Open mike 14/05/2019

Written By: - Date published: 7:00 am, May 14th, 2019 - 245 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

245 comments on “Open mike 14/05/2019”

  1. adam 1

    Smile, have a laugh and giggle…

     



  2. millsy 2

    Yesterday was a classic example of 'you win some, you lose some'.

     

    The win, being the government's scrapping of NCEA fees, and the loss, being of course, Tip Top's sale to an offshoot of Nestle.

    • Hoskins ranting again about Winston's Xenophobia, the problem we have here in NZ, is politicans and NZ business men have sold the country short with incompetent management and poor decision making. Small shareholders, taxpayers and the average New Zealander have been screwed by the Neoliberals and NZ's Business Elite ?

  3. James 3

    https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-48253343

     

    looks like Assange will have a stop over on his way to a US super max. 

     

    Great at news to see (an alleged) rapist standing trial and the chance for justice to be served. 

    • francesca 3.1

      Yes James, the news has been welcomed by Assange's supporters and Wikileaks

      Lets hope justice has its day

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

      • James 3.1.1

        Only an idiot would think that’s going to save him from going to the US. 

         

        Just shows how desperate ‘his Side’ is. 

         

         

        • francesca 3.1.1.1

          So its not so much the alleged rape you're concerned about but the arousing  thought of a journalist rotting away in a US dungeon for exposing war crimes.

          Well, whatever gets you off James, but it puts you in a pretty ugly light

          • James 3.1.1.1.1

            no I’m interested in seeing a coward standing trial for his alleged crimes and receiving punishment if found guilty. 

             

             

      • McFlock 3.1.2

        Hang on, wasn't he in the embassy all that time because the Swedes were going to send him to the US?

        🙄

        • francesca 3.1.2.1

          Has it passed your notice that one way or other he’s going to be extradited to the US?
          The whole notion of political asylum has now been overturned and violated.
          Woohoo I hear you cry! good stuff!

          At least he has the chance to clear his name
          Although I’m not so optimistic what with Marianne NY having destroyed the whole case file
          Strange thing to do if you have the interests of alleged rape victims at heart?

          • Adrian Thornton 3.1.2.1.1

            @francesca, you are probably wasting your time trying to debate these idiots, they have proven themselves time and again to be either unwilling or just to stupid to see through the very obvious layers of propaganda that surrounds Assange.

            You will also find most of them support intervention in Venezuela and  are Russiagaters…some people are just beyond reason and logic, they turned off their critical thinking brains long long ago, now that space operates only as a empty vessel to absorb whatever propaganda is the most easily absorbed.

            Unfortunately they are often here on The Standard proudly parroting that rubbish, seemingly totally unaware that they are just being used as tools of power.

            • francesca 3.1.2.1.1.1

              Kneejerk stuff all right Adrian 

              And it doesn't seem to dismay them that they find themselves in lockstep with the  narratives of the ruling elites

              Fascinating stuff!

          • McFlock 3.1.2.1.2

            He's had a chance to "clear his name" since before he absconded from bail.

            You didn't hear me cry a darned thing. That's your imagination getting away from you again.

            • francesca 3.1.2.1.2.1

              Well , no actually McFlock 

              Sweden had the capacity to interview Assange in the UK . He was under house arrest remember, before he was granted political asylum. 

              It wasn't Assange who was dragging the chain

               The UK Crown Prosecuting service, unaccountably interfering in Sweden's judicial processes, advised the Swedes not to interview him in the UK

              "Adding to the intrigue, it emerged the CPS lawyer involved had, unaccountably, advised the Swedes in 2010 or 2011 not to visit London to interview Assange. An interview at that time could have prevented the long-running embassy standoff."

              https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/nov/10/uk-prosecutors-admit-destroying-key-emails-from-julian-assange-case

              It was only after a Swedish appeal court criticised Marianne NY for her tardiness that Assange was interviewed in the Embassy

               "What made Ny suddenly change her mind after almost five years? According to the Swedish Prosecution Authority, two facts made Ny accept this possibility: the incumbent statute of limitations for two of the alleged crimes – sexual molestation and unlawful coercion, due to expire in August 2015 – and the fact that in November 2014, the Stockholm Court of Appeal, while rejecting Assange's request to lift the arrest warrant, had criticized Marianne Ny for lack of progress in the criminal case, issuing a clear press release: «The Court of Appeal notes, however, that the investigation into the suspected crimes has come to a halt and considers that the failure of the prosecutors to examine alternative avenues is not in line with their obligation – in the interests of everyone concerned – to move the preliminary investigation forward»."

              http://espresso.repubblica.it/internazionale/2015/10/16/news/five-years-confined-new-foia-documents-shed-light-on-the-julian-assange-case-1.235129
               

              • McFlock

                Based on the thin probability that Assange would present an alibi at the last opportunity before arrest, rather than the first.

        • Sacha 3.1.2.2

          Fear of root vegetables is a terrible affliction.

        • mauī 3.1.2.3

          He was there because he believed there were sealed indictments waiting for him and if he left that would lead him to be extradited to the US. Seems he got that one bang on, while his opponents called it a "conspiracy theory".

          • McFlock 3.1.2.3.1

            So he fought to remain in the territory of USA's closest ally. Because they wouldn't extradite him to the USA? Bit of a fail, there. The only thing he's avoided is facing a sexual assault charge.

      • Andre 3.1.3

        That Craig Murray continues to emphasise Assange has not yet been charged in Sweden shows he's either woefully ignorant of the huge differences between Swedish and Anglo justice systems as to how far along in the process charges are actually filed, or that he is aware and is hiding that in order to mislead his readers.

        Either way, that clearly shows he's not to be taken seriously. Either because he doesn't bother to educate himself on a topic, or because he's a rabid partisan shill.

    • James fill us in on the finer details of the alleged rape ?

    • Siobhan 3.3

      All that money the UK spent on keeping tabs on one individual accused/then not accused of rape..meantime..I wonder how many cases could have been solved, support offered to victims for that 10 million pounds (Cost of policing Assange as at 2015). This is not, nor has it ever been about one (or two) accusation's of rape.

      https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/thousands-rape-cases-remain-unsolved-1393253

      https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31159594

      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/21/rape-complainant-loss-privacy-intrusive-investigations

      • James 3.3.1

        He has never been “not accused of rape” since he was indeed accused of rape. 

        • Siobhan 3.3.1.1

          okay..'charged'…or ‘allegations’…now, care to address my actual point?

          • Adrian Thornton 3.3.1.1.1

            @Siobhan, I can almost guarantee that he doesn't answer your original point because that was exactly the same point I have been making for the past couple of years, and they never answer it directly,why?, because there is no answer that wouldn't expose their position to be untenable.

            As I said to francesca earlier these people lack the capacity for any kind of critical thinking, although it can be a bit of fun debating them, ultimately you are wasting your time, they will never address your main points, just as they wouldn't when trying to debate them around Russiagate.

            IMO they are all just a bunch of potential camp guards, just waiting lick boot and do what the man tells them….well they are all certainly doing a pretty good job right now of being the voice of  establishment power. 

            • gsays 3.3.1.1.1.1

              Yep, I have found this rooster to be disingenuous, distasteful and disrespectful.

              Takes a position, usually a provocative one (although this time lining up with unusual bedfellows, hence disingenuous), and then agitates and contributes nothing to a meeting of minds.

              Is only tolerated here because of the grace and decency you find amongst the 'left''

    • I had to laugh at the TV news reporters saying we may be surprised to hear the well-off are less affected by crime.  The second time we got burgled I fitted window bolts, a burglar alarm and video surveillance. No bother with burglars after that. Easily sorted for me, but people on minimum wage in rented accommodation aren't really in a position to go out and spend a couple of grand securing their place against burglars.  Where's the surprise in that?

    • Kevin 4.2

      If home owners became a little less obsessed with building giant walls around their properties the rate could be even less.

  4. francesca 5

    Looks like the Bellingcat analysis of the Douma chlorine "attack" was wrong

    And curious that the final OPCW report omitted its findings on the chlorine cylinders supposedly dropped by Syrian helicopters 

    Turned out that wasn't feasible

     

    https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/05/syria-opcw-engineering-assessment-the-douma-chemical-weapon-incident-was-staged.html#more

    • Stuart Munro. 5.1

      Moon of Alabama and Craig Murray both being enthusiastic supporters of Putinist propaganda lines on everything, their views should be taken with a dose of salts.

      They're still denying Russian involvement in the Skripal attacks for example. Your citation shows that a splinter developed within the OPCW, but that the majority group shut them down. No doubt, like the Malaysian dissenter to the conclusions on MH17, they were Russian catspaws. Were they disinterested their views would not be being proliferated by rancid organs like MOOA.

      • francesca 5.1.1

        Oh Stuey!
        You just can’t help it

        • Stuart Munro. 5.1.1.1

          Yep – I prefer the truth over third rate propaganda – who'd've thunk it?

          • francesca 5.1.1.1.1

            No Stuart , 

            you prefer the narrative that suits your preconceived notions, and strangely they are aligned with the official narrative

            I have doubts about that narrative

            • Stuart Munro. 5.1.1.1.1.1

              Yet oddly no doubts about your substitute narrative.

              The leader of a totalitarian state who routinely crushes dissent and murders political enemies from Litvinenko to Nemtsov is your preferred source of news. 

              That Pussy Riot spent two years in prison just for singing about him is no doubt just another US conspiracy to you, I doubt you even know the genocidal wanker killed half the population of Chechnya.

              • francesca

                Bless

                • Stuart Munro.

                  You see, I don't really think that's an adequate answer.

                  Are you blessing Putin's murder of Chechens? Of Politkovskaya? Of Nemtsov? Of all the others less celebrated, but nevertheless human cut short by Putin's brutal system of self aggrandizement?

                  Just what is wrong with you, that, as a professed progressive, you've teamed up with a totalitarian to peddle his propaganda here?

                  You have to be a little better informed if you want to be persuasive, which you won't get from ranter sites like Moon of Alhambra, and a little bit more consistent – if it's ok for Putin to murder uncle tom cobbly and all, how can you object to anyone else doing anything at all?

    • Milly 5.2

      And just as we just this confirmed, the US instigates another false flag.

      Now Iran is under Bolton’s beady warmongering eye.

  5. A 6

    Oh you haven't?

    https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/in-depth/389140/why-acc-is-turning-away-traumatised-mosque-survivors

    <i>"In December, the OECD released a report on mental health and work in New Zealand, which said intervention for mental health comes too late, is "fragmented", and that health and employment barriers need to be addressed together. It recommended the expansion of ACC to cover mental illness.

    ACC Minister Iain Lees-Galloway responded that would represent "a fundamental change to ACC's purpose" and "to date I have received very little correspondence that indicates that this is front of mind for most New Zealanders".

    <i/>

    • Sacha 6.1

      Any govt genuinely concerned about wellbeing should have little problem extending ACC's scope. Might mean our contributions increase, but health system costs and all those currently-unfunded ones met by people and theur families will reduce.

  6. Robert Guyton 7

    Chloe Zwarbrick too, too scary for Paula Bennett – Paula fails to show:

     

  7. esoteric pineapples 8

    If you go to Google and look up Venezuela’s embassy in Washington, DC, the result you get looks like this:

    Google lists Venezuela’s ambassador to the US as Carlos Vecchio, who has no governmental power and no authority to issue Venezuelan passports, because he represents no actual government but rather the puppet government that the US is attempting to install. Google has no reason to refer to this US government propaganda construct as “Ambassador”, but it does so anyway in support of the US government’s aggressive campaign to replace the Venezuelan government staff in the DC embassy with the staff of its imaginary puppet regime.

    Google, by the way, has been financially intertwined with US intelligence agencies since its very inception when it received research grants from the CIA and NSA for mass surveillance. It pours massive amounts of money into federal lobbying and DC think tanks, has a cozy relationship with the NSA, and has been a military-intelligence contractor from the beginning."

    And further along:

    "Our world’s fundamental problem is that the people calling the shots are omnicidal sociopaths, and the only force capable of stopping them, the collective will of the public, is too thoroughly propagandized to do so. The narratives are too tightly controlled, so the people don’t rise up against the oppressors who are driving them toward extinction via climate chaos or nuclear war. We won’t make it as a species if we can’t find a way to overcome this."

    https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/silicon-valley-giants-collaborate-with-the-us-government-on-venezuela-e9f519d89095?fbclid=IwAR1lzUzCJP02lDQj21_MXzz3zyF-l0D4-LNMxEdGF4IwTt4r-QtnBAuDtc4

     

  8. esoteric pineapples 9

    "The USCGC James, described as the most technologically advanced ship in the US Coast Guard fleet, is fitted with modern surveillance and reconnaissance equipment."

    https://www.rt.com/news/459024-venezuela-us-coast-guard-ship/?fbclid=IwAR0bWA9f04-hR-4tI30H35L1DUB5rs0_Fs1oXpgIM87eM_XTLfXli6jMDZU

  9. dv 10

    Vodaphone sold for 3.4 billion. Works out at about $600 per person in NZ.

     

  10. Dennis Frank 11

    The question of how to regulate social media is examined here by Thomas Coughlan:  https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2019/05/14/583822/how-to-regulate-social-media

    "A report from the Helen Clark Foundation is calling on an independent regulatory body to be created to oversee the regulation of social media companies."

    So far, merely antiquated socialist thought.  Failure to regulate effectively has been the performance track record of such bodies for as long as most folks can remember.  Usually due to been constituted by establishment party hacks, mediocre mainstreamers and industry insiders.  Take the BSA for instance, a perennial bullshit exercise.

    "Singapore, which had taken a hard-line approach to social media, had created an environment where Governments were in the position of deciding “what is true”.  Singapore’s fake news laws allow the Government to unilaterally remove content which it deems to be untrue. Critics argue this allows the Government to stifle free speech."

