170K doses of H1N1 vaccine withdrawn due to severe allergic reactions

[TalkingDog]

Only 6, which is 3 times higher than average....

but still:

http://english.cctv.com/20091121/101765.shtml

OTTAWA, Nov. 20 (Xinhua) -- About 170,000 doses of A/H1N1 flu vaccine are being withdrawn in Canada from Friday after health officials reported an unusually high number of allergic reactions.

Health officials in the western province of Manitoba reported Thursday a higher-than-usual number of allergic reactions after using vaccine from a batch manufactured by a factory of British drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) in Quebec.

Usually one or two allergic reactions are expected for a batch of that size, but Manitoba has recorded six severe allergic reactions.

snip/

Of course this will be unrec'd to death, but so be it.

[kestrel91316]

1. Canadian product, not US product. I had my H1N1 shot yesterday and am fine,

I haven't noticed even any fatigue from it, unlike when I got the seasonal flu shot a month ago. My arm is a little sore if I press on the spot, but otherwise not.

Mine was from "SP" - I need to look up what company that is.....It's Sanofi Pasteur.

[Deep13]

5. I didn't get a sore arm either.

But I did with the seasonal flu shot.

[kestrel91316]

17. I'm curious - were you around for the swine flu shot in 1976 and if so, did you get it?

I did, and wonder if maybe my body isn't alarmed by this one because it's "familiar" to it......

[Deep13]

22. I was around then...

...I don't remember if I got the shot or not. I was nine years old.

[HeresyLives]

9. Canadian vaccine is GlaxoSmithKline.

[still_one]

93. GSK is one of the manufacturers of our vaccine I thought /ns

[emilyg]

2. k

[Deep13]

3. 36 reactions per 6.6 million recipients.

Maybe it is a statistical anamoly in that an unusually high percentage of people there are allergic to eggs. Just a guess. Anyway, the Canadian health people are looking into any possible defects. It is not impossible for a manufacturing defect to cuase problems. That happened once during one of the first polio vaccinations.

[Posteritatis]

4. One reaction per 183,000 shots. The horror! (nt)

[mzmolly]

7. 1 potential death is

horrific.

[Posteritatis]

8. Oh, bullshit. 100% perfect safety is unattainable, period, for anything. (nt)

[mzmolly]

10. So you'd sacrifice which family

member?

What's bullshit is dismissing even one death when we may be able to prevent them if we were not so dismissive.

[PVnRT]

12. So, we should pull anything off the shelves if there's any chance of it killing someone?

I guess all those worthless fucking sick people don't really need their medicine.

[mzmolly]

19. NO we shouldn't, but we SHOULD try and find out why

people die, and if we can do anything in advance to prevent it from happening.

Your suggestion that I'm saying we pull everything off the shelves, would be like me saying you don't wish to pull anything, ever, regardless of safety issues. Neither argument would be honest.

[PVnRT]

50. What the hell do you think clinical tries are for?

Do you think a drug just goes from lab to market, or what?

Drugs are tested for years to find out what the bad reactions are. That's why they have long lists of indications and contraindications for each drug. The problem is that you and others who agree with you seem to think that as soon as someone dies, it's automatically a massive conspiracy on the part of pharm companies who doctored data to kill people and make money.

FDA routinely pulls drugs that turn out to have safety issues later.

[mzmolly]

54. Frankly, the list of contradictions is the pretty much the same

regardless of the vaccine. Also, stating what a reaction is, does nothing to help identify who may be at risk and what the cause might be.

The problem with YOU AND OTHERS is that you assign me thoughts and motives which are not accurate.

[TheWraith]

13. Which family member would you like to die from H1N1?

Or from polio? Or smallpox, or whatever other disease du jour would be making it's way around without proper medical treatment?

[mzmolly]

20. None. Would you chalk up disease related deaths to "shit happens" like you do with

vaccine related deaths?

I don't find death by vaccination any more appealing than death by disease, do you?

I think we're advanced enough as a society to try and figure out why some people die as a result of vaccination. If we can make vaccines safer, we can have the best of both worlds. So, why not try?

[Confusious]

42. No, I just expect

More people see less of a chance of having a problem with a vaccine then dying in a car crash, getting hit by lightning, etc, etc, etc

How much should we spend? $100 billion to save 30 people

or maybe we could spend that on car safety and save 3,000 lives

or we could buy entire towns lightning rods and save 1,000 lives

[mzmolly]

59. I would imagine the answers are quite simple

to identify. Why do you presume it would cost billions? Don't you have faith in science?

[Confusious]

65. I( have plenty of faith in science

But as someone who KNOWS science, I also understand it's limitations. It's not magic, they don't whip shit up out of thin air. It has to be researched, and that takes money.

And accounting for every little thing that could go wrong costs ALOT of money. Its always a logarithmic scale.

[mzmolly]

69. I figured you

profited somehow? You sound like our old friend Varkam. :hi:

That said, much science is ALREADY available. For example, I'd say removing known neurotoxins and carcinogens would be a step in the right direction?

[Confusious]

76. Yea, yea

I'm an evil shill for the pharma lobby. The same lame comeback when you got nothing left.

No, I'm just a science student, sorry to bust your conspiracy theory. I used to believe like you, but then I took chemistry. I felt like an ass.

what neurotoxins and carcinogens are you talking about? thermisol, which makes ethylmercury, which is in no way the same as methylmercury? The one that has shown to have no relation to autism, the one that hasn't been used in most vaccines since 1999?

Or some other one. Or another conspiracy theory?

Carcinogens? formaldehyde? the same stuff you body makes?

[mzmolly]

82. LOL. This from the so called "student" who called

me anti vaccine?

Thimerosal has been proven harmful in various animal studies as it lingers in the brain in spite of possibly clearing from the blood more quickly than methylmercury.

I've heard the talking points about autism and the BS about it being removed from vaccines, in spite of the fact that it remains in many in trace amounts and is found in the seasonal flu jab. However, aluminum is another neurotoxin that should be removed from vaccines. And there are others as well.

Lastly, formaldehyde made by the body is not "free" and is bound to enzymes. It's the free form found in vaccines in other products that is problematic. This I heard from an actual scientist, not a supposed chemistry student.

