Start A Petition

Flu Plan Scandal Ahead

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: abuse, cover-up, corruption, dishonesty, government, healthcare, freedoms, media, lies, propaganda )

- 2823 days ago -
Get ready, even though many of us know it's a hoax, they are going to try to shove it down our throats again.

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Catherine Turley (192)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 2:26 pm
as i watch animal-tested, fda approved drugs destroy people's lives, i have learned to trust nobody and follow the money. thanks kathy.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 2:30 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Catherine because you have done so within the last week.

Thank you Catherine, I hope others understand what is happening here.
It IS the money, & thousands of innocent animals are dying because of fraud

Saturday August 28, 2010, 2:50 pm
I can't get flu shots because of my wacky immune system, and I never catch the flu anyway!

My husband had two flu shots in the past 12 years and got the flu within weeks of having them. The years he didn't get the shot, he didn't get the flu!

Eat right, sleep right, be happy.... and you won't get sick!

charles mclachlan (1677)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:00 pm
hi big thaks kathy l wonder all the time if its worth haveing the flu shots l do have then but seem to get side efects like haveing a cold mopst of the year . if l was well l prob would take the dam jabs interesting story though thanks.

MmAway M (505)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:05 pm
Thank you Kathy!

Personally, I also TRUST NONE of these people....have seen people get these flu shots and they are in the hospital if they are older! I will play Russian Rolette (sp) and see what happens, goodness after that Egg scare here in San Diego, what next..

All gotta go sometimes...and I don't want to be the only one left behind being 100!!!!!!!! YIPES


Kathy Chadwell (354)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:17 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Marilyn D because you have done so within the last week.

You cannot currently send a star to Marilyn M because you have done so within the last week.

I'm with you Marilyn, I'm working on my brownie points here on Earth (to get into Heaven:) because I don't want to be stuck here forever either:)
Thank you all

Alice C (1797)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:21 pm
Noted and shared.

. (0)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:29 pm
I've never heard that greater susceptibility to cold viruses was a side effect of the flu shot, Charles.

I've gotten flu shots every year for I don't know how many years. I've never had the flu - I don't know if that's because of the shots or just because I've got a naturally good immune system - or a combination of both (I certainly don't take care of my health in terms of diet or exercise so it isn't healthy living that's kept me exceptionally free from most illnesses over the years.) And the only side effects I've ever had occasionally were some temporary soreness at the injection site and once I felt tired and a little achy for a day or so after I got my vaccine.

Carole Sarcinello (338)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:34 pm

Maybe -- and knowing you, it's prolly true -- you're blessed, Lindsey. ;)

But, my advice? Don't do it! (I trust big pharma as much as I do the FDA, USDA, Monsanto and GWB!)

Wanna see a litany of after-thoughts from the last flu scare?

Google: "Flu Hoax"

Barb Knight (1688)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:40 pm
Like Lindsey, I've been taking flu shots every year for I don't know how many years. I've never had a problem with taking flu shots either except soreness in my shoulder from where it was given. Nor have I ever gotten the flu from taking the shot.

Jerneja T (66)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:41 pm
I have never had the flu shot and for sure I am not starting now.

Eric Straatsma (3802)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:42 pm
Stand up to Big Pharma.... poison, cut and burn is all they know.

There are natural anti flu remedies. Flu is nothing to be afraid of. Big Pharma on the other hand, I would be VERY afraid of. I would get out of any hospital as FAST as possible.

MsR S (189)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:53 pm
Well said.

. (0)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 3:57 pm
Flu certainly is something 'to be afraid of', Green Road. It's killed an incredible number of people over the years. In the 1918-1920 pandemic, anywhere from 50 to 100 million people worldwide died from influenza.

With modern medical care in developed countries, we certainly can handle the effects of influenza better than previous generations; however, it not only sickens quite a few people still - it's still a killer.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 4:09 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Just C because you have done so within the last week.

Lindsey did you check out the link? There are many links at the site and valuable information.
It's about scaring people into believing false information and pharmaceutical companies getting rich from it. It's about fraud, propaganda, innocent animals dying, humans being used. I'm with Carole, I don't trust any of them. And I do agree with Green Road 100%.
My poor mother gets the regular flu shot every year & is sicker than ---- afterwards. But I talked her out of the swine flu shot last year and I'm so glad she listened. Of course it helped that I copied all the facts from the Nature sites. We are talking swine flu shots, not regular flu shots though I get neither.

Animae C (516)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 4:19 pm
i'm so relieved to see the masses wake up to this humongous hoax!

"serious vaccine adverse effects, besides the hundreds of reported miscarriages, would far outweigh deaths and injury due to the virus." Dr. Gary Null

"Professor Ulrich Keil, director of the World Health Organization’s Collaborating Centre for Epidemiology slammed the swine flu epidemic as an overblown “angst campaign”, devised in conjunction with major drug companies to boost profits for vaccine manufacturers."

"Many batches of the swine flu vaccine included squalene and mercury amongst their ingredients, two substances that have been directly connected with the explosion of autism amongst children as well as other diseases. Individuals within government and the military were privileged to receive additive free shots that did not include these substances. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and government ministers, as well as German soldiers, were amongst those who received access to the so-called “friendly” version of the vaccine.
In order to head off legal claims for side-effects caused by the swine flu vaccination program, the U.S. government provided vaccine makers with blanket legal immunity before the shots began to be dispersed."
Paul Joseph Watson

. (0)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 4:22 pm
I got the swine flu shot last year as well (first time, I believe.) No ill effects for me except for the soreness in my arm the first day or two, though I fully understand that there are negative (and sometimes deadly) side effects possible with any drug (whether pharmaceutical or 'natural').

I don't by any means believe that all drugs are intrinsically beneficial in all cases nor am I blind to the fact that drug companies are in business to make as much money as possible (same reason I work, of course). Nor am I foolish enough not to know that drug companies don't always tell the truth about bad results from drug trials and the like. Nor am I complacent about the current way of doing things - there are reforms that I'd very much like to see.

In the main, however, I trust modern medicine because I've seen too much evidence that it's improved the human condition and extended human lifespans. And if my longtime internist, whom I trust quite well, recommends a drug and my pharmacist (who I always ask about any new drugs I'm prescribed) also has no specific concerns, I'll take it. If I have a serious condition and the treatment is known to be especially potentially harmful, I'd investigate pretty carefully and get several doctors' opinions as to all the alternatives. But for most things I accept what the experts in my life tell me since they're the ones with the medical and pharmaceutical expertise and experience - not me.

Every time I get in my car I'm trusting that the auto manufacturer made it right and that the manufacturer who made the brakes got them right too - and a whole host of other things that I just have to take on trust. Maybe my brakes will fail and I'll be hurt or killed. Hasn't happened yet but it could. But I'm not going to start worrying about it every time I start the motor. If I started investigating everything personally that could potentially harm me in life and worrying about it I wouldn't do much of anything. We all take a multitude of safety-related things on trust every day of our lives out of pure practicality.

Animae C (516)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 4:31 pm
Being awake has nothing to do with worry & trust.

Yvonne White (229)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 4:37 pm
I take my chances, and haven't had the flu since the 80's..

. (0)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 4:42 pm
Sioux, while I'm sure there are many people who just blindly follow along with regard to any individual issue in life (including such things as pharmaceutical conspiracies and the like - blind followers exist on all sides of any issue) many people who may not share your particular viewpoint are indeed 'awake'. Differing opinions and differing priorities don't automatically make a person you disagree with 'unawake'.

It's rather like my smoking. I'm perfectly awake and aware of the stupidity of smoking cigarettes. I know the statistics. I know the dangers. And I do it anyway. In that particular area of my life I'm an idiot - but I am perfectly aware of the consquences of my idiocy and I choose to ignore them.

We can both do things that we believe to be positive when others disagree as well as do things we're aware of as negative - all while remaining 'awake'.

. (0)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 4:46 pm
I haven't taken any flue shots for over the last 3 years I just take imune tablets and vitaum for women and thats it. I ain't taking no stinking flu shot and getting the swine flu that would be my luck and I don't even eat meat. Its a money making hoax. Thanks Kathy Hugs

Elizabeth Schauki (13)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 4:56 pm
I'm not going to take any chances with my health or my child's health. A few years ago a friend of mine's daughter decided not to get her son vaccinated against measles and he got measles and developed measles encephalitis and he has permanent neurological damage. I had my daughter vaccinated for everything her pediatrician said she should have and I'm very glad I did and we both get flu shots each year.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 4:59 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Sioux because you have done so within the last week.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:00 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Yvonne because you have done so within the last week.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:04 pm
Thank you Elizabeth, we all had measles shots, my daughter had them, my granddaughter had them.
But none of us have gotten the H1N1 shots. Nor do we plan to.

. (0)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:05 pm
I would imagine, Elisabeth, that the mother of that child probably thought she was being 'awake' by not vaccinating her son against measles. I wonder how 'awake' she felt after he suffered brain damage due to his contracting measles? Circumstances do tend to change our perception of things quite a lot.

Animae C (516)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:12 pm
Everyone, especially parents MUST do their own research into how much damage is caused by ALL vaccinations.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:17 pm
Everyone, especially parents MUST do their own research into how much damage is caused by ALL vaccinations.