    A govt censor has to be able to know where to draw the line between right and wrong info for that approach to work, but the same logic applies to an autonomous body.  Even if contracted to act in the public interest, to err is human, so we can expect arbitrary decisions.  Some kind of reality check will have to be incorporated.

    "The European Commission is developing an approach that will oblige platforms to remove terrorist content or disable access within one hour of receiving a removal order from authorities. Failure to comply would result in a maximum fine of 4 percent of global turnover for the previous year."

    Interesting technical advice has decided on 4% rather than 5%, obviously!  But it does send a serious compliance signal to social media corporations.

    • The Chairman 11.1

      Her paper proposes an independent regulatory body along the lines of the New Zealand Media Council and Broadcasting Standards Authority. This would replace the current regime in which social media companies are largely left to self-regulate how they monitor and remove harmful content. 

      Interesting. I noted this possible circumvention to Incognito on here a couple of days ago.

      The link below is an interesting related read.

      https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/06-05-2019/jacinda-ardern-must-not-let-emmanuel-macron-co-opt-the-christchurch-call/

       

      • Incognito 11.1.1

        Interesting. I noted this possible circumvention to Incognito on here a couple of days ago.

        Do you mean here: https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-12-05-2019/#comment-1615935?

        Where you said this:

        If one wanted to circumvent human rights, current classifications and broadcasting standards to bring in a more profound form of censorship, it would make total sense. Which of course adds to the negative perception being created.

        No, you didn’t, nor are you on the same wavelength as Helen Clark. The fact that you think these things is quite telling.

  11. Sacha 12

    UN Secretary-General on what is required to combat online hate speech: https://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/first-up/audio/2018694923/un-secretary-general-issues-challenge-to-youth

    Mr Guterres admitted that what he called the UN's "old-style" method of international conventions would not be enough to change the way hate speech and extremist views are spread online.

    "We now need more flexible, more permanent mechanisms in which codes of conduct, forms of soft law, protocols, ethics standards are adopted with a multi-stakeholder approach – governments, companies, researchers, platforms, the civil society – in order to be able to affect and control these horrible spreading [of extremist views] that we are witnessing."

  12. One Two 13

    Medical Journals Are an Extension of the Marketing Arm of Pharmaceutical Companies

    “Journals have devolved into information laundering operations for the pharmaceutical industry”, wrote Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet, in March 2004

    In the same year, Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, lambasted the industry for becoming “primarily a marketing machine” and co-opting “every institution that might stand in its way”.

    Medical journals were conspicuously absent from her list of co-opted institutions, but she and Horton are not the only editors who have become increasingly queasy about the power and influence of the industry.

    Jerry Kassirer, another former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, argues that the industry has deflected the moral compasses of many physicians, and the editors of PLoS

    Medicine have declared that they will not become “part of the cycle of dependency…between journals and the pharmaceutical industry”

    • AB 13.1

      Part of this issue is the dominance in medical journal publishing of just 3 players – Elsevier, Springer and Wolters Kluwer.

      These 3 expertly monetise to their own advantage what is actually just the peer to peer communication of biomedical professionals. Pharmaceutical industry money keeps this publishing gravy train afloat, so the big 3 have no desire to see it reduced. 

      • greywarshark 13.1.1

        AB   Now that's a point.   Can we monetise our endless discussions on The Standard?   They seem to be compelling and magnetic to many.   If the three professionals mentioned above can string it out for useful reward it could be a great way of us getting gravy on our veges.

      • Incognito 13.1.2

        These 3 expertly monetise to their own advantage what is actually just the peer to peer communication of biomedical professionals. Academic industry money keeps this publishing gravy train afloat, so the big 3 have no desire to see it reduced.

        FIFY

    • Rosemary McDonald 14.1

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pertussis_vaccine

      Effectiveness

      Acellular pertussis vaccine (aP) with three or more antigens prevents around 85% of typical whooping cough cases in children.[3] It has higher or similar efficacy to the previously-used whole cell pertussis vaccine, however the efficacy of the acellular vaccine declines faster.[3] Acellular vaccines also cause fewer side effects than whole cell vaccines.[3]

      Despite widespread vaccination, pertussis has persisted in vaccinated populations and is one of the most common vaccine-preventable diseases.[9] The recent resurgence in pertussis infections is attributed to a combination of waning immunity and new mutations in the pathogen that existing vaccines are unable to effectively control.[9][10]

      Some studies have suggested that while acellular pertussis vaccines are effective at preventing the disease, they have a limited impact on infection and transmission, meaning that vaccinated people could spread the disease even though they may have only mild symptoms or none at all.

       There used to be a pertussis vaccine that was actually quite effective at preventing whooping cough…unfortunatley there were too many reported adverse reactions which is why we have the not so effective one now.

      To add to the 'why do these people not 100% trust the vaccines?' brew is this study…

      https://www.ebiomedicine.com/article/S2352-3964(17)30046-4/abstract

      …which found that " Few studies have examined what happened to child survival when DTP and OPV were introduced in low-income countries. These vaccines were introduced in 1981 in an urban community in Guinea-Bissau from 3 months of age in connection with 3-monthly weighing sessions. Children were therefore allocated by birthday to receive vaccines early or late between 3 and 5 months of age. In this natural experiment vaccinated children had 5-fold higher mortality than not-yet-DTP-vaccinated children. DTP-only vaccinations were associated with higher mortality than DTP + OPV vaccinations. Hence, DTP may be associated with a negative effect on child survival. "

      Now unfortunately, again, because so many vaccinated-only-with-DTP children were dying of other illnesses…

       

       

      • One Two 14.1.1

        Epidemic Pertussis and Acellular Pertussis Vaccine Failure in the 21st Century

         

        DTaP Vaccine Effectiveness – Failing

        Maternal Immune Activation is a known problem for fetal development during pregnancy…

         

        There is no pertussis vaccine the same as there is no measles vaccine…

        The question is. Why would they seek feedback on vaccinating pregnant women and also new born and infants who are already compromised thus needing the NICU…

        When it is widely documented the dtap vaccine is failing…

        Fetuses, newborns and infants do not have the renal function to effectively process the toxins from  vaccines…

        Also well documented. I'll link later…

        Surely this is already known to Pharmac and the Nz vaccine requesting agencies…

        • Rosemary McDonald 14.1.1.1

          One Two, I fear your efforts are falling on stony ground.  A pity, because if the evidence is looked at with an independent and open mind it is clear that the current vaccination program is not very effective and does not confer the lifelong immunity that catching and recovering from the disease affords.  Also a pity that those who are lightening quick to defend the vaccination program without actually ever looking at any real scientific evidence that vaccines are safe and effective don't seem to realise that with modern knowledge and treatment the scary outcomes of actually getting these diseases are well mitigated.

          BTW…the very bestest protection for under 6 month olds for whooping cough is via placenta and breast milk from their naturally immune mother.

          A species which is fast disappearing.

          • Psycho Milt 14.1.1.1.1

            …the current vaccination program…does not confer the lifelong immunity that catching and recovering from the disease affords.

            On the plus side, it also doesn't confer the death, disfigurement, temporary or permanent disability that catching and not recovering from the disease affords.  What cost/benefit reasoning are you applying that leads you to conclude the vaccination programme is the worse option?

            • higherstandard 14.1.1.1.1.1

              'What cost/benefit reasoning are you applying that leads you to conclude the vaccination programme is the worse option?'

              Monumental fuckwittery ?

            • One Two 14.1.1.1.1.2

              …On the plus side, it also doesn't confer the death, disfigurement, temporary or permanent disability…

              If you checked the trial data (pre/post) and as a minimum the VAERS data sets…

              You would realise just how untennible and how incorrect your statement is, milt.

              Why are you then raising the cost benefit question?

              On the plus side, it also doesn't confer the death, disfigurement, temporary or permanent disability

              …because you don't even believe your own statements….that is why.

              • Yes, yes, my puny intellect can't possibly etc etc.

                Why did I raise the cost/benefit question?  Because it's not clear how a reasonable person could find the costs of not having the vaccination programme (death, disability etc) to be lower than the costs of having the vaccination programme (occasional adverse reaction, lower level of immunity conferred than having survived the actual disease).  I don't expect to get a rational answer to that question, because it's the crux of the lunacy that is anti-vaccination activism.  

                • One Two

                  Milt, any cost benefits regarding vaccines, are completely flawed…

                  Because they are predicated on faulty data sets , exit statistics from fraudulent and unscientific pre-licensure trials…Which leads to all studies from licensure onwards being flawed by and restricted because of so called governing protocols…

                  If you invested time on exercising your intellect then you might understand what I am referring to…

                  occasional adverse reaction

                  That is incorrect for many reasons. including passive reporting systems capturing as few as 1% of all reactions.

                  The HPV trials had an auto-immune response in the vaccine and AAHS control groups of 2.3%

          • Andre 14.1.1.1.2

            Congratulations on coming right out and being explicit about your pro-disease views.

            It's spectacularly sick and twisted to prefer the excess death and suffering and disability and medical costs imposed by having people actually suffer those diseases, when those burdens have been proven over and over and over again to be enormously reduced by safe and cheap vaccination programs.

            But good on you for owning your malice.

            BTW, this article has a really good graphic as to just how effective those vaccination programs are.

            https://thinkprogress.org/measles-outbreaks-vaccines-exemptions-6dce41092040/

            • Rosemary McDonald 14.1.1.1.2.1

              Andre.  Where did I say I was 'anti-vax'?  I was vaccinated and so were my children for most things.  Doesn't prevent me from trying to find out where the growing mistrust of mass and mandated vaccination programs is coming from.

              Stop being a bullying dick.

              • Andre

                I called you pro-disease. Your entire comment at 14.1.1.1 reads as a paean to catching a specific disease.

                As a general theme, your comments often take obscure situations where vaccines have fallen a bit short of the incredibly high safety and efficacy we now routinely expect of vaccinations, and amplify them as if they're somehow relevant to New Zealand. This isn't trying to understand vaccine hesitancy, it's spreading unwarranted fear and is a favourite tool of anti-vaxers.

                I didn't actually call you an anti-vaxer. But if you don't want to be treated like one, stop behaving like one.

                • One Two

                  I called you pro-disease. Your entire comment at 14.1.1.1 reads as a paean to catching a specific disease.

                  So with the failure rates of vaccines leading to the spreading of disease, as well as the shedding from lives vaccines…how does that not make you you pro disease…

                  Are you even able to comprehend the fail in your primary argument?

                  I didn't actually call you an anti-vaxer. But if you don't want to be treated like one, stop behaving like one.

                  More excused for bigoted and misogynistic insults …from a man..of your age group… is so telling about you who as a …man and a human being..

                  • JohnSelway

                    Jesus you get so angry.

                     

                    You make dumb arguments then when asked to back yourself up you lose your shit.

                    • One Two

                      You think this makes me angry .. No at all, and I had the same conversation with marty mars who attempted to project his rampant anger onto my comments…which is what you are doing…

                      Are you in my vacinity…sitting near me, perhaps? … No. Ok , now that we have established you're reaching… the question is why would you seek to label my comments as angry… (I already know the answer)…

                      Well, as I stated…marty (who is angry in his comments, undeniably angry) used the same tactic against me…it also didn't work…

                      So, following the bouncing ball…leads me to believe , that similar to marty….you are an angry man…

                      And a projectionist.

                    • marty mars

                      yeah 1, 2 an angry man would say that – take those deep breaths before responding – if not 10 then at least 5 – try it what have you got to lose – or what are you afraid of, what is holding you back. Anyway thoughts for you to ponder during those 5 breaths.

              • Milly

                Keep posting 

            • One Two 14.1.1.1.2.2

              Congratulations on coming right out and being explicit about your pro-disease views.

              How many times do you need to be explained, Andre.

              People die and are injured by vaccines….Your home nation has the most scheduled vaccines of any nation on earth and has the sickest human cohorts and the highest infant mortality in the OECD…

               

              It's spectacularly sick and twisted to prefer the excess death and suffering and disability

              Not remotely close to being as spectacularly sick and twisted as your repeated ignoring and outright denialism of the damage caused by vaccines…

              and medical costs imposed by having people actually suffer those diseases, when those burdens have been proven over and over and over again to be enormously reduced by safe and cheap vaccination programs.

              Throwing others under the bus using monetary excuses…without actually understand the degree of harm caused…or even seeking to learn outside of the misogynistic and bigoted musings of Gorski…

              Which is why you have no issue with abusing Rosemary…

              But good on you for owning your malice.

              Still projecting your actions onto others…while not owing it.

              Why are you talking measles in a DtaP thread ?

              I get it, you’re deeply invested in the decisions you’ve made for yourself and your family in choosing to vaccinate….and keeping yourself ignorant is how you protect yourself from the prospects of the damaged you have caused to yourself and to them…

              There is no excuse for your bigoted commentary though, Andre…And again I will suggest that you need to stop it.

              • JohnSelway

                This is where you are so amusing One Two. The other day you were bemoaning how people weren't applying science to 5G radiation and here you are bemoaning the same science.

                You're a hopeless case – total cognitive dissonance.

                 

                • One Two

                  Explain it. If you can.

                  Misuse of and faulty fraudulent science (selway science) is exactly what it is when applied to any industry…

                  Perhaps you should spend less energy trying and failing to score points, and put that energy into improving your lack of understandings…

                  Which are at farcical levels…

                  US mortality. BTW…you should read comments more carefully before posting and then illustrating just how illiterate you can be.

                  Nothing to do with NZ. The comment was to Andre, who is from USA.

                   

                  • JohnSelway

                    Read the link jackass…the US is pretty much on par with NZ.

                    And selway science is repeatable, demonstrable science. Not the weird hybrid you have made up.

