General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Flu Vaccine Press Release from NVIC

Started by John · · Last activity · 13 posts · 591 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
29 December 2003
Last activity
29 December 2003
Original author
John
Posts
13
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
591
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–13 of 13
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. PRESS RELEASE FROM THE NATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER

    for immediate release Wednesday, December 10, 2003

    INFORMED CONSENT ADVOCATE SAYS GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY SHOULD RELEASE FLU VACCINE EFFECTIVENESS DATA

    Washington, D.C. - A leading vaccine safety and informed consent advocate is calling on federal
    health officials and flu vaccine makers to be honest with the American people about the
    effectiveness of this year's flu vaccine. "Public health officials knew last spring that it was
    highly likely that the
    A/Panama strain in the current vaccine was not going to protect against the mutated, more dangerous
    A/Fujian strain of flu. If there is solid new evidence that the vaccine is protective against
    Fujian, then it should be released. If there is no such evidence, then it is not right to lead
    people to believe that if they get vaccinated now, they will be protected against it," said
    Barbara Loe Fisher, president, National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC). Federal officials were
    prevented from replacing the A/Panama strain with the Fujian strain emerging out of Asia and being
    detected in Europe and the U.S. last spring because scientists in labs around the world were
    unable to isolate and grow the virus in a way that would allow vaccine production. Transcripts
    from the February 20 and March 18, 2003 meetings of the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological
    Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) reveal that health officials around the world knew the
    genetically mutated Fujian strain was associated with significant morbidity and mortality and that
    last year's vaccine showed little protection against it. Fisher, who was the consumer voting
    member of the FDA Advisory Committee, abstained from the strain selection vote on March 18, saying
    "I feel uncomfortable voting for inclusion of an A/Panama-like virus, when what may really be
    needed is an A/Fujian-like virus. So I am going to abstain and urge that the public be informed
    that next year's flu vaccine may not be protective against an emerging strain." The National
    Vaccine Information Center is a non-profit, educational organization founded in 1982 by parents
    whose children were injured or died from reactions to the DPT vaccine. Dedicated to preventing
    vaccine injuries and deaths through public education, NVIC also advocates for the inclusion of
    informed consent protections in national vaccine policies and laws. "This is a matter of the
    public's right to have full and truthful information about the benefits and risks of a particular
    vaccine in order for us to make an informed choice. Although there were technological limitations
    with making the switch this year to the new emerging strain, it does not serve either public
    health officials, industry or the public to not be honest about what the current vaccine can and
    can't do. At the end of the day, it is a matter of respecting the public trust," she said. Every
    year, health officials at the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Department of Health
    and Human Services (DHHS) gather information about influenza activity around the world in order to
    try to make an educated guess about which three flu strains to include in the current year's flu
    vaccine. This year, in addition to the inactivated (killed) flu vaccine which is injected, a new
    live virus nasal flu vaccine is available in the U.S. Both the inactivated and live virus vaccines
    contain the same three flu strains. Neither flu vaccine this year contains the mutated Fujian
    strain that is causing the most severe flu in the U.S. this season. The new live virus vaccine
    (FLUMIST), which is squirted up the nose, was licensed by the FDA in June 2003 for use in healthy
    individuals between the ages of five and 50. It is not recommended for pregnant women or those
    with asthma, chronic lung or heart disease; chronic underlying medical conditions such as diabetes
    or kidney disorders; immune suppression or immune system problems; children or adolescents
    receiving aspirin therapy, anyone allergic to eggs; or those with a history of Guillain Barre
    syndrome. It should not be given simultaneously with other vaccines. FLUMIST's vaccine live virus
    is shed after vaccination so the vaccinated are advised to avoid close contact with immune
    compromised individuals for at least 21 days. Some hospital personnel are asking those recently
    vaccinated with FLUMIST to avoid visiting patients in hospitals to prevent the risk of
    transmitting the vaccine strain virus to sick patients. The most common reactions to the live flu
    vaccine are similar to the flu: runny nose, nasal congestion, cough, sore throat, headache, muscle
    aches, fever, chills, and weakness. The killed flu vaccine, which is injected, has historically
    been used in individuals over 60 years old who are at high risk for dying or becoming seriously
    ill during a bout with the flu. However, in recent years, the CDC has been asking all age groups
    to get an annual flu shot and now recommends that all healthy children older than 6 months of age
    get an annual flu shot. Contraindications for the killed flu vaccine are: fever, an impaired
    immune system, egg allergy, mercury allergy or a history of Guillain Barre syndrome. In the past,
    pregnancy was a contraindication but now the CDC recommends flu vaccine for women more than 14
    weeks pregnant. However this recommendation is controversial since most flu vaccines still contain
    the mercury preservative, Thimerosal, and mercury has been associated with brain damage and
    developmental delays in fetuses whose mothers were exposed to high levels of mercury during
    pregnancy. The most common reactions to killed flu vaccine are fever, fatigue, painful joints and
    headache. The most serious reported reaction, which usually occurs within two weeks of
    vaccination, is Guillain Barre syndrome, an immune mediated nerve disorder characterized by muscle
    weakness, numbness, pain and paralysis. Flu vaccine only protects against the three specific
    viruses which are included in any given year's flu vaccine formulation and does not protect
    against throat, respiratory, gastrointestinal and ear infections caused by bacteria and other
    kinds of viruses. When the match between the vaccine and circulating viruses is close, the flu
    vaccine is thought to provide a 70 to 90 percent chance of temporary immunity to selected strains
    in healthy persons less than 65 years old. For those over 65 years old, the efficacy rate drops to
    30 to 40 percent, although it is considered to be 50 to 60 percent effective in preventing
    hospitalization or pneumonia and 80 percent effective in preventing death from flu caused by the
    covered strains. For more information on flu vaccine and selection of this year's flu vaccine
    strains, go to NVIC's website at www.NVIC.org/Diseases/Influenza.htm. -end-

  2. In article <[email hidden]>,

    john said:

    PRESS RELEASE FROM THE NATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER

    for immediate release Wednesday, December 10, 2003

    INFORMED CONSENT ADVOCATE SAYS GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY SHOULD RELEASE FLU VACCINE
    EFFECTIVENESS DATA

    Washington, D.C. - A leading vaccine safety and informed consent advocate is calling on federal
    health officials and flu vaccine makers to be honest with the American people about the
    effectiveness of this year's flu vaccine.

    That's the advantage of having your own organization -- you can then do your own press releases and
    declare yourself to be an "informed consent advocate" and "a leading vaccine safety advocate."

    -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
    correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
    shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

  3. [email hidden] (john) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    PRESS RELEASE FROM THE NATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER

    for immediate release Wednesday, December 10, 2003

    INFORMED CONSENT ADVOCATE SAYS GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY SHOULD RELEASE FLU VACCINE
    EFFECTIVENESS DATA

    Now I am getting confused.

    A virus can live only within a living cell. Once the cell dies we can see the so called "viral
    particles" with an electronmicroscope but the critter is always dead. Scientists have never, ever,
    seen the first live virus and never outside a living cell.

    Just what is a "killed virus" and a "living virus" as is said to be in flumist.

    Just exactly what are we talking about? Are we now talking about a dead organism as if it were
    alive...the English word for that is something like anthropomorphism. Are we talking about the virus
    in an anthropohorhisic manner or can we now confer life to the dead?

    DrC PhD.

  4. "john" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    PRESS RELEASE FROM THE NATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER

    for immediate release Wednesday, December 10, 2003

    INFORMED CONSENT ADVOCATE SAYS GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY SHOULD RELEASE FLU VACCINE
    EFFECTIVENESS DATA

    Washington, D.C. - A leading vaccine safety and informed consent advocate


    is

    Rabid anti-vaccination hate group is a closer description.

