http://www.canadianactionparty.ca/cgi/page.cgi?aid=681&_id=128&zine=show

HPV vaccine, Gardasil, More Dangerous Than Reported

Source Russell Blaylock's latest newsletter .

The government collects reported complications on all vaccines, and these are stored deep in the bowels of the FDA. Recently, the Washington-based public interest group Judicial Watch attempted to examine the adverse effects of the new HPV vaccine Gardasil. But, the FDA refused to release the data - until they were forced to by a Freedom of Information lawsuit. You may recall that the Merck pharmaceutical company, maker of Gardasil, went from state to state passing out bundles of money to legislators and governors in an attempt to have mandatory vaccine legislation passed. They insisted that girls as young as age 9 receive the vaccine by order of the state. Because of the release of this hidden data, we now know that serious complications have occurred with this vaccine with only a limited use of the vaccine nationwide. Some 1,600 young girls have had complications, including death. Almost 25 percent of the complications were serious. Several cases of sudden death occurring within eight hours of taking the vaccine were reported. Death was secondary to coronary artery thrombosis (heart attack), pulmonary embolism (clots in the lung vessels) and enlargement of the heart. Two of the deaths occurred in girls aged 12 and 19. In an attempt to downplay the complications, the FDA listed instances of children being found unresponsive after the vaccine as "minor complications."


In a previous issue of the newsletter, I warned pregnant women about
the dangers of being vaccinated during pregnancy. Incredibly, 42 pregnant women
were vaccinated with this vaccine and 18 experienced side effects, which included spontaneous abortions and malformed babies. Seizures, Bell's palsy and Guillain-Barre syndrome (paralysis) were also reported. If states had passed mandatory vaccination with Gardasil the number of dead, paralyzed, and seriously impaired young girls would have been astronomical. I shudder to think of the number of pregnant women who would have lost their babies or had malformed babies. What makes all this so shocking is that Gardasil has not been shown to actually prevent cervical cancer, and it has been shown to become ineffective after three-and-a-half years.

ost HPV-related cervical cancer occurs afterage 30. It might surprise you to know that there are 20 million people infected with HPV, yet there are only 10,000 cases of cervical cancer in the United States and 3,000 deaths per year. That would be an incidence of HPV related cancer of 0.001 percent, if we assume half of all cases were females. (Cancers caused by the HPV virus can also occur in men. HPV cancers can develop in several places including the penis, anus, mouth, and throat.) Likewise, studies have shown that most cervical cancer occurs in women who do not get regular Pap smears, with the highest incidence in those who have multiple sexual partners, poor personal hygiene, and poor nutrition. Not only should those responsible for these tragedies be sued, they should be serving prison sentences.

Well, 1600 out of how many had complications? If we're talking about 400 "serious" complications in 10 million vaccinations, and the benefit is potentially wiping out HPV, then it proves the vaccine is beneficial.

If he got information by way of the Freedom of Information Act, where exactly is this information?

What makes all this so shocking is that Gardasil has not been shown to actually prevent cervical cancer,

You know, when someone says some like this, it's like tatoo'ing "Im retarded" on his forehead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfU6y6KhEOI

Watch it before it's gone.

U.S. officials and the drug company Merck deny that the vaccine Gardasil can cause seizures, strokes, and other severe health problems. As Sharyl Attkisson reports, new studies indicate otherwise.

Do you have a link to actual "new studies" (not conspiracy theory nonsense)?

You know, when someone says some like this, it's like tatoo'ing "Im retarded" on his forehead.
Year and a half later, this quote is still good.

Well, in all fairness, it would be better if written "something" instead of "some", but I still think it is a good quote regardless of the mental typo.

http://www.sundayexpress.co.uk/posts/view/131817/Jab-as-deadly-as-the-cancer-



Sunday October 4,2009
By Lucy Johnston

The cervical cancer vaccine may be riskier and more deadly than the cancer it is designed to prevent, a leading expert who developed the drug has warned.

The manufacturers of this vaccine obviously need a better marketing department.

If they could just convince the Christians that this drug somehow prevents sex (or sexual thoughts, and the attendant trip to hell, etc.), instead of assuming that sex will normally occur, we wouldn't need to deal with this nonsense.

It works in men too.

Well, 1600 out of how many had complications? If we're talking about 400 "serious" complications in 10 million vaccinations, and the benefit is potentially wiping out HPV, then it proves the vaccine is beneficial.

