32 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
32 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Should Ebola vaccine makers get legal immunity?

by Joe Mobley
25 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
    • |
(Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on Tuesday offered liability protections to drugmakers rushing to develop Ebola vaccines and urged other countries to follow suit.
From the Book of Joe, Responsibilities 1:1

Thou shalt be responsible for thine own shit.


Therefore, I do not think drug makers, doctors, etc. should be exempt from their responsibilities.

But that's just me.

U.S. agency offers legal immunity to Ebola vaccine makers | Reuters

Joe Mobley
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    If its similar as explained here

    US Government Immunizes Future Manufacturers of Ebola Vaccines from Legal Liability | RAPS


    then I see absolutely no issue with it. If it extends for only 12 months and gets experimental drugs out there that may save a life in that time period then its all good. IF not then every company working on it is going to hold back resulting in deaths that might be avoidable.

    When a vaccine is established and refined then it should go back to falling under the normal guidelines for vaccines
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9730083].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

      If its similar as explained here

      US Government Immunizes Future Manufacturers of Ebola Vaccines from Legal Liability | RAPS


      then I see absolutely no issue with it. If it extends for only 12 months and gets experimental drugs out there that may save a life in that time period then its all good. IF not then every company working on it is going to hold back resulting in deaths that might be avoidable.

      When a vaccine is established and refined then it should go back to falling under the normal guidelines for vaccines
      It could also be argued that rushing experimental drugs on to the market without threat of liability could result in deaths that might be avoided.
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9730170].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

        It could also be argued that rushing experimental drugs on to the market without threat of liability could result in deaths that might be avoided.
        I don't see why a doctor would prescribe an experimental drug if the person was in fact responding to other treatment. If they aren' t responding to other treatment then we are talking about Ebola not the flu.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9730213].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Enfusia
          There is a HUGE point that is being missed here.

          What better way to wipe out a mass of the population than to put a delayed reaction carcinogen into a vaccine.
          You make Ebola vaccinations mandatory and 3-5 years later millions have cancer.

          It just so happens that you also own the market on most of the cancer drugs, equipment, treatment and even the facilities.

          You are imune to prosecution from your actions.

          Yes, there are folks out there that would do that.
          There are TONS of freaks out there in the world. Don't think so? you can find them on the internet in less than a second.

          Pardon me for my military logic of what might and well could transpire. As a disabled former combat Marine I tend to look at it like chess.

          Some of you might remember just last week the article where they said that the flue vaccine won't work this year but recommended you take it anyway, what???

          Yup, they did here's the link: The Flu Vaccine Might Not Work -- But You Should Get It Anyway

          Plus they just gave LA P.D. Grenade launchers. Why would cops need grenade launchers?

          Don't think they would do such thing?
          Grenade launchers don't just kill the bad guy they kill everyone in the area.
          Here's the link: Pentagon gives California police grenade launchers, snowshoes

          Just sayin...
          Signature
          Free eBook =>
          The Secret To Success In Any Business
          Yes, Any Business!
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9730312].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kay King
            There are cases where immunity makes sense - which is why a blanket "do you think this is right or not" doesn't work for something like this.

            Ebola is a good example. There was huge pressure to provide experimental meds to those in danger of dying of ebola. If a govt if going to pressure the medical community - or allow the medical community - to use a non-approved drug in an emergency....then YES the pharma and doctor and hospital should have immunity. Otherwise, what you have are drugs used and patient dies anyway....and drug is blamed and family sues. Or you have drugs used and life is saved - and patient sues because the drugs that saved him left him with another medical problem.

            Currently it takes 9-10 years to bring a new cancer drug to the market due to the testing required. Probably the same for ebola UNLESS pharma is pressured to provide drugs not yet fully tested.

            I don't think it should be that complicated. In a life threatening situation a PATIENT should be able to waive his rights to claim liability in order to have a drug that might save or greatly improve his life.
            Signature
            Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
            ***
            One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
            what it is instead of what you think it should be.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9730349].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author HeySal
            Originally Posted by Enfusia View Post

            There is a HUGE point that is being missed here.

            What better way to wipe out a mass of the population than to put a delayed reaction carcinogen into a vaccine.
            You make Ebola vaccinations mandatory and 3-5 years later millions have cancer.

            It just so happens that you also own the market on most of the cancer drugs, equipment, treatment and even the facilities.

            You are imune to prosecution from your actions.

            Yes, there are folks out there that would do that.
            There are TONS of freaks out there in the world. Don't think so? you can find them on the internet in less than a second.

            Pardon me for my military logic of what might and well could transpire. As a disabled former combat Marine I tend to look at it like chess.

            Some of you might remember just last week the article where they said that the flue vaccine won't work this year but recommended you take it anyway, what???

            Yup, they did here's the link: The Flu Vaccine Might Not Work -- But You Should Get It Anyway

            Plus they just gave LA P.D. Grenade launchers. Why would cops need grenade launchers?

            Don't think they would do such thing?
            Grenade launchers don't just kill the bad guy they kill everyone in the area.
            Here's the link: Pentagon gives California police grenade launchers, snowshoes

            Just sayin...
            We already know that the first polio vaccines they were giving us when we were kids in the 50's were laced with live cancer cells. That's been admitted.

            Guardasill (sp) has caused more morbidity and death than the cancer it was developed to stop would have in the first place. It's no longer being marketed it was so lethal.

            The US Gov gave Monsanto andTekmira Pharmaceuticals 140 mil for TKM Ebola - not sure if that's the one they were using experimentally or not but as far as I'm concerned, when you consider Monsanto -- then consider the crap that the pharms are allowed to get away with over here (medical industrial complex) I sure as hell wouldn't be using any of it.

            From everything I've read so far, it seems that people survive it when they drink mass quantities of water and also keep their electrolites in balance (ever heard of Pedeolite?). From every angle I've looked at this crap -- it looks like a form of parvo that hits humans instead of dogs. With the discussion of the electrolytes and water consumption - I'd go that route before ANYTHING that had Monsanto's hand in it. At all. This is a v-i-r-u-s...it's organic. There's nothing on this planet that is organic that can't be killed by something else organic.

            Furthermore - pharmaceutical companies were given a free pass on vaccines several years back. You can't sue a pharm if you have a vaccine and it ruins your life or kills a family member. They're in the clear here. In Europe, you can sue if they give your kid a vaccine and the kid ends up autistic for it. Over here they just look at you like your stupid and tell you that vaccines don't cause autism............even though all you have to do is ask them to see the packaging and look at the warning label right on the pkg to see that autism is listed in the possible side effects. duh. drool.

            Illness scares the crap out of people - so the pharms get over madness on the general population.
            Signature

            Sal
            When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
            Beyond the Path

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9731446].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author seasoned
              Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

              Guardasill (sp) has caused more morbidity and death than the cancer it was developed to stop would have in the first place. It's no longer being marketed it was so lethal.
              WOW! I knew there was a conspiracy, but never knew it was deadly. I mean WHY did they only allow girls of a certain age to take it? From what I have heard, HPV is THE most widely spread nasty lifetime virus there is! I have heard estimates as high as 33% contagion, AND RISING! It affects ******BOTH****** sexes! So AGAIN, WHY ONLY GIRLS?

              As for vaccine causing autism, I doubt it. The FDA has such crazy rules that, if a vaccine is merely THOUGHT to cause CDD(NOT AUTISM, but rumored to be), then they must put autism down. HECK, many such things ALSO speak of "guillain barre". Personally, I think "guillain barre" is a combination of poor hygiene mixed with an over active immune system. Look at infections that may trigger it, etc... and you start to see where I may get this idea:

              Guillain-Barré Syndrome-Topic Overview

              If I am right, one they should look at, as much as the maker of the virus is the distribution network, factory->patient.

              Steve
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9731777].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author HeySal
                Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

                WOW! I knew there was a conspiracy, but never knew it was deadly. I mean WHY did they only allow girls of a certain age to take it? From what I have heard, HPV is THE most widely spread nasty lifetime virus there is! I have heard estimates as high as 33% contagion, AND RISING! It affects ******BOTH****** sexes! So AGAIN, WHY ONLY GIRLS?

