Menu Bar
What's in a Flu Shot?
Needs Plugin: Flash |
Not Working?
Retweet This
Share on Facebook
Email This
RT: 2:49
Make your own in a blender! Reveals the mystery of why Cheetos and Pop Tarts list their ingredients but vaccines do not.
Warning: Very corny Canadian laughtrack humor. But also a realistic look at what's inside that flu shot you just stuck up your arm.
Make your own in a blender! Reveals the mystery of why Cheetos and Pop Tarts list their ingredients but vaccines do not.
Warning: Very corny Canadian laughtrack humor. But also a realistic look at what's inside that flu shot you just stuck up your arm.
Jul 18, 2009 10:30 AM
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
Do yourself (and me) a favor and never go get that flu shot, not even when it's mandatory. Especially not when it's mandatory.
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
Can an influenza vaccine be created without the harmful ingredients? Probably, but I am going to hazard a guess that the shelf life isn't going to be as long (read: invasion of profits) and likely more costly to produce (read: invasion of profits).
Still, the flu shot makes a lot of sense for those at risk. What was that figure? Something like 320,000 deaths each year due to the more common strains of the flu? Hey shit, put up with the pain of a stinking pin prick.
Still, the flu shot makes a lot of sense for those at risk. What was that figure? Something like 320,000 deaths each year due to the more common strains of the flu? Hey shit, put up with the pain of a stinking pin prick.
By: spam_vigilante
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
Also consider the fact that getting a flu shot in many cases is either free or very cheap ($5). Last year, my workplace gave out about 500 free flu shots.
By: chronomitch
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
I'm not sure that the message in this clip is that anyone seems to have a problem with the cost of a flu shot.
And I don't think the concern is whether people mind being stuck with a needle. Not lotsa fun maybe. But no biggie.
I think the concern is about what's actually inside each year's flu shot - and how the FDA requires Twinkies to share its ingredients, but the pharmaceutical folks are much less likely to disclose what you just shot into your veins.
And, of course, what those mystery vaccine ingredients might then do to ya.
Per W_W's interesting clip, I'm guessing this lady on 60 Minutes would much rather have her 5 bucks back... http://www.milkandcookies.com/link/169624/detail/
And I don't think the concern is whether people mind being stuck with a needle. Not lotsa fun maybe. But no biggie.
I think the concern is about what's actually inside each year's flu shot - and how the FDA requires Twinkies to share its ingredients, but the pharmaceutical folks are much less likely to disclose what you just shot into your veins.
And, of course, what those mystery vaccine ingredients might then do to ya.
Per W_W's interesting clip, I'm guessing this lady on 60 Minutes would much rather have her 5 bucks back... http://www.milkandcookies.com/link/169624/detail/
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
If you ask a clinician what is in the flu shot when you go to get one, he will provide you with the information. Notice the host of the show was asking the patients and not the doctors or administrators.
There is cyanide in organically grown almonds. There is acrylamide (a deadly neurotoxin) in organic stir-fried chicken.
After the protest to raise awareness about the potential health problems associated with vaccines, I'm going to smoke a bowl; the tar-filled smoke of a dried plant that I have no idea where or how it was grown.
There is cyanide in organically grown almonds. There is acrylamide (a deadly neurotoxin) in organic stir-fried chicken.
After the protest to raise awareness about the potential health problems associated with vaccines, I'm going to smoke a bowl; the tar-filled smoke of a dried plant that I have no idea where or how it was grown.
By: poonhound
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
This is one of the worst clips i've seen on M&C.
How many fallacies can we count here.
1) False Premise: Vaccinations contain ingredients which are more likely to harm you than help you. The anti-vaccination movement likes to suggest that very scary and harmful ingredients are in vaccinations- even if the ingredients they tell you about were removed over a decade ago. People who believe vaccinations cause autism will tell you that thimerosal, a mercury based preservative, is to blame. What they wont tell you is that the study that made this assertion was found to be fraudulent, that thimerosal was removed from childhood vaccines 10 years ago, and in the time since then the autism rate has not decreased.
I listened to a radio show with someone from the center for disease control as a guest, and he answered some questions from callers. One mother told him she would never vaccinate her children because the shots contain aluminum. He responded by informing her that coming into contact with these elements is a result of living on planet earth, that even breastmilk contained aluminum, at thousands of times the concentration as compared to the vaccinations.
