Not sure what this has to do with herbalism, but it's good news for people whose egg allergies limit their ability to receive traditional flu vaccines, and also welcome news for those concerned about our ability to ramp up vaccine production in response to dangerous flu epidemics.
"Most flu vaccines are made by growing the virus in chicken eggs, then inactivating or killing it, a long process."
"Flublok, by contrast, consists only of a protein (hemagglutinin) from the virus. The protein is made by putting the gene for hemagglutinin into a virus that infects insect cells. Those cells, from the fall armyworm, are grown in culture and churn out the protein. Neither eggs nor the live virus are used, though viral genetic information is needed."
While new for flu, such protein-based vaccines are used to prevent some other diseases."
The NaturalNews article linked to in the opening post is misleading. For instance, it doesn't tell you that Flublok had a good safety profile similar to other flu vaccines in two clinical trials covering nearly 2,500 participants. NaturalNews warns that two deaths occurred during studies, but doesn't reveal that there was one death in the vaccine group and one death in the placebo group (that didn't get the vaccine), and that no deaths were linked to the vaccine.
Misleading the public is typical of NaturalNews, which fulminates in general against vaccines and drug companies, while pushing products made by the multibillion-dollar supplement industry (and a large number of questionable products sold in its own online store).
You are missing the point. This isn't about egg allergies at all. Isn't modifying genes bad enough, but now adding reprogrammed insect viruses, and people ignoring a list of many severe side effects? It seems people have no limit as to what they will put into their bodies.
And lastly, one could also say that vaccines and drug companies are multibillion-dollar industries pushing many other questionable products, although their status as much larger corporations keeps them in better popularity.
So many misstatements, so little time.
The gene product (viral hemagglutinin) is the same as the one produced in traditional flu vaccines. When you make antibodies against it, it offers protection against influenza.
This process utilizing the new vaccine does not result in "many severe side effects" - it has been shown to be as safe as traditional flu vaccines, which have an excellent safety record.
And yes, it is in part about making flu vaccine acceptable for people who couldn't use traditional vaccines (using viral strains grown in eggs) because they have severe egg allergies. The older method is cumbersome and limits the ability to ramp up vaccine production in time to meet challenges from new infectious strains.
If you're ant-Big Pharma, you should welcome vaccines, which prevent diseases that would otherwise result in heftier profits for drug companies making pharmaceuticals to treat them.
As for people not having limits on what they'll put into their bodies, most of us don't want mass quantities of viral hemagglutinins and other viral toxins in our bodies, which is what happens when active disease strikes.
Still wondering what all the anti-vaccine stuff has to do with herbalism.
Vaccines don't prevent anything. Besides, there's no way to qualify nor quantify the effectiveness of vaccines. There's no way to prove that there were any beneficial results had from a vaccine. ("I took a flu vaccine and didn't get sick!" Another person says "I didn't take the flu vaccine and I didn't get sick." Taking vaccines and believing that it worked is what you call, Eric, anecdotal??)
Also, vaccines are based on the principles of the germ theory. I, and others, proved that germs aren't the cause of any disease. Therefore, any remedy based on the germ theory won't be effective. Kinda' like the Wellhausen Theory of Higher Criticism; You can't an effective regimen that's based on an assumption when the assumption itself is erroneous.
Flip-side: No one needs to worry about taking vaccines. The human body is more resilient than we think. It can withstand taking in the crap that vaccines are made from.
"This process utilizing the new vaccine does not result in "many severe side effects" - it has been shown to be as safe as traditional flu vaccines, which have an excellent safety record. "
Excellent? People wouldn't be frequently accusing them of causing many different ailments if they had such an excellent safety record.
Did you not read the article? Everything from Guillain-Barre Syndrome to myalgia is listed as a potential side effect, on the vaccine's literature. It's track record may be perfect to you, but the risks are far too many.
"And yes, it is in part about making flu vaccine acceptable for people who couldn't use traditional vaccines (using viral strains grown in eggs) because they have severe egg allergies. The older method is cumbersome and limits the ability to ramp up vaccine production in time to meet challenges from new infectious strains. "
Again, didn't you read the title? The controversy is about using Genetic Modification for a vaccine, not eggs!
