View Full Version : live avian flu "accidentally" put in US vaccines
mhgaffney
10-11-2009, 11:22 AM
This was reported today by the Seattle examiner.
Get a grip.
Live Avian flu with 60% death-rate "accidentally" put in US company's vaccines
http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m10d10-Live-Avian-flu-with-60-deathrate-accidentally-put-in-US-vaccines
cutthemdown
10-11-2009, 11:58 AM
My doctor told me not to take the vaccine because I rarely get the flu.
Sounds like Obama is trying to kill some people off huh Gaff? Nobel peace prize my ass, Dr Death more like it!!!
J/K
This seems like the sort of mistake that shouldn't be made. Also though it sounds like none of the bad vaccines were actually used. If it was planned then why would they discover the mistake and correct it Gaff?
mhgaffney
10-11-2009, 12:14 PM
What makes you think they are trying to correct it?
This happened last March -- yet was not reported in the US media. Why are we only finding out now?
Also -- why did the US Congress rush a bill through last July exempting Baxter -- the company who screwed up -- from any lawsuits?
So why is the Congress looking out for big pharma -- when they should be protecting the interests of the people?
The woman in Vienna (in the second video) who's been investigating this says that the authorities who started to investigate this case-- were blocked -- officials were fired and replaced with stoolies....and meanwhile the preparations for mass vaccination move forward in every industrial nation -- the first world.
Obviously the mass vaccination program is global and is being coordinated. The plan is to make vaccinations mandatory -- by law.
We shall see. NO one is going to vaccinate me.
MHG
mhgaffney
10-11-2009, 12:16 PM
Dr Bill Deagle, a medical doctor, has been telling me for many months that the next 9/11 could well be a global pandemic.
This report confirms his warnings.
cutthemdown
10-11-2009, 12:28 PM
Well they are saying that they weren't distributed? I guess though that could be a lie. But then why say anything at all? The story looks like it was the LAB itself that blew the whistle right? Just seems like we would never hear, not just hear late, if it was planned.
In any even wouldn't people already be sick with avian flu had they been injected with it?
I would think they give the immunity to keep them from getting sued. Obviously right? Even if they feel they got all the vaccines that were bad removed, even if they can prove that, they don't want every person who gets flu to be able to sue, it would be crazy.
In your opinion wouldn't we already have the flu pandemic in avain flu if in july people were injected?
I would think someone needs to document those vials, were they went etc.
Still though I am with you. No reason for healthy people to get vaccinated.
I guess if people start getting sick i head to my cabin huh? Damn thing has nothing, no electricity, no plumbing. It wouldn't be fun. Now for a place to kick it and fish, in good weather, its great.
c_lazy_r
10-12-2009, 09:53 AM
Well they are saying that they weren't distributed? I guess though that could be a lie. But then why say anything at all? The story looks like it was the LAB itself that blew the whistle right? Just seems like we would never hear, not just hear late, if it was planned.
In any even wouldn't people already be sick with avian flu had they been injected with it?
I would think they give the immunity to keep them from getting sued. Obviously right? Even if they feel they got all the vaccines that were bad removed, even if they can prove that, they don't want every person who gets flu to be able to sue, it would be crazy.
In your opinion wouldn't we already have the flu pandemic in avain flu if in july people were injected?
I would think someone needs to document those vials, were they went etc.
Still though I am with you. No reason for healthy people to get vaccinated.
I guess if people start getting sick i head to my cabin huh? Damn thing has nothing, no electricity, no plumbing. It wouldn't be fun. Now for a place to kick it and fish, in good weather, its great.
These inconveniences might look like a very minor problem if things get ugly.
WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!
Run for the hills!
Rohirrim
10-12-2009, 10:20 AM
I'm going to go up into the mountains and pitch a yurt.
mhgaffney
10-12-2009, 07:08 PM
I'm already in the mts.
And loving it.
Rohirrim
10-12-2009, 08:57 PM
I got the shot and grew an extra penis. Now if I can just figure out how to work this thing...
Does this mean I take two Viagra?
c_lazy_r
10-13-2009, 10:59 AM
I got the shot and grew an extra penis. Now if I can just figure out how to work this thing...
Does this mean I take two Viagra?
:rofl:
Nice!
mhgaffney
10-15-2009, 10:48 AM
Cancer used to be relatively rare. No more. It is now epidemic.
Why?
Check out this radio interview with Ed Haslam, author of DR MARY'S MONKEY, which details how the Sabin vaccine was contaminated with carcinogenic monkey virus --
http://www.oraclebroadcasting.com/archives.php?stream=/americanawakening/americanawakening.2009-03-14_16k.mp3&title=americanawakening
What this means is that an entire population -- you and me -- as many as a 100 million people in the US, mostly children, was inoculated with a cancer causing virus in the 1950s.
That vaccination program was not voluntary. All children were inoculated. Now they want to launch another mandatory vaccination program.
Duh...Is anyone awake out there?
