http://www.infowars.com/pharmacies-p...dical-records/
Pharmacies Profit from Dangerous Flu Shot, Disrupt Medical Records

Lisa Garber
Infowars.com
September 24, 2012

In 2011, Walgreen Co. brought 5.5 million people through their doors for
influenza vaccinations—and was sure to give them coupons on the way out.
Unfortunately, this seemingly benign marketing campaign could have
bigger, more troublesome side effects. In addition to the
ineffectiveness and even danger of many vaccines, receiving them at a
pharmacy as opposed to a physician’s office disrupts medical record
continuity.

“From a quality standpoint, this cuts down on the continuity of care,”
says Dr. Joel Shalowitz, medical group president. “There becomes no way
of knowing when someone is due for a vaccination that they may need.”

Attracting Customers and Money

Meanwhile, the likes of Walgreen are raking in cash.

Pharmacies generally administer flu shots for up to $32, while the
actual dose costs private-sector buyers up to $16.72 (and as low as
$9.50). Therefore, not only do pharmacies profit for the actual
vaccination, they lure patients into the pharmacy to spend more cash on,
for example, deodorant or contact solution. Rite Aid even offers people
who receive their flu shot a booklet with coupons amounting to $100.

The Affordable Care Act is even encouraging vaccination. Walgreen claims
that only 1 of 10 of its customers will pay for their flu shot and
insurance will take care of the rest. But the issue goes far beyond
personal gain in profit. Vaccines are dangerous, and with local
pharmacies offering up a jab, which are very often free during flu
season, even more people are being exposed to the dangers.

Dangers of Vaccines

Unfortunately, most of us are blissfully ignorant of the dangers of many
vaccines. Australian health officials eventually banned the flu shot
after several children were hospitalized for convulsing after
vaccinations, and in 2010 the American government admitted that the H1N1
vaccine side effects included a deadly nerve disease, Guillain-Barre
Syndrome. This, of course, didn’t stop health officials from continuing
the push the vaccine on the public, even though it has been found by
researchers in Vancouver to actually worsen H1N1 symptoms.

To steer clear of the flu and harmful effects of the vaccine, try taking
a sunscreen-free walk in the sun. Just 10 to 15 minutes daily of vitamin
D3 can slash your risk of getting the flu by 42%. You could also start
drinking green tea and following these other steps on how to prevent a
cold and the flu. Your immune system – not vaccines – is the true
fighter against the flu.

# 2 -----------
http://www.naturalnews.com/032558_fl..._wear_off.html

The great vaccine marketing con: Annual vaccine shots
The CDC is now engaged in the marketing of annual vaccination of the
entire population. That's the game, you see: Convince people they need
an annual flu shot just to stay healthy. It's a complete marketing con,
of course, but it's necessary to keep the flu vaccine profit machine
humming along each winter.

In doing this, the CDC is now running a criminal marketing racket to
falsely push vaccines as the solution even though flu vaccines simply
don't work. For every 100 people vaccinated against the winter flu, by
the way, 99 of them will experience no difference whatsoever in their
flu outcomes. Even using the industry's own best evidence, flu vaccines
are no more than one percent effective at actually preventing the flu
(http://www.naturalnews.com/029641_va...k_science.html) -- and
that's only during the first few months before they "fade out."

One of the CDC's own vaccine scientists -- a man who received millions
of dollars in grant money from the CDC -- was recently indicted by a
federal grand jury for money laundering and fraud
(http://www.naturalnews.com/032216_Thorsen_fraud.html). Check out the
NaturalNews diagram called Poul Thorsen's Alleged Web of Fraud to see
the complete web of deceit under which the key players of the vaccine
fraud industry operate:
http://www.naturalnews.com/files/Web...eged-Fraud.pdf

The truth is that the CDC abandoned real science long ago and is now
engaged almost entirely in infectious disease fear mongering and the
wholesale prostitution of itself to the vaccine industry. The CDC has
become to the vaccine industry what infomercial guru Tony Little is to
exercise equipment. This is an agency that now functions as little more
than the marketing branch of the vaccine giants.

As part of that total prostitution of itself to the vaccine makers, last
year the CDC even announced that virtually everyone should get annual
flu vaccine shots, including pregnant women!

#3 ----------
http://wosu.org/2012/news/2008/12/17...for-retailers-
number-of-vaccines-increase-so-do-number-of-deaths-from-flu/

Flu Shots Profitable For Retailers; Number of Vaccines Increase, So Do
Number of Deaths From Flu

Influenza vaccinations are almost as easy to get as the flu itself.
That’s because retailers, like grocery stores and pharmacies, took
one-stop-shopping to the next level when they started offering flu shots
on-site in the early 1990s. WOSU takes a look at the economics of the
flu vaccine.

The flu – fever, chills, muscle aches, lethargy, cough, headache – yuck.
And that’s only if the infection is mild to moderate. Other people can
develop complications like pneumonia. In rare cases influenza can be
fatal. This is why Federal health officials recommend many of us get a
flu shot. It’s supposed to be quick and painless – well there might be a
slight pinch…possibly from the $20 to $30 it takes from one’s
pocketbook.

The Flu shot has become a big business for retailers. You cannot miss
the signs saying “GET YOUR FLU SHOT HERE” at the grocery store or drug
store.

Retailers seized a flu shot opportunity after the Visiting Nurses
Association had a lot of success administering the flu shot in grocery
stores in the early 1990s.

Ann Paulins directs the School of Human and Consumer Sciences at Ohio
University. She said there are a number of reasons why retail chains
offer the flu shot – the bottom line is one of them. And in a recession
when prices are increasing and consumers are watching every dime
retailers are even more conscious of it.

“Certainly all companies, retailers, need to be aware of their bottom
line. So it is a particularly wise strategy to think about what do
consumers need? What will consumers be willing to pay for? And can we
offer that and can we promote it in a way that we’re selling the product
as opposed to our customers going to a competitor for that product,” she
said.

For grocery stores, which operate on thin profit margins for food, flu
vaccines are an excellent source of revenue and profit.

Kroger Grocery stores and CVS pharmacies each plan to administer one
million doses this year – nationwide.

Neither Kroger nor CVS would disclose how much they pay for their flu
shots. But the average wholesale price of a single dose of flu vaccine
is about 12 dollars. Kroger sells the shots for $24.99. CVS charges $30
bucks. So if we do the math…with a million does sold…each chain’s
profits could be between $13 and $18 million. And profits are likely
higher if the retailers get volume discount rates from the vaccine
manufacturers.

Widespread use of the flu shot has surged in the last two decades. The
number of flu vaccines produced since 1988 has increased 530 percent.
The nation’s population only increased 25 percent in that same time
period.

Curtis Allen speaks for The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
in Atlanta. Allen said one reason for the increase is manufacturers
realize there’s a market for flu vaccines. He said another reason is
there are more people that need to be vaccinated.

“We’re learning more about the potential complications of influenza and
the science is growing, and as the science grows we recognize that there
are more people who should be vaccinated than have been vaccinated in
the past,” Allen said.

Doctor Jacob Teitelbaum is an internal medicine physician and graduate
of the Ohio State University Medical School. Teitelbaum, who recommends
the flu shot, said there’s a perfectly good reason for the large
increase in flu shot production.

“How did the Pink Floyd song go? Money, money, money. I mean, fear
sells. And if there’s a buck to be made, especially in medicine, it’s
going to be made,” Teitelbaum said. While more of us are getting the flu
shot, the percentage of the population that dies from the flu has
actually increased. While still very rare, flu deaths are up 44 percent
since the late 80?s.

Allen said the CDC predicts about 36,000 people will die from flu or
complications this year. But he said some scientists think that number
is a conservative one.

There are a number of reasons, Allen said, why the number of flu deaths
is increasing. He said the U.S. has more people over the age of 65 than
ever before, and seniors are more prone to get the flu and develop
life-threatening complications. And he adds not every one who needs to
get a flu shot is doing so.

“Even under the best of circumstances we’re vaccinating well less than
50 percent of the people who should be vaccinated,” Allen said.

Dr. Tietelbaum agrees that an aging population accounts for the
increased number of deaths from flu, but only partially. He adds for the
first time in U.S. history people are obese and malnourished. And he
said if a person is vitamin deficient the flu shot will not work.

“I think the increased death rate has to do with the American public in
general having poor nutrition and poor immune function. I think those
statistics are ignored because no one wants to question vaccinations,”
he said.

And picking the right flu vaccine is not always easy. Last year millions
of Americans opened up their wallets for a flu vaccine that did not
match the viruses that were going around. Every year, health officials
make an educated guess on which flu strains they think will circulate
that season. Allen said the 2007 vaccines were mismatched.

But he said the flu shots were not totally in vain. He says despite the
wrong combination, the vaccine was about 50 to 60 percent effective. And
Allen said the flu is likely to be less severe if it’s contacted after
receiving a flu shot.

On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 23:43:20 -0600, wrote:

>http://www.infowars.com/pharmacies-p...dical-records/
>Pharmacies Profit from Dangerous Flu Shot, Disrupt Medical Records
>
>Lisa Garber
>Infowars.com
>September 24, 2012
>
>In 2011, Walgreen Co. brought 5.5 million people through their doors for
>influenza vaccinations—and was sure to give them coupons on the way out.
>Unfortunately, this seemingly benign marketing campaign could have
>bigger, more troublesome side effects. In addition to the
>ineffectiveness and even danger of many vaccines, receiving them at a
>pharmacy as opposed to a physician’s office disrupts medical record
>continuity.
>
>“From a quality standpoint, this cuts down on the continuity of care,”
>says Dr. Joel Shalowitz, medical group president. “There becomes no way
>of knowing when someone is due for a vaccination that they may need.”
>
>Attracting Customers and Money
>
>Meanwhile, the likes of Walgreen are raking in cash.
>
>Pharmacies generally administer flu shots for up to $32, while the
>actual dose costs private-sector buyers up to $16.72 (and as low as
>$9.50). Therefore, not only do pharmacies profit for the actual
>vaccination, they lure patients into the pharmacy to spend more cash on,
>for example, deodorant or contact solution. Rite Aid even offers people
>who receive their flu shot a booklet with coupons amounting to $100.
>
>The Affordable Care Act is even encouraging vaccination. Walgreen claims
>that only 1 of 10 of its customers will pay for their flu shot and
>insurance will take care of the rest. But the issue goes far beyond
>personal gain in profit. Vaccines are dangerous, and with local
>pharmacies offering up a jab, which are very often free during flu
>season, even more people are being exposed to the dangers.
>
>Dangers of Vaccines
>
>Unfortunately, most of us are blissfully ignorant of the dangers of many
>vaccines. Australian health officials eventually banned the flu shot
>after several children were hospitalized for convulsing after
>vaccinations, and in 2010 the American government admitted that the H1N1
>vaccine side effects included a deadly nerve disease, Guillain-Barre
>Syndrome. This, of course, didn’t stop health officials from continuing
>the push the vaccine on the public, even though it has been found by
>researchers in Vancouver to actually worsen H1N1 symptoms.
>
>To steer clear of the flu and harmful effects of the vaccine, try taking
>a sunscreen-free walk in the sun. Just 10 to 15 minutes daily of vitamin
>D3 can slash your risk of getting the flu by 42%. You could also start
>drinking green tea and following these other steps on how to prevent a
>cold and the flu. Your immune system – not vaccines – is the true
>fighter against the flu.
>
># 2 -----------
>http://www.naturalnews.com/032558_fl..._wear_off.html
>
>The great vaccine marketing con: Annual vaccine shots
>The CDC is now engaged in the marketing of annual vaccination of the
>entire population. That's the game, you see: Convince people they need
>an annual flu shot just to stay healthy. It's a complete marketing con,
>of course, but it's necessary to keep the flu vaccine profit machine
>humming along each winter.
>
>In doing this, the CDC is now running a criminal marketing racket to
>falsely push vaccines as the solution even though flu vaccines simply
>don't work. For every 100 people vaccinated against the winter flu, by
>the way, 99 of them will experience no difference whatsoever in their
>flu outcomes. Even using the industry's own best evidence, flu vaccines
>are no more than one percent effective at actually preventing the flu
>(http://www.naturalnews.com/029641_va...k_science.html) -- and
>that's only during the first few months before they "fade out."
>
>One of the CDC's own vaccine scientists -- a man who received millions
>of dollars in grant money from the CDC -- was recently indicted by a
>federal grand jury for money laundering and fraud
>(http://www.naturalnews.com/032216_Thorsen_fraud.html). Check out the
>NaturalNews diagram called Poul Thorsen's Alleged Web of Fraud to see
>the complete web of deceit under which the key players of the vaccine
>fraud industry operate:
>http://www.naturalnews.com/files/Web...eged-Fraud.pdf
>
>The truth is that the CDC abandoned real science long ago and is now
>engaged almost entirely in infectious disease fear mongering and the
>wholesale prostitution of itself to the vaccine industry. The CDC has
>become to the vaccine industry what infomercial guru Tony Little is to
>exercise equipment. This is an agency that now functions as little more
>than the marketing branch of the vaccine giants.
>
>As part of that total prostitution of itself to the vaccine makers, last
>year the CDC even announced that virtually everyone should get annual
>flu vaccine shots, including pregnant women!
>
>#3 ----------
>http://wosu.org/2012/news/2008/12/17...for-retailers-
>number-of-vaccines-increase-so-do-number-of-deaths-from-flu/
>
>Flu Shots Profitable For Retailers; Number of Vaccines Increase, So Do
>Number of Deaths From Flu
>
>Influenza vaccinations are almost as easy to get as the flu itself.
>That’s because retailers, like grocery stores and pharmacies, took
>one-stop-shopping to the next level when they started offering flu shots
>on-site in the early 1990s. WOSU takes a look at the economics of the
>flu vaccine.
>
>The flu – fever, chills, muscle aches, lethargy, cough, headache – yuck.
>And that’s only if the infection is mild to moderate. Other people can
>develop complications like pneumonia. In rare cases influenza can be
>fatal. This is why Federal health officials recommend many of us get a
>flu shot. It’s supposed to be quick and painless – well there might be a
>slight pinch…possibly from the $20 to $30 it takes from one’s
>pocketbook.
>
>The Flu shot has become a big business for retailers. You cannot miss
>the signs saying “GET YOUR FLU SHOT HERE” at the grocery store or drug
>store.
>
>Retailers seized a flu shot opportunity after the Visiting Nurses
>Association had a lot of success administering the flu shot in grocery
>stores in the early 1990s.
>
>Ann Paulins directs the School of Human and Consumer Sciences at Ohio
>University. She said there are a number of reasons why retail chains
>offer the flu shot – the bottom line is one of them. And in a recession
>when prices are increasing and consumers are watching every dime
>retailers are even more conscious of it.
>
>“Certainly all companies, retailers, need to be aware of their bottom
>line. So it is a particularly wise strategy to think about what do
>consumers need? What will consumers be willing to pay for? And can we
>offer that and can we promote it in a way that we’re selling the product
>as opposed to our customers going to a competitor for that product,” she
>said.
>
>For grocery stores, which operate on thin profit margins for food, flu
>vaccines are an excellent source of revenue and profit.
>
>Kroger Grocery stores and CVS pharmacies each plan to administer one
>million doses this year – nationwide.
>
>Neither Kroger nor CVS would disclose how much they pay for their flu
>shots. But the average wholesale price of a single dose of flu vaccine
>is about 12 dollars. Kroger sells the shots for $24.99. CVS charges $30
>bucks. So if we do the math…with a million does sold…each chain’s
>profits could be between $13 and $18 million. And profits are likely
>higher if the retailers get volume discount rates from the vaccine
>manufacturers.
>
>Widespread use of the flu shot has surged in the last two decades. The
>number of flu vaccines produced since 1988 has increased 530 percent.
>The nation’s population only increased 25 percent in that same time
>period.
>
>Curtis Allen speaks for The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
>in Atlanta. Allen said one reason for the increase is manufacturers
>realize there’s a market for flu vaccines. He said another reason is
>there are more people that need to be vaccinated.
>
>“We’re learning more about the potential complications of influenza and
>the science is growing, and as the science grows we recognize that there
>are more people who should be vaccinated than have been vaccinated in
>the past,” Allen said.
>
>Doctor Jacob Teitelbaum is an internal medicine physician and graduate
>of the Ohio State University Medical School. Teitelbaum, who recommends
>the flu shot, said there’s a perfectly good reason for the large
>increase in flu shot production.
>
>“How did the Pink Floyd song go? Money, money, money. I mean, fear
>sells. And if there’s a buck to be made, especially in medicine, it’s
>going to be made,” Teitelbaum said. While more of us are getting the flu
>shot, the percentage of the population that dies from the flu has
>actually increased. While still very rare, flu deaths are up 44 percent
>since the late 80?s.
>
>Allen said the CDC predicts about 36,000 people will die from flu or
>complications this year. But he said some scientists think that number
>is a conservative one.
>
>There are a number of reasons, Allen said, why the number of flu deaths
>is increasing. He said the U.S. has more people over the age of 65 than
>ever before, and seniors are more prone to get the flu and develop
>life-threatening complications. And he adds not every one who needs to
>get a flu shot is doing so.
>
>“Even under the best of circumstances we’re vaccinating well less than
>50 percent of the people who should be vaccinated,” Allen said.
>
>Dr. Tietelbaum agrees that an aging population accounts for the
>increased number of deaths from flu, but only partially. He adds for the
>first time in U.S. history people are obese and malnourished. And he
>said if a person is vitamin deficient the flu shot will not work.
>
>“I think the increased death rate has to do with the American public in
>general having poor nutrition and poor immune function. I think those
>statistics are ignored because no one wants to question vaccinations,”
>he said.
>
>And picking the right flu vaccine is not always easy. Last year millions
>of Americans opened up their wallets for a flu vaccine that did not
>match the viruses that were going around. Every year, health officials
>make an educated guess on which flu strains they think will circulate
>that season. Allen said the 2007 vaccines were mismatched.
>
>But he said the flu shots were not totally in vain. He says despite the
>wrong combination, the vaccine was about 50 to 60 percent effective. And
>Allen said the flu is likely to be less severe if it’s contacted after
>receiving a flu shot.

