The Obama administration wants to inject healthy children with ANTRAX-vacine !

I'm still kind of puzzled by the title: "The Obama administration wants to inject healthy children with ANTRAX-vacine !"

1. Vaccines are almost always injected into healthy people. It's preventative medicine; you inject them while they're healthy so that they don't get sick.

2. I'm guessing that the TC put anthrax in capital letters in order to emphasise how scary the disease is...but that only emphasises how important a vaccine could be. It has the complete opposite effect of what the author was intending.

3. Couldn't the title just as easily have been "Government undecided on whether or not to launch a protective policy against an unlikely attack"? Or is that not how US politics works - everything apparently has to be polarised to one extreme or another, wildly steering clear of truth and logic at every opportunity?

I'm still kind of puzzled by the title: "The Obama administration wants to inject healthy children with ANTRAX-vacine !"

er or not to launch a protective policy against an unlikely attack"? Or is that not how US politics works - everything apparently has to be polarised to one extreme or another, wildly steering clear of truth and logic at every opportunity?

Planeforger

What policy?

Its RESEARCH. A scientific study by the bioterrorism arm of National health and human services. They take a small sample, test and collect data. There's no nationwide initiative to inject all children with anthrax. Obama is barely involved.

You people are taking this to levels beyond ridiculousness just to smear the administration. If you guys want to hate Obama, by all means you have to the right to do so. But don't insult my intelligence with stuff like. Shame on OP for making an shallow troll thread on wrong information.

[QUOTE="Planeforger"]

I'm still kind of puzzled by the title: "The Obama administration wants to inject healthy children with ANTRAX-vacine !"

er or not to launch a protective policy against an unlikely attack"? Or is that not how US politics works - everything apparently has to be polarised to one extreme or another, wildly steering clear of truth and logic at every opportunity?

Blue-Sky

What policy?

Its RESEARCH. A scientific study by the bioterrorism arm of National health and human services. They take a small sample, test and collect data. There's no nationwide initiative to inject all children with anthrax. Obama is barely involved.

You people are taking this to levels beyond ridiculousness just to smear the administration. If you guys want to hate Obama, by all means you have to the right to do so. But don't insult my intelligence with stuff like. Shame on OP for making an shallow troll thread on wrong information.

[QUOTE="krazykillaz"][QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]Right, so everything is the same except for the strain they use.

Or, to put it another way, how many people have received a flu shot over, say the past ten years compared to the number of males that have received the HPV vaccination? Which shot has more data to review?

Planet_Pluto

We're not going to agree at all. All I can tell you is, as a parent, there is a difference between vaccinations that have been tried and tested for years and one which has recently been brought to the market to fight an ailment that has not been vaccinated against before. If you think those are the same, that's fine, but we don't.

[QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]

[QUOTE="krazykillaz"]It makes no difference whether the vaccine is given to a man or a woman. The immunity forms the same way for both, but to answer your question, the combined data for all flu shots over the past 10 years would without a doubt be greater than the data on HPV vaccines given to men. I don't think you're getting it though. They don't develop a new vaccine the same way they'd develop a new drug. ALL vaccines do the same thing; use a safe version of a dangerous pathogen to allow your body to develop an immunity against it.krazykillaz

We're not going to agree at all. All I can tell you is, as a parent, there is a difference between vaccinations that have been tried and tested for years and one which has recently been brought to the market to fight an ailment that has not been vaccinated against before. If you think those are the same, that's fine, but we don't.

I justcan't subscribe to your philosophy that a 'new' (my word for it, if not technically correct) vaccination to attempt to fight adisease for the first timecan be evaluated (risk/reward) in the same way that well established vaccines are. (Probably a better way to explain it than I am able to come up with at the moment).

In any event, and without going link-crazy,Judicial Watch hassomething that partially touches on my perspective and why I'm a bit cautious not to jump into "new" vaccination programs.... (note I have no idea who Judicial Watch is, this was just used as a quick example).

On June 8, 2006, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the drug Gardasil. Gardasil is a vaccine against certain types of human papillomavirus (HPV) which is the primary cause of cervical cancer in women.

