Skip to main content

Pandemic flu in particular, and public health in general, is a subject I hate to see politicized. Up until now, only Dick Armey has been foolish enough to do so. Armey's schtick was this:

"In September or October there will be a hyped up outbreak of the swine flu which they’ll say is as bad as the bubonic plague to scare the bed-wetters to vote for healthcare reform," said Mr Armey. "That is the only way they can push something on to the American people that the American people don’t want."

There's no "there" there, of course. And now the next iteration of made up stuff is noted by the NY Times, though as is often the case with traditional media, wrongly assigned solely to the internet:

And, in the rancor over health insurance reform, unfounded rumors are spreading that the Obama administration will make swine flu shots mandatory. Administration officials have emphatically denied that. But a recent decision by New York State to make them mandatory for all hospital employees has reinvigorated those rumors on the Internet.

As a point of fact, the internet is where rumors spread on cable TV get debunked. For Exhibit A, look no further than Fox News. Fanning the flames of ignorance is priminent nut job Glenn Beck, this time turning to "you can't trust the government" to explain the recent protests in NY over mandatory flu shots.

Mandatory vaccinations have been standard procedure in health care settings all over the country, less by governments than by employers. In fact, it has also been American Public Health Association for 20 years:

Recommends that institutions that train health professionals, deliver health care, or provide laboratory or other medical support services require appropriate immunizations for personnel at risk for contracting or transmitting vaccine-preventable illnesses;

and this APHA article from 2006 is an excellent discussion of the issue:

Low annual influenza vaccination rates among health care workers are putting patients, workers and the public at risk for flu infections and must be improved to prevent spread of the disease, according to new federal guidelines.

The influenza vaccination guidelines, published in February by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, not only reiterate the importance of yearly vaccination for health care workers, but also offer specific strategies for boosting vaccination rates. The recommendations include making nasal vaccine available for workers who fear needles, offering vaccine education that spells out the importance of protecting others from infection and providing free vaccines so cost is not a barrier for any health care worker.

When New York State moved to make flu shots mandatory last month, some health care workers protested. In a very good review of the subject on CBS' website, Declan McCullagh notes:

While no state has gone as far as New York, many other institutions have grappled with the concept of mandatory vaccination. The University of Iowa required all staff to be vaccinated for H1N1, but then backed down in the face of a union lawsuit. The University of Alabama requires proof of meningitis vaccination, without any obvious exceptions. Protests are planned in London on October 3 against mandatory vaccination.

All members of the U.S. military will receive the H1N1 vaccine starting in October, according to an American Forces Press Service article. Massachusetts is encouraging its health care workers to be vaccinated against seasonal influenza by December 15, but isn't mandating it; its public health commissioner has even sent out a statement trying to "dispel rumors" about "forced vaccination."

An article last year in the Harvard Law Review suggests that vaccination should be viewed as two different types: inoculation against easily-transmitted airborne diseases, and inoculation against diseases where the person can more easily prevent infection, such as sexually transmitted diseases. There are stronger arguments for mandatory vaccination in the first category than the second, the article argues:

"It makes sense to create this two-tiered system in which medically necessary vaccines are linked with narrower exemptions and practically necessary vaccines are instead linked with generous exemptions. So, vaccine laws could explicitly state that parents can exempt their children from hepatitis B and HPV vaccines with no questions asked, unlike vaccines for diseases listed elsewhere in the statute."

McCullagh also correctly points out that this is traditionally an issue that the states and not the Federal government is involved with, despite Beck's innuendo.

Mandatory vs. voluntary vaccination is an interesting debate in and of itself. But like rumors of FEMA detention camps for bird flu, the paranoid delusions of Glenn Beck don't lend themselves to rational debate.

"Who do we believe? The doctors, the nurses that say, 'wait, hey, you ain't giving it to me,' or the government, who says everybody has to have it?"

The government (in this case, the government of NY State, not the Feds) didn't say everybody has to have it, just health care workers. As to how it plays out, that remains to be seen. But the fact is that the current stats on flu vaccine for health care workers at ~50% annually are pretty disappointing. From the 2006 APHA article:

"We should be role models," said Archer, who has gotten a yearly flu shot since his freshman year of college, first because his football coach required it, and later because as a medical student he started thinking about his part in flu control. "I don’t think there’s any question that we have to practice what we preach. We have to clean up our own house first."

Amen, brother. My arm is sore from yesterday's seasonal flu shot. I don't intend to give flu to my patients, and in support of that, I expect my hospital to have an excellent track record for vaccination this year.

When the H1N1 vaccine gets here, I'll be rolling up my sleeve again. It's the least I can do for the people I work with and the patients I care for.

And the fact that wingnuts Armey and Beck would choose to politicize this, suggesting that it's an example of government lying? I'm shocked, shocked that there's gambling in this casino.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:00 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  What is the over and under (16+ / 0-)

    on the number of days before Beck starts warning his viewers about black helicopters?

    "You can never guarantee victory, but you can guarantee defeat."--Hall of Fame baseball writer Leonard Koppett.

    by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:01:42 AM PDT

    •  He hasn't? (5+ / 0-)

      Now that's shocking ;-)

      "The revolution's just an ethical haircut away..." Billy Bragg

      by grannyhelen on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:05:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  he's no Howard Beale (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Matt Z

        Program Director: Take 2, cue Howard.

        Beale: I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It's a depression. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel's worth; banks are going bust; shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter; punks are running wild in the street, and there's nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do, and there's no end to it.

        We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat. And we sit watching our TVs while some local newscaster tells us that today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that's the way it's supposed to be!

        We all know things are bad -- worse than bad -- they're crazy.

        It's like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don't go out any more. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we're living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, "Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials, and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone."

        Well, I'm not going to leave you alone.

        I want you to get mad!

        I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot. I don't want you to write to your Congressman, because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crime in the street.

        All I know is that first, you've got to get mad.

        You've gotta say, "I'm a human being, goddammit! My life has value!"

        So, I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell,

        "I'm as mad as hell,

        and I'm not going to take this anymore!!"

        Beck is the anti-Howard Beale

    •  He's thinning the herd. (10+ / 0-)

      First we have nut-jobs who won't cooperate with the census, thus causing their districts to be unrepresented and underfunded. Now we have nut-jobs who won't get the vaccine, thus increasing the odds that they will die from the flu. I am amazed at the extent that Beck and Limbaugh can convince their fans that the help that others are trying to give them should be avoided the plague.

      Hey Republicans, what part of "Option" don't you get?

      by kitebro on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:45:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  39 (0+ / 0-)

      (-2.12, -5.33)Bill Maher was right, and I wish BondDad would come back.

      by terrypinder on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:49:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Coloreds moving "into position" in the capitol... (0+ / 0-)
    •  We could help him along (0+ / 0-) spreading a rumor that the H1N1 vaccine turns people into Obamabots that support everything Obama does. Inspire them to resist getting the vaccination and allow natural selection to take its course.

      "The survival value of intelligence is that it allows us to extinct a bad idea, before the idea extincts us." -- Karl Popper

      by eyeswideopen on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 12:05:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I love Beck's opening lines. (11+ / 0-)

    You watch Fox and you can't believe it's happening.  That your instincts are correct and it's NOT happening isn't allowed as an possibility.

    Only some conservatives are racist. The rest are merely enabling racists, allying with racists, and hoping they win the next election with racism.

    by Inland on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:05:23 AM PDT

  •  I won't be rolling up my sleeve (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    zmom, RenMin, Leftcandid, LouP

    Most, if not all, vaccines use animal products, including fluids from calf skins, embryonic fluid from chicks, and cells derived from monkey kidneys. And, of course, they are extensively tested on animals who are then summarily killed and incinerated after living their entire lives in a tiny cage.

    So this vegan may get H1N1, and I may suffer, but at least no animals had to suffer alongside me.

    Now I don't know but I been told/it's hard to run with the weight of gold
    Other hand I heard it said/it's just as hard with the weight of lead

    by ekthesy on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:05:50 AM PDT

  •  My fear is that the H1N1 vaccine will be (41+ / 0-)

    tainted with active strains of the Gay virus.  Next thing you know, we're all dressed in rhinestones like a repressed homosexual Republican Congressman in a dance contest.

    Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!

    by bigtimecynic on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:06:40 AM PDT

  •  So what on Beck?? More important.. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drewfromct, SaraBeth, RenMin, Oh Mary Oh

    We need to spend our time contacting Senate Dems who voted againsr Rockafeller and organizing to mount primaries against them , AND more importanltly the White House to make sure that the reform we voted on gets more than just some half-baked "words of support."

  •  Natural Selection (9+ / 0-)

    If all the Beck followers refuse flu shots over the next hundreds of thousands of years we should have fewer right wing idiots to deal with.

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:07:34 AM PDT

  •  I'm actually and rightly scared to death (19+ / 0-)

    of H1N1 and will get all flu shots.

    I have asthma and get everything it seems.

    I kinda want to survive this winter.

    "I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent." - Ghandi

    by Clytemnestra on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:09:45 AM PDT

  •  Government is only 'Lying'... (17+ / 0-)

    Government is only 'lying' when it's not Glenn Beck's party in office.

    When it's Glenn Beck's party in office (God forbid), then it's 'How Dare You Question Our Leaders, You Traitor!'

  •  Maybe Times writers have better things to do with (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dkosdan, RenMin

    their time than watch Glenn Beck.

    Free speech? Yeah, I've heard of that. Have you?

    by dinotrac on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:09:57 AM PDT

  •  my Dr. said I want have to take the H1N1 shot (19+ / 0-)

    because I have the H1N1 now. My 7 year old Grand daughter tested + Sunday her Mom and I went Tuesday both of us have it now,he did the nasal swab to be sure, I was the oldest at 63 to have the flu in his office.this is my second day on Tamiflu, so if you have chills head aches hurt all over get your a$$ to the Dr.. and by all means take the flu shot the R don't need any damn health care!!

    "I want to be in Kentucky when the end of the world comes, because it's always 20 years behind" -Mark Twain

    by vet on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:10:41 AM PDT

  •  My employers pay for our flu shots (8+ / 0-)

    We have a nurse that comes to our office and gives them.  Spouses and kids are welcome to come too.  It is voluntary but encouraged.  We have a very low instance of illness in our office due to influenza and for 3 out of the last 5 years it is the 40 yr old single dentist who doesn't get immunized that gets it.  Swine flu is being offered too.  I'll be in line for that one as well.  Thank you to my employer for helping to keep us healthy and productive.

    "My brothers keeper"

    by Reetz on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:11:05 AM PDT

  •  Let Me Dissent (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maxschell, dkosdan, martydd, tcandew

    No, I don't buy Beck et al's crazy conspiracy theories, but I do object to mandatory vaccinations, particularly for a disease that is usually relatively benign such as the flu.  I still remember back in the 70s -- they were giving flu shots free at my law school, and everyone thought I was crazy for refusing to get one.  Well, I didn't get the flu (I've had it maybe once in the last 30 years, without ever getting a flu shot) and some people ended up getting Guillane-Barre syndrome from the shots -- not many, but why take a chance?

    I just don't want to inject a foreign substance in my body, and shouldn't be required to by the state or my employer.

    I could see it if there were truly an emergency situation, or a highly virulent disease (say Ebola?), but not for the flu.

    "[W]e shall see the reign of witches pass over . . . and the people, recovering their true spirit, restore their government to its true principles." Jefferson

    by RenMin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:11:34 AM PDT

    •  While you may have never had the symptoms of hte (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      chances are that you have definitely passed it on in the last 30 years because you didn't get vaccinated and possible thus contributed to the death of someone else.  Congrats.

      You never know who will show up at Netroots Nation. Will you be there?

      by ETinKC on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:42:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm quite confident that didn't happen (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        But neither one of us can prove it so I won't argue with you.  I'll just hang my head in shame.

        Is the charge manslaughter?  Negligent homicide?

        "[W]e shall see the reign of witches pass over . . . and the people, recovering their true spirit, restore their government to its true principles." Jefferson

        by RenMin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:01:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  On what basis are you "quite confident"? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dkosdan, QuestionAuthority

          You have none.

          Granted, we can't directly link someone's infection to you. But it's proven fact that the more unvaccinated people are running around, the more easily diseases are able to spread from person to person (because there is a higher chance of two unvaccinated people coming into contact with each other then). So lots of people not getting vaccinated perpetuates and accelerates the spread of infectious disease. You might not directly have caused someone's death, but you might have contributed without knowing it.

          •  Depends what the "infectious disease" is. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            In this case, even the CDC's own numbers demonstrate that the number of people infected will be similar to those normally infected by the flu.  Sorry, the case has not been made for anyone to take a personal risk on a biologic that has not been sufficiently tested.

            Send your old shoes to the new George W. Bush library.

            by maxschell on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:43:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Prove it. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Since we know you can't, RenMin's point stands.  No one should be forced to take a vaccine for a disease that even the CDC predicts will be within the normal range of seasonal infection.

        Send your old shoes to the new George W. Bush library.

        by maxschell on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:41:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Guess what disease kills far more people... (5+ / 0-)

      than Ebola and usually most other infectious diseases?


      It doesn't have to be particularly deadly to kill a lot of people, because it's so infectious.

      You might have a point if there were a really serious risk associated with vaccines, but the risks associated with them are far outweighed by the risks associated with infectious disease. So "why take a chance"? Because you're taking a bigger chance by not doing it.

    •  Selfishness (2+ / 0-)

      Good for you that you don't want a foreign substance in your body.

      How sad that you are willing to risk the lives of infants, the elderly, and the immunocompromised to achieve your selfish desire. holding the line against the siege

      by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:18:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yawn. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Flu comes and flu goes.  This biologic has not been sufficiently tested.  You can go ahead and have them inject you and your family with it, and good luck to you.  Others see this for what it is, and will abstain.

        Guess how much PHRMA has already made from this scare in sales of adjuvant alone?  $700MM.

        It's amazing to me that people who are fighting so strongly against PHRMA, health insurance and big business for the public option for healthcare reform, are so ready to blindly trust the same players when it comes to vaccines.  


        Send your old shoes to the new George W. Bush library.

        by maxschell on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:47:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  NO SHOT... NO WORK, period. (0+ / 0-)

      Just like second hand smoke only much more serious, you don't get to be irresponsible and then work as a healthcare worker potentially spreading the disease to the uninfected, sorry.

    •  The Flu is NOT Benign (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      true influenza can absolutely knock you on your can, and as another poster pointed out, it causes more deaths due to infectious disease than many other well known and much scarier viruses.

      Benign? It takes more than my fingers and toes to count the patients I've seen who had serious complications of the flu, being on ventilators, winding up with residual lung disease, oh, yeah, and who died.

      So get a clue, please.

      Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - W S Coffin

      by stitchmd on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 02:49:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Let me ask you this, Mr Beck (10+ / 0-)

    Assume you're a patient in the hospital. Your immune system is already compromised by whatever medical condition caused your admission in the first place. Which healthcare workers would you prefer to be providing your care.....theose that have been vaccinated for H1N1, or those that may  have been exposed to it and can now transmit it to you, in your weakened condition?

    If healthcare providers are down with the flu, who takes care of the rest of us, huh Glenn?????

  •  So why ARE the NY workers protesting? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RenMin, Oh Mary Oh

    that's not manufactured, that's real.

    "He's like any other president -- he's a politician and he's got to do what politicians do." Rev. Jeremiah Wright

    by PhillyGal on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:12:35 AM PDT

    •  they wanted to be at the table (5+ / 0-)

      for discussion. Can't argue with that. But the issue is bringing out a lot of misinformation that ususally goes unremarked on, even within HCW.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:29:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It might also be (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        that this issue is acting as a surrogate for some other aspect of their working conditions, one that's either "undiscussable" or that wouldn't have any resonance with the public.

        I remember reading some years ago about a telephone company that had strained labor relations with its outside-plant technicians (the people who work on customer sites). There were all kinds of complaints about pay and other typical things, but the strange thing was that pay was more than competitive and most working conditions were pretty good. The problem turned out to be that management was setting standards for how long a particular job should take based on unrealistic, best-case conditions; they weren't taking into account that a tech who arrived at the site might have to wait half an hour for the one person with the keys to the wiring closet to get back from lunch, for example. Eventually management came up with more realistic standards, and the trouble went away.

        There is nothing so practical as a good theory—Kurt Lewin

        by ebohlman on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:22:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah right. Sorry, they know what this is about. (0+ / 0-)

        They've seen it before.  And they know this biologic has not been sufficiently tested.

        As I noted above, it is amazing to me that Kossacks are on the one hand so willing to trust the big PHRMA vaccine makers on their manufacture of this biologic, and yet know that on the other hand these same players are interested in preventing fair healthcare reform at all costs.

        As I have pointed out to you in other posts, PHRMA made $700 MM from the production of adjuvant alone and this was entirely based on the fear ginned up in April 2009.

        Can you say cognitive dissonance?

        The Nurses' groups are demanding adequate testing.  They know this vaccine has been rolled out way too fast.  There is nothing "Glenn Beck" about it.  They want safety for their members.

        Send your old shoes to the new George W. Bush library.

        by maxschell on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:52:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  My important meeting was cancelling this morning (17+ / 0-)

    for the third time.  Because the person I need to meet with has twins and one of 'em sick plus her husband sick, and two confirmed cases of H1N1 in the kids daycare.

    I told her thank you for not sharing.

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:13:05 AM PDT

    •  Good on your business contact (4+ / 0-)

      I wish more people were as responsible and kept their germs at home. Unfortunately our work culture seems to regard it as heroic when people drag their sneezing, sorry asses out of their beds and into the office.

      I used to work in a classic cube farm and the flu/cold of the week was passed around like candy. Employers could do us all a favor by encouraging sick employees to stay home, providing means for them to work from home, and reinstituting sick days (which my last 3 employers have not offered).

  •  These guys would politicize diarrhea (10+ / 0-)

    Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore

    by Horsehead on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:14:38 AM PDT

  •  Um. (12+ / 0-)

    Just to apply to the nursing program at the school I want to go to I have had to get a battery of immunizations.  Tetanus, pertussis, rubella, measles, and Hep-B.  Health care workers have to be immunized.  It's sort of part of the job.

    "In the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick." -Barack Obama

    by electricgrendel on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:14:39 AM PDT

  •  I will get the standard shot and the H1N1 shot, (13+ / 0-)

    as will my children.  It simply seems like the prudent thing to do. I realize that the vaccine for H1N1 is untested, but from what I understand so is the standard flu vaccine; every year it is modified to fight off the anticipated dominant strains for the coming season.  

    Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!

    by bigtimecynic on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:15:30 AM PDT

  •  Part of me hopes the wingnuts (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RichM, SaraBeth

    forgo vaccinations. I just hope they don't clog up our emergency rooms because they chose to get sick.

    The weak in courage is strong in cunning-William Blake

    by beltane on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:15:37 AM PDT

  •  These guys would feel real comfortable (9+ / 0-)

    in the middle ages, walking around
    and whipping each other with sticks.

  •  I'm not seeing the downside here... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SaraBeth, amk for obama

    So, the Birthers, Fundies and Nut Jobs don't take the vaccine and end up sick.  Don't fucking ask for any government help if you can't pay your medical bill.  What am I missing?

    "Barack Obama stripped millions of Americans of their right to not have a black President." - Tim F. on Balloon Juice

    by RichM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:17:01 AM PDT

  •  Remember waterboarding (7+ / 0-)

    Remember when that right-wing talk radio guy had himself waterboarded to demonstrate that it wasn't really torture, only to discover that, yeah, it is pretty darn horrifying. The only way some of these nutters will ever understand the serious nature H1N1 is when they contract it themselves. They are incapable of empathy. Until then, the virus is a vast left-wing conspiracy to be used for their own political agitprop.

  •  Kind of fun to watch an inferior product, (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SaraBeth, Oh Mary Oh, annieli, HawkRock33

    Fox News, that is, with Beck, the worst car out on the lot, like a Pinto or a Pacer, and everyone walking by, shaking their heads, and chuckling at the catastrophe of a wreck that everyone and their grandmother knows is absolute shit.

  •  My wife works in a hospital, and a surprising (13+ / 0-)

    number of people there, doctors and nurses, don't want to get the shot.  Of course, if they get sick, they are already at the hospital, but if they get their patients sick..., well....

    And, that is what this is really about - making sure the patients don't get sick versus doctors not liking being told what to do.

    A couple of hospital swine-flu victims suing the hospital over 'failure to vaccinate as an act of negligence', and this will be resolved quickly.

    •  It is not only about making their patients sick.. (4+ / 0-)

      it's about having enough HEALTHY healthcare workers to care for those who do become sick....

    •  Nurses have seen this before. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      This biologic has not been adequately tested.  Therefore, they are not taking it.

      It's called rational choice and it obtains whether or not Glenn Beck happens to be ranting about it for other reasons.  A clock is also correct 2x a day.

      Send your old shoes to the new George W. Bush library.

      by maxschell on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:56:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  look, as healthcare workers, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wa ma, johnva

      we are guinea pigs. The regular flu shot is a well known entity; I think the main reason people haven't gotten it in large numbers yet is because it came out much earlier than usual (it's usually not available until October.) As for the swine flu immunization, the idea that people aren't lining up in droves is, frankly, because of fear; you don't want to be the first to have a complication, and many of us remember 1976.

      I personally haven't had my flu shot yet - I've been on too insane a schedule to stop long enough to get the shot. Seriously. (I've got to get out of this job.) But I will get it and the swine flu shot, too, although I can't say that I'm willing to jump to the head of the line.

      Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - W S Coffin

      by stitchmd on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 02:53:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Don't forget Michelle Bachmann (17+ / 0-)

    She noted that the last time we had an outbreak of Swine Flu, a Democrat, Jimmy Carter was president, and strongly implied there was some conspiracy behind that coincidence. The fact that Ford was President during the previous Swine Flu outbreak did not seem to trouble her in the least.

  •  **Le Sigh** (7+ / 0-)

    I feel the same way I did when people elected Bush the second time. In disbelief that people actually WANT that.

  •  I don't think that ANYONE wants to be told (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    martydd, zmom

    ...what they have to do, especially when it involves a needle. It takes a lot of trust in science, government,  and acceptance of a kind of loss of freedom.

    Do I sound like a wing nut?

    ...there's a rose in the fisted glove and the eagle flies with the dove - Stephen Stills

    by NuttyProf on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:22:23 AM PDT

    •  nope (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Alice in Florida, Oh Mary Oh

      but then again you didn't use the word 'lying'.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:31:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes (4+ / 0-)

      You do. The whole "us against the government" does seem wingnuttery. I know there are examples of government abuse (Tuskegee, Bush's EPA saying it was safe for rescue workers at Ground Zero), but these are about as common as plane crashes--that is, they are a small fraction of government decisions and very uncommon. holding the line against the siege

      by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:41:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh really. (0+ / 0-)

        How about the invasion of Iraq?  The design and implementation of a torture regime by the highest levels of our government?  

        Were these a "small fraction" of government decisions?

        Do you really believe that a government that is willing to torture people has your best interests at heart?

        Your comments here are so transparent.

        Send your old shoes to the new George W. Bush library.

        by maxschell on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:58:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Yes. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      There is no more valid reason to fear a needle than there is to fear anything else that could happen to you every day as a result of someone else's negligence.

      The fact that some people have a visceral fear and paranoia associated with things like vaccines does not mean their fears are valid. They should be ridiculed, not treated like their opinions are worth anything.

  •  I've HAD IT with the Wing Nuts! (5+ / 0-)

    They are openly calling for violence and they are politicizing everything from H1N1 to the Easter Bunny...

    Let them NOT take the vaccine...if they get sick, (and at this point I hope they DO) oh well, they are on their own...

    They rail against government until THEY need the help...well, let them eat cake instead...

  •  I hope Beck gets H1N1 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    and I hope the antivirals don't work on him.

    Because he fucking deserves it, and you know it.

    •  If Glenn Beck gets H1N1... (0+ / 0-)

      Would that prove there's a god?

      Hmm, that's a toughie. Not quite, based on the observed phenomenon that some people are simply too stupid to live.

      Besides, there may be thousands of smart people that contract H1N1 through no fault of their own, simply because they're poor or the vaccine arrives too late.

      Glenn Beck, being a millionaire, can certainly afford a flu shot. He might even claim that he's not going to get one, in one of his demented rants, but that would simply be another lie. Murdoch's millionaire monkeys have a fine medical plan, which would include doctors will all the right needles.

      It is better to be rich and healthy than to be poor and sick. - Anon

      by jimbo92107 on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:38:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Start mass-producing Glenn Beck mug shots... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Oh Mary Oh, HawkRock33

    ...and distribute them to every location providing swine flu vaccinations.  Beneath the picture, add this caption:

    This man will sue you to death if you vaccinate him.

    But we all know that he'll disguise himself as an ill-behaved child (very easy, since he's already one) and sneak into a public school so that he can get a shot, thus denying one of America's children the chance to stay healthy.  Typical Beck....

    The only good freeper is the one found at the bottom of an ocean....

    by Liberal Panzer on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:27:07 AM PDT

  •  Actually, all public contact workers (5+ / 0-)

    Actually, all public contact workers should seriously think about annual flu vaccinations.

    In that definition I include salespeople, airline/transport workers and food service workers, etc. Those folks are excellent vectors to spread an illness.

    "Ridicule may lawfully be employed where reason has no hope of success."

    by QuestionAuthority on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:27:34 AM PDT

  •  2 more teenager deaths in DFW this week, (10+ / 0-)

    another 2 weeks ago. Beck and Armey are scum.

    If you outlaw guns only Republicans will have them.

    by plok on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:27:59 AM PDT

  •  Simple: "No Shirt, No Shot, No Service." (6+ / 0-)

    If you don't have your shots, you're not permitted in my place of business.

    No smoking or weapons allowed either.

    "We can't stop here - this is BAT Country!"

    by here4tehbeer on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:28:03 AM PDT

  •  It seems pretty clear to me (6+ / 0-)

    that Beck doesn't believe a single thing he says. He's got pollsters out there asking questions about what wingnuts are afraid of, and then he goes there. He's in a burning building, and he's pouring gasoline on anything that isn't already on fire. And guess what, wingnuts? That building is your house, and you're too effing stupid to realize what's going on.

    "You can't have everything; where would you put it?" - Steven Wright

    by frsbdg on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:28:48 AM PDT

  •  ACORN cooked up the vaccine in its DC office (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    milkbone, dkosdan, QuestionAuthority


  •  Rolling up my sleeve too (4+ / 0-)

    We're going to miss the high-risk dates at our clinic, which we qualify for as being over 50 and the spouse being a cancer survivor (they're all on Saturdays, and we're committed to spending Saturdays with the spouse's folks), but the first day for the regular folks is this Sunday afternoon, so I'll give up a day of NFL football to get my seasonal shot. Also have flu resources page bookmarked so I can check for the H1N1 info.

    Civility is the way of telling someone to go fuck themselves in such a way that the someone agrees it probably is a good idea.

    by Cali Scribe on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:31:13 AM PDT

  •  I oppose mandatory vaccines on principle (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BoxerDave, dkosdan, martydd

    because I think that it is unethical for the government to force people to inject a substance into there body even if they may have an objection to it. I also think that it is unfair that in many states you can have a religious but not a personal exemption.

    That said, yeah the right-wing noise machine is idiotic.

    •  You cannot get herd immunity (7+ / 0-)

      If you do not require even the unwilling to get vaccinated.

      We would still have high rates of deadly smallpox and polio if it were not for mandatory vaccination programs. The healthcare costs associated with these illnesses are borne by all of us.

      This is a case of assessing whether your right to refuse vaccination infringes on my right to be protected against deadly diseases.

      Newborns cannot be vaccinated until they reach a certain age, so we would have a much higher infant mortality rate if people could refuse vaccinations.

      Of course, it would be natural selection if those stupid enough to refuse vaccination became sick and died. holding the line against the siege

      by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:38:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  smallpox and polio (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dkosdan, zmom, QuestionAuthority

        It could be argued that they where eradicated in part due to better sanitation. That said I think that your argument makes sense but it also doesn't take into account the risk from vaccine and the possibility of a negative reaction especially in young children.

        And I don't think that everybody refusing vaccine is stupid, there may be some legitimate concerns, such as who benefits financially from a vaccine.

        •  I also think that it's a tad hypocritical (0+ / 0-)

          how many people on this site seem to think that "my body my choice" only applies to abortion.

          •  if there was a chance that your abortion could (6+ / 0-)

            kill strangers on the bus you came in contact with - we would have an equivalent situation.

            You never know who will show up at Netroots Nation. Will you be there?

            by ETinKC on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:51:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I would hope (4+ / 0-)

            You are capable of seeing the difference in this situation.

            Have you ever heard that analogy about your right to extend your arm ends where someone else's nose begins?

            If your decision not to get vaccinated would affect no one else but you--that is, it would not require you to incur any health costs if you got sick (which are ultimately born by all of us and strain the nation's resources) and would not put anyone else at risk of getting sick--I'd say go ahead and don't get vaccinated.

            But this isn't like deciding if you should wear a red shirt or a blue shirt. This is making a decision that somewhere along the line could cost someone else his or her life.

   holding the line against the siege

            by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:59:24 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  You could argue that (6+ / 0-)

          but it's not really true.

          In fact, even after the US had eradicated smallpox--largely through vaccination--they decided to enforce strict controls on foreign visitation to the country requiring people to show proof of smallpox immunization or get immunized. In the instances that they did not, smallpox was transmitted, resulting in deaths.

          Better sanitation does not really eliminate viruses, especially if some of those viruses are passed through airborne transmission. You can wash your hands and surfaces all you want, but if someone has the flu, you can still contract it.

          I don't care who benefits financially from a vaccine; we all lose when people elect not to get them.

          Further, the risks associated with vaccination are typically lower than the risks of whatever the person is being vaccinateda gainst.

 holding the line against the siege

          by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:56:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Vaccines do help. (6+ / 0-)

          It could be argued that [smallpox and polio] where eradicated in part due to better sanitation.

          That seems really unlikely.  Improvements in sanitation haven't cleared up the common cold or flu; there's absolutely no reason to think they would have made a dent in smallpox rates.  

          In theory, sanitation could affect polio rates.  But as a counter example, look at the Norwalk virus -- a gastrointestinal bug that to this day takes out cruise ships and college dorms with amazing efficiency.

          •  The sanitation argument is garbage. (9+ / 0-)

            It's basically a standard canard peddled by people who want to minimize the positive effects of vaccination. It's rooted in the pre-germ-theory ideas of disease such as the miasma theory. It's also, not coincidentally, often sold to unwitting people by "alternative medicine" charlatans who have a financial stake in undermining the public's belief in scientific medicine.

            •  people in alternative medicine (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              wa ma

              who benefit financially are often far smaller then those who benefit off pedaling drugs to children and big companies like baxter who make billions and have access to a much broader spectrum of major media markets to spread misinformation. What was the last time you saw a commercial on any major network encouraging somebody to ask there doctor about homeopathy?

              •  Uhh...there are homeopathy ads on cable... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                constantly. And even more for other alternative medicine. What do you think that "Head-on" crap is, or Enzyte?

                Alternative medicine is big business too, even if it's not as big a business as Big Pharma. But it is a multi-billion dollar industry. You're not being anti-establishment and independent if you use it; you're often just getting taken by another corporation. Especially since there is essentially no regulation of it.

                •  I had a patient (0+ / 0-)

                  who came in for a routine physical, complained of some abdominal pain, and blood work showed abnormal liver tests. We went through a whole song and dance about what might be going on, ordering more tests, an ultrasound, a gastroenterology consult - until he told me the symptoms had all started after he started taking Enzyte. Turns out it contains the steroid precursors pregnenolone and DHEAs. He was to stop it and came in a couple of days ago to get blood work. Haven't gotten the results back, but I'll keep you posted.

                  And that's the "science" behind Enzyte.

                  But nooooo, those folks don't want to make money off of people. Not at all. Nuh uh.


                  Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - W S Coffin

                  by stitchmd on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 03:02:33 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Nope (4+ / 0-)

          better sanitation actually led to increases in polio.

          As far as financial benefit, there is little profit in vaccines.

          All my IP addresses have been banned from

          by charliehall on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 09:07:48 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Correct (0+ / 0-)

            The mechanism was that polio is one of those diseases that are more severe the older you are when you contract it (some others, like pertussis, work the other way). Under conditions of poor sanitation, people tended to contract polio (which is spread by fecal-oral transmission) as infants, when the risk of serious complications was low. Better sanitation resulted in people contracting it when they were older (school-age kids, teenagers, young adults), which is when the risk is highest.

            There is nothing so practical as a good theory—Kurt Lewin

            by ebohlman on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:31:55 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  really (0+ / 0-)

            then why has Baxter made record profits since this scare began?

            •  you are clueless (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DemFromCT, johnva

              the vaccine isn't even out yet, so how the hell could they make profits off of it?

              And I say again, why is it we tolerate some conspiracy theorists on this site and not others? We may not have the same degree of lunacy as HuffPo, but this doesn't reflect well on this community, either.

              Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - W S Coffin

              by stitchmd on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 03:04:27 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  yup n/t (0+ / 0-)

            Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - W S Coffin

            by stitchmd on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 03:02:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  no, no, a thousand times no (0+ / 0-)

          and frankly there is some question of whether improved sanitation led to a higher incidence of polio. Polio diminished because of immunization, plain and simple, and the oral polio vaccine led to transmission of inactive vaccine even among the unvaccinated. Poliovirus is transmitted via a fecal-oral route.

          Smallpox was also eliminated plain and simple by vaccination - which is the one place where the term is used truly legitimately. Again, there are specifics in the epidemiology of the smallpox virus that allowed for that to happen, but it was not eliminated due to improved sanitation. To say so is just, frankly, ignorant.

          Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - W S Coffin

          by stitchmd on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 02:58:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  of course (0+ / 0-)

        Of course, it would be natural selection if those stupid enough to refuse vaccination became sick and died.

        Unfortunately they will take down all those newborns and elderly and etc with them who are smart enough to get vaccinated but cant.

        You never know who will show up at Netroots Nation. Will you be there?

        by ETinKC on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:48:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  what about people who die (0+ / 0-)

          from having a negative reaction to taking the vaccine but wouldn't have died otherwise, are there lives expendable?

          •  how many is that? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            stitchmd, ebohlman, timewarp

            A majority of people who can't get vaccines don't - there is always a doctors exemption, BUT that is why you need everyone who can get the shot to get it so those who can't (who often are also at the greatest risk of dying if they get sick) benefit from the heard immunity.

            You never know who will show up at Netroots Nation. Will you be there?

            by ETinKC on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:01:36 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  How many (4+ / 0-)

            do you suppose that will be?

            The government already makes exceptions for people who are high risk, such as those who have had Guillaim Barre syndrome (or however you spell it) or who might be immunocompromised.

            But for those with no known risk factors, your risk of dying from flu is greater than your risk of dying from the vaccine.

            Nobody's life is expendable, but sometimes you have to think of the greater good rather than the individual.

   holding the line against the siege

            by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:02:04 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  understood (0+ / 0-)

              I just wish that the greater good did not include dumping a few people overboard sometimes. I also think that we sometimes need to question who benefits from such a scare as a swine flu pandemic rather then simply following obediantly. 9/11 was used as an excuse to scare people into suppressing there civil liberties and pandemics could be used as an excuse to give big corporations that produce vaccines record profits. What about the 1976 flu pandemic scare?

              All i'm doing is challenging generally accepted dogmas and trying to get people to defend there viewpoints intellectually rather then just assuming that they are correct for taking the contrary position of conservatives. If that means stirring the pot sometimes and making myself look like a paranoid then so be it.  

          •  VERY few people die because of vaccination. (4+ / 0-)

            Much fewer than would die as a direct result of the policy of allowing people to opt out for no real valid reason (which is what you're advocating).

            Let's be clear: from a risk perspective, there is no valid argument against most vaccination if you don't have medical contraindications. Of course there is a slight risk, but it's not even close to the risk to you personally from getting an infectious disease. Especially since under your policy infectious diseases would be much more prevalent than they are now. You can't just say your risk of ID is negligible, so it's not a problem, because they wouldn't be negligible without vaccination of most people.

          •  No, but you can't make a cogent argument (0+ / 0-)

            for letting other people (a lot more people) die in order to save them.

            There is nothing so practical as a good theory—Kurt Lewin

            by ebohlman on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:33:50 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

          That is why I said it was natural selection "if those stupid enough to refuse vaccination became sick and died."

          It is not natural selection if the others who were unable to get vaccinated die. Then it is just a tragedy.

 holding the line against the siege

          by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:00:20 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I oppose even religious exemptions. (5+ / 0-)

      So there you go.

      I think it's much more unethical to allow diseases that threaten the public health to spread by allowing people to opt out for nebulous, subjective reasons (such as religion, "personal", or "philosophical" reasons) than it is to force it on people. I do, of course, support exemptions for medical cause as determined by a doctor. I also think it's different for children vs. adults: I think there should be a much more stringent requirement placed on children, since they don't deserve to suffer merely because their parents are silly (it should be considered child neglect to not vaccinate).

      (Short of actual force, I would at least very highly pressure  to get vaccinated and vaccinate their children, maybe by taking away major tax credits (e.g., child tax exemption), etc for not vaccinating for a silly reason.)

      I don't believe that people should have absolute autonomy over whether to get these things when other people can't receive them for medical reasons and are threatened by the lack of herd immunity. Immunocompromised people, for example, depend on everyone else having received vaccinations.

      I realize that the "popular" thing now seems to be to accommodate people who have silly "concerns" about vaccines. So I realize some people will disagree with me on this. But I don't think that pretending that the emotional reasoning of people who fear vaccines is valid is going to help the situation.

      •  Will You Pay for My Care? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        A close friend now living in Florida got a ("regular") flu shot a couple of years ago.

        He suffered an onset of G-B syndrome, causing partial paralysis below the waist.

        His doctor told him -- and I can't vouch for the medical information, but I'd suppose the doctor knows better than I do -- that G-B is suspiciously prevalent in people who grew up in New Jersey in the 1950s and were given dearly versions of one of the two major polio vaccines, I forget which.

        Since my friend and I are the same age, and grew up in the same town, and I had both the Salk and Sabin polio vaccines, I suspect I am at increased risk of G-B from flu shots.

        Plus, the N1N1 vaccine is being rushed to market, its efficacy is unproved and legitimately open to doubt, it contains toxic substances, AND THE MAKERS HAVE BEEN IMMUNIZED BY CONGRESS FROM LAWSUITS if it harms you, or kills you.

        So, dear "public health" posters:  if I had the shot, and became paralyzed, would you be willing to contribute to my future support?  Then STFU over my private medical choices.  Unless there is clear, convincing and and convincing evidence of the efficacy and safety of any vaccine AND the infectious disease in question is both highly lethal and highly contagious, there isn't even an argument in favor of forcing people to have it.

        •  We will pay for your care, yes. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          There is a government vaccine industry compensation program for precisely that reason. It's very misleading of you to whine about the government immunizing the vaccine makers from lawsuits without mentioning that the reason for that is that a government program has assumed responsibility for compensating victims in lieu of that.

          So yes, I'm perfectly willing to contribute to your future support, if you can demonstrate that you were injured by a vaccine (I think the injury compensation fund is funded by fees from the vaccine members, but I don't remember the details. Regardless, a little piece of it gets passed on to everyone).

      •  My concern is that the CDC (0+ / 0-)

        is actually recommending that immunocompromised people be first in line for the shot even though the safety of the vaccine hasn't been tested in those people.  

        Who will be recommended to receive the 2009 H1N1 vaccine?
        CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has recommended that certain groups of the population receive the 2009 H1N1 vaccine when it first becomes available. These target groups include pregnant women, people who live with or care for children younger than 6 months of age, healthcare and emergency medical services personnel, persons between the ages of 6 months and 24 years old, and people ages of 25 through 64 years of age who are at higher risk for 2009 H1N1 because of chronic health disorders or compromised immune systems.

        We do not expect that there will be a shortage of 2009 H1N1 vaccine, but availability and demand can be unpredictable. There is some possibility that initially the vaccine will be available in limited quantities. In this setting, the committee recommended that the following groups receive the vaccine before others: pregnant women, people who live with or care for children younger than 6 months of age, health care and emergency medical services personnel with direct patient contact, children 6 months through 4 years of age, and children 5 through 18 years of age who have chronic medical conditions.


        Contrast that with part of the exclusion criteria used in the clinical trials of the pediatric H1N1 vaccine:

        Have immunosuppression as a result of an underlying illness or treatment, or use of anticancer chemotherapy or radiation therapy (cytotoxic) within the preceding 36 months

        Have long term use of glucocorticoids including oral, parenteral or high-dose inhaled steroids (>800 mcg/day of beclomethasone dipropionate or equivalent) within the preceding 6 months. (Nasal and topical steroids are allowed.)

        Have an acute or chronic medical condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, would render vaccination unsafe, or would interfere with the evaluation of responses

         Link  Link

        Can you understand why this is confusing and why it damages trust between parents of chronically ill children and medical professionals?  Can you understand why I want to be able to make this decision for my daughter without having to obtain an exemption "for medical cause as determined by a doctor"?

        I have yet to meet a doctor who is not dismissive of my concerns about vaccine safety even though my daughter has a chronic autoimmune disorder treated with steroids and has an abnormal immune system including no thymus gland and low IgG and IgA levels.

        I have only recently learned that I should be cautious in allowing her to be vaccinated because I have read what some of those people with "silly 'concerns'" have written.  To me it feels like you're really trivializing parents' concerns and I can only assume that is because you don't have any real life experience with this.

  •  OK, so let's politicize H1N1... (4+ / 0-) my July 3, 2009 diary I pointed out that the H1N1 mortality rate in the United States was 2.8 times higher than in countries with socialized medicine.  

    Also, my poll showed that only about 10% were so anxious about H1N1 that they believed H1N1 would cause a major calamity.  Translation:  90% are clearly not "bedwetters".

  •  Can't fix stupid (5+ / 0-)

    Since the beginning of time science has been the heretic of the world. People just don't understand. My spouse never got flu shots either until after catching the flu and missing out on a ski trip.  

    I am getting my shot so at least I don't get sick.

    I wish they would stop mainstreaming Glenn Beck.

  •  Comment from Free Republic (6+ / 0-)

    This was in response to someone posting the article where John Perry of Newsmax essentially calls for a military coup against Obama, but it speaks to the conservative paranoia about the swine flu vaccine that Beck is now feeding:

    So lets say you was a dedicated Marxist President determined to remake America and you knew the possibility of the military doing what you say. What would you do?

    Myself if I was a cold blooded but smart totalitarian wannabe I would have my health people dream up a medical emergency where 100% of the military would have to get inoculated with a vaccine. Now if it turns out that the vaccine was tainted with a slow acting poison or disease that would kill or severely handicap most of the military over months well then I would have Americorps and SEIU/Acorn people replace them as a civilian defense force.

    52 posted on Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:01:07 PM by Swiss ("Thus always to tyrants")

    Reagan did a huge disservice to this country when he stripped funding for inpatient mental health services from the budget.

    It is scary to think that there are such a large number of paranoid, delusional, low-IQ individuals out there who believe this kind of thing. holding the line against the siege

    by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:35:22 AM PDT

  •  This kind of crap will get people killed. (6+ / 0-)

    People are going to die from something they could have easily prevented, had they not been scared out of doing it.

