Woo go Canada! I just read in the local paper that some 50-60% of Canadians did not get the H1N1 vaccine. In the prospect of an epidemic, that's a little scary.
@recyard12x So you're really going to pull the fallacy of personal incredulity on me? You can't find any, and you don't accept the sources I've linked to in the crotch bar, and you don't accept that its passing the FDA's thorough and rigorous safety checks, or the science behind how anti-bodies form in the body, thus you don't understand, so then it MUST be false?
Just a bit of constructive criticism, and I really don't mean to be a dick, but that's kind of an illogical argument.
@EvoGenVideos I didn't see any articles about long term effects, and after all the years they've been giving them, you would think there would be some good information somewhere. but as I am not: under 65 with chronic conditions, Pregnant, a Child 6 months to 5 years, residing in remote and isolated settings or communities, or a Health care workers. Because flu vaccine or no our bodies are designed to deal with the flu. and a healthy lifestyle and diet are just as effective if not more.
@recyard12x Bro, the Fallacy of Personal Incredulity is not something you want to make in the open. But the next question is do you really know what you're looking for? Or are you searching through Google? But furthermore, flu vaccines prevent people from dying from the flu. Healthy lifestyles and diets can do some good, but its not more effective, and it doesn't prevent you from getting the disease. People used to die in droves just because of the flu, even if they were healthy.
He did up a good article about why the flu data is so hard to confirm. For every pro vac there's a con vac 3wdotsciencebasedmedicinedororg/?p=2040
"response to the vaccine is not 100%. The older and more immunoincompetent are the least likely to develop a good antibody response to the vaccine. In a bit of medical irony, the more likely a patient is to need protection from the vaccine, the less likely they are to get a protective antibody response from the vaccine."
@recyard12x Having a compromised immune system doesn't mean anything more than just that. What you've just said is "people with poor immune systems are least likely to have an immune response to the vaccine." Yeah, that's common sense with any vaccine, not just flu vaccines.
@recyard12x (part 2) I mean, you do know how vaccines work and anti-bodies form, right? And you're aware of the high mutation in Influenza strains, right? You're also aware that the FDA also tests to see if food, drugs, or supplements are safe to not only consume, but also for purity and potency, and that they do what they're advertised to do, right?
@EvoGenVideos yes I know about vaccines, and the mutation of flu strains. I have my doubts about the FDA though. They do allow vitamins and diet pills, both are safe as well, but they don't really do anything for you. But as the death rate for the flu has remained fairly constant no matter how far off the vaccine strain is from the virus going around it could imply that the shots don't help. And as more doctors are refusing to get it, that implies good hygiene is more effective.
@recyard12x I would need to know who those doctors are (an actual list) before I took a reference to a nebulous cabal of doctors as credible. The shots do help, because the death rate would be higher, but the high mutation rate of the flu keeps the death toll where its at. Even if you skipped a year accidently, it would still be better than not ever having it, and hygiene wouldn't prevent you from getting sick. The disease is caused by the microbes, not uncleanliness.
@recyard12x (part 2) About the FDA though, they don't have domain over vitamins and supplements, until someone actually dies or gets hurt, because of the legal maneuvering done by supplement suppliers (typically advertising that its not a drug or food, stupid, I know). They don't get to step in until public health becomes an issue, but also take note that a lot of diet pills, supplements, and vitamins will say "these statements aren't backed by the FDA."
@recyard12x (part 3) Ephedrine (and its derivitives) for example, were being used as a diet supplement, to help lose weight. The FDA didn't have domain over it, so they had no say-so over whether or not it went commercial. It wasn't until it was linked to hundreds of deaths (and even more injuries, most of them neurological or cardiovascular) that the FDA was finally able to take the reigns and have it removed from the market.
@unmarkedX Okay. You're the one claiming "pharma won, gov't's lost," and no we haven't clarified that, and no my sources say no such thing. You're claiming that, after skimming over them at best, while simultaneously ignoring every other word I say, because its somehow not good enough. And if you're going to turn into a douche, I'm done here.
@unmarkedX Wrong. They are, and you're seemingly desperate to claim that they're not. For someone claiming to come into this with no preconceptions, you seem to have a denialist's standard of evidence.
I read a published paper written by a group of doctors that claimed: The flu shots and just the flu shots. have never had any double blind tests to see if they actually work. Second even when they get the strain wrong their is no increase in the death count from the flu. and lastly that autopsies don't even test for flu viruses and the WHO uses an algorithm to get their data for the number of people who they think died from the flu. I'll look for the link again as I found it over a year ago
@recyard12x That's wrong. First of all, doctors aren't scientists. Secondly, the flu shots were indeed tested to see if they work. Any drug or vaccine has been. The FDA requires it, and it typically it takes around 10 years to get them to approve anything, and when they err, it's typically on the side of unjustified paranoia.
Given that, I'm not prepared to just accept similar claims about the WHO.
@EvoGenVideos Ok I'm having problems finding that paper again. But can you cite any research on the flu vaccine getting tested? And is it just tested to be safe, or to work? Also from the cdc. 3w.cdc dot gov/h1n1flu/estimates_2009_h1n1 dot htm. it uses statistical modeling to estimate the burden of flu illness (including hospitalizations and deaths) in the United States. In the interest of disclosure, what is your tie in or connections to the H1N1 vaccine?
@EvoGenVideos why did you make the video? do you work for any company that makes, sells or researches the vaccine? Do you have any interests on weather or not people take the vaccine? I don't get nearly enough space for these discussions.
@recyard12x Oh. I don't work for anyone that makes or sells the vaccine, but I do a lot of research on biotechnology in my spare time, and I'm starting school soon so that I get into the overall branch of medicine that includes the same type of engineering that led to the H1N1 attenuated live virus vaccine (genomics). In particular, this specific subject is something I've been reading up on since the scare in 2009. So, no, I'm not scientist, but I'm aspiring to be a geneticist.
@recyard12x (part 2) I made the video, because genetics gets a lot of flack from people who read from propagandist, non-expert sources, and H1N1 is perhaps one of the biggest sources of anti-science, anti-genetics propaganda. Anti-vaxxer paranoia, medical denialism, and other similar attitudes have led to people dying from things that should otherwise have been easilly preventable/treatable diseases. In short, like my other videos, it was to clear up some of the mud thrown at genetics.
@recyard12x Not specific paperwork, but to paraphrase "DNA- The Secret of Life" by James Watson, to go from experimental drug to FDA approved, commercially available drug is one that seldom takes less than 10 years. (p.128). He also references how when they err, they often do so on the side of unjustified paranoia (p.153, 154). The same regulations for GM crops and gene therapy, are the same used for vaccines.
You say that what triggered the scare (which was obviously driven by official bodies) was that 1 rapid mutation 2 hitting people at their prime
I consider the 1st point inadequate as a basis for the alarm razed. Ordinary flu and other viruses mutate quickly as well. It does not mean that the virus is virulent or a massive public health hazard.
Can you actually provide the link backing up the claim that this virus actually had a high mortality amongst people in their prime?
I notice you use 'supposedly in their prime’, care to explain that? If these were erroneous reports, do you not think that there was any stage at which this misunderstanding could be resolved to a degree that would allow the scaling down of the scare and the alarm amongst authorities?
You claim that the fact the pandemic did not materialize at the scale and significance predicted by the authorities, the media and other official and semi-official sources has to be attributed to campaigns about washing hands and vaccination programs
Do you have a link with evidence indicating that this is what actually happened?
Are you suggesting that in your opinion the virulence of the strain was neither overstated nor overestimated during the scare? You do not, even in retrospect, think that might have been part of it?
Then you go on about the lack of any motive in a conspiracy scenario
I will state for the record that I have no evidence to either support or reject a scenario of that nature, and therefore this is not what I am doing
But, since your discussion is at a theoretical level as well, are you claiming that no one benefited from the pandemic or at least the scare surrounding it?
