ForumGarden

Before your next flu season!!!!!

This flu season is now the worst in Australian history. Its affecting media, sports, medical staff...the list is extensive. Its striking more people this year and severely. Normally healthy fit people are being stuck down and hospitalised in more numbers than ever before. 97 people already dead, including the latest, a perfectly healthy eight year old girl. Normally theres a push to immunise the very young, infirm and elderly...but this year doctors are injecting (or trying to) everyone.

Ive had it twice now, but just the lurgi type strain. Every single person i know or have spoken to has had it.



So please you guys in the northern hemisphere, your next season of flu is going to be a really bad one.

magentaflame;1512596 wrote: Before your next flu season!!!!!

This flu season is now the worst in Australian history. Its affecting media, sports, medical staff...the list is extensive. Its striking more people this year and severely. Normally healthy fit people are being stuck down and hospitalised in more numbers than ever before. 97 people already dead, including the latest, a perfectly healthy eight year old girl. Normally theres a push to immunise the very young, infirm and elderly...but this year doctors are injecting (or trying to) everyone.

Ive had it twice now, but just the lurgi type strain. Every single person i know or have spoken to has had it.



So please you guys in the northern hemisphere, your next season of flu is going to be a really bad one.VERY good advice!

Got mine yesterday, the hyped up version for us oldtimers.

I got my letter today asking me to arrange a date.

They do that over here to all the old timers.

The strains theyve taken care of this season hasnt been enough even though they put an extra one in. You guys may be luckier. We havent even peaked yet.

And now we have a confirned measles outbreak.. its going to be one of those years.

We all got provided with free flu shots for anyone who wanted them at work last year. Probably will again this year. I get them free anyway, due to being exempt from prescription charges. Otherwise they can cost up to £15 (although I understand that Asda do a value version for £5 - seriously), for the company to invest in innoculating all its staff (about 1000 in the office now), is quite a cost.

pass

NO I am not one of those crazy anti vaxxers. I just do not get the Flu shot for myself.

I dont either to be honest....but im an idiot not getting a pnuemonia shot. (Anyone who's had it before should get it in case they get the flu.

I get offered it every year and every year I remind them I have an egg allergy and every year they say will try to get the egg free vaccine for me.

Not had a flu jab yet.

Healthy pregnant woman just died of it. They put her into an induced coma and took bubs while they could....very very sad.

They will scare you to do just about anything .

Would not have this jab if they paid me .

Of course if you are unhealthy , fat and with a low immunity system , you might wish to make your own decision .

Raphael;1526881 wrote: They will scare you to do just about anything .

Would not have this jab if they paid me .

Of course if you are unhealthy , fat and with a low immunity system , you might wish to make your own decision .


I’m neither unhealthy nor fat, neither do I have a low immunity system but I will definitely make my own decision.

Bryn Mawr;1526901 wrote: I’m neither unhealthy nor fat, neither do I have a low immunity system but I will definitely make my own decision.




Has anybody outside suggested you would not ? For nobody has here .

Perhaps you are just a teeny weeny bit secretly concerned .Subconsciously even .Otherwise why were you so keen to justify yourself to yourself ?



A niggling worry possibly , but one that you do not want to air publicly in the real world .

And heaven forbid mentioning it here .



Seems amazing that Flu is the modern health - speak for catching a cold and until quite recently . People recovered very quickly and with a stronger immune system as a result .

Strange .

Raphael;1526905 wrote: Has anybody outside suggested you would not ? For nobody has here .

Perhaps you are just a teeny weeny bit secretly concerned .Subconsciously even .Otherwise why were you so keen to justify yourself to yourself ?



A niggling worry possibly , but one that you do not want to air publicly in the real world .

And heaven forbid mentioning it here .



Seems amazing that Flu is the modern health - speak for catching a cold and until quite recently . People recovered very quickly and with a stronger immune system as a result .

Strange .


Yes you, it is a direct response to your explicit suggestion that only those as described would make their own decision rather than accepting yours :-



Of course if you are unhealthy , fat and with a low immunity system , you might wish to make your own decision .

It says clearly and with no wriggle room ;-

"Of course if you are unhealthy , fat and with a low immunity system , you might wish to make your own decision ."

If you are none of those unfortunates -- and you claim precisely that --- the thought cannot apply to you .

End Of .

It might also imply that some or many of those with one , two or all three of those serious conditions might like to give the matter further thought because of possible later more severe problems . That might or might not lead to a personal decision being made , perhaps depending on the seriousness of the scenario and whether specialist opinions are taken .

