Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Revmitchell, Oct 13, 2009.
Theres a hospital in anear by city thats telling employees not to get the nose spray vaccine ebcause it's live H1N1 and they could give swine flu to patients.
I was in the ER week before last because of diverticulitis and while I was waiting a good number of people were coming in with flu like symptoms because they were all scared it was the swine flu. The nurse came out to speak to the daughter of an elderly woman who was sick and told her that they were not testing for swine flu they were just going ahead and diagnosing it as that.
So on top of the hysteria that is driving people into the ER they are making a call without supporting evidence. There just seems to be an agenda here that does not add up to reason.
messes up the stastics, now how many hospitals and doctors are doing this, and how far off are the stastics? and why are medical professionals scaring people by telling them they have swine flu without a test to see if they have it.
I can only speak for the local hospital here and the moment I was there. But most likely it goes beyond just that to some level.
If that's the case, they're ignorant about how viruses work. Vaccines containing live viruses is not unusual. A lot of vaccines are derived from live viruses. The polio vaccine and TB vaccines, for example, containe sweakened virus, and are highly effective. Even though the viruses contained in such vaccines are still living, they don't have the ability to multiply.
I highly doubt hundreds of doctors and othe rmedical personell are ignorant
If they think that a vaccines containing live viruses is bad, they're ignorant (or they think that polio viruses are bad). Either that, or you were mistaken about your original information.
Donna the viruses in the vaccinations are not the problem. It is the adjuncts and the preservatives such as mercury and aluminum that are dangerous. So do not let anyone distract you by defending the viruses in the vaccinations. That is not the issue. Add to that the fact is when flu shots are determined they are based on nothing more than a guess as to what strain of flu will be prevalent that year. They are often wrong.
The hospital was on the news last week, so unless they gave false information, then no I am not misinformed. perhaps you are, perhaps you ahve no idea what hospital and where, and do not know or run it, and in reality are totally ignorant in this case of this hospital.
By Anne Marie Helmenstine, Ph.D.
"the flu vaccine will be more effective some years than others. The CDC predicted that the vaccine developed for the winter of 2003/2004 wasn't going to be effective against most cases of the flu because the strains covered by the vaccine weren't the same as the strains that were common. Highly targeted vaccines work, but only against their targets! There's no point in accepting the risks of a vaccine for a disease you can't get. When the flu vaccine is on-target, it's more effective. Even then, the vaccine isn't perfect because it uses inactivated virus. Is that bad? No. A live vaccine is more effective, but much more risky."
Again, if anyone claims that vaccines containing live viruses is bad, they're ignorant. The science of live-virus vaccines is tried and tested for over 60 years, and in many cases, such as the polio vaccine, were more effective using a live virus than a killed virus.
again, you know everything john, and docotrs not nothng apparently.
oops, apparently john doesn't know everything, he seems to to know this.