Rohirrim
10-15-2009, 10:52 AM
We're all gonna die! Run for your lives!
mhgaffney
10-15-2009, 11:09 AM
Ro,
You are as bad as W*gs.
If you don't have anything of substance to add -- then get the **** off my thread.
MHG
mhgaffney
10-15-2009, 11:21 AM
This monkey virus story was one of the CIA's most significant operations -- and has been kept secret since the 1960s.
The contamination of 100 million Americans with cancer causing monkey virus -- was bad enough. But the covert effort to fix the problem -- is just as mind boggling -- given the role that Lee Harvey Oswald played --
Dukes
10-15-2009, 11:26 AM
This monkey virus story was one of the CIA's most significant operations -- and has been kept secret since the 1960s.
The contamination of 100 million Americans with cancer causing monkey virus -- was bad enough. But the covert effort to fix the problem -- is just as mind boggling -- given the role that Lee Harvey Oswald played --
So Jeremiah Wright wasn't lying? Excellent.
alkemical
10-15-2009, 11:57 AM
http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=77974&highlight=swine
Rohirrim
10-15-2009, 12:05 PM
Ro,
You are as bad as W*gs.
If you don't have anything of substance to add -- then get the **** off my thread.
MHG
"My" thread? :giggle:
Yeah, the CIA hired a drop out and a high school scientist to create a virus to kill Castro, and then when the agents failed to pick up the toxin after Oswald delivered it to Mexico City, then the Oswald team decided to kill JFK. But of course, they decided not to use the toxin, but to shoot him instead. You're peddling this year's version of The Da Vinci Code. In other words:
:bs:
Do actually believe all this ****?
jhat01
10-15-2009, 12:47 PM
God damn what a whacko..Everything is not a conspiracy. But then again, how did your forearms gets so hairy?
Breaker
10-15-2009, 03:13 PM
Its flu season Gaff ... better get a flu shot, we want you to be safe :)
Dr Bill Deagle, a medical doctor, has been telling me for many months that the next 9/11 could well be a global pandemic.
This report confirms his warnings.
I been telling you that for over 2 years.
I'm going to go up into the mountains and pitch a yurt.
Before its all over you are going to wish like hell you had done just that my friend and that is no bull shiit.
Rohirrim
10-15-2009, 04:20 PM
Before its all over you are going to wish like hell you had done just that my friend and that is no bull shiit.
How would I catch the Broncos games? :)
How would I catch the Broncos games? :)
get this; http://www.hughesnet.com/
And pray we get to and win SB XLIII before this hits.
TheDave
10-15-2009, 05:04 PM
Quick... Write a book about it. :thumbs:
mhgaffney
10-15-2009, 05:05 PM
I have Hughes net.
It's OK -- good Internet speed. However, we lose the link in bad weather. I suppose you don't have this same problem, though, in Baja.
I'm on DHL right now but I need to get Hughes net for my ranch but I don't have it yet.
Ro,
You are as bad as W*gs.
If you don't have anything of substance to add -- then get the **** off my thread.
Get the **** off the planet - go back to the lizard people.
SPfloppy
10-15-2009, 05:10 PM
"Run for your lives"
I love it dude. You are the schiz
The good news is it will be the pompous ass know-it-alls like the above 2 posters that will be caught by this but unfortunately some good folks will be blind sided too like Ro & TheDave.
I do know, baja.
And you're gonna be one of the first.
gaff-o has yet another reason to "explain" his lack of "performance".
After the fluoride, of course.
'Course, he only has to feel sorry for Madam Palme and her five daughters...
I do know, baja.
And you're gonna be one of the first.
I can live with that.;D
TheDave
10-15-2009, 05:18 PM
The good news is it will be the pompous ass know-it-alls like the above 2 posters that will be caught by this but unfortunately some good folks will be blind sided too like Ro & TheDave.
Dude
You keep forgetting... When the **** hits the fan Spider and I are heading your way.
...after we raid Bob's food filled basement. :thumbs:
You would be welcome
Swing by Golden and pick up Ro would ya.
TheDave
10-15-2009, 05:21 PM
You would be welcome
Swing by Golden and pick up Ro would ya.
Done deal... :thumbs:
Done deal... :thumbs:
Oh and I got you bunking with Gaff you good with that?
TheDave
10-15-2009, 05:28 PM
Oh and I got you bunking with Gaff you good with that?
If the world actually goes down to a pandemic like he has predicted... he quickly goes from internet whack-o to all knowing and wise.
Hell, after things settled out, I actually volunteer to help him search for that "red mercury cold fusion device" thingy
Rohirrim
10-15-2009, 06:22 PM
You would be welcome
Swing by Golden and pick up Ro would ya.
Thanks. I'm always up for a party. We should all not forget that there have been many "end of world" scenarios. We are not alone in this. In the year 1000 AD there was a "Second Coming" frenzy. I don't know if anybody caught this, but I saw an interview the other day with a Mayan elder who said the whole "2012" thing is just bs. He said it really bugs him because everywhere he goes people are asking him about it. The Mayans never attached any significance at all to the date. It's just the end of a cycle in their calendar. Anyway, I try to put my riches where rust and rot do not corrupt. Will this American empire fall? Sure. And life will go on.
truth is we are in the best of times it just doesn't look like it yet.
ak1971
10-15-2009, 06:55 PM
Im going to be really offended if I cant come eat beans and try to gas TheDave out of the bunker
Im going to be really offended if I cant come eat beans and try to gas TheDave out of the bunker
Well you can't just show up, what are you going to bring to the party.
ak1971
10-15-2009, 07:02 PM
Well you can't just show up, what are you going to bring to the party.
How bout this chick
http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk298/AK7745/OE8.jpg
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-16-2009, 02:17 AM
So why is the Congress looking out for big pharma -- when they should be protecting the interests of the people?
Because Big Pharma pays a lot better than us nobodys.
alkemical
10-16-2009, 05:43 AM
You would be welcome
Swing by Golden and pick up Ro would ya.
Do i have an invite to pop in? I wouldn't stay for long, just would be passing through.
mhgaffney
10-16-2009, 11:19 AM
We're all passing through.
Do i have an invite to pop in? I wouldn't stay for long, just would be passing through.
Sure just remember the borders will be on lock down and if you refuse your "flu" shot you will be detained in a "camp".
alkemical
10-16-2009, 11:59 AM
Sure just remember the borders will be on lock down and if you refuse your "flu" shot you will be detained in a "camp".
Oh there's always a way baja...
Tombstone RJ
10-16-2009, 12:10 PM
How bout this chick
http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk298/AK7745/OE8.jpg
I'd like to party with her...
mhgaffney
10-16-2009, 09:15 PM
THis is a must read -- from Atlantic Monthly.
MHG
Whether this season’s swine flu turns out to be deadly or mild, most experts agree that it’s only a matter of time before we’re hit by a truly devastating flu pandemic—one that might kill more people worldwide than have died of the plague and AIDS combined. In the U.S., the main lines of defense are pharmaceutical—vaccines and antiviral drugs to limit the spread of flu and prevent people from dying from it. Yet now some flu experts are challenging the medical orthodoxy and arguing that for those most in need of protection, flu shots and antiviral drugs may provide little to none. So where does that leave us if a bad pandemic strikes?
Does the Vaccine Matter?
by Shannon Brownlee and Jeanne Lenzer
DRIVE TOO FAST along Red Lion Road, beside Philadelphia’s Northeast Airport, and you will miss the low-rise cement building where the biotech company MedImmune has been quietly pumping out swine flu vaccine at about a million doses a week. Through the summer and fall, workers wearing protective gear that covered them from head to toe brewed up batches of live, genetically modified flu virus. Robots then injected tiny doses of virus-laden fluid into glass vials, which were mounted into nasal spritzers, labeled, and readied for shipment at the direction of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in Atlanta, which is helping to coordinate the nation’s pandemic-preparedness plan. In the most ambitious vaccination program the nation has mounted since the anti-polio campaign in the 1950s, the federal government has commissioned MedImmune and four other companies to produce enough vaccine to cover the entire U.S. population.
Vaccination is central to the government’s plan for preventing deaths from swine flu. The CDC has recommended that some 159 million adults and children receive either a swine flu shot or a dose of MedImmune’s nasal vaccine this year. Shots are offered in doctors’ offices, hospitals, airports, pharmacies, schools, polling places, shopping malls, and big-box stores like Wal-Mart. In August, New York state required all health-care workers to get both seasonal and swine flu shots. To further protect the populace, the federal government has spent upwards of $3billion stockpiling millions of doses of antiviral drugs like Tamiflu—which are being used both to prevent swine flu and to treat those who fall ill.
The authors answer practical questions about H1N1 diagnosis and immunity.
But what if everything we think we know about fighting influenza is wrong? What if flu vaccines do not protect people from dying—particularly the elderly, who account for 90 percent of deaths from seasonal flu? And what if the expensive antiviral drugs that the government has stockpiled over the past few years also have little, if any, power to reduce the number of people who die or are hospitalized? The U.S. government—with the support of leaders in the public-health and medical communities—has put its faith in the power of vaccines and antiviral drugs to limit the spread and lethality of swine flu. Other plans to contain the pandemic seem anemic by comparison. Yet some top flu researchers are deeply skeptical of both flu vaccines and antivirals. Like the engineers who warned for years about the levees of New Orleans, these experts caution that our defenses may be flawed, and quite possibly useless against a truly lethal flu. And that unless we are willing to ask fundamental questions about the science behind flu vaccines and antiviral drugs, we could find ourselves, in a bad epidemic, as helpless as the citizens of New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina.
THE TERM INFLUENZA, which dates back to the Middle Ages, is taken from the Italian word for occult or astral influence. Then as now, flu seemed to appear out of nowhere each winter, debilitating or killing large numbers of people, only to vanish in the spring. Today, seasonal flu is estimated to kill about 36,000 people in the United States each year, and half a million worldwide.
Yet the flu, in many important respects, remains mysterious. Determining how many deaths it really causes, or even who has it, is no simple matter. We think we have the flu anytime we fall ill with an ailment that brings on headache, malaise, fever, coughing, sneezing, and that achy feeling as if we’ve been sleeping on a bed of rocks, but researchers have found that at most half, and perhaps as few as 7 or 8 percent, of such cases are actually caused by an influenza virus in any given year. More than 200 known viruses and other pathogens can cause the suite of symptoms known as “influenza-like illness”; respiratory syncytial virus, bocavirus, coronavirus, and rhinovirus are just a few of the bugs that can make a person feel rotten. And depending on the season, in up to two-thirds of the cases of flu-like illness, no cause at all can be found.
Nobody knows precisely why we are much more likely to catch the flu in the winter months than at other times of the year. Perhaps it’s because flu viruses flourish in cool temperatures and are killed by exposure to sunlight. Or maybe it’s because in winter, people spend more time indoors, where a sneeze or a cough can more easily spread a virus to others. What is certain is that influenza viruses mutate with amazing speed, so each flu season sees slightly different genetic versions of the viruses that infected people the year before. Every year, the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention collect data from 94 nations on the flu viruses that circulated the previous year, and then make an educated guess about which viruses are likely to circulate in the coming fall. Based on that information, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issues orders to manufacturers in February for a vaccine that includes the three most likely strains.
Every once in a while, however, a very different bug pops up and infects far more people than the normal seasonal flu variants do. It is these novel viruses that are responsible for pandemics, defined by the World Health Organization as events that occur when “a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity” and which can sweep around the world in a very short time. The worst flu pandemic in recorded history was the “Spanish flu” of 1918–19, at the end of World WarI. A third of the world’s population was infected, with at least 40million and perhaps as many as 100million people dying—more than were killed in World Wars I and II combined. (Some scholars suggest that one reason World WarI ended was that so many soldiers were sick or dying from flu.) Since then, two other flu pandemics have occurred, in 1957 and 1968, neither of which was particularly lethal.
In August, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology projected that this fall and winter, the swine flu, H1N1, could infect anywhere between one-third and one-half of the U.S. population and could kill as many as 90,000 Americans, two and a half times the number killed in a typical flu season. But precisely how deadly, or even how infectious, this year’s H1N1 pandemic will turn out to be won’t be known until it’s over. Most reports coming from the Southern Hemisphere in late August (the end of winter there) suggested that the swine flu is highly infectious, but not particularly lethal. For example, Australian officials estimated they would finish winter with under 1,000 swine flu deaths—fewer than the usual 1,500 to 3,000 from seasonal flu. Among those who have died in the U.S., about 70 percent were already suffering from congenital conditions like cerebral palsy or underlying illnesses such as cancer, asthma, or AIDS, which make people more vulnerable.
Public-health officials consider vaccine their most formidable defense against the pandemic—indeed, against any flu—and on the surface, their faith seems justified. Vaccines developed over the course of the 20th century slashed the death rates of nearly a dozen infectious diseases, such as smallpox and polio, and vaccination became one of medicine’s most potent weapons. Influenza virus was first identified in the 1930s, and by the mid-1940s, researchers had produced a vaccine that was given to soldiers in World WarII. The U.S. government got serious about promoting flu vaccine after the 1957 flu pandemic brought home influenza’s continuing potential to cause widespread illness and death. Today, flu vaccine is a staple of public-health policy; in a normal year, some 100 million Americans get vaccinated.
But while vaccines for, say, whooping cough and polio clearly and dramatically reduced death rates from those diseases, the impact of flu vaccine has been harder to determine. Flu comes and goes with the seasons, and often it does not kill people directly, but rather contributes to death by making the body more susceptible to secondary infections like pneumonia or bronchitis. For this reason, researchers studying the impact of flu vaccination typically look at deaths from all causes during flu season, and compare the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.
Such comparisons have shown a dramatic difference in mortality between these two groups: study after study has found that people who get a flu shot in the fall are about half as likely to die that winter—from any cause—as people who do not. Get your flu shot each year, the literature suggests, and you will dramatically reduce your chance of dying during flu season.
Yet in the view of several vaccine skeptics, this claim is suspicious on its face. Influenza causes only a small minority of all deaths in the U.S., even among senior citizens, and even after adding in the deaths to which flu might have contributed indirectly. When researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases included all deaths from illnesses that flu aggravates, like lung disease or chronic heart failure, they found that flu accounts for, at most, 10 percent of winter deaths among the elderly. So how could flu vaccine possibly reduce total deaths by half? Tom Jefferson, a physician based in Rome and the head of the Vaccines Field at the Cochrane Collaboration, a highly respected international network of researchers who appraise medical evidence, says: “For a vaccine to reduce mortality by 50 percent and up to 90 percent in some studies means it has to prevent deaths not just from influenza, but also from falls, fires, heart disease, strokes, and car accidents. That’s not a vaccine, that’s a miracle.”
The estimate of 50 percent mortality reduction is based on “cohort studies,” which compare death rates in large groups, or cohorts, of people who choose to be vaccinated, against death rates in groups who don’t. But people who choose to be vaccinated may differ in many important respects from people who go unvaccinated—and those differences can influence the chance of death during flu season. Education, lifestyle, income, and many other “confounding” factors can come into play, and as a result, cohort studies are notoriously prone to bias. When researchers crunch the numbers, they typically try to factor out variables that could bias the results, but, as Jefferson remarks, “you can adjust for the confounders you know about, not for the ones you don’t,” and researchers can’t always anticipate what factors are likely to be important to whether a patient dies from flu. There is always the chance that they might miss some critical confounder that renders their results entirely wrong.
When Lisa Jackson, a physician and senior investigator with the Group Health Research Center, in Seattle, began wondering aloud to colleagues if maybe something was amiss with the estimate of 50 percent mortality reduction for people who get flu vaccine, the response she got sounded more like doctrine than science. “People told me, ‘No good can come of [asking] this,’” she says. “‘Potentially a lot of bad could happen’ for me professionally by raising any criticism that might dissuade people from getting vaccinated, because of course, ‘We know that vaccine works.’ This was the prevailing wisdom.”
Nonetheless, in 2004, Jackson and three colleagues set out to determine whether the mortality difference between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated might be caused by a phenomenon known as the “healthy user effect.” They hypothesized that on average, people who get vaccinated are simply healthier than those who don’t, and thus less liable to die over the short term. People who don’t get vaccinated may be bedridden or otherwise too sick to go get a shot. They may also be more likely to succumb to flu or any other illness, because they are generally older and sicker. To test their thesis, Jackson and her colleagues combed through eight years of medical data on more than 72,000 people 65 and older. They looked at who got flu shots and who didn’t. Then they examined which group’s members were more likely to die of any cause when it was not flu season.
Jackson’s findings showed that outside of flu season, the baseline risk of death among people who did not get vaccinated was approximately 60 percent higher than among those who did, lending support to the hypothesis that on average, healthy people chose to get the vaccine, while the “frail elderly” didn’t or couldn’t. In fact, the healthy-user effect explained the entire benefit that other researchers were attributing to flu vaccine, suggesting that the vaccine itself might not reduce mortality at all. Jackson’s papers “are beautiful,” says Lone Simonsen, who is a professor of global health at George Washington University, in Washington, D.C., and an internationally recognized expert in influenza and vaccine epidemiology. “They are classic studies in epidemiology, they are so carefully done.”
The results were also so unexpected that many experts simply refused to believe them. Jackson’s papers were turned down for publication in the top-ranked medical journals. One flu expert who reviewed her studies for the Journal of the American Medical Association wrote, “To accept these results would be to say that the earth is flat!” When the papers were finally published in 2006, in the less prominent International Journal of Epidemiology, they were largely ignored by doctors and public-health officials. “The answer I got,” says Jackson, “was not the right answer.”
For the rest go to
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200911/brownlee-h1n1
TheDave
10-16-2009, 09:25 PM
How bout this chick
http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk298/AK7745/OE8.jpg
He's in... keep in mind folks, in a post pandemic world we might need to "re-start" the population.
Just say'n
He's in... keep in mind folks, in a post pandemic world we might need to "re-start" the population.
Just say'n
Good point I but that in the brochure.
Bronco Bob
10-18-2009, 05:53 PM
This was reported today by the Seattle examiner.
Get a grip.
Live Avian flu with 60% death-rate "accidentally" put in US company's vaccines
http://www.examiner.com/x-18425-LA-County-Nonpartisan-Examiner~y2009m10d10-Live-Avian-flu-with-60-deathrate-accidentally-put-in-US-vaccines
It was a test vaccine, you dope. It isn't the vaccine used on the general public.
And just so people know, this is the H5N1 virus, not the so-called H1N1 "swine flu" virus.
Bronco Bob
10-18-2009, 05:55 PM
Cancer used to be relatively rare. No more. It is now epidemic.
Why?
Cigarettes, radio-active materials, asbestos, lead in paint and gasoline,
stuff that wasn't around a few hundred years ago.
mhgaffney
10-18-2009, 11:32 PM
Good point, Bronco Bob.
Vaccines were not around, either.
You weren't around either, gaff-o. Using your "logic"...
You're the cause of this "epidemic" of cancer!
alkemical
10-19-2009, 05:44 AM
It was a test vaccine, you dope. It isn't the vaccine used on the general public.
And just so people know, this is the H5N1 virus, not the so-called H1N1 "swine flu" virus.
The contaminated product, which Baxter calls “experimental virus material,” was made at the Orth-Donau research facility. Baxter makes its flu vaccine — including a human H5N1 vaccine for which a licence is expected shortly — at a facility in the Czech Republic.
People familiar with biosecurity rules are dismayed by evidence that human H3N2 and avian H5N1 viruses somehow co-mingled in the Orth-Donau facility. That is a dangerous practice that should not be allowed to happen, a number of experts insisted.
Accidental release of a mixture of live H5N1 and H3N2 viruses could have resulted in dire consequences.
While H5N1 doesn’t easily infect people, H3N2 viruses do. If someone exposed to a mixture of the two had been simultaneously infected with both strains, he or she could have served as an incubator for a hybrid virus able to transmit easily to and among people.
That mixing process, called reassortment, is one of two ways pandemic viruses are created.
There is no suggestion that happened because of this accident, however.
“We have no evidence of any reassortment, that any reassortment may have occurred,” said Andraghetti.
“And we have no evidence of any increased transmissibility of the viruses that were involved in the experiment with the ferrets in the Czech Republic.”
Baxter hasn’t shed much light — at least not publicly — on how the accident happened. Earlier this week Bona called the mistake the result of a combination of “just the process itself, (and) technical and human error in this procedure.”
He said he couldn’t reveal more information because it would give away proprietary information about Baxter’s production process.
Question is why are the two strains even at the same facility.
Oh 'snap' I just killed 5 billion people...
Rohirrim
10-19-2009, 09:07 AM
We live in funny times. My theory is that 911 unhinged the personality of America. It was really the final straw. First came JFK, then MLK, then RFK, then Vietnam and Watergate... Then we had the phony baloney "Return to good old America" of the Reagan Era, which turned out to be a total lie, just more of turning over the wheel to the pirates who only value America in its capacity to enrich themselves.
Then we got lied into a war by a president who responded to 911 as simply a way to advance his ideology and reward his cronies. The ultimate betrayal. The culture reflects what we see happening around us. Art reflects reality. Now our films and TV are filled with horror stories, plots and conspiracies. Nothing is at it seems. Behind every act there are numerous unspoken plots. There are codes and secrets and the "Truth is out there." Somewhere. On the "Fringe."
We believed in ourselves. We thought of ourselves as the good guys. Then 911 made us ask, "Why would anybody do something like this to us?" Bush tried to give the simpleton answer, "Because of our freedoms." But in our guts, we know that is bs. In the words of Bob Dylan, "Well, you know something is happening, but you don't know what it is. Do you, Mr. Jones?" That doesn't make everything a conspiracy, but it also doesn't mean there are no conspiracies.
I would advise, "Follow the money." ;D
alkemical
10-19-2009, 09:20 AM
We live in funny times. My theory is that 911 unhinged the personality of America. It was really the final straw. First came JFK, then MLK, then RFK, then Vietnam and Watergate... Then we had the phony baloney "Return to good old America" of the Reagan Era, which turned out to be a total lie, just more of turning over the wheel to the pirates who only value America in its capacity to enrich themselves.
Then we got lied into a war by a president who responded to 911 as simply a way to advance his ideology and reward his cronies. The ultimate betrayal. The culture reflects what we see happening around us. Art reflects reality. Now our films and TV are filled with horror stories, plots and conspiracies. Nothing is at it seems. Behind every act there are numerous unspoken plots. There are codes and secrets and the "Truth is out there." Somewhere. On the "Fringe."
We believed in ourselves. We thought of ourselves as the good guys. Then 911 made us ask, "Why would anybody do something like this to us?" Bush tried to give the simpleton answer, "Because of our freedoms." But in our guts, we know that is bs. In the words of Bob Dylan, "Well, you know something is happening, but you don't know what it is. Do you, Mr. Jones?" That doesn't make everything a conspiracy, but it also doesn't mean there are no conspiracies.
I would advise, "Follow the money." ;D
http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/tamiflu.asp
kappys
10-19-2009, 12:17 PM
http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/tamiflu.asp
If this were true then wouldn't the powers be completely opposed to a vaccine?
Anyways I don't know any infectious disease folks who will tell you that Tamiflu is a great drug. It helps a little but it is quite clearly not analagous to taking antibiotics for a bacterial infection. The duration of illness is somewhat reduced, as is the severity though for any benefit it has to be taken with 48 hours of illness onset. That is one of the major limitations since many people who get quite ill do so after 48 hours. Still its one of the only treatments we have and there is some mild benefit so wouldn't you want it if your loved one was profoundly ill with the flu?
That's why vaccination is so important. An ounce of prevention is worth a lot more than a non-existent cure
alkemical
10-19-2009, 12:25 PM
If this were true then wouldn't the powers be completely opposed to a vaccine?
Anyways I don't know any infectious disease folks who will tell you that Tamiflu is a great drug. It helps a little but it is quite clearly not analagous to taking antibiotics for a bacterial infection. The duration of illness is somewhat reduced, as is the severity though for any benefit it has to be taken with 48 hours of illness onset. That is one of the major limitations since many people who get quite ill do so after 48 hours. Still its one of the only treatments we have and there is some mild benefit so wouldn't you want it if your loved one was profoundly ill with the flu?
That's why vaccination is so important. An ounce of prevention is worth a lot more than a non-existent cure
Why would "they" be opposed to it, if they are making money off of the cures?
kappys
10-19-2009, 12:28 PM
He's in... keep in mind folks, in a post pandemic world we might need to "re-start" the population.
Just say'n
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/iesXUFOlWC0&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/iesXUFOlWC0&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
gyldenlove
10-19-2009, 12:34 PM
Good point, Bronco Bob.
Vaccines were not around, either.
Cancer is an old age disease, if the average life expentancy is 45 and you on average get cancer when you are 55 it is going to be rare. Just like cancer mortality is very low in homicide victims.
alkemical
10-19-2009, 12:41 PM
Cancer is an old age disease, if the average life expentancy is 45 and you on average get cancer when you are 55 it is going to be rare. Just like cancer mortality is very low in homicide victims.
Huh, i should tell my sister who is 27 and is finishing up her chemo.
"Dude, you aren't old - it's not cancer"....
This pandemic will turn out to affect those that eat the highest on the food chain the greatest.
The rich & fat will not have the immune system to defend their bodies from this because of the high toxic load they now carry caused by years of a decadent diet.
"The Meek shall inherit the earth"
Tombstone RJ
10-19-2009, 01:25 PM
This pandemic will turn out to affect those that eat the highest on the food chain the greatest.
The rich & fat will not have the immune system to defend their bodies from this because of the high toxic load they now carry caused by years of a decadent diet.
"The Meek shall inherit the earth"
Cool!
Just one or two proplems with said theory:
1. the rich are not necessarily the fat or obese. Indeed, you'll find that the rich eat healthier than the general population (that's why Whole Foods and Alfalfa's and all those richy rich grocery stores are so expensive, they keep the poor out).
2. Generally speaking, the fat are in the lower classes simple because fast foot and a bag of chips is cheap and readily available. Twinky anyone?
But I do believe in the Meek inheriting the earth.
Cool!
Just one or two proplems with said theory:
1. the rich are not necessarily the fat or obese. Indeed, you'll find that the rich eat healthier than the general population (that's why Whole Foods and Alfalfa's and all those richy rich grocery stores are so expensive, they keep the poor out).
2. Generally speaking, the fat are in the lower classes simple because fast foot and a bag of chips is cheap and readily available. Twinky anyone?
But I do believe in the Meek inheriting the earth.
Your first problem is thinking Whole Foods stores are healthy. If you stick with the organic produce than OK but most of the food is high on the food chain and does carry a high toxic load.
I am not talking about the fat poor Americans they are among the unhealthiest on the planet in the category of toxicity.
The least effected people by a pandemic will be the small farmer in third world countries that never heard of Bank Of America or of vaccines. that lives of the bounty of his land and trading with his neighbors.
Tombstone RJ
10-19-2009, 03:13 PM
Your first problem is thinking Whole Foods stores are healthy. If you stick with the organic produce than OK but most of the food is high on the food chain and does carry a high toxic load.
I am not talking about the fat poor Americans they are among the unhealthiest on the planet in the category of toxicity.
The least effected people by a pandemic will be the small farmer in third world countries that never heard of Bank Of America or of vaccines. that lives of the bounty of his land and trading with his neighbors.
Don't forget about the chick with the huge boobs slamm'n the OOHH-EEEE!
OE and boobs... think about it.
Don't forget about the chick with the huge boobs slamm'n the OOHH-EEEE!
OE and boobs... think about it.
Well that's kinda the bounty of the land isn't it???
gyldenlove
10-20-2009, 01:58 PM
Huh, i should tell my sister who is 27 and is finishing up her chemo.
"Dude, you aren't old - it's not cancer"....
No, you should find 1000 random 27 year olds and realize that your sister is very unfortunate and hope that she is cured.
25268
The prevalence of cancer before age 50 is less than 1% in males and 2% in females, but almost 10% for 70 year olds.
The probability of developing cancer in your teens or twenties is less than 0.1%, but the same probability is over 15% in your sixties and more than 20% in your seventies and eighties.
I am sorry for your sister, I truly am, but one case does not make a trend.
kappys
10-21-2009, 01:00 AM
No, you should find 1000 random 27 year olds and realize that your sister is very unfortunate and hope that she is cured.
25268
The prevalence of cancer before age 50 is less than 1% in males and 2% in females, but almost 10% for 70 year olds.
The probability of developing cancer in your teens or twenties is less than 0.1%, but the same probability is over 15% in your sixties and more than 20% in your seventies and eighties.
I am sorry for your sister, I truly am, but one case does not make a trend.
Interesting graph. I am shocked at the disparity between male/female rates or cancer. I wonder how much of it is related to modifiable risk factors(i.e. smoking) versus some other cause.
alkemical
10-21-2009, 05:12 AM
No, you should find 1000 random 27 year olds and realize that your sister is very unfortunate and hope that she is cured.
25268
The prevalence of cancer before age 50 is less than 1% in males and 2% in females, but almost 10% for 70 year olds.
The probability of developing cancer in your teens or twenties is less than 0.1%, but the same probability is over 15% in your sixties and more than 20% in your seventies and eighties.
I am sorry for your sister, I truly am, but one case does not make a trend.