But regardless , none of these could apply to you as you have denied being unhealthy , fat or with low immunity .

It is simple enough so let's move on .

Raphael;1526915 wrote: It says clearly and with no wriggle room ;-

"Of course if you are unhealthy , fat and with a low immunity system , you might wish to make your own decision ."

If you are none of those unfortunates -- and you claim precisely that --- the thought cannot apply to you .

End Of .


That really is a definition of narcissism, it strikes me. Bryn might want to make his decision for his own reasons. Your arbitrary restrictions are entirely of your own making.

Here you are. Test the notion in private: Narcissists 'horrible people but happy'

I could probably kick all of your asses into next week, and I got a flu shot.

spot;1526917 wrote: That really is a definition of narcissism, it strikes me. Bryn might want to make his decision for his own reasons. Your arbitrary restrictions are entirely of your own making.

Here you are. Test the notion in private: Narcissists 'horrible people but happy'


Seems you do not comprehend elementary English either .

The simple fact is that your comments show you do not understand a fairly uncomplicated sentenced .

It is me who said that Bryn could make his own decisions .

Me . Before Bryn .

Me .Before you .

Me .Before Uncle Tom ------

And there are no restrictions -- arbitrary or otherwise .

If I am wrong , list them .

I was teaching English as a Supply Teacher aged 19 before University to the bottom stream in a Comp . That was much easier in hindsight .

Raphael;1526925 wrote: I was teaching English as a Supply Teacher aged 19 before University to the bottom stream in a Comp . That was much easier in hindsight .Out of curiosity, while teaching your class, assuming it was mainly in written form on paper, did you measure the distance between the last letter and a punctuation mark? Did each student use a measuring stick of some sort, and what distance was tolerable?

Ahso!;1526918 wrote: I could probably kick all of your asses into next week, and I got a flu shot.


Love to see you try .

Still fit and very tough . Just under 260 lbs and little spare weight .

No flu shot . Right or wrong I put my top condition down to eating huge quantities of Garlic , Onion , Ginger and Turmeric .Separately . Plus NZ honey .

Raphael;1526925 wrote:

It is me who said that Bryn could make his own decisions .


You qualified the sentence with " if you are unhealthy , fat and with a low immunity system". That's the bit you're now ignoring. What you're dictating from your first post in this thread, and insisting on ever since, is that if none of those conditions apply then making your own decision is not an option and you must therefore refuse the jab.

You're still putting out your location in those ad-directing HTTP headers every time you click on a web page, despite my helpful advice. I carefully didn't make a URL out of the content back at showthread.php?t=65572&p=1526842&viewfull=1#post1526842 - I thought the advice itself was sufficient - but the upgrade really will make it stop. If you Google-search the number pair and click Maps and it's just a generic random place then fine, but if it's not then at least you can end the data leakage. I've only ever seen that form of location data in that header type from tablets and phones before, yours is a first.

Raphael;1526915 wrote: It says clearly and with no wriggle room ;-

"Of course if you are unhealthy , fat and with a low immunity system , you might wish to make your own decision ."

If you are none of those unfortunates -- and you claim precisely that --- the thought cannot apply to you .

End Of .

It might also imply that some or many of those with one , two or all three of those serious conditions might like to give the matter further thought because of possible later more severe problems . That might or might not lead to a personal decision being made , perhaps depending on the seriousness of the scenario and whether specialist opinions are taken .

But regardless , none of these could apply to you as you have denied being unhealthy , fat or with low immunity .

It is simple enough so let's move on .


If you truly believe that then English is obviously not your first language so I’ll just take it as more of you famed “banter”.

Raphael;1526925 wrote: Seems you do not comprehend elementary English either .

The simple fact is that your comments show you do not understand a fairly uncomplicated sentenced .

It is me who said that Bryn could make his own decisions .

Me . Before Bryn .

Me .Before you .

Me .Before Uncle Tom ------

And there are no restrictions -- arbitrary or otherwise .

If I am wrong , list them .

I was teaching English as a Supply Teacher aged 19 before University to the bottom stream in a Comp . That was much easier in hindsight .


”If a, b or c then x” at the very least implies “if not a and b and c then not x”, the leading “of course” reinforces this and makes it explicit.

I am in living with a number of elderly people, and in a somewhat confined area on a regular basis.

