Swine Flu Info from an Australian Pharmacist /Ingredients list

[Guest guest]

This is what is in the " Swine-Flu " Vaccine:

aluminum hydroxide

aluminum phosphate

ammonium sulfate

amphotericin B

animal tissues: pig blood, horse blood, rabbit brain,

dog kidney, monkey kidney,

chick embryo, chicken egg, duck egg

calf (bovine) serum

betapropiolactone

fetal bovine serum

formaldehyde

formalin

gelatin

glycerol

human diploid cells (originating from human aborted fetal tissue)

hydrolized gelatin

monosodium glutamate (MSG)

neomycin

neomycin sulfate

phenol20red indicator

phenoxyethanol (antifreeze)

potassium diphosphate

potassium monophosphate

polymyxin B

polysorbate 20

polysorbate 80

porcine (pig) pancreatic hydrolysate of casein

residual MRC5 proteins

sorbitol

sucrose

thimerosal (mercury)

tri(n)butylphosphat e,

VERO cells, a continuous line of monkey kidney cells

washed sheep red blood cells

 

" When someone shares something of value with you and you benefit 

from it, you have a moral obligation to share it with 

others "    Chinese Proverb

 

George Mamouzellos, Bachelor of Pharmacy, University of South Australia says :

 

The Australian Government has used $100 million dollars of our 

money to buy a swine flu vaccine that some experts believe is 

several times more dangerous than the swine flu itself.

 

Swine flu has killed between 2000 and 3000 people worldwide. The 

regular flu kills 40 000 people plus, every year, in North 

America alone. Does freaking out about the swine flu make sense? 

No, not really.

 

Swine flu vaccines were created about 5 months ago. They have 

not been thoroughly tested. Most medicines take about 6 years to 

develop and test. The way it goes is that a drug company finds a 

potentially useful drug, tries it in the lab for a few months, 

then tries it on a few animals for a few months, then tries it 

on lots of animals for a few months, then tries it on small 

groups of healthy humans for a year or 2, then tries it on small 

groups of sick humans for a year or 2, then finally tries it on 

large groups of healthy and unhealthy humans for a few years, 

and then, finally, it is released to the public.

 

Swine flu vaccines were not tested in this way. They were 

created in a lab, underwent very limited testing, and have now 

been mass produced, and purchased, by the government, without 

regular testing. They bought 21 million doses - enough for 

pretty much the entire Aussie public.

 

The drug companies that make swine flu vaccines are so unsure of 

human safety, that some have applied a special exemption from 

governments around the world, to sidestep the drug testing/drug 

responsibility protocols, so that in case it doesn't work, or 

makes people sick, people can't sue them. Does that sound like a 

safe drug? no.

 

If you're a pregnant mother in Australia about to take Panvax 

(the one that is being provided by government) ask your doctor 

this - why would you take Panvax, when it contains Neomycin and 

Polymyxin B Sulfate - both of which exhibit positive risk to 

unborn children - so as to avoid what? A mild flu, that kills 

95% fewer people than the regular flu? Does that make sense? Is 

that an appropriate health decision, balancing out the needs of 

the mother and child?

 

If you read the label on the vaccine, it lets you know that a 

possible side effect is Guillan-Bairre syndrome. In short, that 

means you turn into a vegetable. There are approximately 5000 

people in the US (so far, according to various reports) that 

have developed this condition as a result of vaccines. If you 

keep reading the label, it says that one of the ingredients is 

thimerosol - a compound that is 50% mercury. When mercury 

reaches your brain, it attaches to your brain cells, and causes 

brain damage. Brain damage? To avoid the flu? Another ingredient 

is squalene. When squalene enters your body, it tricks your 

immune system into attacking your own cells - which means you 

develop autoimmune diseases, like diabetes, multiple sclerosis, 

asthma, skin disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, and a bunch 

of diseases that we don't have a name for yet, because what we 

are doing is creating them, by using stuff like squalene.

 

I am a qualified pharmacist, and so really know what I'm on 

about in regards to drugs, but I'm a regular guy, just like you. 

This group is me voicing my opinion, based on my own research. 

What freaks me out is that the vaccine seems a lot worse than 

the disease, and not only that, the actual drug company that 

made it is so unsure of their product that they want a legal 

exemption in case it makes us all turn into vegetables, or 

otherwise makes us sick.

 

I don't know about you, but Id rather take my chances with the 

swine flu, that kills 95% less people than the regular flu does, 

than risk turning into a vegetable, or getting brain damage, or 

an autoimmune disease like multiple sclerosis. And not just that 

- what person in the government spent a hundred million bucks on 

this drug without testing it, or asking if we wanted to be 

injected with this stuff?