                As for vaccine causing autism, I doubt it. The FDA has such crazy rules that, if a vaccine is merely THOUGHT to cause CDD(NOT AUTISM, but rumored to be), then they must put autism down. HECK, many such things ALSO speak of "guillain barre". Personally, I think "guillain barre" is a combination of poor hygiene mixed with an over active immune system. Look at infections that may trigger it, etc... and you start to see where I may get this idea:

                Guillain-Barré Syndrome-Topic Overview

                If I am right, one they should look at, as much as the maker of the virus is the distribution network, factory->patient.

                Steve
                Of course, the gov says it's safe. They tell you anything the AMA decides it can do to you is safe. Do you really trust them?

                This article discusses the problem. I might be wrong that guardisil was pulled, but I know it was being talked about for awhile.

                Gardasil Vaccine | The Truth Behind Gardasil Shots and Swine Flu

                All I can tell you is to do a LOT of independent research on vaccines and decide for yourself how something that delivers an up to 25,000 times toxic level dose of thermasol can be safe in any estimation - for anything? Give a dog a teaspoon of thermasol and see how long it lives. Thermasol is mercury - antifreeze.

                As far as thermasol causing autism - as I said, read the pkg - and consider well the fact that the pharms get sued in other countries when their vaccines cause autism......at the same time we here are being told they don't even though the warning is on the packaging. Of course, we are told GMOs are safe at the same time other countries are banning them because they have been found not to be. The difference may be that we operate under a system of crony capitalism? Also remember that 193 countries just banned geo-engineering because of the extreme dangers and irreversible damage caused. Not the US, though. In the US they are selling permits to individual corporations for it. Go figure huh?
                Signature

                Sal
                When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
                Beyond the Path

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9733125].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author HeySal
            Originally Posted by Enfusia View Post

            There is a HUGE point that is being missed here.

            What better way to wipe out a mass of the population than to put a delayed reaction carcinogen into a vaccine.
            You make Ebola vaccinations mandatory and 3-5 years later millions have cancer.

            It just so happens that you also own the market on most of the cancer drugs, equipment, treatment and even the facilities.

            You are imune to prosecution from your actions.

            Yes, there are folks out there that would do that.
            There are TONS of freaks out there in the world. Don't think so? you can find them on the internet in less than a second.

            Pardon me for my military logic of what might and well could transpire. As a disabled former combat Marine I tend to look at it like chess.

            Some of you might remember just last week the article where they said that the flue vaccine won't work this year but recommended you take it anyway, what???

            Yup, they did here's the link: The Flu Vaccine Might Not Work -- But You Should Get It Anyway

            Plus they just gave LA P.D. Grenade launchers. Why would cops need grenade launchers?

            Don't think they would do such thing?
            Grenade launchers don't just kill the bad guy they kill everyone in the area.
            Here's the link: Pentagon gives California police grenade launchers, snowshoes

            Just sayin...
            We already know that the first polio vaccines they were giving us when we were kids in the 50's were laced with live cancer cells. That's been admitted.

            Guardasill (sp) has caused more morbidity and death than the cancer it was developed to stop would have in the first place. It's no longer being marketed it was so lethal.

            The US Gov gave Monsanto andTekmira Pharmaceuticals 140 mil for TKM Ebola - not sure if that's the one they were using experimentally or not but as far as I'm concerned, when you consider Monsanto -- then consider the crap that the pharms are allowed to get away with over here (medical industrial complex) I sure as hell wouldn't be using any of it.

            From everything I've read so far, it seems that people survive it when they drink mass quantities of water and also keep their electrolites in balance (ever heard of Pedeolite?). From every angle I've looked at this crap -- it looks like a form of parvo that hits humans instead of dogs. With the discussion of the electrolytes and water consumption - I'd go that route before ANYTHING that had Monsanto's hand in it. At all. This is a v-i-r-u-s...it's organic. There's nothing on this planet that is organic that can't be killed by something else organic.

            Furthermore - pharmaceutical companies were given a free pass on vaccines several years back. You can't sue a pharm if you have a vaccine and it ruins your life or kills a family member. They're in the clear here. In Europe, you can sue if they give your kid a vaccine and the kid ends up autistic from it. Over here they just look at you like your stupid and tell you that vaccines don't cause autism............even though all you have to do is ask them to see the packaging and look at the warning label right on the pkg to see that autism is listed in the possible side effects. duh. drool.

            Illness scares the crap out of people - so the pharms get over madness on the general population.

            Since they know that heavy water consumption and keeping electrolytes balanced creates survivors...you'd think that's what they'd be doing to treat it?
            Signature

            Sal
            When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
            Beyond the Path

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9731452].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Kay King
              In 1998, the National Cancer Institute undertook a large study, using cancer case information from the Institute's SEER database. The published findings from the study revealed that there was no increased incidence of cancer in persons who may have received vaccine containing SV40

              Another large study in Sweden examined cancer rates of 700,000 individuals who had received potentially contaminated polio vaccine as late as 1957; the study again revealed no increased cancer incidence between persons who received polio vaccines containing SV40 and those who did not.

              The question of whether SV40 causes cancer in humans remains controversial however, and the development of improved assays for detection of SV40 in human tissues will be needed to resolve the controversy

              Yes, there are cases where some paralysis is caused by the vaccine....but nowhere NEAR as many cases of polio as the vaccine prevents. The "anti vaccine" people are fools on this one in my opinion.
              Key facts

              • Polio (poliomyelitis) mainly affects children under 5 years of age.
              • One in 200 infections leads to irreversible paralysis. Among those paralyzed, 5% to 10% die when their breathing muscles become immobilized.
              • Polio cases have decreased by over 99% since 1988, from an
                estimated 350 000 cases then, to 416 reported cases in 2013. The reduction is the result of the global effort to eradicate the disease.
              • In 2014, only 3 countries (Afghanistan, Nigeria and Pakistan) remain polio-endemic, down from more than 125 in 1988.
              In 2013 NPR questioned whether polio had been "eradicated or not" as if only 0 cases were worth celebrating.

              It wasn't a perfect vaccine - but it saved tens of thousands of children....
              Signature
              Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
              ***
              One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
              what it is instead of what you think it should be.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9731582].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    ACTUALLY, this has been the law for a LONG time! It is a GIVEN! If you want to "FAST TRACK" vaccines, HOW do you think they do it? Increase the IQ of doctors by 20000%? NOPE! Keep doctors 100% lucid and awake and mandate that they work around the clock? NOPE! Send them back in a time machine to teach their younger selves about all that needs to be done? NOPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    They do one of two things, and sometimes BOTH!

    1. Mandate that use be only on people DESTINED to die!
    2. THROW OUT MANY TESTING PROTOCOLS/REQUIREMENTS!

    So HOW do you hold people responsible when you throw out requirements to do what informs all of risks and concerns? MANY first trials are BAD! As I recall, it was JENNER that shocked the world by infecting a boy with a nuisance disease. If that wasn't enough, I believe they were then exposed to SMALL POX! And YEAH, it worked, but they got cow pox, and likely had some outbreaks.

    There have been medicines delayed DECADES because of testing, etc....

    And YEAH, it stinks! You could be the LAST one to take a bad batch. Ever see "limitless"? ALL his friends that got the same trial HE did DIED! HE worked to improve things, and ended up changing his native abilities such that he didn't need the drug.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9730291].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    Enfusia,

    The US government, as most, is not to be trusted. They have done bad things, and others have also. But including a cancer, or other virus, is NOT something they would be immune from. Of course proving is difficult.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9730376].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Enfusia
      Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

      Enfusia,

      The US government, as most, is not to be trusted. They have done bad things, and others have also. But including a cancer, or other virus, is NOT something they would be immune from. Of course proving is difficult.

      Steve
      Hi, if I understand your point (correct me if I do not). It may not be that the Gov would have a hand in it. The company elect might. But in Jersey you can set up a Pharm Co for $5,000 and it takes 30 min (New Jersey is teh Pahrmacuetical state for a reason).

      As far as physical immunity, they wouldn't take it. Or if it were a virus they would have the real vaccine or atidote.

      I think in terms of strategy.

      If I was slowly turning a country into a third world country while B.R.I.C. rises I might want to get rid of the strong ones who will rebel and or a bunch of the useless eaters (as we have been called).

      There are many ways to weaken your opposition when time is on your side.
      Signature
      Free eBook =>
      The Secret To Success In Any Business
      Yes, Any Business!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9732671].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
    Banned
    Well, they could of course just let ebola victims be responsible for their own shit. That's currently not working out very well for them. If they are under pressure to deliver a vaccine that could potentially save thousands of lives, but they are under pressure to do it fast, yeah ... I would give them immunity and if I were in the ebola stricken countries, I wouldn't hesitate to use it. Beats dying of ebola.

    BBC News - Ebola outbreak: Virus still 'running ahead of us', says WHO

    Nearly 7,000 people have died from the Ebola virus-WHO -

    Ebola crisis: Sierra Leone doctors go on strike over inadequate equipment | World news | The Guardian

    Ebola 'flaming strongly' in western Sierra Leone, Guinea's forests, WHO says - Health - CBC News

    So yeah ... Let's just let them take care of their own shit.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9731356].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
      Really!?

      You have an opinion that differs from mine? Welcome to one of the largest clubs on the planet.

      You are "enthusiastic" about your opinion? Who would fault that?

      But instead of stating your ideas in a clear manner, you went off on an emotion-filled rant just to a personal swipe at me. I will give you credit though, your diatribe had all of the facts, reason and warmth of an al sharpton speech. (He's probably taking notes.)

      Suzanne, you are smart woman with, usually, a good sense of humor. I have noticed though that when your emotions have you, they grab you by the throat. Unfortunately, I speak from far to much personal experience in this area.

      You do bring up a valid point about the nearly impossible situation that ebola patients find themselves in. Let me suggest that this is all the more reason that those who interact with these people should exercise the highest level of responsibility towards them. Not be given a pass on that responsibility.

      Joe Mobley




      Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

      Well, they could of course just let ebola victims be responsible for their own shit. That's currently not working out very well for them. If they are under pressure to deliver a vaccine that could potentially save thousands of lives, but they are under pressure to do it fast, yeah ... I would give them immunity and if I were in the ebola stricken countries, I wouldn't hesitate to use it. Beats dying of ebola.


      So yeah ... Let's just let them take care of their own shit.
      Signature

      .

      Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9738235].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

        Really!?

        You have an opinion that differs from mine? Welcome to one of the largest clubs on the planet.

        You are "enthusiastic" about your opinion? Who would fault that?

        But instead of stating your ideas in a clear manner, you went off on an emotion-filled rant just to a personal swipe at me. I will give you credit though, your diatribe had all of the facts, reason and warmth of an al sharpton speech. (He's probably taking notes.)

        Suzanne, you are smart woman with, usually, a good sense of humor. I have noticed though that when your emotions have you, they grab you by the throat. Unfortunately, I speak from far to much personal experience in this area.

        You do bring up a valid point about the nearly impossible situation that ebola patients find themselves in. Let me suggest that this is all the more reason that those who interact with these people should exercise the highest level of responsibility towards them. Not be given a pass on that responsibility.

        Joe Mobley
        Joe ... I really wonder why and where you took my couple of little lines in this thread as a personal swipe at you or a rant. Fact is, I'm not the "humanitarian" type that gets emotional over news items that are far removed from my country and life. Never wanted to be a missionary type and trot off to stinking bug infested jungles to help people. Don't get me wrong ... I feel bad that several countries have this problem and a lot of their people are dying, but if Ebola were spreading like wildfire here and people dropping like flies, it would affect me emotionally. I also feel like much of the humanitarian aid, as in millions of dollars sent there, is going directly in the pockets of corrupt government officials rather than to the people that need it. I wouldn't send a nickel over there. Nor would I give $10 to an alcoholic bum on the street, because he'll buy alcohol instead of food. But I would buy him/her a meal.

        A differing opinion is not a personal swipe ... it is a differing opinion and nothing more. It is also not a rant and that's interesting that the thread has now filled up with anti-vaxxer rants and gov conspiracy rants, yet my couple of lines is somehow "the rant" of all rants. lol.

