OT-Influenza

[Sabres Fan in NS]

lol I'm a Molecular Biologist, which is not the same as a Microbiologist or Virologist. Much of my expertise and research has been on genetics and cancer, and I work almost exclusively on human samples (cells / disease) and know very little about virology.

 

All that red hair and a big brain too ... :wub:

 

;)

[josie]

lol I'm a Molecular Biologist, which is not the same as a Microbiologist or Virologist. Much of my expertise and research has been on genetics and cancer, and I work almost exclusively on human samples (cells / disease) and know very little about virology.

You have an awesome career. I wanted to go into genetics or viral pathology originally. I really just wanted to play with gel electrophoresis a lot I think. Such fascinating stuff.

 

I've read a lot about HIV and ebola. Morbid fascination. Actually, if you're interested in some gross history, check out the open Yale course by Dr. Frank Snowden. He teaches Epidemics in Western Society since 1600 and it is fascinating. Delves into the origin of vaccinations later on.

[biodork]

All that red hair and a big brain too ... :wub:

 

;)

 

:blush:

 

You have an awesome career. I wanted to go into genetics or viral pathology originally. I really just wanted to play with gel electrophoresis a lot I think. Such fascinating stuff.

 

I've read a lot about HIV and ebola. Morbid fascination. Actually, if you're interested in some gross history, check out the open Yale course by Dr. Frank Snowden. He teaches Epidemics in Western Society since 1600 and it is fascinating. Delves into the origin of vaccinations later on.

 

Cool stuff. I wanted to take virology and immunology courses but never had room left in the schedule with all the other required course work. I really should read up on some of it now, though, since my current lab focuses on allergies and the immune response! lol

 

Have you ever thought of doing work as a medical illustrator? You've certainly got the artistic talent, and a knack for science doesn't hurt!

[josie]

:blush:

 

 

 

Cool stuff. I wanted to take virology and immunology courses but never had room left in the schedule with all the other required course work. I really should read up on some of it now, though, since my current lab focuses on allergies and the immune response! lol

 

Have you ever thought of doing work as a medical illustrator? You've certainly got the artistic talent, and a knack for science doesn't hurt!

Funnily enough, that is exactly why I turned down multiple full rides to go to RIT. Only RIT and Iowa had a real med ill program, everywhere else was going to make me cobble together my own degree. OSU and Carnegie told me to go to RIT. All through high school I'd skip study hall to go to the anatomy lab and draw/do dissections.

Then I get to RIT. I can handle cadavers no problem. Bone saws, skulls, guts, whatever. But a live surgery. I just cannot handle it. Barf. Eye surgery is my huge undoing- and it seemed like most of the projects I was going to have to undertake dealt with eye surgery. I get more squeamish as I get older, too. So, I did some regular illustration and fell in love. I certainly lost the cache of the "smart" involved in med ill which has propagated quite the chip on my shoulder, but oh well. I love what I do.

[biodork]

Funnily enough, that is exactly why I turned down multiple full rides to go to RIT. Only RIT and Iowa had a real med ill program, everywhere else was going to make me cobble together my own degree. OSU and Carnegie told me to go to RIT. All through high school I'd skip study hall to go to the anatomy lab and draw/do dissections.

Then I get to RIT. I can handle cadavers no problem. Bone saws, skulls, guts, whatever. But a live surgery. I just cannot handle it. Barf. Eye surgery is my huge undoing- and it seemed like most of the projects I was going to have to undertake dealt with eye surgery. I get more squeamish as I get older, too. So, I did some regular illustration and fell in love. I certainly lost the cache of the "smart" involved in med ill which has propagated quite the chip on my shoulder, but oh well. I love what I do.

 

I hear ya; I entertained the idea of med school because I loved anatomy class and knew I was interested in studying human disease, but like you, actual surgery and other procedures on live people freaks me out. Plus I'm antisocial, so research is really a better fit than medicine, lol.

 

And where is Claude to tell us if we're right about the virus thing or not?? :P

[JJFIVEOH]

if you're saying that it's more rational to take some rounded, self-selected numbers and draw your own conclusions (and, based on that, decline the shot) rather than carefully consider the summarized positions and recommendations articulated by thousands of highly educated scientists who've devoted their lives to studying how best to control and contain influenza (and, based on that, get the shot), welp - then. yeah. godspeed.

 

Can you contradict my point or are you just going to stick to the snide comments?

 

 

No, they don't. Yes, both are capable of evolution and change over time, but bacteria are much, much better and faster at this because of their ability to transfer disease resistance between cells. Essentially, once one bacterium figures out a way to survive an antibiotic, it's able to tell other bacteria how to do it and thus bacterial antibiotic resistance can come about much more quickly than simply waiting for a strain with a slight advantage to become more prevalent.

 

My point was that viruses do in fact mutate and evolve. Biodork told me that wasn't so. Now we're all on the same page. ;)

[biodork]

Can you contradict my point or are you just going to stick to the snide comments?

 

 

 

My point was that viruses do in fact mutate and evolve. Biodork told me that wasn't so. Now we're all on the same page. ;)

 

No, I don't disagree that viruses mutate and evolve (that's how we ended up with H1N1 aka swine flu); just saying they're nowhere near as good at it as bacteria, and that vaccines generally are not the cause of viral evolution.

[JJFIVEOH]

No, I don't disagree that viruses mutate and evolve (that's how we ended up with H1N1 aka swine flu); just saying they're nowhere near as good at it as bacteria, and that vaccines generally are not the cause of viral evolution.

 

If flu shots are hit or miss every year because it all comes down to which strains are addressed that year, why don't they cover all major strains with each shot?

 

What about the studies that show vaccinations actually weaken the immune system and also leaves children more prone to diseases later in life?

 

Biodork, that 2nd question wasn't specifically directed at you. It was a separate post (I wish the powers that be would change that).

[That Aud Smell]

Here are some rounded numbers I have come across that stick out in my mind. I don't have cold hard facts in front of me, but simple searches will confirm they are in the ballpark.

 

2/3 of Americans won't get a flu shot

Claims that 1 in 500 child lives are saved every year because of flu shots

Approx 10,000 Americans will die yearly from the flu

 

..........those don't quite add up.

Can you contradict my point or are you just going to stick to the snide comments?

 

i wasn't being snide. i was using a rhetorical device intended to suggest that your position was incorrect (in fact, somewhat absurd (maybe that seemed snide)).

 

in any case, i'm not sure what your point is. i think your point is that because the numbers you've cited "don't add up", there's cause to believe that getting the flu shot is unnecessary or even a bad idea.

 

so, taking your numbers in turn:

 

the proffered percentage regarding americans who don't get the shot is probably accurate, give or take. our conversation cannot account for (because neither you nor i understand) the salutary effects of the herd immunity that the other 1/3 create, to the benefit of the non-immunized as well.

 

your proffered statistic that 1 out of every 500 children have their lives saved by flu shot is an interesting number. i don't think you have accurately stated it. i'm inferring that this number refers to the idea that there is 1 prevented death for every 500 children who are vaccinated -- not 1 out of every 500 kids have their lives saved by flu shots. this study appears to put the number at 1 out of every 420. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200103223441204

 

your proffered # of flu deaths is where the real fallacy appears to lie. first, the "number" of annual flu deaths in the u.s., such as it is, is more like 35,000-40,000. moreover, epidemiologists universally agree that it's essentially impossible to quantify flu deaths. there are many reasons why this is the case; the CDC's and WHO's websites have good explanations of those reasons.

 

If flu shots are hit or miss every year because it all comes down to which strains are addressed that year, why don't they cover all major strains with each shot?

because of big pharma's worldwide and government-facilitated plot to weaken the world's population and keep them dependent on unnecessary vaccines, natch.

[JJFIVEOH]

i wasn't being snide. i was using a rhetorical device intended to suggest that your position was incorrect (in fact, somewhat absurd (maybe that seemed snide)).

 

in any case, i'm not sure what your point is. i think your point is that because the numbers you've cited "don't add up", there's cause to believe that getting the flu shot is unnecessary or even a bad idea.

 

so, taking your numbers in turn:

 

the proffered percentage regarding americans who don't get the shot is probably accurate, give or take. our conversation cannot account for (because neither you nor i understand) the salutary effects of the herd immunity that the other 1/3 create, to the benefit of the non-immunized as well.

 

your proffered statistic that 1 out of every 500 children have their lives saved by flu shot is an interesting number. i don't think you have accurately stated it. i'm inferring that this number refers to the idea that there is 1 prevented death for every 500 children who are vaccinated -- not 1 out of every 500 kids have their lives saved by flu shots. this study appears to put the number at 1 out of every 420. http://www.nejm.org/...200103223441204

 

your proffered # of flu deaths is where the real fallacy appears to lie. first, the "number" of annual flu deaths in the u.s., such as it is, is more like 35,000-40,000. moreover, epidemiologists universally agree that it's essentially impossible to quantify flu deaths. there are many reasons why this is the case; the CDC's and WHO's websites have good explanations of those reasons.

 

 

because of big pharma's worldwide and government-facilitated plot to weaken the world's population and keep them dependent on unnecessary vaccines, natch.

 

Like I said, they were rounded numbers based on what I have heard over time. The point is the 1:500 isn't 1:2 and deaths in the five figure amount aren't in the seven digit range. Don't you find it odd that some studies claim 1:420 lives are saved in children yet less than 1:10,000 (based on a high estimate) actually die every year (most of which are the elderly)?

 

Sorry if I took your post the wrong way.

[That Aud Smell]

The point is the 1:500 isn't 1:2 and deaths in the five figure amount aren't in the seven digit range. Don't you find it odd that some studies claim 1:420 lives are saved in children yet less than 1:10,000 (based on a high estimate) actually die every year (most of which are the elderly)?

i don't know what to tell you other than you're materially misstating the figures and/or their significance, and you're making correlations that are illogical.

[JJFIVEOH]

i don't know what to tell you other than you're materially misstating the figures and/or their significance, and you're making correlations that are illogical.

 

 

Or you're just oblivious to the fact that it's all run by money and scare tactics.

[That Aud Smell]

Or you're just oblivious to the fact that it's all run by money and scare tactics.

and this sort of sentiment is why i originally refrained from joining issue with you.

 

 

edit: doris bucher is clearly in the flu game for the money.

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/12/the-quest-to-end-the-flu/354677/

 

http://www.nymc.edu/People/Doris.J.Bucher/

[Claude_Verret]

Or you're just oblivious to the fact that it's all run by money and scare tactics.

 

I googled "flu vaccine big money scare tactics" and here are the websites that came up on page one. Hint: JAMA, PNAS and Nature they ain't.

 

http://saveourbones.com/flu-shot/

 

http://www.undergroundhealth.com/10-reasons-why-flu-shots-are-more-dangerous-than-the-flu/

 

http://www.progressivehealth.com/do-government-officials-push-unnecessary-flu-shots.htm

 

http://www.granolaville.com/2013/01/im-tired-of-scare-tactics-5-myths-you.html

 

I'll stop there. This stuff I hesitate to even call pseudo-science. It's pure garbage, It's the hockey equivalent of putting your full faith in Ecklund rumors.

[Claude_Verret]

I've never taken a course on it and it's not my area of expertise, but to my understanding Josie is essentially correct. I'll defer to Claude to confirm, though.

 

You ladies have it covered quite well. Antiviral resistance is a big concern with influenza as well, but you are correct in the mechanisms being different largely due to the viral RNA genome. There are reports in the literature that 90-100% of the H1N1 isolates worldwide from 2009 were Tamiflu resistant.

 

lol I'm a Molecular Biologist, which is not the same as a Microbiologist or Virologist. Much of my expertise and research has been on genetics and cancer, and I work almost exclusively on human samples (cells / disease) and know very little about virology.

 

I'm a biochemist by training, but have spent most of my working life in immunology and virology. I've dabbled in molecular biology with some PCR and cloning as well.

[biodork]

If flu shots are hit or miss every year because it all comes down to which strains are addressed that year, why don't they cover all major strains with each shot?

 

What about the studies that show vaccinations actually weaken the immune system and also leaves children more prone to diseases later in life?

 

Biodork, that 2nd question wasn't specifically directed at you. It was a separate post (I wish the powers that be would change that).

 

Glad CV is back, since I'm not really qualified to answer either of those. I suspect including more than 3-5 strains in any given vaccine is either too difficult or has the potential for more problems, but no idea what the actual reason is.

 

You ladies have it covered quite well. Antiviral resistance is a big concern with influenza as well, but you are correct in the mechanisms being different largely due to the viral RNA genome. There are reports in the literature that 90-100% of the H1N1 isolates worldwide from 2009 were Tamiflu resistant.

 

 

 

I'm a biochemist by training, but have spent most of my working life in immunology and virology. I've dabbled in molecular biology with some PCR and cloning as well.

 

He's back!

[JJFIVEOH]

and this sort of sentiment is why i originally refrained from joining issue with you.

 

 

edit: doris bucher is clearly in the flu game for the money.

 

http://www.theatlant...the-flu/354677/

 

http://www.nymc.edu/...Doris.J.Bucher/

I googled "flu vaccine big money scare tactics" and here are the websites that came up on page one. Hint: JAMA, PNAS and Nature they ain't.

 

http://saveourbones.com/flu-shot/

 

http://www.undergrou...s-than-the-flu/

 

http://www.progressi...y-flu-shots.htm

 

http://www.granolavi...-myths-you.html

 

I'll stop there. This stuff I hesitate to even call pseudo-science. It's pure garbage, It's the hockey equivalent of putting your full faith in Ecklund rumors.

 

I'm sorry you two aren't willing to engage in any possibility that there is an ulterior motive. I see it's easier to just go into attack mode when somebody says something you don't agree with. If there is money to be made people will try to profit, it's that simple. They aren't out for your benefit. Yes, there are exceptions but back up and look at the big picture. Sorry, I'm not going to allow some Walgreens employee stick a needle in my arm and inject some unknown substance doing god knows what kind of long term harm, for $20, just so I might not get a sickness I've only had one time in 37 years. Just so you might not catch it from me.

 

I've got some swampland for sale down here. You interested?

[Claude_Verret]

If flu shots are hit or miss every year because it all comes down to which strains are addressed that year, why don't they cover all major strains with each shot?

 

What about the studies that show vaccinations actually weaken the immune system and also leaves children more prone to diseases later in life?

 

Biodork, that 2nd question wasn't specifically directed at you. It was a separate post (I wish the powers that be would change that).

 

To your first question the short answer is antigenic drift. Beyond that even if including all known strains was a plausible strategy (it isn't), your flu shot would probably cost $1000 a dose.

 

For the second question you are going to need to provide a link to the study. Preferably not from granolaville.com.

 

He's back!

 

Hey, I was in the lab checking my flu cultures.....and plotting with my colleagues in the industry on how to further dupe the general public into getting a flu shot every year.

[SwampD]

Ya just don't get involved in a land war in Asia.

 

I've already capitulated and now use only one space after a period. I'll defer to those who know more than I do about something and probably get the shot every year.

[biodork]

To your first question the short answer is antigenic drift. Beyond that even if including all known strains was a plausible strategy (it isn't), your flu shot would probably cost $1000 a dose.

 

For the second question you are going to need to provide a link to the study. Preferably not from granolaville.com.

 

 

 

Hey, I was in the lab checking my flu cultures.....and plotting with my colleagues in the industry on how to further dupe the general public into getting a flu shot every year.

 

lol didn't mean to give you a hard time; you were clearly working, whereas I was clearly not very busy today. ;)

[Claude_Verret]

I'm sorry you two aren't willing to engage in any possibility that there is an ulterior motive. I see it's easier to just go into attack mode when somebody says something you don't agree with. If there is money to be made people will try to profit, it's that simple. They aren't out for your benefit. Yes, there are exceptions but back up and look at the big picture. Sorry, I'm not going to allow some Walgreens employee stick a needle in my arm and inject some unknown substance doing god knows what kind of long term harm, for $20, just so I might not get a sickness I've only had one time in 37 years. Just so you might not catch it from me.

 

I've got some swampland for sale down here. You interested?

 

Here's the deal. There are legitimate concerns and studies critical of the the flu shot and it's pros and cons. You'll find these studies conducted by trained scientists and published in peer reviewed journals. The stuff that you have posted meets none of that criteria. It truly is tin foil hat stuff.

 

We can do virology 101 tomorrow if you want, but I'm going home for the night.

[JJFIVEOH]

Here's the deal. There are legitimate concerns and studies critical of the the flu shot and it's pros and cons. You'll find these studies conducted by trained scientists and published in peer reviewed journals. The stuff that you have posted meets none of that criteria. It truly is tin foil hat stuff.

 

We can do virology 101 tomorrow if you want, but I'm going home for the night.

 

If you say so. Nowhere did I say they weren't beneficial. I've said that it is completely blown out of proportion for the sake of profitability.

 

I feel sorry for you, I really do. Stop looking down your nose and consider others' inputs, it makes for a much better discussion. And you might learn something.

[Claude_Verret]

 

 

If you say so. Nowhere did I say they weren't beneficial. I've said that it is completely blown out of proportion for the sake of profitability.

 

I feel sorry for you, I really do. Stop looking down your nose and consider others' inputs, it makes for a much better discussion. And you might learn something.

 

I'm sorry that you feel that way. Let me try again from a different approach. Everything that I've posted in this thread I either know from my experience in the field or culled from actual research papers in the literature. You've posted a bunch of random statistics about the flu, made specious claims based on those numbers and asked others to consider the possibility that the vaccine is foisted on the public out of profiteering and fear mongering motives. If you want to start posting actual research articles or investigative reports supporting your claims then I'll be happy to read them and continue a discussion.

[Wyldnwoody44]

 

 

:blush:

 

 

 

Cool stuff. I wanted to take virology and immunology courses but never had room left in the schedule with all the other required course work. I really should read up on some of it now, though, since my current lab focuses on allergies and the immune response! lol

 

Have you ever thought of doing work as a medical illustrator? You've certainly got the artistic talent, and a knack for science doesn't hurt!

Good ol IgG, IgM, and IgA..... Do you work with the medical aspect of this such as xolair and etc...

[biodork]

Good ol IgG, IgM, and IgA..... Do you work with the medical aspect of this such as xolair and etc...

 

No, our stuff is more a mix of basic and translational research (no clinical studies). We're looking at the differences in T-cell immune responses in allergic vs non-allergic people to allergic and inflammatory stimuli to try and find therapeutic targets.