Listening to the very good No Agenda podcast with Adam Curry & John Dvorak, I learned of President Obama's investments in BioTech and his push a few weeks later (as a Senator) for more federal funding of the research done by the company he had invested in. Now we're less than a year into President Obama's first term, and in the middle of a Swine Flu Pandemic, which means that the President's biotech investments will likely pay off handsomely. So how come the media aren't investigating this?
http://noagenda.mevio.com/
- although I hate to quote anything posted on the free republic (republican teabagger website), facts re: president Obama's investments in avian flu developers are hard to find. but after investing in big pharma, as a senator he pushed bills promoting government investment in same companies. a little corrupt, perhaps, but now it's not avian but the sine flu, and the government is suggesting we inoculate all our citizens against it. in fact, WHO rules state that as a member nation, the US is required to give shots to all citizens. [if someone can find a weblink to info on Obama's investments and the bill # in question, please post in the comments to this. Freepers are assholes, and the No Agenda Show has not yet posted transcripts or a search engine for such on their website]
http://www.freerepublic.com/...
- there has not been enough testing of the swine flu vaccine. the swine flu vaccine uses components that are also found in Gardasil, which was rushed through the public without adequate testing. now reports are coming out that girls vaccinated with Gardasil are 4x more likely to suffer negative consequences (heart attacks, strokes, and death) than from similar vaccines (for example, the one against rubella). So vigilant consumers should raise questions about the negligible testing procedures taken with the swine flu vaccine, which was rushed to market. Especially since the swine flu vaccination is being pushed so vigorously -- the last big vaccine to hit the market was gardisil, and now that drug is being pushed on BOYS, lord knows why because they don't have cervixes with which to get cervical cancer. i don't trust big pharma to tell us the truth, and neither should you.
http://www.foodconsumer.org/...
http://www.gardasil.com/
- why do we need 2 shots and not just 1? one of the components (referred to above) are adjuvants which are used to modify one's immune response to a vaccine's live or dead agent (i'm not a doctor so i'm simplifying)
[I learned from a couple of responses both the spelling and purpose of adjuvants. thanks for the help, but not for the juvenile name-calling]
http://en.wikipedia.org/...
in the case of the swine flu vaccine, people over 6 years of age need 2 shots, not one, because the swine flu vaccine required using adjuvants in order to make enough of the vaccine for everyone. but i don't understand this logic -- why couldn't they have NOT watered down the vaccine with adjuvants and just given everyone 1 lousy shot? this smacks to me of corporate greed by big pharma, and nobody on TV is asking tough questions like this, forcing big pharma to explain themselves.
- we don't actually know how many people in the US have the swine flu. i learned on NPR last week that the CDC has told doctors that most people catching the flu right now are catching swine flu, so if the doctor asks if a fever has accompanied your flu, then they say the fever is one of the special effects of the swine flu, so you likely have swine flu. that's not a full count and i'm no expert in statistics, but on the surface it looks like bad math to me.
- finally, the adverse effects of swine flu are terrible, including death, but actually bring harm to a far lower number of people than other diseases which are more prevalent in other parts of the world, like dengue fever. the main concern with swine flu, which led to the 'pandemic' designation, is that it spreads very quickly amongst groups of people. since infection USUALLY results in people being healthy a week or two after infection, and then makes people immune to the disease afterwards, it's probably better for all of us to GET the swine flu, get healthy, and then become a stronger human race after beating back the flu. using the vaccine, which may be unsafe and which is very likely a big money grab by big pharma and barrack obama, accomplishes the same goal, but with the negative consequence of handing over $100+ for every shot given to the big pharma and the president's retirement holdings. screw that, just catch the danged swine flu and deal with it.
http://www.cdc.gov/...
- - added after initial posting -
This just in: researchers have found that if you get the regular flu vaccine, but not the swine flu vaccine, you're twice as likely to catch the swine flu.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/...