|
|
Topic started on 14-9-2009 @ 06:48 PM by admriker444
|
My wife is a doctor and divided on the issue of the swine flu vaccine. Personally she and i wont be taking the vaccine. However she cant deny it to
patients who want it without just cause
Her medical peers are unfamiliar with conspiracy issues or the concerns over the vaccine's additive known as squalene.
You would be surprised at some of the sources Ive come across that claim squalene is deadly. Infowars had a few stories quoting one source who it
turns out is a dentist and did no formal study.
Can someone point me to a specific study done by doctors printed by a reputable publication that proves squalene is dangerous ? Ive read the stories
that suggest a possible link to GBS and Gulf War syndrome but those werent actual studies done.
I need actual medical study for her to make this decision. And so far the data she has come across suggests that squalene is perfectly fine. Nothing
in any medical journal she has seen so far indicates any issues
My guess is Gulf War syndrome likely did come from squalene additive simply because the pentagon spent yrs denying it was even in the anthrax vaccine.
That alone suggests they knew its deadly otherwise why hide the fact that it as in there ?
She needs something more solid though before she can deny patients a vaccine the goverment and every major medical source says is safe
[edit on 14-9-2009 by admriker444]
[edit on 14-9-2009 by admriker444]
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Medical Issues & Conspiracies topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
reply posted on 14-9-2009 @ 09:14 PM by Doctor G
|
I have no idea about the British Journal of Cancer or can figure out what this says:
bad
www.nature.com...
A 2000 study published in the American Journal of Pathology demonstrated a single injection of the adjuvant squalene into rats triggered “chronic,
immune-mediated joint-specific inflammation,” also known as rheumatoid arthritis.[vii]
The researchers concluded the study raised questions about the role of adjuvants in chronic inflammatory diseases.
A study conducted at Tulane Medical School and published in the February 2000 issue of Experimental Molecular Pathology included these stunning
statistics:
“ … the substantial majority (95%) of overtly ill deployed GWS patients had antibodies to squalene. All (100%) GWS patients immunized for service
in Desert Shield/Desert Storm who did not deploy, but had the same signs and symptoms as those who did deploy, had antibodies to squalene.
In contrast, none (0%) of the deployed Persian Gulf veterans not showing signs and symptoms of GWS have antibodies to squalene. Neither patients with
idiopathic autoimmune disease nor healthy controls had detectable serum antibodies to squalene. The majority of symptomatic GWS patients had serum
antibodies to squalene.”[xi]
According to Dr. Viera Scheibner, Ph.D., a former principle research scientist for the government of Australia:
“… this adjuvant [squalene] contributed to the cascade of reactions called "Gulf War Syndrome," documented in the soldiers involved in the Gulf
War.
The symptoms they developed included arthritis, fibromyalgia, lymphadenopathy, rashes, photosensitive rashes, malar rashes, chronic fatigue, chronic
headaches, abnormal body hair loss, non-healing skin lesions, aphthous ulcers, dizziness, weakness, memory loss, seizures, mood changes,
neuropsychiatric problems, anti-thyroid effects, anaemia, elevated ESR (erythrocyte sedimentation rate), systemic lupus erythematosus, multiple
sclerosis, ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis), Raynaud’s phenomenon, Sjorgren’s syndrome, chronic diarrhoea, night sweats and low-grade
fevers.”[xii]
not bad
www.sciencedirect.com...
011730081&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=64226cbaf494aab1901a9f9766c78819
Different studies, different answers.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-9-2009 @ 09:44 PM by admriker444
|
reply to post by Doctor G
yes my wife read those. the studies suggested antibodies were produced to squalene.
it doesnt say or prove squalene does anything. essentially it means further study is needed.
i suppose the many posts and topics out here and on infowars will simply ignore this pesky fact though. again i challenge anyone to show me a medical
study linking squalene to gbs or gulf war syndrome or cancer.
I admit I was at first against the idea of a swine flu vaccine and read the inflammatory stories on infowars. Ive changed my mind though because the
facts just dont match what conspiracy sites are telling us
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-9-2009 @ 09:59 PM by admriker444
|
and i see the same old copy and paste of Dr. Schiebner ridiculous claims.
www.apologia.com...
read that link. thats just one of many real studies that prove Schiebner is full of crap. Schiebner claims all vaccines are bad and uses junk science
to state that SIDS is linked to vaccines. This has been disproven by several studies.
folks im a conspiracy buff or i wouldnt be here. i believe the elite are trying to run the world. i believe in alien life, etc.
but there is just no proof that the swine flu or any other vaccine is bad for us.
whats more likely, a secret conspiracy by the elite, pharm, doctors, colleges, medical think tanks, research labs, and govts. to reduce global
populations by giving us a vaccine ??? Or maybe its just what it appears to be, a corp trying to make a profit by offering a treatment for something
that causes disease ?
yeah the media overhyped this. thats what they do, its called getting ratings for advertising dollars. but to stretch this whole thing with some quack
that hates vaccines without proof is pure insanity
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 14-9-2009 @ 10:16 PM by JBA2848
|
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Gulf War Syndrome (GWS) is a multisystemic illness afflicting many Gulf War-era veterans. The molecular pathological basis for GWS has not been
established. We sought to determine whether the presence of antibodies to squalene correlates with the presence of signs and symptoms of GWS.