The serious complications happened to be dizziness and nausea. The only documented serious complication happened to be a girl who died of cancer a few days after receiving the jab. If she was that fragile then in all honesty anything from a severe flu upwards would have killed her.

All I can say about the people who so vehemently opposed this HPV vaccination is that they are no better than those fathers in the middle east who force their youngest son to murder their sister when merely suspected of risking her virginity. Both want to put the death penalty on the mere chance of their daughters having sex.


Eri

It works in men too.

A small miracle the opponents have not tried the 'discrimination' tack to block this vaccination. I mean, this vaccin clearly discriminates against men in that it does not prevent cervical cancer for them too.


Eri
(yes, I think they really are that ignorant of biology that they would consider it a good idea).

The manufacturers of this vaccine obviously need a better marketing department.

If they could just convince the Christians that this drug somehow prevents sex (or sexual thoughts, and the attendant trip to hell, etc.), instead of assuming that sex will normally occur, we wouldn't need to deal with this nonsense.

Really?

How should they market the HSV vaccine?

Like the HPV vaccine, everyone should get it too.

It works in men too.

Well, I assume you mean males, not necessarily men. Most men are already infected rendering the vaccine pointless.

Your sons should be getting it as well as your daughters.

Fast-Tracked Vaccine - Over 3,000 injuries and 48 deaths.
http://www.medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?PAGENO=1010&PERPAGE=10&SORTING=&VAX=HPV4

Gardasil vaccine was fast tracked to licensure by the Food and Drug Administration in 2006.2 It contains genetically engineered virus-like protein particles (VLPs) and aluminum, 3,4,5 which affect immune function. 6,7,8 The exact mechanism of protection is unknown and the vaccine has not been evaluated for the potential to cause cancer or be toxic to the genes.10

It is a vaccine that, by the summer of 2009, already caused more than 15,000 thousand reports of vaccine reactions, including more than 3,000 injuries and 48 deaths.11 14 of the girls who died after getting Gardasil were under age 16 just like Gabrielle.

And that girl in the article i posed before died within 2 hours ... not days

Really?
How should they market the HSV vaccine?
Like the HPV vaccine, everyone should get it too.For one, they should make up a reason that young girls should get it early, other than sex.

I didn't even realize there was an HSV vaccine out there.

Fast-Tracked Vaccine - Over 3,000 injuries and 48 deaths.Let's say those figures are accurate. And let's say those "deaths" were really caused by the vaccine and not in patients who would've easily died of something else the next day.

That's around a one in one million fatality rate.

You have a better chance of being struck by lightning in one year.

Let's say those figures are accurate. And let's say those "deaths" were really caused by the vaccine and not in patients who would've easily died of something else the next day.

That's around a one in one million fatality rate.

You have a better chance of being struck by lightning in one year.

Also better chances than developing and dying of cervical cancer.

However, if you want to argue that it is beyond insanely moronic to allow the watchdog organisation to be (partially) funded by the companies it is supposed to watch then you get no argument from me, nor from anybody but the most foaming-at-the-mouth free market zealot.

(cynical: Of course there is no need to waste tax dollars on supervising nuclear powerplants. Market forces will ensure that any company that does not maintain them properly will soon be out of business... along with a couple of major cities, a quarter of the USA and 20 or so million people... Besides, who would notice that they dump nuclear waste on the nearest landfill?)


Eri

Fast-Tracked Vaccine - Over 3,000 injuries and 48 deaths.
http://www.medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?PAGENO=1010&PERPAGE=10&SORTING=&VAX=HPV4



And that girl in the article i posed before died within 2 hours ... not days

If somebody dies within 2 hours there really is no reason to be worried about potential carcinous side effects. If related to the vaccination at all it is most likely a form of toxic shock or severe allergic reaction which can happen with any form of medication. People die each year of an adverse reaction to common antibiotics (the kind they give you for a mild infection or inflamation).

Tragic as it may be (and if still needs to be confirmed by scientific research rather than by statistics if there is any relation between those deaths and vaccination. After all probably all of those alleged victims had lettuce and tomatoes within the past two days, but nobody is calling for a ban on those vegetables), not giving those vaccinations is going to cause the death of 1000 to 1500 women each year.

But it is fairly clear that some of the (religious) zealots rather see their daughters dead than having sex, and that they have formed an impromptu alliance with the conspiracy theorists on the subject of vaccination.


