Flu Vaccine Truth: Ask a Nurse

Nurse vs Nurse. A summary of stupid things I've heard uttered by other nurses, parents, paramedics, and hippies.


More info:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=2040

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• xtranormal
• flu
• vaccination
• vaccine
• truth
• ask a nurse
• vs nurse
• paramedic
• big pharma
• annual
• flu shot
• influenza
• stupid nurse

[guitpla304]

like how you thru hippies in the description, dumbass, why do you all care if we take a flu shot or not, the amount of mercury in the vaccine they give newborns is more than a 250 lbs man could safely handle,Google it, why do you think we are having a Autistic boom all of a sudden, you guys that blindly follow the wolf in sheeps clothing, and criticize the "conspiracy theorist", deserve whatever you get. IMO

[TheMateusrex]

wtf are you talking about?

[majormana1]

i'd rather get the flu then the flu shot because when i did get it every time afterwords i spent 48 hours throwing up i just rather have flu then take the risk of hit or miss flu shot and end up puking

[pouytrewqazxs]

@BiTchee

Don't jump to assumptions retard, I "believe" jack shit. I "understand" that immunology is a tenuous and sophisticated science that takes "comprehension" to accurately measure efficacy, where as you believe there's a conspiracy that the majority of pharmaceutical makers control a shadow government that fakes studies, also requiring a vast cooperation of hundreds of thousands of physicians in order to generate about fucking 1-2% of annual drug profits, which is what vaccines garner. Wow!

[BryTee]

@pouytrewqazxs again with the insults... a classic sign someone is losing an argument.

You cannot even spell "you're", ironically when you called me illiterate!

Glad you know, the flu vaccine is an educated guess. But you not believe it when THEY reported they got it wrong (twice in 40 years). They admitted (at the time) they needed to review why the end of season statistics did not differ from years when the vaccine WAS guessed accurately. But we (not surprisingly) ever heard back on that.

[pouytrewqazxs]

@dumbass

I can't waste a week to teach you how statistics work and the meaning of what an average is, aka based on a range of variables.

You haven't read a thing I've said. Your guilty of being an illiterate retard. The vaccines always protect against the strain their designed for, but ultimately since vaccine manufacturing is done a year in advance based on expert consensus, its still an "educated guess". You on the other hand, have made a "retarded guess" that the vaccine doesn't work. Nice.

[BryTee]

@pouytrewqazxs why go to a site where the information is known to be biased!

I assume you don't know about the 1968 and 2003 flu shots? The shot did not protect against the major flu virus in those years. The same approximate number of deaths and the same number of people got flu, yet the shot was as effective as a placebo.

I see... the real shot (with all its additional risks) was as good as a placebo and it made no difference to the population.

However the medical industry made its money.

[pouytrewqazxs]

@BT

I do have something to lose from it: human lives! Such as the patients who get the flu spread by ignorant paramedics/CNAs/nurses who are too stupid to understand the subtle efficacy and altruistic implications of getting something as relatively harmless as the annual flu shot.

You can rag on the CDC until your fingers fall off but you didn't even take one second to read what I said: The CDC review cites almost 500 non-CDC studies from a variety of sources, ergo, your argument is baseless :)

[BryTee]

@pouytrewqazxs

You seem emotional about this, that implies you have something to gain/lose from it, thus you are biased so will believe a lie if it helps you out.

You still quote the CDC after I said was not a credible source. Even medical institutions overseas are complaining at them for inaccurate reporting of information and scaremongering.

Consider why you believe what you believe. Think who these beliefs come from and if they have anything to gain/lose from convincing you.

[pouytrewqazxs]

@BryTee

Or instead of a collection of shitty anecdotes and strawman arguments you can look at expert scientific consensus or any meta-analysis with peer review. For instance! This summary includes a well referenced list of around 500 cited studies: cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/­rr5808a1.htm

As you can see your number of dumb quotes is dwarfed by my number of referenced studies, so if we're going to commit a logical fallacy via proof by verbosity (argumentum verbosium), then I fucking win bitch!