Very good statement Sioux, Thank you
I'd give you a star but I already have this week:)

Animae C (516)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:22 pm
"You cannot currently send a star to Kathy because you have done so within the last week."
must've been for your Dulce Report, your stories are TOOOO GOOD Kathy!!

Penelope P (222)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:26 pm
Please enlighten me someone .As I see this
1 You take the shot-

2It stops the Swine flu and possibly other flus

3 Therefore you do not get pneumonia and die.

The vaccine stops the death trigger associated with swine flu- What is the fuss about.?

Penelope P (222)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:35 pm
N ote the main way to die from any flu is pneumonia-often it seems that what caused the pneumonia is not known
therefore if there is an epidemic of swine flu the figures may well be shonky as to when it was swine flu precisely that triggered death by pneumonia.

Note also we do not know how many lives were saved by the vaccine. The government is to be praised as I see it for trying to protect it's citizens- and don't forget quite a lot of people saved are bound to have been saved despite the fact they did not take the vaccine and because others did and therefore those who did not take the vaccine did not have the sort of contact with the dese4ase that they were bound to have had had there been no vaccine.

Penelope P (222)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:44 pm
As regards a misguided fear campaign this seems to me one if there ever was.

As regards faith in medicine Ivan Illich wrote a book proving that was misplaced and that plumbing,antibiotics and anaesthetics accounted for the increase in public health

. (0)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:48 pm
Actually, Penelope, if Mr. Illich was praising antibiotics and anesthetics for the increase in public health, he was indeed praising medicine (since both are pharmaceutical drugs developed for medical uses.) And even modern sanitation has its roots in medicine - without the medical research into the cause of infectious diseases, we would have very little way of knowing why modern sanitation is so valuable and necessary.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 5:59 pm

After months of stalling, the World Health Organization (WHO) has finally revealed the names of key pandemic advisors who influenced its decision to declare a phase six pandemic last year -- a decision that resulted in a financial windfall for vaccine manufacturers. As you'll see here, that list includes at least five expert advisors received money from vaccine companies.

Here's who received money from Big Pharma and then influenced the WHO decision to declare a pandemic:

Arnold Monto is a professor from the United States who has received money from virtually all the major vaccine manufacturers: GSK, Novartis, Roche, Baxter and Sanofi Pasteur. He has specifically been given grant money by Sanofi Pasteur to study influenza vaccines.

Nancy Cox works for the US Centers for Disease Control, which already maintains a pro-vaccine stance while utterly ignoring the importance of vitamin D in halting infectious disease. Nancy took funds from the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) to conduct work on vaccines.

John Wood works at Britain's National Institute for Biological Standards and Control (NIBSC). They've taken money from Sanofi Pasteur, Novartis and several other companies focused on influenza vaccine research.

Maria Zambon is a professor at the UK Health Protection Agency Centre for Infection. She has received money from Sanofi, Novartis, CSL, Baxter and GSK.

Neil Ferguson is also a professor, and he has accepted money from Roche and GSK Biologicals.

There may be more to this story, too: The financial ties explained here are merely the ones that these people chose to publicly disclose to WHO. There may yet be other ties that currently remain a secret and will have to be dug up by some determined reporter...

What's the problem with financial ties, anyway?

Why does it matter that WHO advisors took money from vaccine companies? It's simple: The decision to declare H1N1 swine flu to be a phase 6 pandemic was made by the WHO under advisement from these very people who received money from vaccine companies. And that decision, we now know, resulted in a windfall of profits for the vaccine companies.

Those profits, in turn, were burdened by the taxpayers whose expenditures were largely worthless because a huge portion of those vaccines are now expiring and have to be destroyed. The money was wasted, in other words.

It all has the makings of a grand global con: The WHO enlists advisors with financial ties to the vaccine industry to decide whether a pandemic is under way and then conveniently follows their advice in making a decision that many health experts around the world have been questioning from the start. It all has the appearance of medical corruption, and it looks like WHO decisions are based more on politics than medical science.

It was politically convenient, in other words, to declare a stage six pandemic. And if these WHO advisors have already received money from vaccine manufacturers, it's certainly within the realm of possibility that they would soon be financially rewarded with yet more payoffs. (You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours...)

The appearance of corruption

The unfortunate upshot of all this is that even if these WHO advisors are completely innocent, their financial ties still create the appearance of corruption. And that means the WHO is losing credibility that may compromise its integrity when a real pandemic comes along. If the world can't trust the World Health Organization, in other words, then who should countries look to for real answers on pandemics and infectious disease?

Sadly, even the CDC in the US has now clearly positioned itself as an "anti-nutrition, pro-vaccine" organization, too. Ignoring the huge importance of vitamin D and the support of the human immune system, many CDC experts have also either been on the payrolls of vaccine manufacturers or are looking to join Big Pharma when offered a job. The former head of the CDC, Dr. Julie Gerberding, was recently offered a position as the president of Merck's vaccine division

The frustrating fact is that modern medicine has been subverted by Big Pharma. The vaccine industry practically runs the CDC and WHO -- or at the very least, it heavily influences decisions by these two organizations. As a result, the so-called "scientific" decisions made by these organizations have very little to do with actual science but everything to do with protecting (and expanding) the profits of vaccine manufacturers.

And when public health policy is decided based on corporate profits, the people will always suffer.

Did you notice that the list of WHO advisors did not include even a single naturopathic physician? Not a single holistic nutritionist? There was nobody on the board that brought a pro-nutrition point of view to the discussions. And you know why nutritionists and naturopaths weren't invited to join the WHO advisory board? Because the WHO has already pre-decided it doesn't want to hear those points of view. It has stubbornly decided to entertain only vaccines as the solution to virtually all infectious disease.

And if you only invite vaccine pushers to the table, guess what kind of advice you're going to get? "Push more vaccines!"

Asking a bunch of vaccine experts whether you should declare a pandemic is sort of like asking your insurance agent whether you need more insurance. Well of course you do!

No wonder the WHO has lost so much credibility. It refuses to look at real solutions that might work for poor nations (such as low-cost vitamin D supplements) while strongly favoring the high-profit operations of the vaccine industry. That's why the WHO simply can't be trusted anymore. It has now become a pawn of the pharmaceutical industry that will always make decisions that favor the financial interests of Big Pharma.

See the WHO list of advisors here:


Vivian F (491)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 6:06 pm
No flu shots for me...I don't know what's in them and I'm beginning to distrust a LOT of things in life nowadays. I'm of the older generation so perhaps I am viewed as a liability or drain on the system. EEKS!

. (0)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 7:00 pm
I didn't go for it last year and I'm certainly going to go for this year. The Australian govt. had vaccines for almost all the population. Personally, I'm very sceptical when it comes to drugs and try to avoid as many as possible besides they are tested on animals and I don't believe in testing on animals, I believe in natural herbal remedies.

Past Member (0)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 7:02 pm

Henry P (171)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 7:17 pm
Noted and thanks for the post Kathy C.

Darlene K (356)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 7:30 pm
Never had a flu shot, and I don't plan on getting one, in the future. It is a bit over-the-top, when I go to the grocery store and see stations for "get your flu shot, here now." I am glad my doctors don't push this on me. noted and thank you.

Roseann d (178)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 8:01 pm
They already started. Since the beginning of August, the radio ads are saying: Come in to Safeway for your flu shot and get 10% off your grocery bill. Why the bribe and why the push in August when it's not even flu season. Come to think of it, they never really stopped pushing people to come in to get vaxed at all this year. They just started to amp it up more.

Today, just saw a commercial that you can schedule your flu shot online at CVS. Bizarre.

Mack David (100)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 8:10 pm
You should read what is in the shots!
Man-made disaster and the shots are manipulation to decrease the population???

Matloob ul Hasan (81)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 8:23 pm
Noted, thanks.

Magdalena M (0)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 8:57 pm
No flu shot for me. Even if they give it for free or pay me for one.

Sharon Collins (62)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 9:51 pm
This is my personal view about myself, I have never got any shots of this nature. If I get that sick and maybe die, I see it as mother nature having her way of population control. My immune system seems to be very good against these things. I may get a good cold or flu one in a year, but mostly it is in a two to three year span. I realize I may be lucky now, but as a child, before all this stuff even came out, I was constantly crook from all sorts and nearly did lose my life. If my body is functioning well now, why fix something that doesn't need fixing? I believe it is a personal choice, but, it needs careful research BEFORE jumping in. There is just tooooo much chemical crap in our food, water everything that is supposed to be good for us. With these running rife in our system, no wonder there are also adverse effects from these things. Some food for thought. Testing on animals is apseloutely taboo, wrong, wrong, wrong. I do have other conditions and even with those, I do not take every darn pill thrown at me, I rather suffer than have animals suffer, and that is a given. A human condition is a HUMAN condition, not animals.

Nancy L (141)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 10:31 pm
Myself and my very large family get flu shots every year. My 19yr old nephew did from complications of the flu in 1982. If you get the flu after a flu shot you already had it. It is impossible to get flu from the shot.

Nancy L (141)
Saturday August 28, 2010, 10:32 pm
Should have been died not did.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 12:21 am
Hi Mack David
I did know what WAS in them, I just looked up what they are now planning and oh my STARS.