"If you're ant-Big Pharma, you should welcome vaccines, which prevent diseases that would otherwise result in heftier profits for drug companies making pharmaceuticals to treat them. "
You're mistaken if you expect me to welcome a product containing the aforementioned genetically modified organisms, mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, etc.
"As for people not having limits on what they'll put into their bodies, most of us don't want mass quantities of viral hemagglutinins and other viral toxins in our bodies, which is what happens when active disease strikes. "
How ever scary-sounding "viral hemagglutinins" may sound to a lay person, yes, I would much rather have a human disease, than an insect virus, GMO caterpillar cells, and the rest of the witches brew they seem to put in vaccines.
Lastly, while I agree with you, HerbDoctor, that taking vaccines and believing that they worked is purely anecdotal, you still underestimate the crap those vaccines have on the body.
It's not surprising that germ theory denialism would rear its head in this forum. Depressing, but not surprising.
No one has acknowledged it, but apparently the reason for an antivax slam being posted in the Herbalism forum is part of a general need to deny the accomplishments of evidence-based medicine, and an attempt to keep herbalism in the realm of mysticism and anecdote (rather than being an effective, rational complement to mainstream medicine).
Here is a link that might be useful: Toxic myths about vaccines
Let's go at this from another angle. How long would it take modern medicine to treat successfully someone who has influenza? I mean how long would it take from start to finish to get someone well?
Please, no side stepping. Just answer the question.
Sumatra, how old are you? (I'm not asking as a put down, but I will build on your answer.)
Influenza varies in severity, often based on the general health/underlying medical conditions of the patient, and also varies due to the strain of virus.
Elderly and/or debilitated patients may have higher morbidity and mortality from influenza; conversely younger patients with vigorous immune systems can be disproportionately sickened by influenza due to "cytokine storm" (which occurred with H1N1 and is believed to have caused mass casualties during the 1918-19 worldwide influenza pandemic).
While flu vaccination is not a guarantee that one will not contract influenza, it's still a much better bet than taking your chances with the disease (and either getting sick or transmitting it to loved ones such as children or elderly relatives who are particularly vulnerable).
Since you're requiring "no side stepping", I have a direct question for you. Since you don't believe that microbes cause disease, how about arranging to be inoculated with blood from a patient with HIV and hepatitis C? If your theory is correct, no possible harm could come to you - and if your body succeeds in clearing or preventing infection due to the magic of herbology, it'd dramatically support your views.
So, how about it?
Blah, blah, blah, Eric. You, as well as most of modern medicine, can give no definitive answers to a simple question. It's because modern medicine has neithr the means nor the skill to make anyone well.
Give me a definitive answer. How long?
"Sumatra, how old are you? (I'm not asking as a put down, but I will build on your answer.) "
I may very well be disregarding and future posts in this section of the forum, but I have better things to do than argue with Eric and I am interested in what you have to say, so....
Does it show much?
sumatra, you act and respond much more maturely than the guy giving you grief here. its best to ignore his numerous and ongoing attempts to provoke and insult, he's the kind of guy who delights in putting others down to make himself feel bigger. sad really. if he wasn't such a jerk he would almost elicit my sympathy.
I don't really believe you're 16. However, if you are, you're knowledge exceeds most teenagers. That would be a awesome.
I'll give you some background: I worked in a pharmacy for 2 1/2 years while in High School. Then I entered the Naval Medical Corps for 4 years during Vietnam era where I worked orthopedics, laboratory, pharmacy, x-ray, emergency ambulance, clinical practice, vaccine/immunization, etc. In 1974 I began my studies of herbology. I researched, investigated and discarded many seemingly scientific approaches to herbology including iridology, reflexology, bio-kinesiology, hydro and colonic therapies, spectra-chrome therapy, all of which I found to be unworkable systems by which to integrate the science of herbology with the body. Eventually, I found that eastern sciences had developed a system over thousands of years whereby knowledge of the body and herbology can finally be integrated quite scientifically. It's not from the approach of western science (analytical), but it's more workable for the science of herbology from an eastern (phenomonological) standpoint.