Eri

As I understood it, even when they were issuing the vaccine. There had been some talk about the health side effects, which I might say, take allittle more clinical time before you rush it out. Which considering all the fuss about the department of defense anthrax vaccines, I lost 15 pounds in a month, hint dropping from 170, and being over six feet tall wasn't healthy, I think I bottomed out near the 145 range. As well as became dairy product intolerant for awhile, eventually, after several years, I was able to eat a bowl of ice cream without immediately start going doo doo, vomiting and all kinds of things within 5 minutes. Oddly, enough I could eat beef without that problem. On that end the protesters had a point of potential detriments to the health of those getting vaccinated.

Also as I understand it, the parents were freaking out talking about parents rights, promoting teen sex and stuff as an issue..... which is kind of odd considering they are trying to eradicate completely eradicate a disease within 20 years, much as the measles, mumps, rubella, and polio vaccines. As well as giving more women the opportunity to have children as well without hysterectomy for various cancers in sexual organs. It would be akin to prostate troubles inguinal(sp) hernias, testicular cancer in men and stuff.

Religious zealot **** are strawman arguments.

From the article I first posted since you seem to have missed it.



THE cervical cancer vaccine may be riskier and more deadly than the cancer it is designed to prevent, a leading expert who developed the drug has warned.

She also claimed the jab would do nothing to reduce the rates of cervical cancer in the UK

Oh look more

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2667720/Cervical-cancer-jab-girl-left-brain-damaged.html

"Cancer jab girl, 18, has brain damage

The parents of Stacey Jones, 18, believe the Cervarix injection triggered swelling in her brain which then caused epileptic fits.

They say she is now "zombified" and having to re-learn basic skills like making a sandwich.

Heartbroken mum Julie, 44, from Bilston, West Midlands, said: "She was such a lovely, happy-go-lucky girl, now she is just a shell.

"I really feel she has been used as a guinea pig. I don't think there is enough evidence that the vaccination programme is safe - this all happened days after Stacey was given the vaccine.

"We don't have any other explanation for what triggered her brain injury."

Let's say those figures are accurate. And let's say those "deaths" were really caused by the vaccine and not in patients who would've easily died of something else the next day.

That's around a one in one million fatality rate.

You have a better chance of being struck by lightning in one year.

If you are a member in a trial.
And if you have any adverse conditions.
Every one of those conditions must be listed on that medication as side effects.
Even if not causal relationship exists.

For example.
If you are trialing a medication.
N=2000
1000 in the control population.
1000 in the test population.

Say that there are 3 occurrences of miscarriage in the test population during the clinical trial.
And there are 4 occurrences of miscarriage in the control population.

iscarriage still must be listed as a possible side effect of the medication.

For one, they should make up a reason that young girls should get it early, other than sex.
That it is a pathogen makes too much sense.
Like I have said repeatedly, young boys should get the vaccine too.

I didn't even realize there was an HSV vaccine out there.

ZostaVax is already being dispensed.
HerpeVac is in its last trials phase.

Oh look more

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2667720/Cervical-cancer-jab-girl-left-brain-damaged.html

The Sun is a tabloid.

British National Enquirer rag.

Also as I understand it, the parents were freaking out talking about parents rights, promoting teen sex and stuff as an issue..... which is kind of odd considering they are trying to eradicate completely eradicate a disease within 20 years, much as the measles, mumps, rubella, and polio vaccines. As well as giving more women the opportunity to have children as well without hysterectomy for various cancers in sexual organs. It would be akin to prostate troubles inguinal(sp) hernias, testicular cancer in men and stuff.

abye you missed the news or slept through Biology. You can't eliminate a Virus no matter what the Government or Pharmacuticals (SP) say.

You can build resistances to them but eventually the viruses will mutate and find a way to infect you. Polio and all those evil deseases of the 60's are making a come back because of (A) Parents aren't vacinating their kids and (B) People travel to countries that don't have the same immunities and drugs. "A" seems to be the bigger problem in the US atm but people who had the "Immunity" shots are catching the viruses also cause of mutations in the Virus. "B" seems to be a bigger problem in Europe although their have been no outbreaks like we saw in the early part of the century.

P.S. By "bigger" I mean 20 or so new cases a year from the last time I read about the subject 18 months ago.

I wouldn't recomend anyone get the HPV shot yet.

It was rushed through the FDA who hasn't had a great track record sense the early 90's. Ill let "you and your daughters" be the guinee pigs and if it works out...

Then I'll be wrong and my kids will just have to get the yearly pap smears they already still needed to have. If I'm right about the FDA's track record, I hope your child wasn't one of the unfortunate ones.