New H1N1 Vaccines To Be Grown In Dog Cells, African Green Monkey Kidney Cells, Worm Viruses And Genetically Engineered E.Coli Bacteria

Current H1N1 swine flu vaccine production primarily relies on growing the H1N1 swine flu inside of chicken eggs. However, that process has proven to be too slow to please vaccine manufacturers, so new "cutting edge" processes are being developed to make the vaccine production process quicker and more efficient. According to the Washington Post, some of the bizarre new vaccine production methods being developed include using dog cells to grow the vaccine, using genetically engineered E.coli bacteria to grow the vaccine, and inserting genetically engineered flu genes into a worm virus, which then infects cells from caterpillar ovaries. In addition, some manufacturers are considering going back to an old method that used African green monkey kidney cells to grow flu vaccines.

Does all of that sound far fetched?

After all, who would want to have a vaccine injected into their body that was grown inside someone's pet dog?

But unfortunately this is not science fiction.

This is science fact.

A massive new vaccine factory in North Carolina opened on December 1st which will produce flu vaccines using dog cells instead of chicken eggs. This facility was built with 487 million dollars in funding from the U.S. federal government.

Why does it seem like the U.S. government is always throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at really, really bad ideas?

Would any of you out there really be comfortable having a vaccine injected into you that was grown inside of dog cells?

But this is really happening.

The Washington Post also reported on other bizarre new vaccine production methods that are being developed by pharmaceutical companies.....

*VaxInnate of Cranbury, New Jersey has produced an experimental H1N1 swine flu vaccine using genetically engineered E.coli bacteria.

E.coli bacteria?

Does that actually sound like a good idea to anyone?

Does anyone in that company have even one shred of common sense?

*Protein Sciences of Meriden, Connecticut is seeking FDA approval to sell a vaccine produced by inserting genetically engineered flu genes into a worm virus, which then infects cells from caterpillar ovaries.

Yes, that definitely sounds safer and easier than growing the vaccine inside of chicken eggs.


*Baxter International was recently granted approval to sell an H1N1 swine flu vaccine in Europe that utilizes a decades-old line of African green monkey kidney cells.

But that is just for Europe right?


Baxter is also working on a version of that vaccine for the United States.

Why does Baxter always have to be right in the middle of these things?

Talk about a company that the government should investigate.

But the truth is that these new production methods would only make a really bad situation even worse.

You see, the things that vaccine manufacturers already admit are in these vaccines is enough to make your hair stand on end.

Respected natural health researcher Stephen Lendman has complied a list of ingredients commonly found in flu vaccines that may or may not be admitted to on the package inserts. The following is an excerpt from Stephen Lendman's excellent article entitled "Ineffectiveness and Dangers of Flu Shots".....


Millions voluntarily take annual flu shots not knowing their harmful ingredients. With variations by producer, they contain numerous stabilizers, neutralizers, carrying agents, and preservatives, including:

-- 25 micrograms of mercury (thimerosal), a known neurotoxin; one microgram is considered toxic; according to the NIH, "mercury and all of its compounds are toxic, exposure to excessive levels can permanently damage or fatally injure the brain and kidneys;" even "exposures to very small amounts" can also cause "allergic reactions, neurological damage and death;" it's also linked to autism;

-- aluminum hydroxide and phosphate, known to be linked to some neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer's disease; the Office of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) reports x-ray evidence of pulmonary fibrosis among workers studied; it also reports that patients undergoing long-term kidney dialysis develop speech disorders, dementia, or convulsions;

-- formaldehyde, a known carcinogen according to the National Cancer Institute; it's also linked to upper respiratory tract problems and effects on lymphatic and hematopoietic systems (relating to human blood cells);

-- gelatin, polysorbate 80 and resin - ingredients causing severe allergic reactions;

-- ammonium sulfate, a suspected gastrointestinal, liver, and respiratory toxicant and neurotoxicant;

-- sorbitol, a suspected gastrointestinal and liver toxicant;

-- phenoxyethanol (antifreeze), a suspected developmental and reproductive toxicant;

-- beta-propiolactone, a known carcinogen and suspected gastrointestinal, liver, respiratory, skin and sense organ toxicant;

-- gentamycin, an antibiotic;

-- triton X100, a strong detergent;

-- animal tissues and fluids, including potentially contaminated horse blood, rabbit brain, dog kidney, monkey kidney, chick embryo, chicken egg, duck egg, pig blood, and porcine (pig) protein/tissue;

-- calf and fetal bovine serum;

-- macerated cancer cells;

-- diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue


Do you really want these things injected into you and your family?

Mercury is the second most toxic substance known to mankind.

Is it really a great idea to be injecting it into the bloodstream of your children?

Have you ever wondered why autism is unknown among the Amish (who do not vaccinate their children), while in the rest of American society autism is absolutely exploding?

In fact, a new government study has found that 1 in every 91 U.S. children will be diagnosed at some point in their lives with autism.

That is something to think about.

One of the ingredients not even on Lendman's list that is commonly found in vaccines is Polysorbate 80, which has been associated with infertility in female mice.

Do you really want to risk infertility just to feel a little safer from a mild disease like the H1N1 swine flu?

The truth is that an increasing number of medical doctors are speaking out about the dangers of these vaccines. Will you listen to them?.....

In case you have missed it, the reality is that dozens upon dozens upon dozens of H1N1 swine flu side effect horror stories are already pouring in. Large numbers of people are getting hurt by this vaccine.

If you have an H1N1 vaccine story to share, we encourage you to visit this brand new site and share what has happened to you.

It has been demonstrated that the more people are educated about what is in these vaccines, the less likely they are to take them. People deserve to be able to make an informed decision about these shots, but unfortunately the mainstream media only presents one side of the argument.

If you are considering taking a vaccine, please think twice before you do so. Educate before you vaccinate. Don't just blindly trust the world "health authorities" or the government officials who are in the pocket of the pharmaceutical industry. Get informed and make your own decision. There is too much at stake to let others do your thinking for you.

Pamela C (75)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 12:23 am
I never get a flu shot and very rarely have I ever gotten the flu. Since my immune system is not good, I put it down to regular handwashing with soap and water.
You almost never hear about the possible negative side effects to those that are allergic to eggs, even though many people are.
What alarms me is that a number of people I know got a nasty case of pneumonia last year, a combination of viral and bacterial, the aftereffects of which are still with them. Each of them had gotten a flu shot. I can't say with certainty that the flu shot caused it, but it certainly makes me suspicious.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 12:24 am
Spurred by $487 million in federal funding, OUR TAX DOLLARS

But six years later, as Americans from Washington to California line up to get inoculated against the swine flu, the slow progress toward developing better ways to make a vaccine has become glaringly obvious.

This lag and the shortage of H1N1 vaccine have focused attention on the status of government efforts to develop state-of-the-art techniques to make flu and other vaccines, including those needed to protect against bioterrorism, and the nation's dependence on a process that is notoriously slow and unreliable.

Several new technologies are showing promise. Spurred by $487 million in federal funding, a sprawling new vaccine factory is opening in North Carolina Tuesday that will produce shots using dog cells instead of chicken eggs. A Connecticut biotech company has also applied to sell a vaccine employing a radically different approach involving a genetically engineered virus infecting insect cells -- a strategy a Rockville firm is testing to inoculate people against the swine flu in Mexico. Dozens of other high-tech approaches are also moving through the pipeline.


Kathy Chadwell (354)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 12:32 am
Pamela C you reminded me that I saw a special report from a group of doctors last year that said that very same thing (washing hands, etc) and they said they also believed that adding Antioxidants would keep the flu away. That was what we did last year, it worked. We drank lots of the different V8 juices:) Thank you so much
A-C-E Vitamin Rich V8 was renamed Essential Antioxidants

JustaHuman Here (53)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 12:58 am
My doctor denied to give the flu shot to his patients and distributed a flyer about its dangers.

Teresa W (782)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 2:55 am
Noted. thank you.

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 5:09 am
Pamela, the prohibition against people getting the flu shot if they're allergic to eggs is something which I can't imagine any doctor or clinic not disclosing to the patient before they get the shot. It was on the form I had to sign before I got the shot last year.

patricia lasek (317)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 7:23 am
I have gotten the flu 4 times during my 60 years of life. Twice, just a few hours after getting the shot and my symptoms were much worse than the 2 times without the shot. I have not gotten a flu shot since 1993 and don't intend to now. The 2 times I did get the shot, it was mandatory because of where I worked.

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 7:31 am
The flu vaccine can't give anyone influenza (there aren't any live unattenuated viruses in the vaccine - they're killed). Anyone who gets the flu after receiving the vaccine just was either exposed to the flu virus naturally before the vaccine or was exposed to it naturally during the period before the vaccine reaches maximum protection (or, since the vaccine doesn't give 100% protection, was just exposed to it period at any time.)

Vivian F (491)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 7:32 am
Sounds like WE'RE the guinnea pigs on the 'new cutting edge' drugs!! And for a company to make it 'mandatory' to get the shots is downright scary! What gives them the right? No shot, no job? Hmmmmm....

patricia lasek (317)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 8:24 am
Geez Lindsey, my doctor told me you can get the flu from the shot if you are particularly sensitive to medications, which I am. I'm a nurse, by the way.

