(Busted) Unbelieve Propaganda about additives no evidence

Guess what with no proof, just pointing figures.

Vaccine additive helps immune system respond to, protect against flu
www.google.com...

But a vaccine with adjuvant can produce a good immune response to viruses that are similar but not exactly the same as the vaccine target. There's also a chance one dose of adjuvanted vaccine would suffice for everyone, even young children. Preliminary data released last week by GlaxoSmithKline - the makers of Canada's H1N1 vaccine - shows even young children got what looks like a protective immune response from one dose of vaccine. Children under 10 are currently slated to get two shots, at least 21 days apart - a regimen that will be a figurative pain for parents and a literal one for kids. But Canada's chief public health officer, Dr. David Butler-Jones, says that recommendation may be revised if further data supports a one-dose approach.

AS03 is newer and isn't in GSK's seasonal flu vaccine. But the company has been testing an AS03-boosted vaccine to protect against H5N1 avian flu and a total of 41,000 people have received AS03 in clinical trials, says Dr. Thomas Breuer, head of global clinical development and chief medical officer of GSK Biologicals. In addition, as of late last week 150,000 people had received GSK's H1N1 vaccine containing AS03. To date, there have been no red flags.

Let's be clear. We're not talking about excruciating pain, we're talking about a bit more of a sore arm than usual - though some years seasonal flu vaccine packs a bit of a wallop too. About the pain: The adjuvant causes some inflammation at the site of the injection, a process that activates parts of the immune system. "Invariably adjuvants give you more pain, swelling," Fauci says. "But as far as prolonged or long-term systemic effects, there have been no good data to indicate (that) at all. In fact, the data to the contrary have shown, that it's really quite safe."

Text

My fav line

Q: Isn't squalene dangerous? Didn't it cause Gulf War Syndrome?

A: No and no.

The guy who wrote Helen Branswell had no back supporting evidence for the most of the stuff in the article, remember what he said about Gulf war snydrome?
As for the supposed Gulf War Syndrome link, it isn't true. I say it is true

If you do more digging into the past and finding the right information you will find the link, funny he mentions a study back in 2006 and yet doesn't offer evidence.

You can also tell the way the article was written in way of sense telling the readers the
vaccine is safe but the he who wrote it didn't offer evidence to the readers on how effective is the h1n1 vaccine.

OP - your English is terrible.

Please review what you have written and try to make a point.

I have no idea what you are rambling about - you ask some supposedly rhetorical questions - but I have no idea what answer you expect me to know.

The link is interesting, your rambling and incoherent commentary just adds an element of confusion and detracts from the post.

You launch into the middle - rummage around the end - then proudly assert the beginning - at what stage do we get introduced to your thoughts or conclusions?



[edit on 26-10-2009 by Amagnon]

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter


Thanks for the big pharma propaganda, after all when the president step in to promote the swine flu vaccine with his national emergency, guess who were doing great in the markets today.

Yeah, big pharma.

Hey I will wait for anybody to take the vaccine first then in about three months let see if they come down with some side effects. OK!

BTW, please people stop bashing grammar no everybody has a degree in linguistics or have an English major, we are after all people from many parts of the world in ATS.

[edit on 26-10-2009 by marg6043]

Do look into some thing called mycoplasma, it is also related to GWS and pneumonia.

Golf War Syndrome

1. Infectious Diseases - A number of infectious agents were present in the Gulf but medical records generally show that they weren't a major problem for personnel due to extensive precautionary measures (1). Of cause many infectious agents may lie dormant without causing an acute illness. The most common infectious agents present were thought to be cutaneous leishmaniasis, travelers diarrhea, sandfly fever and malaria. One unique infectious disease has been linked to the Gulf war deployment: viscerotrophic leishmaniasis (1). This infectious disease has been found in 12 U.S. veterans but none of the other Coalition forces personnel.



There is substantial evidence for mycoplasma infection playing a role in veterans illnesses. Mycoplasma can be defined as the smallest organisms lacking cell walls that are capable of self-replication and can cause various diseases in humans. Although usually associated with respitory and urinary disease, mycoplasma are thought by a growing number of medical professionals to be responsible for a number of unexplained symptoms, especially chronic fatigue states. Mycoplasma fermentans has been found in the blood of gulf war veterans at a much higher rate than in the overall population (2, 3, 4).

A few facts on one of the adjuvants added to the H1N1 vaccine, in most countries.

There seem to be some ties between Gulf War Syndrome [GWS] and Squalene. Squalene has also been shown to cause auto-immunity issues in lab animals according to Barbara Loe Fisher of the NVIC, National Vaccine Information Center, a non-profit vaccine watchdog group.

The amount of Squalene in the current H1N1 vaccine is ONE MILLION times the amount [See Squalene thread] that was given to the soldiers in their "Vaccine A" which may have led to GWS. GWS also showed up in people who were enlisted and vaccinated but never went overseas, indicating the antibodies and presence of this was due to the vaccine.



[edit on 26-10-2009 by notreallyalive]

Originally posted by marg6043

BTW, please people stop bashing grammar no everybody has a degree in linguistics or have an English major, we are after all people from many parts of the world in ATS.

Despite the extremely poor level of grammar on ATS I don't usually complain, its not very productive.

However, I read the OP's text - and I CANNOT UNDERSTAND IT AT ALL - I have no idea what he is talking about.

It might as well be "iopujbasukxfk;jn jbhjk jklh12ir478 jklk xd yjhfgv l./.mnk ty jklnm ljkh kvh .kmnm,./;'/ ujhuyfg."

Its completely meaningless to me - so asking for a revision isn't bashing, I am actually interested in the OP's thoughts - I just can't understand what they are.

EDIT: Also - I live in SE Asia - and deal with people who barely speak English, and barely write it all the time. They can make themselves understood - this guys skills are obviously far superior to what I deal with daily, but I can't understand because it is just all thrown together - who is 'he'? What is the subject? What is his point or conclusion if any? Is there any reason he added some text at the bottom at all? Why didn't he just tell some story about Jack and Jill - it would at least have been internally consistent.

[edit on 26-10-2009 by Amagnon]

Originally posted by Amagnon

Originally posted by marg6043

BTW, please people stop bashing grammar no everybody has a degree in linguistics or have an English major, we are after all people from many parts of the world in ATS.

Despite the extremely poor level of grammar on ATS I don't usually complain, its not very productive.

I think it would be a semicolon after "complain"
Just messing around

I know there are a lot of Swine Flu threads out there. I recognized some of what OP wrote as from the World Health Organization [WHO] website (or taken from there) and wonder why WHO doesn't feel the need to quote sources! They mention Squalene isn't dangerous and not associated with GWS but yet don't give ANY proof of this.


[edit on 26-10-2009 by notreallyalive]

I apologize if there were any grammar mistakes during the time i wrote it
sometimes i can write great and some times not

Hes saying that the mainstream medias are lying about vaccinations, and stating things as fact, that they are only speculation, or propaganizing if that is even a word.

Originally posted by BlubberyConspiracy
Hes saying that the mainstream medias are lying about vaccinations, and stating things as fact, that they are only speculation, or propaganizing if that is even a word.

Thank you - that helps somewhat.

The OP said;

"The guy who wrote Helen Branswell" - who or what is Helen Branswell? Is it a book that I should know of? I got lost at this part - and none of it made any sense after that. The OP also kept referring to 'he' - but never identified who 'he' was - who is 'he'?

Then the OP says;

As for the supposed Gulf War Syndrome link, it isn't true. I say it is true

Is the OP asserting its true or not true? Is it a quote from someone? This just looks like a contradiction to me - I don't understand what its all about.

I think that the OP's mind works in a way that makes it impossible for me to understand him, seriously - everything he wrote seems like a secret code - but other people are responding like they 'get it'.

I don't get it - at all.