And yet the massive pandemic never happened! So, even if, as you say, vaccination played a part, don’t you think that at least in retrospect the scale of the vaccination programs required was somewhat :-) overestimated?
Are there not clearly some unwarranted beneficiaries of this excess?
I think this is a slight misrepresentation. There are some studies in the literature pointing towards this link. These studies have been extensively criticized. There have been several other studies disputing this link and several consensus documents and policies by panels of experts and official bodies rejecting the link after reviewing the available data.
The amount of Thimerosal in flu vaccines is negligible from a health point of view
Given that as part of this pandemic the vaccination of pregnant women (any trimester) and babies under 6 months old was recommended (and strongly advocated), can you point to evidence that the amount is negligible in these groups as well?
@unmarkedX "can you point to evidence that the amount is negligible in these groups as well"
Yeah. There's a link in the crotch bar. There's a few of them actually, some of them talking about the additives in the vaccines specifically, one of them specifically addressing getting vaccines during pregnancy. Have you actually taken a look at them, or did you just watch the video?
@unmarkedX The link discusses the safety of certains, and when is a good time to get them or not get them. Another link, the Vaccine FAQ explains that most vaccines given to children and infants (which would go to include fetuses) do not contain thimerosol, except for the flu shots. However the pregnancy FAQ explains that flu shots should be received during pregnancy, which I would hope implies their safety. My point on Thimerosol not being harmful in vaccine doses still stands.
@unmarkedX The story about Jenny McCarthy is but one link. You can either read through the links, the subsequent four of which are perhaps the most relevant to what you're looking for, or you can stop asking for links. When you've read through the links I've provided, then you can ask for links.
@unmarkedX So the fact that flu shots are given to pregnant women and recommended at that, are you seriously implying that the safety of the fetus is not once taken into account? So, you're not willing to consider a source on which vaccines are safe for pregnant women and her child, and when to get them, because it spells it out implicitly, rather than explicitly asking for it?
your source says that the mother should be offered the vaccine if at risk of dying from flu complications ( and calls apon the physician to largely make or guide this decision on an individualized basis)
It does not tell you there is no risk to the fetus
@unmarkedX I've just added another link that explicitly says what you're asking for. And no, I didn't read the source wrong. The whole article is on vaccines recommended to protect the mother and her unborn child, and which are safe and not safe to get. As in both at the same time. Maybe I'm just crazy, but the article references the "inactivated vaccines" not posing a risk to the fetus, in the beginning of the article, which includes the recommended flu vaccine.
@unmarkedX Yeah. A new link I just posted says there is no risk associated with the fetus and giving the mother a flu vaccine, which would include all of its additives (about a third to one-quarter of the way down), which in turn includes the thimerosol.
@EvoGenVideos American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009 Oct 20 “Safety of Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy” Div of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, John Hopkins University, “Inactivated influenza vaccine can be safely and effectively administered during any trimester of pregnancy Moreover, no scientific evidence exists that thimersol-containing vaccines are a cause of adverse events among children born to women who received influenza vaccine during pregnancy.” PUBMED: 19850275
@EvoGenVideos Try this link in answer to this fellow. PUBMED should have the types of research listed to counter what this fellow is implying. Keep up the good work!
@unmarkedX I don't think the fact that people made money means anything. Correlation does not equal causation. In fact, some people, including pork farmers, lost money. But the media played a large role in blowing the epidemic out of proportion.
@unmarkedX Yeah. But there is no factual evidence of a conspiracy, and that's what I was getting at. It was an attempt to explain that for that reason, it wasn't justifiable to think that the government produced the H1N1 virus for the sake of killing people, like the conspiracists were claiming.
There is factual evidence to show that H1N1 is a natural-born virus, and the product of horizontal gene transfer and rapid mutation. I think I accomplished what I set out to do with the video.
@unmarkedX I think you're playing the denialist game. You don't see any evidence in the video, or you're not willing to accept any? The fact that influenza is a naturally occuring virus, as are the other versions it had a horizontal gene transfer event with, and the fact that there is more evidence to suppose that than a gov't conspiracy, that the response of the gov't is unjustified if the conspiracy is true, including that pharmaceutical companies lost money, that's not evidence... Right.
@unmarkedX No. I'm stating based on the evidence, I asked, what reason would the government have to kill their cash cow? Or better yet, their voters? Wouldn't the government, as unmonolithic as it is, largely be appalled by such actions? Wouldn't someone speak up on conscientious grounds, that they had something to do with it and the aim was to kill our own citizens and to cause a global epidemic?
@unmarkedX Yeah. It was definitely blown out of proportion by the media, taking what precautions were suggested to mean "everyone will die." It's nothing new really, it happens all the time. For example, in Florida with hurricane season, if a tropical storm so much has the threat of rustling a few leaves, people take safety precautions and run screaming down the street with them, "the end is nigh."
@unmarkedX Yeah, but think of who makes up governments? The uninformed, the frightened, the non-experts. As far as non-expert interpretation of the experts' data, then sure, yes, they did miscalculate, and I'm sure it wasn't intentional. Stuff like that happens all the time.
@unmarkedX And no, I didn't intend to say that was what did it alone. I was saying it helped, along with other precautionary measures. I think that people being cautious definitely helped.
@unmarkedX "Supposedly at their prime" referred to people who were in their late teens, twenty-somethings, and early to mid thirties. However, a lot of people who died from the disease also had other health issues going on: they were sick with something else or were recovering from injury, their immune systems were compromised, something of that nature. Sure, it was a rough virus to catch, but it typically sounded the death knell if they were already recovering from/battling something else.
Just like all sorts of known viral and bacterial infections who normally do not kill the healthy routinely kill people with significant comorbidities in hospitals every day
what I am asking is
Do you not think that organizations like the CDC or WHO would be able to sort out if this was simply the case or if some extraordinary danger for the actually healthy was indeed posed?
@unmarkedX Well, let's go back to the mutation rate in its context, it got increasingly deadly within just a matter of days. There was a risk that the virus could become more virulent in a similar amount of time. Simply because hind-sight is 20/20 doesn't mean that the precautions or warnings were unwarranted. I'd rather they have done that than had they done nothing at all.
@unmarkedX No, because I would end up losing a lot more money when I had to throw out stock I didn't need, kind of like how the pharmaceutical companies lost money when they had to throw out 40 million expired vaccine doses, and around the time the article in Discovery News was written, another 30 million went bad and had to be thrown out. In total, it was nearly half the country's H1N1 vaccine stock. It would still be a financially stupid move to intentionally overhype a disease.
@unmarkedX No, one of them says that governments wasted money. But keep in mind that if pharmaceutical companies are producing vaccines, like you and I will both agree, it would be them who lose money on the 70 million doses that were thrown out in the US alone. The gov't wouldn't feel any bit of that sting. The government might have wasted money, but they didn't lose money from the 70 million doses being thrown out. I'm not changing anything, you misinterpreted the links.
In an interview with London's The Independent newspaper, a World Health Organization advisor, Prof. Ulrich Keil, complained that by calling the early H1N1 outbreak a “pandemic,” countries around the world wasted precious public health money: "
We know the great killers are hypertension, smoking, high cholesterol, high body mass index, physical inactivity and low fruit and vegetable intake....instead [governments] wasted huge amounts of money by investing in pandemic scenarios whose evidence base is weak."
The second charge, prominently made by Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, the former head of health at the Council of Europe, is that the WHO is unduly influenced by the drugs industry, which stood to make a fortune from selling anti-virals and vaccines. The Swiss giant Novartis, for example, saw its profits jump by nearly a third in the first quarter of this year to $2.95bn, much of it from delivering swine flu vaccines ordered last year.
Debate rages over allegations that some experts who recommended the pandemic be declared, have links to drugs companies, although this has been denied. But critics note that it's hard to become an expert in the field without having some funding from big pharmaceutical companies.
@unmarkedX "critics...hard to become an expert without having funding from big pharmaceutical companies"
That's an opinion from non-experts, not a fact, and even if it were true, it wouldn't prove a conspiracy in the slightest. It would prove that certain biotech companies and pharmaceutical companies were interested in your research, and would like to see it go somewhere, possibly prosper from it. Nothing else.
@unmarkedX Doesn't prove a conspiracy, and its one guy and his opinion. I think you're interested more in who is making the accusation, rather than the evidence supporting said accusation. The World Health Organization doesn't stand to make any of the money from H1N1 vaccine sales, so it wouldn't benefit them to overreact. And given that the same companies producing the vaccines lost money on what they couldn't sell, even if they did have ties to the WHO, they would lose money, too.
@unmarkedX Again, the government consists of politicians, in any country, often times the uneducated (as far as science), the non-experts, and the frightened. It just so happens that they're also the policy-makers and decision-makers of the country.
I think you're taking this out of context, but let's assess what this means. Often times, words like "theory" or "pandemic" have grossly different meanings for scientists/public health experts than they do for non-scientists and non-experts. A pandemic means something that has gone cross-country or international, but to the untrained, it means "everyone will die." Not explaining it simpler terms was a mistake, in other words.
@unmarkedX Yeah, I would consider half of what I'd produced a pretty big loss. That means a large amount of the money I'd made would probably have gone to disposing of all of the expired vaccine doses. Meaning, if I would have made any profit at all, I would have lost money on all of the overstock I couldn't sell, and I might not have lost it all, but I would have lost a lot of it. Half is a damn big chunk.
I think you're going through mental gymnastics on that one. Typically, when overstock can't be sold by a secondary producer, they have to sell it back to the primary producer. Then its on the hands of the primary producer (pharmaceutical companies) to dispose of it themselves. I've been in the manufacturing industry for 5 years, and when a secondary producer can't get rid of overstock we've sold them, they sell it back to us, so WE can get rid of it..
@unmarkedX "get rid of," "dispose of," you know what I mean, but you're being pedantic. And until you can actually account for how "pharma won, gov'ts lost," rather than trying to quote mine MY sources, I have no reason to take your one liner seriously.
@unmarkedX Definitely, rapid mutation alone isn't much reason for concern, but the regular flu is still pretty bad, and if that were it, there would still be cause for concern. The rapid mutation in context causing alarm was the fact that it became contagious and crossed the species border in a very short amount of time, couldn't be contained quickly enough, and went international shortly after that.
@EvoGenVideos As far as killing people in their prime, I only said that it killed people in their prime. I didn't say anything about high mortality rate in people in their prime. I simply made a statement along the lines that being in one's prime wasn't a reason to think you were safe. As for a link to it killing people in their prime, look for news reports that talk about the people who lost their lives. I hate using the "look it up for yourself" line, but it's practically everywhere.
@unmarkedX Yeah, but you're again claiming that I'm claiming there was a high mortality rate, and I never did. All I said was that it was killing people in their prime, never how many people. Secondly, my source wasn't the World Health Organization, but their concerns at the time were warranted.
If you don't want to look up news reports, then I can't force you, but just know that the obituaries and the reports are there. I used a picture of one in the video during that point.
@unmarkedX Well, imagine that you've been presented with a threat, one that has become significantly more dangerous in a short amount of time. A death toll and the number of cases rises significantly. In the past there were outbreaks of this same threat, which killed significantly more people. Would a reaction expecting similar or worse than what happened last time not be justified?
@belmarfilms Bro, for real? I explained it in the video around 5 minutes, 30 seconds in. The thimerosol (which uses mercury) used in vaccines is used to prevent contamination from other microbes. Furthermore, the amount used, while being enough to prevent contamination from other microbes, is still so little that it can't hurt you. Mercury can only really only hurt you in larger doses. I believe the saying goes "the poison is in the dose."
@IppatsuTensei88 No, it's just YouTube's coding the comments to not work right if there are URL's in them. I think its to prevent people from leaving the website as much as possible.
@IppatsuTensei88 A conspiracist website. Seriously? After I addressed part of what was in the opening paragraph? Don't just post a link to something I rebutted, its not like repeating it a second time will make it go away. Offer a rebuttal to my arguments, comment on the quality of the video, or just don't bother.
@EvoGenVideos I don't believe you did rebut this. You cleared the point about the vaccine being patented and not the virus itself, which is fine. There are a couple of notes which drew my attention. Notes such as mercury levels in these vaccines, a study linking mercury with neurobehavioral disorders in children, the quote above where professionals are refusing the vaccine and the quote stating that "You literally need 'national security clearance' to get the full ingredients list."
@IppatsuTensei88 Okay, 1) the levels of mercury used in a vaccine are so tiny, there's no risk associated with it. 2) The only studies showing links between vaccines and neurological disorders are dubious, just look at Andrew Wakefield. He lied in his research, and his supposed sample group consisted of the guests at his child's birthday party.
@IppatsuTensei88 3) Security clearances are used to prevent competitors from seeing, and reverse engineering your product, or having unauthorized personnel leak information to competitors, whether accidental or intentional. It's a counter measure to espionage. I work for a gov't sub-contractor where protecting patents and technical data is one of our top priorities. It's not about being shady, its about protecting intellectual property.
@IppatsuTensei88 4) You don't actually need a clearance to look up the ingredients list. The ingredients of a vaccine are all pretty much the same, except for whatever virus you're using for said vaccine.
@IppatsuTensei88 And finally, number 6). There's a difference between posting a reference to a nebulous list of doctors, and actually posting said list. What are those doctor's names? Who are they? Is there any reason that their conclusion might have a bias? Why do they think the way they do?
Seriously, your link was the same paranoid crap I responded to. I tend to be cautious of anything that refers to a dark cabal called "Big Pharma."
it is bad, the fact that you have it does not make you as a person bad but if you could you would prefer not to have it, right? sorry if i offended someone but its kinda like being ginger -- you are not bad as a human, but you are inferior biologically
@zehaha No, having H1N1 ultimately boils down to just being at the wrong place at the wrong time, and just happening to get infected. Many who caught it fought it off, but many who caught it also had other health problems at the time, so it ended up being too much for the body to overcome and they died. It had to do with the immune system being overwhelmed by and large, not being "biologically inferior."
@zehaha Well, yeah that too. Autism kind of strikes randomly, too. It doesn't boil down to inferiority, anyone's kids could get it, including yours. But that wouldn't make them or you genetically inferior.
@EvoGenVideos 1. i didnt mean to insult in anyways idk were you got that from
2. i also heard from somewhere else that they had created it in Canada but they made this shipment to Mexico witch got caught up in the pigs (swine) after that mexican people found out about the disease and yes i got the point of the video ti dosent mean your right .. it dosent meant your wrong either but all im saying is that it really didnt come from mexico
@DjInglorious But, why are you saying that without giving evidence that it wasn't from Mexico? Unless you missed the point of the video, or are making a bad attempt at an insult.
you said swine flue was never an epidemic at the beginning??? It was a pandemic wtf, teachers at my school caught it, and i live in Queensland in Australia...
@HaydenHatTrick On that note, I have no idea what people are going on about in America or the rest of the world.... so I'll assume this video was targeted at that.
@HaydenHatTrick No, I said that the "epidemic that was predicted to happen didn't happen." As in more people would die than those who died in World War II, that so many people would die in droves that public areas would become quiet and devoid of life. Yeah, it was a pandemic, just not as bad as it was predicted. And people died, but not in the millions or billions. The regular flu killed slightly more people than the H1N1 outbreak that year.
@EvoGenVideos In Australia, I think that 2 people died, who already had a serious disease.... With bird flue, they bit the bullet and locked down the city of origin. I'm kinda annoyed that they let people come and go as they pleased WITH all the fuss...
@zehaha Autism is a naturally occuring thing, it's not bad it just isn't what most wouldn't consider normal. Even if there is no normal, but that's a philosophical discussion .
last year at school when i got the nasal vaccine for H1N1 people were saying i would get it because it had the live germ and all i got was a massive headache the next day and nothing else shows what they know
@yinyang10020 The H1N1 vaccine IS H1N1, but the public doesn't understand that you need to come in contact with a virus to be vaccinated for that virus(much like how they use snake venom for the antidote).
When you get chicken pox you are 99% certain to never have it again because your body will know how to deal with it. Not all Viruses are like this however, such as small pox you need a vacination every 10 years or so.
finally! some one with some brain in their head! congratulations on not being an idiot! I`m sick of all the people saying that everything is a conspiracy, and that the government always tries to kill them... (like the government could function without people to give laws to...)(<- that`s the fist argument against some conspiracy theories)
@skadime (like the government could function without people to give laws to and to control through media make everyone fear a specific something...)(<- that`s the fist argument against some conspiracy theories)
@motorstorm123 I'm assuming you've never heard of Placaebos or even scare tactics. One of those I don't think applies to this, but I find both are far to common.
I bet you feel as though you are very intelligent!!!!!!!!!! How much did you get paid by big pharma to lie to the populace? Really, you have to see the particles in the vaccine for it to cause any damage? WOW- I can't see anthrax particle, potassium cyanide and many other chemicals but they can be deadly. When was the last time you read the insert in those vac? And why was this virus patent in 2008 when many people have never heard of this virus? I am sure you got your dose, did you?
Well, just reading your paranoid ramblings, and given that you probably took everything I said and let it run in one ear and out the other, I think anything's better than how stupid or mentally insane you sound at the moment. You're the kind of trash I made this video to counteract.
@mikuruasahinarunrun You can see anthrax. Shows how much you know, also anthrax isn't a chemical its a virus, so lumping it in with Chemicals is completely wrong.
@victorcelmare yes blame the Muslims, good try. Any intelligent person with critical thinking skill can realize who is behind this---Same breed of people--Palatino, Shuchat, Nancy Synderman, William Schaffner, Kathleen Sebelius, Thomas Friedman just to name a few. All these people have one thing in common--you figure it out. At the same time they are the ones trying push down their agenda on this rest of us in an attempt to carry out their plans, preserve their group, while getting rid of us
@mikuruasahinarunrun You're not really making an argument with anything you've said, just baseless accusations and bare assertion fallacies. I made this video for free, because the only basis you have for anything is paranoia. If its nebulous or difficult to understand, it must be a conspiracy. The only people to use the words "Big Pharma" are people who don't understand how the FDA or biotech companies work. And for the record, I got my H1N1 flu shot around four months ago, never got sick.
I swear I wanted to kill someone for sitting there saying "It wasn't that bad for me, so the Government was lying to us, trying to control us!!!!!" when the H1N1 was beginning to wind down from the media hysterics.
It's very frustrating trying to get people to stop being idiots, and I applaud you for trying!
I never get the flu vaccine, and I never get the flu either.
flubno 1 year ago
Woo go Canada! I just read in the local paper that some 50-60% of Canadians did not get the H1N1 vaccine. In the prospect of an epidemic, that's a little scary.
BuBBaGump014 1 year ago
My last point on this, its interesting that I can find no studies that give any data on the long term effect of flu vaccines.
recyard12x 1 year ago
@recyard12x So you're really going to pull the fallacy of personal incredulity on me? You can't find any, and you don't accept the sources I've linked to in the crotch bar, and you don't accept that its passing the FDA's thorough and rigorous safety checks, or the science behind how anti-bodies form in the body, thus you don't understand, so then it MUST be false?
Just a bit of constructive criticism, and I really don't mean to be a dick, but that's kind of an illogical argument.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos I didn't see any articles about long term effects, and after all the years they've been giving them, you would think there would be some good information somewhere. but as I am not: under 65 with chronic conditions, Pregnant, a Child 6 months to 5 years, residing in remote and isolated settings or communities, or a Health care workers. Because flu vaccine or no our bodies are designed to deal with the flu. and a healthy lifestyle and diet are just as effective if not more.
recyard12x 1 year ago
@recyard12x Bro, the Fallacy of Personal Incredulity is not something you want to make in the open. But the next question is do you really know what you're looking for? Or are you searching through Google? But furthermore, flu vaccines prevent people from dying from the flu. Healthy lifestyles and diets can do some good, but its not more effective, and it doesn't prevent you from getting the disease. People used to die in droves just because of the flu, even if they were healthy.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos yes, i love how science has, what, TRIPLED? our life expectancy?
blazereef 1 year ago
He did up a good article about why the flu data is so hard to confirm. For every pro vac there's a con vac 3wdotsciencebasedmedicinedororg/?p=2040
"response to the vaccine is not 100%. The older and more immunoincompetent are the least likely to develop a good antibody response to the vaccine. In a bit of medical irony, the more likely a patient is to need protection from the vaccine, the less likely they are to get a protective antibody response from the vaccine."
recyard12x 1 year ago
@recyard12x Having a compromised immune system doesn't mean anything more than just that. What you've just said is "people with poor immune systems are least likely to have an immune response to the vaccine." Yeah, that's common sense with any vaccine, not just flu vaccines.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@recyard12x (part 2) I mean, you do know how vaccines work and anti-bodies form, right? And you're aware of the high mutation in Influenza strains, right? You're also aware that the FDA also tests to see if food, drugs, or supplements are safe to not only consume, but also for purity and potency, and that they do what they're advertised to do, right?
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos yes I know about vaccines, and the mutation of flu strains. I have my doubts about the FDA though. They do allow vitamins and diet pills, both are safe as well, but they don't really do anything for you. But as the death rate for the flu has remained fairly constant no matter how far off the vaccine strain is from the virus going around it could imply that the shots don't help. And as more doctors are refusing to get it, that implies good hygiene is more effective.
recyard12x 1 year ago
@recyard12x I would need to know who those doctors are (an actual list) before I took a reference to a nebulous cabal of doctors as credible. The shots do help, because the death rate would be higher, but the high mutation rate of the flu keeps the death toll where its at. Even if you skipped a year accidently, it would still be better than not ever having it, and hygiene wouldn't prevent you from getting sick. The disease is caused by the microbes, not uncleanliness.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@recyard12x (part 2) About the FDA though, they don't have domain over vitamins and supplements, until someone actually dies or gets hurt, because of the legal maneuvering done by supplement suppliers (typically advertising that its not a drug or food, stupid, I know). They don't get to step in until public health becomes an issue, but also take note that a lot of diet pills, supplements, and vitamins will say "these statements aren't backed by the FDA."
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@recyard12x (part 3) Ephedrine (and its derivitives) for example, were being used as a diet supplement, to help lose weight. The FDA didn't have domain over it, so they had no say-so over whether or not it went commercial. It wasn't until it was linked to hundreds of deaths (and even more injuries, most of them neurological or cardiovascular) that the FDA was finally able to take the reigns and have it removed from the market.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
your answers to the quotes are simply irrelevant
there are not posted to support a conspiracy
there are there to confirm the claim you disputed
the articles you point to CLEARLY STATE
GOVERNMENTS LOST
PHARMA WON
which we now have clarified
(BTW though! you probably should not have pointed to articles with which you disagree so strongly
You feel the need to counter every sentence conatined in the articles YOU pointed to in order to SUPPORT your case?:-))
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Okay. You're the one claiming "pharma won, gov't's lost," and no we haven't clarified that, and no my sources say no such thing. You're claiming that, after skimming over them at best, while simultaneously ignoring every other word I say, because its somehow not good enough. And if you're going to turn into a douche, I'm done here.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
give other sources then
your claim is not on these
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Wrong. They are, and you're seemingly desperate to claim that they're not. For someone claiming to come into this with no preconceptions, you seem to have a denialist's standard of evidence.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
HAVE YOU actually read YOUR links???
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX I have read them, but are you?
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
I read a published paper written by a group of doctors that claimed: The flu shots and just the flu shots. have never had any double blind tests to see if they actually work. Second even when they get the strain wrong their is no increase in the death count from the flu. and lastly that autopsies don't even test for flu viruses and the WHO uses an algorithm to get their data for the number of people who they think died from the flu. I'll look for the link again as I found it over a year ago
recyard12x 1 year ago
@recyard12x That's wrong. First of all, doctors aren't scientists. Secondly, the flu shots were indeed tested to see if they work. Any drug or vaccine has been. The FDA requires it, and it typically it takes around 10 years to get them to approve anything, and when they err, it's typically on the side of unjustified paranoia.
Given that, I'm not prepared to just accept similar claims about the WHO.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos Ok I'm having problems finding that paper again. But can you cite any research on the flu vaccine getting tested? And is it just tested to be safe, or to work? Also from the cdc. 3w.cdc dot gov/h1n1flu/estimates_2009_h1n1 dot htm. it uses statistical modeling to estimate the burden of flu illness (including hospitalizations and deaths) in the United States. In the interest of disclosure, what is your tie in or connections to the H1N1 vaccine?
recyard12x 1 year ago
@recyard12x "what is your tie in or connections to the H1N1 vaccine"
Before I answer any of the others, I'm not sure I understand this particular one. What is it your asking here?
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos why did you make the video? do you work for any company that makes, sells or researches the vaccine? Do you have any interests on weather or not people take the vaccine? I don't get nearly enough space for these discussions.
recyard12x 1 year ago
@recyard12x Oh. I don't work for anyone that makes or sells the vaccine, but I do a lot of research on biotechnology in my spare time, and I'm starting school soon so that I get into the overall branch of medicine that includes the same type of engineering that led to the H1N1 attenuated live virus vaccine (genomics). In particular, this specific subject is something I've been reading up on since the scare in 2009. So, no, I'm not scientist, but I'm aspiring to be a geneticist.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@recyard12x (part 2) I made the video, because genetics gets a lot of flack from people who read from propagandist, non-expert sources, and H1N1 is perhaps one of the biggest sources of anti-science, anti-genetics propaganda. Anti-vaxxer paranoia, medical denialism, and other similar attitudes have led to people dying from things that should otherwise have been easilly preventable/treatable diseases. In short, like my other videos, it was to clear up some of the mud thrown at genetics.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@recyard12x Not specific paperwork, but to paraphrase "DNA- The Secret of Life" by James Watson, to go from experimental drug to FDA approved, commercially available drug is one that seldom takes less than 10 years. (p.128). He also references how when they err, they often do so on the side of unjustified paranoia (p.153, 154). The same regulations for GM crops and gene therapy, are the same used for vaccines.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
I am sincerely coming with no preconceptions to this
However there is an undeniable fact
The scare was WAY out of proportion
Which is troubling
Since you go on to make several claims in your vid I feel I am entitled to ask you to back up some of these
As well as make some observations
unmarkedX 1 year ago
You say that what triggered the scare (which was obviously driven by official bodies) was that 1 rapid mutation 2 hitting people at their prime
I consider the 1st point inadequate as a basis for the alarm razed. Ordinary flu and other viruses mutate quickly as well. It does not mean that the virus is virulent or a massive public health hazard.
Can you actually provide the link backing up the claim that this virus actually had a high mortality amongst people in their prime?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
I notice you use 'supposedly in their prime’, care to explain that? If these were erroneous reports, do you not think that there was any stage at which this misunderstanding could be resolved to a degree that would allow the scaling down of the scare and the alarm amongst authorities?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
You claim that the fact the pandemic did not materialize at the scale and significance predicted by the authorities, the media and other official and semi-official sources has to be attributed to campaigns about washing hands and vaccination programs
Do you have a link with evidence indicating that this is what actually happened?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
Are you suggesting that in your opinion the virulence of the strain was neither overstated nor overestimated during the scare? You do not, even in retrospect, think that might have been part of it?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
You make the point that the virus containing parts of other organism’s genome is not proof that it was engineered
That is off course correct
For the record though, I think it is fair to inform viewers that this is not proof that it isn’t engineered
unmarkedX 1 year ago
Then you go on about the lack of any motive in a conspiracy scenario
I will state for the record that I have no evidence to either support or reject a scenario of that nature, and therefore this is not what I am doing
But, since your discussion is at a theoretical level as well, are you claiming that no one benefited from the pandemic or at least the scare surrounding it?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
Pharmaceutical firms announced record profits in a financial collapse year (driven all but exclusively by the sales of vaccines)
All countries failed to use their supplies of vaccines and failed by huge proportions (none run out)
unmarkedX 1 year ago
And yet the massive pandemic never happened! So, even if, as you say, vaccination played a part, don’t you think that at least in retrospect the scale of the vaccination programs required was somewhat :-) overestimated?
Are there not clearly some unwarranted beneficiaries of this excess?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
I think this is a slight misrepresentation. There are some studies in the literature pointing towards this link. These studies have been extensively criticized. There have been several other studies disputing this link and several consensus documents and policies by panels of experts and official bodies rejecting the link after reviewing the available data.
unmarkedX 1 year ago
On the same topic you say
The amount of Thimerosal in flu vaccines is negligible from a health point of view
Given that as part of this pandemic the vaccination of pregnant women (any trimester) and babies under 6 months old was recommended (and strongly advocated), can you point to evidence that the amount is negligible in these groups as well?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX "can you point to evidence that the amount is negligible in these groups as well"
Yeah. There's a link in the crotch bar. There's a few of them actually, some of them talking about the additives in the vaccines specifically, one of them specifically addressing getting vaccines during pregnancy. Have you actually taken a look at them, or did you just watch the video?
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
good can you save me some time and point me to the specific study adressing safety for the fetus and babies under 6 months
I dont wana read about Jeny Macarthy
I am not going to look though all your links
I am only interested in your sources as to these points
unmarkedX 1 year ago
your webMD link says a pregnant woman should take it if in risk of dying of flu complications
yeah in that case saving the mother's life is the first concern
but clearly my question has nothing to do with safety for the mother
The question regarding thimerosal levels is in relation to the fetus
So I see no link
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX The link discusses the safety of certains, and when is a good time to get them or not get them. Another link, the Vaccine FAQ explains that most vaccines given to children and infants (which would go to include fetuses) do not contain thimerosol, except for the flu shots. However the pregnancy FAQ explains that flu shots should be received during pregnancy, which I would hope implies their safety. My point on Thimerosol not being harmful in vaccine doses still stands.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
infants does not include fetuses
you are perhaps thinking of neonates
No, the point about pregnancy implies safety for the mother
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX The story about Jenny McCarthy is but one link. You can either read through the links, the subsequent four of which are perhaps the most relevant to what you're looking for, or you can stop asking for links. When you've read through the links I've provided, then you can ask for links.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
read it
no refernce and no study quoted on fetus safety
please provide
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX So the fact that flu shots are given to pregnant women and recommended at that, are you seriously implying that the safety of the fetus is not once taken into account? So, you're not willing to consider a source on which vaccines are safe for pregnant women and her child, and when to get them, because it spells it out implicitly, rather than explicitly asking for it?
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
You source simply does not make that claim
You do
you just do not understand what your source says
your source says that the mother should be offered the vaccine if at risk of dying from flu complications ( and calls apon the physician to largely make or guide this decision on an individualized basis)
It does not tell you there is no risk to the fetus
unmarkedX 1 year ago
It tells you that if the benefits outweigh the risks for the mother (on a case by case basis i.e.comorbidities like heart or respiratory disease)
then you have to put the mother's life first (that is a basic medical ethics principle)
that is all it says
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX I've just added another link that explicitly says what you're asking for. And no, I didn't read the source wrong. The whole article is on vaccines recommended to protect the mother and her unborn child, and which are safe and not safe to get. As in both at the same time. Maybe I'm just crazy, but the article references the "inactivated vaccines" not posing a risk to the fetus, in the beginning of the article, which includes the recommended flu vaccine.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
Again irrelevant
the inactivated vaccine reference has to do with the prospect of causing the disease inocculated for
It has nothing to do with thimerosal safety for the fetus
I did not ask whether the flu vaccine can give you the flu
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Furthermore, when you're unwilling to look at the links I've provided, why should I provide you anymore links?
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
I have looked through all of them
nothing of the sort
you made the claim
If you do not provide the evidence for you claim then your claim is simply unsubstantiated
that is fine by me if that is they way you want it
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX "you made the claim"
I think its gotten a little disorganized, but I'm trying to figure out what this is specifically in reference to...
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
ok sorry
I asked some posts ago
Flu vaccines have thimerosal
the amounts contained are negligible as you say FOR ADULTS and probaly for children over a certain age
I am asking if THERE IS EVIDENCE this is the case for the fetus and children under 6mo (as the recomendation for H1N1 included them)
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Yeah. A new link I just posted says there is no risk associated with the fetus and giving the mother a flu vaccine, which would include all of its additives (about a third to one-quarter of the way down), which in turn includes the thimerosol.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009 Oct 20 “Safety of Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy” Div of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, John Hopkins University, “Inactivated influenza vaccine can be safely and effectively administered during any trimester of pregnancy Moreover, no scientific evidence exists that thimersol-containing vaccines are a cause of adverse events among children born to women who received influenza vaccine during pregnancy.” PUBMED: 19850275
Stromatolite577 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos Try this link in answer to this fellow. PUBMED should have the types of research listed to counter what this fellow is implying. Keep up the good work!
Stromatolite577 1 year ago
Finally you go into the safety of thimerosal
I do not claim to be an expert and so would be grateful for more specific information
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX "I would be grateful for more specific information"
Again, there's a few links in the crotch bar of the video, specifically talking about vaccine additives.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@unmarkedX I don't think the fact that people made money means anything. Correlation does not equal causation. In fact, some people, including pork farmers, lost money. But the media played a large role in blowing the epidemic out of proportion.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
Well, your argument regarding the rationale of a conspiracy is theoretical in its entirety
you question the theoretical basis of a conspiracy at that poiint, not any factual evidence
Correlation does not equal causation but it does form the basis for RATIONAL hypothesis generation
You asked a theoretical question
You get a theoretical answer
But your question is not a trivial one
CUI BONO?
and therefore the answer is not a trivial one
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Yeah. But there is no factual evidence of a conspiracy, and that's what I was getting at. It was an attempt to explain that for that reason, it wasn't justifiable to think that the government produced the H1N1 virus for the sake of killing people, like the conspiracists were claiming.
There is factual evidence to show that H1N1 is a natural-born virus, and the product of horizontal gene transfer and rapid mutation. I think I accomplished what I set out to do with the video.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
you seem to be scientifically trained as I am
So I am sure we can keep things accurate
I did not question your claim there is no factual evidence of a conspiracy
You ALSO questioned the theoretical plausibility on the basis of motive
(i only commented on that part) and ,as you, I believe what was said in relation to that is quite adequate and will not elaborate further
There may be factual evidence that H1N1 is a natural-born virus
I can not see any in this video though
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX I think you're playing the denialist game. You don't see any evidence in the video, or you're not willing to accept any? The fact that influenza is a naturally occuring virus, as are the other versions it had a horizontal gene transfer event with, and the fact that there is more evidence to suppose that than a gov't conspiracy, that the response of the gov't is unjustified if the conspiracy is true, including that pharmaceutical companies lost money, that's not evidence... Right.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
the fact that influenza is a naturaly ocuring virus means you can not egineer a strain??
(the rest of your sentese is out of syntax i can not follow)
pharmaceutical companies did not loose money
you even provide links saying they didn't
it is simply ridiculous that you are still claiming this
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX No. I'm stating based on the evidence, I asked, what reason would the government have to kill their cash cow? Or better yet, their voters? Wouldn't the government, as unmonolithic as it is, largely be appalled by such actions? Wouldn't someone speak up on conscientious grounds, that they had something to do with it and the aim was to kill our own citizens and to cause a global epidemic?
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@unmarkedX "proof it isn't engineered"
Right. I'm just stating its not proof that it was.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Yeah. It was definitely blown out of proportion by the media, taking what precautions were suggested to mean "everyone will die." It's nothing new really, it happens all the time. For example, in Florida with hurricane season, if a tropical storm so much has the threat of rustling a few leaves, people take safety precautions and run screaming down the street with them, "the end is nigh."
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
very true
But the media did not take decisions regarding vaccination programs magnitude
that was governments, national and international bodies of experts, was it not?
did they miscalculate at all?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Yeah, but think of who makes up governments? The uninformed, the frightened, the non-experts. As far as non-expert interpretation of the experts' data, then sure, yes, they did miscalculate, and I'm sure it wasn't intentional. Stuff like that happens all the time.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
agreed
governments could be wrong
experts should not be, they sometimes are , they were THIS time
what led them to be so wrong?
Well that is what we have been discussing, isn’t it?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX And no, I didn't intend to say that was what did it alone. I was saying it helped, along with other precautionary measures. I think that people being cautious definitely helped.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@unmarkedX "Supposedly at their prime" referred to people who were in their late teens, twenty-somethings, and early to mid thirties. However, a lot of people who died from the disease also had other health issues going on: they were sick with something else or were recovering from injury, their immune systems were compromised, something of that nature. Sure, it was a rough virus to catch, but it typically sounded the death knell if they were already recovering from/battling something else.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
Just like all sorts of known viral and bacterial infections who normally do not kill the healthy routinely kill people with significant comorbidities in hospitals every day
what I am asking is
Do you not think that organizations like the CDC or WHO would be able to sort out if this was simply the case or if some extraordinary danger for the actually healthy was indeed posed?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Well, let's go back to the mutation rate in its context, it got increasingly deadly within just a matter of days. There was a risk that the virus could become more virulent in a similar amount of time. Simply because hind-sight is 20/20 doesn't mean that the precautions or warnings were unwarranted. I'd rather they have done that than had they done nothing at all.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
Yes
it would not make sense for a government to unlease a virus that would wipe out their population
Yoiu have very well established that
if you were making a drug to prevent a disease that is not particularly harmful or prevalent
would you have a financial incentive in making that disease appear more clinicaly and epidemiologically significant than it actually is?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX No, because I would end up losing a lot more money when I had to throw out stock I didn't need, kind of like how the pharmaceutical companies lost money when they had to throw out 40 million expired vaccine doses, and around the time the article in Discovery News was written, another 30 million went bad and had to be thrown out. In total, it was nearly half the country's H1N1 vaccine stock. It would still be a financially stupid move to intentionally overhype a disease.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
only if you had a net loss
which is not the case
as private companies publish such data
unmarkedX 1 year ago
read your links
you title is misleading
both the discovery and the independent article you point at
say GOVERNMENTS lost money
not pharma
the independent clearly names a company as benefiting hugely
Do you not think you should change the description of at least those links?
unmarkedX 1 year ago
and likewise
no studies testing whether amounts of Mercury in flu vaccines are in fact 'negligible' for infants under 6 mo old
in your links
if you do not know of any ,that is fine
I dont either
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX No, one of them says that governments wasted money. But keep in mind that if pharmaceutical companies are producing vaccines, like you and I will both agree, it would be them who lose money on the 70 million doses that were thrown out in the US alone. The gov't wouldn't feel any bit of that sting. The government might have wasted money, but they didn't lose money from the 70 million doses being thrown out. I'm not changing anything, you misinterpreted the links.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos
THIS IS FROM YOUR DISCOVERY LINK
In an interview with London's The Independent newspaper, a World Health Organization advisor, Prof. Ulrich Keil, complained that by calling the early H1N1 outbreak a “pandemic,” countries around the world wasted precious public health money: "
unmarkedX 1 year ago
MORE DISCOVERY QUOTES
We know the great killers are hypertension, smoking, high cholesterol, high body mass index, physical inactivity and low fruit and vegetable intake....instead [governments] wasted huge amounts of money by investing in pandemic scenarios whose evidence base is weak."
unmarkedX 1 year ago
FROM YOUR INDEPENDENT LINK
The second charge, prominently made by Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, the former head of health at the Council of Europe, is that the WHO is unduly influenced by the drugs industry, which stood to make a fortune from selling anti-virals and vaccines. The Swiss giant Novartis, for example, saw its profits jump by nearly a third in the first quarter of this year to $2.95bn, much of it from delivering swine flu vaccines ordered last year.
unmarkedX 1 year ago
MORE FROM THE INDPENDENT
Debate rages over allegations that some experts who recommended the pandemic be declared, have links to drugs companies, although this has been denied. But critics note that it's hard to become an expert in the field without having some funding from big pharmaceutical companies.
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX "critics...hard to become an expert without having funding from big pharmaceutical companies"
That's an opinion from non-experts, not a fact, and even if it were true, it wouldn't prove a conspiracy in the slightest. It would prove that certain biotech companies and pharmaceutical companies were interested in your research, and would like to see it go somewhere, possibly prosper from it. Nothing else.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Doesn't prove a conspiracy, and its one guy and his opinion. I think you're interested more in who is making the accusation, rather than the evidence supporting said accusation. The World Health Organization doesn't stand to make any of the money from H1N1 vaccine sales, so it wouldn't benefit them to overreact. And given that the same companies producing the vaccines lost money on what they couldn't sell, even if they did have ties to the WHO, they would lose money, too.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Again, the government consists of politicians, in any country, often times the uneducated (as far as science), the non-experts, and the frightened. It just so happens that they're also the policy-makers and decision-makers of the country.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@unmarkedX "outbreak a pandemic"
I think you're taking this out of context, but let's assess what this means. Often times, words like "theory" or "pandemic" have grossly different meanings for scientists/public health experts than they do for non-scientists and non-experts. A pandemic means something that has gone cross-country or international, but to the untrained, it means "everyone will die." Not explaining it simpler terms was a mistake, in other words.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Yeah, I would consider half of what I'd produced a pretty big loss. That means a large amount of the money I'd made would probably have gone to disposing of all of the expired vaccine doses. Meaning, if I would have made any profit at all, I would have lost money on all of the overstock I couldn't sell, and I might not have lost it all, but I would have lost a lot of it. Half is a damn big chunk.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
OK that clears it up
that is your missunderstanding then
THAT IS NOT VACCINES OWNED BY PHARMA
The destroyed vaccines had already beeen purchased and stocked by GOVERNMENTS
hence Governments lost (taxpayer;s cash) Pharma won
That clears it up
now you can change the missleading title
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX "OK that clears it up"
I think you're going through mental gymnastics on that one. Typically, when overstock can't be sold by a secondary producer, they have to sell it back to the primary producer. Then its on the hands of the primary producer (pharmaceutical companies) to dispose of it themselves. I've been in the manufacturing industry for 5 years, and when a secondary producer can't get rid of overstock we've sold them, they sell it back to us, so WE can get rid of it..
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
you can not 'get rid ' of expired vaccines
this is not couches
some orders were canceled but not of the magnitude or in time to avert the overall outcome
Pharma made money, Governments lost
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX "get rid of," "dispose of," you know what I mean, but you're being pedantic. And until you can actually account for how "pharma won, gov'ts lost," rather than trying to quote mine MY sources, I have no reason to take your one liner seriously.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Definitely, rapid mutation alone isn't much reason for concern, but the regular flu is still pretty bad, and if that were it, there would still be cause for concern. The rapid mutation in context causing alarm was the fact that it became contagious and crossed the species border in a very short amount of time, couldn't be contained quickly enough, and went international shortly after that.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos As far as killing people in their prime, I only said that it killed people in their prime. I didn't say anything about high mortality rate in people in their prime. I simply made a statement along the lines that being in one's prime wasn't a reason to think you were safe. As for a link to it killing people in their prime, look for news reports that talk about the people who lost their lives. I hate using the "look it up for yourself" line, but it's practically everywhere.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
that would be reason enough for a person relying on news reports to be concerned
not for organization like the WHO to raise unwaranted concerns
and no thanks I will not look up news reports
as my issue is that this is not the kind of evidence that responsible bodies should be relying on
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Yeah, but you're again claiming that I'm claiming there was a high mortality rate, and I never did. All I said was that it was killing people in their prime, never how many people. Secondly, my source wasn't the World Health Organization, but their concerns at the time were warranted.
If you don't want to look up news reports, then I can't force you, but just know that the obituaries and the reports are there. I used a picture of one in the video during that point.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
OK I see how these could be reasonable assumptions at the early stage
although it is bizzare that they remain unproven
as , fas as I understand, we still do not know when this jumped species or when it became contagious
But you understand the argument in relation to the magnitude of the scare is again the same
something being very contagious does not mean very harmfull
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Yeah, but it was harmful before it became contagious. Is that somehow unclear?
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
Well, clearly, HOW harmfull it was, was very definetely unclear and very much miscalculated at the time when the vaccination programs were designed.
unmarkedX 1 year ago
@unmarkedX Well, imagine that you've been presented with a threat, one that has become significantly more dangerous in a short amount of time. A death toll and the number of cases rises significantly. In the past there were outbreaks of this same threat, which killed significantly more people. Would a reaction expecting similar or worse than what happened last time not be justified?
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
how do you explain the mercury in these vaccines?
belmarfilms 1 year ago
@belmarfilms Bro, for real? I explained it in the video around 5 minutes, 30 seconds in. The thimerosol (which uses mercury) used in vaccines is used to prevent contamination from other microbes. Furthermore, the amount used, while being enough to prevent contamination from other microbes, is still so little that it can't hurt you. Mercury can only really only hurt you in larger doses. I believe the saying goes "the poison is in the dose."
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
I altered the link, just paste it in your URL and it should work
Is it possible to specify you don't want links in a comment?
Please see my comment below ;-)
IppatsuTensei88 1 year ago
@IppatsuTensei88 No, it's just YouTube's coding the comments to not work right if there are URL's in them. I think its to prevent people from leaving the website as much as possible.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
This is the information you need to know:
(I got error try again- wondering if its the link)
rense.com/general87/scam.htm
Quote:
"On August 6, 2009, following news that more than half the world's health professionals will refuse vaccinations..."
IppatsuTensei88 1 year ago
@IppatsuTensei88 A conspiracist website. Seriously? After I addressed part of what was in the opening paragraph? Don't just post a link to something I rebutted, its not like repeating it a second time will make it go away. Offer a rebuttal to my arguments, comment on the quality of the video, or just don't bother.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos I don't believe you did rebut this. You cleared the point about the vaccine being patented and not the virus itself, which is fine. There are a couple of notes which drew my attention. Notes such as mercury levels in these vaccines, a study linking mercury with neurobehavioral disorders in children, the quote above where professionals are refusing the vaccine and the quote stating that "You literally need 'national security clearance' to get the full ingredients list."
IppatsuTensei88 1 year ago
@IppatsuTensei88 Okay, 1) the levels of mercury used in a vaccine are so tiny, there's no risk associated with it. 2) The only studies showing links between vaccines and neurological disorders are dubious, just look at Andrew Wakefield. He lied in his research, and his supposed sample group consisted of the guests at his child's birthday party.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@IppatsuTensei88 3) Security clearances are used to prevent competitors from seeing, and reverse engineering your product, or having unauthorized personnel leak information to competitors, whether accidental or intentional. It's a counter measure to espionage. I work for a gov't sub-contractor where protecting patents and technical data is one of our top priorities. It's not about being shady, its about protecting intellectual property.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@IppatsuTensei88 4) You don't actually need a clearance to look up the ingredients list. The ingredients of a vaccine are all pretty much the same, except for whatever virus you're using for said vaccine.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@IppatsuTensei88 And finally, number 6). There's a difference between posting a reference to a nebulous list of doctors, and actually posting said list. What are those doctor's names? Who are they? Is there any reason that their conclusion might have a bias? Why do they think the way they do?
Seriously, your link was the same paranoid crap I responded to. I tend to be cautious of anything that refers to a dark cabal called "Big Pharma."
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
it is bad, the fact that you have it does not make you as a person bad but if you could you would prefer not to have it, right? sorry if i offended someone but its kinda like being ginger -- you are not bad as a human, but you are inferior biologically
zehaha 1 year ago
@zehaha No, having H1N1 ultimately boils down to just being at the wrong place at the wrong time, and just happening to get infected. Many who caught it fought it off, but many who caught it also had other health problems at the time, so it ended up being too much for the body to overcome and they died. It had to do with the immune system being overwhelmed by and large, not being "biologically inferior."
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos umm i was talking about autism
zehaha 1 year ago
@zehaha Well, yeah that too. Autism kind of strikes randomly, too. It doesn't boil down to inferiority, anyone's kids could get it, including yours. But that wouldn't make them or you genetically inferior.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos 1. i didnt mean to insult in anyways idk were you got that from
2. i also heard from somewhere else that they had created it in Canada but they made this shipment to Mexico witch got caught up in the pigs (swine) after that mexican people found out about the disease and yes i got the point of the video ti dosent mean your right .. it dosent meant your wrong either but all im saying is that it really didnt come from mexico
DjInglorious 1 year ago
Very intelligent counter to some very stupid conspiracy theories
dickiesmon 1 year ago
i hope people that thought it was from Mexico feel fucking stupid hahaha i knew it wasn't from Mexico
DjInglorious 1 year ago
@DjInglorious But, why are you saying that without giving evidence that it wasn't from Mexico? Unless you missed the point of the video, or are making a bad attempt at an insult.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
They how come I had swine flu? and I was very sick??????????
mstuie 1 year ago
dude your smart as hell from what i've heard from the video the research you must have done, and your responses to other comments
roy20050 1 year ago
you said swine flue was never an epidemic at the beginning??? It was a pandemic wtf, teachers at my school caught it, and i live in Queensland in Australia...
HaydenHatTrick 1 year ago
@HaydenHatTrick On that note, I have no idea what people are going on about in America or the rest of the world.... so I'll assume this video was targeted at that.
HaydenHatTrick 1 year ago
@HaydenHatTrick No, I said that the "epidemic that was predicted to happen didn't happen." As in more people would die than those who died in World War II, that so many people would die in droves that public areas would become quiet and devoid of life. Yeah, it was a pandemic, just not as bad as it was predicted. And people died, but not in the millions or billions. The regular flu killed slightly more people than the H1N1 outbreak that year.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@EvoGenVideos In Australia, I think that 2 people died, who already had a serious disease.... With bird flue, they bit the bullet and locked down the city of origin. I'm kinda annoyed that they let people come and go as they pleased WITH all the fuss...
HaydenHatTrick 1 year ago
You talk about autism as though it's a bad thing, faggot.
DevotionTrance 1 year ago
@DevotionTrance autism is bad
zehaha 1 year ago
@zehaha ty, i have aspergers.
DevotionTrance 1 year ago
@zehaha Autism is a naturally occuring thing, it's not bad it just isn't what most wouldn't consider normal. Even if there is no normal, but that's a philosophical discussion .
vearheart42 1 year ago
last year at school when i got the nasal vaccine for H1N1 people were saying i would get it because it had the live germ and all i got was a massive headache the next day and nothing else shows what they know
yinyang10020 1 year ago
@yinyang10020 The H1N1 vaccine IS H1N1, but the public doesn't understand that you need to come in contact with a virus to be vaccinated for that virus(much like how they use snake venom for the antidote).
When you get chicken pox you are 99% certain to never have it again because your body will know how to deal with it. Not all Viruses are like this however, such as small pox you need a vacination every 10 years or so.
vearheart42 1 year ago
finally! some one with some brain in their head! congratulations on not being an idiot! I`m sick of all the people saying that everything is a conspiracy, and that the government always tries to kill them... (like the government could function without people to give laws to...)(<- that`s the fist argument against some conspiracy theories)
skadime 1 year ago
@skadime (like the government could function without people to give laws to and to control through media make everyone fear a specific something...)(<- that`s the fist argument against some conspiracy theories)
editted it a bit 4 ya
MightBDead 1 year ago
lol nice video.. i think when people dont understand something they get scared and make a conspiracy theory lol
chaosrave 1 year ago
Excellent vid!
Jachammer93 1 year ago
If swine flu was fake... then what would the shot be for? XD
motorstorm123 1 year ago
@motorstorm123 I'm assuming you've never heard of Placaebos or even scare tactics. One of those I don't think applies to this, but I find both are far to common.
vearheart42 1 year ago
um... Swine Flu was a lie?
motorstorm123 1 year ago
@motorstorm123 Yes, they said that.
Wulfhimself 1 year ago
what is name of the song at the start?
animalnt 1 year ago
I bet you feel as though you are very intelligent!!!!!!!!!! How much did you get paid by big pharma to lie to the populace? Really, you have to see the particles in the vaccine for it to cause any damage? WOW- I can't see anthrax particle, potassium cyanide and many other chemicals but they can be deadly. When was the last time you read the insert in those vac? And why was this virus patent in 2008 when many people have never heard of this virus? I am sure you got your dose, did you?
mikuruasahinarunrun 1 year ago
@mikuruasahinarunrun "I bet you feel as though you are very intelligent"
Well, just reading your paranoid ramblings, and given that you probably took everything I said and let it run in one ear and out the other, I think anything's better than how stupid or mentally insane you sound at the moment. You're the kind of trash I made this video to counteract.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@mikuruasahinarunrun You can see anthrax. Shows how much you know, also anthrax isn't a chemical its a virus, so lumping it in with Chemicals is completely wrong.
vearheart42 1 year ago
You should be paid well for doing these type of videos.
a300pilotster 1 year ago
Great job of debunking some insidious urban myths.
AuntieDiluvian 1 year ago
As any Repub would say, "It's Obama's fault"
Good vid and necessary to counter the bullshit that is out there.
saxmanchiro 1 year ago
h1n1 muslim plot ?
victorcelmare 1 year ago
@victorcelmare
nah they don't have the brain power.
DinoHovind 1 year ago
@victorcelmare yes blame the Muslims, good try. Any intelligent person with critical thinking skill can realize who is behind this---Same breed of people--Palatino, Shuchat, Nancy Synderman, William Schaffner, Kathleen Sebelius, Thomas Friedman just to name a few. All these people have one thing in common--you figure it out. At the same time they are the ones trying push down their agenda on this rest of us in an attempt to carry out their plans, preserve their group, while getting rid of us
mikuruasahinarunrun 1 year ago
@mikuruasahinarunrun You're not really making an argument with anything you've said, just baseless accusations and bare assertion fallacies. I made this video for free, because the only basis you have for anything is paranoia. If its nebulous or difficult to understand, it must be a conspiracy. The only people to use the words "Big Pharma" are people who don't understand how the FDA or biotech companies work. And for the record, I got my H1N1 flu shot around four months ago, never got sick.
EvoGenVideos 1 year ago
@mikuruasahinarunrun shut up you fucking troll, nobody cares about you opinion,just fuck off and get a life!
ihaveafluffyknob 1 year ago
I swear I wanted to kill someone for sitting there saying "It wasn't that bad for me, so the Government was lying to us, trying to control us!!!!!" when the H1N1 was beginning to wind down from the media hysterics.
It's very frustrating trying to get people to stop being idiots, and I applaud you for trying!
Cyrathil 1 year ago 2