RE: Choice and Consequences

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/

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

>

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

> >

>

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

> >

>

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

> >

>

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.Â 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.Â 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 " .Â Was it REALLY necessary to put out a vaccine

> with few studies and push it on such a wide scale?Â But that is just my

> humble opinion.Â Who knows what will happen when it mutates, however....Â It

> could then be very ugly.Â 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?Â

> 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

>

> Â

>

> >>> 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., Guillainâ€“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 â€“ 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.

>

> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â

> _________________________________________________________________

> Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.

> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/

>

October 10, 2009