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 8:32 am
According to the Centers for Disease Control, the Mayo Clinic, and so many others, the flu shot cannot transmit influenza to anyone.

"....The flu vaccine can't give you the flu. But you might develop flu-like symptoms — despite getting a flu shot — for a variety of reasons, including:

Reaction to the vaccine. Some people experience muscle aches and fever for a day or two after receiving a flu shot. This may be a side effect of your body's production of protective antibodies. The nasal vaccine can cause runny nose, headache and sore throat.

The two-week window. It takes about two weeks for the flu shot to take full effect. If you're exposed to the influenza virus shortly before or during that time period, you might catch the flu.

Mismatched flu viruses. In some years, the influenza viruses used for the vaccine don't match the viruses circulating during the flu season. If this occurs, your flu shot won't be able to protect you.

Other illnesses. Many other diseases, such as the common cold, also produce flu-like symptoms. So you may think you have the flu when you actually don't....."

Jessica C (178)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 8:33 am
Quercetin, which is naturally occurring in apples, broccoli, and red onions (as well as an active ingredient in Emergen-C), is what shielded me from the flu last year (at least I'm pretty certain that was they silver bullet) -- and I was almost constantly surrounded by people who were habitually coughing and not covering their mouths. Besides, I'm vegan and allergic to eggs.

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 8:34 am
Individual medical practitioners can believe and promote many things (I've read papers by M.D.s who say that HIV doesn't cause AIDS and is a completely harmless virus.)

I go with what the main body of science says - and the main body of medical practitioners and major health organizations.

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 8:55 am
Actually, I should rephrase my last comment. I accept the recommendations of doctors and other medical practitioners who base their recommendations on the findings of the main body of science and whose recommendations agree with the main body of medical practitioners and major health organizations. Since they're obviously going to be far more knowledgeable and expert through study of the literature and knowledge of the subject than I am.

I trust my own doctor because that's what he bases his treatments on. The day that he starts recommending things that don't agree with conventional medical opinion, unless he can thoroughly explain to my satisfaction why my own particular and unique medical situation is an exception to the rule and can logically show that his recommendations don't violate any known generally-accepted scientific principles, I'm changing doctors.

Michael Austin (51)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 2:09 pm
I'm confused on this one Lindsey, can you help me out? Are people saying don't get the flu shot just because people make money off of it? That doesn't make sense to me.

I used to get the flu at least once a year because of all the contact with people I had. Then I started getting the flu shot about 15 to 20 years ago. I missed getting the shot 1 year a few years ago and ended up in the hospital because of the flu virus I had. Like you, every year that I got my flu shot, I didn't get the flu. Not even a cold.

What really bothered me about that article was this line, "but last year the CDC reported only 12,000 flu deaths – a mere one-third of the average!" ONLY????? One is too many if you have the means to stop it! What am I missing?

Mary Neal (183)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 2:56 pm
The folks who invest in pharmaceutical companies won't give up easy. They want millions of people to take the H1N1 virus shot, which the government says is safe but refuses liability for injuries and deaths that may ensue. Greed is the motivating factor. They are so serious about us taking that mystery drug that Massachusetts passed a Martial Law bill to intern dissenters in FEMA camps. It is a CRIME to keep control over your own bodies now, because Americans have apparently become property of the U.S. Government. In my family's case, the government refuses to even say how or why my handicapped brother was secretly arrested and murdered.

Mary Neal

Larry D Grazier (1362)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 3:11 pm
Hello Everyone,
Just a shorty about the flu stuff. When I was 18 to 55 years of age I was strong and my own body woulld kick out any type of Flu Virus but after the age of 55 years your body is not as good when it comes to fighting off the Flu Bug. For anyone 55 who cares about themselves, be safe and get that Flu Shot and also the people who are around little children it's better to be safe than sorry! One child just in my town of 1200 people could spreed the Flu Virus to 300 kids, 30 adolts, and there family. Be Safe, Be Right!! "Indian Boy"

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 3:26 pm
Michael, I have a suspicion that if some new drug on the market killed 12,000 people in one year, everyone on this thread would be yelling about how wrong that was and how we should be outraged that 12,000 people died. And so would the author of this article. But let those same number of people die from the illness itself - and the author says it's 'only' 12,000 people.

And for those who seem to have a problem with pharmaceutical companies making money on their product - don't take it. Don't use pharmaceuticals. Unless your condition may threaten other people and you're a consenting adult, you've got that ethical right.

Next time you're sick and in pain just stand up to those pharmaceutical monsters and tell them that you'd rather die than line their pockets with gold. I'll defend to the death your right to take that stand (your death, of course, not mine.....)

Nancy L (141)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 4:50 pm
I like the way you think Lindsey...Can't send you any more stars though.

Anna Borsey (66)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 4:57 pm
All this nonsense about first the "bird flu" and then the "swine flu" is really just a diversionary tactic to get people worrying about their own personal sickness and death instead of taking an interest in what is being done in our names by politicians around the world. We are ALL being manipulated - ALL OF US!

Whilst it is true that many millions of people died in total, worldwide, during the flu pandemic of 1918-20 (this used to be called "the Spanish flu" as it was thought to have started in Spain) very few people have died in modern times of either bird flu or swine flu. In the peaceful, residential road where we live, there are quite a few people in their 80s and even well into their 90s and not a single one of them has been laid low in either of these two alleged pandemics.

To claim that "Between 50 and 100 million died" (Wikipedia) of the Spanish flu worldwide in the 2 years and 3 months that the outbreak lasted for seems to me to be quite ridiculously vague. They don't know whether 50 or 60 or 70 or 80 or 90 or even 100 million people died? This is just a wild "guesstimate". Presumably vast numbers of these people died of other causes - no one seems to know, and there are no proper records.

If you go to the following web site, you get a rather different version of events:
"The influenza pandemic of 1918-1919 killed more people than the Great War, known today as World War I (WWI), at somewhere between 20 and 40 million people."

So, at Stanford University they are of the opinion that only somewhere between 20 and 40 million people died of the Spanish flu, in total. These figures are CONSIDERABLY lower than those quoted on Wikipedia (And where did they get their figures from? Sources, please!) Stanford University is one of the world's leading research and teaching institutions. It is located in Palo Alto, California. I am much more inclined to believe Stanford Uni's data than the figures quoted on Wikipedia.

Eventually we all have to die of something or other. Death is just as "natural" as birth, and we are not immortal. VASTLY more people die of injuries sustained in traffic accidents annually, but we are seemingly quite prepared to accept this and wholly sanguine about this state of affairs. Very few people demand that we MUST get all the vehicles off the roads because they are instrumental in far too many deaths and horrific injuries.

All drugs are tested on millions of helpless, innocent animals who are tortured in laboratories in various horrific ways before any new drug is deemed "safe". In spite of this, many humans are allergic to these drugs and quite a few have very severe adverse reactions. We do not have the moral right tp sacrifice many billions of animals of different species for our "comfort" and "safety".

There are millions of people dying of easily preventable causes - such as warfare, malaria, starvation - worldwide, yet in the industrialized part of the world we accept this quite calmly, on the whole. Our lives are certainly not in any way more precious.

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 5:14 pm
Anna, I wasn't referencing Wikipedia when I gave the 50-100 million death figure from the 1918-20 flu pandemic (I'm not quite sure why you would think that since I never mentioned Wiki). I was referencing a National Institutes of Health Report:

"....Scientists and public health officials, wary that the H5N1 avian influenza virus could trigger an influenza pandemic, have looked to past pandemics, including the 1918 “Spanish Flu,” for insight into pandemic planning. However, in a Journal of Infectious Diseases review article now posted online, David M. Morens, M.D., and Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health, conclude that studies of the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed some 50 to 100 million people around the globe...."

And why would you say 'only' in regard to what you consider to be the more accurate figures of 20-40 million people dead in two years from influenza? If the NIH is incorrect and Stanford is correct, I'd still say that 20-40 million dead is a lot of dead people.

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 5:26 pm
Moreover, you state, "VASTLY more people die of injuries sustained in traffic accidents annually, but we are seemingly quite prepared to accept this and wholly sanguine about this state of affairs. Very few people demand that we MUST get all the vehicles off the roads because they are instrumental in far too many deaths and horrific injuries."

But we're hardly 'sanguine' about that 'state of affairs'. In the U.S., there are tons of traffic laws designed to increase safety. We force people to wear seat belts and require airbags in cars. We have speed limits and severe penalties for drunk driving. We have government agencies devoted to reducing traffic fatalities. We have engineers and designers working to design better roadways which will help keep accidents from happening. We force people to have their young children ride in the back of cars for better safety and force people to use car seats for children.

For heaven's sake, we hardly take traffic deaths for granted.

And considering the massive amounts of both tax and charitable dollars we spend on food aid and medical aid and so many other forms of aid to other nations, I really don't think we accept those things 'calmly'.

Yes, death is just as 'natural' as life. But unless we do our best to try and keep people from dying before it's unavoidable, we certainly are 'sanguine' about it, are we? If death is not something to be fought, then why worry about the starving people of the world? Starvation is pretty natural, isn't it? A great way to control the population problem, wouldn't you say?