                    And more cognitive dissonance from you…dropping ad homs while decrying others for ‘name calling’. You’re on a roll!

                    • One Two

                      Selways Science

                      Most scientists 'can't replicate studies by their peers'

                      More than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments. Those are some of the telling figures that emerged from Nature's survey of 1,576 researchers who took a brief online questionnaire on reproducibility in research.

                       

                      Cogitive Dissonance is all yours.

                      As for those ad-homs you're imagining…same as that repeatable science … not there.

                      pretty much on a par with NZ

                      Shifting the goal posts now.

                    • JohnSelway

                      What's the point? Science is repeatable and when it isn't science says it can't be repeated which is what your link says. That's because science is a self-correcting process.

                      Repeatable, demonstrable.

                      What are you trying to imply with the link? That some science isn’t repeatable? Well – of course it isn’t and no one, least of all me, have suggested that some experiments cannot be repeated.

                      Selway Science – Repeatable, demonstrable. You know, ACTUAL science not this vague hand-waving shit you do

                      “Shifting the goal posts now.”

                      It’s nothing to do with ‘shifting the goalposts’ Do you even know what that means?
                      you said ‘the highest infant mortality rate in the OECD’ which is wrong whether it be the US or NZ. You were wrong.

                    • One Two []

                      Which nations from the western world have higher infant mortality than USA in the OECD?

                      None. ZERO.

                       

                      Pointing to NZs miserable record on infant mortality doesnt improve your position either…

                      Neither does the OECD technicality which I was already aware of…

                      Doesnt make you feel any better though does it…using such nations as below to claim victory in a discussion about western infant mortality rates…

                      Russia
                      Costa Rica
                      China
                      Turkey
                      Mexico
                      Brazil
                      Columbia
                      Indonesia
                      Sth Africa
                      India

                      Powerful argument.

                      After the expose your primary point of selway science and it being repeatable…except that is fallacy…

                      Where do you go from here?

                    • cleangreen

                      TO John Selway;

                      Tone down the personal offensive note there John will you.

                      Throwing words like 'Jack asse' and "being a 'opeless case" actually lead right to an anger response.

                      Are you actively inciting violent behaviour?

                      Tone it down eh?

                      Respect others views even if they differ.;

                    • JohnSelway

                      Um, no.

                    • JohnSelway

                      Now thats called 'shifting the goal posts. First you said "the highest in the OECD" then when shown you are wrong you says "which nations from the western world have higher infant mortality than USA in the OECD

              • Andre

                How many people have been killed or suffered a permanent disability from vaccines in New Zealand over the last say 20 years?

                Now, assuming you can actually point to any vaccine related disabilities in New Zealand that aren't SIRVAs, how many of them weren't already suffering a precondition with a very poor life prognosis such as a mitochondrial dysfunction?

                 

                edit: SIRVA is shoulder injury related to vaccine administration. It’s not in any way related to the contents of the vaccine, it’s operator error by the person administering the vaccine.

                • JohnSelway

                  He's also completely wrong about NZ's infant mortality rate.

                  https://data.oecd.org/healthstat/infant-mortality-rates.htm

                  • Andre

                    He? I don't recall One Two ever identifying their gender here.

                    But yeah, thanks for that data. One could spend all day debunking bullshit that takes just a few lines to spray out.

                    • JohnSelway

                      He, she, it…whatever. Point remains the same and if OneTwo wants me to address them as a particular gender they are more than welcome

                  • McFlock

                    If we really wanted to look at that, I wonder how many people would be surprised if the socioeconomic groups with the lowest vaccination rates also had higher infant mortality rates.

                    Probably not due to VPDs, though (although pertussis might figure, ISTR that's one), more due to concomitant barriers to primary healthcare other than immunisation.

                    • One Two

                      I wonder how many people would be surprised if the socioeconomic groups with the lowest vaccination rates also had higher infant mortality rates

                      Not many I wouldn't expect.

                      Vaccinations are not the answer to the question of poverty and poverty related illness, regardless the figures…Not in this day and age…

                      Probably not due to VPDs,

                      So the vaccines are probably not required then…your reasoning..

                      Undernourished and malnourished human beings have higher probability of adverse reactions and death following vaccinations…

                      So, right…vaccines are not the answer…I agree with you on that.

                    • McFlock

                      There is no "the" answer. 

                      But population immunity is a wonderful thing.

                  • McFlock

                    And if he was talking about the USA, at one year (because infant mortality) USA has fewer cumulative doses than Germany, which has a lower infant mort rate.

                    And there isn't all that much difference in dose number, anyway.

                • One Two

                  VAERS.

                  So some legwork Andre.

                  While you are at it, you should spend some time understanding how the fraudulent and highly unscientific methodologies which are used and standard practice during pre-licensure testing…

                  Have impacts on all and any testing and research which is performed after the point of licensure…

                  I've provided that starting point to you previously, more than once when you have asked…

                  Stop asking, and go find the information for yourself…if you're interested…

                  • JohnSelway

                    "… Stop asking, and go find the information for yourself .."

                    Burden of proof is on you. You can't make an argument and then say "…go find the information for yourself .."

                    If you can't show it then no one has to do your work for you.

                  • Andre

                    You made the assertion that there's deaths and injuries out there from vaccines. It's up to you to show them from a credible source.

                    You may think making vague statements about the info being out there make you look mystically knowledgeable. It doesn't. It makes you look like a jerk that's just trying to waste other people's time.

                    • Andre

                      heh – argumentum ad googlam

                    • One Two

                      You made the assertion that there's deaths and injuries out there from vaccines. It's up to you to show them from a credible source.

                      You're making the assertion that deaths and injuries from vaccines are some sort of myth.

                      You may think making dismissing official sources of info validates your own knowledge. It doesn't

                      Fixed that for you.

                      Credible Sources : You cite Gorski and  have repeatedly endorsed his work as credible…you know not the meaning of the word…

                      • I've given you the official NVICP data – You dismissed it.
                      • VAERS – off you go ..

                      It makes you look like a jerk that's just trying to waste other people's time.

                      More insults and deflected laziness.

                    • JohnSelway

                      No one has to do the leg work but you.

                      The onus is on you to provide the data and no one else has to mine for it. If you can't show it, you don't know it

                    • Andre

                      @One Two – what John Selway said. Just pointing someone at the mass of raw Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System data from the US isn't showing New Zealand deaths and disabilities from vaccines.

                      Not least because the VAERS is set to gather data about everything adverse that happened after a vaccination, most of which is completely unrelated to the vaccination.

                      In particular the CDC notes as limitations that 

                      • It is generally not possible to find out from VAERS data if a vaccine caused the adverse event.
                      • Reports submitted to VAERS often lack details and sometimes contain errors.
                      • It is not possible to use VAERS data to calculate how often an adverse event occurs in a population.

                      https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vaers/index.html

                    • One Two []

                      Andre..your excuses are pathetic and transparent…

                      And an excuse you've given is that VAERS data sets are insufficient and under reported….

                      Which I have previously linked on multiple times…

                      Now your using VAERS data inadequacy as an excuse…my oh my…

                      Your flexible and untennable positions are being broken apart and exposed one step at a time…

                    • JohnSelway

                      @Andre – it's called 'Elephant Hurling' and it's an informal logical fallacy where some one throws out a huge volume of data without actually pointing to the specific data which supports the argument.

                      It's like writing a university paper an referencing an entire book rather than chapter and page number.

                    • Andre

                      Elephant hurling, huh? I thought it was a snipe hunt.

          • lprent 14.1.1.1.3

            and does not confer the lifelong immunity that catching and recovering from the disease affords

            That is just complete daft bullshit. Lying like that really doesn’t help your argument – to me it associated you with word “nutter”.

            I have no idea which disease you’re talking about. However you’re dead wrong about getting lifelong immunity from catching any disease. All immunity is temporary which is why both vaccinations and ‘natural immunity’ always express rates of recurrence as probabilities and with a whole pile of differing probabilities .

            There isn’t a disease that I am aware of where there aren’t cases of people catching it later in life.

            The most obvious place to look is when people have reduced immune responses through other diseases, the most obvious case being the childhood diseases that pop up and kill people who have HIV. But you get exactly the same thing when people are stressed, old, have exposure, are malnourished, or just about anything else that reduces the activity of immune system.

            And eventually we all get a reduced immune system as we get older.

            BTW: Which particular diseases are capable of overriding previous immunity when a animal is under stress is largely a function of the risk of exposure in whatever environment they are in. In other words is there are lot of more germs of a particular type in the population that people are in – then those are the most likely to break any protection given by previous exposure, vaccines, mothers milk, or just having a robust healthy immune system. Which is really the whole probabilistic point behind herd vaccinations.

            • One Two 14.1.1.1.3.1

              That is just complete daft bullshit. Lying like that really doesn’t help your argument – to me it associated you with word “nutter”.

              Stop the insults, LP.  Rosemarys comment is verifiably accurate and correct.

              In the context of measles, now that the discussion has widened…

              Adults born in New Zealand before 1969 do not receive a MMR vaccination. They are considered immune to measles as the disease was prevalent and circulating widely prior to introduction of a measles vaccine in 1969.

              Adults born in New Zealand before 1969 do not receive a MMR vaccination. They are considered immune to measles as the disease was prevalent and circulating widely prior to introduction of a measles vaccine in 1969.

              No need for vaccination. Considered Immune. For Life.
               

              There isn’t a disease that I am aware of where there aren’t cases of people catching it later in life.

              I do understand what you are saying there, and in some of the related commentary you provide in support of that statement…many variables as you say…

               

              And eventually we all get a reduced immune system as we get older.

              Which is precisely  why vaccinating elderly folks can have such detrimental effects on their already weakened immune system, by stressing the weakening immune system even further…vaccines 101.

              Which is really the whole probabilistic point behind herd vaccinations.

              An unproven and theoretical mathematical formulation, which has no scientific basis in human populations.

              • Rosemary McDonald

                I'm thinking, One Two, that ffolk around these parts think that all vaccines are somehow the same….

                Grrr….

                • One Two

                  And that all human beings are genetically identical…

                  Which of course they are not. Not even identical twins.

                  • cleangreen

                    Hey one two,

                    I support your call for caution with vaccines.

                    Here is why; my case; 

                    I now have a commpromised immune system after being chemicaly poisoned in a workplace accident in 1992.

                     

                    Since then I have been diagnosed with Neutrepenia, lymphopenia and many other disorders from a lot of doctors who have been involved with my assessments snce aand have reported about my long treatments since.

                    They have written medical notes on my recovery and warned that immune compromised patients need to aviod vaccines and instead need to have my immune system boosted to higher levels soI can coppe with most virises and becterial insults.

                     

                    Strangely I have not seen  the pro-vaccince brigade warn us folks with weakened low operating immune systems to be cautious of taking vaccines?

                    The Cleveland clinic site below advises to be cautious.

                    I respect only medical folks who put the health of the patient and the immune system health before an indestriminent vaccine that may actually not hep if my immune system cannot cope with the imppacts of injecting a virus or contagent into my bloodstream.

                    I cannot condone the forced inocculation of any vaccice.based on my weak compromised immune system that is now term as an "highly sensitive compromised activated immune system''

                    https://health.clevelandclinic.org/if-your-immune-system-is-compromised-can-you-get-vaccinated/

                    For patients with compromised immune systems, getting vaccinated often involves making complex decisions. The protection a vaccine provides is especially important to prevent illness, but do vaccines come with added risks?

                    Whether your system is weakened by conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis or HIV or compromised by medications such as biologics, check with your healthcare provider before receiving a vaccine.

                    • Andre

                      If you were to go to get a vaccination for which immunodeficiency is a contraindication, that's one of the things they should be asking you about in their checklist before giving you a jab. There are a few, although the ones that caught my eye scrolling down the list aren't common ones.

                      In any case, those that are immunocompromised and can't be vaccinated are one of the very good reasons for the rest of us to get vaccinated. So that herd immunity protects the immunocompromised

                    • One Two

                      Hi cleangreen, I've followed your comments regarding the work -place poisoning…

                      Strangely I have not seen  the pro-vaccince brigade warn us folks with weakened low operating immune systems to be cautious of taking vaccines?

                      Having used the immuno compromised as a weapon in support of vaccination, of course the industry is unable to advise that group to be cautious of the recently vaccinated…or of the vaccine themselves…which cause auto immune disease…

                      That would blow the entire facade of vaccine science including the myth of so called herd immunity (currently under-going a renaming exercise by vaccine industry PR) .. out of the water…that is already happening anyway…it won't and can't be stopped now…

                      Example:
                      The HPV trials had (girls and women 9 – 26yrs) a 2.3|100  developed systemic auto immune disorders within the control groups who received the gardasil vaccine or AAHS (aluminium) as the placebo…when compared to the saline control group..

                      Boys and men 9 – 26yrs had 1.5|100 developed systemic auto immune disorders within the control groups who received the gardasil vaccine or AAHS (aluminium) as the placebo…when compared to the saline control group

                      In the same trials there was at least an 18|01  possibly 30|01 if including over-dose and suicide… within the control groups who received the gardasil vaccine or AAHS (aluminium) as the placebo…when compared to the saline control group…

                      Vaccines cause auto immune disorders…that is what the actual science indicates..

                    • lprent

                      Strangely I have not seen  the pro-vaccince brigade warn us folks with weakened low operating immune systems to be cautious of taking vaccines?

                      Well, I don't know about you, but last week when getting an anti-flu vaccine that was one of the questions asked in the form – specifically about colds and types of medications. It was then asked again by the nurse. 

                      I tend to notice it because of the meds I have to take after having stent stuck in one of my arteries usually come up. 

                      I didn't realise that it was meant to be a secret… I'll certainly tell the nurse off next year if they reveal it.