Mabye you missed the news or slept through Biology. You can't eliminate a Virus no matter what the Government or Pharmacuticals (SP) say.

You can build resistances to them but eventually the viruses will mutate and find a way to infect you. Polio and all those evil deseases of the 60's are making a come back because of (A) Parents aren't vacinating their kids and (B) People travel to countries that don't have the same immunities and drugs. "A" seems to be the bigger problem in the US atm but people who had the "Immunity" shots are catching the viruses also cause of mutations in the Virus. "B" seems to be a bigger problem in Europe although their have been no outbreaks like we saw in the early part of the century.

P.S. By "bigger" I mean 20 or so new cases a year from the last time I read about the subject 18 months ago.

Actually you can erradicate even a virus as long as some conditions are met. Viruses (viri?) that have a lot of variations are almost impossible to get rid of, as you would need a vaccin that attacks all of them at once.
Viruses that have a non-human host for a near identical strain are impossible to get rid of, unless genocide is commited on that host species as well.

That said, smallpocks (I think that is what it is called in the USA?) -is- erradicated except for some strains kept in laboratoria. Polio is all but erradicated, and would already be if not for the ignorant paranoia of religious leaders in some african countries.

To erradicate a virus you basically have to make sure that for a generation nobody gets the disease and no infection source remains. If only humans can be a source of infection and you can create a vaccin that covers all variations of the virus then, yes, it is possible.


Eri

You can build resistances to them but eventually the viruses will mutate and find a way to infect you. Polio and all those evil deseases of the 60's are making a come back because of (A) Parents aren't vacinating their kids and (B) People travel to countries that don't have the same immunities and drugs. "A" seems to be the bigger problem in the US atm but people who had the "Immunity" shots are catching the viruses also cause of mutations in the Virus.Vaccines don't always work on an individual level. That's why you need herd immunity.

We've already eliminated polio and smallpox.

The difference here is that there a bunch of fanatical religious zealots trying to block a legitimate public health effort.

Once a vaccine is shown to be safe and effective at removing a serious public health risk, it should be mandated by law.

Vaccines don't always work on an individual level. That's why you need herd immunity.

We've already eliminated polio and smallpox.

The difference here is that there a bunch of fanatical religious zealots trying to block a legitimate public health effort.

Once a vaccine is shown to be safe and effective at removing a serious public health risk, it should be mandated by law.

There is a difference between herd immunity and elimination of a disease. The first allows a small fraction (a few percent) of the population to do without vaccination because they are unlikely to come into contact with a source of the diseases due to the herd of vaccinated people around them that can not transmit it. It is a very weak and unsafe measure of protection as the unvaccinated tend to cluster and it only takes one infection to cause a local epidemic in that population. The Netherlands has a small group of religious extremists who object to all forms of vaccination and innoculation for themselves and their children. They used to have regular epidemics of all kinds of nasty diseases, including polio well into the 90s. Polio only ceased to be a threat because of the UN campaign to eradicate that disease which made it almost impossible for them to find a carrier to infect one of them.

The problem with mandating by law is that the law also protects people's rights to make stupid decisions for themselves (and unfortunately for their children). Doing away with that protection is actually worse as it leads to suppression, religious wars and a whole pandora's box of social ugliness. E.g. think about the whole ugly mess of sex crime offender registration that essentially is a governmental attempt to enforce morality by now (it started out as an attempt to keep track of people who committed violent sexual crimes, but by now encompasses anything a sexophobe anywhere manages to add to the list of registrable offenses. Like teenagers sending naughty emails and images to each other. And four year old children playing doctor).

Regarding polio, chances are that the opportunity to eradicate that disease has been missed. It was pretty much corralled into the north of Nigeria with a few suspect regions in south east Asia. A campaign to vaccinate everybody in those areas (and in a wide area around it) at once would have caused the disease to die out, but thanks to a few hands full of paranoid mullahs who chose to believe that it was an American campaign to sterilise the population that campaign and the millions dollars invested in it had to be abandoned. Polio remained a threat in that area, and thanks to constant migration is now also returning to surrounding countries, and soon will show recurring outbreaks in the USA and the rest of the world. Perhaps the same vaccin will still work but the number of people that have to be vaccinated to get rid of the disease has multiplied by a very large number already, and within a few years may well end up being about 6 billion.