'Nuff said. . . it's a conspiracy theory ;o))
Janet US

On 1/10/2013 1:50 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 23:43:20 -0600, wrote:
>
>> http://www.infowars.com/blahblahblah
>
> This is a cooking group. Not a place to post every little thing that
> enters your feeble mind.
>
> -sw
>
But... but... maybe if he gets the flu he'll have a recipe for chicken soup!

Jill

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 12:05:24 AM UTC-6, Janet Bostwick wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 23:43:20 -0600, wrote:
>
>
>
> >http://www.infowars.com/pharmacies-p...dical-records/
>
> >Pharmacies Profit from Dangerous Flu Shot, Disrupt Medical Records
>
> >
>
> >Lisa Garber
>
> >Infowars.com
>
> >September 24, 2012
>
> >
>
> >In 2011, Walgreen Co. brought 5.5 million people through their doors for
>
> >influenza vaccinations�and was sure to give them coupons on the way out.
>
> >Unfortunately, this seemingly benign marketing campaign could have
>
> >bigger, more troublesome side effects. In addition to the
>
> >ineffectiveness and even danger of many vaccines, receiving them at a
>
> >pharmacy as opposed to a physician�s office disrupts medical record
>
> >continuity.
>
> >
>
> >�From a quality standpoint, this cuts down on the continuity of care,�
>
> >says Dr. Joel Shalowitz, medical group president. �There becomes no way
>
> >of knowing when someone is due for a vaccination that they may need.�
>
> >
>
> >Attracting Customers and Money
>
> >
>
> >Meanwhile, the likes of Walgreen are raking in cash.
>
> >
>
> >Pharmacies generally administer flu shots for up to $32, while the
>
> >actual dose costs private-sector buyers up to $16.72 (and as low as
>
> >$9.50). Therefore, not only do pharmacies profit for the actual
>
> >vaccination, they lure patients into the pharmacy to spend more cash on,
>
> >for example, deodorant or contact solution. Rite Aid even offers people
>
> >who receive their flu shot a booklet with coupons amounting to $100.
>
> >
>
> >The Affordable Care Act is even encouraging vaccination. Walgreen claims
>
> >that only 1 of 10 of its customers will pay for their flu shot and
>
> >insurance will take care of the rest. But the issue goes far beyond
>
> >personal gain in profit. Vaccines are dangerous, and with local
>
> >pharmacies offering up a jab, which are very often free during flu
>
> >season, even more people are being exposed to the dangers.
>
> >
>
> >Dangers of Vaccines
>
> >
>
> >Unfortunately, most of us are blissfully ignorant of the dangers of many
>
> >vaccines. Australian health officials eventually banned the flu shot
>
> >after several children were hospitalized for convulsing after
>
> >vaccinations, and in 2010 the American government admitted that the H1N1
>
> >vaccine side effects included a deadly nerve disease, Guillain-Barre
>
> >Syndrome. This, of course, didn�t stop health officials from continuing
>
> >the push the vaccine on the public, even though it has been found by
>
> >researchers in Vancouver to actually worsen H1N1 symptoms.
>
> >
>
> >To steer clear of the flu and harmful effects of the vaccine, try taking
>
> >a sunscreen-free walk in the sun. Just 10 to 15 minutes daily of vitamin
>
> >D3 can slash your risk of getting the flu by 42%. You could also start
>
> >drinking green tea and following these other steps on how to prevent a
>
> >cold and the flu. Your immune system � not vaccines � is the true
>
> >fighter against the flu.
>
> >
>
> ># 2 -----------
>
> >http://www.naturalnews.com/032558_fl..._wear_off.html
>
> >
>
> >The great vaccine marketing con: Annual vaccine shots
>
> >The CDC is now engaged in the marketing of annual vaccination of the
>
> >entire population. That's the game, you see: Convince people they need
>
> >an annual flu shot just to stay healthy. It's a complete marketing con,
>
> >of course, but it's necessary to keep the flu vaccine profit machine
>
> >humming along each winter.
>
> >
>
> >In doing this, the CDC is now running a criminal marketing racket to
>
> >falsely push vaccines as the solution even though flu vaccines simply
>
> >don't work. For every 100 people vaccinated against the winter flu, by
>
> >the way, 99 of them will experience no difference whatsoever in their
>
> >flu outcomes. Even using the industry's own best evidence, flu vaccines
>
> >are no more than one percent effective at actually preventing the flu
>
> >(http://www.naturalnews.com/029641_va...k_science.html) -- and
>
> >that's only during the first few months before they "fade out."
>
> >
>
> >One of the CDC's own vaccine scientists -- a man who received millions
>
> >of dollars in grant money from the CDC -- was recently indicted by a
>
> >federal grand jury for money laundering and fraud
>
> >(http://www.naturalnews.com/032216_Thorsen_fraud.html). Check out the
>
> >NaturalNews diagram called Poul Thorsen's Alleged Web of Fraud to see
>
> >the complete web of deceit under which the key players of the vaccine
>
> >fraud industry operate:
>
> >http://www.naturalnews.com/files/Web...eged-Fraud.pdf
>
> >
>
> >The truth is that the CDC abandoned real science long ago and is now
>
> >engaged almost entirely in infectious disease fear mongering and the
>
> >wholesale prostitution of itself to the vaccine industry. The CDC has
>
> >become to the vaccine industry what infomercial guru Tony Little is to
>
> >exercise equipment. This is an agency that now functions as little more
>
> >than the marketing branch of the vaccine giants.
>
> >
>
> >As part of that total prostitution of itself to the vaccine makers, last
>
> >year the CDC even announced that virtually everyone should get annual
>
> >flu vaccine shots, including pregnant women!
>
> >
>
> >#3 ----------
>
> >http://wosu.org/2012/news/2008/12/17...for-retailers-
>
> >number-of-vaccines-increase-so-do-number-of-deaths-from-flu/
>
> >
>
> >Flu Shots Profitable For Retailers; Number of Vaccines Increase, So Do
>
> >Number of Deaths From Flu
>
> >
>
> >Influenza vaccinations are almost as easy to get as the flu itself.
>
> >That�s because retailers, like grocery stores and pharmacies, took
>
> >one-stop-shopping to the next level when they started offering flu shots
>
> >on-site in the early 1990s. WOSU takes a look at the economics of the
>
> >flu vaccine.
>
> >
>
> >The flu � fever, chills, muscle aches, lethargy, cough, headache � yuck.
>
> >And that�s only if the infection is mild to moderate. Other people can
>
> >develop complications like pneumonia. In rare cases influenza can be
>
> >fatal. This is why Federal health officials recommend many of us get a
>
> >flu shot. It�s supposed to be quick and painless � well there might be a
>
> >slight pinch�possibly from the $20 to $30 it takes from one�s
>
> >pocketbook.
>
> >
>
> >The Flu shot has become a big business for retailers. You cannot miss
>
> >the signs saying �GET YOUR FLU SHOT HERE� at the grocery store or drug
>
> >store.
>
> >
>
> >Retailers seized a flu shot opportunity after the Visiting Nurses
>
> >Association had a lot of success administering the flu shot in grocery
>
> >stores in the early 1990s.
>
> >
>
> >Ann Paulins directs the School of Human and Consumer Sciences at Ohio
>
> >University. She said there are a number of reasons why retail chains
>
> >offer the flu shot � the bottom line is one of them. And in a recession
>
> >when prices are increasing and consumers are watching every dime
>
> >retailers are even more conscious of it.
>
> >
>
> >�Certainly all companies, retailers, need to be aware of their bottom
>
> >line. So it is a particularly wise strategy to think about what do
>
> >consumers need? What will consumers be willing to pay for? And can we
>
> >offer that and can we promote it in a way that we�re selling the product
>
> >as opposed to our customers going to a competitor for that product,� she
>
> >said.
>
> >
>
> >For grocery stores, which operate on thin profit margins for food, flu
>
> >vaccines are an excellent source of revenue and profit.
>
> >
>
> >Kroger Grocery stores and CVS pharmacies each plan to administer one
>
> >million doses this year � nationwide.
>
> >
>
> >Neither Kroger nor CVS would disclose how much they pay for their flu
>
> >shots. But the average wholesale price of a single dose of flu vaccine
>
> >is about 12 dollars. Kroger sells the shots for $24.99. CVS charges $30
>
> >bucks. So if we do the math�with a million does sold�each chain�s
>
> >profits could be between $13 and $18 million. And profits are likely
>
> >higher if the retailers get volume discount rates from the vaccine
>
> >manufacturers.
>
> >
>
> >Widespread use of the flu shot has surged in the last two decades. The
>
> >number of flu vaccines produced since 1988 has increased 530 percent.
>
> >The nation�s population only increased 25 percent in that same time
>
> >period.
>
> >
>
> >Curtis Allen speaks for The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
>
> >in Atlanta. Allen said one reason for the increase is manufacturers
>
> >realize there�s a market for flu vaccines. He said another reason is
>
> >there are more people that need to be vaccinated.
>
> >
>
> >�We�re learning more about the potential complications of influenza and
>
> >the science is growing, and as the science grows we recognize that there
>
> >are more people who should be vaccinated than have been vaccinated in
>
> >the past,� Allen said.
>
> >
>
> >Doctor Jacob Teitelbaum is an internal medicine physician and graduate
>
> >of the Ohio State University Medical School. Teitelbaum, who recommends
>
> >the flu shot, said there�s a perfectly good reason for the large
>
> >increase in flu shot production.
>
> >
>
> >�How did the Pink Floyd song go? Money, money, money. I mean, fear
>
> >sells. And if there�s a buck to be made, especially in medicine, it�s
>
> >going to be made,� Teitelbaum said. While more of us are getting the flu
>
> >shot, the percentage of the population that dies from the flu has
>
> >actually increased. While still very rare, flu deaths are up 44 percent
>
> >since the late 80?s.
>
> >
>
> >Allen said the CDC predicts about 36,000 people will die from flu or
>
> >complications this year. But he said some scientists think that number
>
> >is a conservative one.
>
> >
>
> >There are a number of reasons, Allen said, why the number of flu deaths
>
> >is increasing. He said the U.S. has more people over the age of 65 than
>
> >ever before, and seniors are more prone to get the flu and develop
>
> >life-threatening complications. And he adds not every one who needs to
>
> >get a flu shot is doing so.
>
> >
>
> >�Even under the best of circumstances we�re vaccinating well less than
>
> >50 percent of the people who should be vaccinated,� Allen said.
>
> >
>
> >Dr. Tietelbaum agrees that an aging population accounts for the
>
> >increased number of deaths from flu, but only partially. He adds for the
>
> >first time in U.S. history people are obese and malnourished. And he
>
> >said if a person is vitamin deficient the flu shot will not work.
>
> >
>
> >�I think the increased death rate has to do with the American public in
>
> >general having poor nutrition and poor immune function. I think those
>
> >statistics are ignored because no one wants to question vaccinations,�
>
> >he said.
>
> >
>
> >And picking the right flu vaccine is not always easy. Last year millions
>
> >of Americans opened up their wallets for a flu vaccine that did not
>
> >match the viruses that were going around. Every year, health officials
>
> >make an educated guess on which flu strains they think will circulate
>
> >that season. Allen said the 2007 vaccines were mismatched.
>
> >
>
> >But he said the flu shots were not totally in vain. He says despite the
>
> >wrong combination, the vaccine was about 50 to 60 percent effective. And
>
> >Allen said the flu is likely to be less severe if it�s contacted after
>
> >receiving a flu shot.
>
>
>
> 'Nuff said. . . it's a conspiracy theory ;o))

You don't need a degree in economics to understand how foolish it to not get a flu shot.
>
> Janet US

--Bryan

On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 18:09:54 -0800 (PST), Bryan
> wrote:

>You don't need a degree in economics to understand how foolish it to not get a flu shot.
>>
>> Janet US
>
>--Bryan

If the shot makes a person sick, it's foolish *TO* get one.
Then too, how do we really know what is in those things? For all we
know, they could be putting some mind altering drug that makes people do
things they would not normally do, or they could make people vote for a
certain candidate, etc.

I dont trust the government or the medical profession.

On 1/12/2013 4:12 AM, wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 18:09:54 -0800 (PST), Bryan
> > wrote:
>
>> You don't need a degree in economics to understand how foolish it to not get a flu shot.
>>>
>>> Janet US
>>
>> --Bryan
>
> If the shot makes a person sick, it's foolish *TO* get one.

That's the only thing you've said that makes sense.

