Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Jason_Tame Nov 30 2009, 04:22 PM

Every Physician, Nurse or medical personnel who administers the H1N1 vaccine (or any vaccine) should be asking themselves why they are injecting the following ingredients into patients that have been scientifically proven to cause immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity, sterility and cancer.......

Novartis Focetria Adjuvanted H1N1
Influenza Vaccine Ingredients/Toxicity
Polysorbate 80: Sterilie Agent
Potassium Chloride: Neurotoxin
Squalene: Neurotoxin
Thimerosal: Neurotoxin

Novartis H1N1 Monovalent Influenza Vaccine Ingredients/Toxicity
Beta-Propiolactone: Carcinogen
Polymyxin: Neurotoxin
Neomycin: Immunotoxin
Thimerosal: Neurotoxin

GlaxoSmithKline Arepanrix Adjuvanted
H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Ingredients/Toxicity
Formaldehyde : Carcinogen
Polysorbate 80: Sterilie Agent
Sodium Deoxycholate: Immunotoxin
Squalene: Neurotoxin
Thimerosal: Neurotoxin

GlaxoSmithKline Pandemrix Adjuvanted
H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Ingredients/Toxicity
Octoxynol 10: Immunotoxin
Polysorbate 80: Sterilie Agent
Potassium Chloride: Neurotoxin
Sodium Deoxycholate: Immunotoxin
Squalene: Neurotoxin
Thimerosal: Neurotoxin

GlaxoSmithKline Fluarix 2009-2010
Formula Ingredients/Toxicity
Formaldehyde : Carcinogen
Octoxynol 10: Immunotoxin
Polysorbate 80: Sterilie Agent
Sodium Deoxycholate: Immunotoxin

Sanofi-Pasteur H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Ingredients/Toxicity
Formaldehyde : Carcinogen
Polyethylene Glycol: Systemic Toxin
Thimerosal: Neurotoxin

MedImmune H1N1 Vaccine Ingredients/Toxicity
Monosodium Glutamate: Neurotoxin
Gentamicin Sulfate: Nephrotoxic
Monobasic Potassium Phosphate: Immunotoxin

FLUARIX 2009 Latest Package Insert Ingredients/Toxicity
Formaldehyde : Carcinogen
Gentamicin Sulfate: Nephrotoxic
Polysorbate 80: Sterilie Agent
Sodium Deoxycholate: Immunotoxin
Thimerosal: Neurotoxin

CSL PANVAX H1N1 Vaccine Ingredients/Toxicity
Beta-Propiolactone: Carcinogen
Neomycin: Immunotoxin
Sodium Taurodeoxycholate: Carcinogen/Immunotoxin
Polymyxin: Neurotoxin
Thimerosal: Neurotoxin

CSL Afluria H1N1 Influenza Vaccine Ingredients/Toxicity
Beta-Propiolactone: Carcinogen
Neomycin Sulfate: Immunotoxin
Polymyxin B: Neurotoxin
Potassium Chloride: Neurotoxin
Sodium Taurodeoxycholate: Carcinogen/Immunotoxin
Thimerosal: Neurotoxin


Serious adverse reactions are as follows:
* Pain

* Redness

* Swelling

* Fatigue

* Headaches

* Arthralgia (joint inflammation)

* Myalgia (muscle inflammation)

* Shivering

* Sweating

* Swollen lymph nodes

* Fever

* Vomiting

* Tingling or numbness of the hands or feet

* Shortness of breath

* Vasculitis (inflammation of the blood vessels)

Serious adverse reactions are as follows:

* Blood and lymphatic system disorders (lymphadenopathy)

* Psychiatric disorders (insomnia)

* Nervous system disorders (dizziness, paraesthesia, inflammation of the central nervous system, inflammation of nerves, autoimmune disorders affecting myelin sheaths of nerves such as Guillain-Barré Syndrome)

* Ear and labyrinth disorders (vertigo)

* Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders (dyspnoea)

* Gastrointestinal disorders (nausea, diarrhea, abdominal pain, vomiting, dyspepsia, stomach discomfort)

* Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (pruritus, rash)

* Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders (back pain, musculoskeletal stiffness, neck pain, muscle spasms, pain in extremity)

* General disorders and administration site conditions (bruising, asthenia, chest pain, malaise)

http://preventdisease.com/news/09/103009_vaccine_sterility_immunotoxicity_neurotoxicity.shtml

Posted by: Bill1 Nov 30 2009, 04:57 PM

Twice?

