Archive for Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Swine flu vaccine plans develop

Vaccines for swine flu are set to be released in October. Certain people get priority access to the vaccine, with it becoming available to the general public by December.

September 22, 2009

Advertisement

Flu experts to offer advice

6News will provide a special program, “H1N1: The Truth About Swine Flu,” at 6:30 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. today on Sunflower Broadband Channel 6.

The 30-minute program will feature three panelists: Charlie Hunt, state epidemiologist; Dr. Terrance Riordan, a Lawrence pediatrician; and Dr. Lee Norman, Kansas University Hospital’s chief medical officer.

The program will include a variety of topics, including how the H1N1 virus compares to previous ones, how to protect yourself against the virus, whether you should get the vaccination, and what measures to take if you get sick.

The show also will air at 8 p.m. Sept. 29, Oct. 7, Oct. 15, Oct. 23 and Oct. 27. The show will be available on Video On Demand from Sunflower Broadband.

The Lawrence-Douglas County Health Department is gearing up to provide the novel H1N1 vaccine to the community.

Dan Partridge, health department director, expects the department to receive its first shipment — about 500 doses — in the first full week of October and then speculates the department will receive weekly shipments.

By October’s end, he estimates, the department will have received between 20,000 and 30,000 doses, which will be based on the county’s population. The department will serve as the traffic cop for distribution of the vaccine, which will be provided by itself, private practices and clinics.

The department has scheduled four community clinics in October at the Douglas County 4-H Fairgrounds. The clinics will be from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m. Oct. 28, 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. Oct. 29-30, and 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. Oct. 31.

The department will provide the vaccine for no cost and will give them only to those who are most at risk of getting the H1N1 virus.

That high-risk group includes: pregnant women, people who live with or care for children younger than 6 months of age, health care and emergency medical services personnel, people between the ages of 6 months and 24 years old, and people between the ages of 25 and 64 years who have chronic health conditions.

Partridge expects the vaccine to be available to the general public in December, and he doesn’t expect a shortage. Everyone is encouraged to get the vaccine unless they have had a confirmed case of H1N1, but it is not mandated. CDC has reported about 10,000 hospitalizations and 600 deaths nationwide related to H1N1. There have been two deaths in Kansas.

“It doesn’t hurt to get the shot unless you have been one of the few who have had a true confirmatory test done. You might as well be safe than sorry,” Partridge said.

The department is working on scheduling other community clinics in Lawrence and surrounding cities during late October and in November. It is looking for volunteers to help at the clinics. They need anyone from health care professionals to people who can help provide directions and run errands.

The department will get $168,000 from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment for the planning phase — phase 1 and 2 — of H1N1 emergency preparedness. It expects to obtain more funding for operations and administering the vaccine. Partridge estimates the department’s H1N1 expenses to be about $300,000 for this year.

For more information about the clinics or to volunteer, call the department at 843-0721 or e-mail info@ldchealth.org.

Also, 6News will be airing a special program called “H1N1: The Truth About Swine Flu” at 6:30 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. today on Sunflower Broadband Channel 6.

Comments

lweinmaster 5 years, 7 months ago

WARNING: FLU-SHOT VACCINES' RISKS

Since our public health officials do not seem concerned about protecting the pregnant women and children in this country, I am forced to ask that everyone who gets this message forward it to all your family and friends. There are two kinds of injected-influenza vaccines (both regular flu and swine flu) avail- able this year - one contains Thimerosal (a mercury based preservative) and the other does not. As a general rule, the vaccines that come in single dose packages do not contain mercury, while the multi-dose vials do. However, some clinics pre-fill syringes from multi-dose vials. Thus, you need to verify that the syringe was filled by the vaccine's manufacturer and not by anyone else, if you are offered a flu-shot dose in a syringe. The amount of mercury in the Thimerosal- preserved vaccines is about 25 micrograms. The EPA safe dose for exposure to mercury that should not be exceeded is 0.1 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day. So, if a child receives a shot with 25 micrograms of mercury, the child would have to weigh 550 pounds to remain within the recommended safe level of exposure. With regard to injecting these vaccines into pregnant women, we know that some of the mercury will cross the placental barrier to the fetus. We tell pregnant women not to eat fish, and yet our government is not warning them about having mercury injected into their bodies while they are pregnant. In my opinion, this is inexcusable. If you receive the swine flu vaccine this year, be sure to keep the card they give you, and make sure the card lists the manufacturer and lot number of the vaccine. But if you are injured by the vaccine, you will not be able to go to the no fault vaccine court that is available for other vaccine injuries. You will have to apply for compensation to a special program, from which there is no appeal and no right to pursue any kind of civil litigation. If you try to get a mercury free flu vaccine and are unable to do so or if this letter has reached you after you already received your flu shot and you discover the one you received had mercury in it, please contact the people at CoMeD (The Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs) by emailing them your story and detailed contact information using the "Contact Us" link provided on the CoMeD website: http://www.Mercury-freeDrugs.org or send your e-mail with your story and detailed contact information directly to ; paulgkingphd@gmail.com.

lweinmaster 5 years, 7 months ago

WARNING: LIVE-VIRUS FLU VACCINES' RISKS

First of all the CDC WARNS that pregnant women should NOT be given a live-virus flu vaccine. The one study in pregnant rats is problematic because rats are immune to flu. A valid study would have tested the live virus in ferrets, which are susceptible to contracting influenza but MedImmune chose to avoid doing this study. Second, inoculation with a live-virus influenza vaccine gives the recipient a "limited" flu infection with up to three (3) strains of flu for FluMist and one (1) strain for the live-virus A/H1N1 vaccine. In some cases, these "limited" flu infections may be or lead to life-threatening illness. Third, those inoculated with these bioengineered flu viruses shed them for an undetermined period of time because the original "shedding" studies did NOT have a large enough population NOR were all those inoculated tracked to define the maximum period of infectivity for the shed live viruses. Based on the preceding, the live-virus vaccines should be avoided because they both cause cases of the flu in all who are inoculated and spread not only the vaccines' strains but also, through reassortment, mutated strains of flu in the popu- lation. This is the case BECAUSE those inoculated are NOT, as they should be, rigorously quarantined from contacts with those who have sub-optimal immune systems (e.g., pregnant women, sick children, and the elderly). Given the current package inserts for the 2009- 2010 FluMist and the 2009-2010 live A/H1N1 nasal virus inoculation, it seems obvious that the government is wanting these flu viruses and their mutations to spread throughout the population so that, like the live-polio vaccines, all will be inoculated with, hopefully, minimal secondary casualties though those behind these vaccines know there is a finite risk of a worse flu mutation developing from their bioengineered influenza viruses and spreading throughout the population.

Hopefully, the preceding has addressed the risks from both the "inactivated" and the live-influenza vaccines in a straightforward manner.

PS: ALL of the large-scale studies of influenza- vaccine effectiveness have found them to be LESS THAN EFFECTIVE at preventing those inoculated from contracting influenza -- the purported justification for a vaccine -- protection from the disease.

cthulhu_4_president 5 years, 7 months ago

"The amount of mercury in the Thimerosal- preserved vaccines is about 25 micrograms. The EPA safe dose for exposure to mercury that should not be exceeded is 0.1 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day. "


Thimerosal is NOT the same substance as the mercury you are describing and does not bio-accumulate as methylmercury does. You are comparing two different substances: ethylmercury (non-reactive vaccine adjuvant) and methylmercury (bio-accumulating toxic substance). Also, thimerosol has been removed from all vaccinations for children under 6 in the US due to unfounded public outcry, even though there is no evidence linking thimerosol to adverse conditions. If you were at all interested in spreading the truth, you would have known that. The rest of your post rambles on about mercury risks to pregnant women, with no facts and plenty of opinion. Add to this multiple studies that analyzed adverse event rates in America to numerous countries in the Eurpean Union (where thimerosol has not been removed) and found no increase of adverse events (http://www.iom.edu/CMS/3793/4705/20155.aspx) I consider your first post busted. Either the study cited is correct, or the conspiracy is global on a scale that is so large it is ludicrous. I invite you to pick the more likely scenerio.

cthulhu_4_president 5 years, 7 months ago


"The one study in pregnant rats is problematic because rats are immune to flu."


