Is it really just a vaccine, or does it actually include a strain of an experimental drug and all the troops are guinea pigs for Amgen or Smith-Cline Biolabs?

An incredibly stupid question that doesn't deserve any sort of answer.

Nice pic, Scott ...

FreedomCelt they been giving the vaccine for over twenty or thirty something years to civilian that work in labs. Please do the research before make a false statement. Or as Cider33Alpha said "An incredibly stupid question that doesn't deserve any sort of answer."

Just to let you know that I have received the vaccine for the last eight and a half years I don't have arm growing out my butt or anything wrong.

Plus I don't think the military would want a law suit on their hands.

Do your research Dude! & Have a great day!

THANK YOU!!!

Your very Welcome Cider!

Not a stupid question at all. The old Vaccine did not have the adjuvant SQUALENE in it. Many service members have become critically ill or even died from reactions to the vaccine.

Gary Matsumoto, a journalist based in New York City, has reported from thirty-two different countries on five continents, covered two wars and five popular uprisings, and won ten journalism awards. He has been the London Bureau Manager and Chief Foreign Correspondent for NBC Radio News; a National Correspondent for NBC's Weekend Today Show and Senior Correspondent for the Fox News Channel. As a broadcaster, he has covered events ranging from the toppling of the Communist Party in Eastern Europe to Desert Storm, the Tiananmen Square massacre to the death of Princess Diana. He has written about the anthrax letter attacks for the Washington Post and Science magazine. His 1998 article in Vanity Fair was the first to draw the connection between the anthrax vaccine and Gulf War Syndrome.

The Greatest Story Never Told

For the past 17 years, the Army has been working on a new anthrax vaccine that contains no anthrax, and is made with an ingredient that it does not want to name. That ingredient is called squalene. Squalene is an oil. Without it, the new vaccine will not work any better than the old one. In fact, for all intents and purposes, without squalene the new vaccine is the old one. What makes squalene so important is its proven ability to stimulate a strong response from the immune system. That is something the main ingredient of the new vaccine, the now ultra-purified protein secreted by the anthrax microbe—recombinant protective antigen—cannot do by itself. It is too weak.

Immunologists have a special name for substances used to boost feeble vaccines. They are called adjuvants. Adjuvants are arguably the most extensively researched pharmaceutical product in the last quarter century that you never heard of. I have used the word adjuvant three times in this paragraph so far and that is probably three times more than you have ever seen it in print before. This is partly because the most effective adjuvants, those formulated with oils, are too dangerous for human use. That is squalene's other proven ability, causing incurable disease, which is why it is such a touchy subject with the Department of Defense.

The word adjuvant comes from a Latin word that means "to help." But with oil adjuvants like squalene that term is misleading. Today, only one adjuvant—an aluminum salt called alum—is licensed for human use. All the oil adjuvants are so noxious that their use is restricted to experiments with animals, and even then, governments have written strict regulations to govern how they are used. The classic oil adjuvant, called Freund's Complete Adjuvant, is considered too inhumane to even inject into animals. It does a terrific job of stimulating the immune system, though. Unfortunately, Freund's Complete Adjuvant can cause permanent organ damage and incurable disease. As early as the 1930s, these oil additives were notorious for inducing illness. By the 1950s, scientists knew these illnesses were specifically autoimmune. Today that is their chief use in research—inducing disease instead of preventing it. Scientists studying autoimmune disease cannot wait around for its spontaneous appearance in a lab animal; they inject it with Freund's Complete Adjuvant to reproduce autoimmunity on demand. Oil adjuvants made with squalene equally effective at this job, and regrettably according to Dutch scientists, equally inhumane. , ,

Autoimmune diseases are chronic and progressively debilitating ailments; some, like multiple sclerosis and lupus, can be fatal. They occur when the immune system loses its ability to distinguish what is "self" from what is foreign. Under normal circumstances, your immune system ignores the constituents of your own body; immunologists call this "tolerance." But if tolerance is broken, the immune system turns relentlessly self-destructive, attacking the body it is supposed to defend.

Adjuvants can break tolerance. In 1956, Dr. Jules Freund, the Hungarian born scientist who gave his name to the adjuvant he created, warned that animals injected with Freund's developed terrible conditions: allergic aspermatogenesis (stoppage of sperm production), experimental allergic encephalomyelitis (the animal version of multiple sclerosis) and allergic neuritis (inflammation of nerves that can lead to paralysis), allergic uveitis (an inflammation in the eye that can cause blindness). There was no reversing any of these conditions.

Scientists are still unsure why oil adjuvants do this. One theory is that oils have the ability to hyperactivate the immune system. "The cause is probably that when injecting these molecules, you create a chaos in the immune system," says Dr. Johnny C. Lorentzen, and immunologist with the Karolinska Institute, which awards the annual Nobel Prize for Medicine. He says these oils induce "an extremely powerful response," so powerful, in fact, that the immune system goes haywire and starts attacking things it would otherwise leave alone. Another possibility, which has not been explored very much, is that this harmful phenomenon actually has something to do with one of the greatest distinguishing characteristics of the immune system—its specificity. Over eons in time, this extraordinarily elegant and powerful system has evolved to respond very precisely to what it deems potentially harmful to the body. Our bodies contain all sorts of oily molecules. It could be that when an oil is injected, the immune system actually responds to it with a high degree of precision - just as it responds to everything else - but because the adjuvant resembles too closely those oils found in the body, the immune system begins attacking those too. In immunology this is called a "cross reaction." Neither proposition - chaos or specificity - has been proven so far. But however oils do their damage, it is well known that they do.

Army scientists have been as aware as anyone else of the harm that injecting oils can do. The problem for military personnel is that these scientists learned this lesson by injecting oils into troops in experiments that in some cases they did not agree to participate in. The central question in this book is whether such an experiment has been done again with the new anthrax vaccine and squalene.

Duplicate post.

See my replies on your OTHER posts on this forum and others, and stop spamming. It's against the TOU and can get you booted.

i'm not a huge fan of the anthrax vaccine -- however, it's funny that all these people are having issues over it, when there has been an anthrax vaccine in various forms over the years, for a very long time.

veterinarians, and people who work regularly with bovines, have been vaccinated with one form for years.

anything that doesn't belong in the body, or the body THINKS doesn't belong there, will stimulate the immune system... hence the reasons vaccines WORK. something that isn't supposed to be there, is there.

this is the same group of people who think that vaccinating ur children will give them autism.
for a hundred years, people have been receiving vaccines, and the fact of the matter is, we have a stronger healthier population now than we did in 1907. More children survive childhood diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, and smallpox. how many children have u heard of in the western world even CONTRACTING some of these diseases? it's because of the effectiveness of the vaccines, that in THEIR day, were highly controversial.

we need to make educated decisions, but at the same time, lets not lose our heads.

quote:

Originally posted by FreedomCelt:
Is it really just a vaccine, or does it actually include a strain of an experimental drug and all the troops are guinea pigs for Amgen or Smith-Cline Biolabs?

all i heard is in the future you can get very deathly sick from it if you dont eat healthy and keep in shape.

If that's "all you heard," then you need to listen up more - or stop being so selective with your hearing.

I thought that Anthrax scare was a bunch of hooey myself, but then again; there are just too many people complaing and/or blaming it for causing them harm to ignore the possibility of it being true. Maybe it does escallate unknown illness... maybe not. How are you going to figure something like that out? Who it affects, who it doesn't; DNA tests?
Government isn't going to fund that kind of research. Even if they already have, the ratio of sick to healthy isn't threatening enough to do anything about it.

This is some nasty stuff.

If by "this" you mean anthrax vaccine, compare that to anthrax itself. Very bad juju, no question. I'll take the vaccine, thanks.

To anyone that has had this vaccine....have you had any problems? My husband hasn't had it yet, but will be getting it soon. I haven't done any research on it and didn't think it was a big deal at all, but my mother in law has recently been calling my husband saying that she has heard some nasty things about it. I think she is just way too overprotective, but just wondering if anyone else has "heard" about it causing birth defects or any of that stuff.

There have been a number of studies looking at the rate of birth defects and miscarriages/stillbirths among women who have received anthrax vaccine versus those who have not. There are no statistical differences.

That also holds true for wives/significant others of men who have been vaccinated versus those who have not.

For a pretty comprehensive look at pertinent studies, Google "Institute of Medicine" and look for studies completed that are about the anthrax vaccine - there are several. That should help put your mind at ease and provide credible information for your M-I-L.

If they offer it, I'll take it!

I am an Immunization technician and I spend most of time throughout the day briefing people on all the vaccinations I administer. Anthrax is just like any other vaccination. There is always a risk of minor/moderate/severe reaction to any medication or vaccine that is introduced in the body. Anthrax vaccine is not an investigational drug that the military is using as an experiment. Farm workers who have increased risk of being exposed to Anthrax in the soil have been getting vaccinated with this for years. Lab workers at Fort Dedrick, Md have been vaccinated with Anthrax since the 1940's. The FDA has approved it as being safe and effective. Also, other civilian-ran organizations (such as the Advisory Committe of Immunization Practices, the Cochrane Collaboration, etc.) have done their own testing on this vaccine and have come up with the same conclusion. The Advisory Committee of Immunization Practices (ACIP) advises the CDC, who in turn gives their findings to the FDA for final approval. To be honest, I would trust receiving Anthrax over any other vaccination because it is the most studied out of all of them. People should be more questionable and hesitant about receiving a new vaccine on the market. And also, to the other guy a few posts up, I find it interesting you are using as a reference a journalist and not a physician/scientist who has actually studied Anthrax. If I believed every word the media said out of their mouth, I would be one delusional individual. And also, squalene in small amounts has been studied and proven to be harmless. Your whole post is nothing but a conspiracy theory with big, pretty words to make it appear accurate. Would you rather receive this vaccination or would you rather run the risk of being exposed to actual Anthrax? It's not a pretty death, let me tell you...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: tmonique81,