Truly dangerous and hyped up FluMist

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

Quoted message said:

*Physicians, nurses, family members, or anyone else coming in close

contact

Quoted message said:

with anyone with a weakened immune system should not receive FluMist.

THIS MEANS ALL THE SHOPPERS AT WALMART, CORRECT????

fda.govflumistqa.htmOpen ↗

Someone with a weakened immune system wouldn't be shopping at Walmart , would they?

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

Quoted message said:

Thanks to Donna Carrillo and Dr. Tenpenny for providing the links to the FluMist Package insert
and the FDA Q&A on FluMist so you can see for yourself how truly dangerous this hyped up new
"nasal vaccine" is.

Here's the link to the FluMist package insert -- fda.govinflmed061703LB.pdfOpen ↗

Are there certain people who should not receive FluMist?

As with any medication, individuals should check with their health care provider before receiving
any flu vaccines. According to the approved package insert, the following people should not get
the intranasal influenza vaccine:

*Adults 50 years of age or older, or children younger than 5 should not receive FluMist.

*FluMist should not be given for any reason to people with immune suppression, including those
with immune deficiency diseases, such as AIDS or cancer, asthma, allergies, diabetes, heart
disease, high blood

pressure, arthritis, or any disease, disorder or condition and people who are being treated with
any drugs.

Quoted message said:

*The safety of FluMist in people with asthma or other reactive airway diseases has not been
established, and therefore, is not recommended for use in patients with a history of reactive
airway problems.

*Additionally, FluMist should not be given to people with chronic underlying medical conditions
that may predispose them to severe flu infections. For these people, the injected vaccine is
indicated.

*Individuals with egg allergies should not receive this or any other flu vaccine.

*People who have health problems associated with heart disease, kidney disease, lung disease, or
metabolic diseases such as diabetes, anemia and other blood disorders should not receive FluMist.

*Because Reye syndrome in children has been associated with administration of aspirin during
influenza virus infections, FluMist is not recommended

in

Quoted message said:

children and adolescents 5-17 years of age if they are receiving aspirin

or

Quoted message said:

aspirin-containing therapy.

*Pregnant women (in their second or third trimesters during influenza season) should not receive
FluMist.

*Anyone with a history of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) should not receive FluMist.

*Physicians, nurses, family members, or anyone else coming in close

contact

Quoted message said:

with anyone with a weakened immune system should not receive FluMist.

THIS MEANS ALL THE SHOPPERS AT WALMART, CORRECT????

fda.govflumistqa.htmOpen ↗

$100,000,000.00 to develop and one FREE posting [censored] about it. Which opinion do you think is
backed up be science?

(john) said:

Thanks to Donna Carrillo and Dr. Tenpenny for providing the links to the FluMist Package insert and
the FDA Q&A on FluMist so you can see for yourself how truly dangerous this hyped up new "nasal
vaccine" is.

Here's the link to the FluMist package insert -- fda.govinflmed061703LB.pdfOpen ↗

Are there certain people who should not receive FluMist?

As with any medication, individuals should check with their health care provider before receiving
any flu vaccines. According to the approved package insert, the following people should not get the
intranasal influenza vaccine:

*Adults 50 years of age or older, or children younger than 5 should not receive FluMist.

*FluMist should not be given for any reason to people with immune suppression, including those with
immune deficiency diseases, such as AIDS or cancer, and people who are being treated with drugs
that cause immunosuppression.

*The safety of FluMist in people with asthma or other reactive airway diseases has not been
established, and therefore, is not recommended for use in patients with a history of reactive
airway problems.

*Additionally, FluMist should not be given to people with chronic underlying medical conditions
that may predispose them to severe flu infections. For these people, the injected vaccine is
indicated.

*Individuals with egg allergies should not receive this or any other flu vaccine.

*People who have health problems associated with heart disease, kidney disease, lung disease, or
metabolic diseases such as diabetes, anemia and other blood disorders should not receive FluMist.

*Because Reye syndrome in children has been associated with administration of aspirin during
influenza virus infections, FluMist is not recommended in children and adolescents 5-17 years of
age if they are receiving aspirin or aspirin-containing therapy.

*Pregnant women (in their second or third trimesters during influenza season) should not
receive FluMist.

*Anyone with a history of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) should not receive FluMist.

*Physicians, nurses, family members, or anyone else coming in close contact with anyone with a
weakened immune system should not receive FluMist.

THIS MEANS ALL THE SHOPPERS AT WALMART, CORRECT????

fda.govflumistqa.htmOpen ↗

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

Quoted message said:

Thanks to Donna Carrillo and Dr. Tenpenny for providing the links to the FluMist Package insert
and the FDA Q&A on FluMist so you can see for yourself how truly dangerous this hyped up new
"nasal vaccine" is.

Here's the link to the FluMist package insert -- fda.govinflmed061703LB.pdfOpen ↗

Are there certain people who should not receive FluMist?

As with any medication, individuals should check with their health care provider before receiving
any flu vaccines. According to the approved package insert, the following people should not get
the intranasal influenza vaccine:

*Adults 50 years of age or older, or children younger than 5 should not receive FluMist.

*FluMist should not be given for any reason to people with immune suppression, including those
with immune deficiency diseases, such as AIDS or cancer, and people who are being treated with
drugs that cause immunosuppression.

*The safety of FluMist in people with asthma or other reactive airway diseases has not been
established, and therefore, is not recommended for use in patients with a history of reactive
airway problems.

*Additionally, FluMist should not be given to people with chronic underlying medical conditions
that may predispose them to severe flu infections. For these people, the injected vaccine is
indicated.

*Individuals with egg allergies should not receive this or any other flu vaccine.

*People who have health problems associated with heart disease, kidney disease, lung disease, or
metabolic diseases such as diabetes, anemia and other blood disorders should not receive FluMist.

*Because Reye syndrome in children has been associated with administration of aspirin during
influenza virus infections, FluMist is not recommended

in

Quoted message said:

children and adolescents 5-17 years of age if they are receiving aspirin

or

Quoted message said:

aspirin-containing therapy.

*Pregnant women (in their second or third trimesters during influenza season) should not receive
FluMist.

*Anyone with a history of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) should not receive FluMist.

*Physicians, nurses, family members, or anyone else coming in close

contact

Quoted message said:

with anyone with a weakened immune system should not receive FluMist.

THIS MEANS ALL THE SHOPPERS AT WALMART, CORRECT????

No. Shoppers at Walmart are not coming in close contact. By close contact, they mean household
members or similar contacts, like when nurses and doctors take care of patients.

The list is actually very reassuring. It shows that the makers of the FluMist did their homework and
determined those people most likely to have increased risk from the vaccine. As we all know, no
vaccine 100% safe. FluMist is no exception. It is certainly much, much safer than getting the real
influenza, as shown by the studies and safe for the people who do not have a contraindication.

Jeff

In said:

Thanks to Donna Carrillo and Dr. Tenpenny for providing the links to the FluMist Package insert
and the FDA Q&A on FluMist so you can see for yourself how truly dangerous this hyped up new
"nasal vaccine" is.

I find Scudamore's obsession with FluMist fascinating. According to him, viruses don't cause
disease, and one of his greatest complaints about immunization injections is that they "bypass the
body's natural defenses."

So here we have FluMist, which is an aerosol (droplet) administration of a less-virulent form of the
same viruses which circulate naturally by -- drumroll -- aerosol droplets. If, as he often tells us,
viruses don't cause disease then FluMist is at worst a waste of money. If FluMist is, as he tells
us, dangerous (esp. because it causes a mild case of the disease which can be passed to others) then
he's been wrong all these years about viruses.

Choose.

Personally, I think he's flipping out because the nasal aerosol administration takes away his
ability to scare people about needles.

--
| "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a | completely unintentional side
| effect. " -- Linus Torvalds |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <[email hidden]> ----------+

gus said:

$100,000,000.00 to develop and one FREE posting [censored] about it. Which opinion do you think is
backed up be science?

What we need to know is whether the money follows the science, or the the science follows
the money....

--

best wishes etc,

Zeronic AT uk2 DOT net

Once upon a time, our fellow Jeff rambled on about "Re: Truly dangerous and hyped up FluMist." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

Quoted message said:

The list is actually very reassuring. It shows that the makers of the FluMist did their homework
and determined those people most likely to have increased risk from the vaccine. As we all know, no
vaccine 100% safe. FluMist is no exception. It is certainly much, much safer than getting the real
influenza, as shown by the studies and safe for the people who do not have a contraindication.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

The people most in need of the flu vaccine have a contraindication which indicates that the safer
FluMist is not safe for them.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

You geeks are full of [censored], as usual. 🙂

"... you have my sympathies" Science Officer Ash to Ripley, in the movie ALIEN.

Once upon a time, our fellow Jeff rambled on about "Re: Truly dangerous and hyped up FluMist." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

*Adults 50 years of age or older, or children younger than 5 should not receive FluMist.

Getting back to my original point: The people most in need of vaccinations to protect them against
viral disease agents, are advised not to receive FluMist.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha! I find that incredibly funny.

Because the rest of the people don't need to be vaccinated for the flu at all, unless they are a
pathetic excuse for a human being.

