Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Yes, those who work for hospital based services being mandated to take it. I wouldn't have a problem with them mandating that those hospitals who run ambulance services have to make the vaccine available at the hospital's expense. But I respectfully just have a problem with the mandate for the personnel for those services to HAVE to take it. Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its safety and efficacy? Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a government rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a little? Maybe you can produce something on here that would alleviate that concern... Jane Dinsmore To: texasems-l From: kenneth.navarro@... Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:59:33 +0000 Subject: Choice and Consequences >>> I am a firm believer folks should have a choice, not be MANDATED to take them. <<< Jane, Folks DO have a choice. But with that choice are consequences. New York is not mandating that ALL EMS personnel get the vaccine, only those who work for hospital-based response services who chose to take care of patients. Any EMS provider can refuse to take the vaccine. The consequence is that they then cannot have access to patients. Kenny Navarro Dallas _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222986/direct/01/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Kenny, that is no choice. What about Paramedics that have allergy's to some of its components? What about a pregnant EMT, since they have not done a study to be sure it will not harm the fetus, should they just take it so they keep a paycheck because the government as they put it thinks it won't affect the baby? So no they are not being given a choice they are being held hostage. Renny > > >>> I am a firm believer folks should have a choice, not be MANDATED to take them. <<< > > Jane, > > Folks DO have a choice. But with that choice are consequences. New York is not mandating that ALL EMS personnel get the vaccine, only those who work for hospital-based response services who chose to take care of patients. > > Any EMS provider can refuse to take the vaccine. The consequence is that they then cannot have access to patients. > > Kenny Navarro > Dallas > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 It's funny how emotional we get over some things. I have lost count of the number of assumptions that have been made since we began talking about this--assumptions that are unsupported by anything other than anecdotal tales. Anybody who has ever taken the flu vaccine knows that there is an informed consent form that must be signed. It lists allergies to certain things on it, and it won't be given to anybody with any of those. Anybody who has a serious doubt about taking it should discuss it with her physician. Before we jump off the edge of the world we ought to stop and think about the science involved. OOPS! I just heard on the radio that the world is actually flat! Run for your lives, but be careful which direction you run because you don't know where the edge might be and you could fall off very easily. I heard that 18 people have already fallen off the edge just in the last 24 hours. GG > Â > Kenny, that is no choice. What about Paramedics that have allergy's to > some of its components? What about a pregnant EMT, since they have not done a > study to be sure it will not harm the fetus, should they just take it so > they keep a paycheck because the government as they put it thinks it won't > affect the baby? > > So no they are not being given a choice they are being held hostage. > > Renny > > > > > > >>> I am a firm believer folks should have a choice, not be MANDATED to > take them. <<< > > > > Jane, > > > > Folks DO have a choice. But with that choice are consequences. New York > is not mandating that ALL EMS personnel get the vaccine, only those who > work for hospital-based response services who chose to take care of patients. > > > > Any EMS provider can refuse to take the vaccine. The consequence is that > they then cannot have access to patients. > > > > Kenny Navarro > > Dallas > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 It's funny how emotional we get over some things. I have lost count of the number of assumptions that have been made since we began talking about this--assumptions that are unsupported by anything other than anecdotal tales. Anybody who has ever taken the flu vaccine knows that there is an informed consent form that must be signed. It lists allergies to certain things on it, and it won't be given to anybody with any of those. Anybody who has a serious doubt about taking it should discuss it with her physician. Before we jump off the edge of the world we ought to stop and think about the science involved. OOPS! I just heard on the radio that the world is actually flat! Run for your lives, but be careful which direction you run because you don't know where the edge might be and you could fall off very easily. I heard that 18 people have already fallen off the edge just in the last 24 hours. GG > Â > Kenny, that is no choice. What about Paramedics that have allergy's to > some of its components? What about a pregnant EMT, since they have not done a > study to be sure it will not harm the fetus, should they just take it so > they keep a paycheck because the government as they put it thinks it won't > affect the baby? > > So no they are not being given a choice they are being held hostage. > > Renny > > > > > > >>> I am a firm believer folks should have a choice, not be MANDATED to > take them. <<< > > > > Jane, > > > > Folks DO have a choice. But with that choice are consequences. New York > is not mandating that ALL EMS personnel get the vaccine, only those who > work for hospital-based response services who chose to take care of patients. > > > > Any EMS provider can refuse to take the vaccine. The consequence is that > they then cannot have access to patients. > > > > Kenny Navarro > > Dallas > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 It's funny how emotional we get over some things. I have lost count of the number of assumptions that have been made since we began talking about this--assumptions that are unsupported by anything other than anecdotal tales. Anybody who has ever taken the flu vaccine knows that there is an informed consent form that must be signed. It lists allergies to certain things on it, and it won't be given to anybody with any of those. Anybody who has a serious doubt about taking it should discuss it with her physician. Before we jump off the edge of the world we ought to stop and think about the science involved. OOPS! I just heard on the radio that the world is actually flat! Run for your lives, but be careful which direction you run because you don't know where the edge might be and you could fall off very easily. I heard that 18 people have already fallen off the edge just in the last 24 hours. GG > Â > Kenny, that is no choice. What about Paramedics that have allergy's to > some of its components? What about a pregnant EMT, since they have not done a > study to be sure it will not harm the fetus, should they just take it so > they keep a paycheck because the government as they put it thinks it won't > affect the baby? > > So no they are not being given a choice they are being held hostage. > > Renny > > > > > > >>> I am a firm believer folks should have a choice, not be MANDATED to > take them. <<< > > > > Jane, > > > > Folks DO have a choice. But with that choice are consequences. New York > is not mandating that ALL EMS personnel get the vaccine, only those who > work for hospital-based response services who chose to take care of patients. > > > > Any EMS provider can refuse to take the vaccine. The consequence is that > they then cannot have access to patients. > > > > Kenny Navarro > > Dallas > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 LAWYERS TO THE RESCUE!!! I knew it would only be a matter time before somebody sued over this. I can see the commercials now: " Have you or a member of your family become ill after taking the flu vaccine? If so, you may be entitled to a large monetary settlement. But time is of the essence. Call the offices of Beatem, Cheatham, and Howe to find out whether you qualify. " Of course, if the vaccine had been withheld in order to do further trials the commercial would be: " Have you or a member of your family become ill with influenza because you were denied the flu vaccine? If so, you may be entitled................and so forth and so on. " From all I can tell the vaccine is perfectly safe, much safer than my twice weekly drive to Sierra Vista to teach my classes. An average of one person per week is killed on the stretch of Interstate 10 I travel. None have died there from GBS after taking the flu shot to my knowledge. No, Kenny, no! Just kidding. I know that's not a valid comparison. Put down that banana! I beg you. GG > > Thanks for your post, Kenny. And thanks for being open minded to those of > us who are a little concerned about the speed of putting out a new > vaccine, lack of large scale reproducible studies, and the fact that the only > studies done were actually done by the pharamaceutical company which stands to > make billiions. And if you look at the numbers and ratios of folks who > have died or been severely incapacitated by the H1N1 (in comparison with the > standard flu bugs out there), it appears that a lot of the " hype " seems to > be a bit of " over the top " . Was it REALLY necessary to put out a vaccine > with few studies and push it on such a wide scale? But that is just my > humble opinion. Who knows what will happen when it mutates, however.... It > could then be very ugly. Did anyone see the info that came out today on the > lawsuit that was filed today in D.C. over this vaccine and this very issue? > THAT didn't take long. > > > > Thanks, Kenny. > > > > Jane Dinsmore > > > > To: texasems-l > From: kenneth.navarro@... > Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:38:36 +0000 > Subject: Re: Choice and Consequences > >  > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its > safety and efficacy? <<< > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > August. > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there > is a bit of science. > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection s > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department of > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > government > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a > little? <<< > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > Kenny Navarro > Dallas > > References > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > >              > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 LAWYERS TO THE RESCUE!!! I knew it would only be a matter time before somebody sued over this. I can see the commercials now: " Have you or a member of your family become ill after taking the flu vaccine? If so, you may be entitled to a large monetary settlement. But time is of the essence. Call the offices of Beatem, Cheatham, and Howe to find out whether you qualify. " Of course, if the vaccine had been withheld in order to do further trials the commercial would be: " Have you or a member of your family become ill with influenza because you were denied the flu vaccine? If so, you may be entitled................and so forth and so on. " From all I can tell the vaccine is perfectly safe, much safer than my twice weekly drive to Sierra Vista to teach my classes. An average of one person per week is killed on the stretch of Interstate 10 I travel. None have died there from GBS after taking the flu shot to my knowledge. No, Kenny, no! Just kidding. I know that's not a valid comparison. Put down that banana! I beg you. GG > > Thanks for your post, Kenny. And thanks for being open minded to those of > us who are a little concerned about the speed of putting out a new > vaccine, lack of large scale reproducible studies, and the fact that the only > studies done were actually done by the pharamaceutical company which stands to > make billiions. And if you look at the numbers and ratios of folks who > have died or been severely incapacitated by the H1N1 (in comparison with the > standard flu bugs out there), it appears that a lot of the " hype " seems to > be a bit of " over the top " . Was it REALLY necessary to put out a vaccine > with few studies and push it on such a wide scale? But that is just my > humble opinion. Who knows what will happen when it mutates, however.... It > could then be very ugly. Did anyone see the info that came out today on the > lawsuit that was filed today in D.C. over this vaccine and this very issue? > THAT didn't take long. > > > > Thanks, Kenny. > > > > Jane Dinsmore > > > > To: texasems-l > From: kenneth.navarro@... > Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:38:36 +0000 > Subject: Re: Choice and Consequences > >  > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its > safety and efficacy? <<< > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > August. > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there > is a bit of science. > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection s > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department of > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > government > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a > little? <<< > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > Kenny Navarro > Dallas > > References > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > >              > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 LAWYERS TO THE RESCUE!!! I knew it would only