• Several state and local governments have proposed requiring the vaccine for school girls entering the 6th grade.
• Gardasil is approved for girls as young as nine years old, despite the fact that the youngest girls participating in clinical trials were 11-12 years old.
• A recent study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, also questioned the general effectiveness of Gardasil. Additionally, there has not been a chance to study long term side effects of the vaccine.

Judicial Watch, concerned about the rush to market and mandate a drug with possible serious adverse effects, filed its first Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on May 9, 2007, and received 1,637 adverse event reports on May 15, 2007. These reports are submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and used by the FDA to monitor the safety of vaccines.

Yes, its all that devious Obama pulling the strings.

Please impeach the idiot now.

Animatronic64

Please learn what impeachment actually is.

This thread once again proves the rule that most people don't read beyond the headline.

How to make an Obama Hate thread:

1. Find a news article that relates to the Administration.

2. Take it completely out of context.

3. Insert headline "Obama wants to [insert propaganda] on our [guns, kids, tax dollars]

4. ????

5. Profit.

For those of you that didn't actually read the article, it mentions that the Pentagon stockpiled over a billion dollars worth of anthrax vaccine in response to the 1998 scare, in case of a bioterrorism attack on the United States. Nicole Lurie, the assistant secretary of bioterrorism at the department of Health and Human services, simply asked the board to evaluate whether the vaccine should be test in children. Becase right now, they only know the affects on adults and animals. Nothing has been decided, it's only a evalution for scientific research and I'm willing to be this hasn't even been brought to Obama's attention.

Blue-Sky

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]

[QUOTE="weezyfb"]we get a lot of shots at birthDroidPhysX

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="racer8dan"]

Not everyone, it's up to the parents. I've never had a shot in my life and never will. I didn't read the article, but as long as it's an opt in not an opt out, because it should always be a choice. The government nor anyone else should have the power to tell me what I put into my body, because my body belongs to me!

racer8dan

I assumed that he was referring to the way you emphasised how it should always be a choice, how nobody else has the power to tell you what to put in your body, and so on...but conceded that it's the parents who choose for their kids?

Small-pox isn't dangerous! We don't need a vaccine! They'll kill us all with their confounded technological advancements!

:roll:

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] The ultimate irony.Planeforger

I assumed that he was referring to the way you emphasised how it should always be a choice, how nobody else has the power to tell you what to put in your body, and so on...but conceded that it's the parents who choose for their kids?

*looks at Washington Post url* "Tabloid" *leaves thread*

*looks at Washington Post url* "Tabloid" *leaves thread*

MgamerBD

- The Washington Post isn't a tabloid.

- It leans towards Democrats anyway.

- If you had actually bothered to read the article you'd realize that it in no way says what the TC is claiming it said.

[QUOTE="MgamerBD"]

*looks at Washington Post url* "Tabloid" *leaves thread*

worlock77

- The Washington Post isn't a tabloid.

- It leans towards Democrats anyway.

- If you had actually bothered to read the article you'd realize that it in no way says what the TC is claiming it said.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="MgamerBD"]

*looks at Washington Post url* "Tabloid" *leaves thread*

MgamerBD

- The Washington Post isn't a tabloid.

- It leans towards Democrats anyway.

- If you had actually bothered to read the article you'd realize that it in no way says what the TC is claiming it said.

Yeah, I know how overwelming a few paragraphs of reading can be.

Trying to use a vaccine on healthy childen? F***ing disgusting.

If this is real than this gurantees that Obama won't be reelected next year.

EDIT: Okay I just got done searching around for this story that TC posted and it DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING about Obama administration wanting to test anthrax on kids, in fact I doubt Obama even is involved with this at all. All that is really happening is that the Pentagon has an overstock of Anthrax Vaccines and they are unaware of the affects that the vaccine could have on children since it only works on adults. And only a FEW people in the Pentagon have proposed that they test it on kids, just a few. Obama has nothing to do with this, I doubt he is even aware of it.

Look I don't like Obama too much either, but come on TC! This was just rediculous....

Trying to use a vaccine on healthy childen? F***ing disgusting.

PBSnipes

I pray to God that's sarcastic.

This is a pretty good follow-up to the "lethal RFID slave-chip" thread... I look forward to future installments of: 'As Schizophrenia Develops!'