    It would be a black mark against Glenn Beck's soul, except I suspect he's already sold it in exchange for his Fox News contract.

    I own half a house- it's a duo.

    by EsnRedshirt on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:38:23 AM PDT

  •  An honest question: (6+ / 0-)

    My husband had a mild case of swine flu a few weeks ago, and then my daughter got it, too. I was in pretty close contact with both of them while they were sick. A few weeks later, my daughter in college got swine flu at the same time as her room mate, so I spent hours with them in the van, bringing them both home, and then spent several days caring for them. So far, I've not gotten sick. Is it possible I have developed some immunity to this, and wouldn't need to get the swine flu shot? I'd rather save the available doses for someone who needs it more.

    •  A good question (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coolsub, timewarp, QuestionAuthority

      How old are you?  Both my doctor and I were around in 1956-57 when the another version of the swine flu purportedly made the rounds.  He said we may have some residual immunity because of that.

      To be clear, my doctor will be taking the swine flu shot, as his family practice involves a LOT of children.  I'll wait at the back of the line.

      The truth always matters.

      by texasmom on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:48:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I did a little digging coolsub.... (5+ / 0-)

      ...and The New England Journal of Medicine published a report on September 10, 2009, that indicated that perhaps about 4% of people born after 1980 could be immune.

      Here's the link.

    •  I have a similar question (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coolsub, QuestionAuthority

      My son had what I believe is swine flu, but they stopped testing in those not hospitalized so who can say for sure?

      Nearly half of swine flu cases do not have a fever, which most government agencies erroneously list as one of the "necessary" symptoms to show you have swine flu. So my other two sons came down with less severe symptoms than their brother (very mild fevers under 100, chest cough that lasted a few days, headaches, tiredness) and I assumed this was all the swine flu. I started to come down with symptoms (mild fever, headache, and initial cough)but began TamiFlu immediately and never developed any more symptoms.

      So would I have immunity, as well? Or do we need shots?

      I have asthma, as does my oldest son, so the question is important for me. holding the line against the siege

      by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:09:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  How do you know it's swine flu? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coolsub, QuestionAuthority

      just do you know it's not regular flu? I know the CDC/public health people have been instructed to assume H1N1 to ensure all cases are treated promptly and to slow the spread..

      "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

      by Alice in Florida on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:29:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The doctors at our local hospital (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        timewarp, wa ma, QuestionAuthority

        were on the news a couple of weeks ago saying that any flu circulating in September should be treated as swine flu.  They said the regular flu virtually never makes an appearance here until December, peaking in Jan. and Feb.  I don't know if that varies in different parts of the country, though.

        The truth always matters.

        by texasmom on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:43:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  good question, (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        texasmom, wa ma, QuestionAuthority

        since they aren't testing many people. I have just assumed that my family members had it, based on their symptoms. I've been told from several sources that there are no other strains of the flu out there right now, so anything that closely resembles swine flu IS swine flu. I know that's what the college health clinic told my daughter, too.

        It's possible I could be wrong.

    •  To me this is a glaring error (0+ / 0-)

      in the management of this pandemic.  I cannot understand why there have not been resources (more $$) devoted to developing a cheap, efficient test for people with the active illness and/or a cheap, efficient test for antibodies for people who suspect they've had H1N1.

      Without this, vaccine will be wasted on people who do not need it (and possibly not go to people who do) and furthermore, people will be subjected to the risk associated with the vaccine without deriving any benefit.

  •  and your point is? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    All that time spent on explaining what Beck did and said serves what purpose?

    Please - surely you'd rather spend your time writing something of value / use to yourself or others.

    Might as well be a diary about "you get wet out in the rain". Nothing here is new, and nobody who reads Kos is going to change their mind about Beck or people like him - RedState lurkers will read that and be energized, actual Kossacks will (might) read it and remain shudderingly disgusted.

    So, what's the point? Left-of-center people are always into these lengthy treatises on everything. Why not a 2-line post:

    "This just (again) in! Glenn Beck is a moron (nothing below the fold folks, nothing more to say)"

    •  Wow (0+ / 0-)

      And your point is? That we should not talk about Beck or others like him because we know what they are?

      The point is to start a discussion about (1) the merits (or not) of vaccination, (2) the effects it might have if people elect not to get vaccinated as a result of this idiot, (3) how we counter this kind of wingnuttery that puts us at risk, (4) to explore the origins of such positions, (5) to explore why people might believe such positions.

      There are all sorts of legitimate conversations that can be inspired by discussing these sorts of things.

      I really find it interesting that some people enjoy doing nothing more useful than being rude to other people. holding the line against the siege

      by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:45:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re-Wow (0+ / 0-)

        what's wow about dissenting? Remember - this is Kos, where we're allowed to ask questions and have dissent.

        Rude? I don't see it. I see questions, and an exhortation to do something that I think is right (it's my right to posit things in which I see value, and question that where I see no value). People are entitled to their own opinions - just as you're entitled to say why you think the post has value.

        Go ahead - I hear you, but don't forget that this works both ways. RedState - now that's different. Dissent there and get your account blocked.

    •  limbaugh & crew have loudest soapbox in emergency (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CatM, timewarp, dkosdan

      24/7 they use a 1000 strong monopoly of radio stations and fox to determine to a large extent the discourse in this country.

      by ignoring that dominating soapbox americans allow them the opportunity to use any real or created emergency to make things worse for political purposes- basically to continue what they always do- use coordinated UNCONTESTED repetition to attack anything and anyone progressive, but moreso.

      ignoring the talk radio monopoly continues to be the biggest political blunder in decades

      by certainot on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:55:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't propose ignoring (0+ / 0-)

        What I can't see is what the point is of long treatises on Beck.

        My view : you get wet out in the rain. Glenn Beck is worthless. How much can we discuss this while getting some value?

        My opinion is that there is no value to be gained, and so I stated that.

        Your view - and you're entitled to it - is that it is valuable. That's fine - we'll agree to disagree.

        •  i think (0+ / 0-)

          there's value in getting into the details of what the RW propaganda machine is up to although i think fox (beck) gets way too much attention and radio (also with beck) much too little attention and analysis.

          seachable transcripts of the main radio blowhards would provide a great roadmap for most of what ends up on fox later in the day or week as well as what is said by GOP and even some blue dog dems and what their strategy is.

          those transcripts would have warned what was coming on everything from gore and kerry to acorn and van jones- it does the groundwork for everything they want to sell.

          ignoring the talk radio monopoly continues to be the biggest political blunder in decades

          by certainot on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 02:40:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  What is the deal with this post? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Are you in a bad mood today?  Why not discuss these issues, including Beck's psychopathology.  I hope someone who may think Beck is sane reads this diary and learns something about this moron and the right wing extremists in the US

      •  tell me one way that a "Beck is Bad" post helps (0+ / 0-)

        What discussion takes place that is useful?

        It's hand-wringing without any positive effect. Talking about something is not, in and of itself, a good thing.

        What is the benefit of talking about "how you get wet out in the rain"?

        Cataloging bad stuff Beck does is not of any use - who is ahead of where they were before that post? Does anyone visit Kos that does not already know this?

  •  Let 'em die off (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Montco PA Dem

    the adults I mean--I do feel for their children--some will die because their parents are paranoid freaks

  •  The comment about the University of Iowa is not (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DemFromCT, dkosdan, annieli
    entirely correct.

    The seasonal flu shot has been deemed manditory.  But, in light of the law suit by the unions, no disiplinary (sp??) action will be taken against those that don't get the seasonal flu shot.  There is a process to opt out of the shots as well.  The H1N1 vaccine will probably be made maditory as well, but no offical word has come down yet.  The H1N1 testing has been occurring not more than 100 feet from my office....

  •  The right's current fear "thing" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    This is all this is.  Yes, the flu is real, but this is another attempt by the Beckerheads to drum up fear of everything in order to merely help themselves.  Next week, it will be something different, perhaps killer monkeys or equal rights for smurfs, or whatever. In the meantime, get your shots, wash your hands, and most of all, RELAX!!

    Keep your head up and be hopeful. Just remember to look at what you are stepping in once in a while...

    by trekguy66 on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 07:53:28 AM PDT

  •  More shameful behavior by health care providers. (6+ / 0-)

    I'm a physician living and practicing in New York State. And let me tell you, when I saw those idiots  protesting in Albany against State mandated flu vaccine for health care workers, I just wanted to bang my head against the desk.

    I mean, how selfish and pig-headed can one be? Here is a vaccine that is at least 50 - 70% effective at preventing acquisition and illness from influenza, a virus that represents a mortal threat to many of our frail elderly and chronically ill younger patients. It's a vaccine with decades of proven safety behind it. And these idiots want to protest being compelled to protect their patients from transmission of a potentially lethal infection by the people nominally caring for them?

    (smacks palm against forehead).

    This makes all of us health care workers look like drooling simpletons, and sets a horrible example for the citizenry—folks who presumably can be expected to be less informed or rational than us "professionals".


  •  The VA has been encouraging flu shots for all (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    of its patients for many years.  They do an excellent job of making it simple, easy and convenient.  I have been getting mine every year for over seven years.  I think the H1N1 vaccination will be handled the same way.  It's due to arrive soon.  I am not clear though, about the high risk of those over 60.  Does anyone know about that?

  •  B.C. May Suspend Flu Shots after Safety Questione (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wa ma

    B.C. might suspend the seasonal flu shots as early as today, in the wake of a Canadian study that suggests people who get the flu vaccine are twice as likely to contract the H1N1 virus.

    Several news outlets reported the preliminary findings of the study, which is still under peer review. Researchers found that those who received the seasonal flu vaccine in the past were more likely to catch H1N1.

    While the research was initially met with much skepticism from health officials, several provinces, including Quebec, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Nova Scotia, have suspended seasonal flu shots for anyone younger than 65, the Globe and Mail newspaper is reporting in its Monday editions.

    Don't have time to comment at length here, other than to say do your research before accepting a largely untested H1N1 shot.

    •  This is in reference to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      the regular flue shot. Plans for H1N1 vaccinations are going ahead.

    •  "Do you research"... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CatM, stitchmd

      assumes that members of the general public are qualified to do so. That assumption is false, which is why we have public health agencies who make recommendations.

      Should the experts look into that sort of thing? Of course. Should members of the public cherry-pick evidence that confirms their preexisting fears and use that as an excuse to ignore the recommendations of health officials? Absolutely not.

      •  Unlike you (0+ / 0-)

        I consider myself ultimately responsible for my health and for the choices I make. I do not rely upon any authority figure, either in religion or medicine or academia, to tell me what I should or should not do in relation to my own health and well being.

        •  Sometimes authority figures know better than you. (0+ / 0-)

          The scientists making these recommendations have opinions that are worth much more than yours, because they are experts and you presumably are not. Sometimes it's smart not to trust authorities, but other times it's foolish not to (such as when the authorities are right). I also noticed downthread that you're perfectly willing to trust authorities (those Canadian provinces) as long as they tell you what you want to hear. I'd submit that you're not really interested in looking at the evidence skeptically and objectively.

