Health care workers refuse to take H1N1 vaccine


Recommended Posts

Leonard Horowitz sells bottles of water for $20 which, "The instant you touch or taste it, every one of your billions of cells gets super-charged with the essence of LOVE." In other words, he's a scam artist who views sickness as profit.

I'll bite. Even if Ol'Len was selling love water for $20, who's making the real profit from sickness?

Flu shots are for people with vulnerable immune systems, there is zero, none, 0, reason for any normal healthy adult or child to mindlessly volunteer for a worthless vaccine that has had practically no clinical trailing (well in Poland, where it was tested on the homeless (resulting in a lawsuit) and something like 13 of the 120 people died), and for which governments have granted immunity from prosecution the vaccine manufacturers so if you do grow a penis from your forehead, you can't sue anyone. And you wonder why you're called sheeple.

You missed my point. I have no problem with people who seek to improve their lives by improving the lives of others through the synthesis of medicines, vaccines, and so on. I think people should be rewarded well when they do well. My point was that people like Leonard Horowitz actively repudiates critical thought and has taken it upon himself to give bad medical advice for the purposing of making people sick so he can profit from their misery. My other point was that people like Leonard Horowitz should never be cited as though he were a reliable source of information.

Your second paragraph was nothing more than a pointless screed that ruined your credibility. First, the Poland incident cannot be construed as a legitimate clinical trial. The results were meaningless. Proper clinical trials are conducted on healthy immune systems, which poor people are less likely to have, hence the investigation of severe negligence. Second, the Poland incident involved one particular kind of vaccine for avian flu (H5N1), not swine flu (H1N1). Third, you cannot legitimately construe the results of that particular vaccine as indicative of other bird flu vaccines. Fourth, you cannot legitimately construe the results of that particular vaccine as indicative of any swine flu vaccine.

And the attack on my character ("you wonder why you're called sheeple") was uncalled for.

true. but life has a price then. they don't want caner patients to end their lives. why? they want you to live long as possible to make more $$$. medicine is only a profit industry

What an absolute load of rubbish

I rest my case. there has been NO conference about a flu vaccine.

read the PDF, and if you don't see my point, then ignore me.

I've attached said PDF to this post

international_swine_flu_conference.pdf

FluZone is the vaccine used for normal seasonal flu. In the top right paragraph, on the FluZone information sheet (pic posted prev), it states very clearly that the FluZone vaccine contains 15mcg of IVR-148 (h1n1). That means people who normally receive a seasonal flu vaccine are also receiving a small amount of a vaccine candidate, and are being injected with the h1n1 virus.

per .5 ml dose

15mcg Influenza

15mcg H1N1

15mcg H3N2

15mcg B/Brisbane/60

Edited by O.G
BOB.. GOD gave us our immune systems. our immune systems are here to help us. we aren't PC's with an extra space in our bodies for a harddrive or genetically engineered components. Now GOD as you said gave us medicine, but not all medicine is of GOD.

my pastor taught me: all that is of GOD is good. all that is good isn't of GOD. he broke it down as, everything that God gave us is good for us. all that we create isn't always good for us. we manipulate DNA to create people, messing with HIS blueprints and use science to create WMD's and kill people. in the 1990's the government finally admitted to testing our citizens for radiation tests back in the 40's and 50's.

injecting radiation into our bodies, having people sit near nuclear explosions.. so medicine doesn't care about you

You let a man with no knowledge in medicine tell you what to think about medicine. Nice.

Vaccines may not work 100% but when they're approved for public distribution, they have been vigorously tested and confirmed safe for a majority of people. One would be naive to think that people come up with a vaccine formula and roll it out to the public the next day or that vaccines were made to prolong our lives to generate profits for the manufacturers.

Your comment on "chemical" really shows you have no idea what "chemical" really means.

"Chemical" (noun) refers to "any substance used in or resulting from a reaction involving changes to atoms or molecules" (definition).

In that sense, anything you touch, see, eat and drink are chemicals, including water.

"Injecting radiation into your body" is the last resource for cancer treatment. If we had a better way to do it, we would have (thankfully we've learnt more and more about the molecular mechanism of cancer, so a more effective treatment is poised to be underway).

The field of medicine was invented to preserve lives. Regardless of the economic involvement in our time, the primary purpose of medicine is to save lives. The companies that profit from producing drugs have nought to do with medicine.

If you think medicine does not care about you, do not see a doctor or buy anything of medical benefits. Next time you come down with something (like gastric ulcer), just let prayers help you. Good luck.

This.

Filling up our body with chemicals? Do you not take Asprin when you get a headache, or Cough Medicine for a sore throat?

Not to mention Polio.

A bunch of common infectious diseases have also been knocked down by vaccination.

Anyway, I suppose few people here understand how vaccines are made, and what they do.

At birth, your immune system is pathetic. It needs to experience real-world pathogens in order to develop familiarity with specific antigens. Exposure is the key here, since it builds up immunity to future infections of the same organism, or similar organisms.