The last thing I need to risk is contract such an avoidable disease, and pass it on to my more vulnerable family members, and possibly contribute to further weakening their immune systems.

In my mind that could qualify as criminal negligence.

I take the shot every year.

LarsMac;1527009 wrote: I take the shot every year.


There's a Ronald Reagan quote a bit like that. About a zipper? Gypper? It's been a long while and I didn't hear it right first time round either.

Dreadful people, actors.

LarsMac;1527009 wrote: I am in living with a number of elderly people, and in a somewhat confined area on a regular basis.

The last thing I need to risk is contract such an avoidable disease, and pass it on to my more vulnerable family members, and possibly contribute to further weakening their immune systems.

In my mind that could qualify as criminal negligence.

I take the shot every year.


With me it’s the very young rather than the very old but the same reasoning.

Ahso!;1526918 wrote: I could probably kick all of your asses into next week, and I got a flu shot.


slap my arse maybe but I don't need a kicking.

magentaflame;1527046 wrote: slap my arse maybe but I don't need a kicking.


Our American cousin employs what I believe to be an idiomatic expression taken from their particular style of Football. They punt an otherwise handheld ball as high into the air as they can manage and then all run toward the opposition's part of the field of play, hoping to be able to flatten whoever is nearest the ball when it next bounces.

I've often felt that the inherently aggressive spirit of the nation is clearly displayed in the language they employ. Otherwise impeccable matrons in their Sunday Go-To-Church finery will bellow to distant grandchildren that they - the grandchildren - should transport their apologetic posteriors with the least possible delay from their current location to where she can see them. I have heard this, it is not an invention on my part. It was thus that the West was won.

Bryn Mawr;1527017 wrote: With me it’s the very young rather than the very old but the same reasoning.


Amazing that everybody did not kill each other back in those bad old days .

Strange that families prior to --- say the seventies -- were so healthy and resilient .

The nearer you get to now , the greater the correlation of ill health with immunity

breakdown and physicians killing patients through mis- diagnosis and wrong prescriptions .

Now the third biggest US people killer .

Raphael;1527072 wrote: Now the third biggest US people killer .
No no, you're forgetting the Marine Corps.

Raphael;1527072 wrote: Amazing that everybody did not kill each other back in those bad old days .

Strange that families prior to --- say the seventies -- were so healthy and resilient .

The nearer you get to now , the greater the correlation of ill health with immunity

breakdown and physicians killing patients through mis- diagnosis and wrong prescriptions .

Now the third biggest US people killer .


Which killed more, the First World War or the influenza epidemic the year after?

What makes you think the people did not die of illness in “the good old days”?

How many people diagnosed with the flu really have the flu?

ANSWER . VIRTUALLY NONE



Peter Doshi writing in the online BMJ (British Medical Journal)

Doshi states, every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory samples are taken from flu patients in the US and tested in labs. Here is the kicker: only a small percentage of these samples show the presence of a flu virus.

This means: most of the people in America who are diagnosed by doctors with the flu have no flu virus in their bodies.

So they don’t have the flu.

Therefore, even if you assume the flu vaccine is useful and safe, it couldn’t possibly prevent all those “flu cases” that aren’t flu cases.

The vaccine couldn’t possibly work.

The vaccine isn’t designed to prevent fake flu, unless pigs can fly.

Here’s the exact quote from Doshi’s BMJ review, “Influenza: marketing vaccines by marketing disease” (BMJ 2013; 346:f3037):

“…even the ideal influenza vaccine, matched perfectly to circulating strains of wild influenza and capable of stopping all influenza viruses, can only deal with a small part of the ‘flu’ problem because most ‘flu’ appears to have nothing to do with influenza. Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive.

“…It’s no wonder so many people feel that ‘flu shots’ don’t work: for most flus, they can’t.”

Because most diagnosed cases of the flu aren’t the flu.

Inject with that .

And cut the crap .

You're going to get booted again if you don't include links to your sources. I'd not like to see that happen.

Your general comprehension is non existent

The most precise links are provided .

You simply neither read and/or understand . Read the post and note .

Just for the record , I banned the Forum for 14 days . I was not banned .

I have returned for an hour to see what you old people have learned .

Nothing . You are ignorant and lazy .

.

Raphael;1527528 wrote: Your general comprehension is non existent

The most precise links are provided .

You simply neither read and/or understand . Read the post and note .

Just for the record , I banned the Forum for 14 days . I was not banned .

I have returned for an hour to see what you old people have learned .

