Reply to: History of Allergic Reactions -

[_V_]

could, in some people, trigger an immune reaction against hypocretin,

I really think CUK users should be careful.

[_V_]

Pandemrix - Wikipedia

Pandemrix is an influenza vaccine for influenza pandemics, such as the 2009 flu pandemic. The vaccine was developed by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)[1] and patented in September 2006.[2]

The vaccine was one of the H1N1 vaccines approved for use by the European Commission in September 2009, upon the recommendations of the European Medicines Agency (EMEA).[3] The vaccine is only approved for use when an H1N1 influenza pandemic has been officially declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) or European Union (EU).[3] The vaccine was initially developed as a pandemic mock-up vaccine using an H5N1 strain.[4]

Pandemrix was found to be associated with an increased risk of narcolepsy[5] following investigations by Swedish and Finnish health authorities[6] and had higher rates of adverse events than other vaccines for H1N1.[7] This resulted in several legal cases.[8] Stanford University studies suggested that narcolepsy is an autoimmune disease[9]

In 2013, the New Scientist reported that "part of a surface protein on the pandemic virus looks very similar to part of a brain protein that helps keep people awake

In 2015, it was reported that the British Department of Health was paying for Sodium oxybate medication for 80 patients who are taking legal action over problems linked to the use of the swine flu vaccine, at a cost to the government of £12,000 per patient per year. Sodium oxybate is not available to patients with narcolepsy through the National Health Service

[vetran]

Wise choice at the micro level, not so wise at the macro level. Your children are not at a lower risk of spreading the virus.

You are thinking family, not species.

As the vaccine stops you getting symptoms as badly it may not stop you spreading it though. That is as much as we know now, we may find out it may make you less infectious.

Giving it to the at risk makes the most sense.

That includes front line staff as they will get a massive viral load.

[AtW]

Now you know why he never slags me off.

Is that you, Simon?

[WTFH]

If cojak was a multimillionaire CUK advertiser, you would be in big trouble.

Now you know why he never slags me off.

[Old Greg]

Little barstewards. Never trust anyone under 5'. Except Cojak of course... (runs for cover).

It's not nice to bully people about their height. If cojak was a multimillionaire CUK advertiser, you would be in big trouble.

[AtW]

?


.

[NotAllThere]

My pleasure.



Coronavirus outbreak and kids - Harvard Health

Little barstewards. Never trust anyone under 5'. Except Cojak of course... (runs for cover).

[darmstadt]

Of course it's a good idea, test it on people of least value to society! Have you not read your communist manifesto recently?

That seems to be the population of the UK then

[clearedforlanding]

Links please, as this is something I'm not aware of. Although I'm thinking of under 10s - not my sprogs some of whom have children.

My pleasure.

Most children who become infected with the COVID-19 virus have no symptoms, or they have milder symptoms such as low-grade fever, fatigue, and cough. Early studies suggested that children do not contribute much to the spread of coronavirus. But more recent studies raise concerns that children could be capable of spreading the infection.

Though the recent studies varied in their methods, their findings were similar: infected children had as much, or more, coronavirus in their upper respiratory tracts as infected adults

Coronavirus outbreak and kids - Harvard Health

[NotAllThere]

Your children are not at a lower risk of spreading the virus.

Links please, as this is something I'm not aware of. Although I'm thinking of under 10s - not my sprogs some of whom have children.

[clearedforlanding]

Or do I choose to vaccinate my parents who are at risk or my children who are at a far far lower risk?

Wise choice at the micro level, not so wise at the macro level. Your children are not at a lower risk of spreading the virus.

You are thinking family, not species.

[NotAllThere]

Do I choose to vaccinate my parents who are at the end of their life & no longer reproducing, or my children who are?

Or do I choose to vaccinate my parents who are at risk or my children who are at a far far lower risk?

[NotAllThere]

Very old yes and those unlikely to have an adverse reaction. These are the people that a vaccine that stops them getting sick will help.

Yep. It's all about balance of risk. T

Only a matter of time before the paranoid knuckleheads that are up in arms about the "safety" of the vaccine show up quoting the "off-piste" speculations of various discredited medicos.

In many cases these are the same people that will quite happily buy and snort a few grams of "Coke" in the bogs of a nightclub whilst the worse for drink.

You couldn't make it up.

And sadly, we don't need to.

What's wrong with me? I've agreed with both vetran and shaunbhoy in one post... I'm going for a lie down. With a nice warm bottle of whisky.

[clearedforlanding]

Of course it's a good idea, test it on people of least value to society! Have you not read your communist manifesto recently?

Nothing to do with communism. When aiming for a health objective for an entire species this is simply logical.

I have 2 daughters and 2 parents. Let's say (hypothetically) I am allocated 2 vaccines courses, due to limits on production. Do I choose to vaccinate my parents who are at the end of their life & no longer reproducing, or my children who are?

Maybe I should vaccinate myself as I pay the most tax & avoid vaccinating dad so my inheritance comes quicker.