A vaccine is made from inactivated (either genetically truncated virus that can't replicate, or heat-inactivated virus, or viral epitopes, e. g. pieces of virus proteins) virus that serves as primers for your immune system to gain experience. Your immune cells sample the epitope and create antibodies to recognize and attack the viral analogue in the vaccine. The point is that you give your immune system experience without any actual risk of infection.

I'm going to guess that 25 micrograms of some organomercuric agent is nothing compared to annual mercury exposure. It isn't like your body can't deal with toxic metals (mercuric reductase, anyone?).

Also, for those who think that the immune system is a perfect godly gift, and that young healthy individuals won't get sick...want to explain to me the demographics of the 1918 Spanish Flu?

You let a man with no knowledge in medicine tell you what to think about medicine. Nice.

Vaccines may not work 100% but when they're approved for public distribution, they have been vigorously tested and confirmed safe for a majority of people. One would be naive to think that people come up with a vaccine formula and roll it out to the public the next day or that vaccines were made to prolong our lives to generate profits for the manufacturers.

You should try reading the thread. The vaccine being proposed for swine flu has not been vigorously tested or confirmed safe, and the approval is being done via fast tracking based only on the performance if a similar vaccine. The widespread effects and effectiveness will not be known until it has been administered. That's direct from the World Health Organization. Why do you think the manufacturers have been granted immunity from prosecution? It's an untested vaccine.

Who's naive?

I'm going to guess that 25 micrograms of some organomercuric agent is nothing compared to annual mercury exposure. It isn't like your body can't deal with toxic metals (mercuric reductase, anyone?).

10mcg is considered a very high dosage when talking about enviromental exposure to mercury. 1 or 2 mcg is still high but the average. 25 is just stupid, and thats in one dose.

Edited by O.G
You should try reading the thread. The vaccine being proposed for swine flu has not been tested, and the approval is being done via fast tracking. The widespread effects and effectiveness will not be known until it has been administered. That's direct from the World Health Organization. Why do you think the manufacturers have been granted immunity from prosecution? It's an untested vaccine.

Who's naive?

I prefer to see it for myself: http://www.who.int/csr/disease/swineflu/gu.../candidates/en/

The vaccines are still "candidates", meaning they have to undergo testing approval. Fast tracking does not mean they just take the vaccines and throw at you without at least making sure it will work.

As for immunity, it is necessary because some people may react negatively to the vaccine. No lab testing can cater for all the possibilities but when the vaccine is out, it's certain that it'll do its job for most people. You don't want someone to sue the manufacturers to bankruptcy because of a person's peculiar reaction towards the drug that works as intended in many others.

Then you need to read it again. From the horses mouth.

Time constraints mean that clinical data at the time when pandemic vaccines are first administered will inevitably be limited. Further testing of safety and effectiveness will need to take place after administration of the vaccine has begun.
-WHO

If WHO decides there is a pandemic, the normal routine of testing is simply cast aside. They worry about the consequence after the vaccine has been dished out. That's why the vaccine manufacturers demanded immunity in a pandemic, so that if there were serious issues resulting from the use of an untested drug on the mass population, the drug company would not have to answer to any legal action against them.

10mcg is considered a very high dosage when talking about enviromental exposure to mercury. 1 or 2 mcg is still high but the average. 25 is just stupid, and thats in one dose.

25 micrograms is about the amount that you would consume with your food in one month, by a conservative estimate. The estimated daily consumption varies from 1.4 micrograms to 0.8 micrograms. If you like your fish, this can be significantly higher. This doesn't consider environmental exposure.

25 micrograms is about the amount that you would consume with your food in one month, by a conservative estimate. The estimated daily consumption varies from 1.4 micrograms to 0.8 micrograms. If you like your fish, this can be significantly higher. This doesn't consider environmental exposure.

The EPA guidlines, which are by no means strict, state the maximum safe level for an adult is 0.1mcg/kg. 25mcg would be 4 times the recommended safe limit for an adult.

Then you need to read it again. From the horses mouth.

-WHO

If WHO decides there is a pandemic, the normal routine of testing is simply cast aside. They worry about the consequence after the vaccine has been dished out. That's why the vaccine manufacturers demanded immunity in a pandemic, so that if there were serious issues resulting from the use of an untested drug on the mass population, the drug company would not have to answer to any legal action against them.

So you think they'll just give you any random vaccine without at least a rationale for its approval and ultimately, worldwide distribution? Lab testing, even if just limited, helps select the working strains. You clearly see they're subjecting the vaccine donations through a screening process. It means that even with the knowledge and past success of vaccine production, we still have to make sure that the ones selected are the best possible. You make it sound like the health authority just dishes out anything just to do their job. That's what annoys me.

Of course, like you, I am sick of the organisations that try to exploit people's healthcare for their personal gains. However, if it is an international collaboration, there's no good reason to be sceptical. If there were a better solution than a vaccine, it would have been delivered.