At present, I'm being tutored in eastern herbology by a professor from the acupuncture college in Phoenix. We've become good friends. And even at my age, I'm continuing my education by studying at the Institute of Chinese Herbology which teaches the classic Chinese herbology as opposed to Traditional Chinese herbology so prevalent today (That's another subject).
What I'm getting at, I've seen so much in clinical practice, that I can share with you one indisputable fact: Special interest groups (medical or natural) will try to get us to believe something that may not necessarily be accurate, but is designed to stir the emotions to the point of manipulating our thought processes. Don't let them affect you to the point of getting sucked into a debate over vaccines. Debating does nothing, but there are some on this site who will annoy us if we let them. Don't let ME affect your thoughts. Be objective, do research, then usie your powers of deductive reasoning to draw your conclusions. One good thing about experience is that it will temper your opinions and give you a more rounded out view of life and yourself.
Sorry for running on at the mouth. Just wanted to share.
This post was edited by HerbDoctor on Mon, Aug 26, 13 at 12:34
Well, thanks for addressing the subject of qualifications, Charlie (interesting you chose another thread to do it in). Two questions:
One - do you primarily work as a herbalist? Or does the part of your resume you omitted mentioning (selling mobile homes and real estate) represent your major occupation?
Secondly - do you recognize that there is no way for the average poster to verify the qualifications and anecdotes you talks about in this forum? Don't you think there's an important role here in linking to verifiable evidence from reliable sources, rather than essentially saying "trust me, I'm a doctor"?
Here is a link that might be useful: vaccination in chinese medicine
This post was edited by eric_oh on Mon, Aug 26, 13 at 14:41
Attacking ones qualifications is a sign of desperation, Eric.
No, my primary means of income is I make hand-crafted hardwood flooring and custom refinishing. I became a master finisher in the antique refinishing world years ago (26 years ago?). I used to restore mansions for Penn State University. Now, I do hardwood flooring and I make very good money at it. More than being an herbalist.
It has taken me 40 years of making mistakes and learning from them. I wish I could've found a school way back in the 70's to teach me what I now know. But there's so much junk science out there, both in the natural and modern medical fields. It took me 40 years to weed through things. That's why I am continuing my studies with the Institute.
Here's a for instance: A couple years ago, I called a college teaching herbology out of Texas. They still teach Iridology!!!!! That was trendy in the 80's and has since been discarded as junk science. So, a person attends this college and gets a piece of paper, does it mean a person has credentials? I think not!!
Oh, by the way, I've been an eonologist (winemaker) since I first studied it and did a career notebook for sociology class in the 9th grade. By the time I was in 10th grade, I had a 30 gallon wine barrel in our basement making wine. I used to take samples of the fermenting wine to my biology teacher, old Mr. Mitchell, and we'd look at the active yeast under the microscope. But so as not to create a scandal among the other students and teachers, he said "Bring it in after school and we'll look at it." Come to find out that he made homemade wine and loved sharing.
I'm also an accomplished bluegrass folk guitarist and blues lead player. I recently lost a close friend who died this past year. You might know him; Doc Watson. We used to play on his patio at his home in Boone, NC.
Eric, I'm sure that to you, everything in life is all about appearances. But I'm more interested in how efficient and productive is something in getting the job done.
What more do you want to know in your attempt to discredit me?
as within, so without.
a certain person's consistent pattern of issuing ugly condescending insults reflects his inner landscape. it'd be almost funny if not so sad.
Oh, I absolutely agree. I've asked you (and others) repeatedly to avoid attacking my background and to stop flinging insults. But the pattern continues, so I thought it would be instructive for you to see how enjoyable it is to have your own qualifications questioned.
One reassuring aspect is that when people are reduced to childish insults, it's a sure sign that they cannot support their claims and are getting personal to create a distraction.