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Nov 30 2009, 05:00 PM

Nothing like a good bit of Scaremongering.

We are all doomed! Doomed I tells ya.

Posted by: Jason_Tame Nov 30 2009, 05:03 PM

I'm just letting you all know what is inside the Vaccine. Sorry about the double post, I don't know what happened

Posted by: Rose8 Nov 30 2009, 05:07 PM

I understand whats trying to be said here. But taking almost any medication gives a risk of all 'POSSIBLE' side effects. Each person has to weigh up the pro's and con's and decide for themselves. I dont have VERY YOUNG children, so i wouldn't be giving this to my children. I also don't come under any 'at risk' category ie asthmatic / pregnant etc so i wouldnt be offered it. I would rather 'ride the storm' and hopefully get over it. But thats just me :-)

Posted by: Jason_Tame Nov 30 2009, 05:12 PM

The MedImmune H1N1 Vaccine has Monosodium Glutamate inside it ?

MSG ?

Nobody cares, No one cares whats inside the Vaccines

Even if it had Mercury inside, people still would not Care ............................................................Thimerosal

Posted by: Rose8 Nov 30 2009, 05:16 PM

Its scary what they put into these drugs and then what we will possibly (if we chose to take it) then put in our bodies. Women have been taking the pill for years now, they have reduced certain chemicals in them as the years have gone on, but my worry is, no-one knows the long term future effects and again, this is the same for any drugs. And again, one to be decided by the individual. I do think we all need to know the advantages / dis-advantages etc of anything that we take. Its a hard decision.

Posted by: Jeven Nov 30 2009, 07:57 PM

Most drugs are as bad as this sadly. Still, I wouldn't want it, or recommend it unless the person was considered at risk through job, age, health conditions etc

Posted by: Chesapeake Dec 1 2009, 09:00 AM

I am considered at risk, so I have just had the Flu jab and the Swine Flu jab, one in each arm. I had no side effects apart from a slight bruised feeling in one arm for a day. I would rather that than risk leaving my children without a mother. My son is still very young, under five and so should also have the swine flu jab but they are not rolling out the jab to under fives untill January. He will be having it as he suffers from asthma. Again I would rather do everything in my power to keep him safe than risk him becoming one of the statistical dead. Thousands of people have died.

If we look at all the ingredients in everything we use (shampoos, soaps, clothes etc.etc.) we would go back to living like cavemen. We wouldn't drive cars, we wouldn't read/use newspapers, we wouldn't have home insulation, duvets, sofas, beds. I could go on and on as nearly everything has man made chemicals in it. In the main the world is a better place and we nearly all enjoy the benefits of this progress. I wonder if the original poster can honestly claim that he doesn't also enjoy these benefits?

This sort of scare-mongering makes me cross! It does more damage than good!

Posted by: JeffG Dec 1 2009, 10:48 AM

Hear, hear. It smacks of the MMR thing - kids getting measles which can be life-threatening because parents were scared off the vaccine by bad science.

Posted by: Iommi Dec 1 2009, 11:07 AM

True, but when the PM won't own up to using it (for his children) then some people might smell something fishy.

Posted by: JeffG Dec 1 2009, 11:34 AM

Private family decisions like that should be kept private and not in the public domain. They are nothing to do with politics. Otherwise you get the ridiculous thing with John Gummer feeding beefburgers to his daughter. He was ridiculed for that, so damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Posted by: Iommi Dec 1 2009, 12:38 PM

I think they have everything to do with politics. At least Gummer stood by the strength of his convictions, but Mr Blair didn't. I can't see what is so sensitive to state whether one used an MMR or not, it is not like one's medical condition is being publicised. Mr Blair could have stood up and said, it is safe, my children have had it.

Posted by: Sarah Dec 1 2009, 01:47 PM

I think you'll find that many of the parents who were concerned about the MMR vaccine, went to great lengths to check out all available information, including the opinions of doctors both for and against.

Many of those who opted out went on and paid for their children to have single vaccines.

I don't think it's unreasonable for parents to be concerned and it's quite understandable that they don't want to go ahead with anything that might harm their child, nor is it unreasonable to expect the PM to show how much he actually believes/supports his government's advice, by saying whether or not he had agreed to his children having the vaccine.

Posted by: Andy Dec 1 2009, 02:04 PM

Don't agree at all. His choice should not influence anybody else in their decision and that's exactly why it's a sensitive issue.

What Blair or any other public, or private for that matter, individual does with private health decisions is theirs and theirs alone and should have no bearing or influence on anybody else.

If, for example, he openly stated his children did not have the jab and you followed suit with yours, then your child died of measles. Is then Blair's fault? No, but you'd blame him!!! I for one am more than capable of making my own informed decisions on these matters.

And that is also exactly why this OP is dangerous and I personally think should be removed.

Posted by: Jason_Tame Dec 1 2009, 02:07 PM

Doctors I know, don't take Vaccines and neither do there children

Posted by: Iommi Dec 1 2009, 02:38 PM

His government said it was safe and good. If he chooses to have the vaccines any other way, then he is possibly showing concern about the veracity of his government policy.


If that were the case, then we wouldn't have celebrities encouraging people to improve their health and wellbeing (think Pele).


Of course I wouldn't blame him, this isn't the issue, the issue is of MMR or individually, or not. If he says it is safe, but blowed if I'm going to do it, what message does that send?


People should take advice of their Doctor and not of politicians or websites.

Posted by: Chesapeake Dec 1 2009, 02:39 PM

How could we honestly believe the rantings of someone who doesn't even know the difference between "there" and "their".

Your comments are far too generalistic. You may very well know this about a doctor or two but what sort of "doctor"? Don't put all doctors into the same group, they're all individuals with a right to their own opinions.

Posted by: Jason_Tame Dec 1 2009, 02:54 PM

Wow Chesapeake, I wish I was you!

So I can correct everyone on there bad English, and make myself look really cool.

O hang on............

Their bad English!

ahehe I just posted the ingredients of the Vaccines, don't believe me, go find out for yourself.

whilst you are at it can you spell check for me again ? cheers

Posted by: Andy Dec 1 2009, 03:01 PM

The government just pass on the advice from the medical profession and then roll it out as they are best placed to run the logistics of that roll out. They state it is safe, because that is the medical advice, they do not force anyone or everyone to have it.


Hardly the same..Erection problems and a potential life saving vaccine. Plus, I'm sure Pfizer reimburse him hansomly for his time.


But others just might, which is exactly why an individuals choice should influence others unless a medical professional.


Doesn't this just contradict what you've been arguing for? That's exactly what I've stated from the beginning.

Posted by: Jason_Tame Dec 1 2009, 03:05 PM

Worshipful Andy, did you spell check ?

Posted by: zeospike Dec 1 2009, 03:07 PM

Firstly, name one with their contact details, as I doubt any proper, medically qualified doctor would not use a vaccine when necessary. I'd really like to speak to them to find out why they don't use vaccines.

Secondly you list a whole bunch of dreadful chemicals in the vaccines, but maybe you should research them a bit more. For instance Squalene is naturally occurring in the human body, and you'll get a bigger dose of it eating a Tuna sandwich than from a vaccine.

Thimerasol isn't used in vaccines in the UK and hasn't been in the US for nearly 10 years. PLUS the claimed link between Thimerasol and Autism touted by the anti-vax lobby has not been proved despite several years of Thimerasol-free data. This is pure out and out scare-mongering.

Thirdly, vaccines work primarily by protecting the population from a disease which stops it spreading and reduces its chance of mutating. This creates hurd immunity which means those people who are un-vaccinated are less at risk as there are less potential carriers. By not getting vaccinated you not only put yourself at risk, but you put all those around you at risk. Assessing risk and chance are not something humans are very good at. I recently saw someone buying cigarettes and a lottery ticket which to me shows the complete inability to sensibly guage the chance of winning the lottery (1:14,000,000) and the risk of dying from smoking (1:2). Your odds of getting a serious complication from a vaccine are low compared to your risk of dying which is somewhere between 1:1,000 to 1:10,000.

