Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#121
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
You can't read either, huh? Are you related to Jax? The virus strain
mutates...not the material used for immunization.... wrote in message ... On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:19:22 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" wrote: Katy, the vaccines are a dead virus. Do you have any idea what you're talking about?? Now you are starting to get the picture! BB |
#122
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jon,
Like I said, you can argue until you're blue in the face...about all it will get you is a certain level of asphyxia.... "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... "katysails" wrote in message news ![]() The residents medical needs are met by Medicare but their room and board is not....and no, I'm not against vaccination when it makes sense. Influenza is a dangerous disease..to some. To you. You certainly need a flu shot. Most people would benefit from the vaccination. Check the CDC. Up until this fiasco, that's what they've been recommending. It is not like the vaccines made for other diseases...it has to be re-configured a guess every year and is not a broad spectrum vaccine. The reasons why there were flu epidemics in the past are mostly gone in this country. They are reconfigured. It's more than a guess and less than a certainty. You do not know that for a fact. It's a guess and not a very good one. Get your facts straight. We do not have wide-scale starvation (malnutrition is not starvation...it means you are not eating correctly..not eating at all...), We do have situations of starvation, but it isn't wide-scale. What's your point? we have adequate sanitation, and a better understanding of how viri are caught. Handwashing, self quarantine when infected, and use of masks are far better options to choose than the needle...for the healthy. No. They're one of many things that help prevent getting or spreading the virus. And as far as the government being involved in health care goes...I believe there should be research and development and there should be a regulatory agency but I do not believe the government should be the administrator of or the provider of health care services except to assistance programs. No one does. The point is that Bush's administration DID NOTHING. "Thom Stewart" wrote in message ... Katie, I hope you're not saying, " no more Polio, TB, scarlet fever, small pox,etc shots" I like the Federal Gov to be involved in our health care. Does your Health Care Center take Medicare Payments? Ole Thom |
#123
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
The word ''vacines'' does not exist in the English language.
Scotty wrote Attention world: Stop making flu vacines! RB |
#124
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
And, they guess quite well about what to use for the vaccine. If they
didn't, we would have even more deaths. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "katysails" wrote in message ... You can't read either, huh? Are you related to Jax? The virus strain mutates...not the material used for immunization.... wrote in message ... On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:19:22 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" wrote: Katy, the vaccines are a dead virus. Do you have any idea what you're talking about?? Now you are starting to get the picture! BB |
#125
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
It's good enough for the CDC to recommend it.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "katysails" wrote in message news ![]() You misread....I know they inject dead virus samples....however, the virus you are trying to protect against mutates too fast for that to be efficacious for any period of time. "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... Katy, the vaccines are a dead virus. Do you have any idea what you're talking about?? If you had said the inhaled version, then at least you'd have an argument. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "katysails" wrote in message ... No...injecting foreign substances into your body that you do not need is not a good idea when it comes to viri. They mutate too fast in in ways that are too complicated to keep up with new technology. "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... In article , katysails wrote: Do that...you're still going to die sometime.... Whatever. The point is that innoculating people agaist the flu is a very good idea. We normally lose 36K or so people every year to it. Some people are at higher risk that others, but some flu strains are deadly to even normally healthy people. We're lucky that this year is a mild season. What if it had been a bad one, ala 1918, and Bush had failed to follow up on the advice he was given to do something to ensure the supply? Instead of a few extra deaths, we might have a few tens of thousands of extra deaths. Bush did nothing. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
#126
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
So, you're admitting you're wrong... no problem!
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "katysails" wrote in message ... Jon, Like I said, you can argue until you're blue in the face...about all it will get you is a certain level of asphyxia.... "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... "katysails" wrote in message news ![]() The residents medical needs are met by Medicare but their room and board is not....and no, I'm not against vaccination when it makes sense. Influenza is a dangerous disease..to some. To you. You certainly need a flu shot. Most people would benefit from the vaccination. Check the CDC. Up until this fiasco, that's what they've been recommending. It is not like the vaccines made for other diseases...it has to be re-configured a guess every year and is not a broad spectrum vaccine. The reasons why there were flu epidemics in the past are mostly gone in this country. They are reconfigured. It's more than a guess and less than a certainty. You do not know that for a fact. It's a guess and not a very good one. Get your facts straight. We do not have wide-scale starvation (malnutrition is not starvation...it means you are not eating correctly..not eating at all...), We do have situations of starvation, but it isn't wide-scale. What's your point? we have adequate sanitation, and a better understanding of how viri are caught. Handwashing, self quarantine when infected, and use of masks are far better options to choose than the needle...for the healthy. No. They're one of many things that help prevent getting or spreading the virus. And as far as the government being involved in health care goes...I believe there should be research and development and there should be a regulatory agency but I do not believe the government should be the administrator of or the provider of health care services except to assistance programs. No one does. The point is that Bush's administration DID NOTHING. "Thom Stewart" wrote in message ... Katie, I hope you're not saying, " no more Polio, TB, scarlet fever, small pox,etc shots" I like the Federal Gov to be involved in our health care. Does your Health Care Center take Medicare Payments? Ole Thom |
#128
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
BOO ! I went trick or treating tonight dressed up as a hooker. I
gots lots of yummy candy. Suzy |
#129
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
wrote: On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 20:19:12 GMT, "katysails" wrote: Si I dropped a friggin i from the word...so what? And I've never been to receptionist school or whatever you call it...I went to a Catholic lib arts college....and if you read any of the postings on this ng, you'd know that your opinion is held in respect by one person only....you know, maybe injecting a foreign substance into your veins might be a good idea... Dropped an "i"? Hoo Boy!!! There is no such word as "virii" in the English language either, ****forbrains. I'm guessing that you are looking for the plural of virus? It's "viruses" Actually it's virii. Latin plural of a latin singular. Common usage is viruses. Try looking further than the cheap dictionary you use for failing to solve kids' crosswords. PDW |
#130
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
More to the point, do you think the legislators will ignore their rich and
powerful constituents, just like they did during the civil rights crises in the 60s? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On 29 Oct 2004 15:12:40 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: More fundamentally, I think it's short-sighted, and a serious mistake, to base Constitutional principle solely on whether it yields your desired result in a particular case. So, you would advocate the repeal of all civil rights legislation that has taken place at the Federal level in favor of the legislation being put to the individual states? Talk about short-sighted!! From your last paragraph, should we infer that the Bill of Rights should also be eliminated, since it was designed to specifically address a desired result? As usual, non-sequiturs. And you still haven't answered the question: you think the State legislators will ignore their constituents if, as you say, and vast majority favor your position? Or the second question: Could it be that you have doubts about whether that vast majority is such a vast majority? |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
What does MIT say about ionization and lightning?? | ASA |