Cancer is Better than Sex

[Ch. 12]

Backlash Against Cancer Vaccine

Seems that the idiots that have been feeding the big bucks to and benefitting the most from King Bush's reign of terror have decided that they would rather have dead girls than allow them to be vaccinated with a drug that has a secondary benefit of preventing some STDs. Seems that being vaccinated for cervical cancer means that you're free to go have sex...and apparantly the vaccination is an aphrodesiac.

Give me a break. These are the people (tiny minority) that Bush has given so much power to?! I can't wait to hear the tales of support.

 

[delldude]

Backlash Against Cancer Vaccine

Seems that the idiots that have been feeding the big bucks to and benefitting the most from King Bush's reign of terror have decided that they would rather have dead girls than allow them to be vaccinated with a drug that has a secondary benefit of preventing some STDs. Seems that being vaccinated for cervical cancer means that you're free to go have sex...and apparantly the vaccination is an aphrodesiac.

Give me a break. These are the people (tiny minority) that Bush has given so much power to?! I can't wait to hear the tales of support.

Nice to see you exorcising your freedom of speech here and now without any possibility of reprisals in this free land....
So feed these little fornicating deviates this wonder drug and when they reach their mid life, the side effects rear their ugly heads as another clinical experiment with a terrible outcome.You kill me you liberal POS.

Put a lock on that box and no STD's....

 

[UAL_TECH]

Backlash Against Cancer Vaccine

Seems that the idiots that have been feeding the big bucks to and benefitting the most from King Bush's reign of terror have decided that they would rather have dead girls than allow them to be vaccinated with a drug that has a secondary benefit of preventing some STDs. Seems that being vaccinated for cervical cancer means that you're free to go have sex...and apparantly the vaccination is an aphrodesiac.

Give me a break. These are the people (tiny minority) that Bush has given so much power to?! I can't wait to hear the tales of support.

What a narrow minded view you have, did the Merck Corp. make a contribution to you?

MERCK'S GARDASIL VACCINE NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS

The FDA allowed Merck to use a potentially reactive aluminum containing placebo as a control for most trial participants, rather than a non-reactive saline solution placebo.[1] A reactive placebo can artificially increase the appearance of safety of an experimental drug or vaccine in a clinical trial. Gardasil contains 225 mcg of aluminum and, although aluminum adjuvants have been used in vaccines for decades, they were never tested for safety in clinical trials. Merck and the FDA did not disclose how much aluminum was in the placebo.[2]

Animal and human studies have shown that aluminum can cause nerve cell death [3] and that vaccine aluminum adjuvants can allow aluminum to enter the brain, [4 5] as well as cause inflammation at the injection site leading to chronic joint and muscle pain and fatigue. [6 7] Nearly 90 percent of Gardasil recipients and 85 percent of aluminum placebo recipients followed-up for safety reported one or more adverse events within 15 days of vaccination, particularly at the injection site.[8] Pain and swelling at injection site occurred in approximately 83 percent of Gardasil and 73 percent of aluminum placebo recipients. About 60 percent of those who got Gardasil or the aluminum placebo had systemic adverse events including headache, fever, nausea, dizziness, vomiting, diarrhea, myalgia. [9 10] Gardasil recipients had more serious adverse events such as headache, gastroenteritis, appendicitis, pelvic inflammatory disease, asthma, bronchospasm and arthritis.

"Merck and the FDA do not reveal in public documents exactly how many 9 to 15 year old girls were in the clinical trials, how many of them received hepatitis B vaccine and Gardasil simultaneously, and how many of them had serious adverse events after being injected with Gardasil or the aluminum placebo. For example, if there were less than 1,000 little girls actually injected with three doses of Gardasil, it is important to know how many had serious adverse events and how long they were followed for chronic health problems, such as juvenile arthritis."

UT

 

[Ch. 12]

Nice to see you exorcising your freedom of speech here and now without any possibility of reprisals in this free land....
So feed these little fornicating deviates this wonder drug and when they reach their mid life, the side effects rear their ugly heads as another clinical experiment with a terrible outcome.You kill me you liberal POS.

Put a lock on that box and no STD's....

No...what I posted was about the christian right stating that the drug opened the door for little girls to have sex (which is ASSinine in the first place) and how, to them, that was more atrocious than the girls receiving a cervical cancer vaccination. Get with it, "dude".

As far as side effects (and this is also in response to UAL Tech)...#1 it was FDA approved...no S&M sex addict rushed this illicit drug to the shelves via blackmarket channels (and THAT was not the argument...it was the christian right's sex issue that i pointed out) and #2 please read your deoderant label. ALUMINUM. This is not a new "concern" (just like cell phones causing tumors). It has long been suspected...or at least hypothesized...that aluminum is also a leading contributor to alzheimers but why aren't you all running around with your secondary argument that we should ban deoderant? It's b/c of just that...it is your secondary argument for your real first argument which is that sex is worse than cancer. Like the war in Iraq and global warming (and every other hot topic), when your primary excuse is debunked you manufacture more. Get lives.

