Sunday, October 12, 2008

Avian Flu Vaccine Strategy Revealed to Be a Farce to Be Reckoned With

Can it get any weirder? Headline: New Avian Flu Vaccine Strategy Proposed "People can be protected against a potential avian flu epidemic by getting advance shots of a vaccine that may or may not be effective against the strain causing the epidemic, British researchers suggest."

It doesn't work against the strain causing the pandemic but it does? Yeah, and I voted for it before I voted against it. Vaccine-makers sound more and more like congressmen every day. Prestigious medical journals certainly would not support such bizarre immunologically-bereft conclusions, would they? Let's check in with the NEJM:

"That apparently daffy strategy is scientifically sound, according to a letter in the Oct. 9 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, because priming people with an old vaccine would make any new vaccine work faster and better."

Huh? That's like saying my new car is faster and better because my old one wouldn't run anyway. What the heck does one have to do with the other?

I suppose that both shots theoretically have something to do with the flu. After that, it gets a little cloudy. Scientists do not know which strain, or even IF a strain will mutate for easy human-to-human transmission. Remember the head of the CDC, Julie Gerberding, admitting that there is no evidence that H5N1 is mutating or even if it will mutate in the future for easier peep to peep transmission.

"We don't believe an influenza is imminent," the spokeswoman said, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with department policy.

Oh really? What happened to the "most severe" threat? This reminds me of the CDC's Julie Gerberding basically admitting that screaming Bird Flu was like shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. Check out what The News Tribune in Tacoma Washington caught her saying on April 15, 2006:

There is no evidence it will be the next pandemic, Dr. Julie Gerberding, head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, said of avian flu. There is no evidence it is evolving in a direction that is becoming more transmissible to people.

Additionally, H5N1 is not even a new strain as

"The H5N1 virus is not new to science and was responsible for an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza in Scotland in 1959..."

Gee, everything old is new again. When will the American public get the memo?

This ongoing absurdity makes it seem like perfect sense for welfare scientists to claim that a bird-flu shot with the "wrong" strain in it will make the next bird-flu shot with the "wrong" strain in it work better and faster.

Anybody with a shred of common sense left in them should respond with: "Huh?"

Fear not, for it does not have to make sense as long as Congress approves it and the President signs it. Does anyone even remember the $850 Billion Bailout? It worked just as well as the new Avian Flu strategy will.

Roll up your sleeve or bend over, the end result will be just as bad. The "daffiness" of the Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex never ceases to amaze me. Perhaps some Pretty Amazing Grace will see us through?

No comments:

Created with Admarket's flickrSLiDR.