I've taken chemistry classes as well, albeit many moons ago. Though, I would only feel like a fool if I believed that neurotoxins and carcingogens are deemed safe because they happen to be used in vaccines.

I will say I appreciate the direction that the US has gone in with the H1N1 vaccine. For example, the nasal spray lacks mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde. And the injectable does not have an adjuvant to my understanding? A step forward in spite of the "cost" concerns of uh, science students.

[Confusious]

96. Whatever

While you may think you can dismiss a "science student" I'm not you basic "science student". I already have another degree in science. I'm just getting another.

If you drink to much alcohol, you die. Have to much vitamin C, you shit you brains out, and cause hardening of the arteries. There are a million more things that are harmful, vitamins included.

"I've heard the talking points about autism and the BS about it being removed from vaccines". Yes, and dismissing them point to an anti-vaxx conspiracy theorist.

"Thimerosal has been proven harmful in various animal studies as it lingers in the brain"

Study where? I'm old enough to have gotten the full dose, and most of my family, which numbers 100+. none of them came down with anything. Shouldn't we all be banging our heads on a wall somewhere?

"aluminum is another neurotoxin"

Aluminum salts are used. Not free aluminium. "Despite its natural abundance, aluminium has no known function in living cells and presents some toxic effects in elevated concentrations." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium

Out of all of this, I can definitely say, you get more of it in a year from the environment then an injection of a vaccine. The dose makes the poison.
On top of that, I may be a student, but what have you got that even comes close to being in the science field?

[mzmolly]

101. Thought so. As I've said initially

I expect you profit from that degree? You were a bit misleading when you indicated you were merely a student. Now you back peddle, proving you're dishonesty.

As for your "scientific" assertion that you've had mercury in vaccines and you're ok, I'll let that speak for itself. Surely anyone, with a degree in science or not will recognize the absurdity of that statement.

Here is one study on thimerosal and the brain. There are more. Google if you must.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16079072

And on aluminum:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17114826

Any study that shows vaccines in a less than glowing light, will have an abundance of well funded critique. But don't say the science doesn't exist, because it does.

I'm out :hi:

[Confusious]

111. Wow

I'm a student = Dismissed
I have a education = Dismissed
I may or may have made money from my education = Dismissed

The view becomes clear.

I guess because I'm not a google warrior I don't count.

That first study said nothing about the toxicity of ethyl mercury, which is less then methylmercury

The second study, why do you think they call it "Gulf war syndrome?" it was probably in stuff that you and I will never see. Prove it's in the general population vaccines.

Come to think of it, my brother was in the gulf war. He shows no signs.

[mzmolly]

116. The first study showed that

thimerosal lingers in the brain longer than methylmercury, which is what I noted.

In addition the study concludes - The results indicate that MeHg is not a suitable reference for risk assessment from exposure to thimerosal-derived Hg. Knowledge of the toxicokinetics and developmental toxicity of thimerosal is needed to afford a meaningful assessment of the developmental effects of thimerosal-containing vaccines.

Which means your talking point about thimerosal's proven safety is false.

In addition, you need to read that second study again. It clearly denotes a potential connection between the aluminum adjuvant used in vaccines like Gardasil and Anthrax, to syndromes like GWS.

In addition, I did not dismiss the fact that you make money from your education. In fact, I suggested that you do.

[Confusious]

125. Bounce bounce bounce

You never stop anywhere, not going good in one place, on to another.

thimerosal has been around since the 1920's and in vaccines. I am old enough to have gotten them.

And no, from the way I took it, because I have a science degree, I am one of the evil unwashed who cannot possibly understand.

[mzmolly]

136. And we gave far less vaccines

in the 1920's so what's your point? That we have not advanced scientifically since that time? That we should continue with crude medical practices that were put in place before we understood that mercury was a neurotoxin?

:eyes:

[Confusious]

142. Yes, but

vaccines did not come around till the 1940's or so. and then the 50's and 60's and 70's and 80's and thermisol was in THEM ALL.

where are all the millions upon millions of people that where made brainless by the preservative?

[HuckleB]

144. Watching cable news?

[mzmolly]

148. In the late 80's and early 90's the number of recommended vaccines

was increased and the amount of mercury used in routine vaccines, per child, tripled as a result. By 2003, most US vaccines were nearly mercury free. But, in the spring 2004, the CDC announced the seasonal flu shot would still contain questionable amounts mercury. Thankfully the H1N1 vaccine is available sans mercury.

[Confusious]

150. Ethanol is neurotoxin

Ban all liquor!

[mzmolly]

152. Ethanol is not used in vaccines, not given to children, and one does not partake

while pregnant, hopefully.

"Ethanol is classified as a teratogen. See fetal alcohol syndrome."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol#Birth_defects

[Confusious]

156. Yes, but ethanol does cross the blood brain barrier

and is there in pure form. Unless you wish to claim drunkenness does not happen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotoxin

Exogenous

Toxins ingested from the environment are described as exogenous and include gases (such as carbon monoxide), metals (such as mercury<5>), liquids (ethanol) and numerous solids. Many neurotoxins are found in plant and animal matter found in nature; for example the neurotoxin aesculin is found in the horse chestnut (Aesculus hippocastanum),<6> and the California buckeye tree.<7> When exogenous toxins are ingested, the effect on neurons is largely dependent on dosage.

Besides, children are not the weak little things most people like to think they are. they can fall and due severe harm to themselves, and live, whereas an adult would die.

[mzmolly]

158. Which brings us back to the fact that ethanol isn't given to newborns.

eom

[Confusious]

161. No, but it is a neurotoxin

So how much really makes a poison? You argument was that it's all bad.

We don't give vaccines to newborns. Vaccines start at 2.

[mzmolly]

163. Man, you just revealed your complete ignorance on this issue.

http://www.cispimmunize.org/IZSchedule_Childhood.pdf

I'm out as I've said. :hi:

[Confusious]

167. it's been 14 years since I had a child

So I'm a little off. I still say it's NP. Children are more resilient the adults give credit for.

[kimmerspixelated]

83. Exactly-why not green the vaccines??

WHO wants to put a lot of toxic sludge deliberately in their veins and play russian roulette- when you could up your dose of Vit D,C, wash your hands, get enough sleep and have some strong anti-virals on hand-the ones that have been tested and trial-ed for thousands of years!

[ET Awful]

16. So . . . a LOT of people have died from an allergic reaction to pencillin . . .

Do you want it off the market?

About 300 deaths per year from allergic reactions to penicillin.

http://allergies.about.com/od/medicationallergy/a/penicillin.htm

So why aren't you complaining about it?

[mzmolly]

18. I don't want anything "off the market" I want to be less dismissive of death

and try to find out why certain people have reactions to XYZ, so we can prevent them from occurring. Should we never pull ANYTHING off the market that is deemed unsafe simply because most people live through XYZ?

[Chorophyll]

21. Thank you. I'm highly allergic to penicillin

but I don't expect anyone else to go without it. All vaccines and drugs carry risks, but so does leaving your house every day.

[mzmolly]

24. But you DO expect that you will not be shamed for not taking the medication

I presume? We don't have many options when it comes to vaccination. We should encourage more so that those who may be vulnerable have the same variety of choice, you do.

[Confusious]

49. Well, just as long as you never leave your house

or never see anyone, ever again.

people have died because of unvaxxed kids. Making those people feel shame is a good thing.

[mzmolly]

55. It's you who should not leave your house. In spite of your "faith" in vaccines

you might run into a person whose status is unknown. Or, whose vaccine has worn off? Or, a hypocritical adult whose not had every recommended booster, much like yourself I presume?

[Confusious]

68. You pressume to much

with facts not in evidence, but what should I expect from an anti-vaxxer?

[mzmolly]

70. A cheap shot. As one would expect from a

desperate "big-pharma lover and profiteer." :eyes:

[Confusious]

79. Blah, blah blah

No, not big pharma lover and profiteer. Got nothing left but lame conspiracy theories, huh.

As I said uppost, I'm just a science student, who took chemistry. And read the reports about no link to autism, and felt like an ass. I'm also really tired of people attacking science, who don't even know that you can't whip a vaccine up out of thin air. You need a DISEASE FIRST. because a vaccine is a dead virus that you body reacts to.

[mzmolly]

85. Not that I buy your story, but you may feel like more of an ass

if you read some of the science that contradicts the official talking points?

I'm aware that you generally need a disease before you can make a vaccine. However Cuba has created synthetic vaccines ~

http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/americas/cuba/foodAndMeds/1510.html.pf

[Confusious]

99. I don't think there is science that contradicts

the facts. I make a habit of checking up on the sources of places that print the bullshit. They either have no science background or have other motives, such as money.

I have 100+ people in my family. If it was such a problem, shouldn't I have been going to funerals? shouldn't I have been visiting them in a hospital.

As for cuba, it my be synthetic, but they still needed a disease to fight. It's not a drug. The antigen only works with that disease, nothing else.

[mzmolly]

104. A disease to fight, vs a disease to manufacture

a vaccine.

In addition, in my family we have survivors of measles, polio, chicken pox, stage four cancer, H1N1 and so on, that does not mean everyone will survive these things as you know.

Again, I'm out :hi:

[Confusious]

129. Yes in my family

We had people who did not survive. My grandmother had a daughter who died at 1 year of age from rubella.

Are you going to tell your kids to just suck it up, those crutches aren't THAT hard!

Survival of the fittest, is that what you're after?

[mzmolly]

145. I could point out that death from exposure to rubella was less likely than dying

in a car crash, couldn't I?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubella

"Rubella is a common childhood infection usually with minimal systemic upset although transient arthropathy may occur in adults. Serious complications are very rare. Apart from the effects of transplacental infection on the developing fetus, rubella is a relatively trivial infection."

"Serious complications are very rare." Much like vaccine side effects, no?

I've told you what I'm after >>>>>>>>>> SAFER VACCINES SANS KNOWN NEUROTOXINS AND CARCINOGENS, got that this time?

Lastly, if a company decided to make "green vaccines" they'd see a heck of a profit because there is an untapped demand.

[Confusious]

146. You could point that out to my grandmother

I really don't think she would think you have any idea what you are talking about. She was born in 1917. She saw what these diseases did to people.

You don't like numbers, so why should I bother?

fewer people die from vaccines or have problems then died from rubella.

Death is not the only problem. Measles can cause blindness or make you deaf. Mumps can make you sterile.

Here's something you probably don't want to see....
Rubella cases drop because of vaccinations.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/968523-overview

[mzmolly]

151. My great grandmother was born in 1895

and said she lived to be 100 because she "stayed away from doctors." That said, my sister and brother in law are medical professionals and I appreciate their contributions to society.

Also "death" isn't the only "problem" when it comes to vaccine side effects, either. Lastly, I've never argued that vaccines haven't had a positive impact on the elimination of disease. Though, some do.

[Confusious]

159. Your agrueing about 6 cases in the united states

with h1n1, and 36 in Canada, all of whom will recover. You don't get eyesight or hearing back.

[mzmolly]

162. Six cases that you know of, and in todays

climate we'd have different disease outcomes as well.

I'm out as I have a child wanting to use the PC. :hi:

[Confusious]

166. I doubt that

Science does not know all. You learn that when you take it.

If smallpox was still around and no vaccines, it would still be in the 30% death rate, instead of 40%

[kimmerspixelated]

87. Great response!

Heh!

[mzmolly]

91. Thanks.

;)

[kimmerspixelated]

86. Your answer makes me think you are a fascist!

Mandatory vaccines are a form of health fascism. Telling folks that make different decisions than yours that they are somehow murderous is fucking insane-not to mention obnoxious and beyond RUDE!

[neverforget]

121. health fascism? now i have heard it all

:banghead:

[Confusious]

128. Mandatory death at an early age used to be the norm

We can go back to it, if you want. I suggest you try somewhere in india, they still have polio around. Maybe some burning sage can save you from it, or a nice homeopathic mouth wash.

"Telling folks that make different decisions than yours that they are somehow murderous is fucking insane-not to mention obnoxious and beyond RUDE!"

Telling another to die due to a preventable disease is ruder, and heartless, I might add. I'm willing to get vaccines, not for myself only, but my daughter, my grandmother, and for the good of society as a whole. Isn't that what we do everyday with government, fire, police, prisons, medical. Or is it just about you, and only you.

[ET Awful]

60. They do, there are multiple versions of the vaccination. Only one (and not one in the US) has had

issues with allergic reaction. Your point?

[mzmolly]

63. Beyond the fact that you're wrong about only one version having

allergic reactions... was pretty clear above.

How many different vaccines do you have to choose from? At present, I'm not on the priority list in my state, so I don't have any vaccines to choose from.

[ET Awful]

64. I had my choice between two just 2 weeks ago in Massachusetts.

Paid for by my employer.

[mzmolly]

66. Good for you. A nasal and an injectable I presume?

That choice is not available to all. Not everyone can get the nasal version even when it's widely available.

However, H1N1 is a bit of a different animal vaccine wise. We haven't had decades to provide choice, so I understand the lack of it, in this case.

[Confusious]

39. So you sacrifice which family member

When you let them drive?

[mzmolly]

73. Who would you let drive without a seatbelt?

Installing seat belts in every car costs money, ya know.

[Confusious]

77. Yes, but driving a car

is more dangerous then a vaccine. That was the point

stay on topic please.

[mzmolly]

97. And again, putting seat belts in every

car costs money but it saves lives. In addition, your odds of dying from cancer are greater than the odd of dying in a car accident thus the desire to see carcinogens removed from vaccines. Your odds are short term at best. How many cases of childhood cancer are caused by formaldehyde in vaccines? I suppose it might cost too much money to find that out?

In addition, I was also thoughtful about the type of family vehicle we purchased. Thank goodness for crash testing and choice.

[Confusious]

103. Why do you want research?

If the results aren't to you liking, your not going to believe them.

Childhood cancer caused by vaccines. That's a new one. What about " Earthquakes caused by childhood vaccines!" or "Tsunami caused by childhood vaccines!"

and still your odds of problems from a vaccine are lower then cancer or car accident.

[mzmolly]

105. I don't buy odds

pulled out of ones ass. I'd like to see double blind long term studies on rates of cancer vaccinated vs. non vaccinated. You know, science.

Again, I'm out but am responding to each response I notice before leaving for the night.

:hi:

[Confusious]

112. Why? you won't believe the research

if it doesn't agree with you preconceived notions.

[kimmerspixelated]

81. Touche'!

[tridim]

11. Except for Cannabis.

[TZ]

28. Not true

You can have severe allergic reactions to cannibis JUST LIKE ANY OTHER product. Geezus. Learn some biology.

[tridim]

33. At risk of going seriously off topic, feel free to post the story..

About someone dying from an allergic reaction to Cannabis.

[TZ]

35. I don't no if anyone's died from the allergy

But your claim that no one is allergic is bullshit..THIS IS FROM A CANNABIS WEBSITE...
http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/articles/4215.html
I'm really fed up with people who don't understand that medicininal benefits or not cannibis is not god touched or something miraculous like that that causes it to break all the biological laws.

[tridim]

36. I didn't say "no one is allergic"

I just said nobody has EVER died from Cannabis use. Allergy, OD or otherwise.

That can't be said of any other substance on Earth, including water.

[TZ]

40. You can't make that claim, unless your are God. Did I miss your divinity?

I'd be willing to bet someone has, unfortunately theres probably not a clear record of that. And you'd be surprised what people can be allergic to. (water allergy is impossible because that person would die before being born). Cannibis is a fucking plant like any other. Its not some god touched substance, therefore anaphylactic shock is entirely possible. Please actually include some actual peer reviewed science when you make a claim like this. Pulling "facts" out of your ass does not impress me.

[tridim]

43. I'm not trying to impress you.

And I did state a fact that nobody has ever died from Cannabis toxicity.

Now go drink your legal toxic liquids and stop spreading disinformation.

[PVnRT]

51. If it's a "fact," you should be able to post some evidence of it

We'll wait.

[tridim]

61. Evidence of a negative? Impossible..

But I'll submit that since there has never been a single report of death by Cannabis toxicity, that should be sufficient for any rational person.

If it ever happens I'll be sure to post a link for you weirdos.

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LeftyMom]

74. I'm allergic to hemp and inhaling pot smoke triggers my asthma.

Nearly killed me last year.

[Deep13]

23. No, one actual death is to those involved.

We all are surrounded by a potential for death all the time. The risk of harm in acting has to be weighed against the harm of inaction.

[mzmolly]

25. Why the false choice?

Can't we find out what people might react to and provide a solution?

The vaccine industry has successfully created the false choice you promote ~ 1. accept death by vaccination or 2. accept more death by disease.

I suggest we don't have to accept either. We actually CAN demand safer vaccines, with a small amount if intellectual curiosity. But there is no incentive because we simply accept that people are expendable when it comes to vaccination.

If a car has unsafe tires, we don't simply say "most people did not have their Firestone tires blow up on the highway." We investigate, we seek answers and we have many options to choose from in the process.

[Deep13]

26. They ARE investigating. nt

[mzmolly]

34. They're investigating to see if they can absolve

the vaccine. My guess is they'll find a way.

[Confusious]

48. conspiracy theory...................eom

[mzmolly]

56. Fact.....

unless you can show me otherwise, when the "investigation" is complete? I'll not hold my breath.

[Confusious]

67. So if it is the vaccine

All vaccines are bad, right

and if it isn't they are covering it up.

Damned if you do, Damned if you don't sort of thing.

I don't honestly believe you'll EVER find anything to sway your mind that vaccines are bad.

[mzmolly]

71. No,

I've never claimed that "vaccines are bad." I've only said they could be BETTER. People like yourself wish to prevent better vaccines because it might ah, "cost money."

[Confusious]

78. Alot more things could be made "better"

For less money then running down every possible reaction to a vaccine

1.5 million to 1. you don't see those kind of odds much in life.

[mzmolly]

89. I disagree with your odds.

However, most things are a matter of choice. With vaccines we're told we have to partake or we're putting everyone else at risk. I say those who wish to save money for the sake of cheaper vaccines are putting others at risk.

Cheers.

[Confusious]

100. Not suprising

"With vaccines we're told we have to partake or we're putting everyone else at risk"

you are. A baby in San Diego died because of unvaxxed kids.

I figure no amount of real science or facts are going to change your mind. You know what you know. It's not you. It's the rest of the world.

[mzmolly]

107. Bullcrap. And the 'unvaxed kids' made the disease in their kitchen?

Or were they exposed by a 'vaxed kid' somewhere along the line? Or an unvaxed adult, like yourself?

http://women.webmd.com/guide/adult-immunizations

When did you have your adult boosters? Or, are you another hypocrite demanding everyone but you, comply?

[Confusious]

113. no bull

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5708a3.htm

http://ww.uniontrib.com/news/metro/20080213-9999-1n13measles.html

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/29/local/me-immunization29

[mzmolly]

115. Yep, bullcrap. Unless the children in SD created measles in their kitchen, as I've said.

Where is that herd immunity we hear so much about?

Vaccine coverage levels in the US have gradually increased over the past four decades from about 50 to over 90%. Yet anytime we have a small outbreak we have the "hype" blaming un-vaccinated children? In fact, in the 1960's, 70's and 80's vaccine coverage levels were much lower, yet we credit vaccines with a dramatic decline in disease in these decades. So which is it? Do we need 100% compliance, or did vaccines have a dramatic impact on disease?

We've also had outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations, yet we don't hold manufacturers responsible for the false sense of security they provide, why?

I will tolerate much when it comes to this debate, but not blaming children who are either too young to vaccinate, or unable to for whatever reason.

Again, when did YOU have YOUR adult boosters?

[Confusious]

123. I'm not blaming children I'm blaming parents and anti-vaxxers

Boy you certainly do move around in this conversation don't you? When are you going to ask me when I stopped beating my wife?

And you know, I was thinking about when I had my boosters. I tore my finger open at one point, mid 20's. I was going to get a tetanus shot, but that didn't happen, I would have been dead already if I hadn't already had it. But at that time the boosters came up, and I got them. It's been about 10 years, time for more boosters. I have to have a doc appointment at least once a year, or else he won't prescribe medications and that's coming up, so I'll ask then.

"So which is it? Do we need 100% compliance, or did vaccines have a dramatic impact on disease?"

So I guess homeopathy or maybe some burning sage wiped out smallpox? Or maybe, smallpox is a conspiracy, there never was any SMALLPOX, it's just to get us to shoot STUFF into our BODIES!!!!!!

You need at least 80% for heard immunity, but some people won't take, and there are always going to be the stupid who don't get them.


"We've also had outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations, yet we don't hold manufacturers responsible for the false sense of security they provide, why?"

I see no polio, rubella, smallpox in this this country, do you? there is no false sense of security

When was the last outbreak of polio, rubella or smallpox in this country? I'm sure there are also religous groups that don't get vaccines, along with the brain damaged anti-vaxxers.

And of course, you dismiss the articles out of hand because they don't agree with you preconceived notions.

[mzmolly]

134. You don't think Tetanus is the only adult booster recommendation do you?

If so, you're the hypocrite I thought you were.

I have never indicated homeopathy wiped out disease. What I've indicated is that far lesser rates of compliance were said to be effective. (YET we panic about one unvaccinated kid on a plane?) Your note about polio and small pox case in point. We did not have 90% compliance until recent decades. Further, we have had rubella outbreaks in the US in recent years, in spite of mass vaccination. We also had at least one vaccine related case of Polio in the US in recent years as well. The origins are a mystery given we no longer administer the live vaccine.

However, speaking of rubella, I was tested for immunity to rubella while pregnant, and in spite of being up to date on the jab, I tested negative for titers. Who's to blame? I should have been immune at the time I needed it most. Not so. Instead I was advised to get the shot while pregnant. In hindsight, a very bad idea.

Lastly, my husband was fully vaccinated against measles, had a nasty case in spite. Fever spiked at 105. He was nearly hospitalized. Why do you suppose that is?

As I've said, we've had outbreaks of disease in highly vaccinated populations. So, your issue should not be with those who opt out of vaccines, but with those who sell you a product that does not work as advertised. A few examples below:

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/113/3/455

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7795768

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00000359.htm

Editorial Note: "This outbreak demonstrates that transmission of measles can occur within a school population with a documented immunization level of 100%. This level was validated during the outbreak investigation."

More here: http://www.wvve.info/issues/outbreaks.html

Bottom line, if you feel vaccines protect you, you shouldn't worry about what I choose to do.

[Techn0Girl]

137. You are arguing with people...

who shows up on virtually each and every H1N1 thread and spreads industry BS and misinfo. You need to stop arguing with people like that and just put them on ignore.

[Confusious]

140. Yes, and you show up to..

What you in the sack for the homeopathy lobby or the funeral homes?

[mzmolly]

153. LOL

What a joke. I'm in the sack for the "green vaccine lobby" which doesn't exist as of today. ;)

[Confusious]

143. NM

[mzmolly]

157. Probably

but, sick person that I am, part of me enjoys it. It wont be long before I hang it up for the evening though.

:hi:

[Techn0Girl]

173. You are being a Troll's Wet Dream ....

I can understand 3 or even 4 exchanges - I give people 3 or 4 chances myself. But you continually "argue" with the same people in thread after thread - and not only does it contribute nothing to the conversation but it actually distracts from it frankly.

Me? I will go through 3 exchanges give or take but if the person proves to be ingenuous or an outright teabagger-equivalent then I out them on ignore and I don't have to be distracted by them.

I have a hard time understanding the "enjoyment" that you state you enjoy by continually engaging the same idiotic people. You and I , for instance, share similar ideas with regard to a lot of the Swine flu controversy. Not everything to be sure but a lot. Yet I find it difficult to support or ally myself with you because of your "wars" with obvious trolls in every single thread.

You aren't adding to the discussion. You're adding to the distraction from it.

[HuckleB]

174. Troll?

Pot meet kettle.

To date, I have yet to see you support the various claims you make on these boards. You hit and run, and you even go to the name calling routine.

Until you clean up your own room, you have no business trying to point out the dirty shirt on the floor of someone else's room.

[mzmolly]

185. Hey thanks

Huck. ;) :hi:

[mzmolly]

182. I'm sorry but who the hell are you? l'll decide what I discuss

with whom, and for how long. I don't need you to tell me how to spend my time here, understand? I am interested in the subject of vaccination, thus I discuss it. I also enjoy discussion and debate. So, save your sanctimonious lecture for someone who might be impressed by you. I'm not.

[mzmolly]

186. You need to stop lecturing

me. If anyone is going on my ignore list, it's you.

[Confusious]

138. Ok, you don't read do you?

I said, and I will put it in caps so you can see it "THE SUBJECT OF BOOSTERS CAME UP AT THE TIME, AND I GOT THEM" there, did you see it? need larger, let me know.

Vaccines are not always going to take. That is the nature of the game. Stuff in the store doesn't always work when you bring it home. It gets taken back. You go get another shot.

Why do you expect 100% from something when nothing in YOUR LIFE is 100%. And if you think it is, it's just an illusion you put up yourself.

[mzmolly]

149. Which boosters did you have specifically? Many docs don't recommend the adult series. Mine did not.

Also, if nothing is 100% how can you blame one un-vaccinated kid on an airplane for an outbreak? Absolutely absurd, given you admit that vaccines have been proven ineffective at times.

[Confusious]

154. Ok, once again

do you have eye porblems or something

"I DON'T BLAME THE KIDS, I BLAME THE PARENTS" if they had got the shots, then they would have been absolved of responsibility.

I don't go into the office and ask for each one by name. I just say "I need boosters" they say "which ones" I say "whatever someone in their mid 20's should have"

They give it to me, I leave. I don't have the need to control things that much. It's a waste of time and energy.

[mzmolly]

155. I don't believe

you've had your adult boosters if you can't name them. Some scientist! :hi:

[Confusious]

164. It was 10 years ago

I don't have a need to control as much as other people do.

A. Einstein - I never remember anything I can look up.

[mzmolly]

184. If it's been ten years

you're behind on your adult tdap to say the least. You may be spreading pertussis and diptheria as we speak. Get in for that booster! ;)

http://women.webmd.com/guide/adult-immunizations

[Confusious]

47. We can

How much do you propose we invest, and what do you propose we cut to make up the difference

10 million doses given with 6 bad reactions, some of who died because of other problems, like a girl with a tumor

Making something like that "safer" which is already safer then most things you do in a day is going to cost ALOT of money.

its not a linear scale, its a logarithmic scale.

We don't have all the money in the world, so your going to have to cut money from other things, like drug safety or car safety to make up the difference.

[mzmolly]

53. I'd pay a bit more to get honest answers and remove questionable ingredients.

And again, the numbers are not in so you're assertion above is false.

The girl with a tumor died after getting Gardasil, BTW. And she's not the only Gardasil vaccine related death so why taut her as THE example?

[Confusious]

75. The numbers don't have to be in

It's an economic LAW: law of diminishing marginal returns or the law of increasing relative cost.

The more factors you bring in, the more it costs. You have to cut factors to make it economically feasible, or in the case of a budget, to have enough money to do other things.

Of course, you'll probably ignore that, like other inconvenient facts.

And I got my HUGE number of deaths from vaccines mixed up, it's funny I quoted one girl, and not numbers.

As Stalin said: one death is a tragedy, a million a statistic.

[mzmolly]

109. Yes

money talks. However as I've said, pulling known issues from the vaccines would not be the huge expense you suggest. Medimune, for example, has removed all mercury, aluminum, and formaldehyde from their version of the H1N1 vaccine. It didn't cost them much to do so.

[HuckleB]

130. I don't see it as a false choice.

I see scientists trying to make the safest vaccines they can over time. In the meantime, I see them having to make risk-benefit assessments. The data seems clear that those assessments favor the continued use of most current vaccines, if not all of them.

Those aren't false choices. They may seem difficult, but they're not false.

[mzmolly]

160. It's false to suggest that I have to choose

between vaccines containing known carcinogens or neurotoxins, or inaction. I can "act" by demanding safer vaccines.

[HuckleB]

165. At this point, I have to say, please come up with a better process then.

I know too many scientists who would love to come up with better processes, and some of them are working to do so.

Again, I don't buy the false choice theory at all. I think it flies in the face of too many good people, who work very hard to improve public health.

[mzmolly]

181. All I ask for is a better product.

Not a better "process."

[Odin2005]

45. Holy scientific illiteracy batman!

all drugs have side effects.

[mzmolly]

117. Holy bullshit talking point batman!

Vaccines are not a drug, remember? Or did you forget that in your effort to remain scientifically literate?

[Confusious]

52. So we shouldn't use something

If it has the possibility of causing one death?

Your life must be lovely, that you've never had to peel though the shades of grey in life.

[kimmerspixelated]

95. Ever think that maybe the answer doesn't involve a synthetic chemical?

Seriously, the idea of a vaccine IS scientifically sound. The preservatives involved(to save money) , I'm guessing, are the real problem, in almost every case. Why can't they figure out a better way to preserve them, better yet, why not make the injection with an actual cocktail of something the body can use? VitD,C for starters. Isn't Vit C used as a preservative sometimes, except by Big Pharma?

[Confusious]

131. I'm, glad you THINK it's sound

After 50 years and wiping out smallpox.

I've never heard of vitamin c being used, and if it was, only in specific cases.

Thermisol has been around since the 20's. If there was a problem, don'[t you think it would have shown up before now?

[kimmerspixelated]

179. Right, just like there is no problem with mercury

things like that...Okay! SO possible paralysis, etc. by chemicals injected don't scare the crap out of you? The world is so used to chemicals, which is a very sad state of affairs.

[HuckleB]

132. Can you link us to information about the use of vitamin C as a preservative?

Thanks.

[kimmerspixelated]

180. Some food labels list ascorbic acid.

Instead of dangerous preservatives.

[kimmerspixelated]

80. Agreed!

But the pro-vaxers around here believe they should always do what the CDC dictates no matter what the cost.

[Confusious]

84. What costs would those be

The millions who died from diseases around the world before vaccines, or the few who had bad reactions to the vaccines.

Read a little history, and it will become clear.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox

[HuckleB]

133. Really?

Exactly what cost are you talking about, uh, in relation to benefit.

[whopis01]

90. While that is the case, pulling those vaccines may lead to more deaths.

The death rate associated with the vaccine (from what was stated in this article) appears to be .000015% (and that is assuming that the one death was actually linked to the vaccine).

For the same group of people, there would likely be between 2 and 12 (1.88 to 11.88) deaths from swine flu. That's assuming an estimated 40% infection rate and a mortality rate between .00007% and .00045%.

While every step should be taken to minimize the deaths from reactions to the vaccine, pulling them does not appear to be a very wise decision.

[mzmolly]

118. Except for no one suggested

we pull every H1N1 vaccine.

[whopis01]

175. The logic remains the same whether they pull 170,000 doses or all doses or even a single dose.

The (estimated) mortality rate from swine flue for the people who don't receive the vaccine is still 2 to 6 times higher than the (estimated) mortality rate from a reaction to the vaccine for those who do receive it.

Beyond that, there has only been a single death, which has not even been positively linked to the vaccine.

The fact is that they did pull 170,000 doses of the vaccine.


The reality of the situation is that some people may have a severe reaction to the H1N1 vaccine. Is it possible that someone who otherwise would have remained healthy will die from receiving the vaccine? Yes it is. Is this a tragedy? Yes it is. It is just as much of a tragedy as the person who died from the swine flu because they did not receive the vaccine. And all of the evidence indicates that the latter is much more likely than the former.

[mzmolly]

183. Unsupported statistics aside...

I'd simply like to see less people die in an effort to preserve life. Removing known neurotoxins and carcinogens from all childhood vaccines, would be a good first step.

[whopis01]

187. I understand your agenda regarding vaccines

and I agree with it. I know of no one who feels that neurotoxins and carcinogens being in vaccines is a good thing.

I just feel that the goal should be to see less people die. It doesn't matter from what they die. Too many people are ready to throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak. Even if a vaccine causes illness or death in a certain percentage of people, that would be preferable assuming that a greater percentage would become ill and die if not given the vaccine. Less deaths is always better - no two ways about it.

Anyway - this is quickly becoming similar to the arguments people make for not wearing seat belts because someone was once killed while wearing a seat belt and would not have been if they hadn't worn it.

As far as the statistics go, they are hardly unsupported. While it is impossible to have exact figures, and there will be some room for debate about the rates, observations and conclusions are quite possible:

http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE58E6NZ20090916
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2009/11/swine_flu_killing_younger_peop.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swine_influenza
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17466-swine-flu-death-rate-estimates-flawed.html
http://www.sacbee.com/1098/story/2324020.html

This could go on forever - but I will end it now.

[mzmolly]

189. I don't dispute the fact that swine flu (or any flu) is a serious disease.

I do dispute the notion that we realize how many people vaccines harm in the short and long term, however. That said, I'm going to out myself as a supporter of the H1N1 vaccine. ;) I think it's a timely vaccine, I think it's needed and I appreciate the fact that the US decided not to use an adjuvant. Not to mention we have a mercury and formaldehyde free version available, which is a step in the right direction. If there ever was a need to develop a vaccine, this is it. Even if the flu turns out to be relatively benign for most, when all is said and done.

Peace :hi:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

147. Of course you mean from the flu, right?

[Ignis]

14. Six Sigma is only for cars, not people!

If a person dies, just make another one!

:crazy:

[mzmolly]

6. I'm glad Canada takes vaccine reactions seriously.

It would be interesting to contrast the number of Canadian reactions to the US and European versions.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/280927

[lyonspotter]

15. Thank you for posting this!!!!!

Rec'd!

[Divine Discontent]

27. wonder if the US woulda done the same.

[TZ]

29. Yes.

The FDA can and has done this. This is what LOT RELEASE TESTING is all about. I'm so fucking sick of lay people who think if they haven't heard of it, it doesn't happen. :banghead:
How do I know? My company had a lot that was bad and was pulled by the FDA a couple of years ago although no one reported any injuries.

[Divine Discontent]

171. for experts they've done some really shitty things that effect our safety, so that's why I asked.

I'm glad you're confident this wouldn't have been assuaged into something akin to, "oh, it's just a slightly higher rate, it happens"

don't bang your head too hard, btw, you'll get netgraines.

[HuckleB]

30. It would, yes.

[TZ]

31. ZOMG BAN PEANUTS PEOPLE DIE EATING PEANUTS!

There is a certain "ignored" here that I suspect I know who it is. A person who is a foaming at the mouth anti-vaxxer who doesn't understand that everything that we eat or is around us is a potential allergen and nothing in life is 100% safe. Someone who actually thinks measles vaccines kill more people than measles (quite wrong) Some people are deathly allergic to peanuts. Should we then ban all peanuts?

[mamaleah]

172. Oh don't even joke. There are people who want peanuts banned from restaurants.

Many schools already have a ban in place. Some want it extended to restaurants too.

[HuckleB]

32. Why do you think anyone would unrec this piece?

[TZ]

37. because some of us are tired of the fear mongering anti-vaxx bullshit

This was definitely posted as a LOOK TEH VACCINE IS TEH EVUL suggestion. I'm tired of the anti-vax nitwits on this site.

[HuckleB]

38. I understand that that is probably why this was posted.

In truth, this simply shows that the check and balances of the system work. So, in reality, this really goes against the usual anti-vax crowd.

[TZ]

41. You would think.

However, the anti-vax crowd likes to take any little factoid and run with it. They are not known for reading comphrension skills.

[mzmolly]

57. The Canadian

system, perhaps.

[HuckleB]

88. Thanks for the cynicism.

I don't think it's warranted, however.

[mzmolly]

124. It's not cynical to note that the article

referenced the Canadian health care system.

[HuckleB]

127. I understood your cynicism to be aimed at the US.

I believe that stories about the large ongoing precautionary steps taken to watch for such occurrences have been posted in threads in which we have discussed such matters.

Thus, I don't find the cynicism to be warranted.

Cheers!

[spoony]

44. Sounds like they're acting out of an abundance of caution.

Doesn't exactly sound like the profit-driven, reckless, cover-up prone phantoms we're told are behind these vaccines.

[mzmolly]

58. Canada

isn't primarily profit driven medicine.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

176. In the US, we'd do this out of fear of lawsuits

The hundreds who die of flu won't cause suits. Ths six that die of reactions certainly will cause suits.

Dunno how it works in Canada.

:hi:

[Odin2005]

46. Wow, 6 cases Fucking hysteria.

[peaches2003]

62. Happy for those of you who can get the shot, but

I found out today how they are planning on cutting Medicare costs. I've been searching and waiting for the vaccine to come to my area and found it today. I was turned away. NO ONE, regardless of medical issues, who is 65 or older is allowed to get a shot. Federal requirement when the vaccine is distributed. I have emphysema and chronic bronchitis and have been told I must find the vaccine. So I did and was turned away. I've been a huge Obama supporter, but now am wondering if Sarah Palin may not be right about the death panels.

And PLEASE don't flame me. I can't take any more today.

[Robb]

72. Who told you you "must find the vaccine"?

Not flaming. I believe the reason no one over 65 is getting the shot is that immune systems at that age do not respond robustly to immunizations in general; the idea is for your body to make antibodies, and over 65 it doesn't happen well.

Anyone with a degree, please chime in. :D

[peaches2003]

94. Who told me?

Docs (who didn't have the vaccine in) told me to find it and get the shot. One of whom is my son, a fine physician who really wants his Mom to live a lot longer. The stated reason is that seniors "probably" had a swine vaccine in the 70s. I have no idea if I did or not, but do know with my medical issues I cannot get even a mild cold without it turning into serious bronchitis. I do get the seasonal flu vaccine and have had the pneumonia immunization and nothing ever has been said about over 65s not producing fewer antibodies than anyone else. My belief today is that they are not giving it to seniors so as to save Medicare costs.

[Robb]

119. Slow down

...Think about that last sentence. The vaccine is free. If you get sick, the costs to Medicare would be higher.

I want your son's mom to live a lot longer, too. :hi:

[peaches2003]

178. For being so nice

:toast:

[kimmerspixelated]

98. Please don't play into the fear that all is lost

just cuz you can't get a vaccine. There ARE strong anti-virals out there IF you should get the flu. I gave my daughter Oil of Oregano when she was ill-we always have it on hand! Sure, it tastes yucky, but it knocks it out! Good luck...and if you are open to natural medicine, there are plenty of things you can do. Most people believe in Vitamins-Up your dose of VIT D3!!

[peaches2003]

110. Thank you for the advice

I will look into what you say. However, I have VERY low Vit D and already take 50,000 units/week.

[Confusious]

114. Yea, that's going to help with polio, rubella, mumps, etc.....eom

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

108. If you are older than 65 you likely already have immunity.

[whopis01]

190. What you are saying (what you have been told by others) is simply not true.

There is no "Federal requirement" that no one over 65 be given the vaccine.

If you are over 65, you are in the lowest priority group - but that is because people over 65 have had the lowest infection rate of any age group. The infection rate for the over 65 group has been 1.3 / 100,000 whereas the infection rate for the under 24 group is 26.7 / 100,000.

In any case, the priority lists are just recommendations made by the CDC. They are not requirements. In fact, on their site they even talk about those over 65 being able to get the vaccine once the high risk groups have been given a chance to get it.

http://www.cdc.gov/H1N1flu/vaccination/vaccine_seniors.htm

[still_one]

92. CCTV is a Chinese news outlet. Is this verified by independent sources? /nt

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

106. So the 4000 deaths are just hysteria but we're supposed to worry about 6 allergic reactions? LOL.

[Barack_America]

120. That's really the crux of it right there.

Great point.

[Techn0Girl]

122. I was around in '76

When a huge batch of H1N1 vaccine became contaminated and led directly to 500 deaths by Guillian-Bar syndrome and thousands of cases more of paralysis lasting to varying degrees for a lifetime.

People need to remember that first and foremost Big Pharma wants to make a profit. Safety and health are always secondary concerns.

[HuckleB]

126. Incorrect.

http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swineflu/frequently_asked_questions/vaccine_preparedness/safety_approval/en/index.html

"During the 1976 influenza vaccination campaign, about 10 persons per million vaccinated persons developed GBS."

-------------

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_swine_flu_outbreak

"Overall, about 500 cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), resulting in death from severe pulmonary complications for 25 people, were probably caused by an immunopathological reaction to the 1976 vaccine. Other influenza vaccines have not been linked to Guillain-Barré syndrome, though caution is advised for certain individuals, particularly those with a history of GBS.<6><7>"

[winyanstaz]

135. I have seen a few dozen posts about deaths due to the vaccines posted here and there on the web..but

I have not found an up to date list of the number of people that have died due to complications etc from the vaccines...
Anyone got a list?
Maybe I am not using google right or something....

[Techn0Girl]

139. There have been at least 5 reports so far....

of Guillian-Barr syndrome associated with the vaccine (can be easily Googled). It takes many months to get accurate stats on vaccine related illness and deaths and there has only been widespread distribution of the vaccine in the U.S. for only a few months at best. It will take some time before accurate stats from reputable sources filter down.

[HuckleB]

141. Then Google them for us.

And please prove the association. Are there more cases of GBS in vaccine recipients than there would be generally otherwise?

Thanks for proving your assertions.

I know you'll do it.

Right?

[backscatter712]

188. That's not larger percentage-wise than seen with the usual seasonal vaccine.

Really, making an H1N1 vaccine isn't any harder than making the seasonal vaccine, which has been done every year for decades.

[ismnotwasm]

168. Yikes

Not good. Still, I've had mine. Both of them actually, seasonal and H1N1. The hospital I work in has at least one H1N1 case on practically every unit. We have all of our negative pressure rooms tracked for possible use at patient flow. (We only need negative pressure rooms in certain cases)

I neither want to get it or, worse perhaps, pass it it on to someone else. I work on a unit with immunocomprimised patients.

A few weeks before, a bunch of us had a pertussis exposure. Had to get a booster AND take antibiotics.

After all that, I STILL got a fucking cold, dammit.

[tyedyeto]

169. My sis-in-law who is a RN and works in a hospital....

is allergic to a component of every flu shot and is ineligible to be given the H1N1 shot. Her hospital is OK that she, as an in-house worker, cannot be given the shot yet she is still working and caring for patients. In talking with her last week, she told me that her hospital is under Marshall Law to restrict many visitors who arrive to visit patients. Mostly, the restrictions are for those under the age of 18.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

177. Marshall Law? When did the Governor declare martial law and which state was it?

[kixat2550]

170. Yawn. More hysteria.