Eri

The Netherlands has a small group of religious extremists who object to all forms of vaccination and innoculation for themselves and their children. They used to have regular epidemics of all kinds of nasty diseases, including polio well into the 90s.Then you should deport those people, and they can go ahead and infect themselves, and treat themselves, and die themselves, at their own expense, as a consequence of their stupidity.The problem with mandating by law is that the law also protects people's rights to make stupid decisions for themselves (and unfortunately for their children).Key word being "themselves". I don't care if religious zealots kill themselves, but refusing immunizations harms the entire society, as long as they are in contact with our society. The public interest in doing away with epidemics far outweighs any individual's right to practice his religion.

People who refuse vaccination of a serious, potentially epidemic disease should be given the option to leave the country, or should be vaccinated by force if necessary.Doing away with that protection is actually worse as it leads to suppression, religious wars and a whole pandora's box of social ugliness.It doesn't lead to anything but a healthier society. Free exercise of religion is always limited, even in the countries with the greatest freedoms.E.g. think about the whole ugly mess of sex crime offender registration that essentially is a governmental attempt to enforce moralityMorality is simply an idea, or opinion, and governments should not be in the habit of mandating ideas or opinions.

But government should always be in the habit of looking out for the public health. That is one major reason governments exist in the first place, so that we can live out our lives in comfort and safety.

Vaccinations for serious diseases falls clearly within the scope of the government's role in protecting the public.

Quote"Mabye you missed the news or slept through Biology. You can't eliminate a Virus no matter what the Government or Pharmacuticals (SP) say.

You can build resistances to them but eventually the viruses will mutate and find a way to infect you. Polio and all those evil deseases of the 60's are making a come back because of (A) Parents aren't vacinating their kids and (B) People travel to countries that don't have the same immunities and drugs. "A" seems to be the bigger problem in the US atm but people who had the "Immunity" shots are catching the viruses also cause of mutations in the Virus. "B" seems to be a bigger problem in Europe although their have been no outbreaks like we saw in the early part of the century.

P.S. By "bigger" I mean 20 or so new cases a year from the last time I read about the subject 18 months ago."

That is fair. Yes, I mispoke slightly. Virtually eliminated for about 100 years would have been better wording, as yes, some cases can and do pop up in cases such as polio, even with the immunization. As pointed out later, the troubles with Africa. It would also take a bit more than just a generation to be immunized do to the nature of the Humanopamilia Virus(sp). To easy to spread to younger generations from the older generations. But, ya, they got into allittle bit of a hurry trying to get this vaccine out the door.

But, ya, they got into allittle bit of a hurry trying to get this vaccine out the door.

No more hurry than any other seasonal flu vaccine.

There is a difference between herd immunity and elimination of a disease. The first allows a small fraction (a few percent) of the population to do without vaccination because they are unlikely to come into contact with a source of the diseases due to the herd of vaccinated people around them that can not transmit it. It is a very weak and unsafe measure of protection as the unvaccinated tend to cluster and it only takes one infection to cause a local epidemic in that population.

Herd immunity is not weak or unsafe.

It is how vaccines are designed to work.

If there are people who do not get vaccinated, and thus are carriers or vectors...they are as responsible as fleas, mosquitoes, and rats. They are disease carriers and should be treated as such.

To easy to spread to younger generations from the older generations. But, ya, they got into allittle bit of a hurry trying to get this vaccine out the door.

Absolutely true.

ost children of this generation are already infected with it. It is not for your children. But your grand children. Your great grandchildren.

It took 2-3 generations for the existing vaccines to eradicate past scourges.

The HPV vaccines will take longer because of these silly myth believing idiots. Only vaccinating girls, instead of both genders, will only prolong the length of lifespan of HPV. And only the girls of non religious nuts will extend it as well.

These people are absolutely immoral and irresponsible.

These people are absolutely immoral and irresponsible.

That I can certainly agree with. But it is still their choice. The ease with which Tudamorf tosses aside all civil liberties and even basic human rights for those who do not agree with his opinions is also immoral and appalling, if you ask me.


Eri
(and maybe we think of something different when we talk about herd immunity? From what I understand it is the fact that a small unvaccinated fraction of a population is still protected because of the mass of vaccinated that surround them and that make it (near) impossible for them to be infected. The disease vector can not reach them. That kind of protection is weak and unsafe for the unvaccinated, because all it takes is one exposure to cause a local epidemic (the people who oppose vaccination tend to congregate)).

You have no civil liberty to harm others. Your freedoms end when they become harm to me. Classic hand-nose test. You, nor any other, has a basic human right to spread disease to another.