                      /sarc

                • McFlock

                  Well, my perspective isn't that all vaccines are the same. They all have different efficacy levels mitigating different levels of QALY risk with differing levels of adverse reactions.

                  But in NZ, the process for evaluating and assigning different vaccines to the schedule is pretty much the same. And it involves input from a multitude of people, many of whom are much more expert in the nuanced areas of that decision making than I will ever be. And additionally, it's not just about whether it helps me, but whether my decision will impact negatively on the health of people around me. Whether I shoulder some of that tiny risk, or merely rely on the efforts of others to protect me.

                  The idea of picking and choosing which ones I want at which pace just strikes me as being a selfish conceit. 

                   

                  • One Two

                    but whether my decision will impact negatively on the health of people around me. Whether I shoulder some of that tiny risk, or merely rely on the efforts of others to protect me.

                    How many times are you going to keep regurgitating that fallacy?

                    • McFlock

                      As long as it remains true.

                    • One Two []

                      Remains true 

                      It was never true for vaccines…that's been illustrated to you multiple times…

                      In what sense are you believing the maths formula of manufactured vaccine immunity…is true?

                      I also get your invested in vaccine theory…it's why you get a.flu shot despite it being one of the largest  failures in vaccine industry..

                      You can and do believe anything you like mcflock…that is fine by me..just don't keep repeating proven falsehoods about herd immunity…

                      Or that pushing untested vaccines on pregnant women unborn children and nicu new borns and infants is ok..

                      It's not…and I'm sure you can understand why not…

                    • Gabby

                      "when compared to the saline control group"

                       

                      What does that mean? More/ Less? the same?

                    • One Two []

                      when compared to the saline control group…

                      The pre-licensure HPV trials had 3 placebo control groups.

                      • Gardasil vaccine group
                      • AAHS aluminium control group
                      • Saline group

                      It means, the trial group using the now globally scheduled HPV vaccine developed 2.3% (female) and 1.5% (male) auto immune disorders during the trial period.

                      The saline control group data of auto immune disease was then merged with the AAHS control group severe adverse reaction statistics…sometime during the trials…before FDA approval.

                      …leading to a presumption that 0.0% of the saline control group developed systemic auto immune disease during the trial period.

                      Additionally,  18 or 30 deaths occurred in the Gard/AAHS control groups…actually 40 deaths in total (all 3 control groups) but auto related deaths could be discounted…leaving the comparison at 30|01 or 18|01

                      1 death (of 40) from a type of brain tumor occured in the saline control group during the trial period.

                      Auto immune disease AE’s from the Gardasil HPV vaccine is not published as 2.3 / 1.5%

                      But they do exist in the trial data and the vaccine package insert.

                  • Rosemary McDonald

                    Whether I shoulder some of that tiny risk,

                    Would you expect the aunty of a child who lives with lifelong disabilities caused by a severe adverse reaction to a vaccination to shoulder that 'tiny' bit of risk when it comes to vaccinating her children?

                    Because, out there in the real world, these are the decisions being made.  And as someone, it could have been Bully Boy, suggested earlier…there are some pre- existing conditions (that often are undetected until the shit hits the fan) that run in families.  Aunty is wise to think carefully.

                    And you might be prepared to 'shoulder some of that tiny risk' and simply suck it up if your child suffers encephalitis because of a vaccine and ends up with long term neurological impairment…but many parents are not willing to chance it.

                    I get that, and I believe that most other parents would too.

                    Especially if they know of someone adversely affected.

                    The day very well may come when we won't be able to have this conversation in public because 'fake news' and other such rubbish.  But no amount of censorship will stop the conversations over coffee, at the tangi or while standing around waiting to pick the kids up from school.

                    Much better to have these conversations out in the open without the slagging off and personal attacks….actually acknowledge there has been more than a couple of children harmed by vaccines and that some vaccines have actually been withdrawn for use on children (with no fanfare of course).  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22021725

                    And then the onus should be on the State to do whatever it takes to restore trust in vaccinations….not abuse and threaten parents who are rightly cautious.

                    • Andre

                      Vaccine related encephalopathy? Extremely unlikely to actually be related to the vaccine. The developmental regressions appear to be caused by an underlying genetic mutation.

                      Genetics and the myth of vaccine encephalopathy

                    • Rosemary McDonald

                      @ Andre

                      Vaccine related encephalopathy?

                      I said  'encephalitis' not 'encephalopathy.'

                      Idiot's Guide here…https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK236288/

                       

                       

                    • Andre

                      Rosemary, from your link:

                      Encephalitis refers to an encephalopathy caused by an inflammatory response in the brain.

                      Encephalitis is a subset of encephalopathy.

                      All encephalitis is also encephalopathy, but there are also some other kinds of encephalopathies that are not encephalitis.

                    • One Two []

                      How are you finding the Gorski training scripts?

                      I observe that you've modified your writing style…albeit only in short bursts…

                      You were attempting to use tactics not seen in your comments before…in an exchange with Adam , yesterday on another topic…

                      You still don't understand what you're writing about though…

                      And making the farcical excuses for avoiding official data sets…

                      Gorski 101

                    • McFlock

                      If that child can reasonably (not beyond all doubt, just reasonably) be thought to have had a serious adverse reaction to a particular vaccine, sure, that's probably already a contraindication anyway.

                      But it means that the child can only be protected by not being exposed to whatever the immunisation was going to be against.

                      As for "restore trust in vaccinations", for those particular parents? Meh. Small beans. The trouble isn't parents who genuinely have a concern that whatever afflicted their child was caused by a jab the child had however long before, the problem is people hearing about someone who said they once knew someone whose child got XYZ from a vaccine, or watched a fecking youtube video with dramatic music. Because that's totally a great way to assess risk.

                    • One Two []

                      If that child can reasonably (not beyond all doubt, just reasonably) be thought to have had a serious adverse reaction to a particular vaccine, sure,

                      You're applying criteria which the 0% vaccine manufacturers do not need to adhere to…

                      Which leaves the courts to make the decision. $4bn and VAERS data 1% reflective of reality at best…says you're making shit up.

                      that's probably already a contraindication anyway.

                      Provide examples and citations.

                    • McFlock

                      VAERS? lol. That's like literally one payout in a million doses.

                      Anyway, this is a cut and paste from the consent form emailed to me for my most recent vaccination:

                      • "that's probably already a contraindication anyway.

                      Provide examples and citations.

                      Well, here's an example:

                      Do any of the following apply to you? (please tick)

                      • I have had a previous severe response to an influenza vaccination

                      There are more contraindications/flags in the list, but literally the first thing on the list was whether I'd had a previous severe reaction. 

                       

                    • One Two []

                      Why are you laughing at vaccine damage and death evidence…

                      You don't even know what VAERS is …you've got it awfully mixed up…

                      I said citation not your personal and unverifiable tale…

                      In any case you don't understand what is or is not classified as a severe adverse reaction to [any vaccine]…

                      Because you don't understand the testing fraud involved. Fraud which I have linked to and provided evidence of..

                      While you lol at vaccine damage…and apologise for the 0% liability vaccine manufacturers harming human beings…

                      That is what you are doing in your comments.

                    • McFlock

                      I laugh because it's fucking miniscule compared to damage and death evidence from the actual diseases.

                      You asked for examples and citations. I gave you an example. You want to verify the example with a link (because fuck harvard APA, I'm late for bed) try this

                      I just googled "have had a previous severe response to an influenza vaccination". Seemed to work for me, but you're an idiot, so whatevs.

                      Night night

            • Rosemary McDonald 14.1.1.1.3.2

              https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2763266/

              Lots and lots of big words and an incredible amount of esoteric statistics but, in a nutshell, for pertussis…

              Aggregating the results on inter-epidemic periods from both eras, we find that average durations of natural immunity of 60–100 years are consistent with the data. In addition, vaccine-induced immunity is likely to be shorter, in some cases much shorter, than natural immunity.

              But if you intend to join the ranks of the rich- old -prick- blood- drinkers

              (https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/347828f8-6e7f-4a9b-92ab-95f637a9dc2e) that might not constitute 'lifelong' to you.

              When I talk about a vaccine…I am going to talk about that particular vaccine.

              And if you'd read the original post you'd know we were talking about pertussis, aka whooping cough.

              Shakes head.  Struggles to understand this near rabid reaction from autonomous adults when there is even a hint that the state approved narrative on vaccinations might not actually be accurate.

              Dismissing the concerns of the many, many people who have suffered from significant adverse effects from vaccines is simply rude.  Maybe you haven't actually met any of these people? And no. I'm not talking about autism.

               

               

              • Drowsy M. Kram

                The PLoS Pathogens paper that you provided a link to is almost 10 years old.

                Here’s a link to a 2019 paper; both papers have one author in common.

                https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2731128

                Question  How are trends in the odds of acquiring pertussis related to the effectiveness and durability of vaccine protection?

                Findings  This simulation study used a previously validated mathematical model of pertussis transmission to systematically explore a range of hypotheses about the degree of waning immunity conferred by the diphtheria-tetanus–acellular pertussis vaccine. Based on metrics documented in epidemiologic studies in the United States, it was estimated that vaccine effectiveness exceeded 75% in children aged 5 to 9 years.

                Meaning  These results suggest that the diphtheria-tetanus–acellular pertussis vaccine confers imperfect, but long-lived, protection.

                Like you, Rosemary, I'm a survivor – 27 hours since my annual influenza vaccination and counting. But I may be too old to consider using the current acellular pertussis vaccine.

                https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X17316195
                (Abstract only)

                • Rosemary McDonald

                  ….it was estimated that vaccine effectiveness exceeded 75% in children aged 5 to 9 years and that more than 65% of children remained immune to pertussis 5 years after the last DTaP dose.

                  FIFY

                  Wow….5 years!

                   

                   

                  • Drowsy M. Kram

                    Yeah, amazing what biomedical researchers & clinicians can do these days.

                    Unfortunately, despite widespread expectations, they're not infallible miracle workers – always room for improvement smiley

                  • McFlock

                    I love how big pharma covers up decline in effectiveness over time by recommending booster shots. So crafty, nobody will notice that one shot hardly ever provides permanent protection.

                    • One Two

                      i love it…

                      You love seeing the open admission of manufactured vaccine immunity failure…pretending to pass itself off as scientific ?

                      You understand thats what boosters are…an admission of vaccine failure.

                    • McFlock

                      Hardly failure.

                      Repeatable temporary success to prevent disease.

              • One Two

                I've posted this same information previously.

                Diphtheria toxoid / pertussis, acellular / tetanus toxoid Pregnancy Warnings

                Comments:

                -There is no data on use in pregnant women to know this drugs risks, including the risk of fetal harm or reproductive effects.
                -Available data from patients who received this vaccine during or within 30 days prior to pregnancy show major birth defect and miscarriage rates consistent with estimated background rates.

                Animal studies showed no evidence of fetal harm. There are no controlled data in human pregnancy.

                The background birth defect and miscarriage risk for the indicated population is not known. In the US general population, the estimated major birth defect risk is 2 to 4% and the miscarriage risk is 15 to 20%.

                • McFlock

                  You want big pharma to experiment every vaccine on pregnant women? 🙄

                  • One Two

                    You really do not see the problem with that comment?

                    The various agencies say the untested vaccines are <em>safe</em>…

                    The vaccine is not tested for safety…not even on pregnant women…

                    And you think its ok to recommend pregnant woman and NiCU patients are vaccinated…

                    With untested vaccines?

                    • McFlock

                      Available data from patients who received this vaccine during or within 30 days prior to pregnancy show major birth defect and miscarriage rates consistent with estimated background rates.

                      That's an assessment of safety, based on and assessment of people who got that vaccine and later found out they were pregnant. Which is much more ethical than a case-control study on pregnant women. And still found no higher rate of ill effects.

                      Very few drugs are tested initially on pregnant women. let alone "not even". Something about dead babies resulting from human experimentation upsets people.

                    • One Two []

                      You're an apologist for the vaccine industry pushing untested products on cohorts for which no testing was done.

                      Can you explain why you're so keen to endorse medical experimentation on pregnant women, unborn babies, and infants including those in nicu?

                    • JohnSelway

                      " Can you explain why you're so keen to endorse medical experimentation on pregnant women, unborn babies, and infants including those in nicu? "

                      Reading and comprehension isn't your strong suit

                    • One Two []

                      I'm well aware there could be another perspective…

                      But not for the apologist position..that can’t be explained away..his words are clear on that…

                      Which is why I asked Mcflock to validate his position regarding endorsement

                      You're not mcflock…I was not interested in your guess as to his mindset..

                       

                      Run along, selway…

                    • JohnSelway

                      The only way you could think there 'was another perspective' is if you lacked the ability to read and interpret information properly

                      And why should anyone validate their opinion to you given you have completely failed to do so for anyone else and classed all opposition to your comments as misogyny and bigotry?

                    • One Two []

                      Irony?

                      I'll help you out. You need all the help you can get..

                      Your contention is that reading and comprehension is not my strong point…your words..

                      I explained the question was not yours to answer…

                      And you've fallen into an ironic hole by responding…

                      Clearly it is a case of reading and comprehension not being your strong point…

                      Run along selway.

                    • JohnSelway

                      " reading and comprehension is not my strong point…your words.. "

                      Actually my words were " reading and comprehension is not [your] strong suit". Irony indeed…

                    • One Two []

                      Like a fly to the bait trap..

                      Selway science…

                      Run along selway…you’re not up to it.

                      Self relegated to picking up scraps off the discussion floor..trying to answer someone else’s question…

                      Unable to contribute to the actual conversation…

                    • JohnSelway

                      " Unable to contribute to the actual conversation "

                      Ummm actually I made several comments pointing to the paucity of your own conversation. That you can't properly mount an argument that isn't logically fallacious isn't my fault.