be a matter time before somebody sued over this. I can see the commercials now: " Have you or a member of your family become ill after taking the flu vaccine? If so, you may be entitled to a large monetary settlement. But time is of the essence. Call the offices of Beatem, Cheatham, and Howe to find out whether you qualify. " Of course, if the vaccine had been withheld in order to do further trials the commercial would be: " Have you or a member of your family become ill with influenza because you were denied the flu vaccine? If so, you may be entitled................and so forth and so on. " From all I can tell the vaccine is perfectly safe, much safer than my twice weekly drive to Sierra Vista to teach my classes. An average of one person per week is killed on the stretch of Interstate 10 I travel. None have died there from GBS after taking the flu shot to my knowledge. No, Kenny, no! Just kidding. I know that's not a valid comparison. Put down that banana! I beg you. GG > > Thanks for your post, Kenny. And thanks for being open minded to those of > us who are a little concerned about the speed of putting out a new > vaccine, lack of large scale reproducible studies, and the fact that the only > studies done were actually done by the pharamaceutical company which stands to > make billiions. And if you look at the numbers and ratios of folks who > have died or been severely incapacitated by the H1N1 (in comparison with the > standard flu bugs out there), it appears that a lot of the " hype " seems to > be a bit of " over the top " . Was it REALLY necessary to put out a vaccine > with few studies and push it on such a wide scale? But that is just my > humble opinion. Who knows what will happen when it mutates, however.... It > could then be very ugly. Did anyone see the info that came out today on the > lawsuit that was filed today in D.C. over this vaccine and this very issue? > THAT didn't take long. > > > > Thanks, Kenny. > > > > Jane Dinsmore > > > > To: texasems-l > From: kenneth.navarro@... > Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:38:36 +0000 > Subject: Re: Choice and Consequences > >  > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its > safety and efficacy? <<< > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > August. > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there > is a bit of science. > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection s > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department of > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > government > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a > little? <<< > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > Kenny Navarro > Dallas > > References > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > >              > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its safety and efficacy? <<< Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in August. I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there is a bit of science. In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection site reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). While it is true that the clinical research and development department of one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer review at the New England Journal of Medicine. >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a government rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a little? <<< I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. Kenny Navarro Dallas References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 58, 1100-1101. Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. Retrieved October 10, 2009, from http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its safety and efficacy? <<< Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in August. I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there is a bit of science. In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection site reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). While it is true that the clinical research and development department of one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer review at the New England Journal of Medicine. >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a government rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a little? <<< I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. Kenny Navarro Dallas References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 58, 1100-1101. Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. Retrieved October 10, 2009, from http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its safety and efficacy? <<< Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in August. I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there is a bit of science. In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection site reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). While it is true that the clinical research and development department of one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer review at the New England Journal of Medicine. >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a government rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a little? <<< I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. Kenny Navarro Dallas References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 58, 1100-1101. Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. Retrieved October 10, 2009, from http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Bernie, I also have taken the flu shots every year for umpteen years, and I have never had the flu in spite of hauling lots of flu patients to the hospital. I am a believer, although I have wondered whether this set of horns I have grown might have anything to do with those shots. Maybe the tail is the result of them also--who knows. At any rate it helps me swat flies and seems to help me maintain my balance. Gene >  > Gene, > > There was a story on the local news a couple of weeks ago here in DFW > about the flu shots. The doctor being interviewed said if the H1N1 had arrived > earlier this year we would not even be having this discussion. The reporter > interviewing the doctor asked why? The doctor replied because it would > have been included in the seasonal flu vaccine. > I have had flu shots for years and I am still normal, careful I heard > several of you snicker. Ok I have no noted side effects from a flu shot. Given > the number of folks that are getting sick, if I can take a flu shot and > maybe avoid all these problems, I am at the front of the line. > > Bernie Stafford > > Re: Choice and Consequences > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has > been > > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows > its > > safety and