine. I notice Dr. David Butler-Jones is still sticking to his "adverse reactions are rare" mantra. He'll probably lose his job over this in the end, since the Health Canada gets their talking point from him. Aglukkaq is a politician not a doctor, she relies on his expertise, so she sure isn't going to take the heat for it.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

bsenka, you have just described a conspiracy theory that would probably make a successful but totally unbelievable film. Why? Because your theorem requires a large number of people administering the shot to be complicit. It only takes one whistle-blower (thank goodness) and the consequential fall-out of disclosure would be horrendous. Moreover, this conspiracy of silence would also have to occur with press complicity and the public too (or would the person having a seizure be ignored by the 200 people standing in line?). You will need to do a lot better than this if you want a credible story line for a science fiction novel.

There is a good reason for protection from liability. With 20 million vaccinations of apparently healthy people in Canada, there are bound to be coincidental and extremely rare side effects. The people affected can still sue, just not the company, and there are limits to the potential damages. This is standard practice for vaccines where the administration is voluntary. No company would produce vaccines in other circumstances. The alternative is to have the government produce the vaccine. Hmm.... that sounds like the topic for another disaster novel.

Onwards.....


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

Daughter and I got our shots today. From the time we went in the door until we got our shot was 10 minutes. While waiting out our 15 minutes post shot time I casually asked one of the nurses how many have had a bad reaction after the shot at that location. She told me not a single one... thanks goodness.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

Last year I posted a story about a girl who was working at a hospital, received her regular flu shot at that hospital and they immediately had to call a "code blue". Stuff does happen.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

bsenka said:


> Like I said before, I know first hand that bad reactions are common.


That says "anecdotal evidence" to me. That's one of the most overlooked oxymorons.


> I've met nurses that said they refuse to vaccinate children for H1N1 anymore.


Yeah, probably because of how they were acting up, not from any adverse reactions.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

5 Days after the vaccination - I have no more sore arm.

My husband and teen daughter both rec'd the vaccination the day after I did. 
Today, 4 days later, my husband's arm is also back to normal, but the teen's normally skinny little arm is still very swollen, red, extra warm and very sore. 

I note that for my husband and daughter - it was the same antigen lot number, adjuvant number and 0.5 mL dose. ...although the daughter weighs less than half of what her average weight Dad does. Perhaps because of her diminutive size, she should have been given 2 smaller doses rather than one adult size dose.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Arrived at clinic this morning at 10:18, filled out form, no line up, brief explanation by nurse, poke, waited 15 minutes and exited at 10:42. No problems since.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

hayesk said:


> Yeah, probably because of how they were acting up, not from any adverse reactions.


They were having seizures immediately after inoculation. It's been an almost daily occurrence.

Anecdotal to YOU or not, I personally know two people here in Winnipeg who were hospitalized due to severe adverse reactions. In both cases, it was the kind reaction you'd expect from anaphylaxis (closed throat, drop in blood pressure, etc). Both were OK the next day. So you don't have to take my word for it, I really don't care. I know different, first hand, and that's what matters to me. You can tell me there's no such thing as blue cars, but if I own one I'll know better than you. Whether you believe me or not, makes no difference, I'll still be right and you;ll still be wrong. A lie is still a lie even if everyone believes it, and the truth is still the truth even if no one knows it.

The bottom line is, public health agencies are lying about both the virus and vaccine. The virus is nowhere near as serious as they're making it out to be, and the vaccine is nowhere near as safe. I flat out do not believe a word they say anymore.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

With over 200,000 vaccinations in NL to date, there have been reports of only 20 adverse reactions, all minor, and all 20 persons are fine now after a couple of days of discomfort. We have run out of vaccines here in NL, so the tally shall again begin once the vaccination clinics reopen when more vaccine is available.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Interesting development. It appears that the really deadly flu that is hitting the Ukraine is a mutation of H1N1. Still waiting to see articles written in clear English.

No mention as to whether the vaccine will actually protect anyone from this mutation. 

One writer claimed the mutation was almost identical to the 1918 virus. I am going to note that I lost track of that one and will take it with a grain of salt until it has been generally confirmed.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

MazterCBlazter said:


> The 1918 flu was truly deadly. The hini doesn't even register on the scale by comparison. that is one strain of flu I would not want to see rear it's ugly head again.


Agreed which does make one wonder why they went to so much trouble to exhume corpses to find a viable sample.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

History tends to repeat itself if we forget to learn from it.

The Spanish flu occurred before antibiotics and before anyone knew what caused it. While flu is caused by a virus, most people who died in the 1918/19 outbreak died of associated infections (pneumonia) caused by the influenza weakening the delicate lung tissue. The spread of the Spanish flu was also exacerbated by a variety of measures taken by communities that were intended to try to contain it. Ignorance serves no one and we know a lot more about influenza now. However, don't for a second think we know enough.

bsenka, there are 24 documented cases of anaphylaxis after inoculation in Canada (representing a rate of 0.3 per 100,000 or more). That exceeds the projected safety. All but one fully recovered and the exception was an elderly person with other conditions. Since this immune response is reportable and requires intervention (such as adrenalin injection and often hospitalization, etc), your direct experience with two of these cases is incredibly bad luck, to say the least.