    Quoted message said:

    calling on federal health officials and flu vaccine makers to be honest


    with

    Quoted message said:

    the American people about the effectiveness of this year's flu vaccine.

    Honest information is available at the CDC website, and from many other sources.

    Quoted message said:

    "Public health officials knew last spring that it was highly likely that


    the

    Quoted message said:

    A/Panama strain in the current vaccine was not going to protect against


    the

    Quoted message said:

    mutated, more dangerous A/Fujian strain of flu. If there is solid new evidence that the vaccine is
    protective against Fujian, then it should be released.

    When it is understood to what extent the current flu vaccine protects against Fugian, that
    information will be made public. All we know now is speculation.

    Quoted message said:

    If there is no such evidence, then it is not right to lead people to believe that if they get
    vaccinated now, they will be protected against it," said Barbara Loe Fisher, president, National
    Vaccine Information


    Center

    Quoted message said:

    (NVIC).

    No agency or epidemiologist is making that claim. There is no conspiracy to decieve the public.
    People are encouraged to get vaccinated to be protected against the other strains of flu which are
    still very much out there.

    Quoted message said:

    Federal officials were prevented from replacing the A/Panama strain with


    the

    Quoted message said:

    Fujian strain emerging out of Asia and being detected in Europe and the


    U.S.

    Quoted message said:

    last spring because scientists in labs around the world were unable to isolate and grow the virus
    in a way that would allow vaccine production. Transcripts from the February 20 and March 18, 2003
    meetings of the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC)


    reveal

    Quoted message said:

    that health officials around the world knew the genetically mutated Fujian strain was associated
    with significant morbidity and mortality and that


    last

    Quoted message said:

    year's vaccine showed little protection against it. Fisher, who was the consumer voting member of
    the FDA Advisory Committee, abstained from the strain selection vote on March 18, saying "I feel
    uncomfortable voting for inclusion of an A/Panama-like virus, when what


    may

    Quoted message said:

    really be needed is an A/Fujian-like virus. So I am going to abstain and urge that the public be
    informed that next year's flu vaccine may not be protective against an emerging strain."

    So? They did the best they could with what they had. The vaccine that is available protects against
    much of the flu that's circulating, and may provide some immunity to the Fugian strain as well.

    Quoted message said:

    The National Vaccine Information Center is a non-profit, educational organization founded in 1982
    by parents whose children were injured or


    died

    Quoted message said:

    from reactions to the DPT vaccine. Dedicated to preventing vaccine


    injuries

    Quoted message said:

    and deaths through public education, NVIC also advocates for the inclusion of informed consent
    protections in national vaccine policies and laws.


    "This

    Quoted message said:

    is a matter of the public's right to have full and truthful information

    The NVIC would not recognize the truth if they were up to their necks in it.

    Quoted message said:

    about the benefits and risks of a particular vaccine in order for us to


    make

    Quoted message said:

    an informed choice. Although there were technological limitations with making the switch this year
    to the new emerging strain, it does not serve either public health officials, industry or the
    public to not be honest about what the current vaccine can and can't do. At the end of the day, it
    is a matter of respecting the public trust," she said. Every year, health officials at the World
    Health Organization (WHO) and


    the

    Quoted message said:

    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) gather information


    about

    Quoted message said:

    influenza activity around the world in order to try to make an educated guess about which three
    flu strains to include in the current year's flu vaccine.

    And they have an excellent track record of "guessing" quite accurately.

