Hangdog42, I'd thank you for your last post if it were possible in General.

Sigh. OK, you asked for it. There are actually several tests, but the CDC recommends an RT-PCR test, which looks for the signature hemagglutanin and neuramindase sequences. I'm sure that if there was any doubt, they would fall back and do sequencing to make sure. However, RT-PCR is highly accurate.

CDC Update. Have a look at some of the references here, particularly this one as it talks a bit about safety and efficacy as well as a little history of H1N1.

This is a nice review as well. One of the outrages about scientific literature is that a lot of it is available only with a subscription, but this review links to a lot more literature, at least some of which is freely available online.

If you do a search at PubMed on "H1N1 vaccine" and then click on the Reviews tab, you'll find 45 reviews that cover pretty much every aspect of these vaccines. Again, you might not be able to get to all the articles, but a number of them are freely available. If any of them seem particularly interesting, the Related Articles link under each entry is worth clicking. You should note that the stuff indexed in PubMed is from peer-reviewed journals.

Yeah... Me too. I wish more people appreciated science. And I also want to thank you for being one of the voices of reason and logic.

"For the great enemy of truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth -- persistent, persuasive and unrealistic." --John F. Kennedy

Thank you for the information Hangdog42, I've read about the tests


and my questions on the tests are - Do you know how much each test costs? How common is the availability of the RT-PCR test, because the CDC suggests that some areas have it, and some might not. I assume, without yet looking into it myself that this is a relatively new and/or expensive process.

Also, it would appear that the RIA test is inconclusive. How common is the use of this test?

Also, Immunofluorescence is suggested to depend on a large amount of variables. A specific variable that would further pique my curiosity is "how skilled is the operator?" My experiences with medical personnel has varied widely from all specialties within the field, both in small locations, and large metropolitan areas.

How common is the use of this test?

With the viral culture, I would assume that given the availability of a high powered microscope (40,000 x magnification or better?), one could conduct this test with repeatable results. Is this correct?


On reading the next link you've provided - The suggested amount of Hg contained within some of the vaccines is a relatively small number (~1/2 or 1 microgram in a dose from the multidose vial) Though the content is indicated as being 0 with the prefilled syringes. I don't know why this would be the case.

My question from this article is what, if not thimerosal, or other adjuvants (which was previously stated in the CDC update to NOT be present within the vaccines)

causes issues within a certain, admittedly small, percentage of people?
Why will some people die, others be damaged, and some be just fine?
What particular instance causes this, and what are the ingredients of the vaccine, aside from their mercury content, and the genetic material that composes the virus? (presumably radiated in the "iactivated" versions, though I'm not sure what the actual procedure is.)

(although I still adhere to my, and Tex's comments regarding the use of mercury, and how this practice, to me, would be a fundamental flaw in anything designed to keep people alive. I am willing to give anyone the benefit of doubt.)

If any of my questions are answered within further reading of the material supplied, I will answer my own questions at that time.

Thank you for your response, sir, more information requested.

*Tired sigh*. Well at least you do seem to be interested in finding out more, even if it means you have to be spoon-fed.
Here is a nice paper on the mercury emissions of coal power plants (which by the way generate about half of the power your country uses):

http://www.nescaum.org/documents/rpt031104mercury.pdf

I'll just point you quickly to page 11 (but please read what comes before and after, it is very interesting and informative) which shows that the acceptable methylmercury exposure per kilogram of body mass per day for adults is 0.4 micrograms. Now keep in mind that thimerosal, or ethylmercury, clears our systems more than twice as fast as methylmercury.

I don't know if you consider power plants something designed to keep people alive, but just use that vast imagination of yours to picture the consequences of shutting down half your country's power generating capability.

Oh and BTW, that supposedly evil gubmint of yours is forcing the reduction of mercury emissions by the power plants.

PCR is actually a fairly old technology. It was invented in the mid 80s and is one of the most insanely useful technologies to ever hit biology. RT-PCR is simply a real time detection method for PCR and is also very established technology. As for the costs, I'm not real sure, but it shouldn't be very expensive. PCR is a fairly cheap technology. The expensive bit here would be the cost of the people qualified to run the test. Someone with a bachelors degree would be well qualified with the proper training. Hospitals and testing labs also slap various overhead charges onto test prices, but this technology is so cheap that cost isn't likely to be an issue.

I don't know how widespread the test is, but I would challenge that is it inconclusive. It wasn't really designed to test specifically for H1N1, but rather a broader class of flu virus. The issue here is that developing and testing the H1N1 specific antibodies needed by this kind of test is MUCH more expensive and time consuming than developing the primers needed for PCR.


You're right here. Immunoassays tend to have more variables than PCR, however that is largely dependent on the quality of the antibody being used in the test. As far as operator skill, the people doing these are probably on the same level as those doing the PCR test. Someone with an associates or bachelors degree in biology could easily do both of these tests with the proper training. That said, testing labs certainly have SOPs in place for both tests and those MUST be followed. That takes a lot of variability out of the tests.

This is likely the least consistent test and the most likely to suffer from operator error. Reading between the lines of the CDC recommendations, they aren't suggesting using this for diagnosis of H1N1.

A couple of things about this. First, the hysteria over mercury is near the levels of hysteria over radiation. Yes, elemental mercury is very damaging and toxic. However, we're not talking about elemental mercury here and just because a compound contains mercury doesn't mean that it is as toxic as mercury. Second, thimersol is a mercury containing compound and is a pretty effective preservative. However, it is not the only preservative and I suspect the hysteria over mercury is driving companies to look at alternatives. By the way, the actual science linking thimersol to diseases (particularly autism) is very, very inconclusive. Most of the connection between the two exists primarily in the minds of lawyers looking for a big payday. Also keep in mind that some things that are toxic in large doses are actually required in small doses. Take a look at selenium for example. However, my main point is that just because a compound contains an element that is toxic in a different form, it does not follow that that compound is also toxic.

As far as I'm aware, there is only one significant issue with a vaccine component and health issues. Since the virus used in these vaccines are raised in eggs, people with egg allergies do run a risk of having a reaction if they are vaccinated. Does that mean the vaccines are 100% safe? No, nothing is 100% safe. The fact is that we don't know enough about human biology to completely understand the risks. For example, last time around with swine flu there, some people developed Gullain-Barre syndrome as a result. The most likely explanation for why is the people have widely differing responses to any given antigen, and there is really no way to tell in advance who will react well and who wont. Individuals have a widely varying capability to mount an immune response to something. If you really want to dig into it, you need to look at something called the Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC). This is the part of the immune system that is responsible for recognizing self and non-self. The issue is that any individuals MHC is not capable of recognizing all non-self antigens. One of the theories as to why Native Americans were obliterated by European diseases is that relatively few individuals served as the founding members of the Native American population and those individuals had a set of MHC genes that weren't capable of recognizing diseases like smallpox. Hence, they were defenseless against it. As you may have noticed, this is a highly complicated subject area.

Viruses themselves are pretty simple and consist of their genetic material and their protein coat. There are probably some lipids and sugars along for the ride. There are also two forms of the vaccine. The injected version uses a killed virus (I think it is chemically killed, not irradiated) and the FluMist version is a live attenuated virus. Basically it has been genetically modified to not cause disease. If you look at that Novartis file, the vaccine itself is pretty simple. It consists of viral proteins, phosphate buffer and some chemicals that are likely stabilizers. What is noteworthy is that this composition has been through multiple clinical trials over the past few decades. If there were something truly evil in these vaccines, they would have shown up.

Since this thread is in danger of becoming rational and a useful source of information, I thought I'd submit a clip of the latest US response to the swine flu:

swineflu.jpg

Can you catch it from bacon sandwiches?

"It needs to be zero.. but this is causing it to be -2."

"So what? This other thing is causing it to be -6!"

Yes, yes.. Coal burning power plants produce toxic chemicals, the beautiful prius battery comes from a factory that produces toxic chemicals, monsanto corporation is complaining about itself because it violates it's own proposal for new mercury regulation, which hasn't been established yet. This isn't about what we breathe in, this is about what is injected into our bloodstream.


As far as .gov is concerned - If it gives them more power, that's what they're doing. Doesn't have to do with keeping me healthy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z16jT5dwPcM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5xdF...eature=related

Hangdog42: Thank you for your time. You've given me enough to start reading on it myself. That's a good thing =)

Dogs,

Glad I could point you in a more reliable direction. All I'm asking is that your opinions be based on facts, not crapola with an agenda.

Nuts. I missed my march.

Right...as long as vaccines dont't contain thimerosal, everything is right as rain. Who cares what we breathe in?

As Hangdog42 pointed out earlier: if you want to complain about a non-issue in the chemical makeup of vaccines, then at least be consistent and also aim your outrage at other (real) sources of hazardous chemicals.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't...

Ok, we can derail this thread again by considering issues that aren't in any way related to the swine flu, or the vaccine. That's fine with me.

What do you have, my friend?

I'll point out monsanto corporation's phosphate production plants. I didn't start their corporation, I'm not a part of it, and I don't appreciate mercury poisoning. Please get whatever it is on your chest, off of it.

http://www.allbusiness.com/environme...2571569-1.html


@Hangdog42 - Yes sir, but none of what you've provided eases my concerns about .gov being an inherently evil entity as of late, that is primarily focused on destroying its own part of the world, along with everyone else.

By destroying the world, I mean changing it in a way that sucks, IMO.

Such as police states, population control, etc, which I suspect that easuter knows a bit about.

Perhaps the CDC is by-the-book this time, but that doesn't change the fact that Obama made a powergrab for the embraceable ability to ruin the lives of anyone who wanted to, for whatever reason he wanted to.

Perhaps the swine flu, which so far has been thoroughly uninteresting in my part of the country, could be like a scaled down, unoffensive 9/11 in which .gov used the "crisis" to mask their "unconstitutional" ideas from becoming a reality.

Just ask Rahm Emanuel about how useful a crisis can be to do things you never thought you could do before, and how wonderful an opportunity it is to be able to generate them at will, with the help of the mainstream media.

or maybe we're all gunna die, but I doubt it.

One of the issues surrounding the vaccine in this thread is its supposed mercury content. How is this not related to other forms of mercury contamination that you and 'Tex' choose to conveniently ignore?

1. You and Tex claim vaccines contain elemental mercury. They don't.
2. Power plants pump elemental mercury and methylmercury into the atmosphere and water deposits. You and Tex' seem just fine with it.

Puzzling, from where I stand. You should be outraged at real sources of mercury contamination if you are so worried about it.

Even after that long exchange we had where I made my position very clear, you are STILL on about population control as some sort of ultimate evil.
Usually only creationists and conspiracy theorists are this willfully ignorant and dishonest.

This thread opened my eyes somewhat to opinions that aren't as light-hearted as mine are. It's intriguing.

Note that I did not say,

"easuter supports"

I said

"easuter knows a bit about"

Do you not know anything about population control? If not, then I retract my suspicions.

Also, I've not stated that thimerosal is anything but an organomercury compound.

As far as elemental mercury goes --- Yes, I would prefer to have the public's support in dropping the population of any non-essential establishment that was guilty of contaminating, with some very unfriendly chemicals, --- water supplies, food supplies, the air, etc.

That's not the case, however, nor is it part of this thread.

Furthermore, it's not my fault that they exist, it's the fault of every American alive at the time of its inception for not thinking about the consequences of such a screwed up chain of events.

More specifically, it's their fault for not being diligent in the preservation of their way of life, which is not limited to, but includes, allowing companies like Monsanto, and coal burning energy facilities, to operate in a way that poses a very dangerous threat to all life forms on earth, including, but not limited to, ME.

Yeah, but you still lumped it into the category of "destroying the world" even after I explained that population controll is NOT about culling the population!

Well it still is closely related to the topic! One "non-source" of mercury like vaccines is a problem of Armageddon-sized proportions, and the contamination of our environment by other sources is not, for some reason.

Why are vaccines singled out for criticism that they don't even deserve? ---> This is the point I was trying to make above.

Quite right.

You basically want a government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub, but you also want some form of industry regulation (and subsequent regulation enforcement). How exactly are you going to reconcile both those ideas?