CDC says flu shot only 9% 'effective' against flu
POSTED BY: PIRATENEWS
UPDATED: Monday, June 17, 2024 23:26
VIEWED: 6228
PAGE 3 of 5
Some of the best trolls I've seen are also very effective poes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law
A few have managed to infiltrate groups to such a degree that they have even been made admins within those groups, at which point the mask comes off and the fun really starts.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Good thing we don't have admins ey.
Jack you make a good point about kids and dirt, its good for them to get dirty because it strengthens their immune systems. When I was little I was a rather sickly child, I caught lots of things and made it and now I've got an iron immune system. If I'd been born in the olden days I would have died from one of my various childhood sicknesses and it would have been good and right and the best thing for myself and my family, that way I would have been weeded out of the gene pool and spared the agony that would come later, but which the olden days couldn't treat. I probably would have gotten burnt at the stake when I was thirteen and first started having trouble. So nature would have been kind to me by killing me off from infections in early girlhood. But this is today and here I am, for better or worse, when I'm doing better I think the former and when I'm doing worse I think the latter. But there are lots of things in my life worth living for and experiencing, so that's always good, that's what keeps me flying. I think I'm brave and tough. Maybe I'm tricking myself and I'm not. But I think I am and I trust that I am and I hope that I am.
This thread has gotten lame so I'm changing to subject. But that's okay. Trolls are boring.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
"The world today has 6.8 billion people that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."
-Bill Gates
http://www.naturalnews.com/029911_vaccines_Bill_Gates.html
Dozens of vaccine workers and their police state death squads murdered in self defense:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21585291
Female Vaccination Workers, Essential in Pakistan, Become Prey
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/21/world/asia/un-halts-vaccine-work-in-
pakistan-after-more-killings.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
More polio vaccination workers killed in Pakistan
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/19/more-polio-vaccination-wor
kers-killed
Gunmen Kill Nigerian Polio Vaccine Workers in Echo of Pakistan Attacks
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/09/world/africa/in-nigeria-polio-vaccin
e-workers-are-killed-by-gunmen.html
Quote:
Bill Gates Continues ‘God’s Work’ To Reduce Population With Vaccines, Third World Vaccine Workers Shot Dead
In January 2013, Bill Gates told the world in an interview that he had no need for money and that he believed the global vaccination program was God’s work. [1] “It’s not going to stop us succeeding,” says Gates. “It does force us to sit down with the Pakistan government to renew their commitments, see what they’re going to do in security and make changes to protect the women who are doing God’s work and getting out to these children and delivering the vaccine.”
His words came after several vaccine workers administering the polio vaccination in Pakistan were shot dead in January. [2]
It appears that although Gates wants to carry on with what he calls ‘God’s work,’ people living in the third world are beginning to make their feelings abundantly clear. It appears that they don’t want his vaccines or his charity, as more shootings were reported in Nigeria.
On February 8, 2013, The Guardian reported that at least nine health workers administering the polio vaccinations in Nigeria were shot dead by gunmen thought to belong to radical an Islamist sect. The Guardian wrote:
“The killings drew comparisons with a series of incidents in Pakistan last December where five female polio vaccinators were gunned down, apparently by Islamist militants. It also signalled a fresh wave of hostility towards immunisation drives in Nigeria, where some clerics have claimed the vaccines are part of a western plot to sterilise young girls and eliminate the Muslim population.” [3]
DO YOU KNOW WHAT’S IN THAT NEEDLE?
They are right to be suspicious because it would not be the first time that vaccines were given with the intention of sterilizing women in the third world. In 1995, many third world countries were given a tetanus vaccine containing a birth control drug by the World Health Organization.
An organization known as The Comite became suspicious of the protocols surrounding the vaccines and obtained several vials for testing. It was discovered that some of the vials contained human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), a naturally occurring hormone essential for maintaining a pregnancy.
However, when combined with a tetanus toxoid carrier, this vaccine essentially causes a woman’s body to produce antibodies against pregnancy, forcing her body to abort her unborn baby, as reported by ThinkTwice Global Vaccine Institute:
“In nature the hCG hormone alerts the woman’s body that she is pregnant and causes the release of other hormones to prepare the uterine lining for the implantation of the fertilized egg. The rapid rise in hCG levels after conception makes it an excellent marker for confirmation of pregnancy: when a woman takes a pregnancy test she is not tested for the pregnancy itself, but for the elevated presence of hCG.
However, when introduced into the body coupled with a tetanus toxoid carrier, antibodies will be formeNOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
This thread has gotten lame so I'm changing to subject. But that's okay. Trolls are boring.
You're getting the hang of it. Soon you'll be trolling me back like a pro.
I can't really help it. Like you, people in other ages would've thought I was a changeling; unlike you, I don't ever really get sick.
PN: Yeah, I'm not sure why people think Bill Gates is such a good guy just because he does humanitarian aid work. He's still pretty much pure evil - his business practices when he was running Microsoft are an obvious sign.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Kwicko: Poe himself was an amazing troll.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Literature/TheNarrativeOfArthurG
ordonPymOfNantucket
(not the same poe, but still)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Damn skippy, Riona! 
Honestly, we don't even know what we're messing with here, doing our damned best to sheild our kids from EVERYTHING, including the common cold.
Think about that phrase for a second "Common Cold".....
What does that remind you of......?
It reminds me of the generic term for mixed Europeans today, "Caucasian".
Caucasian is so insulting to me because it throws away any culture that my history may have been made up of. I'm quite sure that any blacks and hispanics here can say the same thing.