    Quoted message said:

    This year, in addition to the inactivated (killed) flu vaccine which is injected, a new live virus
    nasal flu vaccine is available in the U.S. Both the inactivated and live virus vaccines contain
    the same three


    flu

    Quoted message said:

    strains. Neither flu vaccine this year contains the mutated Fujian strain that is causing the most
    severe flu in the U.S. this season. The new live virus vaccine (FLUMIST), which is squirted up the
    nose, was licensed by the FDA in June 2003 for use in healthy individuals between


    the

    Quoted message said:

    ages of five and 50. It is not recommended for pregnant women or those


    with

    Quoted message said:

    asthma, chronic lung or heart disease; chronic underlying medical


    conditions

    Quoted message said:

    such as diabetes or kidney disorders; immune suppression or immune system problems; children or
    adolescents receiving aspirin therapy, anyone


    allergic

    Quoted message said:

    to eggs; or those with a history of Guillain Barre syndrome. It should not be given simultaneously
    with other vaccines. FLUMIST's vaccine live virus is shed after vaccination so the vaccinated


    are

    Quoted message said:

    advised to avoid close contact with immune compromised individuals for at least 21 days. Some
    hospital personnel are asking those recently


    vaccinated

    Quoted message said:

    with FLUMIST to avoid visiting patients in hospitals to prevent the risk


    of

    Quoted message said:

    transmitting the vaccine strain virus to sick patients. The most common reactions to the live flu
    vaccine are similar to the flu: runny nose,


    nasal

    Quoted message said:

    congestion, cough, sore throat, headache, muscle aches, fever, chills, and weakness. The killed
    flu vaccine, which is injected, has historically been used in individuals over 60 years old who
    are at high risk for dying or becoming seriously ill during a bout with the flu. However, in
    recent years, the


    CDC

    Quoted message said:

    has been asking all age groups to get an annual flu shot and now


    recommends

    Quoted message said:

    that all healthy children older than 6 months of age get an annual flu


    shot.

    Quoted message said:

    Contraindications for the killed flu vaccine are: fever, an impaired


    immune

    Quoted message said:

    system, egg allergy, mercury allergy or a history of Guillain Barre syndrome. In the past,
    pregnancy was a contraindication but now the CDC recommends flu vaccine for women more than 14
    weeks pregnant. However this recommendation is controversial

    It's only "controversial" to anti-vac whackos who believe the minute amount of mercury in Thimerosal
    in a flu shot is biologically significant.

    Quoted message said:

    since most flu vaccines still contain the mercury preservative, Thimerosal, and mercury has been
    associated with


    brain

    Quoted message said:

    damage and developmental delays in fetuses whose mothers were exposed to high levels of mercury
    during pregnancy.

    Water "has been associated with" drowning, but I just bravely drank a whole glass of it.

    Quoted message said:

    The most common reactions to killed flu vaccine are fever, fatigue,


    painful

    Quoted message said:

    joints and headache.

    No, the most common reaction is a sore arm.

    Quoted message said:

    The most serious reported reaction, which usually occurs within two weeks of vaccination, is
    Guillain Barre syndrome, an immune mediated nerve disorder characterized by muscle weakness,
    numbness, pain and paralysis.

    The relation of Guillain Barre to flu vaccine is not definitively established, but if vaccine
    related G-B occurs, it is so rare that your chance of dying from the flu, if unvaccinated, is much
    greater than your chance of getting G-B from the shot.

    Quoted message said:

    Flu vaccine only protects against the three specific viruses which are included in any given
    year's flu vaccine formulation and does not protect against throat, respiratory, gastrointestinal
    and ear infections caused by bacteria and other kinds of viruses.

    It won't protect you against appendicitis or athlete's foot either. So what?

    Quoted message said:

    When the match between the vaccine and circulating viruses is close, the flu vaccine is thought to
    provide a 70


    to

    Quoted message said:

    90 percent chance of temporary immunity to selected strains in healthy persons less than 65 years
    old. For those over 65 years old, the efficacy rate drops to 30 to 40 percent, although it is
    considered to be 50 to 60 percent effective in preventing hospitalization or pneumonia and 80


    percent

    Quoted message said:

    effective in preventing death from flu caused by the covered strains. For more information on flu
    vaccine and selection of this year's flu


    vaccine

    Quoted message said:

    strains, go to NVIC's website at www.NVIC.org/Disaeses/Influenza.htm. -end-

    Better yet, go to cdc.govflu and get the truth.