Of course we worry about the starving. And the innocents who die in war. And people who die from illnesses and diseases which sometimes can be prevented through modern medicine.

Jacqueline S Wolf Heart (74)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 6:04 pm
THANK YOU FOR this Post Kathy

Past Member (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 7:10 pm
Having been part of Pharmacy for over 15 years, I never get a flu shot for many reasons....Depending on what shot it is, vaccines are usually made from animal or fetal parts, not including the toxins that are part of the "inactive" ingredients. Secondly, people seem to think getting a vaccine equals immunity, and that is not humanly possible, as immunity is a complicated process that takes place in the body by a variety of mechanisms, not in a test tube. Thirdly, bacteria is smarter than most people, and by the time people are vaccinated, the strain has usually morphed into another strain, and the vaccine is ineffective.

Most people do not seem to see anything unusual about signing a "waiver" before getting a flu shot. Why? If it is such a simple and harmless thing, then why is it needed? Every year millions of seniors are biased or scared into getting, what they otherwise would not. It is from beginning to end, all about the $$$.

-Andrea Oefinger, C.Ph.T.

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 7:26 pm
Andrea, saying that vaccines are usually made from 'fetal parts' makes it sound like researchers are killing fetuses and chopping them up to put in vaccines. But, with regard to human fetuses, the situation is as follows, from what I've read:

"Two different strains of human diploid cell cultures made from fetuses have been used extensively for vaccine production for decades. One was developed in the United States in 1961 (called WI-38) and the other in the United Kingdom in 1966 (called MRC-5).

WI-38 came from lung cells from a female fetus of 3-months gestation and MRC-5 was developed from lung cells from a 14-week-old male fetus. Both fetuses were intentionally aborted, but neither was aborted for the purpose of obtaining diploid cells. The fetal tissues that eventually became WI-38 and the MRC-5 cell cultures were removed from fetuses that were dead. The cellular biologists who made the cell cultures did not induce the abortions."

These are "descendent" cell cultures made from cell lines from two fetuses legally aborted over 50 years ago and never even formed part of the fetus' body (just as I never formed part of my grandmother's body).

Doesn't sound quite so Frankensteinian when it's explained, does it?

And anyone who thinks getting a vaccine means 100% immunity isn't very well informed. Because vaccine manufacturers don't claim that their products give 100% immunity.

And of course getting a vaccine is not a 'simple and harmless thing' - that's why waivers are signed so people are made aware of the fact that vaccines, like all drugs, have known negative side effects in some who take them.

Past Member (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 8:02 pm
You just proved my point Lindsey. Fetal cells are from fetal parts. For someone like me, who has ethical problems with abortion, it does not make any difference whether it was from a "legal" abortion or not, or when that abortion was done.

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 8:09 pm
Then if you object to using vaccines cultured in fetal cells from two legal abortions over 50 years ago, you're certainly free not to ever take a vaccine.

Luckily the majority of people either accept legalized abortion or accept that it's better to use these cell lines - which can harm no fetus today - if they help humans healthwise.

Past Member (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 8:12 pm
Equally as disturbing are the animal rights implications, which I applaud Kathy C. for being so factually specific about. These matters are not known to the general public, and the public never sees a vial, packaging box, or insert from the manufacturer listing the ingredients, or potential side effects. Most people also do not think to ask. I think the crux of the matter is, that all people receiving vaccines of any kind, should be given full written information and then make the decision themselves, without bias from the government or pharmaceutical companies. If you think that both of those agencies exist only to better human health or improve people's quality of life, you are sadly mistaken.

. (0)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 8:31 pm
Of course pharmaceutical manufacturers don't exist 'only to better human health'. They're businesses - and they want to make money. Just like a defense attorney helps his client - and makes money doing so. Just as a nurse helps patients - but earns her living that way. Unless something is a non-profit, they're in it to make a profit. I see nothing wrong with that.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 9:29 pm
I thank all of you, I applaud Anna Borsey, & Andrea Oefinger for their comments and their strong believes in compassion before all else.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Sunday August 29, 2010, 9:35 pm
I also would like to tell Mary Neal how sorry I am about her husband:(

Ester Hellen (228)
Monday August 30, 2010, 12:21 am
Thank you Kathy,everybody thought I was grazy for net letting my son (3 years at that time) vaccinated and thought I had a deadwish towards him,but I did read about the compagny that sold the swinefly vaccinations and how much profits it would give them.Also our government bought too much vaccinations at that time,I do believe that 15 milllion vaccinations (never used) was going to be destroyed in april.
They really spooked me when there was so much media covers about the swineflu,but fear is a bad advice-keeperI don't trust the governement and the big compagnies.

JoAnne Perdue (50)
Monday August 30, 2010, 9:04 am

Anna Borsey (66)
Monday August 30, 2010, 2:05 pm
Lindsey - "the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health, conclude that studies of the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed some 50 to 100 million people around the globe...."

So, the US NIAID also does not know whether 50 million or 100 million people died of Spanish flu. I find that extraordinary. This is a massive 100% error margin!

If every single human was saved from dying of different cancers, leukaemia, flu, pneumonia, heart infarct, liver failure, kidney failure etc etc etc - guess what? We would be in even MORE serious trouble than we are already; global population very nearly 7 BILLION humans, and rising . . .

Maybe we should simply accept that various diseases are "nature's way" of culling the human population. We CANNOT live for ever, and we CANNOT save every foetus, every baby, every child, every adult. If everyone's life WAS saved, and they all lived on into their 80s or 90s, all of these people (or the majority of them) would go on to breed. Before very long, there wouldn't even be standing room for us all on this planet! There has to be some way of culling humanity as we live in a finite world with finite resources.

I am child-free by choice - as is my brother (there are only two us in our family), ditto my present partner - as I have never wanted to add to the global problems by reproducing.


Past Member (0)
Monday August 30, 2010, 2:15 pm
The FDA is already preparing for this flu season -ANY flu shots will contain the H1N1 Virus and all the ingredients that were in that vaccine and they are incorporating it into the regular flu shots. Parents beware that these vaccines contain carcinogens and will harm human health. Take holistic vitamins instead and eat healthy.

. (0)
Monday August 30, 2010, 2:40 pm
Anna, I believe there are better ways of controlling the population rather than allowing people to die 'naturally' rather than trying to save lives. If it comes down to it, mandatory birth control and mandatory limits on the number of children anyone can have would be infinitely preferable to deliberately allowing people to die who could be saved. In fact, I personally am quite glad that attitude wasn't in effect when I was born - I was premature and would never have survived without medical intervention. And after 52 years of healthy and productive living, I'm quite glad that medical science had the ability to give me those years. "Culling" is not something I care to accept when it comes to either humanity or non-human animals unless for purely individual humane reasons (I'm completely in favor of physician-aid-in-dying for patients who wish it.)

And why would you find it 'extraordinary' that the numbers who died in the 1918-1920 influenza pandemic aren't known anywhere near exactly? That was almost a century ago - and not only was recordkeeping in first-world countries far less developed than today but that pandemic included deaths all over the world - including in places where recordkeeping was sketchy to say the least.

Any estimates given out by any organization are in the tens of millions. So however it's calculated, everyone agrees that a truly massive number of people died. My grandmother was an R.N. and told me of the overflowing hospitals with patients being put in tents or in corridors and public events cancelled for fear of spreading the illness. It was a major worldwide health crisis.

Michael Austin (51)
Monday August 30, 2010, 6:17 pm
"Maybe we should simply accept that various diseases are "nature's way" of culling the human population."

I don't get shocked often, but that statement dropped my jaw! I can't believe someone would want another person to die instead of getting help. That's exactly what it boils down to! It's my belief that people have a responsibility of not only taking care of themselves but also making sure they wouldn't be a carrier to injure others. I wonder if people who believe disease is nature's way of culling the human race if when they get sick if they go to a doctor. Why see a doctor if nature wants you to die? I just can't fathom that.

Like people who don't want to immunize their kids. I don't want those kids around my kids! Don't we have immunizations to thank for the end of polio? How about Smallpox? And either eradicated or very close to it, the measles, mumps, rubella and lymphatic filariasis. These things used to kill or maim our children! You would rather see a child die than to receive an immunization? I just cannot fathom that thought.

My wife, my son and myself went in today and got our flu shot. I was told before hand that the shot contained the h1n1 antivirus as well as the standard flu antivirus. They already know my full medical record and whether or not the shot would be good for me or not. I'm glad we got our shots! I don't have to worry about getting the flu and I don't have to be concerned about spreading it to someone else. I see that as our civic duty to make sure we are not spreading a disease around.

I understand people being upset about the price of medications, but to deny pharmaceutical companies their profit is wrong. They spend years and years working on various things to help people, not kill them. I agree there has been too much of a push to get some things out and they end up with bad results, such as fen fen. It had to be pulled off the market because it was hurting people, as it should have been. I know some people who were extremely upset that it was pulled. But we owe it to the community to do what is right. If something is found to be bad, get it off the shelf. If something is found to be good, get it to everyone who needs it.

I wonder if the people against vaccinations, vaccinate their pets against Rabies, distemper, feline leukemia, etc. Since my cats are indoor only, I didn't get the feline leukemia. Then my son brought home a feral kitten, who died after 6 months from leukemia. I immediately had my other 2 checked out and vaccinated. I'll never bypass it again! I won't bypass any vaccinations for my people family or my cat family.

patricia lasek (317)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 5:13 am
Michael, I'm so glad you believe that the pharmaceutical companies deserve the profits they make due to their extensive researc, not to mention the billions they spend annually promoting their drugs through ads on television, in newspapers and magazines. I won't even bring up the kickbacks to doctors in the form of free lunches, etc.

. (0)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 5:49 am
Patricia, any person or company legally 'deserves' any profits they make (so long as they're engaged in a legal enterprise). My boss also uses some of his profits to advertise his services - which means our clients, like drug consumers, are also paying to have those services advertised to them (every company that advertises uses money it obtained from its customers to pay for the advertising.) I'm sure some of our clients feel my boss' billable hourly rate for his legal services is too high - but he has a right to charge that rate and if they want his services they have to pay it. Of course, like the pharmaceutical companies, my boss also gives away some of his 'product' for free or at reduced cost to low-income clients.

I don't understand why anyone would feel that a non-government for-profit entity doesn't have the legal right to as much profit as they can earn. I don't like the price I have to pay for a lot of things in life - but it isn't my decision as to how much profit anyone selling to me should make. Just like it's no one else's right to decide how much profit I'm personally allowed to make through selling my services to my boss - I legally 'deserve' whatever salary he's willing to pay me.


Nancy L (141)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 5:57 am
Very well said Lindsey. I don't understand it either. Consumers are free to pay for those services or go elsewhere.

Gina P (22)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 6:53 am
Nice! I am going to print out the article and have it ready for work. I am a nurse and we were told we MUST ge the flu vaccine or be terminated!!!!!!!!! Yes I'm telling the truth! We had to get union and rights invoved to prevent this mandatory assault on our bodies! Thank you for sharing, Kathy!

Michael Austin (51)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 7:03 am
Patricia, you bet. I believe in capitalism. I believe that's why we have more patents than any other country. I believe that's why we come out with working medications more times than other countries. Capitalism works if govt keeps their hands out of it.
One thing I don't understand is the amount of money a drug company spends on advertising. Why tell me about the drug? It's my doctor that needs to know. If my doctor prescribes something for me, I look it up on the internet. I don't wait to hear it from a commercial. Just seems to me that money could be put to better use than advertising a drug that requires a prescription. It's the Dr who makes the call on what we get. OTC drugs, I can understand advertising because we are making the choice from a miriad of different brands. But prescriptions, especially ones that are so new there are no generic for it, I trust my Dr over some TV ad. I would much rather see that money going to programs for the disabled and elderly, much better than what they offer today "for those who cannot afford their medication." They have very strict guidelines for who they will help. It's all by income with no regard to what medical bills you have. For disabled and the elderly, many who can't afford the medication make too much money to get help from the company. For example, a person may be making $2000 a month but are paying out $1000 a month for medication. They don't qualify for assistance from the company. By the time you add in mortgage, food and gas going back and forth to doctors, there's nothing left. My parents are in that position, so we kids help them out each month. I don't mind helping my parents, but it does rub me the wrong way seeing ads on TV about how they will help those who can't afford their medication. So I would love to see that TV money going into a program. Most definitely they deserve a fair profit, but I think they could better spend that profit to help others and themselves.

Animae C (516)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 3:42 pm
Woooaaaah! it's the Lyndsey DTSW, NE L, Michael A. show again!!!
be back later....

Michael Austin (51)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 4:06 pm
uhm..... is that good or bad? Got your popcorn? Ice Cream? Soda? Got Mine, I'm ready! :-)

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 4:10 pm
You cannot currently send a star to patricia m because you have done so within the last week.

And Gina P if you start a petition, I will happily sign it and pass it around for you

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 4:24 pm
I have to wonder with all we now know about this hoax, why some are still defending it.
I wonder if they have stocks in these companies.
If you wish to take the H1N1 that is your right,, but please don't continue to try to shove your opinions down the throats of those who have educated themselves to this issue. Everybody has given an opinion and I've respected that. But if you continue to bully everybody who has a difference of opinion on my thread, I will block you If you want to do a debate and provide non bias information plus the links, I have no problem with that.

Animae C (516)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 4:30 pm
a squillion stars to you!!

. (0)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 5:28 pm
Michael, I think the pharmaceutical companies advertise specific drugs hoping that consumers will remember them the next time they have that condition and try to get their doctor to prescribe the advertised drug over others the doctor might prescribe. Which does seem rather silly since it's the physician who should be prescribing, not the patient. But obviously the advertising works or they wouldn't keep doing it.

patricia lasek (317)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 5:57 pm
Lindsey, that is exaactly why I think it unethical for Big-Pharma to advertise their wares to the general population.

. (0)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 6:09 pm
I'm not sure I'd go so far to call it unethical (though it's a fine line and a case could be made perhaps on both sides) since people can't get prescriptions without going through a doctor, and the doctor is supposed to rein them in if they're off on an unrealistic desire for some advertised medication. But I don't personally like it and wish they wouldn't advertise.

Animae C (516)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 7:10 pm
Michael A
"Don't we have immunizations to thank for the end of polio? How about Smallpox?"
Where did you source this info??
Link/ref please.

. (0)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 7:33 pm
Hope you don't mind, Michael, but I've got some of those sources and links Sioux asks for.

Polio isn't completely eradicated unfortunately, though its incidence has been seriously reduced (and public sanitation certainly is part of the success story as well as vaccination). But smallpox seems to have been eradicated:

From the CDC: "....Thanks to the success of vaccination, the last natural outbreak of smallpox in the U.S. occurred in 1949. By 1972, routine smallpox vaccinations for children in the U.S. were no longer needed. In 1980, smallpox was said to be wiped out worldwide, and no cases of naturally occurring smallpox have happened since....."

From the Mayo Clinic: "Smallpox is a contagious, disfiguring and often deadly disease caused by the variola virus. Smallpox is believed to have been around for thousands of years. Few other illnesses have had such a devastating effect on human health and history. There's no treatment or cure for smallpox. The only prevention is vaccination. Naturally occurring smallpox was eradicated worldwide by 1980 — the result of an unprecedented immunization campaign....."

From Johns Hopkins: "....Smallpox was once among the deadliest of diseases afflicting humankind, killing millions of people in regular epidemics. Thanks to a worldwide vaccination drive, smallpox was effectively wiped out in 1980...."

And for those who don't like sources from capitalist countries who make money on medications:

From Cuba: "The National [Immunization] Program, begun in 1962, has resulted in internationally noteworthy results over the last 42 years, including the elimination of the following diseases: Poliomyelitis (1962)...."

And for a paper from the Journal of the American Medical Association on Historical Comparisons of Morbidity and Mortality for Vaccine-Preventable Diseases in the United States, anyone may go to:


Animae C (516)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 7:53 pm
Natural immunization is a complex interactive process involving many bodily organs and systems;
it cannot be replicated by the artificial stimulation of antibodies.
Research also indicates that vaccination commits immune cells to the specific antigens in a vaccine, rendering them incapable of reacting to other infections.
Immunological reserves may thus actually be reduced, causing a generally lowered resistance.
Measles, mumps, small pox, pertussis, polio and Hib outbreaks have all occurred in vaccinated populations.
In 1989 the CDC reported: "Among school-aged children, [measles] outbreaks have occurred in schools with vaccination levels of greater than 98 percent. [They] have occurred in all parts of the country, including areas that had not reported measles for years."
The CDC even reported a measles outbreak in a documented 100% vaccinated population.

also see


Animae C (516)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 7:55 pm
YES very well aware of those links Lindsey/Michael now have a look at mine.

Animae C (516)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 7:57 pm
YES well aware of those links Michael/Lindsay, have a look into mine.

. (0)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 8:10 pm
Yes, Sioux, vaccination isn't something which generally confers 100% immunity on the patient. And science doesn't claim that it does. So there's certainly nothing particularly revealing about highlighting a known fact. There will indeed be cases among the vaccinated. Per capita, fewer cases than among the unvaccinated, certainly. But still some cases.

I'm curious as to why you would ask for links to information you were already 'very well aware of'. I tend not to ask for verification of facts I already know. But, no matter - your prerogative, of course.

. (0)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 8:16 pm
Though some vaccines are 100% effective, such as that for rabies:

"Rabies is 100 percent preventable with vaccinations if patients receive them before the onset of symptoms...."

Elizabeth Schauki (13)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 8:36 pm
I read that story on Cuba's vaccine program and they really have done a good job with that. I wish the U.S. was as thorough as Cuba has been but maybe Cuba's got an advantage since their government has the power to tell their people what to do more strongly than ours does so more Cuban people got immunized and most vaccinations here are by choice. Cuba's got a really good medical system I think.

Animae C (516)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 8:56 pm
Lindsey i ask for the links for everyone else's benefit here.

"There will indeed be cases among the vaccinated. Per capita, fewer cases than among the unvaccinated, certainly." WRONG
i can see you didn't even glance at the links i've provided.

i have dedicated MANY years educating myself, reading in their entirety ALL forms of information available.
mine is an educated decision.
sadly, you have a very fixed view & whatever your reason is in promoting POISONS, it's entirely yours.

Elizabeth maybe a move to Cuba would do you some good.

. (0)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 9:03 pm
Yes, Sioux - I looked at your links. But reading something doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to agree with what it says, of course (what an odd concept). I just choose to accept the findings of the main body of scientists and medical practitioners since over the course of 53 years of life I've found them to be far more likely to be right than those on the fringe. But, to each her own, I suppose.

Elizabeth Schauki (13)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 9:25 pm
I wouldn't want to live in Cuba Sioux but I do think they have a better health system than we have. Everyone has healthcare there even if they're poor and they seem to have good doctors and good health programs. A lot of things are wrong with their political system and other things. And I don't believe I was rude to you and I would appreciate the same courtesy.

Animae C (516)
Tuesday August 31, 2010, 9:48 pm
I wish the U.S. was as thorough as Cuba has been but maybe Cuba's got an advantage since their government has the power to tell their people what to do more strongly than ours does so more Cuban people got immunized and most vaccinations here are by choice. Cuba's got a really good medical system I think.

Now why would you assume i was being rude? you have lovely things to say about Cuba, you also think they've got a good medical system. it's a complement my dear.

Michael Austin (51)
Wednesday September 1, 2010, 1:31 am
Sioux, interesting reading, but I can't say they convinced me. I get the impression they are more alarmist than actual fact retrievers. There is a lot of information for both sides. It's simply a matter of what you feel comfortable with believing. Some will never trust a gov't organization to the tell the truth regardless of what the stats prove. Some will never trust a non gov't agency thinking they are nothing more than conspiracy theorists.
Then there are those who twist things beyond what it actually is. Like asking why the minority of people in here are shoving ideas down people throats. What?? This is a debate is it not? In a debate each side is going to "sell" their view. I don't see that as shoving anything down anyone's throat. Yes we have the right to take the vaccine if we want. And you have the right not to. I agree that you have that right, but what about the rights of those who believe in immunizations and don't want to put their children at risk? Who has the right there? You don't want to put "poison" in your child and others don't want contageous children running around spreading disease.
There are valid points on both sides and yet I see no one shoving anything. There are many of us in here who have spent a lot of time researching. Just because one believes the documentation in the left hand and another believes the documentation in the right hand, doesn't mean one is any less educated as the other. This is one of those subjects that has data from either side to prove their point. I'm speaking of the professionals, not us in here. The educated person will poor over documents from every side and take everything into consideration.
Personally I haven't found anything that would sway me, especially since I've had my shot. I believe the proof for getting the immunization outweighs the proof against it. I see a lot of bias in the against documentation. I see a lot of distraction in the against documentation, meaning they point fingers more than they give stats. This is my reason for having started flu shots in the first place. I take them now because I have personal experience that it works and works quiite well for my family. I also have personal experience as to what happens if I miss my flu shot ... I won't do that again! A nice little ambulance ride and 4 days in the hospital is a pretty good reminder.

Anna Borsey (66)
Wednesday September 1, 2010, 5:12 am
Lindsey . "I don't understand why anyone would feel that a non-government for-profit entity doesn't have the legal right to as much profit as they can earn. I don't like the price I have to pay for a lot of things in life - but it isn't my decision as to how much profit anyone selling to me should make. Just like it's no one else's right to decide how much profit I'm personally allowed to make through selling my services to my boss - I legally 'deserve' whatever salary he's willing to pay me."

There is a vast difference between need and greed. It is profoundly unethical to charge "what the market will bear" when what this REALLY means is that the market forces are determined by the wealthy, the well off and the comfortably off. It is just too bad if you happen not to belong to that category. Global pharmaceutical companies are making astronomical profits on people's fear, ignorance and paranoia. This is profiteering and it should be stopped.

The legal right to a maximum profit is certainly not the same as the moral right. There are all kinds of things that are legal in this world, although this varies from country to country, but the fact that they are "legal" does not make it ethical.

Many doctors are bribed by the big pharmaceutical companies into prescribing one drug rather than another, similar, drug. Most patients are ignorant of medical issues and are forced to rely on their doctor, who may well NOT be doing what is best for his patients.

You must be aware that a wealthy professional, such as a lawyer or a doctor, is able to set the rate he is prepared to pay his employees and if these are not happy with what he is offering there are always plenty of other people who are desperate for work. This position is not comparable to that of the lawyers and doctors etc who appear to have formed their own unlicensed cartels, thus forcing their clients to pay the rates that they demand.

Just as with the issue of organ donorship, this issue of "flu jabs" is a luxury western problem. In many other parts of the world children (and adults too) are dying like the proverbial flies for lack of clean water, from malaria, from chronic diarrhoea, from dehydration, from open sewers and other basic, simple complaints.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Wednesday September 1, 2010, 8:58 pm
Michael, in reference to my statement of shoving something down someones throat (I said that) when somebody sits by and rudely heckles everybody else's opinion when it doesn't agree with your's, one could interpret it to be harassing, shoving something down another's throat. All polite responses and debate (meaning links and proof ) are welcome. Sioux & many others on here (yes, even some with difference of opinions) are my friends and I won't allow them to be attacked on my thread.

Lindsey, thank you for the links:) If I had time I could probably tear through each of them, (& I'm not saying I could, I said probably:) But this story was to let people know they were at it again, I had no idea that some didn't realize the H1N1 was a hoax. I can't provide anymore reputable links than the links in Keith Mann's site did. (and there are tons of them) So I will respect that you believe in H1N1, & you will have to respect that I know it's a hoax to scare people. More people died from the common flu last year that from the actual H1N1 flu. The jury is still out on the vaccine, since even the inventor of this vaccine admitted the proper testing time hadn't been allotted. I will look for the article that tells you he himself didn't take the vaccine.

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Wednesday September 1, 2010, 9:28 pm

Baxter’s Patent on H1N1-Releasing Deadly Viruses-Part 1

Under patent number US 2009/0060950 A1 Baxter Pharmaceutical company know as Baxter Healthcare Corporation in the USA applied for and received a patent on the Swine Flu Vaccine for H1N1 and many other “swine” “bird” “human” virus diseases to come by the inventors of the swine viral vaccine from Austria. Initially they had commenced the patents in 2007 well before the outbreak of the swine flu virus.

Baxter employs the following inventors from Austria and they are coincidentally hired as advisers to the Whore Health Organization, that is the World Health Organization.

These inventors are:

Otfried Kistner, of Vienna, Christa Tauer, of Vienna, Noel Barrett Klosterneuburg/Weilding of Vienna and Wolfgang Mundt of Vienna Austria. Otfried Kistner is also the person who is implicated in who was responsible for accidentally shipping a live deadly virus to 16 labs in February 2009.

You can search for more of Otfried’s work here but mysteriously his picture is not available for viewing, perhaps he is in hiding as a result of the accidental release of deadly viruses.

Otfried’s Patent on Swine Flu Vaccines and you can see Otfried Kistner doesn’t like his picture taken.

Otfried is also the scientist who is the head of virus studies and he advises the WHO on viruses and is their intelligence point man on concocting vaccines. A conflict of big interests between Baxter and the World Health Organization.

Otfried also had initiated this patent back in 2007 actually this is 2 years before the outbreak and that makes Otfried a psychic scientist or the man behind the curtain. It turns out that the WHO gave Baxter the live bird flu virus that the drug company Baxter used in contaminating 73 kilo’s of vaccine material. 72 Kilograms is 159 pounds of a live deadly active bird flu virus that was “accidentally” released by Baxter Pharma in Vienna. This means a drug company hired by the WHO to perform studies on viruses actually invented the processes and ingredients used in the swine flu vaccine.

Swine Vaccine and the WHO

These are the same scientists that conveniently advise the World Health Organization on swine flu outbreaks and they developed the Baxter Swine Flu Vaccine. This represents a strange conflict of interest but the US government still bought this vaccine from the Austrian Baxter scientists. They applied under the Correspondence and corporate office of Baxter HealthCare Corporation, One Baxter Parkway, DF2-2E Deerfield, Illinois 60015 USA.

In the chemical processes of the patent it is noted that the Carrier sleeve tank or removal of micro carriers includes Benzonase, the addition of Formaldehyde. Also note the Tween 80 Stabilization process.

The Description of the vaccine and how it works includes phrases such as the ones you hear in the media because the media has become the spokesperson for the drug companies.

The reference to Tween 80 -which causes infertility and is disastrously dangerous to people causing anaphylactic shock and if you just consider what it can do to a fetus in a pregnant woman you would not take this vaccine.
According to the World Intellectual Property Organization, which is part of the United Nations, scientists from the organization are developing vaccines specifically to damage fertility as a method of contraception. A suggested ingredient for the vaccine is tween 80 (polysorbate 80): “In a preferred embodiment the vaccine comprises oil, preferably a biodegradable oil such as squalene oil. Typically, the vaccine is prepared using an adjuvant concentrate which contains lecithin in squalene oil. The aqueous solution glycoprotein is typically a phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) solution, and additionally preferably contains Tween 80.” (Fertility Impairing Vaccine And Methods of Use’ This application claims the benefit of U. S. Provisional Application No. 60/070,375, filed January 2,1998, U. S. Provisional Application No. 60/071,406, filed January 15,1998.)