                      By the way, ‘selway science’ is actual science using the tried, tested and true Scientific Method. Repeatable and demonstrable

                    • Bazza64

                      Message to all re One Two. The chance of him being correct is probably about 0.000000001 %.

                      But one thing we can all agree on 100% –  his posts are the most dour, pessimistic you will see. To get through them takes additional energy. (Not the Wifi type) I have submitted his posts to a sleep clinic where they are assisting those that suffer from the most serious forms of insomnia. The early feedback is positive, with many previously untreatable patients nodding off after just a few lines of reading the turgid prose he posts.

                      Happy May everyone

                    • McFlock

                      I quite enjoyed the ironic reading comprehension fail.

                    • One Two []

                      I'm sure you did…you guys need something to cling to right…

                      We're you going to answer the question about the untested vaccines being pushed onto untested cohorts?

                      And whether you suppport it.

                    • McFlock

                      This drug should be used during pregnancy only if clearly needed.

                      Funny how you missed pasting that bit.

                      Anyway, seeing as you are operating at a higher level, how do you suggest "controlled data" be obtained? 

                       

                       

                    • One Two []

                      You mean how I didn't paste the entire page…and that's how you're avoiding admitting to being a vaccine apologist…

                      And that your silly comments do nothing to alter the truth of the non existent testing on pregnant women, unborn children and nicu babies…

                      Being pushed onto cohorts without testing..

                      As for controlled data..

                      Stop vaccinating first and/or remove the pretence of ethics and perform the tests…

                      Can't get volunteers…can't do the appropriate independent testing…can't sell the vaccines.

                    • McFlock

                      How do we get a fetus to volunteer? 

              • lprent

                Rosemary..

                You'll note that I didn't say that the immunity from vaccines wasn't likely to be shorter. That is kind of the point with taking a vaccine. It isn't meant to stress your immune system to the breaking point of having to go to bed to fight off a disease. They are designed to elicit a much smaller response than dying or being off work, and consequently they don’t give the ‘nearly died immune responses’.

                What I said was that you were talking complete bullshit when you said the fighting off a disease confers lifelong immunity.  It doesn't.

                I guess it might do if you have a very short life…

                But I like to fact-check OTT bullshit, and to encourage people to not repeat it, I flavour the information with enough bile to make their mistakes memorable. 

                As I said, it doesn't matter which disease you're looking at, without regular exposure to a particular disease or bug everyone's immune system will start to drop their response to it. After all there are a lot of new bugs that the immune system has to deal with all of the time and the body changes priorities on what it produces to handle all of the time.

                Incidentally, if you hunt around you can find papers on the decrease in specific immunity periods for people and animals who live in wider disease environments. That is because of the shift in the types of immune responses to deal with current threats at a higher priority than ones from the past. In humans this shows up mostly for people dealing with animals and bugs trying to jump species barriers. Running immune responses is expensive for the body

                • Rosemary McDonald

                  Whatever lprent. 

                  Without even knowing the disease I was referring to you said… That is just complete daft bullshit. Lying like that really doesn’t help your argument – to me it associated you with word “nutter”.

                  I don't lie.  I will get things wrong now and again, but I don't lie.

                  And "nutter" ?

                  Really?

                  I understand folk having strong opinions about particular issues, but leveling abuse at, and calling into question the mental health of someone you happen to disagree with (without even finding out what they are referring to ) is, in my book, totally unacceptable.

                  But TS is your site, and you set the rules.

                   

                   

                   

                   

                  • Drowsy M. Kram

                    Think of it as 'eliciting a strong response'; characteristic and worth noting. Small chance of triggering a targetted autoimmune disorder, but still worthwhile, overall.

                    "The antigen is then recognized as foreign by the immune system, eliciting a strong response for protection against the target pathogen."

                    Some ideas rub people up the wrong way, but we’re still free (for the most part) to exchange opinions.

                • One Two

                  But I like to fact-check OTT bullshit, and to encourage people to not repeat it, I flavour the information with enough bile to make their mistakes memorable. 

                  Except it appears that you're not very good at it. About the same quality as your comments on this subject , LP.

                  And I can spot your level of uninformed bullshit from a very long way.

                  Example:

                  That is kind of the point with taking a vaccine. It isn't meant to stress your immune system to the breaking point of having to go to bed to fight off a disease.

                  That is exactly the purpose of vaccine theory.

                  • To stress (activate) the immune system into an artificial reaction by using various adjuvants injected directly into the human body.
                    • A reaction that it would not otherwise make without the adjuvants stressing the body into an artificially activated response
                       
                  • How many artificial activations can the human body take from day one of life before it reaches breaking point…
                    • Unknown. Not tested. Not Ever. Not Possible.

                  As I said, it doesn't matter which disease you're looking at, without regular exposure to a particular disease or bug everyone's immune system will start to drop their response to it

                  Second time you've made that assertion on this thread…time for a citation.  Which I will fact check.

                  Perhaps you're not aware of full cell immunity versus antibody immunity (there is a clue for you to follow)

                  As I've already said, i understand with some of what you are saying, but despite your self belief in being good at fact-checking (on other subjects I would agree..that you are)…on this subject you are poorly informed..

                  After all there are a lot of new bugs that the immune system has to deal with all of the time and the body changes priorities on what it produces to handle all of the time.

                  Absolutely right. Which invalidates the requirement to use the immuno compromised as leverage in the so called herd immunity argument.

                  Or to vaccinate at all. Should that be a choice people wish to make.

                  The rest of your comment…doesn't validate your own, unvalidated contention.

                  As I already linked to you earlier: Which according to those in NZ who are making the decisions … They signal the wild virus confers life long immunity since before 1969 – Death.

                  Adults born in New Zealand before 1969 do not receive a MMR vaccination. They are considered immune to measles as the disease was prevalent and circulating widely prior to introduction of a measles vaccine in 1969.

                  No need for vaccination. Considered Immune. For Life.

                  I like to fact-check OTT bullshit, and to encourage people to not repeat it,

                  Stop repeating bullshit then.

                  • marty mars

                    [deleted] – you know nothing but how to cut and paste – oh and bold too.
                    I thought you knew something about this subject but all your links are shown as malignant spin designed to hurt people. Your evidence when you can be bothered to pretend to put it up is shown false or not relevant. You are dishonest and nasty – and they are your good qualities buddy.

              • maggieinnz

                I think you've misunderstood what that linked research is showing Rosemary.  It's not saying that natural immunity in humans is 60-100 years.  It's a mathematical model showing the relationship between waning immunity between natural vs vaccine induced immunity whereby they plug in data and run it through their model.  This part was just below the 60-100 year quote you posted.

                result in an average duration of natural immunity of between 20 and 40 years, as shown in Figure 3B. This range shifts to between 30 and 60 years if the average duration of vaccine-induced immunity is fixed at 10 years (Figure 3C). 

            • gsays 14.1.1.1.3.3

              At the risk of being a nutter or some other term of endearment…

               

              From the Immunisation Advisory Centre:

              "Adults aged 50 years or older (born in New Zealand before 1969)

              • Not recommended to receive MMR vaccination. They are considered to be immune to measles as there was no measles containing vaccine until 1969 and the disease is so highly infectious."

               

          • One Two 14.1.1.1.4

            No worries from my perspective Rosemary, I am not posting for anyone's benefit. in particular…

            I post on subjects which are of interest to me, and you can read the repeated tactics which come back through the comments…

            All men, such as it is…each of them propagating ignorance of the highest level through the bigoted and and misogynistic comments which they write..

            As seen through the comments, they have absolutely no interest in anything other than insults and abuse of others…while seemingly reveling in a complete lack of motivation to invest in improving themselves and their knowledge levels…

            It is a sign of the present state of the world that such speech which is actually h-@te speech can be so casually and flippantly used despite the decades of archived and rapidly expanding data sets of the damage caused and fraudulant practices of the vaccine industry

            Denying the undeniable simply exposes other agendas…what they are…I wouldn't know…but I have my suspicions which will be correct, at least in part…

            • cleangreen 14.1.1.1.4.1

              smileyKeep it up One Two,

              See my considered response to support you on 14.1.1.1.3.1

              • One Two

                Yes sure…It is easy for me to handle the angry little mans group…who embrace harm upon women…indeed they appear to revel in denying the harm exists to vaccinated children…pretending the damaged do not exist…

                When confronted with undeniable evidence of harm and death…they deflect and seek to avoid…

                This comment from McFlock is once of the very worst…

                You want big pharma to experiment every vaccine on pregnant women?

                According to that comment, it is acceptable for official regulators to schedule, mandate and expand access to untested vaccinations…

                To be injected into pregnant women, NICU new borns and infants…

                 

                • JohnSelway

                  " Yes sure…It is easy for me to handle the angry little mans group…who embrace harm upon women…indeed they appear to revel in denying the harm exists to vaccinated children…pretending the damaged do not exist… "

                  No one did any of that – you were just asked to support your arguments properly and you didn't.

                  • Sacha

                    A sensitive wee sausage, that one too. Easily set off.

                    • JohnSelway

                      Yet I'm one of the ' angry little mans group' who does 'Selway Science' (which is actual science but has my name in front of it)

                    • One Two

                      If it helps you feel better…which it won't be, sacha..

                      Believe whatever helps you out..

                    • cleangreen

                      Sasha you are a sick puppy and a sad sack of ………

                      Never are you constructive..

                      Join your ilk and go back to your hives.

                    • Sacha

                      But I have provided a bounty of links, information, and details. A trove, I tell you.

                  • One Two

                    No one did any of that –

                    That is exactly what yourself and all the men who take such positions are doing…you may not realise it but you are …

                    you were just asked to support your arguments properly and you didn't

                    But I have provided a bounty of links, information and details…which has been dismissed, deflected, avoided and discarded …thereby invalidating your comment about  not reveling in denying the harm exists to vaccinated children

                    Which in denying and avoiding the information provided…affirms that you are engaged in bigoted and misogynistic activity in denying , through avoidance…the damage and death caused by vaccines…to the children of women and all parents…

                    • JohnSelway

                      none of what you said above is true.

                    • Tuppence Shrewsbury

                      But the cornucopia of information! the sheer abundance of verifiable links to links to other links on the internet! The refusal to accept the caustion by the CDC in using VAERS as a measure of vaccines risk because you need to do your own research and open your mind like 5,6. 

                      If you don't like preventing communicable diseases, you are angry and misogynistic. 

                      Clearly all those mothers who vaccinate their children and refuse to let their kids play with unvaccinated children are misogynistic. how did we miss that? it explains everything. 

                    • One Two []

                      Do you even know what the CDC use VAERS for

                      How it’s referenced around the western world…go right ahead and explain it before you or any others here claim it is invalid data…

                      Saying that the officially recognized vaccine injury reporting system is invalid…

                      …Defeats and invalidates any argument made by you guys on this subject..

                       

                      As for your attempts at making a case to turn the misogyny  away from others , including yourself…

                      Invalidate themselves..without my pointing out how…

                      You little guys are becoming more ridiculous with every comment …

                    • JohnSelway

                      It's cute you think it’s everyone else becoming more ridiculous with every comment …

                    • Tuppence Shrewsbury []

                      classic Ed style cognitive dissonance

              • Andre

                Y'know, cleangreen, if you are genuinely immunodeficient as you claim to be elsewhere in today's Open Mike, then you are being protected by herd immunity.

                Herd immunity is one of the first things to go once the rate of non-vaccination goes high enough. So I'm fucked if I get why you're cheering on One Two's anti-vax efforts.

                Although I'd now see a certain karmic or darwinian aspect to it if you did catch a VPD from someone that's unvaccinated because of anti-vaxer efforts like One Two's that you're encouraging.

                • One Two

                  Herd immunity is one of the first things to go once the rate of non-vaccination goes high enough

                  Logical fallacy propagated the accepting a myth. Regurgitated by those who are unable to think critically.

                  Something which has never existed (manufactured vaccine immunity) … can't possibly be one of the first things to go.

                  So I'm fucked if I get why you're cheering on One Two's anti-vax efforts.

                  Of course you are. Your bias is so deeply ingrained you can't recognise it …   thus logic and reasoning are not possible for you on this subject…

                  • Drowsy M. Kram

                    Global eradication of the serious disease smallpox was achieved by the use of focused surveillance and ring vaccination programmes.

                    "In 1980, after decades of efforts by the World Health Organization, the World Health Assembly endorsed a statement declaring smallpox eradicated. Coordinated efforts rid the world of a disease that had once killed up to 35% of its victims and left others scarred or blind."

                    If it was feasible to eradicate a serious disease, say polio, using vaccination programmes, then surely all sides of the vaccination debate could agree that would be a good outcome.  The disease would be gone forever, and no-one would be vaccinated against it ever again.

                    Many diseases aren’t currently eradicable using vaccines, but I support the efforts of biomedical researchers/scientists to develop new and/or improved disease-prevention treatments – it’s challenging work.

                    Who knows, sometime in the future vaccines will be seen as 'old hat', but we're not there yet.

                    "Guinea worm disease is likely on the verge of eradication. Only 30 cases were reported in 2017, from just 2 countries (Chad [15 cases], Ethiopia [15 cases]). Though the case count increased from 2016, experts are still hopeful about the possibility of eradication. The Carter Center International Task Force for Disease Eradication has declared six additional diseases as potentially eradicable: lymphatic filariasis (Elephantiasis), polio, measles, mumps, rubella, and pork tapeworm.

                    *Rinderpest, a disease that affected livestock, has also been eradicated, largely due to vaccination."

                    https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/disease-eradication

                    • One Two

                      WHO has made many false statements regarding disease eradication…

                      If it was feasible to eradicate a serious disease, say polio, using vaccination programmes,…

                      IF.

                      then surely all sides of the vaccination debate could agree that would be a good outcome. 

