Bryan

"Otherwise healthy" with conveniently undisclosed histories of respiratory problems?

I think the ten percenters should either be abolished altogether, or at least should have to be paid by party funds, not the MPs budgets. However, I do not believe the top ten percenter lists posted in this thread for a second. I've never even seen a CPC or NDP one, but I get several Liberal ones every week

After sitting with a couple of vaccine clinic nurses at a fund-raiser this past weekend, there's no way in hell I'd let anyone I care about take the vaccine. People having seizures are a daily occurrence, and the official policy is to NOT report them because that would discourage others. It's getting to the point that some of the nurses are demanding that they not have to inoculate children if they have to man the vaccine stations because they can't handle it when the kids go into seizures when they get the shot. I was only joking about this in my previous post, but they said they were also told during orientation that there was no shortage of the vaccine at all, that people were only being told that there was in order to increase demand.

How do you convince people to line up for a vaccination they aren't interested in? Tell them there's a shortage.

Duffy made great points and his appearance was pretty much the only high point of P&P's remarkably weak run so far. He clearly showed that Stoffer is just as much of a liar as the rest of the opposition.

As usual, Liberals are lying about what they did in order to smear Conservatives that are stuck cleaning up Liberal messes. No surprise, business as usual. And they wonder why they are so far down in the polls? Stop with the idiotic lies, and maybe people will take you seriously.

You must not own a TV. Hyperbole has been king on virtually all media reports I've seen.

I never thought of it that way, but that pretty much does sum it up.

The premise of the article is highly flawed. If the NDP and Liberals were as closely aligned as the author seems to think, their vote and seat count would be more split than it is now, and the NDP would occasionally supersede the Liberal totals. Either that, or they would have just merged years ago. Many people who vote either Liberal or NDP would never vote for the other under any circumstances. Here in Manitoba for instance, MOST people are likely to vote either Conservative or NDP, but far less likely to vote Liberal (Provincially or Federally). Also, I've seen some of the recent federal voting trend polling appearing to show more back and forth movement between NDP and CPC support than LPC/NDP. What I mean is, when the CPC is down one week by say 2%, it's more often the NDP that's up 2% rather than the Liberals (and vice-versa). Besides that, the Dippers that are even more to the left that the CPC would never be on their radar, are just as likely to be put off by the Liberals as not left enough. No NDP choice on the ballot could push them either towards an even more marginal party, or they just might not vote. Many Liberals would never vote NDP either. Country-wide, since confederation, the Conservative vs Liberal choice has been the dominant one. An absence of one automatically creates at least some increase for the other.

I kind of like this layout, it's a fresh new look. I'd keep it (Except for the "IPBoard" logo).

Several serious reactions to the vaccines here in Winnipeg this week, and they've only been doing the vaccinations for a couple of days. This kind of falls into the "why do they say that when it's so obvious to prove false" category since many public health officials have been matter-of-factly stating that adverse events are in the order of less than one in a million.

Like I said, he's not the only one I've seen with what appear to be legitimate credentials making similar claims. I'd really like to see more insight as to what they're getting at. My only guess is that they are referring to something more specific than "all flu vaccines". Perhaps it's H1N1 specifically they are referring to, or maybe even adjuvanted vs not?

From the other articles I've read, that appears to be the point they are actually trying to make. Not that they have any knowledge that the flu vaccine is bad, rather that it's impossible to have the kind of certainty that public health officials are telling us that they have.

It's still pretty small, but fact that the abstract clearly does state the study was randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled, certainly refutes the "ever" claims. Makes one wonder why people like Dr. Wright who is a professor of pharmacology claim the opposite. If anyone would know what is and is not legit, he would. I could see why he would not be moved by one small study 15 years ago (when the flu vaccine is based on a new strain each year), but that doesn't explain why he'd claim "never". Perhaps what he actually meant got garbled by the reporter?

It's not the first time I've seen that claim made. I've read several sources that have claimed outright that no randomized placebo controlled double blind studies have ever been done on flu vaccines. They made a point of emphasizing "ever". I've seen health officials claim the opposite, but what's curious to me is is the studies they link to are very short term, small sample size, and not randomized placebo controlled double blind. The kinds of studies that are usually dismissed as irrelevant when a supplement maker or "natural heath remedy" type of outfit is using it to bolster their claims.

After Vioxx, Fen-phen, Baycol, etc, etc, we certainly should be at least a little skeptical when a pharmaceutical company tells us one of their products has been tested and found safe/effective. After Avian Flu, West Nile, SARS, etc, etc, we certainly should be at least a little skeptical when a public agency tells us we are all in danger. There is far too much scare-mongering, and far too many declarations of absolute certainty for any discerning person to just take what they are being told at face value.

The Liberal accusations of impropriety are falling on deaf ears precisely because they keep walking this delicate tight-rope between complete fabrication, and sheer ineptitude. One single cheque with a logo on it which the PM was clearly opposed to was spun as 180+ instances, the small rural community club projects going mostly to rural ridings was spun as most of the funding going to CPC ridings when the big money is going to the city ridings which are mostly LPC, bodybags that ordered by the nurse on the reserve was spun as the feds telling the aboriginals to just die, etc. The only thing the Liberals understand is lying, and they're totally confused when people don't listen to it anymore.

I tend to think that rather than merging, the NDP will just be the last man standing on the left after the Liberals disappear.

Did you actually look at those pictures? It's exactly one cheque (Keddy's) with a Conservative logo. Almost all of them in that slideshow are "Government of Canada" or "Canada's Economic Action Plan" motifs. Are the MPs names on them? Sure, those presenting the cheques did put their names on them, in many cases including MLAs from other parties. Again, if this is what counts as a "scandal", Conservatives everywhere should be proud.

No he isn't.

Mann's hockey stick graph passed peer review.

I never made any such argument.

No he isn't.

I'm saying he didn't put the logo on the prop for the photo-op. Harper's opinion is unchanged, he is saying the same thing now as he said then.

I'm generally impatient with the anti-vaccine people. However, most of the info I've been hearing on NPR has been contradictory at best. I'm still not in the "no vaccines" camp, but I'm becoming skeptical of the motives, efficacy, and safety regarding the H1N1 vaccines specifically. There are just too many unanswered questions about this particular vaccine for me.