Including spreading disease to another in society when immunization and vaccine is readily available. Including your own children.

You become, in essence, no greater than a human vermin. A vector of disease, and should be regarded as such.

And should be treated as almost all other vectors of disease are. Isolation and quarantine.

This fails the social contract of the classic hand-nose test. It is inherently harmful to others. And should be treated as every other comparable harmful act.

You have a moral obligation to others to not harm others. And that is EXACTLY what you are doing when you persuade others to not be vaccinated, or you yourself are not vaccinated.

That I can certainly agree with. But it is still their choice. The ease with which Tudamorf tosses aside all civil liberties and even basic human rights for those who do not agree with his opinions is also immoral and appalling, if you ask me.Would you apply the same reasoning to a mass murderer who claims his religion mandates it?

No difference.

You have no civil liberty, or basic human right, to infect people with disease.

(and maybe we think of something different when we talk about herd immunity? From what I understand it is the fact that a small unvaccinated fraction of a population is still protected because of the mass of vaccinated that surround them and that make it (near) impossible for them to be infected. The disease vector can not reach them. That kind of protection is weak and unsafe for the unvaccinated, because all it takes is one exposure to cause a local epidemic (the people who oppose vaccination tend to congregate)).
Let me take to a real example.

Young family. Mother, Husband, couple kids in school, and a newborn baby.

Newborns are in the highest risk groups to contract and die from H1N1.

But you can't vaccinate under 6 month old babies. Their immune systems will not respond properly. And you might kill the baby.

om, Dad, and the other children get the flu shot. And as long as they don't allow an unvaccinated or infected person around the baby, odds are pretty slim that baby will get the flu. Combined with lots of handwashing.

If Mom, Dad and the other kids do not get the flu shot, and are exposed to the flu. Odds are pretty great that the baby will get the flu, and probably die.

Herd immunity is not weak.
It is how vaccines work.

Mom, Dad, and the other children get the flu shot. And as long as they don't allow an unvaccinated or infected person around the baby, odds are pretty slim that baby will get the flu. Combined with lots of handwashing.

If Mom, Dad and the other kids do not get the flu shot, and are exposed to the flu. Odds are pretty great that the baby will get the flu, and probably die.

Herd immunity is not weak.
It is how vaccines work.

<facetious>Vaccines work by priming the natural immune system of the body with an ineffective or weakened version of the virus or bacteria, so that when the real thing comes along the body responds quickly and destroys the virus before you get (too) ill.</facetious>

Practically, vaccines work by making people more or less immune against the disease.
Herd immunity allows for that coverage to be less than 100pct so that the few people who are not vaccinated or who would get ill despite it are still protected. Not from the disease itself but from infection by it. In that respect it is a weaker protection because should those people be exposed they have the normal risk of infection, whereas somebody who was vaccinated has virtually no risk of infection.

What is far more worrysome than these semantics is the fact that the persistent anti-vaccination campaign by irresponsible and rather uninformed individuals has gained enough traction that experts are beginning to worry that coverage is slipping below the point that herd immunity is going to work at all. They fear that if this trend continues within the next two decades a few very nasty and ugly epidemics are going to decimate the children of some countries.


Eri

http://kevan.org/proce55ing/zombies/#

Epidemics work very much like this old little program. In terms of spread.

One would need to rewrite the code a little to make it more accurate.

Some zombies would 'die' after a short period of time.
ost zombies would become non infectious after a short period of time.

And if only half the crazy little people running around were immune with zombie vaccine, you could see the spread of the zombies decrease dramatically.

Really?

How should they market the HSV vaccine?

Like the HPV vaccine, everyone should get it too.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8326026.stmHPV jab girls are 'sex cautious'

Eight in 10 girls say that having the HPV jab makes them think twice about the risks of having sex, a poll finds.

The findings may go some way to dispel concerns that the cervical cancer vaccine could make girls more likely to start having sex younger, say experts.

But, 79% of the girls said having the vaccination reminded them of the possible risks of sexual contact and 93% said it showed they were serious about their own health.

The survey was funded by GlaxoSmithKline, which makes the Cervarix vaccine currently used in a national immunisation programme.I see at least one vaccine manufacturer took my advice. Beat the Christians at their own game.

There is untold/unknown pathogenesis from these viruses.

How many cancers are caused by HPV and HSV?

We don't have the means to study them all, they could be so vast.

What if you get a wart on your friggen aortic valve. Who is gonna call that what it is? Lung cancer started from a HPV outbreak, or kidney cancer...