    --Rich

  5. There is a lot of controversy on a topic of great value. It's important to realize that just as
    diseases are different, the vaccines for those diseases are different. Some complications can raise
    a general theory of harm based on a common factor such as a preservative. Others may not share a
    common factor. In those cases, it's more helpful to look at the individual disease vaccines which
    may be for bacterial or viral illnesses, be combined or given singly, and have different routes of
    administration and different ages given, and different purposes too (childhood vaccination versus
    war fighting prevention).

    Vaccines are hugely important from a public health standpoint and from a personal health standpoint.
    Even mainstream doctors realize there is a tradeoff of risks and benefits. It's important to keep
    the discussion going: Personal stories sometimes provide the clues as to what's really going on. But
    it's equally important to remember that science usually has to test these clues to see if the theory
    behind them is true or not.

    Dr.R.

    --
    Vaccines: Do They Prevent Epidemics or Cause Them? Instant Information: [email hidden]

  6. In article <[email hidden]>,

    drceephd said:

    [email hidden] (john) wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    PRESS RELEASE FROM THE NATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER

    for immediate release Wednesday, December 10, 2003

    INFORMED CONSENT ADVOCATE SAYS GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY SHOULD RELEASE FLU VACCINE
    EFFECTIVENESS DATA

    Now I am getting confused.

    A virus can live only within a living cell. Once the cell dies we can see the so called "viral
    particles" with an electronmicroscope but the critter is always dead. Scientists have never, ever,
    seen the first live virus and never outside a living cell.

    Just what is a "killed virus" and a "living virus" as is said to be in flumist.

    What do you care, Chalupa Chuck? You don't believe in viruses anyway. Not as pathogenic
    agents, at least.

    -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
    correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
    shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

  7. "drceephd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    [email hidden] (john) wrote in message


    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    PRESS RELEASE FROM THE NATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER

    for immediate release Wednesday, December 10, 2003

    INFORMED CONSENT ADVOCATE SAYS GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY SHOULD RELEASE FLU VACCINE
    EFFECTIVENESS DATA

    Now I am getting confused.

    You've been confused since before you started posting here.

    Quoted message said:


    A virus can live only within a living cell. Once the cell dies we can see the so called "viral
    particles" with an electronmicroscope but the critter is always dead. Scientists have never, ever,
    seen the first live virus and never outside a living cell.

    Viruses are not alive. But they can and do exist outside of cells and are infectious by definition.
    Electron microscopes can image viruses, not just "viral particles."

    Quoted message said:


    Just what is a "killed virus" and a "living virus" as is said to be in flumist.

    You are correct here, in that "killed virus" is a poor term for what is in injectable flu vaccine.
    Here, your term "viral particles" might better apply, or perhaps "damaged viruses" would better
    convey the concept. In any case, the immune system is presented with a molecule that will prepare it
    to recognize the real, infectious virus when it is encountered.

    Quoted message said:


    Just exactly what are we talking about? Are we now talking about a dead organism as if it were
    alive...the English word for that is something like anthropomorphism. Are we talking about the
    virus in an anthropohorhisic manner or can we now confer life to the dead?

    The application of the word "virus" to the nasty software programs that malicious computer dweebs
    like to turn loose on the internet is particularly apt. Like biological viruses, these programs are
    not alive, but they are capable of finding a host, reproducing themselves, and propagating
    themselves through a population via a vector. True, a flu virus is not "alive," but neither is it
    dead if you define "dead" as inert or harmless.

    Whether you like it or not, "Doctor," viruses exist and they cause disease, and your theory of
    disease is false at it's rotten core.

    --Rich

  8. "Rich Shewmaker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:


    A virus can live only within a living cell. Once the cell dies we can see the so called "viral
    particles" with an electronmicroscope but the critter is always dead. Scientists have never,
    ever, seen the first live virus and never outside a living cell.

    Viruses are not alive. But they can and do exist outside of cells and are infectious by
    definition. Electron microscopes can image viruses, not just "viral particles."

