It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
well sure, as soon as someone does the story/study on those who took the vaccine under duress and against their will, simply because they prefer to be continually employed.
Please show us where anyone had anything placed in their blood stream without their approval in this case?
Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
reply to post by NavyDoc
NavyDoc
This study has absolutely NOTHING to do with preventing the flu or mortality among patients. This is a study of vaccinations of health care workers (why they don't want to get vaccinated and how many got side effects from the shot).
This study does NOTHING to support your point that workers getting the shot is necessary to prevent immuno-suppressed patients.
I have a great many concerns about this study but I will simply quote this:
Influenza is the sixth leading cause of death among adults in the United States, killing an average of 36,000 Americans annually [18]. Vaccination is considered to be 70–90% effective in the prevention of influenza in healthy adults under 65 years of age [19,20]. Influenza vaccination reduces otitis media in children, absenteeism from work in adults, hospitalization and mortality in high-risk groups, and the number of physician visits and influenza-related respiratory tract infections in all age groups [21].
The authors of this study collected NO DATA to support these facts. Scientists do not make assumptions. And as a matter of fact, the CDC considers the shot to be only 40 to 60 % effectiveness rate for the shots. Otitis media is generally caused by "glue ear" not the flu and there absolutely no data to support any of these statements.
When scientists start making statements that are unrelated to the study in question, what they are doing is repeating a message that public health considers desirable. This is a technique of propaganda. Tell a lie, tell it often and tell it big and repeat, repeat, repeat
The fact that these scientists are making unrelated statements in their study makes their study very very suspicious.
further the study itself noted that there were side effect to the shot in 197 out of 500 some odd staff. People were working with sore arms, sore muscles and while they suffered malaise. These people ought to have been off work but they weren't (probably due to personal dedication). This DOES NOT support the assertion that the shot reduces absentism and as a matter of fact, since there was no comparison between the vaccinated and a control group - there is absolutely no data to support such a statement.
I have posted a video in this thread that teaches you how to interpret studies - have you watched it to see how data can be manipulated to provide the desired results? When scientists serve up propaganda - there is every reason to believe that they have manipulated the data.
Would you like to try another study that proves your point that staff should be vaccinated to protect immuno-suppressed patients?
PS - and you are correct. I will not do literature searches. If you quote a study - you should provide it.
Another good tip is to follow the foot notes - quite often scientists will make a statement and provide a reference to the study that proves that statement. Just as often, I have followed the footnote and found that the reference was unrelated to the quote.
Tired of Control Freaks
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc
well sure, as soon as someone does the story/study on those who took the vaccine under duress and against their will, simply because they prefer to be continually employed.
Please show us where anyone had anything placed in their blood stream without their approval in this case?
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc
all i did was share a reference provided by another member that completely shoots your theory out the window.
you can nit-pick it all you want, that doesn't change the conclusions of the study ... which, btw, indicate MORE study needs to be done.
yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah ... they are all strains of the "disease" you call influenza.
the study is talking about the same strain that innoculations were developed and provided to prevent ... they failed.
and somehow you expect anyone with a modicum of knowledge to believe "how stuff works" is a scientific bastion of knowledge, eh ? oooook.
Trying to keep it simple for you since you obviouysly lack the basic understanding.
i do hope that once you've completed the circles you're travelling in this conversation, that someone is available to unwind you.
broad study group you say ??
yeah, i suppose 31 participants could be a broad study group ... of a daycare.
well finally, the truth comes out ... just like in most propaganda pieces, it's usually buried very near the end ... but thanks all the same
I agree that forced immunizations are wrong
because patients are not forced to obtain said "necessary and required" vaccines.
did you miss the excerpt indicating ALL persons on mediCAID are not required to be vaccinated ?? aren't they supposed to be comprised of the "the most infectious" members of society ??
why then, wouldn't they be required to submit to this policy, first ?
with that, i'm out ... i know my choice and no other is gonna make it for me.
Do you even understand what makes one "most infectious", whatever the hell that means? C'mon, you haven't a clue.
Nor should they. Better people that you wil be happy to take care of you when your ignorance hurts you.
yada, yada, yada, blah, blah, blah ... they are all strains of the "disease" you call influenza.
the study is talking about the same strain that innoculations were developed and provided to prevent
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Originally posted by Artistic
EVENTUALLY , ALL companies might one day require this mandate or something akin to it...
What you say is; a person has the freedom to leave and go somewhere else but
1. someday ALL companies in america might require this
2. why should we as americans ; living in this free country allow ourselves to be treated in this manner??
In my locality, there is a law that requires the workers in food industry wash their hands after they visit the bathroom. To me, this makes an enormous amount of sense. Pretty much every food industry company enforces this lest they lose their license. Of course, not everyone will find this obligation convenient.
Anyone who thinks this is an infringement of liberties and all that, is a nut.
Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
reply to post by NavyDoc
NavyDoc
I suggest you read what the CDC has to say about vaccination studies
www.cdc.gov...