[edit on 26-10-2009 by Amagnon]

[edit on 26-10-2009 by Amagnon]

reply to post by Amagnon


It helps if you have been following the whole issue about the swine flu pandemic and the mass vaccination previous threads.

Is easier to connect the dots with the information you have at hand that trying to figure out what is going on.

Some of us here knows very well about the Gulf war syndrome and the testing of drugs on soldiers, see I have very close information on that because my husband a now retire marine was one of the testing rats, he and only he knows what he experienced with the pills and shots he got during the first gulf war while in the middle east.

And he has a letter in is records to prove that. The government went on their butts denying what they were doing to the soldiers, now we know it was true, so how can we trust the same government to tell us that the swine flu vaccine is safe, is too many facts against the propaganda.

Still we have done extensive research on the so call "safety of the swine flu vaccine here in ATS in other threads, specially one of mine the squalene littler secret.

So as you see is easier for people like me to understand first hand what the OP is telling.

Sorry you have to take more time to relate the issues in the OP.



[edit on 26-10-2009 by marg6043]

Q: Isn't squalene dangerous?

NO. This molecule is a precursor to cholesterol. Without squalene existence, your body would not be able to produce cholesterol (wich maintain your cellular membrane fluidity) , sexual hormone like testostérone or estrogen, or any other steroid lipids wich use cholesterol as a frame.

Squalene is form by chemically combining 6 terpene.
-2 terpene combined can produce a molecule called
Geranyl Diphosphate' or what make the roses smell like roses if you like.
-4 terpene combined cab produce a molecule called phytol wich is a precursor to chlorophyll, vitamin E and K
-8 terpene combined can produce a molecule called Beta-Carotene
, know to be a good source of vitamin A.

So as you can see, there nothing wrong with using squalene in anything. it's a natural occuring molecule in every animal.

As for the gulf war syndrome,

subsequent investigation revealed that the study in question, which attempted to link squalene to Gulf War Syndrome, had several technical deficiencies in the way in which it analyzed its data. On top of this, it has been determined that the anthrax vaccines given to those US military personnel, did not actually contain added squalene.

From wiki.

Froma guy who know a thing or two in biochemistry

reply to post by Jigore


I guess the so call expert forgot that the squalene used in the vaccine is not the natural squalene that we humans and animals produce but a man made additive that is not natural at all.

Hell that is why manufacturing of drugs is so cheap while been sold to us so expensive, if the big pharma were using natural ingredients in the crap they manufacture their drugs will priced like gold.

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by Jigore

 

I guess the so call expert forgot that the squalene used in the vaccine is not the natural squalene that we humans and animals produce but a man made additive that is not natural at all.

Hell that is why manufacturing of drugs is so cheap while been sold to us so expensive, if the big pharma were using natural ingredients in the crap they manufacture their drugs will priced like gold.

LoL are you serious?
Squalene = Squalene
It's that simple.
Natural squalene is the same thing as synthethic squalene. there is no difference. Same molecular formula, same molar mass, same density, same boiling point, same melting point, same viscosity, same vapor pressure, same refractive index and same IUPAC name.
And oh, the bigs means pharmas obtain it via shark liver, kinda ''natural'' don't you think?

reply to post by Jigore


My dear you are very confuse about what the body produces naturally and what we consume in our food and what big pharma manufactures.

Squalene: The Swine Flu Vaccine’s Dirty Little Secret Exposed

Oil-based vaccination adjuvants like squalene have been proved to generate concentrated, unremitting immune responses over long periods of time.

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.

Novartis’s proprietary squalene adjuvant for their H1N1 vaccine is MF59. Glaxo’s is ASO3. MF59 has yet to be approved by the FDA for use in any U.S. vaccine, despite its history of use in other countries.

There are only three vaccines in existence using an approved squalene adjuvant. None of the three are approved for use in the U.S.

Why because the gulf war syndrom was to real too be ignored.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Is OK, I am going to wait until you get the shot and let see what the results will be in about three months.

It took about three months for the fiasco of 1976 to kill and paralyze people.