> Then too, how do we really know what is in those things? For all we
> know, they could be putting some mind altering drug

Read a little Stephen King novel called 'Firestarter', did you? LOL

Jill

On Saturday, January 12, 2013 8:50:43 AM UTC-6, jmcquown wrote:
> On 1/12/2013 4:12 AM, wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 18:09:54 -0800 (PST), Bryan
>
> > > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> You don't need a degree in economics to understand how foolish it to not get a flu shot.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Janet US
>
> >>
>
> >> --Bryan
>
> >
>
> > If the shot makes a person sick, it's foolish *TO* get one.
>
>
>
> That's the only thing you've said that makes sense.
>
The percentage of folks who suffer adverse effects from the flu shot is very small.
>
> > Then too, how do we really know what is in those things? For all we
>
> > know, they could be putting some mind altering drug
>
>
>
> Read a little Stephen King novel called 'Firestarter', did you? LOL
>
I really should shut up, and just think that when a person doesn't get immunized, and they end up dying, it's a cause for celebration. One less damned fool taking up space on the planet.
>
> Jill

--Bryan

jmcquown wrote:
>
> On 1/12/2013 4:12 AM, wrote:

> > Then too, how do we really know what is in those things? For all we
> > know, they could be putting some mind altering drug
>
> Read a little Stephen King novel called 'Firestarter', did you? LOL

I'm sure I read that book in the past. I used to be a SK fan.
I just (last night) finished re-reading an old book by Dean Koontz
titled "Night Chills"

It's the same subject about drug given to citizens to enable mind control.
In this book they add to the towns water supply.

I'm not a tin-foil hat person, but I do realize that the highly encouraged
flu shots thing each year really *would* be a great way to drug the masses.
Laugh at the thought but you should always keep an open mind to the things
that you think "would never happen."

OB Food: You would never think that someone would try a recipe using ground
beef and cantelope as the main ingredients but I know someone that did. It
wasn't all that but it was interesting. It wasn't me that tried that, I
swear! ;-)

On 1/12/2013 9:58 AM, Bryan wrote:
> On Saturday, January 12, 2013 8:50:43 AM UTC-6, jmcquown wrote:
>> On 1/12/2013 4:12 AM, wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 18:09:54 -0800 (PST), Bryan
>>
>>> Then too, how do we really know what is in those things? For all we
>>
>>> know, they could be putting some mind altering drug
>>
>>
>>
>> Read a little Stephen King novel called 'Firestarter', did you? LOL
>>
> I really should shut up, and just think that when a person doesn't get immunized, and they end up dying, it's a cause for celebration. One less damned fool taking up space on the planet.
>>
>
I wasn't replying to you, Bryan. I was replying to the person who
thinks mind-altering drugs are being given to people as some sort of
mind-control blather.

Jill

wrote in
:

> Pharmacies generally administer flu shots for up to $32, while
> the actual dose costs private-sector buyers up to $16.72 (and
> as low as $9.50).

In Canada, flu vaccines are covered by provincial health care
plans (no "co-pay" in most if not all provinces), and here is a
record of which you vaccine you received and when. Starting late
in 2012 was the first time Ontario allowed pharmacies to give the
vaccine to take pressure off the clinics. And yet hospital
emergencies are being flooded with flu sufferers.

I got the H3N2 vaccine in December and still came down with the
flu around Christmas Day, but it was definitely attenuated by the
vaccine. I was sick, but no headaches or cough or congestion,
watery eyes, red nose and some of the symptoms I did have only
lasted a day (aching muscles, sore throat...). I did have a
fever, fatigue and loss of appetite for almost a week. In fact,
most protein food tasted bad (a symptom usually associated with
antibiotics which I did not take).

The Quebec Minister of Health was explaining on Radio-Canada
yesterday that health authorities look at what strain is hitting
Australia because that is what North America will get the next
year. You can tell a new strain because it hits mid-December
rather than February.

--

Traditions are group efforts to keep the unexpected
from happening.

-- Barbara Tober

On Saturday, January 12, 2013 9:14:31 AM UTC-6, Gary wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>
> >
>
> > On 1/12/2013 4:12 AM, wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Then too, how do we really know what is in those things? For all we
>
> > > know, they could be putting some mind altering drug
>
> >
>
> > Read a little Stephen King novel called 'Firestarter', did you? LOL
>
>
>
> I'm sure I read that book in the past. I used to be a SK fan.
>
> I just (last night) finished re-reading an old book by Dean Koontz
>
> titled "Night Chills"
>
>
>
> It's the same subject about drug given to citizens to enable mind control.
>
> In this book they add to the towns water supply.
>
>
>
> I'm not a tin-foil hat person, but I do realize that the highly encouraged
>
> flu shots thing each year really *would* be a great way to drug the masses.
>
> Laugh at the thought but you should always keep an open mind to the things
>
> that you think "would never happen."
>
If they do put drugs in the shots, then they must be drugs that make you smarter because smart people tend to be the ones who get flu shots, whereas those who don't get the shots tend to be stupid.

(It was a joke, so don't act like I don't know about causality.)

--Bryan

Bryan wrote:
>
> Gary wrote:
> > I'm not a tin-foil hat person, but I do realize that the highly encouraged
> > flu shots thing each year really *would* be a great way to drug the masses.
> >
> > Laugh at the thought but you should always keep an open mind to the things
> > that you think "would never happen."
> >
> If they do put drugs in the shots, then they must be drugs that make you
> smarter because smart people tend to be the ones who get flu shots,
> whereas those who don't get the shots tend to be stupid.
>
> (It was a joke, so don't act like I don't know about causality.)

And on your side of it, no doubt there were many doubters years ago when the
polio vaccination was encouraged. And the measles shot, etc.

I was "just sayin"

On 1/12/2013 10:14 AM, Gary wrote:

> It's the same subject about drug given to citizens to enable mind control.
> In this book they add to the towns water supply.
>
> I'm not a tin-foil hat person, but I do realize that the highly encouraged
> flu shots thing each year really *would* be a great way to drug the masses.
> Laugh at the thought but you should always keep an open mind to the things
> that you think "would never happen."

Did you read Cell? If you could transmit something to 'drug' the
most people, sending a signal through the cell phone would be
pretty effective.

Of course, now they'd have to figure out a way to zombie-ize people
through texting.

Wait ... maybe they have!

nancy

Gary wrote:

> And on your side of it, no doubt there were many doubters years ago when the
> polio vaccination was encouraged. And the measles shot, etc.
> I was "just yappin"

Raise your hand if you bought that story about inoculations causing autism.

On Jan 11, 5:34*pm, jmcquown > wrote:

> But... but... maybe if he gets the flu he'll have a recipe for chicken soup!


Good comeback. Why do people wait till they get sick to eat
healthy? As for the shot, I don't trust it a bit. Never had one,
never will. I get a prescription (diazepam), at a local pharmacy that
calls me each month when it's ready. Well, I went in last week and
got it. But yesterday and today I got robot-voiced messages on my
answering machine telling me my prescription was ready, only to be
followed by an announcement that flu shots are now available at the
pharmacy. It's a sting operation of sorts calling people in for
scripts that have already been cashed so they can give me the flu shot
pitch.

TJ

On Jan 12, 4:12*am, wrote:

> I dont trust the government or the medical profession.



I'm not sure I trust any profession. My rule of thumb is to look
in the yellow pages directory. Any field that occupies more than one
page is really corrupt. It has to be to have that many people selling
the same thing. Doctors, lawyers, auto mechanics - check it out -
they take up a lot of space in the yellow pages. There is something
immoral about professions. Cops need crime, doctors need disease (or
the fear of it), dentists need tooth decay, etc. None of them want to
lose their jobs, even if it means things get better as a whole. I
know a tree man who prays for natural disasters to bring him
business. Well, I'm not sure he actually prays for it, but when it
happens he's happy. Funny thing though, I actually trust the
government more than the medical profession, if someone put a gun to
my head and ordered me to choose.