Is the vaccination 100% safe? Of course not, but nothing is. More people die whilst swimming than die from getting vaccinations, but would you stop taking your children swimming? You drive your kids to school but the risk of injury in an accident is about the same as from seasonal flu. Life isn't safe, but if I was in an aircraft and had a choice between an untested not 100% safe parachute or no parachute, I know which I'd chose.

Posted by: Jason_Tame Dec 1 2009, 03:14 PM

Hey Chesapeake,

How can we Believe you ? if you cannot spell apologizing?

If you want to play the silly spelling and grammer mistake game, make sure you don't throw stones from a glass house.

Posted by: Iommi Dec 1 2009, 03:17 PM

I don't think it does contradict what I've said. My point is that politicians who call the shots, would do well to follow their own policies. Why should people believe those that might not.

Posted by: Jason_Tame Dec 1 2009, 03:20 PM

Your immune system recognizes squalene as an oil molecule native to your body. It is found throughout your nervous system and brain. In fact, you can consume squalene in olive oil and not only will your immune system recognize it, you will also reap the benefits of its antioxidant properties.

The difference between “good” and “bad” squalene is the route by which it enters your body. Injection is an abnormal route of entry which incites your immune system to attack all the squalene in your body, not just the vaccine adjuvant.

Your immune system will attempt to destroy the molecule wherever it finds it, including in places where it occurs naturally, and where it is vital to the health of your nervous system

Posted by: Jason_Tame Dec 1 2009, 03:22 PM

Gulf War veterans with Gulf War Syndrome (GWS) received anthrax vaccines which contained squalene.

Posted by: Andy Dec 1 2009, 03:46 PM

No, I'm just intelligent and can spell.

But I apologise (not Apologize in the UK, as this is an Americanism) if I made any errors.

Posted by: zeospike Dec 1 2009, 03:48 PM

Sorry but you're digging deeper in to woo-woo and non-science here. What is "good" and "bad" Squalene? It is a chemical compound; how it gets in to you is irrelevant as to how the body will deal with it. Whether you have it injected, sprayed or eat in on wholemeal with some Rocket. Secondly the evidence connecting Squalene to the Anthrax vaccine was disproved. But then GWS, really? Really? I think you are clutching at straws in an attempt to bury the agument in noise.

From what I have read the vaccine is doing what it is intended to do; prevent people from catching and spreading a virus which if left unchecked will kill thousands of people. Please read up on the 1918 influenza pandemic which killed between 50 and 100 million people. Swine Flu is not a tin-foil hat conspiracy theory; it's real. Please start taking it seriously.

Posted by: JeffG Dec 1 2009, 04:03 PM

Hah! I saw this post after looking up Squalene on Wikipedia, where I read the following:



I know Wikipedia cannot be taken as 100% accurate, but I'd be careful about making statements that flatly contradict it.

Posted by: JeffG Dec 1 2009, 04:05 PM

However, you did make one spelling mistake in that post. But I'm feeling generous today, and will let you off with a caution.

Edit: Eek! I've just spotted a missing apostrophe, too!

Posted by: Roost Dec 1 2009, 05:41 PM

Personally I really don't think this will all matter too much.

Most of our children will kill themselves through drinking too much, smoking too much, taking too many illicit drugs or stabbing each other.

Kinda think a vaccine, no matter what it may or may not contain pales a little in comparison.....!!





The glass is half whatnow??!!!

Posted by: Exhausted Dec 1 2009, 06:49 PM

I am mindful of the Polio vaccine which every child was given in the fifties. Fortunately, the internet was not around and parents saw it as a blessing that their child would be spared this dreadful and in those days common disease. The good news is that as a result Polio is now almost erradicated. There are others, smallpox for instance.

However, that said and although not a vaccine, the result of Thalidomide was a disaster.

You win some, you lose some.