Those little pink/red bumps that people get on their hands or feet. Those are from undiagnosed viruses(most probably HPV or HSV). They are in all of you.

Imagine those things going off where it counts, like your hypothalamus, cerebellum, or your pancreas. Or on a transitional cell, which has no idea how to react. Blam, esophageal cancer, bladder cancer, colon cancer...

Critics say, "only 4 strains", blah blah blah.

These are the first ones.

I don't remember reading anyone every criticizing the Salk Vaccine, "Well, it's no good, don't get it, it don't fix Smallpox and Chickenpox too."

They will get to the rest of the strains, given if this one is a success. It took decades for the Salk Vaccine and Smallpox vaccine to work as intended. Why are people so fn upset this one does not do it all? They will come. Not an excuse.

H1N1, same thing, I hear people complain that it could 'cause paralysis'. That was the nonsense they said back in 1977 with the first one. Anecdotal nonsense...at best. Lies, most likely.

Healthy User Bias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_user_bias). Trips up epidemiologists all the time. Since the vaccine is voluntary, girls, and their parents, who get the HPV shot are probably more concerned about health and would most likely take more precautions to protect their health. The shot doesn't make them more concerned, they were probably that way to start with.

The shot doesn't make them more concerned, they were probably that way to start with.Well, if you had actually read the article, you'd see why your comment doesn't apply. (Girls were randomly asked beforehand, not as they were being vaccinated.)

oreover, it's besides the point.

The point is that GlaxoSmithKline designed and funded a survey designed to open up a new market for their product (Christians).

If every manufacturer had simply done that from the start, we wouldn't be having this problem now. Christian parents would be lining up their kids for the HPV vaccine as they are now doing for the pathetic H1N1 flu virus.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/06/23/state/n111147D00.DTL&tsp=1Whooping cough epidemic in California

(06-23) 13:10 PDT Los Angeles, CA (AP) -- Whooping cough is now an epidemic in California, and is on pace to break a 50-year record for infections for the year.

As of June 15, California had 910 recorded cases of the highly contagious disease, and five babies — all under 3 months of age — have died from the disease this year.

"Children should be vaccinated against the disease and parents, family members and caregivers of infants need a booster shot," California Department of Public Health director Dr. Mark Horton said Wednesday.

At least 600 additional cases are under investigation by local health departments. Officials fear that with the number of known and suspected cases at 1,510, the state is on track to beat 1958's record 3,847 cases; midway through that year, 1,200 cases had been reported.

Unimmunized or incompletely immunized babies are particularly vulnerable. Three vaccines are administered for whooping cough, from 2 to 6 months of age. Neither vaccine nor surviving the illness provides lifetime immunity.I wonder whether the unvaccinated babies of Christian conspiracy theory nutjobs had a hand in this.

Anti vaccine people come from all walks of life Tudamorf.

And they make up a lot more people than just the Christian whackjob crowd.


The anti HPV vaccine people are mostly Christian whackjobs, but that would not account for DPT vaccine being avoided. And they will be the same crowd who will protest the HSV or HIV vaccine when they are eventually available.




The name Whooping Cough is just such a safe sounding name, that many parents don't really know how fatal it is when left to run amok. In 1900, 25% of all Russian children died of Pertussis/Whooping Cough. 1 in 4.

Anti vaccine people come from all walks of life Tudamorf.

And they make up a lot more people than just the Christian whackjob crowd.Then who are these people?

Why are they allowed to breed freely and walk around freely, intentionally endangering our society, while people who are not dangerous are thrown in cages?

Preaching to the choir, I know.

Then who are these people?

They are your neighbors man.
Your friends.

People you know.

You think that all the anti vaccine people are Christian whackjobs?
Bite that.

They live next you in your flat in SF.
Across the street from you.
Drinking lattes by you when you have your latte.

It is NOT some Republican Christian conspiracy thing, you got them next to you Tudamorf. In your citadel of Liberal enlightenment of SF.

They are your neighbors man.
Your friends.Sorry, I don't know anyone that stupid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDxJgJRqPng&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMqYlnAiIUU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMqYlnAiIUU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7Yt1PYhwXI

Swine flu is a really bad example, because that WAS just a bunch of media hype and a money grab by vaccine manufacturers.

Do you know anyone who got swine flu?
Or died from it?


I do.
I do.

Do you know anyone who got swine flu?
Or died from it?Everyone (well, the percentage who normally get the flu) got swine flu, and the mortality rate was much lower than that of the ordinary seasonal flu, according to the CDC.