I've been looking for evidence to support this claim. Care to supply some?

"...these “limited” flu infections may be or lead to life-threatening illness."


No arguing with this. The CDC esimates as many as 30,000 adverse reactions with a small percentage of deaths. Now, the question you must ask yourself is if this is better than 40,000 unpreventable flu deaths per year that occur already? The benefits outweigh the risks by orders of magnitude.

"Third, those inoculated with these bioengineered flu viruses shed them for an undetermined period of time because the original “shedding” studies...."


May I have a link to one of these flawed studies, or is it too much to ask of you to have real information to back up your hysteria? What about more recent 'shedding' studies. Surely they have been conducted.

"Based on the preceding,"

Read "Based on my non-medical opinion"

" ....though those behind these vaccines know there is a finite risk of a worse flu mutation"


Yes it is finite. So is the chance that you will be struck by an asteriod as you type. In both cases, it also happens to be very close to zero.

"Hopefully, the preceding has addressed the risks from both the “inactivated” and the live-influenza vaccines in a straightforward manner."


No, it really hasn't. What it has done is to trumpet the worst-case scenerios of vaccination as if they were guarenteed to happen, topped off with a healthy dose of untruth and conspiracy theory. I'm not setting myself up just to be contrary to you. All I need is a little objective evidence to support the claims you make. You provide none.

cthulhu_4_president 5 years, 7 months ago

"...from contracting influenza — the purported justification for a vaccine — protection from the disease."


And that's the punchline: you're understanding of the primary purpose of vaccine is fundamentally flawed. It is not to keep healthy people from getting ill (although that is a good thing), it is to protect communities from illness with an accquired herd immunity. The herd immunity gained in communities protects the elderly and immunocompromised citizens that you addressed earlier, for whom catching the disease would mean certain death. Do you remember the last huge smallpox, measles or polio outbreak? The answer is 'no' because of vaccines. In communities where the herd immunity has dropped, these diseases have made a return: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/134968.php and the most numerous victims of the antivaccination rhetoric will always be the most innocent among us. They must die because someone else chose not to be vaccinated.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/04/26/the-australian-antivax-movement-takes-its-toll/

Again, I want to stress that all I need to be conviced by you are a few small pieces of objective evidence. I've looked for them, and can't find them. The fear is understandable, though. Our brians instinctively process risk vs. reward not by probability, but by the worst-case. It's a valid survivial mechanism, but must be overcome when dealing with the public good. To this end, I would appreciate it if you would reveal your sources that you used for your posts. Perhaps you should review them as well. If I am misinformed, I want to know.

This issue is not about what you or I feel: it's about what the evidence shows. It does not show support for your position.

Boston_Corbett 5 years, 7 months ago

lweinmaster's posts are so full of falsehoods that one doesn't even know where to start.

gr 5 years, 7 months ago

cthulhu_4_president: "Thimerosal is NOT the same substance as the mercury you are describing and does not bio-accumulate as methylmercury does."

What I find dishonest is you say lweinmaster was wrong, but you have failed to state what IS the EPA recommended safe dose of mercury.

"Now, the question you must ask yourself is if this is better than 40,000 unpreventable flu deaths per year that occur already?"

As you would say: "I've been looking for evidence to support this claim. Care to supply some?" Also, strange how you said it. If they are unpreventable, what are you comparing?

"It is not to keep healthy people from getting ill (although that is a good thing), it is to protect communities from illness with an accquired herd immunity." "They must die because someone else chose not to be vaccinated."

I can't believe you actually admitted that. And I have yet to hear anyone put such above imaginations in terms of the concept for crop "refuge areas". I doubt you can. Because you haven't either heard of it or thought for yourself.

So, folks, as cthulhu_4_president has admitted, getting the flu vaccine for the majority of you WILL NOT protect you, but someone else. You will take the risk, and risk dying to help protect someone else.
'Die for the team.' We'll throw a flower on your grave.

.