You can read up on squalene or Tween 80 -it is an interesting read.

Squalene in Swine Vaccines

Gardasil also contains Squalene and has caused the death and damage to our young teenage daughters and should be pulled off the market. There is no vaccine that is proven to prevent cervical cancer or any cancer for that matter. This is a dangerous sterilization chemical and nothing more.

Squalene damages your brain: especially babies and young children.

“Polysorbate-80 is used in pharmacology to assist in the delivery of certain drugs or chemotherapeutic agents across the blood-brain-barrier. What viral, bacterial, yeast, heavy metal or other vaccine containing ingredient need to pass into the brains of our children? Do they belong in the brain?

Is that part of the needed immune response to protect our children from disease? Do vaccine materials pass across the blood-brain barrier with the help of Polysorbate-80? If so, are there complications from being in the brains of our children? Is this another connection to help us get an understanding of why 1 in 150 children have autism, or 1 in 6 children has developmental/learning disabilities? Aluminum and Vaccine Ingredients: What Do We Know? What Don’t We Know? by Lawrence B. Palevsky, MD, FAAP”. Parents you need to know about what you are infecting your children with when you vaccinate with the swine flu vaccine. See: Squalene.

TAGS: Baxter Drug Patent On Swine Flu, Swine Flu Vaccines and the WHO, World Health Organization, Infecting vaccines, Tween 80 in the Swine Flu Vaccine, Polysorbate-80 causes fertility problems, Sterilizing with Tween 80, Baxter Drug Patent for Swine 2007, Aluminum in Vaccines, Swine Flu Ingredients, news media, Politicol News, politics.


Animae C (516)
Thursday September 2, 2010, 1:03 am
Kathy, you've worked very hard & have presented so much education on this thread!
Not everyone is capable of accepting new knowledge,
as the Buddha teaches, "The worst human trait is a fixed mind."

"It is impossible to begin to learn that which one thinks one already knows."
Epictetus (50-120) Greek philosopher

Michael Austin (51)
Thursday September 2, 2010, 1:24 am
Kathy, thank you for your reply and clarification. No need to go back through any messages as I was mostly concerned that it was directed to anyone who does believe h1n1 is real, which included me. I didn't see anywhere people shoving it down others, but then I didn't read every post either. While I might get passionate about what I believe, I never mean to come across as shoving anything on anyone. Sure I might try to convince you, but that's what debate is about. You will always find me to be open, honest, helpful and hopefully a good debater. I don't just roll over and accept everything nor believe any one person until I know them really well. I love doing research and spend hours every day researching various things just so I can learn more. I try to always be respectful, but like anyone, I have my off days. Call me on it and I won't hesitate to apologize if I screwed up. I have no problem saying sorry and learning from my mistake. On the other hand, I hate being accused of something I didn't do. Because of that, I try to look at how I affected the person, rather than what was said. It's easy to say sorry for something said, but I can't sleep knowing I hurt someone. Drives me crazy until we make up and agree to disagree or whatever.

I believe in the h1n1 because someone very close to me had it. They were hospitalized and near death because of it. So yeah, I believe it exists. I do remember the live virus fiasco, a serious error yes! But we are people and people do make mistakes. The person responsible should be held accountable. I also believe that because of what happened, there will be triple checks to make sure it doesn't happen again. I can't bring myself to ignore the warnings of the CDC. My ex sister in law used to work there and I have faith in her to be straight up when it comes to anything medical. She's one of the good ones.

This is one of those things where I believe no one can be 100% correct. The negative side has their proof, which amounts to conjecture and the positive side has theirs, also conjecture. I believe the WHO and CIC would be up front about these things. You do not. Still, I may not respect your opinion, but I will always respect your right to your opinion, always! I hope that makes sense. I respect the person, not the thing.
Since it is unclear how this vaccine will affect people, I think it's important for those of us who have taken it to keep you apprised of how it's going. Obviously those of us who received the vaccine have a better chance of proving if it works or not over those who refuse it. For that reason, I have instructed my daughter Kristy and my wife Kristie, to post an update in here if something should happen to me. They have the instructions on how to get here on my computer and sign in as me. They will identify themself up front. My wife is IE and my daughter Y. haha That's how we refer to them when they are in the same room. IE and Y, Kristie and Kristy. This way if I am here and kicking and causing trouble you will know the vaccine worked. If I am not here to report back, then you have proof that it doesn't. Just for the record, I'm 56 and disabled due to nerve damage. Because I can't exercize, I'm a little overweight ... ok a lot. more than I want to be! I'm 6 foot and 225 lbs. Never been heavy in my life until I couldn't move around anymore. I can't say whether I have a good immune system or not. I do catch things, cut myself or what ever, but I heal very very fast. If I catch a cold from my wife, I'm over it in 2, 3 days tops while my poor wife has it for 10 days. I've had a cat claw mark that was completely gone in 3 days. A puncture from his claw is gone in a matter of hours. I heal very fast but since I can catch things like colds and the flu so easy, I don't know if that means I have a good immune system or not.

As it stands now, everyone in my family is doing quite well after our shots, which we received Monday. We don't even have the sicky feeling that sometimes accompanies those kind of shots. I guess we will know for sure about 10 days after the shot. I'll be the guinea pig for this round. haha

Oh yeah, one other thing about me. I'm very long winded! My computer is my contact with the outside world so I tend to get a bit chatty. LOLL

. (0)
Thursday September 2, 2010, 2:41 am
Sioux, merely because one doesn't accept 'new knowledge' doesn't mean one has a 'fixed mind'.

Everything depends on the quality of the knowledge and the individual evaluation of the evidence backing it up. When I was originally presented with 'new knowledge' that President Obama was supposedly a Muslim - I also didn't accept it since I considered the evidence showed he actually is a Christian. Does that mean I have a 'fixed mind' on the subject of the President?

Michael Austin (51)
Thursday September 2, 2010, 4:44 am
"Does that mean I have a 'fixed mind' on the subject of the President?"

I would have to say ... oh yeah!! ROFL Couldnt resist Lindsey!! We can't agree on everything or people would talk! LOL

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Thursday September 2, 2010, 12:08 pm
Way to go India:)

. (0)
Thursday September 2, 2010, 2:15 pm
The link you gave, Kathy, states that the four children in India died after receiving measles vaccinations - but doesn't give any background to the story, leaving the reader to assume that the children died after being given a normal usual vaccination against measles and that the deaths were attributable to reaction to a normal vaccination. But there is rather more to the story:

"According to eye witnesses, no sooner had the kids got the shot that they exhibited serious reaction to the vaccine.

The children became breathless, began to sweat. They felt faintish and did not recover there after. Their eyes rolled back and some fluid started coming out of their mouth (convulsion like symptoms)....According to experts, death after vaccination occurs either due to expiry of vaccine or if it is contaminated making it unfit for human use...."Prima facie it seems that the incident occurred due to spurious vaccine..."

“Even vaccine reaction which occurs one in a million was ruled out on account of the proximity of the casualties,” he said....."

Until the results of the chemical analysis are finished we aren't going to know what contaminated that batch of vaccines.

If this kind of multiple, instantaneous and catastrophicly deadly reaction to the measles vaccine were simply a result of a normal vaccination rather than being associated with a bad contaminated batch, I do believe we'd certainly be seeing that kind of reaction throughout the United States (and all over the world) in an overwhelming number of children - and would have over the years. But that isn't happening.


Kathy Chadwell (354)
Thursday September 2, 2010, 2:25 pm
Sorry Lindsey, I only read the story on myspace and searched care2 to see if somebody was running it here, so people who don't want to leave care2 could read it. Just do a search for this, it's all over the internet.

. (0)
Thursday September 2, 2010, 2:34 pm
Yes, there are a lot of stories about the situation I found. I hope I can remember to search for the story in a week or so after the chemical analyses have had time to be fully run to learn the cause of the deaths. I just didn't want anyone to read the limited information and come away with a wrong impression.

Julie van Niekerk (230)
Friday September 3, 2010, 1:39 am
You swallow the flu medication and or anti flu injection and they go all the way to the bank with huge smiles. Another successfull plan!

Jose Ovidio Perez Morel (50)
Friday September 3, 2010, 11:43 pm

Past Member (0)
Sunday September 5, 2010, 2:20 pm
Flu shots for 2010 THIS FALL will contain the H1N1 virus strain. Even though the WHO downgraded the threat of H1N1 as of 2 months ago in July, 2010, the CDC, NIH, FDA the three stooges are putting this vile and dangerous mixture of chemicals in the regular flu shot. They had so much of this crap left over from last year that no one wanted -they are pushing it in vaccines this fall. Anyone who takes the regular flu shot will do permanent damage to their immune system. SPREAD THE not take the regular flu shot -ever again. You just can't trust this government.

Joel Scott S (17)
Sunday September 5, 2010, 3:50 pm
The Department of Health and other non-profit health orginizations should do the work of maintaining and montoring of all vaccines. Better yet, make sure we take Mein Yiddishite Mamma's Chicken Soup!

Kathy Chadwell (354)
Sunday September 5, 2010, 7:23 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Teri S because you have done so within the last week.
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.