efficacy? <<< > > > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > > August. > > > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the > other flu > > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they > pondered > > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but > there > > is a bit of science. > > > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either > 15 > > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection > (Greenberg, > > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the > injection s > > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious > adverse > > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest > (neurologic, > > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from > safety > > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department > of > > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, > although > > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper > appears > > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > > government > > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just > a > > little? <<< > > > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety > appears > > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > > > Kenny Navarro > > Dallas > > > > References > > > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality > Weekly > > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & > Basser, R. > > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) > 2009 > > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > > http://content.http://cohttp://contehttp://contenthttp://content.http:/ > > > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., > Brady, > > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., > Bennet, > > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated > influenza > > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ > > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > > http://clk.atdmt.http://clk.http://clkhttp://clk > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Bernie, I also have taken the flu shots every year for umpteen years, and I have never had the flu in spite of hauling lots of flu patients to the hospital. I am a believer, although I have wondered whether this set of horns I have grown might have anything to do with those shots. Maybe the tail is the result of them also--who knows. At any rate it helps me swat flies and seems to help me maintain my balance. Gene >  > Gene, > > There was a story on the local news a couple of weeks ago here in DFW > about the flu shots. The doctor being interviewed said if the H1N1 had arrived > earlier this year we would not even be having this discussion. The reporter > interviewing the doctor asked why? The doctor replied because it would > have been included in the seasonal flu vaccine. > I have had flu shots for years and I am still normal, careful I heard > several of you snicker. Ok I have no noted side effects from a flu shot. Given > the number of folks that are getting sick, if I can take a flu shot and > maybe avoid all these problems, I am at the front of the line. > > Bernie Stafford > > Re: Choice and Consequences > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has > been > > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows > its > > safety and efficacy? <<< > > > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > > August. > > > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the > other flu > > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they > pondered > > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but > there > > is a bit of science. > > > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either > 15 > > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection > (Greenberg, > > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the > injection s > > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious > adverse > > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest > (neurologic, > > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from > safety > > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department > of > > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, > although > > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper > appears > > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > > government > > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just > a > > little? <<< > > > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety > appears > > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > > > Kenny Navarro > > Dallas > > > > References > > > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality > Weekly > > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & > Basser, R. > > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) > 2009 > > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > > http://content.http://cohttp://contehttp://contenthttp://content.http:/ > > > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., > Brady, > > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., > Bennet, > > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated > influenza > > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ > > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > > http://clk.atdmt.http://clk.http://clkhttp://clk > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Bernie, I also have taken the flu shots every year for umpteen years, and I have never had the flu in spite of hauling lots of flu patients to the hospital. I am a believer, although I have wondered whether this set of horns I have grown might have anything to do with those shots. Maybe the tail is the result of them also--who knows. At any rate it helps me swat flies and seems to help me maintain my balance. Gene >  > Gene, > > There was a story on the local news a couple of weeks ago here in DFW > about the flu shots. The doctor being interviewed said if the H1N1 had arrived > earlier this year we would not even be having this discussion. The reporter > interviewing the doctor asked why? The doctor replied because it would > have been included in the seasonal flu vaccine. > I have had flu shots for years and I am still normal, careful I heard > several of you snicker. Ok I have no noted side effects from a flu shot. Given > the number of folks that are getting sick, if I can take a flu shot and > maybe avoid all these problems, I am at the front of the line. > > Bernie Stafford > > Re: Choice and Consequences > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has > been > > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows > its > > safety and efficacy? <<< > > > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > > August. > > > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the > other flu > > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they > pondered > > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but > there > > is a bit of science. > > > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either > 15 > > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection > (Greenberg, > > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the > injection s > > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious > adverse > > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest > (neurologic, > > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from > safety > > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department > of > > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, > although > > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper > appears > > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > > government > > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just > a > > little? <<< > > > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety > appears > > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > > > Kenny Navarro > > Dallas > > > > References > > > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality > Weekly > > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & > Basser, R. > > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) > 2009 > > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > > http://content.http://cohttp://contehttp://contenthttp://content.http:/ > > > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., > Brady, > > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., > Bennet, > > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated > influenza > > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ > > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > > http://clk.atdmt.http://clk.http://clkhttp://clk > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Thanks for your post, Kenny. And thanks for being open minded to those of us who are a little concerned about the speed of putting out a new vaccine, lack of large scale reproducible studies, and the fact that the only studies done were actually done by the pharamaceutical company which stands to make billiions. And if you look at the numbers and ratios of folks who have died or been severely incapacitated by the H1N1 (in comparison with the standard flu bugs out there), it appears that a lot of the " hype " seems to be a bit of " over the top " . Was it REALLY necessary to put out a vaccine with few studies and push it on such a wide scale? But that is just my humble opinion. Who knows what will happen when it mutates, however.... It could then be very ugly. Did anyone see the info that came out today on the lawsuit that was filed today in D.C. over this vaccine and this very issue? THAT didn't take long. Thanks, Kenny. Jane Dinsmore To: texasems-l From: kenneth.navarro@... Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:38:36 +0000 Subject: Re: Choice and Consequences >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its safety and efficacy? <<< Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in August. I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there is a bit of science. In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection site reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). While it is true that the clinical research and development department of one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer review at the New England Journal of Medicine. >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a government rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a little? <<< I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. Kenny Navarro Dallas References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 58, 1100-1101. Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. Retrieved October 10, 2009, from http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Thanks for your post, Kenny. And thanks for being open minded to those of us who are a little concerned about the speed of putting out a new vaccine, lack of large scale reproducible studies, and the fact that the only studies done were actually done by the pharamaceutical company which stands to make billiions. And if you look at the numbers and ratios of folks who have died or been severely incapacitated by the H1N1 (in comparison with the standard flu bugs out there), it appears that a lot of the " hype " seems to be a bit of " over the top " . Was it REALLY necessary to put out a vaccine with few studies and push it on such a wide scale? But that is just my humble opinion. Who knows what will happen when it mutates, however.... It could then be very ugly. Did anyone see the info that came out today on the lawsuit that was filed today in D.C. over this vaccine and this very issue? THAT didn't take long. Thanks, Kenny. Jane Dinsmore To: texasems-l From: kenneth.navarro@... Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:38:36 +0000 Subject: Re: Choice and Consequences >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its safety and efficacy? <<< Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in August. I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there is a bit of science. In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection site reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). While it is true that the clinical research and development department of one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer review at the New England Journal of Medicine. >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a government rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a little? <<< I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. Kenny Navarro Dallas References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 58, 1100-1101. Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. Retrieved October 10, 2009, from http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Thanks for your post, Kenny. And thanks for being open minded to those of us who are a little concerned about the speed of putting out a new vaccine, lack of large scale reproducible studies, and the fact that the only studies done were actually done by the pharamaceutical company which stands to make billiions. And if you look at the numbers and ratios of folks who have died or been severely incapacitated by the H1N1 (in comparison with the standard flu bugs out there), it appears that a lot of the " hype " seems to be a bit of " over the top " . Was it REALLY necessary to put out a vaccine with few studies and push it on such a wide scale? But that is just my humble opinion. Who knows what will happen when it mutates, however.... It could then be very ugly. Did anyone see the info that came out today on the lawsuit that was filed today in D.C. over this vaccine and this very issue? THAT didn't take long. Thanks, Kenny. Jane Dinsmore To: texasems-l From: kenneth.navarro@... Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:38:36 +0000 Subject: Re: Choice and Consequences >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its safety and efficacy? <<< Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in August. I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there is a bit of science. In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection site reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). While it is true that the clinical research and development department of one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer review at the New England Journal of Medicine. >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a government rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a little? <<< I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. Kenny Navarro Dallas References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 58, 1100-1101. Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. Retrieved October 10, 2009, from http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 Gene, There was a story on the local news a couple of weeks ago here in DFW about the flu shots. The doctor being interviewed said if the H1N1 had arrived earlier this year we would not even be having this discussion. The reporter interviewing the doctor asked why? The doctor replied because it would have been included in the seasonal flu vaccine. I have had flu shots for years and I am still normal, careful I heard several of you snicker. Ok I have no noted side effects from a flu shot. Given the number of folks that are getting sick, if I can take a flu shot and maybe avoid all these problems, I am at the front of the line. Bernie Stafford Re: Choice and Consequences > > > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its > safety and efficacy? <<< > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > August. > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there > is a bit of science. > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection s > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department of > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > government > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a > little? <<< > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > Kenny Navarro > Dallas > > References > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 You darn lawyers. Get a rope....... LOL Jane Dinsmore To: texasems-l From: wegandy1938@... Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:34:47 -0400 Subject: Re: Re: Choice and Consequences LAWYERS TO THE RESCUE!!! I knew it would only be a matter time before somebody sued over this. I can see the commercials now: " Have you or a member of your family become ill after taking the flu vaccine? If so, you may be entitled to a large monetary settlement. But time is of the essence. Call the offices of Beatem, Cheatham, and Howe to find out whether you qualify. " Of course, if the vaccine had been withheld in order to do further trials the commercial would be: " Have you or a member of your family become ill with influenza because you were denied the flu vaccine? If so, you may be entitled................and so forth and so on. " From all I can tell the vaccine is perfectly safe, much safer than my twice weekly drive to Sierra Vista to teach my classes. An average of one person per week is killed on the stretch of Interstate 10 I travel. None have died there from GBS after taking the flu shot to my knowledge. No, Kenny, no! Just kidding. I know that's not a valid comparison. Put down that banana! I beg you. GG > > Thanks for your post, Kenny. And thanks for being open minded to those of > us who are a little concerned about the speed of putting out a new > vaccine, lack of large scale reproducible studies, and the fact that the only > studies done were actually done by the pharamaceutical company which stands to > make billiions. And if you look at the numbers and ratios of folks who > have died or been severely incapacitated by the H1N1 (in comparison with the > standard flu bugs out there), it appears that a lot of the " hype " seems to > be a bit of " over the top " . Was it REALLY necessary to put out a vaccine > with few studies and push it on such a wide scale? But that is just my > humble opinion. Who knows what will happen when it mutates, however.... It > could then be very ugly. Did anyone see the info that came out today on the > lawsuit that was filed today in D.C. over this vaccine and this very issue? > THAT didn't take long. > > > > Thanks, Kenny. > > > > Jane Dinsmore > > > > To: texasems-l > From: kenneth.navarro@... > Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 00:38:36 +0000 > Subject: Re: Choice and Consequences > > > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has been > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows its > safety and efficacy? <<< > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > August. > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the other flu > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they pondered > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but there > is a bit of science. > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either 15 > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection (Greenberg, > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the injection s > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious adverse > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest (neurologic, > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from safety > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department of > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, although > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper appears > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > government > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just a > little? <<< > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety appears > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > Kenny Navarro > Dallas > > References > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & Basser, R. > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) 2009 > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMoa0907413.pdf?resourcetype=HWCIT > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., Brady, > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., Bennet, > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated influenza > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 Ahhhh, but here is the crux of the conversation. You have a CHOICE about taking that vaccine. Back to where we started... Jane Dinsmore To: texasems-l From: wegandy1938@... Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 01:28:59 -0400 Subject: Re: Re: Choice and Consequences Bernie, I also have taken the flu shots every year for umpteen years, and I have never had the flu in spite of hauling lots of flu patients to the hospital. I am a believer, although I have wondered whether this set of horns I have grown might have anything to do with those shots. Maybe the tail is the result of them also--who knows. At any rate it helps me swat flies and seems to help me maintain my balance. Gene > > Gene, > > There was a story on the local news a couple of weeks ago here in DFW > about the flu shots. The doctor being interviewed said if the H1N1 had arrived > earlier this year we would not even be having this discussion. The reporter > interviewing the doctor asked why? The doctor replied because it would > have been included in the seasonal flu vaccine. > I have had flu shots for years and I am still normal, careful I heard > several of you snicker. Ok I have no noted side effects from a flu shot. Given > the number of folks that are getting sick, if I can take a flu shot and > maybe avoid all these problems, I am at the front of the line. > > Bernie Stafford > > Re: Choice and Consequences > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has > been > > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows > its > > safety and efficacy? <<< > > > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > > August. > > > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the > other flu > > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they > pondered > > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but > there > > is a bit of science. > > > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either > 15 > > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection > (Greenberg, > > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the > injection s > > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious > adverse > > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest > (neurologic, > > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from > safety > > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department > of > > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, > although > > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper > appears > > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > > government > > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just > a > > little? <<< > > > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety > appears > > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > > > Kenny Navarro > > Dallas > > > > References > > > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality > Weekly > > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & > Basser, R. > > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) > 2009 > > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > > http://content.http://cohttp://contehttp://contenthttp://content.http:/ > > > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., > Brady, > > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., > Bennet, > > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated > influenza > > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ > > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > > http://clk.atdmt.http://clk.http://clkhttp://clk > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 Ahhhh, but here is the crux of the conversation. You have a CHOICE about taking that vaccine. Back to where we started... Jane Dinsmore To: texasems-l From: wegandy1938@... Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 01:28:59 -0400 Subject: Re: Re: Choice and Consequences Bernie, I also have taken the flu shots every year for umpteen years, and I have never had the flu in spite of hauling lots of flu patients to the hospital. I am a believer, although I have wondered whether this set of horns I have grown might have anything to do with those shots. Maybe the tail is the result of them also--who knows. At any rate it helps me swat flies and seems to help me maintain my balance. Gene > > Gene, > > There was a story on the local news a couple of weeks ago here in DFW > about the flu shots. The doctor being interviewed said if the H1N1 had arrived > earlier this year we would not even be having this discussion. The reporter > interviewing the doctor asked why? The doctor replied because it would > have been included in the seasonal flu vaccine. > I have had flu shots for years and I am still normal, careful I heard > several of you snicker. Ok I have no noted side effects from a flu shot. Given > the number of folks that are getting sick, if I can take a flu shot and > maybe avoid all these problems, I am at the front of the line. > > Bernie Stafford > > Re: Choice and Consequences > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has > been > > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows > its > > safety and efficacy? <<< > > > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > > August. > > > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the > other flu > > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they > pondered > > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but > there > > is a bit of science. > > > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either > 15 > > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection > (Greenberg, > > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the > injection s > > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious > adverse > > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest > (neurologic, > > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from > safety > > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department > of > > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, > although > > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper > appears > > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > > government > > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just > a > > little? <<< > > > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety > appears > > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > > > Kenny Navarro > > Dallas > > > > References > > > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality > Weekly > > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & > Basser, R. > > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) > 2009 > > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > > http://content.http://cohttp://contehttp://contenthttp://content.http:/ > > > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., > Brady, > > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., > Bennet, > > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated > influenza > > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ > > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > > http://clk.atdmt.http://clk.http://clkhttp://clk > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 Ahhhh, but here is the crux of the conversation. You have a CHOICE about taking that vaccine. Back to where we started... Jane Dinsmore To: texasems-l From: wegandy1938@... Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 01:28:59 -0400 Subject: Re: Re: Choice and Consequences Bernie, I also have taken the flu shots every year for umpteen years, and I have never had the flu in spite of hauling lots of flu patients to the hospital. I am a believer, although I have wondered whether this set of horns I have grown might have anything to do with those shots. Maybe the tail is the result of them also--who knows. At any rate it helps me swat flies and seems to help me maintain my balance. Gene > > Gene, > > There was a story on the local news a couple of weeks ago here in DFW > about the flu shots. The doctor being interviewed said if the H1N1 had arrived > earlier this year we would not even be having this discussion. The reporter > interviewing the doctor asked why? The doctor replied because it would > have been included in the seasonal flu vaccine. > I have had flu shots for years and I am still normal, careful I heard > several of you snicker. Ok I have no noted side effects from a flu shot. Given > the number of folks that are getting sick, if I can take a flu shot and > maybe avoid all these problems, I am at the front of the line. > > Bernie Stafford > > Re: Choice and Consequences > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Kenny, can you produce verifiable, reproducable research that has > been > > done by an independent non-biased firm on the H1N1 vaccine that shows > its > > safety and efficacy? <<< > > > > Since science only recently created the H1N1 vaccine, there has not been > > enough time for clinical trial results to be available. Most began in > > August. > > > > I think the rush to put a vaccine on the market is a legitimate concern. > > However, the companies are using the same manufacturing techniques, same > > equipment, and the same quality control methods as they use for the > other flu > > strains. I suppose this gave regulators some peace of mind as they > pondered > > the approval in the face of extreme (some might say hysterical) demand. > > > > The CDC (2009) reports that the safety of the H1N1 vaccine is similar to > > that of seasonal influenza vaccines. This could be a rubber stamp but > there > > is a bit of science. > > > > In a recently published Australian study, 240 patients received either > 15 > > or 30 micrograms of the H1N1 vaccine by intramuscular injection > (Greenberg, > > et al., 2009). By 21 days post vaccination, 95% of the patients were > > immunogenic (efficacious) with discomfort, tenderness, or pain at the > injection s > > ite reported by 46% of the patients and systemic complaints, such as a > > headache, reported by 45%. There were no reported deaths, serious > adverse > > events (patient determined), or adverse events of special interest > (neurologic, > > e.g., Guillain–Barre syndrome, immune system, and other disorders). The > > safety data reported in this study does not significantly vary from > safety > > data reported from seasonal influenza vaccines conducted in a randomized > > controlled trial at Vanderbilt University. (Talbot, 2008). > > > > While it is true that the clinical research and development department > of > > one of the companies that manufactures the H1N1 vaccine conducted the > > Greenburg trial, that fact does not automatically negate the results, > although > > you are wise to be cautious. The methodology described in the paper > appears > > sound and did not trigger any authenticity suspicions during the peer > > review at the New England Journal of Medicine. > > > > >>> Everything I have found has been done by the pharmaceutical company > > that has developed it for sale and distribution with basically a > > government > > rubber stamp on it. If that is the case, wouldn't that concern you just > a > > little? <<< > > > > I am not concerned because there is not enough of the vaccine for me to > > have a shot (no pun intended). I am riding steerage on this ship. > > > > As for those at the top of the list, I agree with the CDC – safety > appears > > to be similar to that of the seasonal vaccines. > > > > Kenny Navarro > > Dallas > > > > References > > > > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2009). Update on > > influenza A (H1N1) 2009 monovalent vaccines. Morbidity and Mortality > Weekly > > Report, 58, 1100-1101. > > > > Greenberg, M. E., Lai, M. H., Hartel, G. F., Wichems, C. H., Gittleson, > > C., Bennet, J., Dawson, G., Hu, W., Leggio, C., Washington, D., & > Basser, R. > > L. (2009). Response after one dose of a monovalent influenza A (H1N1) > 2009 > > vaccine: Preliminary report. New England Journal of Medicine, [E-pub]. > > Retrieved October 10, 2009, from > > http://content.http://cohttp://contehttp://contenthttp://content.http:/ > > > > Talbot, H. K., Keitel, W., Cate, T. R., Treanor, J., , J., > Brady, > > R. C., Graham, I., Dekker, C. L., Ho, D., Winokur, P., Walter, E., > Bennet, > > J., Formica, N., Hartel, G., Skeljo, M., & , K. M. (2008). > > Immunogenicity, safety and consistency of new trivalent inactivated > influenza > > vaccine. Vaccine, 26, 4057-4061. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ > > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > > http://clk.atdmt.http://clk.http://clkhttp://clk > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 >>> From all I can tell the vaccine is perfectly safe, much safer than my twice weekly drive to Sierra Vista to teach my classes. <<< On this, we agree. Everyone on this list is much more likely to be injured or killed driving to get the flu shot than they are getting the vaccine. How many are willing to stop riding in a car because of the potential for injury? Kenny Navarro Dallas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 >>> From all I can tell the vaccine is perfectly safe, much safer than my twice weekly drive to Sierra Vista to teach my classes. <<< On this, we agree. Everyone on this list is much more likely to be injured or killed driving to get the flu shot than they are getting the vaccine. How many are willing to stop riding in a car because of the potential for injury? Kenny Navarro Dallas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2009 Report Share Posted October 11, 2009 >>> From all I can tell the vaccine is perfectly safe, much safer than my twice weekly drive to Sierra Vista to teach my classes. <<< On this, we agree. Everyone on this list is much more likely to be injured or killed driving to get the flu shot than they are getting the vaccine. How many are willing to stop riding in a car because of the potential for injury? Kenny Navarro Dallas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.