How to make an Obama Hate thread:

1. Find a news article that relates to the Administration.

2. Take it completely out of context.

3. Insert headline "Obama wants to [insert propaganda] on our [guns, kids, tax dollars]

4. ????

5. Profit.

For those of you that didn't actually read the article, it mentions that the Pentagon stockpiled over a billion dollars worth of anthrax vaccine in response to the 1998 scare, in case of a bioterrorism attack on the United States. Nicole Lurie, the assistant secretary of bioterrorism at the department of Health and Human services, simply asked the board to evaluate whether the vaccine should be test in children. Becase right now, they only know the affects on adults and animals. Nothing has been decided, it's only a evalution for scientific research and I'm willing to be this hasn't even been brought to Obama's attention.

Blue-Sky

If this is real than this gurantees that Obama won't be reelected next year.

ShadowMoses900

I've noticed, over my 34 years on this rock, that everything is a guarantee that a politician won't be re-elected.

Small-pox isn't dangerous! We don't need a vaccine! They'll kill us all with their confounded technological advancements!

:roll:

Maniacc1

[QUOTE="MgamerBD"][QUOTE="worlock77"]

- The Washington Post isn't a tabloid.

- It leans towards Democrats anyway.

- If you had actually bothered to read the article you'd realize that it in no way says what the TC is claiming it said.

worlock77

Yeah, I know how overwelming a few paragraphs of reading can be.

[QUOTE="Maniacc1"]

Small-pox isn't dangerous! We don't need a vaccine! They'll kill us all with their confounded technological advancements!

:roll:

surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="Maniacc1"]

Small-pox isn't dangerous! We don't need a vaccine! They'll kill us all with their confounded technological advancements!

:roll:

[QUOTE="Maniacc1"]

Small-pox isn't dangerous! We don't need a vaccine! They'll kill us all with their confounded technological advancements!

:roll:

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="Maniacc1"]

Small-pox isn't dangerous! We don't need a vaccine! They'll kill us all with their confounded technological advancements!

:roll:

Frame_Dragger

Why bother?

How many governments have the resources to:

a.) weaponize anthrax in quantities that would pose a serious threat?
b.) have the actual motivation to launch that kind of attack?
c.) are willing to accept the political backlash that a biological attack would engender?

...because it would take a major government to launch the kind of anthrax attack it would take to make a mass vaccination of the populace necessary, in my estimation.

Besides... Anthrax is pretty good. I'd rather we vaccinate against Lady Gaga, Ke$ha, Justin Bieber, and the rest of the generic but oh-so-catchy pop garbage we're exposed to.

Yay, fear mongering, conspiracies and ignorance. Vaccines themselves are harmless, just dead viruses that your immune system kills off and then remembers how to kill it off once a real infection occurs. But isn't antrax caused by bacterial spores? How do you vaccinate against that?

I think Obama's children should test it then.

Obama is an idiot who only knows how to campaign.

Yay, fear mongering, conspiracies and ignorance. Vaccines themselves are harmless, just dead viruses that your immune system kills off and then remembers how to kill it off once a real infection occurs. But isn't antrax caused by bacterial spores? How do you vaccinate against that?

Former_Slacker

Better yet how many anthrax deaths have their been in the past 10 years? This is such a pointless POINTLESS topic to even talk about..

I like to picture Obama himself personally injecting children with live anthrax, not just a vaccine, while making them listen to Anthrax and cackling manaically and occaisionally singing along - "I am the law! You won't f*** around no more!"

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

Yay, fear mongering, conspiracies and ignorance. Vaccines themselves are harmless, just dead viruses that your immune system kills off and then remembers how to kill it off once a real infection occurs. But isn't antrax caused by bacterial spores? How do you vaccinate against that?

sSubZerOo

Better yet how many anthrax deaths have their been in the past 10 years? This is such a pointless POINTLESS topic to even talk about..

I like to picture Obama himself personally injecting children with live anthrax, not just a vaccine, while making them listen to Anthrax and cackling manaically and occaisionally singing along - "I am the law! You won't f*** around no more!"

worlock77

This is actually pretty simple. Democrats abort their babies and have no children. Republicans multiply like rabbits, and the plan is to inject these children with biotoxins. These children will then infect their Republican voting parents prior to the 2012 election.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

I like to picture Obama himself personally injecting children with live anthrax, not just a vaccine, while making them listen to Anthrax and cackling manaically and occaisionally singing along - "I am the law! You won't f*** around no more!"