    At least we agree that viruses are not alive. Which means they have no respiration, do not eat,
    cannot move, and exist outside of cells only as organic material waiting for bacterial digestion.
    This also means that the viral particles have absolutely no way of entering a human body and getting
    into a living cell. This can only happen in the laboratory, not in real life.

    Quoted message said:

    The application of the word "virus" to the nasty software programs that malicious computer dweebs
    like to turn loose on the internet is particularly apt. Like biological viruses, these programs
    are not alive, but they are capable of finding a host, reproducing themselves, and propagating
    themselves through a population via a vector. True, a flu virus is not "alive," but neither is it
    dead if you define "dead" as inert or harmless.

    You have no evidence of what you state, only proposed theories. Just how are these dead particles
    capable of finding a host, reproducing themselves, and propagating themselves though a population
    via some unknown and ill defined vector? Again, theories to fit the model, and absolutely no
    scientific data to back up the claim.

    Quoted message said:

    Whether you like it or not, "Doctor," viruses exist and they cause disease, and your theory of
    disease is false at it's rotten core.

    --Rich

    The virus exits only within the imagination of man. The virus can only sometimes cause disease in
    the laboratory, never in real life.

    Dr. C. PhD.

  9. "drceephd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "Rich Shewmaker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message


    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:


    A virus can live only within a living cell. Once the cell dies we can see the so called "viral
    particles" with an electronmicroscope but the critter is always dead. Scientists have never,
    ever, seen the first live virus and never outside a living cell.

    Viruses are not alive. But they can and do exist outside of cells and


    are

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    infectious by definition. Electron microscopes can image viruses, not


    just

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    "viral particles."

    At least we agree that viruses are not alive. Which means they have no respiration, do not eat,
    cannot move, and exist outside of cells only as organic material waiting for bacterial digestion.
    This also means that the viral particles have absolutely no way of entering a human body and
    getting into a living cell. This can only happen in the laboratory, not in real life.

    Viruses have no respiration and do not eat. They have no ability to move under their own power, but
    they get carried far and wide by their environment. A jar of honey cannot move, either, but if you
    spill it on your kitchen floor and do not clean it up, it will soon be throughout your home, and
    beyond. Your idea that viruses do not exist outside of cells is quite wrong, as is the silly idea
    that they are food for bacteria. And of course, viruses can get into a living cell...that's how they
    reproduce. In real life.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    The application of the word "virus" to the nasty software programs that malicious computer
    dweebs like to turn loose on the internet is


    particularly

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    apt. Like biological viruses, these programs are not alive, but they are capable of finding a
    host, reproducing themselves, and propagating themselves through a population via a vector.
    True, a flu virus is not "alive," but neither is it dead if you define "dead" as inert or


    harmless.

    Quoted message said:


    You have no evidence of what you state, only proposed theories. Just how are these dead particles
    capable of finding a host, reproducing themselves, and propagating themselves though a population
    via some unknown and ill defined vector? Again, theories to fit the model, and absolutely no
    scientific data to back up the claim.

    The evidence abounds. It is known what mechanisms the viruses use to enter cells. It is known how
    the viruses use the cell's machinery to make copies of themselves. And the vectors by which viruses
    spread through a population differ from virus to virus, but are well understood. (Flu virus is
    airborne, West Nile virus is carried by mosquitos, and the adenoviruses are spread primarily via
    fomites, etc.)

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    Whether you like it or not, "Doctor," viruses exist and they cause


    disease,

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    and your theory of disease is false at it's rotten core.

    --Rich

    The virus exits only within the imagination of man. The virus can only sometimes cause disease in
    the laboratory, never in real life.

    Dr. C. PhD.

    You obviously are a total science illiterate. Your posts make you sound awfully ignorant. Why don't
    you go back to school or do some home study to get your knowledge at least up to high school level,
    and drop that phony "PhD" from your sig?