2) Strawman argument: The host of this video presents a fictitious method of creating a vaccine, to make that field of medicine appear unsophisticated and unprofessional. While I don't know the ins and outs of creating a vaccine (I do know that 1 egg is required per vaccination), I think we can all reasonably assume scientists aren't having joe schmoe sneeze in a blender and haphazardly throwing other ingredients in.
3)Cherry Picking Evidence: The only ingredients they talk about going into shots are the scary ones, while omitting anything normal, or neglecting to tell you the purpose or concentrations of the ingredients they did use.
4) Anecdotal evidence: The only reason they present for mercury being harmful is because "mom says its bad". Perhaps instead of using a preservative they would prefer this scenario from wikipedia: "In multidose injectable drug delivery systems, it prevents serious adverse effects such as the Staphylococcus infection that, in one 1928 incident, killed 12 of 21 children inoculated with a diphtheria vaccine that lacked a preservative"
While I frequent M&C for it's humor, artistic finds, and insight, I find that this entry fails in every regard.
How many fallacies can we count here.
1) False Premise: Vaccinations contain ingredients which are more likely to harm you than help you. The anti-vaccination movement likes to suggest that very scary and harmful ingredients are in vaccinations- even if the ingredients they tell you about were removed over a decade ago. People who believe vaccinations cause autism will tell you that thimerosal, a mercury based preservative, is to blame. What they wont tell you is that the study that made this assertion was found to be fraudulent, that thimerosal was removed from childhood vaccines 10 years ago, and in the time since then the autism rate has not decreased.
I listened to a radio show with someone from the center for disease control as a guest, and he answered some questions from callers. One mother told him she would never vaccinate her children because the shots contain aluminum. He responded by informing her that coming into contact with these elements is a result of living on planet earth, that even breastmilk contained aluminum, at thousands of times the concentration as compared to the vaccinations.
2) Strawman argument: The host of this video presents a fictitious method of creating a vaccine, to make that field of medicine appear unsophisticated and unprofessional. While I don't know the ins and outs of creating a vaccine (I do know that 1 egg is required per vaccination), I think we can all reasonably assume scientists aren't having joe schmoe sneeze in a blender and haphazardly throwing other ingredients in.
3)Cherry Picking Evidence: The only ingredients they talk about going into shots are the scary ones, while omitting anything normal, or neglecting to tell you the purpose or concentrations of the ingredients they did use.
4) Anecdotal evidence: The only reason they present for mercury being harmful is because "mom says its bad". Perhaps instead of using a preservative they would prefer this scenario from wikipedia: "In multidose injectable drug delivery systems, it prevents serious adverse effects such as the Staphylococcus infection that, in one 1928 incident, killed 12 of 21 children inoculated with a diphtheria vaccine that lacked a preservative"
While I frequent M&C for it's humor, artistic finds, and insight, I find that this entry fails in every regard.
By: hypersapien
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
Unfortunately, it would seem that the US government does not share your evangelical confidence in their vaccination program:
LEGAL IMMUNITY SET FOR SWINE FLU VACCINE MAKERS -- Mike Stobbe, AP News
"Vaccine makers and federal officials will be immune from lawsuits that result from any new swine flu vaccine, under a document signed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, government health officials said Friday."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hjdCHrP82YTFser5vD6CzTK1az6wD99GH8580
Of course, the most simple of corporate lackeys and pundits will respond (if they deign at all) that the government's move is merely a pre-calculated effort to protect the meek, defenseless lambs of Corporate America from any litigious gnats who might deign to potentially hold 'em accountable just like any other responsible business. Or rather, it may indicate a lack of confidence in their vaccine "product." Not sure.
But either way, it's probably good to avoid the high-strung fringes on both sides and do our own research and come to our own conclusion on the level of risk we're willing to take with vaccines. Especially since we have no legal recourse should it all go wrong.
LEGAL IMMUNITY SET FOR SWINE FLU VACCINE MAKERS -- Mike Stobbe, AP News
"Vaccine makers and federal officials will be immune from lawsuits that result from any new swine flu vaccine, under a document signed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, government health officials said Friday."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hjdCHrP82YTFser5vD6CzTK1az6wD99GH8580
Of course, the most simple of corporate lackeys and pundits will respond (if they deign at all) that the government's move is merely a pre-calculated effort to protect the meek, defenseless lambs of Corporate America from any litigious gnats who might deign to potentially hold 'em accountable just like any other responsible business. Or rather, it may indicate a lack of confidence in their vaccine "product." Not sure.