                      Speculation… and most likely grossly incorrect for multiple reasons such as…

                      • Vaccines cause damage and death
                      • It is not possible to eradicate a virus (clue about smallpox fallacy)

                      The disease would be gone forever, and no-one would be vaccinated against it ever again.

                      • In name only
                      • And of course the manufacturers will fill any voids caused by the vaccines. (See chicken pox vaccine causing shingles)

                       

                      Cattle-beast / Livestock.

                      Yes. Quite.

                    • Tuppence Shrewsbury []

                      when was the last time anyone died from smallpox wees&poos?

                    • Drowsy M. Kram

                      One Two, are you in favour of using vaccination programmes to eradicate selected diseases?  Here is an example of a NZ public health vaccination programme, including a successful improvement on the original vaccine.

                      "Prior to the development of polio vaccines nearly every person became infected, with the highest disease rate being in infants and young children. New Zealand began immunising with the oral polio vaccine (OPV) in 1961. The oral  vaccine contains attenuated (weakened) live poliovirus, but is associated with a rare risk of vaccine-derived poliovirus infection. In 2002, New Zealand introduced an inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) to stop the risk of polio caused by vaccine-derived poliovirus."

                      "Since 1962, seven cases of polio have been reported in New Zealand, the most recent was in 1998. Four cases were confirmed as vaccine-associated and two, classified as probably vaccine related, occurred before New Zealand changed from OPV to the IPV in 2002. One case of wild-type polio (not vaccine related) was acquired in Tonga and imported into New Zealand."

                      http://www.immune.org.nz/diseases/polio

                      It’s obvious why the medical establishment would promote vaccination as a means for disease control/prevention. They also acknowledge the risks associated with vaccination.

                      "In the past, many children died or were left with life-long problems from diseases such as diphtheria, tetanus, polio and whooping cough. Today, we use vaccines to immunise children against these and other diseases. Vaccines stimulate their immune system to produce antibodies, exactly like it would if they were exposed to the disease. The child will develop immunity to that disease, but they don't have to get sick first. This is what makes vaccines such a powerful medicine."

                      https://www.healthnavigator.org.nz/health-a-z/c/childhood-immunisation/

                • Tuppence Shrewsbury

                  It's not an immunodeficiency. it's an intellectual one. Fairly common amongst extreme train spotters

                • cleangreen

                  Andre You are a sack of … go join your ilk with the gang you have now here as pro vacine artists.

                  You have shown you are prepared to feed toins to those of us who are now damaged by chemicals and now you want to put us who are already immune compromised on the slab of death.

                  What we are all witnessing here is 'a group of you troll artists now as pro vaccane advocates, but other times it is anti climate change or pro free speech, and other times poo the pollution debate we have raised before so I have you spotted now..

                  We are not foooled by your beehive of hate.

                   

                   

                  • Tuppence Shrewsbury

                    Those same “toins” keep you from using spellcheck? Or self administered now?

                    You foool

          • maggieinnz 14.1.1.1.5

            BTW…the very bestest protection for under 6 month olds for whooping cough is via placenta and breast milk from their naturally immune mother.

            Actually that's completely wrong Rosemary.

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5605623/
            Protection against Pertussis in Humans Correlates to Elevated Serum Antibodies and Memory B Cells
            "Adoptive maternal immunity does not prevent pertussis in the neonate."

            "Serum antibodies are excellent correlates of protection for many infectious diseases (29) but for pertussis there is no “universally accepted quantifiable serological measure of protection” (30). We show that the recall response of memory B cells is used by the adult immune system for protection (not immunoglobulins as is the case with other infectious diseases).  Maternal vaccination prevents neonatal pertussis. Retrospective studies showed 91% effectiveness of DTaP vaccination of mothers for protecting newborns against pertussis in the first 2 months of life" 

            "As the mother can exclusively transfer antibodies and no memory B cells during pregnancy, the effectiveness of maternal vaccination indicates that passively transferred IgG indeed protect against infection, but only at high concentrations. Placental transfer of anti-PT maternal antibodies is a highly efficient mechanism ensuring that specific IgG levels are higher in the newborn than in the mother (23). Transferred antibodies rapidly decay and at 2 months of age the concentration of anti-PT-IgG is decreased by 76% from the levels measured in cord blood
            After birth, the immune system of the mother can still contribute to the protection of the neonate through IgA antibodies in the milk. We find IgA able to react with pertussis is present at low concentrations in breast milk of women not exposed to the infection and increased in mothers of the PERTUSSIS group. Thus, the low levels of B. pertussis-specific antibodies, in the serum and in the milk, explain why neonates are born without sufficient protection and cannot be helped to fight infection by breast feeding."

            It's the IgM memory B cells that play the role of first-line protection, whereas switched memory B cells (that secrete pertussis-specific immunoglobulins), generated by the specific immune response in the GCs, eliminate the pathogen and remain in the organism to prevent re-infection.

            Women have a more active immune systems that respond to infection better than men's (but women suffer the consequence of higher rates of auto-immune disease). The female's ability to produce more antibodies faster is beneficial in protecting babies in the first few months of life as she donates her IgG and IgA antibodies (but not the IgM needed for first-line defence against Pertussis)  to the baby.  Unfortunately her immunity gift is less than perfect and maternal vaccination is needed when it comes to pertussis. 

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27870812
            Does Breastfeeding Protect Young Infants From Pertussis? Case-control Study and Immunologic Evaluation.
            "CONCLUSION:
            Breastfeeding remains a mainstay of prevention for numerous diseases, though it does not seem to play a role against pertussis. Alternative strategies to protect unvaccinated infants from pertussis should be considered."

            "Based on the results of a case–control study, however, we have recently demonstrated that breast feeding does not protect infants from pertussis (17). In addition, we have shown that mothers may represent the source of infection for children in 50% of the cases (18)."

             

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25148774
            The induction of breast milk pertussis specific antibodies following gestational tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccination.
            CONCLUSIONS:
            "Select colostrum pertussis antibody levels were significantly higher among women vaccinated with Tdap during pregnancy compared with unvaccinated women. Among vaccinated women, maximal levels of pertussis specific IgA were in the colostrum but still detected at 8 weeks. Lactation may augment infant's protection against pertussis."

             

        • maggieinnz 14.1.1.2

          Dancing around the truth again One Two… perhaps you should actually read that research paper you linked.  Perhaps you don't understand immunology very well.

          Maternal Immune Activation is a known problem for fetal development during pregnancy…

          The link between Maternal Immune Activation (MIA) and neural issues in the developing fetus is very well documented but linking it, as you have, to immunisation during pregnancy is far too simplistic and reductionist.    Interleukin 6 (one of the inflammatory factors associated with MIA) is both a cytokine and myokine.  As a cytokine it's an inflammatory B-cell stimulating factor – basically it turns b cells into immunoglobulin-secreting memory b cells which hold a very specific "antigen recipe".  When IL-6 is a myokine it's an anti-inflammatory which is produced in muscles and is significantly elevated with exercise in response to muscle contractions. MIA triggered inflammation can come from a number of sources including stress, mental illness, infection and excessive weight and even giving birth.  The immune response from a booster vaccination isn't going to trip the whole immune system cascade, just wake up the memory B cells to start producing immunoglobulins and the later it's done in pregnancy the lower the risk of MIA-related neurological damage; which is already minimal.  In fact, a pregnant female who's unvaccinated has the highest risk of contracting pertussis and having a far more severe bout that those going for a booster.

          The question is. Why would they seek feedback on vaccinating pregnant women and also new born and infants who are already compromised thus needing the NICU…

          Because Drs estimate 50% of babies who contract Whooping Cough get it from their unvaccinated or insufficiently vaccinated mothers.  At some point the mother was infected and formed an immune response.  The antibodies from that immune response rapidly decay but her pertussis  memory B cells hold the ability to perform a recall response which protects HER from severe infection but doesn't avoid colonisation, disease or transmission. So she becomes a micro-carrier for whooping cough which is why they recommend pregnant mother receive a booster to trigger her memory B recall response which, in turn, causes rapid propagation of antibodies she can then pass on to her baby via the placenta whilst decreasing her own pertussis colony (if one exists).
          Pertussis-specific Memory B cells alone are insufficient for protection so the mother has nothing relevant to pass on to the baby.  With other pathogens the mother passes on memory B cells and antibodies thus ensuring reasonable defense.  This is even more important if babies are medically compromised.

          As for your fears about the "failing" vaccine…I strongly suggest you read that article you linked because the vaccine isn't failing for everyone and in fact is efficacious for 75% of the population.  They go on to explain that they've discovered a coverage gap in 9-11 year old kids where the immunity is waning and look at why that might be.  This is good news because it proves those researchers aren't hiding the problem, they aren't pretending it's all good but instead are looking for ways to make it better.  It's not black and white as though vaccines are pass/fail and even in its "failing" state it offers far more immunity than being unvaccinated.  Pertussis is only fatal to babies but we continue to vaccinate the 'herd' as a means to protect babies who are too young to be vaccinated.  Natural immunity isn't perfect, not by a long shot and for the safety of our most vulnerable we need to vaccinate. 

          • One Two 14.1.1.2.1

            Dancing around the truth again One Two…

            Again?…in your opinion…no question mark your side…you've made a real statement there…Do you feel better getting that out of the way in the very first sentence…

            It appears to set-up the other dismissive remarks you make elsewhere in the response…

            Was that the intent. To paint me as being dishonest from the outset ?

             

            …but linking it, as you have, to immunisation during pregnancy is far too simplistic and reductionist.

            Then you can provide the rationale as to why you believe that statement…the commentary below that sentence contradicts what you wrote there…

            MIA triggered inflammation can come from a number of sources including stress, mental illness, infection and excessive weight and even giving birth.

            Vaccines induce an inflammatory response. Inducing an inflammatory response is the primary objective of vaccination theory. indeed it is the catalyst from which the antibodies are measured to be used to sell efficacy.

            Why would you leave vaccines out of the number of sources you list, when vaccines cause inflammation?
             

            The immune response from a booster vaccination isn't going to trip the whole immune system cascade…

            And you would need citation (s) in support of your speculation…

             

            In fact, a pregnant female who's unvaccinated has the highest risk of contracting pertussis and having a far more severe bout that those going for a booster.

            The vaccine is failing, which in and of itself, makes that statement verifiably untrue…

            perhaps you should actually read that research paper you linked. 

            I read every link I post. If I do not read and understand the linked material, I will not post it.
             

            Perhaps you don't understand immunology very well.

            I would suggest from your interpretations and commentary…that you are projecting…Your copy and paste provided that signal …

            Because Drs estimate 50% of babies who contract Whooping Cough get it from their unvaccinated or insufficiently vaccinated mothers.

            Doctors  estimate .. Which doctors…GP's…which specialized field are you referring to ?

            The vaccine is failing…that has been established…which in and of itself makes that statement verifiably untrue…

            As for your fears about the "failing" vaccine

            Why would you pretend to understand my emotions here? Does your belief I am fearful assist  in substantiating your position…or does it undermine your commentary, in another observed attempt to undermine my own?

            The vaccine is failing. Emotions are not required to discuss that fact.

            I strongly suggest you read that article you linked because the vaccine isn't failing for everyone and in fact is efficacious for 75% of the population.

            Again, I always read before I post to it…

            75% of the population….sure…and you have not understood the data, or what it is saying…

            Pertussis is only fatal to babies but we continue to vaccinate the 'herd' as a means to protect babies who are too young to be vaccinated. 

            It appears you do not understand  complications in vaccinating an immature immune system

             

            This is good news because it proves those researchers aren't hiding the problem, they aren't pretending it's all good but instead are looking for ways to make it better. 

            How precisely are the researchers achieving such as it relates to the type of vaccine being recommended for expanded use in NZ, including more vulnerable fetuses and compromised NICU new-borns and infants…

            How are the researchers altering the vaccine recommendation being discussed here?

            and even in its "failing" state it offers far more immunity than being unvaccinated.

            And it is in a failing state…

            As I have posted and linked on many time here previously. Herd Immunity is a logical fallacy built on a mathematical model which is unprovable in the real  non animal world outside of a model…but which is demonstrably false.

             

            You've not provided an adequate response as to why it would be recommended to expand the failing and dangerous DTaP vaccine to include pregnancy at any stage, and also NICU new-borns and infants with immature and already significantly compromised bodily function.

            • maggieinnz 14.1.1.2.1.1

              I don't think you're dishonest, just emotionally invested in your own opinion. It's ok, I get like that too sometimes so don't beat yourself up over it.  I'm a direct speaker, believe what I'm saying is accurate given my understanding of the material and don't really see the point of 'maybe this' or 'perhaps that'.  If you want something fluffier then I'm sorry, I'm guaranteed to disappoint.

              Then you can provide the rationale as to why you believe that statement…the commentary below that sentence contradicts what you wrote there…

              No it doesn't.  I mentioned infection which is exactly what a vaccination is – a deliberate infection to stimulate an immune response.  All I did was include the handful of other possible triggers of MIA to offer a more balanced perspective.

              indeed it is the catalyst from which the antibodies are measured to be used to sell efficacy.

              Wrong. 

              "Serum antibodies are excellent correlates of protection for many infectious diseases (29) but for pertussis there is no “universally accepted quantifiable serological measure of protection” (30). We show that the recall response of memory B cells is used by the adult immune system for protection.  Maternal vaccination prevents neonatal pertussis. Retrospective studies showed 91% effectiveness of DTaP vaccination of mothers for protecting newborns against pertussis in the first 2 months of life" – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5605623/

              And you would need citation (s) in support of your speculation…

              See, this is how I know you didn't read the research.  This is basic immune response stuff here.  How can you make an intelligent informed decision if you don't understand that a booster vaccine is different than a first shot? Initial exposure to pertussis triggers an immune response.  The immunoglobulins don't stay around for very long but that's ok because the memory B cells have something called a recall response that sets of the development of pre-formed antibodies for making new immunoglobulins antibodies just in case the sneaky bug shows up again.  When/if it does then a few of the immune system factors get together and mark him as unwanted, start producing antibodies and organise for the bug to be recycled (they're good like that).  Here's a link so you can go read up for yourself. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23660557/

              The vaccine is failing, which in and of itself, makes that statement verifiably untrue…

              Nope. Here's the thing.  Saying something is failing isn't the same as saying it has failed. 