          •  Trusting authorities (0+ / 0-)

            is never a smart idea. It's better to trust yourself. Never rely on authorities to tell you what is right for your health -- do your own research and consider alternatives.

            In any case, please see the posts below about how even doctors are split on whether to take the H1N1 vaccination. If you are willing to trust authorities, consider whether these physicians may be wise in refusing an unproven, largely untested, rushed-into-production vaccine.

            •  I totally disagree with this. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Lindmere, ebohlman

              You're exhibiting what I sometimes call "pseudoskepticism". You reflexively oppose all "authorities", even experts, in favor of your own judgment, but you don't ground that in real world data. The facts are that top experts know more than you about this. And their views disagree with yours. I'm not saying to just trust all authority; I'm saying to trust authority when they're right, and accept that you don't know everything.

              It's pretty arrogant to suggest that you will always be better off trusting yourself. I'm not advocating just trusting people BECAUSE they are in the government, or whatever. What I'm advocating is trusting people, at least to a degree, who have earned their position of intellectual authority on a subject. To say that all experts are untrustworthy is anti-intellectualism at its finest, an attitude on the level of Beck.

              •  Thanks (0+ / 0-)

                for telling me I'm arrogant for trusting myself. Ha! That's an incredible statement, really. I certainly would not trust you as a health care provider.

                •  I'm not one. (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Lindmere, ebohlman, QuestionAuthority

                  I don't see what's so "incredible" about saying people should admit that they don't know everything. I don't know everything, but I do know that the guys at the CDC know more about this than I do.

                •  Well, Thaxter (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  If you were an MD, epidemiologist, virologist, etc, it would make sense for you to trust yourself to make a sound decision in this case. You would have the knowledge and experience to make that decision.

                  But you don't.

                  So I can equate your position to believing that you should fly the Boeing 747 you just boarded for your vacation, because you don't trust authorities (The flight crew, FAA, Boeing, etc.).

                  So yeah, we can make a strong case that you are at least making a mistake, if not being arrogant.

                  "Ridicule may lawfully be employed where reason has no hope of success."

                  by QuestionAuthority on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:59:34 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

    •  CDC has commented on this (4+ / 0-)

      and finds no merit in the story or the canadian position.

      Tom Maugh: hi.  There were two potentially concerning reports this week.  I would appreciate it if you would address them.  One is the paper showing that flu mist is not effective against seasonal flu as the decibel vaccine and the second is the so-called Canadian problem.  Can you talk about those?  

      Thomas Frieden: so taking them one at a time, a very carefully done study in the new England journal of medicine showed that for one particular mix of flu mist and one particular season of flu, that flu mist was a little less effective than the flu shot.  There are other scientific studies that suggest that for children, for example, the flu mist is a little more effective than the flu shot.  And for this flu season, with this flu vaccine, all betts are off in terms of which is better.  Any time you try and make a prediction about flu, you have to stop yourself.  You can make predictions about flu, but you're likely to be wrong.  I will anticipate and say I do think it's likely that both the nasal spray and the injectable flu vaccine for h1n1 are both likely to be quite effective against this year's h1n1 strain because the match is so close for both and because the flu mist spray that's being used is just a single type of flu virus.  It′s not mixed with others which might be one of the reasons why there's some problems with or slightly less effective than some flu mist.  But the great thing is that we know that both of them are effective and both of them will be available in the coming weeks.  In terms of the media reports coming out of Canada, there are reports that the -- in some analyses, people who received the seasonal flu vaccine were more likely to get h1n1 infection.  We have looked at our data at the CDC nationally.  I have looked carefully at the data from New York City where we had a very large outbreak and lots of information about what vaccine was received.  The Australians have looked at it and published their information.  And in none of those data is there any suggestion that the seasonal flu vaccine has any impact on your likelihood of getting h1n1.  It doesn't protect you at all and there's no suggestion from any of the other data sets that it increases your risks.  If data is published in the scientific literature, but all means, we would love to see it.  If there's preliminary data, we would love to see it.  But nothing that wove seen suggests that that is likely to be a problem.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:23:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's interesting (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Thanks for your comment, but with all due respect, that's one man's opinion against the public health considerations of five (and now possibly six) Canadian provinces. The Canadians are doing the right thing by suspending the vaccination in light of their findings.

        •  It's not just "one man's opinion". (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lindmere, QuestionAuthority

          He's speaking for the CDC, and lots of other people have taken issue with that study as well. It seems like you're just believing what you want to believe instead of looking at the evidence and recommendations as a whole. The fact is, most public health agencies worldwide don't agree with the Canadians.

          •  I personally know (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            medical doctors who will refuse to take the H1N1 vaccination because they are concerned that it has not been adequately tested nor proven safe. Further, they state that the severity of swine flu symptoms doesn't warrant a mass vaccination program. Are these physicians "just believing what they want to believe," or are they looking at the evidence and recommendations as a whole?

            •  Doctors aren't infallible. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              And yes, there are risks. They just aren't as bad as the risks associated with not doing it.

            •  actually, they are believing what they want (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Lindmere, QuestionAuthority

              if you lok at their professional societies rather than individual docs, the recommendations are crystal clear... roll up your sleeve. See APHA data  I posted, and note also that I am a doc, with a sore arm from a shot.

              "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

              by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 09:21:34 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I'm all for taking "personal responsibility for (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Lindmere, ebohlman, QuestionAuthority

              your health," but here's where a little knowledge comes in handy.  The H1N1 is manufactured using the same process as the annual seasonal vaccine, and furthermore, the annual vaccine, since it's made anew with new strains each year is tested approximately as rigeorously.

              As for the handful of doctors who won't get the shot - you can find a handful doctors who reject evolution too.

              We have always known that heedless self interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics. - FDR 1936

              by AndersOSU on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:15:53 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  if this is "one man's opinion" (0+ / 0-)

          then so is the Canadian study.

          In reality, both opinions were developed with a team and based on a careful analysis of a data set.  It also appears that the CDC's data set is larger than the Canadian's.

          We have always known that heedless self interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics. - FDR 1936

          by AndersOSU on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:12:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'm taking this approach (0+ / 0-)

          Since the seasonal flu typically strikes later in the year and swine flu is here now, I'm going to wait to get the seasonal flu vaccine until after the Canadian data are published to see if there's anything to this.

      •  Also (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Doctors who have thus far been polled are split about whether they will take the vaccine. See, for example, this report from England:

        Up to 60% of GPs may choose not to be vaccinated against swine flu, with many concerned about the safety of the vaccine, a GP newspaper survey suggests.

        Of 216 GPs who responded to the survey, 29% said they would not opt to receive the swine flu vaccine and a further 29% said they were not sure whether they would or not.

        Of those who would refuse vaccination, 71% said they were concerned that the vaccine had not been through sufficient trials to guarantee its safety.

        There are several other polls I can link to that point to doctors' reluctance to take the H1N1 vaccine, here and abroad.

        So, like the general public, health care workers are split as to whether the vaccine is safe.

        In any case, those who take the vaccination should be immune from contracting the disease, and therefore have no right to pressure or ridicule those who refuse to take the vaccination.

        •  Public health is not a popularity contest. n/t (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          •  Certainly (0+ / 0-)

            And perhaps you'd like to tell that to the 500 unfortunates who contracted Guillain-Barre syndrome after taking the swine flu vaccine in 1976.

            •  interesting (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              because Guillain Barre occurs 1 in 100,000 people every year, so you need to know what it was above baseline, not hpow many cases there were. there was a wonderful article in the wapo sunday asking if you got the shot and then had a heart attack whether you'd be blaming the shot or the lifetime of french fries.

              "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

              by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:13:31 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

                I saw that article. However, note that this time:

                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.


                Note also that the package inserts for the Novartis 2009 vaccine lists GBS as one of its possible side effects. In any case, I understand that health care providers have been asked to carefully monitor their vaccinated patients for GBS; unfortunately, should people again contract the brain disease, they will have no legal recourse to sue the vaccine makers for having created it.

                •  That's how most vaccines work. (2+ / 0-)

                  We give the makers legal immunity, and the government pays out to victims of adverse effects from a compensation fund. The reason is because otherwise companies wouldn't make vaccines, due to the fact that some people will inevitably have negative effects from them. You're prioritizing that tiny group (who DO get compensated, just not via a lawsuit against the vaccine makers) over all the good the vaccines do.

                  •  And note that the standards for (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:

                    receiving compensation from that fund are much more relaxed than the burden of proof needed to successfully sue a vaccine manufacturer. To get VICP compensation, you merely need to show that it's plausible that the vaccine caused your problem. To sue a manufacturer, you also have to show that the manufacturer was negligent or that the vaccine itself was defective.

                    There is nothing so practical as a good theory—Kurt Lewin

                    by ebohlman on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:52:47 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  same thing applies to miscarriages and seizures (0+ / 0-)

              it needs to be carefully tracked (that's why there's VAERS and a very robust tracking system for H1N1 vaccine.)

              "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

              by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:14:52 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  there's lots of misinformation even amongst HCW (0+ / 0-)

          and in england and  to some extent the US there's no 'vaccine is the norm' culture to encourage the vax.

          One good thing about this discussion is that it gets it in the open so it can be addressed.

          "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

          by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 09:23:35 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  correction (0+ / 0-)

        the story was accurate (the reporter got it right). The meat of the story was of questionable value in terms of how it is being used now, since the reporter was careful to label this as preliminary.

        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

        by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:17:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  wrong, wrong, several layers of wrong (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      there is epidemiologic data that indicates (but does not prove, and certainly does not prove causation) that people who got the regular flu shot were more likely to develop H1N1.

      This does not equate to not getting the H1N1 immunization. At all. In any way.

      In fact, the suggestions (not rules) are that people who are at low risk for seasonal flu delay getting the regular immunization until after they get the H1N1 immunization.

      And this study isn't even published, so there hasn't been large scale scrutiny of it either.

      Carts tend to work better when they go after the horses.

      Diversity may be the hardest thing for a society to live with, and perhaps the most dangerous thing for a society to be without - W S Coffin

      by stitchmd on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 03:14:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Beck is a hemorrhoid on the ass of humanity.. (0+ / 0-)

    "Chase after the truth like all hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat tails." -Clarence Darrow

    by Elvis Engineer on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:03:18 AM PDT

  •  Exposing lunatic fringe becoming an obsession. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dkosdan, itsallhamlet

    When the RW hate radio (and TV) folks were flying under the MSM radar I thought it was worthwhile to expose the nutters at every turn.

    More recently I believe it's become a unhealthly obsession with some progressive blogs and may do more harm (wasted energy, focusing on their tactics and programs instead of organizing our own, giving them too much psychic power, etc.) than good.

    I'm not saying we should completely ignore the nutters, rather that we have now tipped into near obsession detailing their daily lunacy and have lost perspective on why it is we do this.

    Why do we do this?

    Is it to better understand our enemy?

    Is it to publicize their idiocy and craziness to a wider audience?

    Is it to show the world that they are willing to lie, to make stuff up, to assassinate character, to manipulate, to use fear, to ....