Edited by lamchopz
The EPA guidlines, which are by no means strict, state the maximum safe level for an adult is 0.1mcg/kg. 25mcg would be 4 times the recommended safe limit for an adult.

Per day, you don't get vaccines that often.

And even then, it's a different type of mercury that is removed from the body fairly quickly.

So you think they'll just give you any random vaccine without at least a rationale for its approval and ultimately, worldwide distribution?

That is exactly what WHO said they could do, indeed it would be expected to happen in a pandemic. There is your rational.

They've sent vaccines off to Africa tainted with AIDS, accidentally, that's pretty random wouldn't you say? How the hell do I know what's in a vaccine. It's simple, mercury makes you stupid, it's a fact. If you trot off to get some untested vaccine that you don't need because of an advert you seen on tv, or worse, by force, well what the hell, you'll be doing the rest of us a favour.

Edited by O.G
They've sent vaccines off to Africa tainted with AIDS, accidentally, that's pretty random wouldn't you say? How the hell do I know what's in a vaccine. It's simple, mercury makes you stupid, it's a fact. If you trot off to get some untested vaccine that you don't need because of an advert you seen on tv, or worse, by force, well what the hell, you'll be doing the rest of us a favour.

Firstly, the selection process is not final. Wonder why it takes so long?

Secondly, your country's health authority is in charge of distributing the vaccine, and with it, the responsibility to ensure it is effective prior to making it public.

Thirdly, you decide whether or not you'll be vaccinated. If you don't trust the vaccine, don't get vaccinated. Especially after the outcome of the H1N1 outbreak, the virus was shown to exert mostly mild effects on healthy individuals. Do you think this vaccination would be compulsory? There is a choice and it's yours.

That is exactly what WHO said they could do, indeed it would be expected to happen in a pandemic. There is your rational.

Terribly flawed. A vaccine would be not distributed if it didn't show at least a working capacity. That they "could" do is grossly misinterpreted: in response to a deadly pandemic, you don't send random vaccines hoping to do their job. Even if short-phased, the internal testing has to take place to ensure that what they're giving out does what it's intended - to what extent and what consequences would entail are post-distribution concerns. Of course it only happens in a pandemic that kills off the world at a rapid rate.

Edited by lamchopz

There seems to be growing concern over the implementation of forced vaccination. This is really what is the issue here. Of why there are talks of mass vaccination of the public, on the authority of WHO, by force if necessary. Surely you would agree that the whole swine flu non-epidemic was completely blown out of proportion by the media. It was as if it was meant to be worse, but never quite happened. It failed. So, becuase it failed, the end result has yet to be achieved, the tactics need to change. No one is buying the swine flu crap anymore and it's looking like the only way they will get lots of people to take a vaccination, is to force them.

Now there is a whole great big story about how the financing between the tax payer and big pharma works, and about how there was hardly any stocks being held by governments "in case of emergency" and how this was seen by pharma as a market to be exploited if only the pharma could show the gov it would be in their best interests to hold massive quantities of emergency drugs paid for by you and me, and if need be perform a demonstration and convince the public such expenses were justified. Swine Flu, kerching. Pharma is a business, they are not in it for your best interests, if they were, it would be free.

I just got an Influenza shot yesterday, and the nurses there were ranting on and on about the dangers of the H1N1 shot and the Pneumonia shot. The nurse that was taking care of me looked me straight in the eye and said: "Trust me, you don't want it." Now, I'm not big into conspiracy theories and what not, but if a nurse tells me not to take a shot being offered, then I'm going to take her word for it.

There seems to be growing concern over the implementation of forced vaccination. This is really what is the issue here. Of why there are talks of mass vaccination of the public, on the authority of WHO, by force if necessary. Surely you would agree that the whole swine flu non-epidemic was completely blown out of proportion by the media. It was as if it was meant to be worse, but never quite happened. It failed. So, becuase it failed, the end result has yet to be achieved, the tactics need to change. No one is buying the swine flu crap anymore and it's looking like the only way they will get lots of people to take a vaccination, is to force them.

Now there is a whole great big story about how the financing between the tax payer and big pharma works, and about how there was hardly any stocks being held by governments "in case of emergency" and how this was seen by pharma as a market to be exploited if only the pharma could show the gov it would be in their best interests to hold massive quantities of emergency drugs paid for by you and me, and if need be perform a demonstration and convince the public such expenses were justified. Swine Flu, kerching. Pharma is a business, they are not in it for your best interests, if they were, it would be free.

I'm aware of the possible shady business between the pharmacy industry and some governments. However, as I said, mandatory H1N1 vaccination is very unlikely because there is no good reason after we all saw how "bad" H1N1 really was. No government in its right mind would blatantly mandate the vaccination unless it wished to lose the next election. For countries such as those in Africa, it's an entirely different story.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!