Any NORMAL healthy person with a strong immune system should not get the flu at all ever. People get
colds and the flu only when they are totally run down and are other wise chronically unhealthy.
Also, healthy people need to be in a closed environment, like an ocean liner, before they are likely
to be affected by viral disease agents.

Just my opinion. But, I am *right* as usual!
--
John Gohde,
Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!

Get started on improving your personal health and fitness, today.
tutorials.naturalhealthperspective.comtutorials.naturalhealthperspective.comOpen ↗
Offering easy to understand lessons that will change your life.

zeronic <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

gus said:

$100,000,000.00 to develop and one FREE posting [censored] about it. Which opinion do you think is
backed up be science?

What we need to know is whether the money follows the science, or the the science follows the
money....

LOL. Nicely put, and its science following the money every time with vaccines and most drugs.

john

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 16:09:19 +0100, zeronic <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

gus said:

$100,000,000.00 to develop and one FREE posting [censored] about it. Which opinion do you think is
backed up be science?

What we need to know is whether the money follows the science, or the the science follows the
money....

You will NEVER see any "proof" of this until there is an "Enron" in the drug business. The
"proof" will be one of the most carefully guarded secrets inthe business. Until then, it is best
to assume it is being run with the ethics of Enron. It is all about money. Big money begets the
worst of ethics.

For $100,000,000.00 you can buy the science you want. Scientists who sell out can make more money
than those who don't. Just keep looking through until you find a few who will do your bidding. For
$100,000,000.00 you can do a LOT of weeding out to get favorable results.

pronto

"John 'the Man'" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Once upon a time, our fellow Jeff rambled on about "Re: Truly dangerous and hyped up FluMist." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

Quoted message said:

The list is actually very reassuring. It shows that the makers of the FluMist did their homework
and determined those people most likely to

have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

increased risk from the vaccine. As we all know, no vaccine 100% safe. FluMist is no exception.
It is certainly much, much safer than getting

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

real influenza, as shown by the studies and safe for the people who do

not

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have a contraindication.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

The people most in need of the flu vaccine have a contraindication which indicates that the safer
FluMist is not safe for them.

Yeah, but it does not involve a needle. A lot of people who would not get the shot will get this
vaccine. Which means that they are much less likely to get influenza, which helps slow down the
spread of the illness.

So even the people who have countraindications to the vaccine benefit.

Jeff

Quoted message said:

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

You geeks are full of [censored], as usual. 🙂

"... you have my sympathies" Science Officer Ash to Ripley, in the movie ALIEN.

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

Quoted message said:

zeronic <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

gus said:

$100,000,000.00 to develop and one FREE posting [censored] about it. Which opinion do you think
is backed up be science?

What we need to know is whether the money follows the science, or the the science follows the
money....

LOL. Nicely put, and its science following the money every time with vaccines and most drugs.

You're confusing homeopathy and other alternative medicines with real medicine. Every treatment in
real medicine must be proven to work before it can be licensed. And all of the treatments coming out
today, are backed by science. For example, the makers of FluMist had to prove that their vaccine
worked before they could sell it.

Unlike, say, homeopathy, which has never been shown to work. I guess you can say that science does
not follow homeopathy, though. Because science is not involved with homeopathy at all.

Jeff

Quoted message said:

john

Once upon a time, our fellow Jeff rambled on about "Re: Truly dangerous and hyped up FluMist." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

The only person confused here is Jeff.

Just thought that you might want to know, Jeff. 🙂

Quoted message said:

You're confusing homeopathy and other alternative medicines with real medicine.

Real medicine has one-and-only one method of treatment called drugs.

Any other method of treatment that real Medicine uses is either surgery, a form of natural health,
or a form of alternative medicine. 🙂

Physical Therapy, for example, is obviously based on the natural therapy of physical exercise. And,
since the mode of treatment used by Physical Therapy is not drugs it should be classified as
Alternative Medicine rather than as real medicine.

Just thought that you might want to know, Jeff. 🙂

Quoted message said:

Every treatment in real medicine must be proven to work before it can be licensed.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha! You don't know too much do you, Jeff?

Quoted message said:

And all of the treatments coming out today, are backed by science.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha! You don't know too much do you, Jeff?

Quoted message said:

For example, the makers of FluMist had to prove that their vaccine worked before they
could sell it.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha! You don't know too much do you, Jeff? I already pointed out why you are an idiot on
this THREAD, Jeff. Do I have to do it again?

Quoted message said:

Unlike, say, homeopathy, which has never been shown to work. I guess you can say that science does
not follow homeopathy, though. Because science is not involved with homeopathy at all.

Excuse me, but I just posted two studies from two prestigious journals (BMJ and The Lancet) that
supports the effectiveness of homeopathy.

So, please stop posting your lies in public. Your bias is showing, Jeff!

Just my opinion. But, I am *right* as usual!

"John 'the Man'" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Once upon a time, our fellow Jeff rambled on about "Re: Truly dangerous and hyped up FluMist." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

The only person confused here is Jeff.

Just thought that you might want to know, Jeff. 🙂

Quoted message said:

You're confusing homeopathy and other alternative medicines with real medicine.

Real medicine has one-and-only one method of treatment called drugs.

Wrong. Treatments include occupational and physical therapy, dentistry, diet, excercise and surgery.

Quoted message said:

Any other method of treatment that real Medicine uses is either surgery, a form of natural health,
or a form of alternative medicine. 🙂

Physical Therapy, for example, is obviously based on the natural therapy of physical exercise.

Wrong. Physical therapy is based on principles of anatomy and physiology. Physical excercise is part
of it, though.

Quoted message said:

And, since the mode of treatment used by Physical Therapy is not drugs it should be classified as
Alternative Medicine rather than as real medicine.

Wrong. The difference between conventional medicine and alternative medicine is that the things in
conventional medicine have been proven to work. Physical therapy is a proven part of conventional
medicine. It is used extensively after surgery and injury.

Quoted message said:

Just thought that you might want to know, Jeff. 🙂

Quoted message said:

Every treatment in real medicine must be proven to work before it can be licensed.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha! You don't know too much do you, Jeff?

Quoted message said:

And all of the treatments coming out today, are backed by science.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha! You don't know too much do you, Jeff?

Quoted message said:

For example, the makers of FluMist had to prove that their vaccine worked before they could
sell it.

Ha, ... Hah, Ha! You don't know too much do you, Jeff? I already pointed out why you are an idiot
on this THREAD, Jeff. Do I have to do it again?

Quoted message said:

Unlike, say, homeopathy, which has never been shown to work. I guess you can say that science
does not follow homeopathy, though. Because science

is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

not involved with homeopathy at all.

Excuse me, but I just posted two studies from two prestigious journals (BMJ and The Lancet) that
supports the effectiveness of homeopathy.

So, please stop posting your lies in public. Your bias is showing, Jeff!

Just my opinion. But, I am *right* as usual!

John 'the Man' <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Just thought that you might want to know, Jeff. 🙂

Jeff is a pharma shill, he knows the truth and has to lie daily. Power first, babies way down the
list whale.toputz.htmlOpen ↗

Nice guy!

john

Once upon a time, our fellow Jeff rambled on about "Re: Truly dangerous and hyped up FluMist." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nursing retorts, thusly ...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The only person confused here is Jeff.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You're confusing homeopathy and other alternative medicines with real medicine.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Real medicine has one-and-only one method of treatment called drugs.

Quoted message said:

Wrong. Treatments include occupational and physical therapy, dentistry, diet, excercise
and surgery.

Wrong!

Dentistry is dentistry.

Surgeons practice surgery. Surgery has been separated from medicine since the Middle Ages. It is
about time that you figure it out!

Diet and exercise is a part of natural health.

Physical therapy is alternative medicine.

Occupational therapy is well, Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

All I see here is that some medicine geek named Jeff is trying to claim credit for treatments that
have nothing to do with medicine.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Any other method of treatment that real Medicine uses is either surgery, a form of natural
health, or a form of alternative medicine. 🙂

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Physical Therapy, for example, is obviously based on the natural therapy of physical exercise.

Quoted message said:

Wrong. Physical therapy is based on principles of anatomy and physiology. Physical excercise is
part of it, though.

Anatomy and physiology is *not* therapy. Just thought that you might want to know. 🙂 Anatomy and
physiology is what academics teach in order to justify their pathetic little lives. Anatomy is a
dead science.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And, since the mode of treatment used by Physical Therapy is not drugs it should be classified as
Alternative Medicine rather than as real medicine.

Quoted message said:

Wrong. The difference between conventional medicine and alternative medicine is that the things in
conventional medicine have been proven to work.

In other words, medicine tries to steal other methods of treatment once science finally gets around
to proving that they actually work. Ha, ... Hah, Ha! I agree completely.

Physical Therapy should be classified as Alternative Medicine rather than as real medicine.

Quoted message said:

Physical therapy is a proven part of conventional medicine. It is used extensively after surgery
and injury.

Correct: medicine has tried to claim credit for Physical therapy even though it clearly is a form of
alternative medicine. 🙂

Just thought that you might want to know, Jeff. 🙂