TJ

On Jan 12, 10:53*am, Michel Boucher > wrote:

> I got the H3N2 vaccine in December and still came down with the
> flu around Christmas Day, but it was definitely attenuated by the
> vaccine. *I was sick, but no headaches or cough or congestion,
> watery eyes, red nose and some of the symptoms I did have only
> lasted a day (aching muscles, sore throat...). *I did have a
> fever, fatigue and loss of appetite for almost a week. *In fact,
> most protein food tasted bad (a symptom usually associated with
> antibiotics which I did not take).



I haven't had the flu in years, and I'm not Mr Health by any
means. Never had a flu shot. Sometimes I think maybe I have a huge
slow-growing disease inside me that's keeping all the known stuff
away. Sort of like the bully of the block telling all the other
diseases, "This guy is mine, get lost!" My bully buddy disease
devours all the ordinary stuff that invades my body - like colds and
the flu - but will one day run out of things to eat and will then
devour me. In the meantime I'm still alive and not paying for flu
shots to achieve the status.

TJ

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:53:22 -0600, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>In Canada, flu vaccines are covered by provincial health care
>plans (no "co-pay" in most if not all provinces), and here is a
>record of which you vaccine you received and when. Starting late
>in 2012 was the first time Ontario allowed pharmacies to give the
>vaccine to take pressure off the clinics. And yet hospital
>emergencies are being flooded with flu sufferers.

Back a few years ago, I had a job which required every worker to get the
flu shot. It was free to the workers. I refused. I was told that I
either quit my job, or must fill out all kinds of forms, which stated
that my employer is not liable if I get the flu, and I'm talking pages
and pages of written legal gobbledygook..... I wasted 2 hours filling
out all the paperwork. A couple weeks later i was fired for "no reason
given". I was happy to suck every last cent of unemployment
compensation from them.... This was in the US.

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 06:58:17 -0800 (PST), Bryan
> wrote:

>I really should shut up, and just think that when a person doesn't
get immunized, and they end up dying, it's a cause for celebration. One
less damned fool taking up space on the planet.
>>
>
>--Bryan

With an attitude like yours, you'd do everyone a favor if you died. I'd
even throw a party to celebrate! Please do everyone a favor, DIE. That
would be one less damned fool taking up space on the planet.

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 00:12:32 -0600, wrote:



>
>Back a few years ago, I had a job which required every worker to get the
>flu shot. It was free to the workers. I refused. I was told that I
>either quit my job, or must fill out all kinds of forms, which stated
>that my employer is not liable if I get the flu, and I'm talking pages
>and pages of written legal gobbledygook..... I wasted 2 hours filling
>out all the paperwork. A couple weeks later i was fired for "no reason
>given". I was happy to suck every last cent of unemployment
>compensation from them.... This was in the US.
>
>

Here in CT it is in the courts now. A hospital required the shots and
a couple of people refused.

I do get the flu shot, but it is my body and I should determine what
gets injected into it.

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 1:12:32 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:53:22 -0600, Michel Boucher
>
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> >In Canada, flu vaccines are covered by provincial health care
>
> >plans (no "co-pay" in most if not all provinces), and here is a
>
> >record of which you vaccine you received and when. Starting late
>
> >in 2012 was the first time Ontario allowed pharmacies to give the
>
> >vaccine to take pressure off the clinics. And yet hospital
>
> >emergencies are being flooded with flu sufferers.
>
>
>
> Back a few years ago, I had a job which required every worker to get the
>
> flu shot. It was free to the workers. I refused. I was told that I
>
> either quit my job, or must fill out all kinds of forms, which stated
>
> that my employer is not liable if I get the flu, and I'm talking pages
>
> and pages of written legal gobbledygook..... I wasted 2 hours filling
>
> out all the paperwork. A couple weeks later i was fired for "no reason
>
> given". I was happy to suck every last cent of unemployment
>
> compensation from them.... This was in the US.

WoW. You're a real rebel. Get the shot. Don't get sick. Keep your job. I guess that was too easy for you.

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 1:44:36 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 00:12:32 -0600, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>
> >Back a few years ago, I had a job which required every worker to get the
>
> >flu shot. It was free to the workers. I refused. I was told that I
>
> >either quit my job, or must fill out all kinds of forms, which stated
>
> >that my employer is not liable if I get the flu, and I'm talking pages
>
> >and pages of written legal gobbledygook..... I wasted 2 hours filling
>
> >out all the paperwork. A couple weeks later i was fired for "no reason
>
> >given". I was happy to suck every last cent of unemployment
>
> >compensation from them.... This was in the US.
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
> Here in CT it is in the courts now. A hospital required the shots and
>
> a couple of people refused.
>
>
>
> I do get the flu shot, but it is my body and I should determine what
>
> gets injected into it.

Not if you work in a hospital. Your body is a potential danger to patients. If you work in a hospital and balk at a flu shot, you're just being contrary. To even GET the job, you had to show proof of MMR and other vaccines, or get them. You have to get TB tests yearly. All of a sudden you can't get a flu shot - which will make a real difference?

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 01:44:36 -0500, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>Here in CT it is in the courts now. A hospital required the shots and
>a couple of people refused.
>
>I do get the flu shot, but it is my body and I should determine what
>gets injected into it.

EXACTLY !
Just because someone else thinks the flu shots are wonderful, dont mean
I must agree. Lots of people think artificial diet sweetners are
wonderful too. I wont touch the shit. I either drink the sugar/corn
syrup types, or none at all. I feel a lot safer with the natural
products than some crap designed in a test tube, which has unknown long
term consequences, but someone says the shit is safe and is making lots
of money selling it.

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 22:02:10 -0800 (PST), Tommy Joe >
wrote:

>On Jan 12, 4:12*am, wrote:
>
>> I dont trust the government or the medical profession.
>
>
>
> I'm not sure I trust any profession. My rule of thumb is to look
>in the yellow pages directory. Any field that occupies more than one
>page is really corrupt. It has to be to have that many people selling
>the same thing. Doctors, lawyers, auto mechanics - check it out -
>they take up a lot of space in the yellow pages. There is something
>immoral about professions. Cops need crime, doctors need disease (or
>the fear of it), dentists need tooth decay, etc. None of them want to
>lose their jobs, even if it means things get better as a whole. I
>know a tree man who prays for natural disasters to bring him
>business. Well, I'm not sure he actually prays for it, but when it
>happens he's happy. Funny thing though, I actually trust the
>government more than the medical profession, if someone put a gun to
>my head and ordered me to choose.
>
>TJ

Since you mentioned it, dentists love to promote toothpaste, and
toothpaste contains abrasives that wear the enamel off of teeth. Of
course that gets them more business down the road....

It's just like the guys with snowplows who cant wait for a major
blizzard. They make lots of money helping others relieve their
suffering from getting snowed in.

It seems that disasters are the best time to prey on others. They know
people need them, and they can charge whatever they want because people
will pay. It's just like when someone dies, these funeral people know
the surviving spouse is hurting, so they will offer the most expensive
funeral as possible. When one of my parents died, the surviving spouse
was offerred a very expensive funeral package, and only one day to
decide. Us "adult children" had to dicker with the funeral director,
because we knew there were better options, and knew the survivor could
not pay his top of the line package. We nearly cut the cost in half and
it was still done nicely.

While the flu does exist, much of these flu shots are based on fear.
Scare the masses and they will pay anything. Just the same as these
antivirus software companies create fear to make sales. I get a laugh
out of some of these tv commercials that say "your computer is full of
viruses and spyware". Bullshit, mine isn't. But then these commercials
also like to tell us that all older men have prostate problems, and 90%
of women have lumps on their breasts, etc. NEVER, EVER listen to
commercials, they are liars or extremly exaggerated.

On 1/13/2013 1:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 00:12:32 -0600, wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> Back a few years ago, I had a job which required every worker to get the
>> flu shot. It was free to the workers. I refused. I was told that I
>> either quit my job, or must fill out all kinds of forms, which stated
>> that my employer is not liable if I get the flu, and I'm talking pages
>> and pages of written legal gobbledygook..... I wasted 2 hours filling
>> out all the paperwork.