Swine flu replaced the seasonal flu and was safer for us.

Yet thanks to the media hype and the fear they spread, drug companies made a huge profit (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/375dde06-7559-11de-9ed5-00144feabdc0.html) selling worthless vaccines that now have to be thrown away.

And of course, I'm stuck with the bill even though I ignored the hype and never bought the vaccine.

Everyone (well, the percentage who normally get the flu) got swine flu, and the mortality rate was much lower than that of the ordinary seasonal flu, according to the CDC.
What does that mean?

10,000+ young people died from H1N1.
Estimates are 1 in 6 Americans contracted H1N1. And most of them were treated with antivirals(antibiotics, pressors, etc) which kept them alive, also made by evil profiteering pharmas. And evil doctors and evil greedy nurses, profiteering off of sick people. So no, not everyone got the swine flu.

Not counting isolation and quarantine procedures enacted which helped prevent the spread and transmission.

Swine flu replaced the seasonal flu and was safer for us.
No there were both(actually a few) flu's circulating concurrently.
Those who took just the regular seasonal flu vaccine received secondary immunity to H1N1.

Yet thanks to the media hype and the fear they spread, drug companies made a huge profit (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/375dde06-7559-11de-9ed5-00144feabdc0.html) selling worthless vaccines that now have to be thrown away.
illions of people received the vaccine at no charge.
Those that paid cash were charged like 20 bucks.
What was not known until about half way through the spread(when the morbidity and mortality numbers were available) was that those who were here in America in the 70s for the Chinese variant had a residual immunity(or partial immunity) to the Mexican variant. Older Americans with intact immune systems were virtually untouched by H1N1, relatively.

And of course, I'm stuck with the bill even though I ignored the hype and never bought the vaccine.
You received the benefit of herd immunity, without paying the dues. Or had residual immunity because you were exposed to the Chinese variant in the 70s.
/shrug

Thousands of American kids, teens, and 20 somethings died from H1N1. Of course, if one had a negative human population growth bias, that would be a good thing I suppose. What was the name of the 60s 70s proponent writer again, I forget, Brown or something?

You received the benefit of herd immunity, without paying the dues.I don't know what you're talking about.

Swine flu spread like wildfire here in the Bay Area, almost everyone had it because so few had immunity, and there was no vaccine generally available to adults until late 2009, when the so-called epidemic was almost over and the point was moot.

There was no herd immunity, or even an attempt at herd immunity, and I was exposed to it just like everyone else. (Health officials testing for it basically said, if you have flu symptoms now, it's swine flu.)

And guess what, it was milder than the regular flu, and no one really cared, and all of the media hype was much ado about nothing (except to fill the coffers of vaccine manufacturers, which were able to scare governments into buying up vast quantities of their useless product).

The CDC said about 12,000 Americans died from swine flu, which is 1/3 of the 36,000 who usually die from regular seasonal flu.Millions of people received the vaccine at no charge.At no charge to whom?

You mean the vaccine manufacturers donated all of their product for free, out of the goodness of their hearts? :rolleyes:

You don't know what you're talking about.

But that comes as no surprise.

You don't know what you're talking about.No, I don't personally.

But I assume the CDC does, better than you at least, unless you can show otherwise.

And I know for a fact that the vaccine was NOT generally available here at a time when swine flu was widespread. They were offering it to children only for a long time, until everyone realized that the whole thing was much ado about nothing.

You just don't know what you are talking about.
You are just plain wrong.

You just don't know what you are talking about.
You are just plain wrong.The CDC says (http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/pdf/graph_April%202010N.pdf) that nationwide there were about 61 million cases of H1N1 flu from April 2009 through 2010, 274,000 hospitalizations, and 12,470 deaths.

Are they wrong too?

Because if they are not wrong, it contradicts basically everything you said.

And if they are wrong, you're going to have to do better than "you are just plain wrong" to be convincing.

You believe that the Sun doesnt warms the Earth.
I am unable to convince you of anything.

You're statements about H1N1 are blatantly wrong.
So absolutely wrong no debate is necessary.

In other words, you're making stuff up and have no intelligent reply.

Just like Mercury is hotter than Venus!

Gotcha. I'll take the CDC's word then.

(Oh and the Sun does warm the Earth.)

You don't need to translate what I wrote.
No in other words needed.

You have no idea about what you are talking about. And what you are saying is grossly wrong. So wrong that debate is not even necessary.