BTW - presuming that 100 % vaccinations will result in further decrease in mortality rates is a hypothesis. Since the vaccine is itself less that 100 % effective, its a hypothesis that needs to be tested and proved by studies. Real scientists make no such presumptions
Tired of Control Freaks
Adults 65 years or older in long-term care facilities
All residents of long-term care facilities s (e.g., nursing homes) should receive annual influenza vaccination, as outbreaks of influenza can be explosive and result in substantial morbidity and mortality among residents of such facilities. There is evidence that vaccination prevents respiratory illnesses during periods of influenza circulation for elderly nursing home residents. For example, one study conducted during the 1991-1992 influenza season found that vaccination was associated with a 34% reduction in total respiratory illnesses and a 55% reduction in pneumonia during the two-week peak of influenza activity (Monto, 2001). In addition, one study conducted in UK nursing homes found that vaccinating health care workers decreased deaths during periods of influenza activity during one season with substantial influenza circulation, but not during the next year, when influenza activity was low throughout the winter (Hayward, 2006).
which of these is NOT poison to the bloodstream/body ... thimerasol, formeldyhyde. aluminum, MSG or latex ??
Originally posted by NavyDoc
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by buddhasystem
Anyone who thinks this is an infringement of liberties and all that, is a nut
and likewise, anyone that continually insists injection of known poisons into your bloodstream under the threat of financial consequence isn't a violation of individual freedom and liberty, must be a complete fruitcake.
Known poison? Silly hyperbole is silly.
gladly, where's your byline ?
Originally posted by NavyDoc
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc
well sure, as soon as someone does the story/study on those who took the vaccine under duress and against their will, simply because they prefer to be continually employed.
Please show us where anyone had anything placed in their blood stream without their approval in this case?
Well, let's see it then.
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc
ummmm, a 12yr old study, this is your foundation ??
well ok then ... i guess we'll just go with your seiously out-dated information as current factual anaysis
tis a shame you cannot locate any CURRENT studies to support this nonsense.
Originally posted by Honor93
gladly, where's your byline ?
Originally posted by NavyDoc
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc
well sure, as soon as someone does the story/study on those who took the vaccine under duress and against their will, simply because they prefer to be continually employed.
Please show us where anyone had anything placed in their blood stream without their approval in this case?
Well, let's see it then.
i know i haven't submitted such a study, i presume you must have, right ?
Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
reply to post by NavyDoc
NavyDoc
Here is a quote from your post
Let's look at #18:
It's a PDF at the link
but here is a cut and paste of the abstract:
Abstract
Background: This study aims to determine side effects in healthcare workers receiving influenza vaccination, and to scrutinize the opinion of and attitude toward vaccination of healthcare workers.
Methods: Five hundred forty-seven hospital personnel employed by the Eskişehir Yunus Emre State Hospital were included in the study which was conducted in November 2006,. Hospital personnel were administered 0.5 ml inactivated influenza vaccine consisting of 2006/2007 strains. Inoculations were given intramuscularly into the deltoid muscle. A specially designated area in the emergency unit was used for the procedure.
Results: An evaluation on Day 10 following influenza vaccination demonstrated at least one adverse effect in 197 (36%) hospital personnel. There was no statistical relationship between side effects and age or gender (p=0.860, p=0.929), while side effects were significantly more frequent among subjects receiving their first vaccination (p=0.008) and nurses (p=0.021). The reasons for the lack of prior immunization in 420 (76.8%) HCWs included not considering influenza a serious disease in 124 (29.5%), disbelief in the efficacy of vaccination in 109 (26%), the lack of reimbursement of vaccination in 105 (25%), fear of the side effects of vaccination in 45 (10.7%), preference for other methods of protection in 75 (17.9%), and fear of injection in 29 (6.9%).
Conclusions: The increase in the rate of influenza immunization among healthcare personnel is possible
This is the Potter study you referred to. The abstract itself says that the only people who were vacinated were HOSPITAL STAFF
What are you talking about when you say the study you referred me to were patient studies?????????
Tired of control Freaks
Vaccination of HCWs was associated with reductions in total patient mortality from 17% to 10% (odds ratio [OR], 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.80) and in influenza-like illness (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.34-0.94).
Originally posted by Honor93which of these is NOT poison to the bloodstream/body ... thimerasol, formeldyhyde. aluminum, MSG or latex ??
no bucko, you brought it up ... where's your evidence ??
Originally posted by NavyDoc
Originally posted by Honor93
gladly, where's your byline ?
Originally posted by NavyDoc
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc
well sure, as soon as someone does the story/study on those who took the vaccine under duress and against their will, simply because they prefer to be continually employed.
Please show us where anyone had anything placed in their blood stream without their approval in this case?
Well, let's see it then.
i know i haven't submitted such a study, i presume you must have, right ?
I don't think the event exists, you do, therefore the onus of proof is on you, bucko.
acutally, it's not.
That is the whole issue surrounding this thread.
since the mercury compound in most vaccines has a compounding effect toward toxicity, this argument fails on all levels of reason.
Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli
Originally posted by Honor93which of these is NOT poison to the bloodstream/body ... thimerasol, formeldyhyde. aluminum, MSG or latex ??
It's a cliche, but it's worth repeating here: The dose makes the poison. That is, if the dose is insufficient to cause harm, it's not a poison. So unless someone finds evidence that these compounds, in the amounts present in vaccines, are causing harm, none of them are poisons.