    There is a potential danger that recounting (or documenting) the latest outrage dulls the response, promotes their POV, motivates their audience, and helps spread the message of lunacy beyond the fringe.

    I know that completely ignoring the nutters is not the answer either.  They must be held to account in some way for their vile rantings and ravings.

    However, I think we have elevated their power and influence by becoming an unintentional echo chamber for their most outrageous claims.

    In the recent Salon article about Beck's early years in Zoo Radio, one incident in particlar could be instructive in how to best deal with the Beck phenomenom.

    In the late 80's or early 90's Beck moved to Arizona to take a job on a morning drive time Zoo radio show.  It turned out that he was going up against a former on air partner (and friend) from his earlier radio days.  The competition between the two stations was intense and Beck turned it into a WAR by doing things that went beyind the pale.

    Beck's erstwhile co-host and friend said he used the most egregious tactics and the way he responded was by IGNORING him.  This apparently drove Beck insane to the point of near meltdown.  Beck was eventually fired when his ratings deteriorated.  

    Perhaps we should learn something from this.

    I have no doubt that RW lunacy will eventually burn itself out and that the leading lights of the "movement" will flameout (who wants to take a bet on the date GB is walked out of FNC sutdios in a straightjacket) in spectacular ways.

    While it's interesting watching these guys perform (I actually listended to GB on the radio last week and it was fascinating to hear him take calls and interact with his people) I think we may be promoting them with our intense focus on their latest lunacy.

    I think looking the other way for a bit may be just what the doctor ordered.

    No quarter. No surrender.

    by hegemony57 on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:04:29 AM PDT

    •  I think we do it (3+ / 0-)

      because the lunatic fringe is becoming more lunatic, possibly bordering on dangerous.

      It concerns me that some people are ignoring it or suggest we need to "look the other way" rather than try to get people to see how dangerous and, yes, powerful, the lunatic "fringe" is becoming.

      Newsmax recently (then pulled) ran an article that essentially justified a military coup against the president of the United States. People are putting up polls asking if the president should be killed and bringing guns to political rallies and publicly stating that they are praying for his death. A census worker was found asphyxiated and tied to a tree with the word "Fed" scrawled on his chest.

      Concerted right wing manipulation is resulting in good people losing their jobs and good agencies being flushed down the toilet because too many progressives are afraid to stand up to their noise machine.

      Ignoring the right wing hate is not much worse than being a part of it. holding the line against the siege

      by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:13:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Wow, how did you get this from my post? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Ignoring the right wing hate is not much worse than being a part of it.

        Here is what I wrote ...

        I know that completely ignoring the nutters is not the answer either.  They must be held to account in some way for their vile rantings and ravings.

        ... but my essential point is that our obsession (my words) may be helping the RW by diverting our attention and promoting their influence beyong the marginal lunatic fringe.

        What exactly does posting and recounting a daily diet of crazy from GB and company do for us?  As I noted above, I think it was important to raise the alarm when these guys were flying under the MSM radar, now they are not and I think we make a strategic mistake to focus too closely on their particular form of crazy ... which if you read about his past and listen to GB on the radio today you understands is one part crazy, one part schtick, and one part finger in the eye of "liberals."

        No quarter. No surrender.

        by hegemony57 on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 09:31:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  From this (0+ / 0-)

          I think looking the other way for a bit may be just what the doctor ordered.

 holding the line against the siege

          by CatM on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 12:15:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hmmmmm ... so "for a bit" turns into ... (0+ / 0-)

            ... "ignoring the right wing hate is not much worse than being part of it."

            I think your perspective describes part of the problem.  The hyperbole doesn't help and puffs up the RW into something they are not ... 10 foot soldiers.  Sounds like the CIA's assessment of the USSR circa 1988 ... right before they crumbled into sand.

            No quarter. No surrender.

            by hegemony57 on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 06:05:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  All this Beck and Faux stuff (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hegemony57, dkosdan

      maddening as it is, is wasting time and energy better spent on motivating our own party. I think the whole purpose of the Becks et al is to serve as a distraction. And, yes, giving them much more than they deserve.

  •  That illusion (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, dkosdan

    has already closed down two schools (that I know about) in the North Texas area, Dick and Glenn.

    Irresponsible wealth leads to unaccountable power.

    by rlharry on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:23:38 AM PDT

  •  More disinformation from Wikipedia (0+ / 0-)

    Ford was confronted with a potential swine flu pandemic. Sometime in the early 1970s, an influenza strain H1N1 shifted from a form of flu that affected primarily pigs and crossed over to humans. On February 5, 1976, an Army recruit at Fort Dix mysteriously died and four fellow soldiers were hospitalized; health officials announced that "swine flu" was the cause. Soon after, public health officials in the Ford administration urged that every person in the United States be vaccinated. Although the vaccination program was plagued by delays and public relations problems, some 25% of the population was vaccinated by the time the program was canceled. The vaccine was blamed for twenty-five deaths; more people died from the shots than from the swine flu.

    I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person. -- Pogo

    by annieli on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:26:27 AM PDT

    •  uh what's the disinformation? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      There was an H1N1 outbreak in 1976, Ford did urge everyone to be vaccinated, and some 25 people did die from Guillain-Barré Syndrome which is linked to influenza vaccines.  The only mildly questionable statement is that more people died from GBS than H1N1, this may technically be true, but only because the flu was successfully contained at Ft. Dix. Finally, the federal government was roundly criticized for the whole program.

      I'm a person who generally trusts vaccines anyway.  I don't usually get the seasonal flu vaccine because I'm young and healthy, I know that if I catch the flu the probability of complications is exceedingly low.  Furthermore, the flu vaccine isn't particularly effective and that there is a chance that the vaccine itself will give you the flu.  That said, I'll probably get the H1N1 vaccine this year if it's available before the disease peaks.

      We have always known that heedless self interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics. - FDR 1936

      by AndersOSU on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 09:15:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  uh... (3+ / 0-)

        Furthermore, the flu vaccine isn't particularly effective

        70-80% in younger people, 60% in 65+

        and that there is a chance that the vaccine itself will give you the flu.

        no there isn't. there's zero chance, as in impossible, from a shot.

        The flu shot: The viruses in the flu shot are killed (inactivated), so you cannot get the flu from a flu shot. Some minor side effects that could occur are:

        Soreness, redness, or swelling where the shot was given
        Fever (low grade)
        If these problems occur, they begin soon after the shot and usually last 1 to 2 days. Almost all people who receive influenza vaccine have no serious problems from it. However, on rare occasions, flu vaccination can cause serious problems, such as severe allergic reactions.

        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

        by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:04:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  for a vaccine (0+ / 0-)

          70-80% effective isn't that good.  Also it varies year to year, with some years a good match and others not so much.

          You're right about the shot not giving you the flu, but not about the vaccine generally - the mist can give you the flu.  Besides, for most people consider the difference between having the flu and having flu-like symptoms is a wash (granting of course that the flu lasts longer than a day or two).

          Suffice it to say that I'm not afraid of the shot - but neither am I particularly afraid of the flu.  As I said, I'm not a high risk individual, and if I need to I'll stay in bed for a couple of days, therefore, I opt out.

          We have always known that heedless self interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics. - FDR 1936

          by AndersOSU on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:31:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  for a vaccine 70-80% is excellent (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            and it does very year to year, but since WHO and CDC are tracking H1N1 very closely, and it hasn't mutated, it should be an excellent match.

            You can get low grade flu symptoms from flumist (no big deal, and most people don't) but if you prefer to skip the chance, get the traditional shot.

            don't forget a a quarter or so of hospitalized patients didn';t have risk factors. it's more important for high risk patients to get the shot first, but there's room on line for everyone.

            but you're right, it's not mandatory for you.

            "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

            by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:59:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Tea Baggers worry... (0+ / 0-)

    these shots are a secret plot by Obama to turn our kids into gay Latinos who dance in tight pants.

    "One man alone can be pretty dumb sometimes, but for real bona fide stupidity nothing beats teamwork." - Mark Twain

    by greendem on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:26:44 AM PDT

  •  My View of the Pandemic Flu (0+ / 0-)

    The medical industrial complex will have flu H1N1 vaccine widely available just about the time everyone has already had it.  What's the matter with these fuckers?

    This aggression will not stand, man.

    by kaleidescope on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:29:48 AM PDT

  •  "Swiner" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Did anyone already coin the term "swiner" to go with "birther" and "deather"?

  •  It Must Be Galling To Teabaggers (0+ / 0-)

    that the flu vaccine is a CDC-sponsored product.  This is government-run, government-paid for healthcare at its very worst.

    Anyone who declines the vaccine and gets sick turns himself into a virus reservoir who will infect others.

  •  George Washington initiated mandatory vaccines! (5+ / 0-)

    He required everyone in the Continental Army to be innoculated against smallpox.

    That may have won the war.

    All my IP addresses have been banned from

    by charliehall on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:42:58 AM PDT

  •  I wasn't going to get the shot. . . (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    . . .but if Glenn Beck is against it, I guess I had better roll up my sleeve as soon as possible!

  •  Mandatory vaccinations is a bad idea (0+ / 0-)

    It's not a political thing. There are good reasons to oppose this vaccine.

    New adjuvants:

    From what I've read this flu is no more and no less virulent than the regular flu.

    Don't make vaccinations a political thing. It isn't.

    •  Risk is outweighed by the benefit. (3+ / 0-)

      You're wrong that that is a good reason to oppose it for this narrow subgroup of healthcare workers (who can always quit their jobs if their don't want to get the vaccine).

      And also, it's not really relevant whether it's "less virulent" than regular flu. The issue is that fewer people will have immunity against it because it's a new strain, so more people will get it. That means more people will die, even if the death rate per case were the same.

      •  Actually (0+ / 0-)

        I'm not "wrong." I feel on Constitutional grounds they have the legal right to oppose it, and I also feel they have the moral right to oppose it.

        I believe they have shown the mortality IS the same thus far. This is not inherently political. Though I would point out it is a bonanza for big Pharma. I'm sure that's merely coincidental.

        •  I didn't say the mortality rate was higher. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ebohlman, timewarp

          Read and understand what I wrote. I was saying that more people will die even if the mortality rate is the SAME, because more people will get it.

          They aren't being forced by the government to take the vaccine, so there isn't really any constitutional grounds. They're merely being forced to take it as a condition of a job since otherwise they would be putting vulnerable people at risk. As for a "moral right", I think it's far more immoral for someone who comes into contact with a lot of sick and vulnerable people to refuse the vaccine than it is to ask that they not put other people at risk.

          •  Well (0+ / 0-)

            You're surmising more people will get it based on it being a new strain. I'd like to see some supporting evidence for that assertion. What I understand is that no more people are dying from it than regular flu, which would actually indicate mortality rate is lower if it's infecting more people.

            Also, unless you're an actual Constitutional scholar, I don't think you really know whether there's a Constitutional issue or not. As far as morality, that's an opinion. I disagree, and am not interested in debating it, since my opinion is not going to change, nor is yours I would guess.

            •  That's the whole idea of a pandemic flu. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              Pandemic flu by definition means it's infecting more people. It may well have a lower mortality rate, although that's hard to measure. I'm just stating what the risk is. And we do vaccinate even against seasonal flu, so I don't see why we shouldn't vaccinate against H1N1.

              •  Maybe vaccinating against seasonal flu IS (0+ / 0-)
                •  ::sigh:: (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  We're having this discussion upthread. Most public health experts worldwide have rejected those UNPUBLISHED findings as a fluke. In any case, it doesn't make sense to rely on a single study that comes to a very counter-intuitive conclusion, before those findings can even be replicated or even examined by outside peer review.

                  •  I agree (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:

                    But it's food for thought. They're not published because they're being peer-reviewed. If they had been published, they would be decried for not being peer-reviewed. Can't fault it for not being published if they're actually doing it the right way. They may be a fluke, they may not. Time will tell. But yes, I agree that policy should not be dictated by an unpublished study.

                    •  But at least (0+ / 0-)

                      We know that vaccines are all perfectly safe and effective, right?

                      •  No one said that. (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:

                        In fact, I have repeatedly said in this very thread that vaccines have risks. My viewpoint is not that they are perfectly safe, but that the risk of not getting them greatly outweighs the risk of getting them.

                        There is little reason to believe that the H1N1 vaccine will be more dangerous than other vaccines.

                        •  My basic problem (0+ / 0-)

                          Is forcing workers to do something that you're admitting is risky. Whether the benefits outweigh the risks is an opinion. I don't like the idea that employers (or the government) have the right to tell you to do something potentially harmful to your body or lose your job. What's to stop any employer from doing that? When all employers do it, can you just say "if you don't want to do it, find another job?"

                          •  Not really opinion. (0+ / 0-)

                            We can objectively study whether the risk associated with the vaccine is greater or less than the risk associated with the disease.

                          •  Mmmm, no (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            wa ma

                            You can quantify black and white things like risk of dying from the vaccine versus risk of dying from the swine flu, sure. How do you quantify something like getting sick from the vaccine, but not dying? Adverse reactions are on a spectrum, and probably mild reactions will never be tallied. But they count to the person that gets it. So you can study risk on black and white, measurable things like death, if you can even trust that accurate, complete data is going to be kept (I wouldn't assume that at all), but mild to medium illness from the vaccine is much harder.

                          •  I agree that it's somewhat difficult to study. (0+ / 0-)

                            But that type of research can be done, and has been done in the past.

                            Employers don't have a blanket right to force people to do something that carries a small risk like this. The only reason they can in this case is because it's deemed necessary for public health. In other words, it's not so much that they're forcing the workers to get the much as they're saying that the risks associated with them working with patients while unvaccinated are too great.

                    •  Thank you (0+ / 0-)

                      That is an extremely reasonable response. Five and now possibly six Canadian provinces have suspended the regular flu vaccine because of their findings that it increases the chances of getting swine flu.

                      •  the data ought to be transparently published asap (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        wa ma

                        based on their response, and they should share it with the US (I assume they are).

                        I cannopt tell you if they are being premature with theior decision.

                        "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

                        by Greg Dworkin on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:20:27 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  That actually disagrees with his... (0+ / 0-)

                        statement that "policy should not be dictated by an unpublished study".

                        •  It's fairly likely (0+ / 0-)

                          that the people making policy decisions have access to people who are as qualified to evaluate the study as the people on the peer review committee.

                          We have always known that heedless self interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics. - FDR 1936

                          by AndersOSU on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:36:17 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

        •  Nope (0+ / 0-)

          Courts have always interpreted the Constitution to allow coercive public health measures.

          All my IP addresses have been banned from

          by charliehall on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 09:32:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  The point is that sick patients (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lindmere, QuestionAuthority

      very sick and vulnerable patients should be protected from exposure to a flu virus, which can be deadly to those who already have compromised immune systems.

  •  I've worked in health care since I was 18 (8+ / 0-)

    and have gotten a flu shot every year.

    Because I'm an acupuncturist now I hear all kinds of conspiracy theories  about the flu vaccine; sadly, much of it promulgated by other alternative practitioners who tend to be suspicious of all things Western medicine.  (I am not-- worked in hospitals for 15 years).

    It saddens me to have to consistently dispel these rumors.

    I tell my patients I get a flu shot every year in the interests of public health and that I'm a strong believer in preventative medicine.  

    Sadly, any time a racist criticizes the President, someone cries "Racism." Colbert

    by smileycreek on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:52:11 AM PDT

  •  Hey Healthcare Pro... NO SHOT NO WORK. (7+ / 0-)

    Noone should force you, but if you dont take the shot you cannot work with patients.

    You are a principle VECTOR for infection, interacting with the infected, and then with many more NOT infected. You become one of the main vectors for the spread of the very disease we are trying to put the brakes on.

    If you can't understand that, you have no business working in the medical field.

  •  Tell Dick Armey years ago.... (0+ / 0-)

    We did not have this shot and when it finally arrived in 1976, it was a live virus and caused a lot of problems.  You would think that getting a shot of a dead virus to keep you healthy would be a big deal to them.....if THEIR PRESIDENT was still in office -- it would be.

  •  It gave me a happy little tingle... (0+ / 0-)

    seeing "Glenn Beck" and "Pandemic Flu" in the same sentence

  •  Rampant, phony paranoia plays to his base. (0+ / 0-)

    He must have needed another injection of crazy to get him back in the news.

  •  I hope Beck refuses to get a shot... (0+ / 0-)

    ... and then misses a week of work with the swine flu.

  •  If the people following these nutjobs (0+ / 0-)

    are that stupid - then they will have to deal with the consequences.

    If they decide not to have the vaccinations ---- If they die - they die - that is their decision.

    It is kind of like with the census - fine if you do not want to be counted -- then I hope to God that your disctrict will be eliminated because there are not enough people counted!!

    If people insist on being stupid - and doing things against their own best interest -- then they will just have to pay the price.

    I honestly cannot get so worked up about it.

    "Proud to proclaim: I am a Bleeding Heart Liberal"

    by sara seattle on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 09:14:16 AM PDT

  •  I work part time in a NY State hospital (3+ / 0-)

    in Brooklyn (I am not a health care professional - just a clerk) and I am astounded at the level of ignorance/carelessness regarding basic hygiene among so-called health care workers there.  The floors in many parts of the hospital are filthy and people rely more on rubber gloves than handwashing (both are important).  I have also heard a lot of talk about not wanting flu vaccines - yet, rules regarding not coming to work while sick are not enforced.  People seem to regard their sick days as extra vacation time, and don't want to "waste" them on days when they actually have a cold or flu.  

    I blame the management.

  •  Commiefascist Mandatory Waiter Handwashing (3+ / 0-)
    Beck is, of course, 105% correct. He's finally exposed, after all these years, the commiefascist conspiracy that mandates all restaurant employees wash their hands after using the toilet. Didn't anyone notice that water is all flouridated? It goes directly from the hands to the employee's brain - and through our food, to the diners' brains.

    They're brainwashing us with flouride.

    No wonder the salt of the Earth, who don't sip lattes or pay others to cook for them when they've got a perfectly good woman barefoot and pregnant at home, can see so much more clearly than the elite. No wonder these brainwashed sheep gave up so easily their right to smoke in others' faces while they're eating. Their right to bring guns, and spit tobacco juice on the floor.

    When will the liberal commiefascists stop forcefeeding us "hygiene", and let us wallow in the filth that is our godgiven birthright?

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 09:30:13 AM PDT

  •  I Hope Becks Audience Triples (0+ / 0-)
    I hope he gets so many viewers that Fox News could not justify canning him even if they wanted to. I can't stand the guy but honestly could you ask for a better poster child to use against Republicans? I hope Beck stays an anchor tied tightly around the GOP's neck for years to come. I also hope the GOP never figures out that is exactly what he is either.


  •  In Re: Mandatory Vaccinations (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I know our [healthcare] organization has been loathe to require vaccinations, out of concern about ????

    All anyone need do is read "the book" -- John M. Barry, "The Great Influenza."  That will scare anyone silly/stiff/straight.  Well maybe not Dicky Boy and Glenn Boob.

    So maybe we get off easy on this year's H1N1 virus.  But Dick Armey's approach makes it real easy to take the next one less seriously, and the one after that.  And then the repeat of 1918 will hit, and we'll be back about where we were (at least societally, prob. not scientifically) in the Fall of 1918.

    "A village cannot reorganize village life to suit the village idiot." Frank Schaeffer on TRMS, 16 Sep 2009

    by planmeister on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 09:57:54 AM PDT

  •  My doctor (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wa ma

    has recommended we NOT have the H1N1 vaccine, due to the fact it is brand new and has some pretty severe, albeit rare, side effects.  Also, research out of Canada shows that if you have seasonal flu vaccine, you are at a HIGHER risk for H1N1.  The information is very confusing, and I have two kids in the high risk group.

  •  we won, Fox is BS, we post it and we still jump (0+ / 0-)

    If we had virtual super majorities, you would never guess based on how Dems act - mainly in the Senate.

    There is a need to call out BS on the lawmakers themselves, especially those willing to make rash decisions based on tabloid "news".

    In this case, are there some takers in the Senate to go on the record with the Fox take on H1N1? Sheesh!!!

    "O you can't scare me, I'm sticking to the union" - Woody Guthrie from Union Maid

    by dkosdan on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:26:29 AM PDT

  •  The "Socialist" U.S. Military Mandates Vaccines (0+ / 0-)

    Unless they changed protocol from when I served, (Marines in the 80's) the military requires all recruits to get a host of vaccinations during basic training.  Once on active duty they also "mandate" a number of vaccines depending on where you served, including the flu vaccine.
    (Apology in advance that this is a hit and run post as I'm swamped at work.)

  •  BeKKK can eat my poo (0+ / 0-)

    "Goin' back to Houston, do the hot dog dance."

    by A Runner on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 10:49:04 AM PDT

  •  It's not necessary for me to read the rest of the (0+ / 0-)

    thread (got here late today) to know that someone else has already wished that a virulent H1N1 pathogen visit Mr.'s Armey and Beck and dwell in their lungs for awhile.
    Of course, I'm a pacifist, so I hope they barely survive to tell the tale of woe.

  •  What a idiot!! (0+ / 0-)

    New York is a MAJOR international hub, something breaks out in NYC and it will go global fast!!

    these people are sick in the head, they actually beleive that the goverment is trying to harm people with a vacciene... WOW, just fucking WOW!!

  •  God forgive me but I hope Beck gets the worst case (0+ / 0-)
    of Swine Flu ever!
  •  Is it bad to hope Glenn Beck gets flu& pneumonia? (0+ / 0-)

    It's such a fun thought.

    We're all pretty strange one way or another; some of us just hide it better. "Normal" is a dryer setting.

    by david78209 on Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 03:05:13 PM PDT

  •  I really can't bare to click the play button... (0+ / 0-)

    when it comes to Beck anymore. Just seeing his face prompts a visceral roiling deep in my gut.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site