Hey man, you said cancer is an old age disease, yet i've known a few young'ns that have had it. Of course the food we eat based upon our consumerist choices is a big reasoning IMO for younger people getting "old people's" disease.
ak1971
10-21-2009, 05:44 AM
Dont you think with cancer and other diseases, they seem more prevalent now due to medical care, and reporting. More people have medical care, and more diseases have been discovered, whereas in the past those people may have just died, and it 'is what it is'
alkemical
10-21-2009, 05:47 AM
Dont you think with cancer and other diseases, they seem more prevalent now due to medical care, and reporting. More people have medical care, and more diseases have been discovered, whereas in the past those people may have just died, and it 'is what it is'
I think environmental changes are a part of it: Food, radio/electro-radiation, etc...
ak1971
10-21-2009, 05:49 AM
I think environmental changes are a part of it: Food, radio/electro-radiation, etc...
I do think that its part of it, but the reporting part comes into play also.
gyldenlove
10-21-2009, 06:09 AM
Hey man, you said cancer is an old age disease, yet i've known a few young'ns that have had it. Of course the food we eat based upon our consumerist choices is a big reasoning IMO for younger people getting "old people's" disease.
I should have said largely old age disease, you are still more than 100 times as likely to get cancer between the age of 60 and 90 as you are getting cancer before you are 60.
Interesting graph. I am shocked at the disparity between male/female rates or cancer. I wonder how much of it is related to modifiable risk factors(i.e. smoking) versus some other cause.
Some external factors surely impact that graphs, however the BRCA1 and 2 genes are definitely a significant factor in that as well. A lot of breast cancer cases are caused by those genes and in general they are connected a lot with early life cancer cases. HPV is also a factor since infections often happen early in life when people are more sexually active and HPV like BRCA1 and 2 causes cancer more often in females than males.
kappys
10-21-2009, 06:49 AM
I should have said largely old age disease, you are still more than 100 times as likely to get cancer between the age of 60 and 90 as you are getting cancer before you are 60.
Some external factors surely impact that graphs, however the BRCA1 and 2 genes are definitely a significant factor in that as well. A lot of breast cancer cases are caused by those genes and in general they are connected a lot with early life cancer cases. HPV is also a factor since infections often happen early in life when people are more sexually active and HPV like BRCA1 and 2 causes cancer more often in females than males.
There are plenty of risk factors(genetic and environmental) that impact cancers. The ones you've cited are signficant causes of female cancers. However the graph demonstrates a markedly higher incidence of cancers in males versus females.
If you had asked who has the higher tumor rate I would have guessed women - particularly since men have higher mortality from cardiac disease and trauma earlier in life before the rise in cancer rates.
Obviously this graph proves I'm way off.
gyldenlove
10-21-2009, 07:32 AM
There are plenty of risk factors(genetic and environmental) that impact cancers. The ones you've cited are signficant causes of female cancers. However the graph demonstrates a markedly higher incidence of cancers in males versus females.
If you had asked who has the higher tumor rate I would have guessed women - particularly since men have higher mortality from cardiac disease and trauma earlier in life before the rise in cancer rates.
Obviously this graph proves I'm way off.
The old guys who are getting cancer now are the ones who worked in highly polluted industries. All the people who worked with things like asbestos, lead paint, in smoke filled areas, in dusty areas, a lot of these guys spend 30 years inhaling and surrounded by severe carcinogens, one of the few advantages women had from the gender seperated job market and the prevalence of homemaking.
I think the curves will converge somewhat over the next 30-40 years when especially things like work hazards will be more equalized as well as external factors such as smoking and drinking.
FYI, prostate cancer is a real bugger, it will get some of us, so prepare to bend over and have things stuck where the sun don't shine.
Rohirrim
10-21-2009, 07:42 AM
Then there is this:
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/21/cold-war-remnant-cancer-for-baby-boomers/
It appears that all those tests of atomic weapons in the Sixties were floating Strontium 90 across the country, which turns out to have not been good for the general welfare.
alkemical
10-21-2009, 07:52 AM
Then there is this:
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/21/cold-war-remnant-cancer-for-baby-boomers/
It appears that all those tests of atomic weapons in the Sixties were floating Strontium 90 across the country, which turns out to have not been good for the general welfare.
That's what i consider "environmental" -
alkemical
10-21-2009, 07:52 AM
Our waters are polluted that we can barley find any fish that aren't polluted.
We are basically ****ting in our own beds.
gyldenlove
10-22-2009, 01:14 PM
Our waters are polluted that we can barley find any fish that aren't polluted.
We are basically ****ting in our own beds.
Absolutely.
Then there is this:
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/21/cold-war-remnant-cancer-for-baby-boomers/
It appears that all those tests of atomic weapons in the Sixties were floating Strontium 90 across the country, which turns out to have not been good for the general welfare.
You can notice the dumbing down of America when you live outside it's borders and return a few times a year. ;D
Wags for example.
You're just upset that I mock you and your paranoia.
Tough titties.