 

Like I said, I?m a pharmacist. I'm highly trained in critical 

analysis, and assessing drug efficacy in humans - and let me say 

this straight - I am so bloody worried about this vaccine that 

if anyone came near my family with it, I would look around for a 

weapon and let them know that if they tried jabbing anyone that 

I loved with it, they would be beaten to within an inch of their 

bloody lives.

 

Ask the logical questions - why does the drug company want an 

exemption? Why were 21 million doses ordered without doing a 

proper assessment? Is " fast tracking " a drug that might hurt 

millions of people a responsible decision? Why are we so upset 

about a flu that kills 95% less than regular flu? Does this make 

sense?

 

Hope you're all well,

 

George Mamouzellos

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

It was said, " Swine flu has killed between 2000 and 3000 people worldwide.

The regular flu kills 40 000 people plus, every year, in North

America alone. Does freaking out about the swine flu make sense? No, not

really. "

 

It is not about the raw #'s but the percentages (meaning severity). IS that

not right? However as of the end of October, " the proportion of deaths

attributed to pneumonia and influenza was above the epidemic threshold. "

That is " 7.4% of all deaths reported through the 122-cities mortality

reporting system were due to P & I " , Furthermore, " the proportion of

outpatient visits for influenza-like illness was above the national

baseline. "

The fear is if H1N1 ever went bigtime... For example, there have been three

influenza pandemics in the 20th century and killed tens of millions of

people.

Although, there is always some debate on the numbers, The World Health

Organization (WHO) reported that H1N1 has become the dominant influenza

strain around the globe, as the number of deaths due to the virus passed

6,000 worldwide. The CDC has similar numbers as well as, " However, new

estimates by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gave a

mid-range estimate of 3,900 Americans dying from the virus between April and

mid-October. "

 

I am not in any way though suggesting that a vaccination is the appropriate

method to deal with this situation, b/c Chinese medicine is perfectly

capable. I just think one must view these numbers with a little more rigor.

 

-Jason

 

 

 

On Behalf Of acuman1

[Guest guest]

All numbers are dependent on what one is looking for, which is one of

the things that differentiates hard science from biomedicine, as far

as I am concerned.

I just heard Eudell say that all money spent on anything but regular

pharmed is wasteful placebo and should not be involved in health care

at all, and he can prove it.

It certainly is easier to prove you killed something than to prove you

enhanced someone's health so they didn't get it or got over it easier.

 

Bioscience has its utility and is sort of neat, but I wouldn't trust

it as the be all /end all that its proponents insist on its being.

 

David Molony

..

On Nov 15, 2009, at 3:53:42 PM, " "

wrote:

 

 

I am not in any way though suggesting that a vaccination is the

appropriate

method to deal with this situation, b/c Chinese medicine is perfectly

capable. I just think one must view these numbers with a little more

rigor.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

David,

 

 

 

Do you have different numbers (stats) than the ones (I presented) from the

WHO and CDC?

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of acuman1

Sunday, November 15, 2009 3:05 PM

 

RE: Swine Flu Info from an Australian Pharmacist /Ingredients

list

 

 

 

 

 

All numbers are dependent on what one is looking for, which is one of

the things that differentiates hard science from biomedicine, as far

as I am concerned.

I just heard Eudell say that all money spent on anything but regular

pharmed is wasteful placebo and should not be involved in health care

at all, and he can prove it.

It certainly is easier to prove you killed something than to prove you

enhanced someone's health so they didn't get it or got over it easier.

 

Bioscience has its utility and is sort of neat, but I wouldn't trust

it as the be all /end all that its proponents insist on its being.

 

David Molony

..

On Nov 15, 2009, at 3:53:42 PM, " "

< <%40Chinese Medicine>

> wrote:

 

I am not in any way though suggesting that a vaccination is the

appropriate

method to deal with this situation, b/c Chinese medicine is perfectly

capable. I just think one must view these numbers with a little more

rigor.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Does anyone here actually know George Mamouzellos or know if he and

his list of ingredients and comments are actually legitimate?

 

I am quite skeptically as to the need for the H1N1 and seasonal flu

vaccine but I cannot accept Mamouzellos' info without other

supporting information.

 

I assume that someone else has submitted information on Brownlee's

article in the Nov issue of Atlantic. Brownlee, Lenzer and Tom

Jefferson I know of and can find additional info about.