They started in Oct 12 of 1976 by December 16 the results of the vaccine were to much to keep vaccinating the population.

At least the children and the unborn were not the target in those days.

The compound of the squalene used in vaccines explained,

MF-59, MF59TM is a sub-micron oil-in-water emulsion of a squalene, polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate (TweenTM 80) and sorbitan trioleate. Squalene is a natural organic compound originally obtained from shark liver oil and a biochemical precursor to steroids. The MF59 adjuvant was developed by Chiron Corp., a company acquired by Novartis. MF59 is approved in Europe and is found in several vaccines, such as an influenza vaccine manufactured by Novartis. It has also been licensed to other companies and is being actively tested in vaccine trials. Exploring Vaccines

www.whale.to...

Vaccine Ingredients

www.whale.to...

reply to post by marg6043


My dear, you seems confuse about chemistry. You can argue all night if you like, but synthethic squalene will always be the same as natural squalene.
Despite all the arguements you will ever use to prove im wrong about this. I will still be right and you will still be wrong.

No matter what you say,

6E,10E,14E,18E)-2,6,10,15,19,23-hexamethyltetracosa-2,6,10,14,18,22-hexaene

will still be

6E,10E,14E,18E)-2,6,10,15,19,23-hexamethyltetracosa-2,6,10,14,18,22-hexaene.

That the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry name for what we mortal call squalene. Know what It mean? I do.
It mean among other things that something will never be called squalene unless all the rights chemicals functions are in exactly the right order, exactly the right chirality, atoms for atoms.

Let'S say you take H2O from a river, or you synthetise it by hum... mixing a primary amide with phosphorus pentoxide, it will still be call water because it will still be H20.

Like synthetic water = natural water,
synthetic squalene = natural squalene.

Philosophically speaking, natural squalene is synthetised by your body with some obscure catalyst and acetyl CoA, so even natural squalene is synthetic

And for the fact that you point out about ''squalene have been proved to generate concentrated, unremitting immune responses over long periods of time.'' well, squalene is a lipid. Lipids are soluble in organic solvant, like oil. Your cellular membrane are made from phosphatidylcholine, another lipid. Both like each other because they hate water, so what do they do when they meet? Yeah they join force against water by merging. So if you take TOO MUCH squalene, yes you will have nasty side effect. The same goes if you take too much vitamin A,D,E,K.

Maybe the guy responsible for the anthrax vaccine messed up. I don't know. Maybe he put TOO MUCH squalene in it for it to be super effective during the war.

Let's just say that if you take anything in excess, you will often face nasty consequence.
If you feel that I am being condescendent, well im not.

reply to post by Jigore


Like I say you get the vaccine and then lets talk again about three months for now.

Originally posted by marg6043
The compound of the squalene used in vaccines explained,

MF-59, MF59TM is a sub-micron oil-in-water emulsion of a squalene, polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate (TweenTM 80) and sorbitan trioleate. Squalene is a natural organic compound originally obtained from shark liver oil and a biochemical precursor to steroids. The MF59 adjuvant was developed by Chiron Corp., a company acquired by Novartis. MF59 is approved in Europe and is found in several vaccines, such as an influenza vaccine manufactured by Novartis. It has also been licensed to other companies and is being actively tested in vaccine trials. Exploring Vaccines

www.whale.to...

Vaccine Ingredients

www.whale.to...

Yeah polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate is another name for squalene. No one use the prefix mono- anymore in chemistry.

An emulsion is simply a little bit of lipids in a larger portion of water.
This ''TweenTM 80'' is a proportion of ingredients rather than a different molecule.

As your source pointed out :
''Squalene is a natural organic compound originally obtained from shark liver oil and a biochemical precursor to steroids''

This is basically what I said earlier.

reply to post by Jigore


There is a difference between a chemical found in your liver, and one injected into your bloodstream. I can think of many natural occurring chemicals produced that I do not want injected directly into my bloodstream.

Do you understand this difference?