Nothing . You are ignorant and lazy .

.


You need a link or I will ban you again. Did you miss your infraction message from the ban you claim you didn't get? I could copy and paste it up here for you to see if not.

The forum rules are that you have to provide a link, not just a reference to a journal, you need to prove where you copied and pasted from. That's not debatable.

Spot or Ahso will help you if you don't know how to provide a link because they are friendly and helpful guys like that.

Now, welcome to the forum, be nice and stop calling people names.

Raphael;1527528 wrote: The most precise links are provided .


Perhaps it might help if I explain why.

What the author did with "Peter Doshi writing in the online BMJ" is paraphrasing. You, in copying that text, provided no quotes whatever. Speaking just for myself, I think if there is anyone called Peter Doshi writing on the BMJ (and I have no reason to think there is) his version and your copied paraphrased version of the story differ markedly. As far as I can see what you actually did was to copy a Facebook post from Dr. Christiane Northrup direct and unaltered onto the thread without any acknowledgement. The actual text, from my cursory search, appears to be hers and subsequently copied onto other areas of the Internet by any number of cranks - many of them either fundamentalist Christians or copycat trolls.

Which is why we demand - not just request, but demand - a simple unequivocal hyperlink to the actual source material of the posted text if asked for. We consider it good manners to provide one without being asked, when quoting, in the first place, but if asked the matter is non-negotiable.

As for the quotation from the BMJ article, could I highlight "Every year, hundreds of thousands of respiratory specimens are tested across the US. Of those tested, on average 16% are found to be influenza positive". I'm not sure how that figure relates to the number who were genuinely protected from the influenza "every year". There are tens of millions vaccinated in the US annually, not hundreds of thousands.

• Were the hundreds of thousands those with symptoms, tested as much to eliminate influenza as a cause as to determine that it was, of whom only 16% turned out to be unwell by reason of influenza?
  
  
  
  Were millions untested because the vaccine protected them after infection and they consequently remained asymptomatic?
  
  
  I fail to see cause and effect in the quoted numbers, as far as I can see the figures argue just as cogently that the protection was astoundingly effective. I think that in fact different figures are needed if the efficacy of the vaccination is to be determined. You need to test randomly across the population and correlate for all sampled individuals whether they test positive, whether they were vaccinated and whether they were asymptomatic. That would do it.
  
  In other news / meanwhile / by the way / on an unrelated note / oh, and / tangentially, you are still leaking your name, your address and your phone number out of your adware cookie store with every web access, for goodness sake - updating from El Capitan would save you a lot of embarrassment. If I abbreviate the cookies to rr-24-70 would that help focus your mind?

Bryn Mawr;1527091 wrote: Which killed more, the First World War or the influenza epidemic the year after?

What makes you think the people did not die of illness in “the good old days”?


https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d641/4 ... e4aaf6.pdf is interesting.

For the record, I had one yesterday.

The chap with the syringe chatted as he plunged his needle into my flesh. We mentioned the old school multipuncture BCG jab with 18 needles where entire classrooms of children had the same needle array applied without so much as a wipe, the glass polio and smallpox syringes with no needle replacement from one day to the next getting blunter with each use but at least getting the blood off the tip with cotton wool each time. There's an entire generation in England with upper arm scars from inoculations like those, youngsters these days don't know they're born.

spot;1528471 wrote: For the record, I had one yesterday.

The chap with the syringe chatted as he plunged his needle into my flesh. We mentioned the old school multipuncture BCG jab with 18 needles where entire classrooms of children had the same needle array applied without so much as a wipe, the glass polio and smallpox syringes with no needle replacement from one day to the next getting blunter with each use but at least getting the blood off the tip with cotton wool each time. There's an entire generation in England with upper arm scars from inoculations like those, youngsters these days don't know they're born.


At least my polio “jab” was a sugar lump but yes, the bcg reaction test was not a good one to have.

In Boot Camp, the Navy made sure that we all were properly inoculated against a wide array of maladies.

They had these air-pressurized guns that injected a stream that broke the skin and deposited an amount of whatever the dose of the day was. Some days there was a corpsman on each side, and we got two for the price of one.

I do remember back in the mid 50s the Polio vaccine operation. I was too worried about the soon-to-be-inflicted pain to observe whether they changed needled between patients.

This year, with a number of relatives in and out of the hospital, I think I need to get that shot.

I am seeing a new Doc next week, and plan to get it. I will make sure they use a fresh point.