              Doctors  estimate .. Which doctors…GP's…which specialized field are you referring to ?

              These doctors:

              "Parents of pertussis cases had PT-IgG levels significantly higher as compared to LRTI and HE parents. More than 40 % were compatible as transmitters of pertussis to their babies, since they had a level of PT-IgG ≥ 100 IU/ml, which is considered diagnostic for a recent pertussis episode. Based on serology, the percentage of pertussis cases that had at least one parent as source of infection was 49.1 %. When cough symptoms were taken into account, the percentage of parents putative transmitters of the infection to their infants increased to 56.4 %." – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27614887

              Why would you pretend to understand my emotions here? Does your belief I am fearful assist  in substantiating your position…or does it undermine your commentary, in another observed attempt to undermine my own?

              laugh Actually, I thought you were concerned for the welfare of babies.  If I believed something awful was going to happen to thousands of people I'd be scared, I'd fear for their safety. I'm sorry I assumed that about you.

              and you have not understood the data, or what it is saying…

              That's a fair call.  Please, explain to me what I have misunderstood.

              It appears you do not understand  complications in vaccinating an immature immune system

              I do but why don't you show me where I'm wrong instead of just saying that I don't understand.  

              As I have posted and linked on many time here previously. Herd Immunity is a logical fallacy built on a mathematical model which is unprovable in the real  non animal world outside of a model…but which is demonstrably false.

              Show me medical research to support that – not some legal rubbish. C'mon man, you have to do way better than that.

              You've not provided an adequate response as to why it would be recommended to expand the failing and dangerous DTaP vaccine to include pregnancy at any stage, and also NICU new-borns and infants with immature and already significantly compromised bodily function.

              Yes I did.  Go back and read my comment.  Here, I'll bullet point it for you:

              • 1. 50% of mothers are carriers that infect their newborn babies.
              • 2. Vaccinating a pregnant woman offers passive immunisation to newborns which is vital to NICU babies to ensure no additional medical burden.
              • Pertussis is lethal to newborns, vaccines aren't.
              • Mother's can't protect unvaccinated babies by breast feeding.

              That's it for me.  Nachos for dinner tonight!  Yum!!

              No doubt you'll do your little one/two dance around the data and you know what, go for it.  Have a great night 🙂

               

               

               

               

               

               

              • marty mars

                wow. Great to see you back maggie.

              • One Two

                Retrospective Studies.

                Booster: (Where is the evidence of primary vaccination)

                See, this is how I know you didn't read the research.  This is basic immune response stuff here.  How can you make an intelligent informed decision if you don't understand that a booster vaccine is different than a first shot?

                Actually.. it is how you exhibit an apparent lack of awareness to the root cause of the entire discussion…this one and those which have come before it..

                • Booster shots are first and foremost an admission of vaccine failure…that has already been establish…the primary DTaP vaccine is failing around the world.
                   

                  • Widening the net confirms failure of the primary vaccine efficacy is far higher than the vulnerable cohorts and the wider public are being advised of by vaccine manufacturers and regulatory agencies (one and the same as I have shown elsewhere)
                     
                • It would need be proven which primary vaccine had already been delivered to the pregnant woman as well as premature newborns, infants and all cohorts proposed within the expansion proposal…
                   

                  • It would then need to be proven that maternal antibodies had been passed via the placenta to the premature newborn, newborns and infants including the NICU
                     

                    • Otherwise it is pure speculation based on assumptions of passive immunity which , according to your commentary….would not otherwise exist…rendering delivery of booster shot to nothing but a risk.

                 

                Which goes back to the core premise of this subject:

                • The vaccines (primary or booster) were NEVER FDA licensed... for use on any stage pregnant woman, premature new-borns, newborns/infants who are compromised to the level of NICU admission and prolonged stay

                FDA

                BOOSTRIX is a vaccine indicated for active booster immunization against tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis . BOOSTRIX is approved for use as a single dose in individuals 10 years of age and older

                Medsafe

                Pregnancy (Category B1) – Drugs which have been taken by only a limited number of pregnant women and women of childbearing age

                Human data from prospective clinical studies on the use of BOOSTRIX during the first and second trimester of pregnancy are not available.

                Limited data indicate that maternal antibodies may reduce the magnitude of the immune response to some vaccines in infants born from mothers vaccinated with BOOSTRIX during pregnancy.

                The clinical relevance of this observation is unknown.

                 

                Breast-feeding

                The safety of BOOSTRIX when administered to breast-feeding women has not been evaluated.

                It is unknown whether BOOSTRIX is excreted in human breast milk.

                 

                • The maternal antibodies reduce immune response to some vaccines

                 

                Safety data from a prospective observational study where BOOSTRIX was administered to pregnant women during the third trimester (793 pregnancy outcomes) as well as data from post-marketing surveillance where pregnant women were exposed to BOOSTRIX or to BOOSTRIX-IPV4 (dTpa-inactivated poliovirus vaccine) indicate no vaccine related adverse effect on pregnancy or on the health of the foetus/newborn child

                 

                Clinical trial data

                The safety profile below is based on data from clinical trials where BOOSTRIX was administered to 839 children (from 4 to 9 years of age) and 1931 adults, adolescents and children (above 10 years of age).

                 

                Pertussis is lethal to newborns, vaccines aren't.

                Those two highlighted words lead to exposure of your position.

                 

                The question is. Why would they seek feedback on vaccinating pregnant women and also new born and infants who are already compromised thus needing the NICU…

                 

                Based on.

                The vaccines in question were Never FDA licensed for use on any stage pregnant woman, premature new-borns, newborns/infants who are compromised to the level of NICU admission and prolonged stay.

                Never Licensed.

                • maggieinnz

                  I don't care what the FDA has approved or not approved. Bureaucracy muddies the waters and I form my own conclusions on peer reviewed research from sources who don't have conflicts of interest.

                  If you want to be taken seriously then don't take comments out of context.  When I said "Pertussis is lethal to newborns, vaccines aren't." I clearly wasn't implying that pertussis is ALWAYS fatal and vaccines NEVER are.

                  The maternal antibodies reduce immune response to some vaccines.

                   

                  I agree with that statement and will add that maternal antibodies (regardless of how they were acquired) can also reduce immune responses to infectious diseases. 

                  "Booster shots are first and foremost an admission of vaccine failure…"

                  Nope.  When a person is first exposed to pertussis they have no pertussis-specific memory B cells to trigger immunoglobulin production so our immune system becomes activated and runs through a cascade of immuno-regulatory processes to fight off the infection.  The results of this first fight are the memory B cells and immunoglobulins (which die off fairly quickly).  A booster vaccine mimics secondary infection with a known pathogen and triggers off a lessor reaction called a recall response which enhances the bodies ability to quickly and effectively respond to the pathogen. 

                  "It would need be proven which primary vaccine had already been delivered to the pregnant woman as well as premature newborns, infants and all cohorts proposed within the expansion proposal…"

                  I have no idea what you mean by "which primary vaccine had already been delivered".  This conversation is about pertussis so I'm assuming you're talking about older version vs newer or something but again, it doesn't matter.  The immune response from a first exposure isn't extreme and that's part of the problem.  Adults and teenagers who get pertussis often don't even realise they have it because the symptoms are usually quite mild. The best immunity comes from a more severe, and thus, longer lasting infection but the problem is that usually only happens to infants under 6 months of age who has little to no natural defence to such infections.  The booster shot is no different than the primary vaccine and is only called a booster shot because it 'boosts' the immune response by causing a secondary infection (just like natural exposure does).

                  It would then need to be proven that maternal antibodies had been passed via the placenta to the premature newborn, newborns and infants including the NICU

                  It has been proven and I've already given you the research that proves it. I suggest you read it.

                  • One Two

                    I don't care what the FDA has approved or not approved. Bureaucracy muddies the waters and I form my own conclusions on peer reviewed research from sources who don't have conflicts of interest.

                    You don't care about the safety of toxic biological products which are injected into the most sensitive and vulnerable human beings. 
                     

                    • The FDA are the authoritative adjudicator of vaccine safety and effectiveness.
                      • The FDA / CDC / WHO et al are part of the vaccine industry and ensure that COI flows all levels through to the peer reviewed research you believe is not conflicted (I have posted on this site elsewhere that is a fallacy)
                         

                        • Pre and post approval testing protocols and ethics ensure tight controls are in place which direct what can and can't be evaluated in post licensure assessments and retrospective studies
                           
                    • Once a vaccine is licensed by the FDA, down stream testing sponsored and directed by industry, including regional subsidiaries such as AU NZ TGA is based on the pre-licensure fraud which has already occurred upstream

                     

                    If you want to be taken seriously then don't take comments out of context.  When I said "Pertussis is lethal to newborns, vaccines aren't." I clearly wasn't implying that pertussis is ALWAYS fatal and vaccines NEVER are.

                    • I don't care (about regulation) – Your words.
                       

                      • Don't care to inform yourself of the consequences of such dismissive response to the default global vaccine agency for approvals and licensing
                         
                      • Don't care about vaccine safety standards or the global regulatory structures which directly control, direct and influence vaccine policy around the world
                         
                    • I clearly wasn't saying… – Your words
                       

                      • Then you need to be more precise with your writing…but as you say… you don't care

                    Manufacturer and Regulatory Fraud

                    • maggieinnz

                      I don't care (about regulation) – Your words.

                      No, those aren't my words and if you're going to add your own words to my comments at least have the decency to mark them as yours.

                      I don't care about the FDA or their rulings because they aren't proof of safety or harm.  I make my own decisions based on peer reviewed scientific research from independent researchers.

                      To be honest, One Two, I'm really disappointed in you.  I knew you were stuck in your own opinion and like I said before, that's fine, but to systematically dismantle people's words in such a childish manner is not what I expected of you.  I thought you might at least offer a compelling argument but no, nothing but manipulation and game playing.  I won't engage with you again because you have nothing of value to offer.  Good job on derailing a very important topic.

                    • One Two []

                      Through using emotive put downs (childish) and insults , you signal repeatedly taking a personal approach…

                      Saying I'm really disappointed in you One Two  is transferring your issues onto my comments by emphasising the degree to which you have made this personal.

                      You've made the put downs,  by claiming you did not say the following…

                      I don't care what the FDA has approved or not approved. Bureaucracy muddies the waters…

                      And you repeated exactly the same words in a separate comment…

                      I don't care about the FDA or their rulings…(my bold)

                      There is no systematic dismantling of people's (your) words…no manipulation…no game playing and no derailing…

                      I don't care…(you said it)

                      They are your words.

                      If you do not care to understand the significance of FDA et al in the global regulatory framework for vaccine safety and effectiveness…that is categorically an oversight if you genuinely believe this to be very important topic.

                      Do not dismiss the information provided because you don't care…

                      It is too important (if you're genuine) for you not to care about the FDA et al.

                      The link provided in my previous reply, speaks directly to the governance structures, the agencies involved, their influence globally and the conflicts of interest those governing agencies are wracked by.

                      If you believe such information to be nothing of value to you …that is of course, your prerogative…

      • gsays 14.1.2

        " why do these people not 100% trust the vaccines? " cough.. thalidomide… cough.

      • maggieinnz 14.1.3

        That reminds me of the Tuskegee syphilis experiment.

  13. greywarshark 15

    We are apparently setting ourselves up to be an arm of the USA military with rockets from the Mahia Peninsula.   This will bring business in the modern technological sector and give jobs for some young people in the tech services business.   So a good place for investment and takes us into the developed world business sector and away from reliance on farming.    Investment in the military makes sense from that point of view.   

    Forget food, and natural resources, and concern for reasonable standards for everybody;  the value in those is whether they can be good little earners and be sold off to rich overseas speculators. 

    Money and materialism is what we in NZ have concerned ourselves with apart from people with adventurous spirits, or 'man alone' propensities, or the few with burning desire to progress with integrity who succeed occasionally when there is a 'tipping-point'.

    The rest of us just wanted a beaut house, a well-polished car really; an opportunity to be hedonistic; the latest mechanical toy – perhaps a fabulous little screen that shows pictures of the world, or a jet ski.   And we have been prepared to sell off our dreams and our citizen-entailed land in exchange for a handful of beans; but we hope to climb up and help ourselves to some of the giant's gold and get away with it.

  14. Poission 16

    Gulf of Tonkin.

  15. marty mars 17

    Not happy about this stuff and sad these 'labour' people mouthing off and providing 'services' to these exploiters.

    Pressure  is mounting on the Government to save an internationally significant fossil site near Middlemarch from being consumed by a proposed multimillion-dollar diatomite mine.

    Opposition to the controversial mining project is growing…

    …But Dunedin South MP Clare Curran says she supports the proposal in the Otago hinterland and the public lack the full story due to the slow overseas investment approval process…

    …Former Labour minister Clayton Cosgrove has been hired by the company as an adviser but Ms Curran said she met the company's New Zealand representatives directly and not through an intermediary.

    Concerns about the low quality of the diatomite at the site and the destruction of the entire fossil field were unfounded, she said.

    https://www.odt.co.nz/regions/central-otago/curran-frustrated-mine-delays-says-public-lacks-facts

    • Puckish Rogue 17.1

      Clayton Cosgrove, jobs for the boys eh 😉

      But seriously if this is true: “who say the site is the only one of its kind in the southern hemisphere” then it probably should be protected

      However it goes hopefully it’ll mean more money going into the local economy and maybe Middlemarch can start to grow

      • marty mars 17.1.1

        Middlemarch doesn't need to grow – have you ever been there – it is what it is and not what it isn't.

        • Puckish Rogue 17.1.1.1

          Yeah I've been there recently and I still have family there, I'm not saying it'll get big but its tired and it could do with some sprucing up

          Part of the issue (IMHO) is that the  Taieri gorge railway doesn't always stop there (thanks cruise ships) and so Middlemarch is missing out on the economic benefit of the central otago rail trail that other towns are getting

  16. joe90 18

    Bill's had a enough.

  17. greywarshark 19

    Have you had a nice ice cream sundae at a milkbar lately?   I see that they have somehow got a connection with the old Tip Top company working on the nostalgia bit.     https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/first-up/audio/2018694921/eldest-son-of-tip-top-founder-fondly-remembers-the-company

    So we forget that it's not NZ owned any more, just another bit of our basic food supply we have sold off overseas, thanks Fonterra.    Ice cream is something we all used to make ourselves.   We could do that again, there are various different recipes.    Alternatively some one advised Deep South.

    Here is a list of Ice Cream Manufacturers.  (They will have to take Tip Top off.)     https://www.nzicecream.org.nz/DeepSouth.htm

    There is also Killinchy Gold.

  18. indiana 20

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12230804

    I can only think of pulling the ladder up after yourself….slow hand clap, Labour.

    • Gabby 20.1

      I'm sure Red Robbo will be cutting the subsidies of the sprogs of the well to do. Shouting lawyers' kids a year at uni would be pretty low quality spending. I'm sure.

  19. Jilly Bee 21

    Wow, just wow, I've been listening to Lisa Owen making our esteemed Leader of the Opposition looking (or rather sounding) like the proverbial fish out of water on Checkpoint this evening.  Keep it up Simon, love it wink

  20. greywarshark 22

    I think that those who want to argue about vaccines should go to a special blog set up for that.   I am sure there is one.   It's drags on here and it is useless and boring and not at all helpful.   Other topics have been discouraged and I think this one discourages thought about all the other things that are happening.  

    • lprent 22.1

      Other topics have been discouraged and I think this one discourages thought about all the other things that are happening.

      Starting to feel that way to me as well. It is like the assaults from the anti-1080, anti-fluoride and the fall of the twin towers discussions. Probably destined to the same fate eventually as the death of a fad.

      Rather pointless because to date in the various links I’ve read I haven’t seen anything that was new from the last time this came around… Certainly nothing that convinces me that there is much merit in the anti-vaxxer arguments

      • One Two 22.1.1

        Certainly nothing that convinces me that there is much merit in the anti-vaxxer arguments

        Use of a dismissive and bigoted pejorative indicates there is unlikely anything that could convince you..

        Built in prejudice will lead to such barriers.

        Stop the name calling.

        • JohnSelway 22.1.1.1

          Anti-vaxxer isn't a "dismissive and bigoted pejorative".

          It's what you are. Deal with it.

          • One Two 22.1.1.1.1

            Anti-vaxxer isn't a "dismissive and bigoted pejorative".

            Of course it is.

            It's what you are. Deal with it.

            You have no idea what I am.

            But through your commentary…you're a grown man with some rather obvious and unpleasant limitations.

            Deal with them.

            • JohnSelway 22.1.1.1.1.1

              You're anti-vaxx. If you find it dismissive and bigoted then that's your problem because it's an apt description. If you don't like it there's nothing I can do to help you with that. You're an anti-vaxxer.

              You can call me what you like. I don't have to deal with it

      • Incognito 22.1.2

        The worst thing about it is that you cannot even move it to OM 😉

    • cleangreen 22.2

      smileyAgreed greywarshark;

      This group of six are a pack of arguementative activists, who specialise in nasty rebuttle that discourage participation on this site.

    • Rosemary McDonald 22.3

       

      Christine Stabell Benn is a medical doctor and professor in global health. By studying real-life effects of vaccines in Africa, she has found that vaccines do much more than protect against the target disease; they have so-called non-specific effects.

       

       

      • One Two 22.3.1

        Absolutely , Rosemary.

        No matter what level the studies are performed at, or by whom the data is delivered by…see the avoidance when I pointed the guys at the VAERS data…(CDC data)…

        It was like garlic to vampires…

        There will always be the authoritarians who are unable to see what is in front of their faces…no need to be concerned about those folks…

        Change has always happened to them…not because of them….despite them if you will…

        Most of You Think We Know What Our Vaccines Are Doing—We Don’t

        Dr. Peter Aaby announced: “This vaccine (DPT) is killing children” at the Symposium About Scientific Freedom, Copenhagan, March 9, 2019.

        Dr. Aaby is a world renown researcher with an impressive list of peer- reviewed, published scientific articles on vaccines. Here is Dr. Aaby’s extensive research list of 376 articles in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) website “PubMed.”

      • Drowsy M. Kram 22.3.2

        “I spend a lot of time speculating about how to communicate these findings in a manner that doesn’t create panic about vaccines,” says Professor Benn.

        “I’m so worried about creating a general sense that vaccines are unsafe, because that is definitely not my agenda,” she says.

        That's very informative Rosemary, and Prof. Benn makes an excellent plea for depolarising the debate.

        So, if the polio vaccination programme in NZ had persisted with using the oral polio vaccine (which contained attenuated (weakened) live poliovirus), rather than switching (in 2002) to the inactivated polio vaccine, then maybe (probably?) the then unrecognised extra health benefits of the attenuated live virus would have easily outweighed the tiny chance of one baby contracting polio (from the live virus) once every five years or so.

        Maybe the (very slightly) safer inactivated vaccines can be modified to confer the extra health benefits associated with attentuated vaccines, or the attenuated vaccines could be attenuated further to decrease the (very slight) risk of disease without compromising the extra health benefits.

        Either way, with an optimised vaccine formulation it might be possible to decrease the number jabs, and the number/variety of antigens that children are exposed to.  Clearly much more research needs to be done to optimise infant vaccination programmes.

        "This makes vaccines the largest untapped resource for improving health globally."

        http://medicalrepublic.com.au/bring-back-smallpox-vaccine-2/20365

        UNINTENDED EFFECTS 

        Currently, the research into the unintended effects of vaccines can be crudely divided into two areas, says Dr Jim Buttery, a paediatric infectious diseases physician and vaccinologist at Monash University. 

        “There are the pure non-specific effects of vaccination that we don’t fully understand,” he says. This is where the vaccine seems to make the immune system wiser and helps it defeat pathogens that are not the direct targets of the vaccine. 

        “The second category, if you like, is where we introduce a vaccine and we end up learning more about what the bug that we are vaccinating against actually did in the community,” he says. 

        “And the example of that would be when we introduced rotavirus vaccination and there was an approximately 20% drop in febrile convulsions in both Australia and the US,” he says. “We never appreciated that rotavirus had much involvement in febrile convulsions.”

        There’s also a third category; where a vaccine has a beneficial, specific effect that it wasn’t designed to have.

        An example of this is the serogroup B meningococcal vaccine, MeNZB, which might provide some protection against gonorrhoea.

        After New Zealand rolled out MeNZB vaccinations for more than a million people, researchers analysing the retrospective data found that the vaccine was 31% effective at stopping gonorrhoea infections.

        This was big news because we’ve never been able to develop a vaccine against gonorrhoea specifically.

        The 2017 New Zealand study on people aged 15 to 30 years was observational, so it doesn’t provide causality.

        However, research by Associate Professor Kate Seib, a microbiologist at Griffith University in Queensland, published last year, revealed a plausible biological mechanism by which MeNZB and the newer MenB vaccine Bexsero could be shielding people against gonorrhoea.

        Both bacteria are similar in terms of their protein makeup, so it makes sense that the MenB vaccine might provide cross-protection against gonorrhoea, says Professor Seib.  

        If RCTs confirm the result, there would be two options: we could use the MenB vaccine to directly vaccinate against gonorrhoea, or we could use our improved understanding of the protective immune response to gonorrhoea to develop a more potent, specific gonorrhoea vaccine, says Professor Seib.

        GSK, which manufactures Bexsero, funded the New Zealand trial but wasn’t involved in Professor Seib’s study.

        It’s not unusual for vaccines to offer cross-protection. The group A meningococcal conjugate vaccine also protects against tetanus, for example.

        This is because the vaccine uses a tetanus toxoid as a carrier protein, which induces an immune response against tetanus.

        Neonatal cases of tetanus dropped 25% across sub-Saharan Africa in the 2010s, when the “MenAfriVac” program kicked off.

  21. Jenny - How to Get there? 23

    It’s the end of the world as we know it *

    By: MICKYSAVAGE
    Date published:10:00 am, May 7th, 2019 –104 comments

    * and I don’t feel fine.

    lt’s the continuation of the world as we know it*

    *and Helen Clark is staggered.

    At a summit of Arctic Nations Mike Pompeo lays out the US vision for the future of the region.

     As the Arctic sea ice disappears, Mike Pompeo looks forward to the discovery and exploitation of new oil and gas fields, and other Arctic mineral resources and new trade routes. (The race between the various competing nations to control this new "frontier of opportunity" is one which the US is determined to win).

    ….Pompeo called the Arctic "a frontier of opportunity and abundance" with untouched oil and gas reserves, unmined uranium, raw earth minerals, precious metals and gems.

    "Arctic sea lanes could become the 21st century's Suez and Panama Canals," he said…..

    You think it could hardly get worse. But it does. Mike Pompeo looks forward to how this real estate will become a new area of "strategic engagement" where the world's super powers can finally settle their differences, and learn who’s boss.

    ….His speech also focused on the threats Russia and China posed to the Arctic region.

    "The region has become an arena of global power and competition and the eight Arctic states must adapt to this new future," Pompeo said.

    "We're entering a new age of strategic engagement in the Arctic, complete with new threats to Arctic interests and its real estate.

    He said China's attempts to inject itself into the region's affairs by pushing infrastructure projects and commercial investments must be checked….

    ….Pompeo also warned that Russia's intentions in the Arctic, where it has embarked on a massive military expansion campaign, may prove destabilising given its record.

    "We know Russian territorial ambitions can turn violent," he said, pointing to the conflict in eastern Ukraine……</blockquote>

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/112540098/mike-pompeos-arctic-speech-focuses-on-trade-not-climate-change

  22. Kia ora The AM Show. 

    I Tau toko compolsery vacations. 

    Its show me that money runs this Papatuanukue when I see all the dumb attacks on our Coalition Government. I'm taking about the bullshit coming out about the government free university fees ect strikes it just get my attention. 

    Now we can thank social media that shorts the money effect on Papatuanukue media were only the wealthy point of opinion rose to the top BEFORE social media. 

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/qz.com/1001657/when-youre-washing-your-hands-water-temperature-doesnt-matter-as-much-as-scrubbing-time/amp/

    Hudson and Halls was a funny Kiwi back in the day comedy show British and Australian humour. There is a book out on Hudson and Hall be a good read. 

    It looks like the 2 main British political partys took there eyes off the ball while matatini gazing frorage/ has used social media to steal votes. 

    That's cool Mercedes Bends is going to be carbon neutral by 2039 thanks. 

    Ka kite ano P.S preoccupied 

     

     

  23. Some Eco Maori Music for the minute. 

    Time to go hunting and diving for kai moana and meat for the hakare  BROs

  24. I totally agree with this statement Australia is running out of time to combat Human caused climate change the left need to get out there and let the pollies know that WE want a happy healthy future for ALL OUR Mokopuna not just the 00.1 of people enjoying Papatuanukue while the rest of US will be living in sqular living in our shit. Ka kite ano links below. 

     

    We've run out of elections to waste – this is the last chance to make a difference on climate change

     

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/14/weve-run-out-of-elections-to-waste-this-is-the-last-chance-to-make-a-difference-on-climate-change

     

     

  25. Some Eco Maori Music for the minute. 

  26. Some Eco Maori Music for the minute. 

  27. TIKAPA Some Eco Maori Music for the minute

  28. Whanau here is another story about how the system is treating tangata whenua O Atoearoa. 

     

    The topic of racism is rife in New Zealand and everywhere the issue is demanding atThe topic of racism is rife in New Zealand and everywhere the issue is demanding attentiontention

    Ka kite ano links below.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503459&objectid=11097292

     

  29. Some Eco Maori Music for the minute. 

     

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Safety focus in improved drug driver testing
    Improving the safety of all road users is the focus of a new public consultation document on the issue of drug driver testing. Plans for public consultation on options to improve the drug driver testing process have been announced by ...
    4 days ago
  • Making it easier to get help from Police
    Police Minister Stuart Nash says calling a cop suddenly got a whole lot easier with the launch of a ground-breaking new service for non-emergency calls. “The single non-emergency number ‘ten-five’ is designed to provide better service for the public and ...
    1 week ago
  • More Police deployed to the regions
    Frontline Police numbers have been boosted with today’s deployment of 77 new officers to the regions. Police Minister Stuart Nash today congratulated the recruits of Wing 325 who graduated at a formal ceremony at the Royal New Zealand Police College. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Taxpayers get a smarter and fairer system
    One of the biggest IT projects ever undertaken in the state sector has successfully passed its latest hurdle with the transition of more than 19.7 million taxpayer accounts from one Inland Revenue computer system to another. Revenue Minister Stuart Nash ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Early insights into use of restricted drugs
    The first nationwide snapshot of the consumption of restricted drugs indicates the prevalence of methamphetamine use in New Zealand, says Police Minister Stuart Nash. “The first quarterly analysis of the nationwide wastewater testing programme reinforces the coalition government’s determination to ...
    3 weeks ago