 

[delldude]

As far as side effects (and this is also in response to UAL Tech)...#1 it was FDA approved...no S&M sex addict rushed this illicit drug to the shelves via blackmarket channels (and THAT was not the argument...it was the christian right's sex issue that i pointed out)

Abbott Seeks FDA approval for cancer drug despite failed trials - WSJ

LEAD: A Congressional investigation into how the Food and Drug Administration approved a sedative linked to deaths and serious side effects shows that the agency has failed to get all available data before clearing this and other drugs, a House subcommittee reported today.

WASHINGTON, Feb. 16 — A top federal medical official overruled the unanimous opinion of his scientific staff when he decided last year to approve a pacemaker-like device to treat persistent depression, a Senate committee reported Thursday.



Sounds like a place where huge profits may have big influence in approvals to me.....

...#1 it was FDA approved...no S&M sex addict rushed this illicit drug to the shelves via blackmarket channels

Following the death of as many as 60,000 Americans from COX-2 inhibitors (source: British Medical Journal, author Dr. David Graham, FDA drug safety researcher), an FDA advisory panel has now voted to allow the drugs to return to the market with full FDA safety approval. The fact that a single COX-2 drug has reportedly killed more Americans than the entire Vietnam War is apparently not sufficient for the FDA to characterize it as unsafe.
With this decision, a "safety approval" by the FDA has now become meaningless. If the agency can put its stamp of public safety approval on a drug that has killed tens of thousands of Americans and that was removed from the market by its own manufacturer following the revelation of studies showing alarming increases in heart attack risk, then what, pray tell, could possibly be the FDA's definition of a dangerous drug?


University of La Verne, School of Public Administration
Gary W. Lawson, DPA - May 2005 Doctoral Thesis

FDA Should Disclose Their Dependence On Drug Industry Funding

I have been a senior healthcare executive for more than 20 years. When I first started my thesis research I had no idea that the FDA was receiving a significant portion of its funding from the drug industry. At the time I started the study, even if I had known of the FDA's financial relationship to the drug industry, I wouldn't have believed that the FDA could be corrupted or influenced by this funding method. After two-years of investigation, I am convinced that the FDA's dependence on drug industry fees has created a deadly, unethical alliance and caused a principal-agent, pro-drug industry shift that puts millions of innocent Americans at risk. In my opinion, due to its dependence on drug industry fees, the FDA's actions related to prescription drugs are suspect, and the Agency can no longer be trusted to act in its traditional capacity as a legitimate, objective, consumer protection agency.


Dude,you kill me....

 

[local 12 proud]

Abbott Seeks FDA approval for cancer drug despite failed trials - WSJ

LEAD: A Congressional investigation into how the Food and Drug Administration approved a sedative linked to deaths and serious side effects shows that the agency has failed to get all available data before clearing this and other drugs, a House subcommittee reported today.

WASHINGTON, Feb. 16 — A top federal medical official overruled the unanimous opinion of his scientific staff when he decided last year to approve a pacemaker-like device to treat persistent depression, a Senate committee reported Thursday.



Sounds like a place where huge profits may have big influence in approvals to me.....
Following the death of as many as 60,000 Americans from COX-2 inhibitors (source: British Medical Journal, author Dr. David Graham, FDA drug safety researcher), an FDA advisory panel has now voted to allow the drugs to return to the market with full FDA safety approval. The fact that a single COX-2 drug has reportedly killed more Americans than the entire Vietnam War is apparently not sufficient for the FDA to characterize it as unsafe.
With this decision, a "safety approval" by the FDA has now become meaningless. If the agency can put its stamp of public safety approval on a drug that has killed tens of thousands of Americans and that was removed from the market by its own manufacturer following the revelation of studies showing alarming increases in heart attack risk, then what, pray tell, could possibly be the FDA's definition of a dangerous drug?


University of La Verne, School of Public Administration
Gary W. Lawson, DPA - May 2005 Doctoral Thesis

FDA Should Disclose Their Dependence On Drug Industry Funding

I have been a senior healthcare executive for more than 20 years. When I first started my thesis research I had no idea that the FDA was receiving a significant portion of its funding from the drug industry. At the time I started the study, even if I had known of the FDA's financial relationship to the drug industry, I wouldn't have believed that the FDA could be corrupted or influenced by this funding method. After two-years of investigation, I am convinced that the FDA's dependence on drug industry fees has created a deadly, unethical alliance and caused a principal-agent, pro-drug industry shift that puts millions of innocent Americans at risk. In my opinion, due to its dependence on drug industry fees, the FDA's actions related to prescription drugs are suspect, and the Agency can no longer be trusted to act in its traditional capacity as a legitimate, objective, consumer protection agency.