There may well be mutations occurring in the H1N1 virus although it does seem quite stable (there are sporadic reports of variants but its not yet clear whether these are true changes in the virus or co-morbidities). The chances of mutations increase directly with the amount of virus produced, i.e. in proportion to the infection frequency. This is another good reason to increase immunity through vaccination since the virus cannot reproduce and spread if there are fewer hosts.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

bsenka said:


> They were having seizures immediately after inoculation. It's been an almost daily occurrence.
> 
> Anecdotal to YOU or not, I personally know two people here in Winnipeg who were hospitalized due to severe adverse reactions.


I believe you saw two people have reactions, but I don't believe two people are enough for you to determine that bad reactions are common.



> The bottom line is, public health agencies are lying about both the virus and vaccine. The virus is nowhere near as serious as they're making it out to be, and the vaccine is nowhere near as safe. I flat out do not believe a word they say anymore.


Bottom line is you asserted they are lying without real information to support your claim.

How many people died from the vaccine? How many people died from H1N1?

You can talk about your personal observation if you want to, but bottom line, it's a pretty simple decision:
- get the vaccine and you don't have to worry about the odds of dying from H1N1. (or infecting anyone else who might die from it)
- or don't get it because you are worried about feeling bad for a day or two, or an extremely rare seizure


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

My shot is now 25 hours old and the numbness and pain in my left arm has subsided. It was uncomfortable overnight and so much so, that I could not sleep on that side. But all in all, not a real bad experience and I would do it again in a heartbeat. 10 more days or so and I should be immune.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

and a good thing ...death toll is rising and not a pretty outcome for victims....



> * As toll mounts, researchers peer into the H1N1 death spiral *
> 
> *So far, 309 people have died across Canada s*ince the pandemic began in the spring, and roughly one-third had no underlying health conditions
> 
> ...


continues
As toll mounts, researchers peer into the H1N1 death spiral - The Globe and Mail


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

used to be jwoodget said:


> bsenka, there are 24 documented cases of anaphylaxis after inoculation in Canada (representing a rate of 0.3 per 100,000 or more). That exceeds the projected safety. All but one fully recovered and the exception was an elderly person with other conditions. Since this immune response is reportable and requires intervention (such as adrenalin injection and often hospitalization, etc), your direct experience with two of these cases is incredibly bad luck, to say the least.


*Documented*. Yes.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Do you find it exhausting to have no trust in anything or anyone? I would.

I do believe that we should all examine information for ourselves and come to our own conclusions, but there comes a point where you need to realize that we don't control everything, we cannot outsmart every possible disaster, and we have to just let go of some of the worry and fear and get on with everything else.

Just my humble opinion.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Sonal said:


> Do you find it exhausting to have no trust in anything or anyone? I would.
> 
> I do believe that we should all examine information for ourselves and come to our own conclusions, but there comes a point where you need to realize that we don't control everything, we cannot outsmart every possible disaster, and we have to just let go of some of the worry and fear and get on with everything else.
> 
> Just my humble opinion.


An excellent point, Sonal.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

> I have as much faith in the bogus hini scare as in Bre-X shares.


I am ready willing and able to offer 10¢ for a block of 1000 Bre-X shares. I will even go so far as to buy 10 blocks at that price.

Seller will have to provide actual paper certificates of each share as my intent is to use them as wall paper should Bre-X fail to make a come back over the next few months.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

Sonal said:


> Do you find it exhausting to have no trust in anything or anyone? I would..


I see the opposite. People get all worked up jumping from panic to panic that nearly always turn out to be nothing but bullcrap. I don't buy into it anymore, and it's quite relaxing.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

bsenka said:


> I see the opposite. People get all worked up jumping from panic to panic that nearly always turn out to be nothing but bullcrap. I don't buy into it anymore, and it's quite relaxing.


Ah, you see, I'm not panicking or getting freaked out by the hype either, AND I don't think there is a giant conspiracy or cover-up going on either. Also quite relaxing.

Perhaps you are relaxed, but your words here make you seem like you are suspicious and a bit paranoid, states of being that one does not typically associate with relaxation.

Again, just my opinion.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> Documented. Yes.


so someone recovers from ashock without intervention.....sure....


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

Sonal said:


> Ah, you see, I'm not panicking or getting freaked out by the hype either, AND I don't think there is a giant conspiracy or cover-up going on either. Also quite relaxing.
> 
> Perhaps you are relaxed, but your words here make you seem like you are suspicious and a bit paranoid, states of being that one does not typically associate with relaxation.
> 
> Again, just my opinion.