Denying a child the ability to be exposed and build immunities to the "Common Cold" is just like how we've managed to basically create a NEW race of "White American" people with ZERO heritage and call them Caucasian. Neither practice, I believe, is healthy in the long run.
How many of those "Common Colds" today were deadly flu viruses or something similar 200 years ago???? How many of them have been thrown on the shit-heap of "nothing more than runny-nose annoyances" that keep Kleenex in business?
Even if one or more of what we dismiss as common colds today were considered plagues in the 1400's, you've got to hand it to the little buggers.... they really know how to hold on, don't they????
For all we know, any one of the potential serious outbreaks we face today could be evolutions of those viruses and bacteria that were so harmless, only 10 years ago. We pump our kids so readily with penicillin and make sure they're wiping their hands so many times to instill OCD into them that we're probably inducing survival of the fittest in the micro-colonies that infest our hands.
Did I ever tell you about my Strep Throat horror story?
I had full health insurance, but hate going to the doctor for anything.
Long story short, I finally succumbed and begged my brother to drive me to the clinic after 8 days and a 103 degree fever. (I still don't even know if the human body can fight this on its own, but I couldn't wait one more day to find out on my own).
At that point, the right side of my throat had swollen easily to the size of a golf ball. Had the left swollen up that much, I wouldn't be able to breathe or swallow. As gross as it sounds, I wish I had pictures of it instead of just the memories of that gigantic, puss-ridden horror in my mouth. Even swallowing ice-cream or ice-water felt like swallowing a handful of razor blades.
2 years later, when I was 27, I was working one night and told my brother, 8 hours before the shift ended, that I was going back to the same clinic because I had strep throat again. He said "How do you know?". I said, trust me bro....
When the nurse practitioner asked me what I needed today, I told her I needed penicillin because I had strep throat. She used her tongue-depresser and flash-scope and told me there was no evidence of strep and she'd have to swab test for it. I told her to knock herself out. 10 minutes later, she told me I had strep and 15 minutes later I had my prescription. I didn't miss a single day of work that time.
Part of virus/bacteria, I believe, is mental prevention, but only when you REALLY know what you're defending yourself against. Most illnesses will run their course. Just don't let them go too long unchecked.
If I could turn back time though........
My singing voice for most Karaoke is shit today. I still do a mean Tom Petty, but there are a lot of 80's/90's love songs I can't touch anymore because the aftermath of a golf-ball size "tumor" on the tonsil totally re-shapes the landscape of the tubes.....
I hate being old......
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"It would make absolutely no sense to talk about vaccine effectiveness in people WHO HADN'T HAD THE VACCINE."
They're the control group. Not everyone who is un-vaccinated gets the flu. not everyone who is vaccinated will avoid it. If you are doing calculations about a vaccine's effectiveness your statistics have to take that into account.
"Vaccine efficacy/effectiveness (VE) is measured by calculating the risk of disease among vaccinated and unvaccinated persons and determining the percentage reduction in risk of disease among vaccinated persons relative to unvaccinated persons.
Risk among unvaccinated group - risk among vaccinated group divided byRisk among unvaccinated group
OR: 1 - risk ratio"
1 is the statistical equivalent of 100%
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I understand how a control group works (which, BTW, isn't usually the general unvaccinated population, but a group that has been given a proxy or placebo to compare the difference in a controlled setting).
This is simple statistics for vaccine effectiveness after the vaccine has been produced and administered.
Shall I quote what you posted to me?
Quote:
"These adjusted VE (vaccine effectiveness) estimates indicate that vaccination with the 2012–13 influenza season vaccine reduced the risk for OUTPATIENT MEDICAL VISITS resulting from influenza by approximately one half to two thirds for most persons, although VE was lower and not statistically significant among older adults."
Quote:
Oh, I just wanted to add this - you all completely misunderstood the statistics. It's not that half of all people got the flu whether or not they were vaccinated. It's that compared to un-vaccinated people as the 100% mark, only 56% got the flu.
Quote:
"Vaccine efficacy/effectiveness (VE) is measured by calculating the risk of disease among vaccinated and unvaccinated persons and determining the percentage reduction in risk of disease among vaccinated persons relative to unvaccinated persons.
Emphasis yours.
I'm not even sure at this point what you're saying I have wrong. None of us ever said that half of all people got the flu whether or not they were vaccinated. It was an unfair and inaccurate accusation to make.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If I may quote you:
'For the rest of the population it's 56%, but that's not exactly good either. 50% would mean an even odds bet that you'll get the virus anyway (or exhibit vaccine symptoms exactly like a virus).'
While you made no specific statement about un-vaccinated people, to complete the context of your statement, the REST of it SHOULD have been - and your chances of getting the flu are 75% if you're un-vaccinated. (or at 56% effectiveness, about 80%)
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
For the rest of the population it's 56%, but that's not exactly good either. 50% would mean an even odds bet that you'll get the virus anyway (or exhibit vaccine symptoms exactly like a virus).
Right, and I said that in respects for the vaccine's efficiency. I didn't think I'd have to spell it out because it was an implied part of the comment. I said "vaccine symptoms exactly like a virus" which was a big indicator. As was the "anyway" which is not the same as "Whether or not" in context, but rather "if you get vaccinated." I was making a snark about how I think that people are actually getting the flu from the vaccines. I was talking about people who were vaccinated.
And I inferred that the percentage might hold true in the greater population of vaccinated people based on a theoretically representative sample. That's the whole point of statistics. More specifically that's "the rest of the vaccinated population compared to the vaccinated elderly," which I was correcting PN about.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME