Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

  1. #11
    Educating the Ignorant
    zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:02 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,465
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    A disease cannot mutate if it has no viable hosts. Your opinion is objectively wrong. As in, literally kills people wrong. Yes, a healthy lifestyle helps your body fight off a flu, but a vaccine prevents it entirely. More importantly, the vaccine can prevent you from spreading the disease to others. No matter how in-shape you are, you are always capable of spreading the disease to a child or an old person, the very people who are at risk of death from the flu. Or people taking immunosuppressants due to organ transplant or people with compromised immune systems.

    The short answer: Smallpox would like a word with you, sir.
    A tip to those out there until this miracle comes to market:

    I read a book about the common cold some 20 years ago, and what I got out of it was... no sticking your fingers in your eyes to clean them of debris. Fingers are great carriers, and the eyes have... water... so it's easy to transmit pathogens... and get sick.

    Haven't had the flu in over 3 or 4 years.

    .
    The Clintons are what happens...
    when you have NO MORAL COMPASS.

  2. #12
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    A tip to those out there until this miracle comes to market:

    I read a book about the common cold some 20 years ago, and what I got out of it was... no sticking your fingers in your eyes to clean them of debris. Fingers are great carriers, and the eyes have... water... so it's easy to transmit pathogens... and get sick.

    Haven't had the flu in over 3 or 4 years.

    .
    Quite right. Frequent washing hands, and the ability to avoid touching your face, eyes, nose with your hands seriously puts a dent in colds and flu. Flu can however travel in the air and infect simply by breathing in droplets from someone else sneezing or coughing too. Which is why covering the mouth is required to keep the droplets from atomizing into the air.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    A disease cannot mutate if it has no viable hosts. Your opinion is objectively wrong. As in, literally kills people wrong.
    It kills people who are in the high risk groups, yeah. Hence me saying the majority of the population, but not all of the population. I believe in a person's right to choose their own medicine, but I am just saying that if you are a healthy individual who is outside of the high risk ages, then getting the flu isn't going to kill you. It would just be an inconvenience and that's all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Yes, a healthy lifestyle helps your body fight off a flu, but a vaccine prevents it entirely. More importantly, the vaccine can prevent you from spreading the disease to others. No matter how in-shape you are, you are always capable of spreading the disease to a child or an old person, the very people who are at risk of death from the flu. Or people taking immunosuppressants due to organ transplant or people with compromised immune systems.
    This is not correct in several ways. First, flu epidemiology requires the host to be infected for it to be spread, even if they are pre-symptomatic. Healthy individuals with strong immune systems won't become infected, even if they come into contact with the virus. If you are showing no symptoms and are spreading the virus, it means you are infected and will soon show symptoms yourself. Humans can't carry the flu. You are either infected or not.

    Second, the flu will spread faster in unhealthy populations, regardless of vaccination status. If you compare the epidemiology of healthier societies that aren't vaccinated to unhealthy societies that are vaccinated, flu transmission and incidence will still be lower in the healthier society.

    Even if you are vaccinated, you can still become infected and transmit the virus to vulnerable people; all it would mean is that your infection period would be less since your body already has the acquired immunity. It doesn't mean you aren't contagious. For this reason, it is pointless to scapegoat people for choosing to not get the vaccination. Also, it's important to note that although vaccination increases survival rates in infants and the elderly, those who have been inoculated can still die from the flu.

    Medical technology places all of its efforts on combating the virus, such as through vaccines, and little effort on prevention through healthy lifestyle. The American population has a high index for type II diabetes and obesity, both of which lower immune response significantly. The virus would spread faster there than in comparatively healthier countries.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    The short answer: Smallpox would like a word with you, sir.
    I singled out the flu, and no other virus. I am not saying that vaccines are patently useless across the board. Smallpox vaccines were definitely a good idea, considering the mortality rate. I see no such justification for the flu, even H1N1.

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    11-23-11 @ 10:06 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,827

    Re: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

    I won't be getting vaccinated. No way.

  5. #15
    Educator
    Anarcho-fascist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    T E X A S !
    Last Seen
    09-26-14 @ 11:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,069
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by MyOwnDrum View Post
    I won't be getting vaccinated. No way.
    Why wouldn't you get vaccinated?

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    Very nice.
    The jokes too.

    It's going to blow a huge hole in some pharma's bottom line.

    .
    Umm... it's not your local pharmacist that's going to profit from this....

  7. #17
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,807

    Re: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    It kills people who are in the high risk groups, yeah. Hence me saying the majority of the population, but not all of the population. I believe in a person's right to choose their own medicine, but I am just saying that if you are a healthy individual who is outside of the high risk ages, then getting the flu isn't going to kill you. It would just be an inconvenience and that's all.
    Herd immunity. The higher the vaccination rate, the less ability the virus has to continue the chain of infection. Break the chain, break the virus. Period.

    This is not correct in several ways. First, flu epidemiology requires the host to be infected for it to be spread, even if they are pre-symptomatic. Healthy individuals with strong immune systems won't become infected, even if they come into contact with the virus. If you are showing no symptoms and are spreading the virus, it means you are infected and will soon show symptoms yourself. Humans can't carry the flu. You are either infected or not.
    I think you misunderstand what I meant. The vaccine can prevent you from transmitting the virus because your body will kill off the virus very quickly instead of slowly. And yes, actually, a healthy immune system can still be infected.

    Second, the flu will spread faster in unhealthy populations, regardless of vaccination status. If you compare the epidemiology of healthier societies that aren't vaccinated to unhealthy societies that are vaccinated, flu transmission and incidence will still be lower in the healthier society.
    Err, yeah, but you're comparing apples to oranges. Other factors being equal, a higher rate of vaccination will reduce the spread of any virus.

    Even if you are vaccinated, you can still become infected and transmit the virus to vulnerable people; all it would mean is that your infection period would be less since your body already has the acquired immunity. It doesn't mean you aren't contagious. For this reason, it is pointless to scapegoat people for choosing to not get the vaccination. Also, it's important to note that although vaccination increases survival rates in infants and the elderly, those who have been inoculated can still die from the flu.
    Reduced effect is reduced effect. Like I said above, a vaccinated population will kill off the virus very quickly and break the chain of infection.

    Medical technology places all of its efforts on combating the virus, such as through vaccines, and little effort on prevention through healthy lifestyle. The American population has a high index for type II diabetes and obesity, both of which lower immune response significantly. The virus would spread faster there than in comparatively healthier countries.
    Well, yes, I was not at all saying people should stop exercising.

    I singled out the flu, and no other virus. I am not saying that vaccines are patently useless across the board. Smallpox vaccines were definitely a good idea, considering the mortality rate. I see no such justification for the flu, even H1N1.
    Flu kills a lot of people.

    Your whole post seems to be an inadvertent strawman.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  8. #18
    Educator
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Last Seen
    12-18-11 @ 05:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    949

    Re: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

    Is a universal flu vaccine really a good idea?

    Influenza spreads around the world in seasonal epidemics, resulting in the deaths of between 250,000 and 500,000 people every year;* up to millions in some pandemic years.

    Wouldn't mankind be taking away a method of population control used by Mother Nature to try to maintain some balance in the world? I'm sure that more people die each year from other things besides a killer flu. However, a universal flu vaccine could conceivably allow between 250,000 and 500,000 people to remain on this planet. These people would continue to use up resources on the planet, and some will continue to procreate. The population increases steadily. I wonder how many people would have been born last year around the world if flu had not killed the potential parents first?
    It matters not how strait the gate,
    How charged with punishments the scroll,
    I am the master of my fate:
    I am the captain of my soul.

  9. #19
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,807

    Re: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by quatrotritikali View Post
    Is a universal flu vaccine really a good idea?

    Influenza spreads around the world in seasonal epidemics, resulting in the deaths of between 250,000 and 500,000 people every year;* up to millions in some pandemic years.

    Wouldn't mankind be taking away a method of population control used by Mother Nature to try to maintain some balance in the world? I'm sure that more people die each year from other things besides a killer flu. However, a universal flu vaccine could conceivably allow between 250,000 and 500,000 people to remain on this planet. These people would continue to use up resources on the planet, and some will continue to procreate. The population increases steadily. I wonder how many people would have been born last year around the world if flu had not killed the potential parents first?
    "Mother Nature" is not a sentient being striving towards any particular goal and those people you're talking about happen to be... well, people. People who die.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  10. #20
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: ‘Universal’ flu vaccine moves ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by quatrotritikali View Post
    Is a universal flu vaccine really a good idea?

    Influenza spreads around the world in seasonal epidemics, resulting in the deaths of between 250,000 and 500,000 people every year;* up to millions in some pandemic years.

    Wouldn't mankind be taking away a method of population control used by Mother Nature to try to maintain some balance in the world? I'm sure that more people die each year from other things besides a killer flu. However, a universal flu vaccine could conceivably allow between 250,000 and 500,000 people to remain on this planet. These people would continue to use up resources on the planet, and some will continue to procreate. The population increases steadily. I wonder how many people would have been born last year around the world if flu had not killed the potential parents first?
    I can't tell if you're trolling or not, so let's go with the assumption that you actually believe this: What other curable diseases do you think we should allow people to die from? Do you think eliminating smallpox, reducing tuberculosis, and treating HIV were bad ideas? If so, nothing is stopping you from going out and voluntarily contracting a deadly disease to reduce the population.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 05-27-10 at 05:16 AM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •