I heard that some of the vaccine will contain thiomersal. Personally, I do not want my children vaccinated with it. Not sure about the nasal dose, though.

Find out if "MultiCare" has money invested in the companies that produce these vaccines!

Aslo keep in mind that the government has already created legislation to prevent any law suits against the companies manufacturing these vaccines.

GO NURSES!

It's not a rule created by the hospital systems. Health officials are requiring it of all health care workers in the event of a "pandemic" outbreak. They're just following government guidelines on the disaster scenario.

And the shots do have trace amounts of mercury as a preservative. The funny thing is health officials say that the anti-viral meds like tamiflu have some pretty nasty side effects, so they're warning doctors not to prescribe them unless a person is already dying.

The masks issue is a little wonky though...they can't fire a person for choosing not to take the shots.

Here is something by Helen Branswell Medical Reporter (CP)

"...TORONTO An unpublished Canadian study that suggests seasonal flu shots raise a person's risk of catching swine flu is raising concern abroad and triggering changes to flu vaccine program schedules at home.

The data, referred to as "the Canadian problem" by some scientists outside this country, are reported to link getting a flu shot last year with double the risk of contracting swine flu this year...."

Also, it was stated at a Congressional hearing a day ago that the IF anyone is getting the flu vaccine they should request a shot from a single dose vial. The multiple dose vials contain a larger percentage of mercury because more preservative is required.

I can't believe this article did not receive more hits. We are being turned into unwilling lab rats for the pharmaceutical and chemical industries. This is like being in a huge insane asylum with no walls. If you don't take your meds, then you risk prosecution. It is bad enough with the likes of Monsanto and their Gmo's ,but now they want to force their poison down our throats. Very creepy.

"there is a lack of research showing that masks actually prevent flu transmission"

There is a lack of research on many things. Because such research, MOST research, doesn't create a profit potential. As Friedmanite capitalism takes over public policy in the "good ol USA", we're only putting on blinders, and blundering into the future without the information we need. This capitalist influence on the society is a plague. Massive progress awaits after we bury Friedmanite capitalism.

Great, but why would a mandatory government program be better! I mean if you don't want to have the shot where you work, you do have the option to quit after all but if it is the government you have no way to avoid it except jail. How is an even more unfair and abusive policy better? I'm all for the nurses standing up for their rights but they should not support a mandatory government program.

I read an article the other day that basically said that the swine flu pandemic is very overblown ... that the seasonal flu has killed more people and is far more widespread than the swine flu.

It's all part of the plan to keep Americans AFRAID.

When I worked in hospitals, I noted that nurses were often resistant to getting flu shots. Nurses are charged with hands-on patient care. They see the results of policies. Intelligent observers with little say about how things are run, they have developed a jaundiced view of certain aspects of medical practice.

I attended a lecture by Joshua Lederberg about the incredible adaptations of viruses and the rapidity of their mutations. It convinced me that the annual flu immunizations were little more than a shot in the dark in terms of targeting the particular viruses that were likely to emerge in the flu season to follow. I am not saying they do no good, especially for people with comprimised immune systems, but I don't get them. I just keep my immune system healthy.

There are many ill-advised commercially driven pushes for mass innoculation. The worst was recently in Texas where they were about to mandate that every 12 year old girl get an innoculation against HPV, a usually mild and transient sexually transmitted disease that occasionally appears to be a precursor to cervical cancer if left untreated for a long period.

This inititive was killed by the purity brigades. But I opposed it for different reasons. Why innoculate a very young girl, almost a child, against dysplasia? Why expose millions of girls to the side effects of the vaccine when there is no evidence that any girl will soon engage in risky behavior?

This innoculation might give a girl the idea she is protected against sexually transmitted diseases. It might make her think (if a twelve year old having sex is actually thinking rationally) that she has some blanket protections.

It might make her think that it's OK to for her have sex without a condom and possibly risk AIDS, gonorrhea, syphillis, hepatitis or unwanted pregnancy? To me, the confusion that this vaccine sows, the false assurance of safety, is more dangerous than any possible benefit. Considering the emotions and social pressures around sex, the message for young girls and boys has to be clear and simple. It is a matter of life and death. Don't have sex, but if you must, use a condom and spermicide.

This HPV vaccine was such an opportunity for the drug companies. From a health perspective, condoms and an annual pap smear would do so much more good. But pharma got some officials to try to mandate a mass innoculation.

I don't want to be like a mountain man in a cabin shooting my gun off at every modern initiative, but we should ask questions when someone tells us something is for our own good.

By the way, viva the nurses!

Joe

I feel a lot more people need to read this, very good info!
health insurance comparison

http://www.moneytime.com.au