Now, if we can get back to discussing herbalism and related issues calmly, without the personal remarks and without demands that those with differing views leave the forum, that would be most welcome.
Eric, honestly you're the last person in the world who's qualified to discuss herbalism. You're an allopath. You don't give evidence that you know the natural principles involved with the practice of herbalism. I'm not trying to be mean. But . . . why are you in this forum in the first place?
Please, take some courses in eastern herbology and let's share with upbuilding conversation.
We love you, Eric.
We're all "allopaths" in so far as we do not use homeopathy (which few here support).
Those who get in a dither about having to share a forum with people with differing beliefs, should consider going elsewhere, possibly starting their own e-mail list (I hear a private bubble with no dissension can be quite soothing).* ;)
*Speaking of which, I hear that CureZone does not allow deviation from the party line. You once had a paid forum there to sell your pricey liver tonic - what happened?
This post was edited by eric_oh on Tue, Aug 27, 13 at 11:43
Poor marketing on my part, Eric. You caught me once again and I am so-o-o-o discredited and so ashamed. Feel better?
Curezone is what it is. I've been thrown off that site more times than I can remember. lol But we must all learn and grow in proportion to our mistakes.
Eric, honestly . . . you don't have differing beliefs. You have DOGMATIC beliefs. You tear down instead of building up. I wish you could contribute something of substance.
Before you accuse me
Take a look at yourself
- Bo Diddley
its the pot calling kettle black. again. how freaking boring.
this forum is nowhere good enough to make listening to these two infantile adult men squabble constantly worthwhile.
suggest those folks here who are serious about herbalism seek out forums with moderators who'd never allow this nonsense to continue, there are some good ones on fb.
farewell good folks, you deserve better!
If you don't like "squabbling", why have so many of your postings consisted of pointless insults?
This is the second time you've announced that you're departing forever (now the line is that Gardenweb just isn't good enough for you). Assuming this latest declaration is for real, here's a tip:
There are indeed websites where only one point of view is tolerated, and the echo chamber effect will be to your liking. It may surprise you though that even among those who think alike, people can't seem to stop themselves from hurling invective at each other and getting booted off forums (see Charlie's comments about his history at CureZone).
If you could tone down the rancor, you'd have more to contribute. Good luck in your travels (although I suspect you'll be back here again before long to snipe at other posters). :)
This post was edited by eric_oh on Wed, Aug 28, 13 at 22:57
I really am that age. But if you don't believe me, it doesn't make much difference anyhow.
You are very well qualified in this field, although you may be considered new by some.
While I do make it a point too consider all forms of conventional medicine, including the aforementioned including reflexology, hydro and colonic therapies, etc. except for those that are obviously harmful (like vaccines), this goes for classic Chinese medicine too and I am open to what you have to say. Affecting my thoughts has nothing to do with it , as I'll draw my own conclusions when possible objections are visible.
It is very true though, that so often debating does nothing, as it doesn't change what really matters-not the person's opinion-but the fashion of medicine commonly being used.
Contrary to the beliefs some have expressed in this discussion, there is nothing preventing users of herbalism from taking advantage of vaccines to prevent serious diseases. In fact, if you want to strike back at Big Pharma, get immunized. By avoiding illness and hospitalization, you don't have to get involved with the medical system and pay for its products and services.
Here is a link that might be useful: The vaccine success story
Here's my problems with prevention via vaccines: No one can prove that vaccines actually prevent anything.
Take 100 people, give them all viable vaccines. 99 of them don't get influenza. Up front, it might appear that the vaccine helped. But it could also be that those 99 would never have gotten the flu at all. So, back to my original statement, no one can prove that vaccines actually prevent anything.
There's a science called epidemiology with which you should acquaint yourself.
We've repeatedly seen once-common infectious diseases decline dramatically and even be eradicated following the introduction of vaccines designed against them. Measles, polio, diphtheria and many more.
You apparently want us to believe these advances are coincidence, and that smallpox is now just a bad memory due to planetary alignments rather than smallpox vaccine.
It is bizarre and rather sad that some alt med enthusiasts continue to attack immunization and deny its great value in preventing serious diseases and reducing human suffering and death. Vaccination is such a great medical success story that certain alties feel they just can't compete unless they can damage it through falsehoods and innuendo.
Fortunately, most people who use medicinal herbs believe in herbalism as complementary to mainstream medicine, rather than its bitter opponent.
This post was edited by eric_oh on Tue, Sep 17, 13 at 23:45
Just a simple question: Why did the Spanish Influenza epidemic of 1918 end?
The 1918-19 flu pandemic largely ended for the same reason as other killer epidemics before it - the number of susceptible people were too few and scattered to maintain a chain of transmission of the virus. In addition, quarantines and measures like limiting public gatherings probably had a small beneficial impact.
By the time the Great Influenza Pandemic ended, 500 million people had been sickened and up to 50 million were killed.
So, if your question is designed to make us think that since epidemics eventually wane on their own there is no need for vaccines, tell us this: how many millions of deaths from a new influenza pandemic (or from resurgence of other diseases) would you find acceptable? Why don't you think it's worthwhile to prevent suffering and death on that scale through immunization?
And why is vaccination so antithetical to your personal beliefs? Is it the antivax misinformation you've read, a fear that supporting vaccines strengthens mainstream medicine, or both?
Common sense, Eric. Still, you can't provide proof that there is such a thing as "prevention" using vaccines.
When polio ran its course, THEN modern medicine came out with "vaccines" and said "Look what we've cured!!" You can't possibly quantify nor qualify those kinds of smoke and mirrors. But modern medicine wants to take credit for "curing" a disease that had already finished running its course.
Spanish influenza ran its course. Biggest cause was social stress in the aftermath of WWI and poor nutrition. Not some virus.
Remember, figures lie. And liars figure.
Modern medicine is chasing its tail. Besides, one last dig at modern medicine: Vaccine use is based on the germ theory of disease. But I proved with deductive reasoning a long time ago that germs don't cause any disease. (Another subject entirely.) So, again, Eric. the vaccine therapies are built on an erroneous assumption. Remember the Welhausen Theory of Higher Criticism. If a theory is built on erroneous assumptions, then the whole theory has to be thrown out.
Germs don't cause disease? Hilarious.
Funny how no germ theory denialists are willing to have themselves inoculated with HIV, Ebola or other deadly pathogens to prove that "good nutrition" or their allegedly "superior immune systems" will protect them.
I've run into this business of "all disease outbreaks run their course, no big deal" before. One time an antivax poster argued that even though the Black Death (plague) killed 1/3 of the world's people, so what, mankind survived.
It takes a special kind of sickness to shrug off suffering on such a scale.
It's one thing when adults pursue this foolishness, another when they fail to protect children who have no say in the matter.
Again, most of those who follow herbalism are smart enough to take advantage of effective mainstream medical interventions like vaccines as well.
No one's shrugging off suffering, Eric. I'm poo-pooing modern medicine's attitude (an yours) that the Almighty Medical Community had all the answers.
By the way, if someone was foolish enough to inoculate themselves with a concentration of bacteria/viruses, it no longer falls within the realm of disease. It's now in the area of trauma. Such inoculation would fall outside the natural processes involving germs. You'd be traumatizing the body with it. Similar to having the flu (disease) or being hit by a Mack truck (trauma). That's basic knowledge, Eric, and I'm amazed that you wouldn't know the difference.
I'll post later about the germ theory, then we'll let the people on this forum vote.
You never answered my question. Well, you kinda' did with modern medical smoke-and-mirror jargon. But please give me a simple and concise answer: Why did the Spanish influenza epidemic end?
Exposure to blood products/secretions is the natural means of transmission of HIV. But I can understand that germ theory denialists want an excuse to avoid putting their beliefs into action.
And of course I did answer your question about how the 1918-19 influenza pandemic ended. Sorry you don't want to accept it, or acknowledge that simply waiting out epidemics (while millions die) is not an acceptable way to deal with them.
It's like telling a trauma victim "well, bleeding always stops."