Dude,you kill me....

Ch. 12 Posted Today, 01:31 PM
Like the war in Iraq and global warming (and every other hot topic), when your primary excuse is debunked you manufacture more. Get lives.

More manufactured excuses waiting to be debunked I see.

No...what I posted was about the christian right stating that the drug opened the door for little girls to have sex (which is ASSinine in the first place) and how, to them, that was more atrocious than the girls receiving a cervical cancer vaccination. Get with it, "dude".

So go get your daughters vaccinated and get'em a diaphram while your at it, who's stopping you?

 

[Ch. 12]

Better throw away your deoderant as well. Somehow the aluminum in there has passed your "corruption" threshold but not in this drug? You can't choose to have it be good in one place and bad in another just b/c you think that a cancer vaccine (the first real step to any cancer prevention) that happens to also treat hepatitis will suddently empassion millions of teens to throw off their clothes and jump into bed with strangers. Give me a break. You guys need to get a grip on the real facts. Oh yeah...and a little consistency would go a long way...but then again...I know that neither of you are concerned about your credibility b/c you squashed that long ago by talking out of both sides of your mouth and manufacturing sensationalistic crap.

Yes...I will let my kids get vaccinated for cancer. I am intelligent enough to know that there is no aphrodesiatic quality to the drug so that chances of the drug luring them into having sex any more than their hormones already would is nil. I will also let them use deoderant...I have for decades and despite it having the same "toxic" poison as this vaccine, I am still here. And my deoderant never caused me to jump into bed with strangers, either.

Now I don't dispute that there is corruption in the FDA...there is in all of gov't. But I won't treat this drug differently from other daily-use items that contain the same ingredients.

 

[delldude]

Yes...I will let my kids get vaccinated for cancer.

I hope for your sake they don't end up like some who have taken estrogens and the like...I think theres a constitutional issue at stake here also....don't eat the soylent green..

Merck declined to disclose its lobbying and advertising budget for the vaccine.


Seems that the idiots that have been feeding the big bucks to and benefitting the most from King Bush's reign of terror have decided that they would rather have dead girls than allow them to be vaccinated with a drug that has a secondary benefit of preventing some STDs.

Who the hell said they have aphrodesiac effects?

Oh hell...you did

BTW-Aluminum in deodorant has been linked with Liberal Posting..... 😛

 

[700IAM]

I hope for your sake they don't end up like some who have taken estrogens and the like...I think theres a constitutional issue at stake here also....don't eat the soylent green..

Merck declined to disclose its lobbying and advertising budget for the vaccine.


Seems that the idiots that have been feeding the big bucks to and benefitting the most from King Bush's reign of terror have decided that they would rather have dead girls than allow them to be vaccinated with a drug that has a secondary benefit of preventing some STDs.

Who the hell said they have aphrodesiac effects?

Oh hell...you did

BTW-Aluminum in deodorant has been linked with Liberal Posting..... 😛

Don't let these fruit cakes get to you...

Like M.S. says...it's a [mental disorder]...only thing that makes sense, unless you consider the enemy and his deceptions they swallow hook line and sinker, which is what is really occurring here, and that is not my opinion but pure fact. Of course illusions rule the day on here with the lost calling me a freak trying to shield themselves from the light that destroys their spiritual and mental stupors.

 

[local 12 proud]

No...what I posted was about the christian right stating that the drug opened the door for little girls to have sex (which is ASSinine in the first place) and how, to them, that was more atrocious than the girls receiving a cervical cancer vaccination. Get with it, "dude".

Now you know good and well as do we, that you are trying to wind up 700IAM... 😉

No one is saying you can't get those misguided liberal
little girls protected against cancer while engaging in "fututio" not to be confused with "fellatio", just don't presume that all adolescents gals have been indoctrinated into your "free love hedonism club" and put your anti christian spin on it.

Parents should be able to determine whats in their kids best interest without the government shoving it down their throats.....ooops thats not where they are trying to shove it. :mf_boff:

 

[local 12 proud]

Put a lock on that box and no STD's....

C'mon, that would'nt be "fashionable"

Get with it, "dude".

:blink:

A pregnant 14-year-old has told how having a baby is now regarded as "fashionable" among schoolgirls.

Kizzy Neal has been asked to give advice to four of her classmates who have also fallen pregnant since Christmas.


The teen, from Torbay in Devon, said: "When my friends see my bump they say they wish they could have a baby, then three weeks later they're pregnant and don't know what to do.

"Teenage girls think babies are cute, but they forget the physical side of being pregnant, then having to give up your own childhood to look after a baby.

"It seems to be fashionable to get pregnant."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770