But either way, it's probably good to avoid the high-strung fringes on both sides and do our own research and come to our own conclusion on the level of risk we're willing to take with vaccines. Especially since we have no legal recourse should it all go wrong.
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
I can appreciate your viewpoint. I should clarify that I'm not taking a stance that vaccines should be mandatory or anything like that. The point I was trying to make, however, was that anyone who wants to argue against the use of vaccines should make better arguments than those presented in this video.
By: hypersapien
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
Interesting. Ya I guess people do come into contact with many toxins normally. However, you don't normally mainline these toxins into your bloodstream like you would with a flu shot. Also, it seems like mass vaccinations could cause a virus to mutate, like they do with antibiotics. I dunno.
By: KeyserSosay
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
One of the chief issues with vaccines that contain mercury corresponds to shelf-life. Namely, the mercury is used as a preservative, so that the vaccine can be stockpiled, like jerky in plastic versus a steak on ice. The problem is that when a vaccine sits on the shelf, a lot of settling occurs, and mercury, being a metal is dense enough to sink. If the person administering the vaccine does not shake the vial vigorously before dosing people, the first, say, 9 doses contain almost no mercury and the tenth contains enough mercury to preserve ten doses of the vaccination. Apart from being, then, an ineffective preservative, the potential dose of mercury in any one vial is potentially huge. In children especially, this is bad news because mercury crosses the blood-brain barrier, and will seriously impede the development of a young brain. This is thought to be linked to the sky-rocketing rates of children born with autism. The scary thing is, the threat was taken seriously enough that further production of vaccines intended for children was halted, but the existing stock stays in circulation, which means it's still being administered to our kids.
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
Correction: the production of vaccines intended for children which contain mercury as a preservative
Addendum: Aluminum is associated with increasing rates of Alzheimer's.
Addendum: Aluminum is associated with increasing rates of Alzheimer's.
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
It sounds to me that your problem isn't with mercury being in vaccines, but rather with the incompetency of those administrating it. If you agree with that statement, then you may agree with me in suggesting that the ingredients in the vaccine are not as harmful as the potential human error existing around them. I could, then make the same argument that eating at a restaurant is dangerous because you could get e coli- so lets only eat home cooked meals from now on.
As for Alzheimer's; I had heard of this many years ago, and the last news I heard on the issue was that aluminum is no longer thought to be as serious a threat as it once was suggested to be. Here's what wikipedia says:
According to The Alzheimer's Society, the overwhelming medical and scientific opinion is that studies have not convincingly demonstrated a causal relationship between aluminium and Alzheimer's disease.[60] Nevertheless, some studies cite aluminium exposure as a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease, as some brain plaques have been found to contain increased levels of the metal. Research in this area has been inconclusive; aluminium accumulation may be a consequence of the disease rather than a causal agent. In any event, if there is any toxicity of aluminium, it must be via a very specific mechanism, since total human exposure to the element in the form of naturally occurring clay in soil and dust is enormously large over a lifetime.[61][62] Scientific consensus does not yet exist about whether aluminium exposure could directly increase the risk of Alzheimer's disease.
As for Alzheimer's; I had heard of this many years ago, and the last news I heard on the issue was that aluminum is no longer thought to be as serious a threat as it once was suggested to be. Here's what wikipedia says:
According to The Alzheimer's Society, the overwhelming medical and scientific opinion is that studies have not convincingly demonstrated a causal relationship between aluminium and Alzheimer's disease.[60] Nevertheless, some studies cite aluminium exposure as a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease, as some brain plaques have been found to contain increased levels of the metal. Research in this area has been inconclusive; aluminium accumulation may be a consequence of the disease rather than a causal agent. In any event, if there is any toxicity of aluminium, it must be via a very specific mechanism, since total human exposure to the element in the form of naturally occurring clay in soil and dust is enormously large over a lifetime.[61][62] Scientific consensus does not yet exist about whether aluminium exposure could directly increase the risk of Alzheimer's disease.
