Swine Flu Vaccine - Would you get it?

[Phil_dB]

Hasn't anyone studied the chinese horoscope? Can't believe no-one has raised this yet. Sounds crazy but bare with me:


2007 - Chinese year of the Chicken - Bird Flu Pandemic devastates parts of Asia

2008 - Chinese year of the Horse - Equine Influenza decimates Australian racing

2009 - Chinese year of the Pig - Swine Flu Pandemic kills hundreds of pigs around the globe.


It gets worse......


next year....


2010 - Chinese year of the Còck !

[ducasi]

Thimerosal contains 49.6 percent mercury

Thimerosal is used as a preservative, and is only a tiny portion of the vaccine. Each dose has about 25 micrograms of mercury in it. That's 0.025 milligrams, or 0.000025 grams. And if you like fish, you've probably eaten much more mercury this year than you'll get from a vaccine. Oh, and it's also in all the vegetables we eat – even organic ones.

Vaccines given to children and pregnant women do not contain thimerosal as a preservative and so only contain trace level of mercury, if any.

[David Franklin]

Thimerosal is used as a preservative, and is only a tiny portion of the vaccine. Each dose has about 25 micrograms of mercury in it. That's 0.025 milligrams, or 0.000025 grams. And if you like fish, you've probably eaten much more mercury this year than you'll get from a vaccine.

For comparison, one standard tin of tuna typically contains something like 45 micrograms.

(Calculated using FDA 2002-2004 average of 0.383 ppm for all canned tuna types).

Studies have also found Thimerosal typically leaves the body much quicker than other mercury compounds (therefore causing less potential damage than a simple dosage calculation might indicate).

[Badders]

Vaccines given to children and pregnant women do not contain thimerosal as a preservative and so only contain trace level of mercury, if any.

Actually the vaccine which is currently being offered to pregnant woman DOES contain Thiomersal. You can ask for the other vaccine but we shouldn't be offered the one with Thiomersal at all.

I am really struggling with my decision, should I have the vaccine or not? I don't want to put the health of my unborn baby at risk by being injected by a vaccine which has not been tested fully, and certainly not on pregnant woman.

My GP doesn't have supplies as yet, but she did say that she certainly wouldn't recommend the vaccine to me just now as it's not been fully tested and the long term effects, if any, are not known. If need be she'll sign me off work until things calm down or until my baby has been born.

The decision to vaccinate or not has to be an individual choice.

J

[Phil_dB]

There's a lot of evidence that D3 can significantly reduce your chances of catching Swine Flu (or any type of flu).

D3 has also helped people who suffer from S.A.D. As ultimately, lack of sunshine, or UVB, causes a lack of D3 in your system.

I'm currently taken 5,000 IU of these sunshine pills a day...

[ducasi]

There's a lot of evidence that D3 can significantly reduce your chances of catching Swine Flu (or any type of flu).

D3 has also helped people who suffer from S.A.D. As ultimately, lack of sunshine, or UVB, causes a lack of D3 in your system.

I'm currently taken 5,000 IU of these sunshine pills a day...

You know that vitamin D is toxic?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...of-fluids.html

[ducasi]

In direct reply to these videos about Guillain-Barré syndrome, see this page...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...-mild-flu.html

You are 40 times more likely to get Guillain-Barré syndrome by catching the 'flu, than by being vaccinated.

[Phil_dB]

You know that vitamin D is toxic?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...of-fluids.html

"Vitamin D" is not a vitamin, - it's a hormone.


I'm taking 5000 IU ED, - toxicity has been recorded at 40,000 + IU

Lots of things in life are toxic, especially if you overdose on them
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/69/5/842


Lastly, the study you've linked to which states that D3 is an ineffective preventative against flu; only 2000 IU was used. The effective dose is 5000 IU, so no suprises there that it had little effect

There's many studies showing that, at 5000 IU, it has a significant effect at decreasing your chances of catching flu (plus other benefits), I'll dig out some links if you like. (nb: of course, i'm not for one second saying that it should be substituted for the vaccine however).

[Dottie]

"Vitamin D" is not a vitamin, - it's a hormone.

Could you elaborate on this?

[Phil_dB]

Could you elaborate on this?

All vitamins (apart from D) cannot be made by our bodies, so must be obtained from food. D3 is a steroid hormone; given UVB exposure on our skin, our bodies can make it on its own.

Is this the sort of info you're after? I can't elaborate much further anyway as i'm far from an expert on the subject! My limited knowledge on this comes from an interest in health & fitness.

[Dottie]

All vitamins (apart from D) cannot be made by our bodies, so must be obtained from food. D3 is a steroid hormone; given UVB exposure on our skin, our bodies can make it on its own.

Is this the sort of info you're after? I can't elaborate much further anyway as i'm far from an expert on the subject! My limited knowledge on this comes from an interest in health & fitness.

Thanks. I was under the impression it is not a hormone itself but a hormone precursor.

[Phil_dB]

Thanks. I was under the impression it is not a hormone itself but a hormone precursor.

A pro-hormone? You may very well be right,- google will know for sure

[Phil_dB]

Dottie you're right, D3 is a prohormone.

[batnurse]

Lastly, the study you've linked to which states that D3 is an ineffective preventative against flu; only 2000 IU was used. The effective dose is 5000 IU, so no suprises there that it had little effect

There's many studies showing that, at 5000 IU, it has a significant effect at decreasing your chances of catching flu (plus other benefits), I'll dig out some links if you like. (nb: of course, i'm not for one second saying that it should be substituted for the vaccine however).

Just asked my bosses (Consultants in Virology) and they say it's tosh. All evidence they've seen in anecdotal. Unless it's in a peer reviewed journal it doesn't count as scientific evidence...

It is difficult to overdose on vitamin D, but as it's fat soluble your body doesn't excrete it easily, so toxic effects are cumlative. The main toxic effect is hypercalcemia, and symptoms include: anorexia, nausea, and vomiting, followed by polyuria/polydipsia (excessive drinking and weeing), weakness, nervousness, and pruritus (itchy skin), leading to renal failure. Proteinuria, urinary casts, azotemia, and metastatic calcifications (especially in the kidneys) can also occur.

[Phil_dB]

It was anecdotal evidence from people who have seen the benefits for themselves persuaded me to start taking d3. People who had felt tired and sometimes depressed feeling much happier and have more much energy since taking D3. Others say they haven't had a cold since supplementing.

The weather turns cold and the sun disappears, everyone starts catching the colds etc, - from my small amount of research it made sense to a layman like me that deficient levels of d3 and the immune system not working as well was a contributing factor.


I would like to know HOW cumlative the toxic effects are... - I'll see if I can find out..... (unless you can? )


Obviously hypercalcemia isn't something to take lightly, - but I have read that most nutritionalist and researchers agree that supplementing with 1000 IU of D3 ED poses little risk, - I have just started taking half that amount (and I will probably stop when the sun comes back out). As said above, the published cases of D3 toxicity involve the intake of more than 40,000 IU every day.

With that in mind, do you thinik that I should take less than 5000 IU ED?

Or cycle it (I was planning to, seasonally, but maybe rethink the cycle?).

Or stop altogether?

Surely a deficiency of D3 in the system it not good either?

[Dottie]

It is difficult to overdose on vitamin D, but as it's fat soluble your body doesn't excrete it easily, so toxic effects are cumlative.

Absolutely! Supplementing with any fat soluble vitamins above the recommended level requires caution - even with nutritional supplements perceived as being "safe" such as cod liver oil. Taken in excess over a period of time can result in toxic effects such as those described by batnurse.

http://www.eatwell.gov.uk/healthydie...rals/vitamind/

[Phil_dB]

Absolutely! Supplementing with any fat soluble vitamins above the recommended level requires caution - even with nutritional supplements perceived as being "safe" such as cod liver oil. Taken in excess over a period of time can result in toxic effects such as those described by batnurse.

http://www.eatwell.gov.uk/healthydie...rals/vitamind/

A quote from the 'review of vit d' pdf link from the bottom of that ^^ link:
http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/evm_d.pdf


"For guidance purposes only, a level of 0.025 mg/day supplementary vitamin D would not be expected
to cause adverse effects in the general population."


I am supplementing with HALF that amount.

(..I get no sunshine at the moment, although I do eat oily fish twice a week.)


Do you think I should I be concerned? Should I cycle the dosage?

Who would have thought that vitamin supplements would be so complicated!

[Phil_dB]

I don't know if it was Dottie or Batnurse who sent me that little rep comment? - but thank-you!

Anyway, sorry, didn't mean to derail this thread, - back on topic!

[Dottie]

I don't know if it was Dottie or Batnurse who sent me that little rep comment? - but thank-you!

Anyway, sorry, didn't mean to derail this thread, - back on topic!

I should have signed it - forgot you couldn't see rep.

Back on topic...

My daughter had her swine flu jab today.

[StokeBloke]

I'm just telling you the ingredients, take 3 minutes to read this article for your own sake if not for your kids.

Fair point. Thanks for sharing this Alan. I read it. Including the part that said:

It is only unscientific opinions and pharmaceutical propaganda which have propelled the mythological validity, safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

One word - Polio, actually make that two words - Polio, Smallpox, actually make that three words - Polio, Smallpox, Tetanus, actually make that four words - Polio, Smallpox, Tetanus, Malaria, actually make that fiv....

I have a problem when it comes to statements like "It is only.."! This website seems to fall foul of the usual scaremongering theories and websites in its totally inability to give a balanced view. I am not saying that some of the information contained within the page is not true, but which parts are true, which parts are gross exaggerations and which parts are just misleading *shrug* I don't know! It is clear to me that the writer has an agenda, and that agenda is NOT "what is a balanced and reasonable assessment of this situation".

So, while the info may be of some use, I am unsure what parts are and what parts are not. I personally feel the usefulness of the article is very limited and the info needs to be taken in context of all the other information that is also available.

Demanding a double blind placebo trial of a vaccine designed to combat a current threat is just an unworkable request in my opinion. If people were dying of Swine Flu whilst this trial was taking place, what then? Let's take the three, four, five years it usually takes to test medication and release it as safe after the virus has died out - very useful. That would be a government/pharmaceutical/military conspiracy too no doubt

Life is not safe. Life is a constant game of risk assessment. Personally I will use these facts(?) as a part of my risk assessment, also as part of my assessment I will take into account my personal lack of Polio, Tetanus, Malaria, Smallpox, Mumps, Measles and God knows how many other critters the capitalists pigs have selfishly deprived me from experiencing first hand