Yes, the Flu Swindle is gearing up for full speed.

lweinmaster 5 years, 7 months ago

Dr. Mercola interviews famous neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock regarding flu vaccines, I imagine he knows a little more about the brain than cthulhu_4_president

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/09/19/The-Truth-about-the-Flu-Shot.aspx

Susan Mangan 5 years, 7 months ago

Lweinmaster - Please DO share your credentials. That H1N1 "hysteria" wouldn't be anything like that vaccine hysteria, would it? No...I'm sure not.

Just make educated decisions. Either way you're gambling a little. But I'm certainly not basing my medical decisions on a paranoid post in a reader blog. I've refused a few vaccines for myself, and my kids, before. Many I've gotten. It just depended on the specific risks/benefits of the disease and vaccine. But, from what I've witnessed, firsthand, in my hospital, so far, if I were pregnant right now, I would be the very first person in line at the first clinic. I'm basing that on my experience as an ICU nurse...not as a layperson looking for someone to blame for a neurological problem.

cthulhu_4_president 5 years, 7 months ago

Dr. Mercola is a quack. Last week his 'newsletter' said that the herb tulsi could prevent swine flu. What was his source? Yahoo news. What was their source? An herbal 'healer' in India. What was his source? His mouth. People are taking advice from this guy?

I never said I knew more about the brain than a doctor, but I recognize BS when I smell it, and a little critical thinking is all that is necessary to see the truth in this issue.

gr: The choice to vaccinate is indeed a choice that is made not for self, but for community. If you don't understand that, then my usefulness in this conversation has ended.

Voiceofreason: you sure are :)

cthulhu_4_president 5 years, 7 months ago

Clarification: Studies have shown that tulsi can be effective as a mild painkiller, and has been used in a limited degree to moderate glucose levels in diabetes patients. There are no studies I know of that demostrate its efficacy as an antiviral. Dr. Mercola is notorious for giving incorrect, misleading, and straight up incorrect medical advice. Also, a brief search on Dr. Blaylock reveals that he stopped practicing neuroscience in 2003 and has since authored books like "Natural Strategies for the Cancer Patient". Hmm, as opposed to strategies that work I guess. Mercola accuses the government of being in bed with pharma, but Mercola is in bed with these naturalist wackjobs!! The irony is so thick it could be spread on a biscut!

As anyone interested in the truth should be, I love to be proven wrong.

gr 5 years, 7 months ago

"But, from what I've witnessed, firsthand, in my hospital, so far, if I were pregnant right now, I would be the very first person in line at the first clinic. I'm basing that on my experience as an ICU nurse…not as a layperson looking for someone to blame for a neurological problem."

Voice, all I saw you said was that some pregnant people were suffering from what I assume is the swine flu. No information on whether they were or were not vaccinated. Or if it was tested for swine flu.

But, no matter what, from what cthul freely admits, taking the vaccination would not help the pregnant person nor anyone else. It only helps others. So, being the first in line would do you absolutely no good.

According to a non scientific, follow the mob, blog poster, cthul, getting the flu shot to protect you from getting the flu does not work that way. It would be no different than covering your mouth protects you from getting the flu.

cthulhu_4_president 5 years, 7 months ago

gr, you must be tired from shovelling all those words in my mouth. Nowhere did I say that vaccination won't prevent you from getting the illness, I was merely describing what the ultimate, long-term goal of vaccination was. As with everything else iwien posted, he/she is wrong about that, too. Follow the mob? I follow the evidence. Try it sometime.

As I've said before, I honestly want to know if I'm wrong. if you have any facts to back up your opinion, please share them so I can correct myself. If you instead want to continue strawman attacks and emotional argument, then please continue. It only makes you seem more foolish.

gr 5 years, 7 months ago

"Nowhere did I say that vaccination won't prevent you from getting the illness, I was merely describing what the ultimate, long-term goal of vaccination was."

The choice to vaccinate is indeed a choice that is made not for self, but for community. If you don't understand that, then my usefulness in this conversation has ended.

"Follow the mob? I follow the evidence. Try it sometime." Ok. Let's see it.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.