        I'll make my position clear. Thousands are dying of Ebola and a vaccine would be handy thing to have if it works. But the problem is, the government defunded an Ebola vaccine that was being developed and it was put on the shelf. Several other companies are not working as fast as they can on their vaccines for Ebola, but there is pressure upon them to get it out fast and eliminate some steps that they would otherwise take.

        If they want Ebola vaccine that bad, then the companies who produce it for them should not be at risk of going bankrupt with lawsuits if something goes wrong. Pharm companies are in the business of producing drugs that will profit their companies rather than bankrupt them. That's business 101. So, if some of them have a vaccine that has prevented Ebola in the apes that they have tested it on, and they do, and there were no harmful side effects in those apes, and there wasn't ... it appears that they are at least on the right path for a vaccine that will be effective in humans as well.

        But if it is not distributed quickly, it will be too late. There will be few over there either alive or who aren't already immune to Ebola because they survived it. Once that happens, the anti-vaxxers will move in and spread their fear and conspiracy theories and people over there, already being immune to Ebola and not thinking ahead to future generations, will once again go back to their beliefs in those conspiracy theories and shun the vaccine, which they are known to do. At the beginning of this epidemic, these uneducated people thought that the health care workers were trying to kill them all by spreading Ebola and that going to one of their hospitals was where they would kill them.

        So, if I were a Pharma co, and I'm not and don't play one on TV, I would not rush my vaccine, if indeed I bothered to even make an Ebola vaccine, particularly with the very likely chance that the company would be sued into Kingdom come by the same countries that it was trying to help.

        Just look at Duncan, America's first Ebola victim, after being fully exposed and lying his way into this country, he drops a surprise visit on an unsuspecting hospital here. He gets free medical care (which I don't, by the way) and causes havoc in a whole state and costs that state hundreds of thousands of dollars and a ding on the reputation of one of its hospitals. Two nurses then get Ebola because of him. Then the f%#ker dies in our hospital and the family sues and all get a nice settlement, compliments of the USA.

        Sorry, but I see no reason that anyone should put themselves or their companies at risk to lend a hand. That doesn't mean that humanitarian efforts shouldn't be made, but I would never risk being sued by people that I was trying to help. I know I won't win any Nobel prizes and I'm completely comfortable with that.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9738734].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
    This is part of a much bigger issue. How do you test new medicines?

    Human guinea pigs?

    Animal testing?

    If things go right and a new cure is found, all well and good.

    What if things go wrong though?

    This isn't a black or white issue, it is very, very grey.
    Signature
    Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
    So that blind people can hate them as well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9731395].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Nick Logan
    Hey guys!

    You should read this book...it is a total eye opener: Who is the real killer - Ebola or Pharmacy?
    Signature

    *****
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9738254].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Conspiracy theories. Bwahhhhaaaaa hahahahahaha. If people are so damned lofty sure that vaccines are safe then by all means let them have them. After all if YOU have your vaccine and it works just like they tell you they will, then you don't have to be afraid of me if I don't get one.

    I find it interesting that one country was able to completely douse a pretty large outbreak without special ebola drugs - while there are countries still raging with it and now are getting ready to be given unproven vaccines.

    Ya know it's one thing to give someone untested emergency meds - but emergency vaccines? Makes more sense to me to just do what the country that beat the illness (it's a virus, not a disease) did.

    Holy cow people go freaking batshyte crazy when they are scared. Seems weird to me that they can only be comforted by swallowing a vial of pills or getting a needle stuck in them. lol. I'm sorry - that that is really weird.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9738890].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
      Banned
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      Conspiracy theories. Bwahhhhaaaaa hahahahahaha. If people are so damned lofty sure that vaccines are safe then by all means let them have them. After all if YOU have your vaccine and it works just like they tell you they will, then you don't have to be afraid of me if I don't get one.
      I have, and my children have, taken all the recommended vaccines, so yeah. We aren't afraid of anti-vaxxers ... at all. And I'm still alive to talk about it and never got polio, DPT, MMR, smallpox and whatever else I was immunized against, as well as millions of others whose lives have been saved by said vaccines.

      But that is the reason that I didn't bother coming back to this thread until Joe decided that my four lines were a swipe at him, emotional and a rant, none of which is true.... But I really don't care what anti-vaxxers do with their lives, as long as they keep their children out of public schools or find some anti-vaxxer-only schools and I still have access to the vaccines that I choose for myself and family. That's the beauty of paid for gov education ... they get to determine what is a public health threat, not the anti-vaxxers. As long as a bunch of fringe fanatics don't affect my family's healthcare, they can do as they wish.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9738898].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    I agree with you. Each to what they think is safest for them. They say that the concentration of a few vaccines were high enough that theoretically the disease should have been wiped out - and that didn't happen so it's not really going to make a difference to anyone whether someone else gets vaccines or not. I believe everything to do with health is a personal choice. I had 2 vacs and that's all I'll ever get. Some people get em all, some get none. Some people die of the vac, some die of the disease. Some people get vac'd and still die of the disease. Flip your coin.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741073].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
      Banned
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      I agree with you. Each to what they think is safest for them. They say that the concentration of a few vaccines were high enough that theoretically the disease should have been wiped out - and that didn't happen so it's not really going to make a difference to anyone whether someone else gets vaccines or not. I believe everything to do with health is a personal choice. I had 2 vacs and that's all I'll ever get. Some people get em all, some get none. Some people die of the vac, some die of the disease. Some people get vac'd and still die of the disease. Flip your coin.
      I had all the usual childhood vaccinations and my kids did too. We basically got the vaccinations that are required by schools. I've never had another vaccination since my childhood. If the Ebola vaccine were available, I wouldn't go get one ... unless ... I lived in Sierra Leone, Liberia, etc. Then I might consider it. And it would be on my list in the future when it was tested and stabilized for my children in those countries.

      Once this epidemic is done, Ebola will remain in the bats that carry it and will continue to infect the apes and those people will continue to eat bush meat, so Ebola will sleep at times, but it will be back eventually. All it takes is one dead monkey on the dinner table to start the epidemic.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741099].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
        Suzanne,

        Thanks for your response. My apologies for my sensitivities.

        Thank you for taking a moment to spell out your ideas. You do bring to bear a point that I hadn't thought of but is probably true. The idea that there is a LARGE amount of corruption going on and it is probably costing lives. Unfortunate.

        I think the point that we probably disagree on is the "fast tracking" of approval. I'm all for it. I also understand that all of the testing and evaluation that normally goes on would not be possible.

        I do think that the measures that are taken and the disclosures to made should be done in the most responsible manner possible. Big-pharma being given a get-out-of-court-free card could possibly invite more of the corruption you mentioned.

        Just my opinion.

        Joe Mobley
        Signature

        .

        Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9742613].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

          Thank you for taking a moment to spell out your ideas. You do bring to bear a point that I hadn't thought of but is probably true. The idea that there is a LARGE amount of corruption going on and it is probably costing lives. Unfortunate.

          Joe Mobley
          Here's where I first of the conflicting political factions and how it is affecting aid to those countries. Pretty disgraceful.

          In the case of the shipping container, the desperately needed supplies seem to have been caught, at least in part, in a trap that is common the world over: politics, money and power.

          The government official who pleaded for the shipment to come in said that the political tensions may have contributed to the delay, to prevent the opposition from trumpeting the donations.
          http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/wo...yed-docks.html
          Here's another one that indicates that they only want cash donations rather than items needed by the hospitals and doctors

          Report: Donated Ebola aid sits unopened on Sierra Leone dock for weeks - The Washington Post

          The shipper agreed to send the container before receiving a $6,500 payment, which has so far not been made, despite the fact that the country has received $40 million in international donations.

          "Instead, top government officials argued over the fee, said that the proper procedures had not been followed, and finally brushed aside the official urging that the supplies be let in, saying they wanted to hear nothing more about it." It quoted Bah as saying "It appears all they are interested in is cash donations...."
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9743403].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Suzanne - feel like a little blood boil to wake you up? Check out the date on this "plan" before you read it. July 2014. Says a lot about what we're seeing right now. Prophetically timely to say the least.

    http://endinafrica.org/wp-content/up...lan-FY2015.pdf
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9743433].message }}

Trending Topics