By: hypersapien
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
My fiance has never been sick with any kind of sore throat, fever, cold or flu in his 30 years of life. He was the IT exec at a hospital and they insisted on "mandatory" vaccines and tests for all kinds of crap that included injecting him with a variety of both dead and live viruses. He told them to get bent and almost lost his job - until he threatened them with a lawsuit over his rights. They backed off and he eventually changed jobs. It makes me shudder just thinking about it.
By: TeeheeRuler
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
The tough part about this controversy is that personal & public well being intersect with personal freedom, and it definitely is hard to come to a solution thats the right answer universally for every person.
Judging from what you said (you don't name what particular vaccinations or diseases they were trying to protect against), it sounds as though your fiance was right to stand up for himself. In some cases though, such as the vaccination of children for MMR (measles mumps and rubella ), I do feel that these vaccinations should be mandatory because they put the population at large in risk.
In short: One person's freedoms end, where every one else's begins.
Judging from what you said (you don't name what particular vaccinations or diseases they were trying to protect against), it sounds as though your fiance was right to stand up for himself. In some cases though, such as the vaccination of children for MMR (measles mumps and rubella ), I do feel that these vaccinations should be mandatory because they put the population at large in risk.
In short: One person's freedoms end, where every one else's begins.
By: hypersapien
Re: What's in a Flu Shot?
With all due respect, you're on a very slippery slope, my good hyper-s.
At one point in the 80s, a number of Americans called out to round up citizens with HIV and put them in internment camps because they supposedly "put the population at risk." (at taxpayer expense, natch)
Now, you and I know this fear to be utter bullshi!t. (I assume you'd agree since you seem fairly erudite and all.) And yet... Our Government also forced Japanese Americans into camps because it supposedly "put the population at risk." Still crazy, right? But just recently the US invaded and occupied an entire nation (at our entire economy's detriment) because these folks *definitely* had WMDs which put us all at risk. Colin Powell told us so, right?
Whoops.
It doesn't matter if it's vaccines or armed conflict, any time we say we need to force anything on the American people (or others) for "our own good," we open the door to mania, waste, fraud, and abuse. History has repeatedly taught us this.
Once we allow ourselves the (insane to me) belief that "these vaccinations should be mandatory," you can immediately factor in these human qualities of greed (unnecessary tax-payer supported vaccines), corruption (dose the masses for ulterior reasons), or simple laziness (poor administration of a vaccination against our will leading to illness).
What'd ol' Ben Franklin say about Freedom?
And your comparison above to eating at a restaurant that may serve e coli or hep? It doesn't work unless you're literally forcing me to eat there.
Rather, as I've stated, this entire topic of vaccinations should be one of openness and complete transparency. Allow discussion and sharing of details, just as in anything, and let a free society make our own conclusions based on the level of risk we're individually willing to take.
Bottom line? My body? My own. It chills me to read that someone seemingly intelligent believes the State should have control over our very own bodies. Sigh... A very slippery slope.
At one point in the 80s, a number of Americans called out to round up citizens with HIV and put them in internment camps because they supposedly "put the population at risk." (at taxpayer expense, natch)
Now, you and I know this fear to be utter bullshi!t. (I assume you'd agree since you seem fairly erudite and all.) And yet... Our Government also forced Japanese Americans into camps because it supposedly "put the population at risk." Still crazy, right? But just recently the US invaded and occupied an entire nation (at our entire economy's detriment) because these folks *definitely* had WMDs which put us all at risk. Colin Powell told us so, right?
Whoops.
It doesn't matter if it's vaccines or armed conflict, any time we say we need to force anything on the American people (or others) for "our own good," we open the door to mania, waste, fraud, and abuse. History has repeatedly taught us this.
Once we allow ourselves the (insane to me) belief that "these vaccinations should be mandatory," you can immediately factor in these human qualities of greed (unnecessary tax-payer supported vaccines), corruption (dose the masses for ulterior reasons), or simple laziness (poor administration of a vaccination against our will leading to illness).
What'd ol' Ben Franklin say about Freedom?
And your comparison above to eating at a restaurant that may serve e coli or hep? It doesn't work unless you're literally forcing me to eat there.
Rather, as I've stated, this entire topic of vaccinations should be one of openness and complete transparency. Allow discussion and sharing of details, just as in anything, and let a free society make our own conclusions based on the level of risk we're individually willing to take.
Bottom line? My body? My own. It chills me to read that someone seemingly intelligent believes the State should have control over our very own bodies. Sigh... A very slippery slope.