 

--

Duncan E

 

" We are here to help each other get though this thing, whatever it is. "

-Mark Vonnegut

[Guest guest]

Hi Duncan,

 

There are several different H1N1 vaccines in use in the US. You can find

out lists of ingredients from the packaging inserts such as

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19987384/Panvax-H1N1-PI-Vaccine-packaging-inse\

rt

<http://www.scribd.com/doc/19987384/Panvax-H1N1-PI-Vaccine-packaging-ins\

ert> or go to

http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/ucm1\

81950.htm

<http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/ucm\

181950.htm> and click on the name of vaccine, then to

" Product Information " . So yes, some of the vaccines do contain Category

D Category D " Evidence of fetal risk, but benefits outweigh risks " drugs

such as neomycin, and Category X " Evidence of fetal risk. Risks outweigh

any benefits " such as thimerosal.

 

I found this summary useful:

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view & friendId=2130283\

67 & blogId=512366665

<http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view & friendId=213028\

367 & blogId=512366665>

 

And this is worth consideration:

http://organichealthadviser.com/archives/shocking-h1n1-swine-flu-vaccine\

-miscarriage-stores-from-pregnant-women-tell-your-doctors-that-vaccines-\

and-pregnancy-do-not-mix

<http://organichealthadviser.com/archives/shocking-h1n1-swine-flu-vaccin\

e-miscarriage-stores-from-pregnant-women-tell-your-doctors-that-vaccines\

-and-pregnancy-do-not-mix>

 

Charlie

 

, Duncan E <willhealu

wrote:

>

> Does anyone here actually know George Mamouzellos or know if he and

> his list of ingredients and comments are actually legitimate?

>

> I am quite skeptically as to the need for the H1N1 and seasonal flu

> vaccine but I cannot accept Mamouzellos' info without other

> supporting information.

>

> I assume that someone else has submitted information on Brownlee's

> article in the Nov issue of Atlantic. Brownlee, Lenzer and Tom

> Jefferson I know of and can find additional info about.

>

> --

> Duncan E

>

> " We are here to help each other get though this thing, whatever it

is. "

> -Mark Vonnegut

>

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

" We don't really know how many cases of H1N1 there have been, truly, " said Dr.

Len Horovitz, a pulmonary specialist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York.

 

This is a quote from the following article:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/SwineFluNews/h1n1-deaths-triple-overnight/story?id=\

9057650

 

The statistics cannot be considered 100% accurate.

 

Amadea

 

 

, " " wrote:

>

> David,

>

>

>

> Do you have different numbers (stats) than the ones (I presented) from the

> WHO and CDC?

>

>

>

> -Jason

>

>

>

>

> On Behalf Of acuman1

> Sunday, November 15, 2009 3:05 PM

>

> RE: Swine Flu Info from an Australian Pharmacist /Ingredients

> list

>

>

>

>

>

> All numbers are dependent on what one is looking for, which is one of

> the things that differentiates hard science from biomedicine, as far

> as I am concerned.

> I just heard Eudell say that all money spent on anything but regular

> pharmed is wasteful placebo and should not be involved in health care

> at all, and he can prove it.

> It certainly is easier to prove you killed something than to prove you

> enhanced someone's health so they didn't get it or got over it easier.

>

> Bioscience has its utility and is sort of neat, but I wouldn't trust

> it as the be all /end all that its proponents insist on its being.

>

> David Molony

> .

> On Nov 15, 2009, at 3:53:42 PM, " "

> < <%40Chinese Medicine>

> > wrote:

>

> I am not in any way though suggesting that a vaccination is the

> appropriate

> method to deal with this situation, b/c Chinese medicine is perfectly

> capable. I just think one must view these numbers with a little more

> rigor.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Thanks for sharing the article. However, of course calculating numbers

(accumulating stats) is always an estimate and nothing is 100% accurate,

however the article below does state that the changes to surveillance

methods <http://i.abcnews.com/Health/ColdandFluNews/story?id=6231359 & page=1>

are more accurate than previous methods. This is why the death toll is now

higher.

 

 

 

-Jason

 

 

 

 

On Behalf Of amadeashakti

Monday, November 16, 2009 1:43 PM

 

Re: Swine Flu Info from an Australian Pharmacist /Ingredients

list

 

 

 

 

 

" We don't really know how many cases of H1N1 there have been, truly, " said

Dr. Len Horovitz, a pulmonary specialist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York.

 

This is a quote from the following article:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/SwineFluNews/h1n1-deaths-triple-overnight/story

?id=9057650

 

The statistics cannot be considered 100% accurate.

 

Amadea

 

 

 

70.14.67/2506 - Release 11/16/09 07:43:00