OrkHammer007

True. I'm forgetting my Anthrax a bit. It's been near 20 years since I really listened to them.

Trying to use a vaccine on healthy childen? F***ing disgusting.

PBSnipes

most children are healthy because of various vaccines.

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] i will agree that this thread is absurd, but actively spending resources to combat a problem that there is no history of is absolutely silly. yea the government purchased a lot of this vaccine back in the late 90's and now they are looking for a use. there is none, there is no history of masses dead because of anthrax in the united states. according to my googles, there have only been 5 deaths in the states from anthrax in the last 10 years. drowning by your own saliva is a bigger risk than anthrax.

Yay, fear mongering, conspiracies and ignorance. Vaccines themselves are harmless, just dead viruses that your immune system kills off and then remembers how to kill it off once a real infection occurs. But isn't antrax caused by bacterial spores? How do you vaccinate against that?

Former_Slacker

Yay, fear mongering, conspiracies and ignorance. Vaccines themselves are harmless, just dead viruses that your immune system kills off and then remembers how to kill it off once a real infection occurs. But isn't antrax caused by bacterial spores? How do you vaccinate against that?

Former_Slacker

Endospores are essentially a form of hibernation for bacteria -- in order to actually infect someone the spores need to return to their active, "normal" state. So the vaccine works on the same principles as other viral and bacterial infections.

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

Yay, fear mongering, conspiracies and ignorance. Vaccines themselves are harmless, just dead viruses that your immune system kills off and then remembers how to kill it off once a real infection occurs. But isn't antrax caused by bacterial spores? How do you vaccinate against that?

Frame_Dragger

As for vaccinating against bacteria, it's the same as a virus; a vaccine is a means of priming the human immune system to fight ANY infection. You can in fact, do this with some tumors... in theory you could do it for any specific protein marker. The reason why you don't usually vaccinate against bacteria is that you don't NEED to, and treatments for bacterial infections exist. Once a virus takes hold, there is GENERALLY little to be done except offer supportive care.

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"][QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

Yay, fear mongering, conspiracies and ignorance. Vaccines themselves are harmless, just dead viruses that your immune system kills off and then remembers how to kill it off once a real infection occurs. But isn't antrax caused by bacterial spores? How do you vaccinate against that?

surrealnumber5

As for vaccinating against bacteria, it's the same as a virus; a vaccine is a means of priming the human immune system to fight ANY infection. You can in fact, do this with some tumors... in theory you could do it for any specific protein marker. The reason why you don't usually vaccinate against bacteria is that you don't NEED to, and treatments for bacterial infections exist. Once a virus takes hold, there is GENERALLY little to be done except offer supportive care.

Problem : Too manay humans

Solution : create a slow working poison variant and call it Vacine.

btw. Fluoride in American water reservoirs works too slow.

Problem : Too manay humans

Solution : create a slow working poison variant and call it Vacine.

btw. Fluoride in American water reservoirs works too slow.

CHANCESUNDANCE

General Jack D. Ripper: Fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face.

---

General Jack D. Ripper: Mandrake, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk... ice cream. Ice cream, Mandrake, children's ice cream.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: [very nervous] Lord, Jack.
General Jack D. Ripper: You know when fluoridation first began?
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: I... no, no. I don't, Jack.
General Jack D. Ripper: Nineteen hundred and forty-six. 1946, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Uh, Jack, Jack, listen... tell me, tell me, Jack. When did you first... become... well, develop this theory?
General Jack D. Ripper: [somewhat embarassed] Well, I, uh... I... I... first became aware of it, Mandrake, during the physical act of love.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Hmm.
General Jack D. Ripper: Yes, a uh, a profound sense of fatigue... a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I... I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Hmm.
General Jack D. Ripper: I can assure you it has not recurred, Mandrake. Women uh... women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I, uh... I do not avoid women, Mandrake.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: No.
General Jack D. Ripper: But I... I do deny them my essence.
IMBD

Anthrax? I didn't realize we were still stuck in 2001-2002.