Anyone who accepts the official position on any of these panic-de-jours, and pays anything they say any heed is freaking out as far as I'm concerned. If you thought there was any legitimate reason to get vaccinated, you're solidly in my definition of someone who is freaking out over nothing. That the vaccine even exists is evidence of panic, as is the rush to shout down anyone who might try to be the voice of reason. 

Also, just *my* opinion.

Outside of seeing people freak out on this forum, I don't give it a moments thought in my daily life.



MacDoc said:


> so someone recovers from a shock without intervention.....sure....


No, they get intervention, and they're hospitalized. But the H1N1 clinics have been instructed not to document such incidents specifically so that they do not show up as being caused by the vaccine in the "official" numbers.

That's not my opinion, it's what a clinic nurse told me a couple of weeks ago.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

On the news recently it appears that Canada ordered roughly 50 million doses of vaccine or enough to vaccinate three quarters of the populace twice. As could easily be predicted less than half the populace will be vaccinated once leaving the idiots in charge trying to figure out what to do with about 30 million doses of the flu vaccine. 

There is an added bonus. Early indicators show that the really deadly mutation, which has hit the Ukraine and to a lesser degree Norway and Texas, will need its own vaccine.

My fearless prediction is to expect an instant replay.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Fortunately (as far as I am concerned), Canada has successfully immunized about a third of the population including many of those most vulnerable. That really is all that matters since preventing disease is far, far cheaper than treating it. If anyone doubts this, they only need look at where half of their provinces taxes go. But prevention has the unfortunate habit of party pooping when it comes to headlines. It's effects are a non-event!


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Alberta lags far behind that average at about 24%.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Newfoundland and Labrador has immunized nearly half of the population, but we keep running out of vaccine. The long lineups I experienced are gone now, but people are being given "rain checks" for shots when they become available.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

I have a couple of points. First off the question about 50 million doses. This was all in the news months and months ago but I guess some folks aren't up on the news. At the time before the vaccine was to be manufactured there was some question of it's efficacy because of the small amount being used. It was thought at the time that we might require 2 doses instead of one. Thankfully, as it turns out, one dose is working fine. Too bad we don't have crystal balls to see into the future. 

Secondly, the question about numbers of deaths. Thankfully they are low. I don't think this is entirely the doing of the virus itself but in part due to quick medical intervention with those who are stricken badly. Public awareness is high and those who are ill are more likely to seek care sooner than under other circumstances. That is key to flu intervention. A quick response is more likely to lesson mortality. I know of a person who came darn close to being an H1N1 death statistic and likely would be had it not been for immediate care. I'm not suggesting N1N1 is more or less worse than the regular flu, just don't go by death statistics.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

*LOL Scammers using the flu to phish...*

Received this phishing scam in my email today...too funny:



> You have received this e-mail because of the launching of State Vaccination H1N1 Program.
> 
> You need to create your personal H1N1 (swine flu) Vaccination Profile on the cdc.gov website. The Vaccination is not obligatory, but every person that has reached the age of 18 has to have his personal Vaccination Profile on the cdc.gov site. This profile has to be created both for the vaccinated people and the not-vaccinated ones. This profile is used for the registering system of vaccinated and not-vaccinated people.
> Create your Personal H1N1 Vaccination Profile using the link:
> ...


Didn't know The Center for Disease Control was in Italy (origin of the email).

The "create profile" link (which I didn't click) pointed here:










No idea where .im is as it's not a valid country code.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

MazterCBlazter said:


> So the h1n1 has come and gone.
> 
> There was talk of a second wave hitting us in February. Seems to be quiet now.
> 
> ...


Gone? Seriously? Good, I am sick of washing my hands.


----------



## Elric (Jul 30, 2005)

MazterCBlazter said:


> It seemed to do much less damage than the regular flu season in terms of casualties. Except for our wallets and health budgets not much damage was done.
> 
> It wasn't exactly the back death.
> 
> Thoughts?


Then it was a successful "Stimulus Package", lets hope that those Pharma Co's spend the money locally.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

H1N1 needle blamed for partial paralysis - Canada - Canoe.ca

As far my thoughts on it being gone... not sure. A ton of people been getting the flu lately around here (past week), especially at work. This includes myself and my fiance (we have been healthy this season and no vaccinations). By the mild symptoms, probably not H1N1, but the flu season seems like it's pulled the goalie in the 3rd period.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Last batch of my Chinese herbs got rid of my headaches and persistent sore throat. While I originally thought I had no side effects from that BS swine flu shot, my Chinese doctor had someone there that spoke English and did some translating for us. My Chinese doctor could tell I had the shot, and it was probably the reason my system is out of whack. He had seen the effect in a number of his clients that had this inoculation.
> 
> I went over my workout logs and noticed a statistical decline in training performance over this time period.
> 
> ...


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

Boy there imaginary things being made up, all right.


----------