Why don't I believe this?

A couple weeks later i was fired for "no reason
>> given". I was happy to suck every last cent of unemployment
>> compensation from them.... This was in the US.
>>
Some states are "At Will" states.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment

They don't have to give you a reason. I doubt it had anything to do
with refusing get the flu shot. They offered free flu shots at one
place I worked. I certainly didn't have to fill out copious amounts of
paperwork. They just posted notices of when the shots would be
available. Sign up if you want one. Do you *really* think they were
keeping tally sheets of people who refused to get a flu shot so they
could fire them later?

> Here in CT it is in the courts now. A hospital required the shots and
> a couple of people refused.
>
It *might* make sense to request (not *require*) the flu shot if you're
someone working directly with patients. People in the hospital are
already sick, otherwise they wouldn't be in the hospital.

Jill

On 1/13/2013 9:25 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> It*might* make sense to request (not*require*) the flu shot if you're
> someone working directly with patients. People in the hospital are
> already sick, otherwise they wouldn't be in the hospital.

Since Becca and I work in a home office, we don't have personal contact
with as many people as most. But in a few weeks we are going on a trip
that entails flying. Being locked in a small area with 160 strangers...
half of whom seem to be coughing and sneezing... kind of scares me. Then
we will be on a cruise ship for 10 days... and back on a place.

We got the flu shots the other night... just in case.

George L

On 1/13/2013 10:47 AM, George Leppla wrote:
> On 1/13/2013 9:25 AM, jmcquown wrote:
>> It*might* make sense to request (not*require*) the flu shot if you're
>> someone working directly with patients. People in the hospital are
>> already sick, otherwise they wouldn't be in the hospital.
>
> Since Becca and I work in a home office, we don't have personal contact
> with as many people as most. But in a few weeks we are going on a trip
> that entails flying. Being locked in a small area with 160 strangers...
> half of whom seem to be coughing and sneezing... kind of scares me. Then
> we will be on a cruise ship for 10 days... and back on a place.
>
> We got the flu shots the other night... just in case.
>
> George L

That's a good reason. But if you aren't normally in contact with the
general public (I am not) I don't see much point in getting a flu shot.

You're going to be on a plane, in an aiport (if there is a layover and
change of planes.) Then on a boat. Rather close quarters, wouldn't you
say?

I'll leave the cruising thing to you and Becca. I've absolutely no
interest in spending a week on a boat. But I'd probably get a flu shot
if I did.

Jill

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:25:46 -0500, jmcquown >
wrote:



>>
>It *might* make sense to request (not *require*) the flu shot if you're
>someone working directly with patients. People in the hospital are
>already sick, otherwise they wouldn't be in the hospital.
>
>Jill

Healthcare workers are often required to have some shots, but they
know this when they take the job. If it was required to be hired, I'd
have no beef with it as you are free to make a choice. To add such a
requirement later is not right. Suggest? Sure. Force? No.

"George Leppla" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/13/2013 9:25 AM, jmcquown wrote:
>> It*might* make sense to request (not*require*) the flu shot if you're
>> someone working directly with patients. People in the hospital are
>> already sick, otherwise they wouldn't be in the hospital.
>
> Since Becca and I work in a home office, we don't have personal contact
> with as many people as most. But in a few weeks we are going on a trip
> that entails flying. Being locked in a small area with 160 strangers...
> half of whom seem to be coughing and sneezing... kind of scares me. Then
> we will be on a cruise ship for 10 days... and back on a place.
>
> We got the flu shots the other night... just in case.

Blimey! I would think so. Can you not postpone that trip??

--
--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

micksullivan wrote:
>Bryan wrote:
>
>>I really should shut up, and just think that when a person doesn't
>get immunized, and they end up dying, it's a cause for celebration. One
>less damned fool taking up space on the planet.
>
>With an attitude like yours, you'd do everyone a favor if you died. I'd
>even throw a party to celebrate! Please do everyone a favor, DIE. That
>would be one less damned fool taking up space on the planet.

When you die there'll be a celebration, one less stupid douchebag
mick.

On 1/13/2013 11:06 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:25:46 -0500, jmcquown >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>
>> It *might* make sense to request (not *require*) the flu shot if you're
>> someone working directly with patients. People in the hospital are
>> already sick, otherwise they wouldn't be in the hospital.
>>
>> Jill
>
> Healthcare workers are often required to have some shots, but they
> know this when they take the job. If it was required to be hired, I'd
> have no beef with it as you are free to make a choice. To add such a
> requirement later is not right. Suggest? Sure. Force? No.
>
Of course I'm not a healthcare worker but I understand what you're
saying. Don't tack it on later as a requirement because that's not what
was agreed upon when I was hired.

Jill

On 1/13/2013 10:35 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>> Since Becca and I work in a home office, we don't have personal contact
>> >with as many people as most. But in a few weeks we are going on a trip
>> >that entails flying. Being locked in a small area with 160 strangers...
>> >half of whom seem to be coughing and sneezing... kind of scares me. Then
>> >we will be on a cruise ship for 10 days... and back on a place.
>> >
>> >We got the flu shots the other night... just in case.

> Blimey! I would think so. Can you not postpone that trip??


We sell cruises for a living! On Feb 1, we are going with 90 people in
the Celebrity Equinox and our customers probably wouldn't be happy if we
didn't show up! Usually we promote and go with these groups 3 times a
year. Our biggest group was 434 people... the smallest had 12. Here are
some pictures....

http://www.cruisemaster.com/ggc2009.jpg
http://cruisemaster.com/ggc2008large.jpg

We always have a lot of fun.

George L http://www.cruiseshipcenters.com/en-...rgeLeppla/home

"George Leppla" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/13/2013 10:35 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>>> Since Becca and I work in a home office, we don't have personal contact
>>> >with as many people as most. But in a few weeks we are going on a trip
>>> >that entails flying. Being locked in a small area with 160
>>> >strangers...
>>> >half of whom seem to be coughing and sneezing... kind of scares me.
>>> >Then
>>> >we will be on a cruise ship for 10 days... and back on a place.
>>> >
>>> >We got the flu shots the other night... just in case.
>
>> Blimey! I would think so. Can you not postpone that trip??
>
>
> We sell cruises for a living! On Feb 1, we are going with 90 people in
> the Celebrity Equinox and our customers probably wouldn't be happy if we
> didn't show up! Usually we promote and go with these groups 3 times a
> year. Our biggest group was 434 people... the smallest had 12. Here are
> some pictures....
>
> http://www.cruisemaster.com/ggc2009.jpg
> http://cruisemaster.com/ggc2008large.jpg
>
> We always have a lot of fun.
>
> George L http://www.cruiseshipcenters.com/en-...rgeLeppla/home

Understood! Well, good luck and take lots of care!

--
--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:38:53 -0000, Janet > wrote:



>
> The longer anyone works in a field (not just medicine) the more likely
>it is that new science (or legislation, or world events) will alter the
>conditions of their employment. The fact new requirements arrived later
>than the employee, does not excuse the employee from observing them.
>
>40 years ago a hospital ward Dr might wear long sleeves, a wris****ch,
>wedding ring, often worked with bare hands and unprotected eyes. Todays
>rules are very different, "bare below the elbow", use of protective
>gloves, eye visors etc.
>
> Janet UK
>

I don't have a problem with rules of that sort. But to tell me I have
to inject a fluid into my body crosses the line.