Participants in this blinded cohort study were individuals immunized for service in Desert Shield/Desert Storm during 1990-1991. They included 144
Gulf War-era veterans or military employees (58 in the blinded study), 48 blood donors, 40 systemic lupus erythematosus patients, 34 silicone breast
implant recipients, and 30 chronic fatigue syndrome patients. Serum antibodies to squalene were measured. In our small cohort, the substantial
majority (95%) of overtly ill deployed GWS patients had antibodies to squalene. All (100%) GWS patients immunized for service in Desert Shield/Desert
Storm who did not deploy, but had the same signs and symptoms as those who did deploy, had antibodies to squalene. In contrast, none (0%) of the
deployed Persian Gulf veterans not showing signs and symptoms of GWS have antibodies to squalene. Neither patients with idiopathic autoimmune disease
nor healthy controls had detectable serum antibodies to squalene. The majority of symptomatic GWS patients had serum antibodies to squalene. Copyright
2000 Academic Press.
www.avip2001.net...
We previously reported that antibodies to squalene, an experimental vaccine adjuvant, are present in persons with symptoms consistent with Gulf
War Syndrome (GWS) (P. B. Asa et al., Exp. Mol. Pathol 68, 196–197, 2000). The United States Department of Defense initiated the Anthrax Vaccine
Immunization Program (AVIP) in 1997 to immunize 2.4 million military personnel. Because adverse reactions in vaccinated personnel were similar to
symptoms of GWS, we tested AVIP participants for anti-squalene antibodies (ASA). In a pilot study, 6 of 6 vaccine recipients with GWS-like symptoms
were positive for ASA. In a larger blinded study, only 32% (8/25) of AVIP personnel compared to 15.7% (3/19) of controls were positive (P 0.05).
Further analysis revealed that ASA were associated with specific lots of vaccine. The incidence of ASA in personnel in the blinded study receiving
these lots was 47% (8/17) compared to an incidence of 0% (0/8; P 0.025) of the AVIP participants receiving other lots of vaccine. Analysis of
additional personnel revealed that in all but one case (19/20; 95%), ASA were restricted to personnel immunized with lots of vaccine known to contain
squalene. Except for one symptomatic individual, positive clinical findings in 17 ASA-negative personnel were restricted to 4 individuals receiving
vaccine from lots containing squalene. ASA were not present prior to vaccination in preimmunization sera available from 4 AVIP personnel. Three of
these individuals became ASA positive after vaccination. These results suggest that the production of ASA in GWS patients is linked to the presence of
squalene in certain lots of anthrax vaccine. © 2002 Elsevier Science (USA)
Key Words: anthrax vaccines; adverse adjuvant effect; squalene toxicity;
Gulf War Syndrome; multisystem disorders.
INTRODUCTION
The Anthrax Vaccine Adsorbed contains aluminium hydroxide as an adjuvant.[5] Each dose of the vaccine contains no more that 0.83 mg aluminum per 0.5
mL dose. This is near the allowed upper limit of 0.85 mg/dose.[13] The BioPort anthrax vaccine also contains 0.0025% benzethonium chloride as a
preservative, and 0.0037% formaldehyde as a stabilizer.[5]
In 2007, tests with mice of the anthrax vaccine using aluminum hydroxide adjuvant were reported as resulting in adverse neuropathy symptoms.[14]
2005 judge stops the vaccine
2008 judge rules vaccines can be given
[edit on 14-9-2009 by JBA2848]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-9-2009 @ 10:29 PM by loam
|
reply to post by admriker444
You are my new best friend.
Originally posted by admriker444
...Or maybe its just what it appears to be, a corp trying to make a profit by offering a treatment for something that causes disease ?
And a government filled with bureaucrats and politicians terrified of any possible accusation that they did nothing should something actually
materialize.
A perfect storm of predation and idiocy... In other words, normal human governance of its affairs.
On topic, good luck with your research.
Unfortunately, I suspect your timing is way off...
[edit on 14-9-2009 by loam]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 14-9-2009 @ 10:59 PM by lasimplereality
|
Originally posted by admriker444
reply to post by Doctor G
I admit I was at first against the idea of a swine flu vaccine and read the inflammatory stories on infowars. Ive changed my mind though because the
facts just dont match what conspiracy sites are telling us
Unfortunately is really hard to get any 'objective' studies if big pharma controls all studies. Back in undergad (10 years ago) i was working at a
lab as an assistant and many graduate students would tell me that their research was never 100% theirs because to get the grants, they would have to
comply with the terms. At the time I didn't really probe much into that, but looking back, i guess research is only done on those topics that are
funded by the 'big dogs.'
Anyway, when i worked in the hospitals, I never got the flu vaccines b/c i took pride in the fact that i was always healthy; many nurses would line up
to get the vaccine; two of my friends ended up in the ICU and they swore it was vaccine related. Their doctors and other nurses said that most likely
the reaction came from some pre existing condition. These 2 women now refuse to vaccinate their kids or themselves.
As your wife should know, we all react differently to vaccines; 100 people might take a medication, and maybe 5 of them will come out with adverse
side effects. It could be blamed on the fact that their bodies were weaker, but you will never see drug companies saying that it was the chemicals in
their drugs that caused the problem, even though their drugs are full of adverse side effects. Just 2 months ago I had to take prednisone because I
develop a severe infection; after 2 doses, I was itching like a maniac. I told my doctor and he said, nah, not really related to prednisone; i
continue the dosage next day, and again, severe itching. I stopped taking it, and itching gone. Bottom line, doctors are many times clueless.
That's why they practice medicine----cause they barely get it right, and thus, they keep on practicing hoping to one day become professionals.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
|
|
|