Sorry difar but I’m afraid your lack of faith in the medical profession is not something you’ll resolve trawling the internet. Talk to a doctor. They aren’t all part of the great conspiracy…….
No I don't believe that the vaccine does cover all the different mutations and manifestations of the anthrax lurgy. No vaccine will cover all strains. The vaccine will be targeted at the most common or the strain most likely to be encountered. I don't believe that it is intended as a "better-than-nothing" vaccine.
I don't have a blind faith in Medical Science and I am well aware that some drug companies may push profitable products ahead of more efficacious ones. That’s just big business I’m afraid.
On the other hand I am the son of a doctor, nephew to two doctors and the husband of a doctor. Perhaps this skews my opinion somewhat or perhaps it gives me more insight into how these people go about their work.
Dr StopStart's opinion is that if your not going to be exposed to anthrax then don't have the vaccine, not because it'll make your head fall off but because there's no point. Otherwise we'd all have our appendix and tonsils removed at birth just on the off chance they become infected etc and all be given 100s of vaccines also just on the off chance we are exposed to the diseases.
The are thousands of vaccines out there for thousands of diseases. We are only vaccinated against things that we may be exposed to. If we are running the risk of being exposed to anthrax then we should be vaccinated against it. The choice is ultimately yours, obviously, but if you are not vaccinated then the Service might see your deployment to a theatre where anthrax was a threat as too high a risk.
Since the Sierra Leone malaria business the MoD has gone overboard to ensure their personnel are properly protected against disease, wherever possible. Partially, as I say, to safeguard the operational efficiency of the force but also to cover their asses for when everybody starts to sue them – as seems de rigueur these days
Like I said, I base my opinions on what I know and have been told by professionals. I’m fortunate that I can ask Mrs StopStart – last thing she’s going to want is a drooling vegetable cluttering up the house if I have a vaccine which subsequently has some terrible side effect. She has nothing to gain and everything to lose by advising me to have a vaccine that may potentially do me great harm. I would like to think that someone with 8 years professional training, 8 years in the job and currently working in a auto-immune research job might be a more reliable source of information than Pprune or that daily RAF publication “BlokeSaid”. Her thoughts were “The anthrax vaccine that is a licenced product that has been used by vets and farm workers for nearly 30 years. If you’re going to be exposed to anthrax, then have the vaccine. If you’re not, then don’t bother. There’s no point having a sore arm for three days if you’re never going to be exposed. Now stop wasting your life on the internet and do the washing up.”
Wise words
BlueWolf, one would indeed be foolish to accept all that the Medical machine produces as gospel truth. As it stands, however, orthodox, clinical medicine provides far more answers for me than does alternative medicine. Until there is any real, documented proof that alternative therapies work then I’m afraid I will remain a sceptic.
As you rightly say, people should make up their own minds based on what information they can find and what they believe. Medical science can provide me with enough proof that many of it’s techniques and treatments do work. I know for a fact (as we all do) that there is much they do not understand. I also know that within orthodox medicine opinions are divided on many things. However the basic accepted tenets of medical science hold water for very many people across the spectrum and it is from these that their work develops.
To go back to the origins of it all, Monsieur Beauchamp’s initial theories on fermentation were correct. Pasteur’s were wrong. Pasteur may well have plagiarised his work on this subject but why then did he not go on to pinch the rest of his work? Perhaps Beauchamp hit lucky with the yeast thing however the rest of his theories have never been substantiated or proven in any way at all. I sense neither conspiracy nor cover up by the medical establishment over this just merely unproven theories. If a drug company could prove his theories and subsequently used them to cure cancer they’d be in for a whole pile of money. Seeing as money makes the world go round, I suspect if there was anything in it they’d have found it by now
Still happy to be proven wrong though.