    --Rich

  10. (drceephd) said:


    At least we agree that viruses are not alive. Which means they have no respiration, do not eat,
    cannot move, and exist outside of cells only as organic material waiting for bacterial digestion.
    This also means that the viral particles have absolutely no way of entering a human body and
    getting into a living cell. This can only happen in the laboratory, not in real life.

    A = Something is not alive.

    B = Something has absolutely no way of entering a human body and getting into a living cell.

    You seem to believe that: If A, then B. (Since you used this to "prove" B about viruses.)

    If B is false and A is true about anything, though, then your ridiculous, fallacious assumption is
    proven wrong.

    How about mercury vapor?

    Quoted message said:

    The virus exits only within the imagination of man. The virus can only sometimes cause disease in
    the laboratory, never in real life.

    Well, as I'm sure has been suggested to you many, many times before, if you're so sure, then how
    about we inject a pure solution of adenovirus in saline into your nose? Or hepatitis C virus into
    your bloodstream? Or have you swallow a nice wad of Norwalk virus?

    PF

  11. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Rich Shewmaker said:


    "PF Riley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    (drceephd) said:


    At least we agree that viruses are not alive. Which means they have no respiration, do not eat,
    cannot move, and exist outside of cells only as organic material waiting for bacterial
    digestion. This also means that the viral particles have absolutely no way of entering a human
    body and getting into a living cell. This can only happen in the laboratory, not in real life.

    A = Something is not alive.

    B = Something has absolutely no way of entering a human body and getting into a living cell.

    You seem to believe that: If A, then B. (Since you used this to "prove" B about viruses.)

    If B is false and A is true about anything, though, then your ridiculous, fallacious assumption
    is proven wrong.

    How about mercury vapor?

    Quoted message said:

    The virus exits only within the imagination of man. The virus can only sometimes cause disease
    in the laboratory, never in real life.

    Well, as I'm sure has been suggested to you many, many times before, if you're so sure, then how
    about we inject a pure solution of adenovirus in saline into your nose? Or hepatitis C virus into
    your bloodstream? Or have you swallow a nice wad of Norwalk virus?

    PF

    Ebola would be more fun to watch. Or perhaps smallpox. Polio, of course, would be most appropriate,
    but it's a mild disease in 70-80% of cases. But then, the "doctor" is probably old enough to
    greatly increase the odds of getting the paralytic form of Polio.

    You guys are too merciful. Use rabies virus.

    -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
    correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
    shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

  12. (drceephd) said:

    The virus exits only within the imagination of man. The virus can only sometimes cause disease in
    the laboratory, never in real life.

    That is idiocy.

    Aribert Deckers
    --
    World Conference "Health Care Systems: Public and Private Management"

    ariplex.comama p0.htm

  13. "PF Riley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    (drceephd) said:


    At least we agree that viruses are not alive. Which means they have no respiration, do not eat,
    cannot move, and exist outside of cells only as organic material waiting for bacterial digestion.
    This also means that the viral particles have absolutely no way of entering a human body and
    getting into a living cell. This can only happen in the laboratory, not in real life.

    A = Something is not alive.

    B = Something has absolutely no way of entering a human body and getting into a living cell.

    You seem to believe that: If A, then B. (Since you used this to "prove" B about viruses.)

    If B is false and A is true about anything, though, then your ridiculous, fallacious assumption is
    proven wrong.

    How about mercury vapor?

    Quoted message said:

    The virus exits only within the imagination of man. The virus can only sometimes cause disease in
    the laboratory, never in real life.

    Well, as I'm sure has been suggested to you many, many times before, if you're so sure, then how
    about we inject a pure solution of adenovirus in saline into your nose? Or hepatitis C virus into
    your bloodstream? Or have you swallow a nice wad of Norwalk virus?

    PF

    Ebola would be more fun to watch. Or perhaps smallpox. Polio, of course, would be most appropriate,
    but it's a mild disease in 70-80% of cases. But then, the "doctor" is probably old enough to greatly
    increase the odds of getting the paralytic form of Polio.

    --Rich

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.