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 2:13:08 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:38:53 -0000, Janet > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>
> > The longer anyone works in a field (not just medicine) the more likely
>
> >it is that new science (or legislation, or world events) will alter the
>
> >conditions of their employment. The fact new requirements arrived later
>
> >than the employee, does not excuse the employee from observing them.
>
> >
>
> >40 years ago a hospital ward Dr might wear long sleeves, a wris****ch,
>
> >wedding ring, often worked with bare hands and unprotected eyes. Todays
>
> >rules are very different, "bare below the elbow", use of protective
>
> >gloves, eye visors etc.
>
> >
>
> > Janet UK
>
> >
>
>
>
> I don't have a problem with rules of that sort. But to tell me I have
>
> to inject a fluid into my body crosses the line.

Then you can't work in a hospital. It's really that simple.

"Janet" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> says...
>>
>> On 1/13/2013 11:06 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> > On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 10:25:46 -0500, jmcquown >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>>
>> >> It *might* make sense to request (not *require*) the flu shot if
>> >> you're
>> >> someone working directly with patients. People in the hospital are
>> >> already sick, otherwise they wouldn't be in the hospital.
>> >>
>> >> Jill
>> >
>> > Healthcare workers are often required to have some shots, but they
>> > know this when they take the job. If it was required to be hired, I'd
>> > have no beef with it as you are free to make a choice. To add such a
>> > requirement later is not right. Suggest? Sure. Force? No.
>> >
>> Of course I'm not a healthcare worker but I understand what you're
>> saying. Don't tack it on later as a requirement because that's not what
>> was agreed upon when I was hired.
>
> The longer anyone works in a field (not just medicine) the more likely
> it is that new science (or legislation, or world events) will alter the
> conditions of their employment. The fact new requirements arrived later
> than the employee, does not excuse the employee from observing them.
>
> 40 years ago a hospital ward Dr might wear long sleeves, a wris****ch,
> wedding ring, often worked with bare hands and unprotected eyes. Todays
> rules are very different, "bare below the elbow", use of protective
> gloves, eye visors etc.
>
and patients smoked! About 35 years ago I was in for a spinal fusion and
insisted that I was not to be put in a room with a smoker. Eventually, they
put a smoker in my room but as I was in there first, he wasn't allowed to
smoke and the nurses thought I was being unreasonable!

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 11:30:36 -0800 (PST), wrote:



>>
>>
>> I don't have a problem with rules of that sort. But to tell me I have
>>
>> to inject a fluid into my body crosses the line.
>
>Then you can't work in a hospital. It's really that simple.

Yes, it is. I got the hepatitis shot when I worked for my son's
medical business. I had no problem with it, but I still had a choice.
Get the shot or not work for him. If I took a job at a hospital and
after some years of service, I'm still going to decide. I did get the
flu shot, but it was my choice not a condition of my employment. Not
that my place would care or have such as requirement.

On Sunday, January 13, 2013 3:54:00 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 11:30:36 -0800 (PST), wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> I don't have a problem with rules of that sort. But to tell me I have
>
> >>
>
> >> to inject a fluid into my body crosses the line.
>
> >
>
> >Then you can't work in a hospital. It's really that simple.
>
>
>
> Yes, it is. I got the hepatitis shot when I worked for my son's
>
> medical business. I had no problem with it, but I still had a choice.
>
> Get the shot or not work for him. If I took a job at a hospital and
>
> after some years of service, I'm still going to decide. I did get the
>
> flu shot, but it was my choice not a condition of my employment. Not
>
> that my place would care or have such as requirement.

You seem to agree and then not agree. Getting vaccinations to ensure the safety of patients AND OTHER CAREGIVERS is a condition of your employment at a hospital. Personally, I don't want to work in a place that allows a bunch of backward hicks to endanger me. But if I'm a patient or a nurse, it goes beyond that. The spread of influenza is complicated. If an IT employee interacts with a nurse and exposes him/her to flu, then a patient may be exposed before symptoms occur. How would you feel about going in for a hip replacement and catching the flu in recovery? How would you feel about your tax dollars paying for the extended stay of someone that happened to? Get the ****ing shot and shut up. If you're such a backward rube that you think a flu shot endangers you, you have no business working anywhere near healthcare.. An RN who has a problem with a flu shot should be run out of the profession. That's like a priest who doesn't believe in god. Except the priest is just smart. But he DOES need to change professions.

On Jan 13, 1:44*am, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> Here in CT it is in the courts now. *A hospital required the shots and
> a couple of people refused.
>
> I do get the flu shot, but it is my body and I should determine what
> gets injected into it.



Another sickening aspect to this issue is that it benefits some
people that it remain an issue for a long time. It's like anything
else. Take cameras at intersections for example. Sure, if someone
gets a ticket for running a red light he can take it to court if he's
got enough money. Or get in on some kind of class action suit. But
with all these "issues" it seems they all turn out to be just another
reason to keep lawyers busy. The flu shot will eventually make its
way into the courts as an issue (whoops, already has - your post), but
as usual it will just go back and forth forever so the legal system
will get paid no matter which way things turn out. It's like a being
a bookie.

TJ

On Jan 13, 4:48*am, wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 22:02:10 -0800 (PST), Tommy Joe >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Jan 12, 4:12*am, wrote:
>
> >> I dont trust the government or the medical profession.
>
> > * I'm not sure I trust any profession. *My rule of thumb is to look
> >in the yellow pages directory. *Any field that occupies more than one
> >page is really corrupt. *It has to be to have that many people selling
> >the same thing. *Doctors, lawyers, auto mechanics - check it out -
> >they take up a lot of space in the yellow pages. *There is something
> >immoral about professions. *Cops need crime, doctors need disease (or
> >the fear of it), dentists need tooth decay, etc. *None of them want to
> >lose their jobs, even if it means things get better as a whole. *I
> >know a tree man who prays for natural disasters to bring him
> >business. *Well, I'm not sure he actually prays for it, but when it
> >happens he's happy. *Funny thing though, I actually trust the
> >government more than the medical profession, if someone put a gun to
> >my head and ordered me to choose.
>
> >TJ
>
> Since you mentioned it, dentists love to promote toothpaste, and
> toothpaste contains abrasives that wear the enamel off of teeth. *Of
> course that gets them more business down the road....
>
> It's just like the guys with snowplows who cant wait for a major
> blizzard. *They make lots of money helping others relieve their
> suffering from getting snowed in.
>
> It seems that disasters are the best time to prey on others. *They know
> people need them, and they can charge whatever they want because people
> will pay. *It's just like when someone dies, these funeral people know
> the surviving spouse is hurting, so they will offer the most expensive
> funeral as possible. *When one of my parents died, the surviving spouse
> was offerred a very expensive funeral package, and only one day to
> decide. *Us "adult children" had to dicker with the funeral director,
> because we knew there were better options, and knew the survivor could
> not pay his top of the line package. *We nearly cut the cost in half and
> it was still done nicely.
>
> While the flu does exist, much of these flu shots are based on fear.
> Scare the masses and they will pay anything. *Just the same as these
> antivirus software companies create fear to make sales. *I get a laugh
> out of some of these tv commercials that say "your computer is full of
> viruses and spyware". *Bullshit, mine isn't. *But then these commercials
> also like to tell us that all older men have prostate problems, and 90%
> of women have lumps on their breasts, etc. *NEVER, EVER listen to
> commercials, they are liars or extremely exaggerated.


I have saved your post. Very good. Of course I'm saying that
mainly because I agree with most of it. Not only are flu shots based
on fear, I think the same of blood pressure tests. I do believe there
is such a thing as high blood pressure and that it can be a problem,
but I see the test itself as hocus pocus of a sort. I remember when
normal was 120 over 80. Now they've changed it to 120 over 70. Too
many healthy people, too many doctors, they had to lower the number to
get more customers. And they don't have to lie. You come in with a
reading of 120 over 71, the doctor can say your pressure is "a bit
high" and not be lying in the technical sense of the word. They call
high blood pressure the silent killer. Fine with me. Better than a
screaming killer. I have saved your post into a file I call "Other
People's Stuff".

TJ