Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which would be true if it was proven to be 100% effective.
Its not even close. Yet you continue to beat your fear-mongering drum about how EVERYONE needs the vaccine. No. You do not control others actions as much as you stamp your feet and yell on this board. Seriously, how many provaccine threads have you started? How many times have you demanded others go get the vaccine, no thinking necessary, just GO NOW!!! IT'S AVAILABLE NOW!!!! insert 57 links to who knows where to support it, because well, you will die if you don't get it.
So yes, I "get it." It's not worth it. It does. not. work. Decision is not even a head scratcher, just a resounding: Not Worth It.
When it's 100% effective? Let me know. Maybe we can talk then.
I spent three and a half weeks in an ICU on a ventilator and another two weeks recovering in the hospital because I caught the flu and almost died from it.
In a little over a month, I lost eighty pounds and had to relearn sitting, standing, walking, drinking water from a glass, eating and writing my name.
The vast majority of people who refuse to get a flu shot are the raging liberals who also believe that infant vaccinations cause autism, that 'natural' toothpaste is good for their teeth, yet fluoride in their water is bad for them, that GMOs are bad for them, that fracking is a net negative, etc.
In other words, liberals are anti-science and will believe any trend that they can jump on at any moment. The poor things simply cannot help themselves, as they are programmed to try to fit in with their contemporaries.
Not in my neck of the woods. Here it tends to be right wing Christian homeschooling evangelicals that avoid vaccinations.
As stated previously, efficacy estimates are pure speculation (at best), based on purely unproven assumptions.
Stated more bluntly, there is no validity to these figures whatsoever. An analogy might help here ... let’s say we place a Greenbay Packer bobble head on the dash of 1000 cars, and those 1000 cars experience a statistical decrease in accident rates, compared to the average ... did the bobble head improve driver safety? The entire exercise would be meaningless since bobble heads couldn’t possibly prevent accidents ... yet the statistics might show this, based purely on random chance. The same is true when attempting to present efficacy figures of vaccines, given the randomness of assuming virus exposure rates, among the other countless variables which might contribute to increases or decreases in infection rates, having nothing to do with vaccine usage.
Based on my personal experience ... doing nothing at all was 96% effective in preventing the flu. Convince me why I should reduce that to 40%, by taking the vaccine?
True ... cluelessness does indeed span the political spectrum.
I’ve heard the line “I’m from the government, and here to help you” nonsense ... but this is is a real doozy...
Here’s the truth .... this “system” is designed to accomplish several beneficial outcomes, none of which apply to the victims suffering damage.
1) it’s a shut up and go away, hush money system, which is NOT PAID FOR BY THE VACCINE MANUFACTURERS, as the monies paid in damages come from a portion of the costs tagged onto each vaccination jab. In other words, each vaccine recipient foots the bill for those who suffer damage. It’s a greate little scheme if you can afford to buy congressmen ... which the vaccine makers are surely flush with cash to do it. After all, $4,000,000,000+ is a lot of loot to spread around to our elected bribe takers ... which is the figure to date, paid in damages, of which not a penny came from the liable parties. No guilt, no cost, no repercussions... no bad press for Big Pharma .... a sweet deal, if you can afford it.
2) By having their own little court system extraneous to the the mainstream justice system applying to everyone and everything not vaccine related, proceedings, court records and transcripts are not widely available for review, thereby keeping the dirty laundry secrets, secret. And, contrary to our mainstream justice system, which must decide and declare an entity either liable, or not liable for damages (guilty or not guilty), no such judgements are rendered there ... in fact, each award specifically states that the awarding of damages only recognize that actual damage was suffered, but explicitly insists that the decision does not conclude that the vaccine caused the damage. How brilliantly convenient!!!
Vaccine needles are as safe as firearms .... so long as you don’t point them at a person, and pull the trigger, they’re safe. And that’s where safety begins and ends, with both.
See the vaccine court scheme as the gate keeper, keeping vaccines safe from the guilty verdict that would otherwise occur, if not kept quiet and secret by kangaroos wearing black gowns.
It's untrue that there is no manufacturer liability. See this: https://violentmetaphors.com/2013/11...lin-mcroberts/ "Why Anti-vaxers Hate the NVICP and Just What is it Anyway" "The NVICP is a special court set up by Congress for people who claim they were injured by vaccines. Instead of having to sue the vaccine makers, which is an incredibly expensive, difficult, and time-consuming process, those plaintiffs get fast-tracked through a non-adversarial system. That means that instead of making them fight with the vaccine makers’ lawyers, the government pays for the plaintiffs’ counsel and works with them to determine whether compensation is appropriate. Plaintiffs in the NVICP win their cases much more often than plaintiffs in the normal product-liability courts, and even if they lose they don’t have to pay for their own lawyers."
Plus much more. And to repeat, no one who is pro-vax says that vaccines are 100% safe, but they are very close to that.
Close to 100% safe? $4 billion in payouts from adverse effects .. and you still the beat "THEY ARE SAFE!!!! SAFE I TELL YOU!!!!!" drum?
Show me were it says that the manufacturer admits guilt that the vaccine caused harm.
$4 billion in payouts and counting ... and yet I've never seen one headline "Vaccine Manufacturer Found Guilty"
It's been shown that most people who choose not to vaccinate are in fact highly educated and of upper level income.
I'm not talking about backwoods serpent handling folk. One of the biggest measles outbreaks in the DFW area in the last few years happened at a mega church, lots of money there.
The "flu shots" you are referring to back in the 1970's were nothing of the sort. Instead that scar you have on your arm is from a inoculation gun you were given for XYZ, not the flu.
It is amazing how often you are either wrong or misinformed, yet you still feel as if your opinion is valid for some reason.
The evil "bid pharma" (I suppose like big oil and other evil works of satan) has saved more lives and enriched more lives than you seem capable of understanding.
The flu vaccine is a newer phenomenon, yet to some growing up today, it seems like a PB & J sandwich.
Many people, including my parents never once took the flu vaccine, and never caught a flu, despite some of their elderly friends who did, and yet some still got sick.
That of course is an anecdotal story, but rest assured getting or not getting a flu shot is a far different matter than not getting inoculated with standard vaccines, for serious and sometimes deadly pathogens that can become an epidemic.
`
The flu shot for the general public media blitz started in 1976. Marketing. The Flu Pandemic that wasn't. President Ford was shown on TV rolling up his sleeve getting his flu shot. According to medical professionals on here, the flu vaccine had been around since the 1940's but wasn't pushed on the general public until then. I am 70. so obviously my parents nor I ever got a flu shot growing up. I have never in my life had a flu shot.
My daughters were never mandated to get a yearly flu shot in public school back in the 80's and 90's. It still isn't today. California, and recently NY, has mandated it for Day Care and Pre-School but not K-12. Definitely not for public school staff. Encourage, Yes. Mandate, No. I worked in Public School in NY and Florida until 2008. Neither students nor staff were required to get yearly flu shots.
As Guy n Texas has pointed out...…. "there is no way to assess vaccine effectiveness in an uncontrolled environment ... meaning: without direct and deliberate exposure to the virus, no one can legitimately claim that the vaccine prevented an illness event, when exposure is unknown. In such an uncontrolled environment, the absence of illness can be the result of non-exposure to the virus, as well as the proper functioning of the immune system upon exposure to it."
I'm over 70, have never gotten the shots, have never had the flu.
Is it because I have an natural immunity? Is it because I've never been exposed? Just lucky? Who knows, even though I have been around a couple of people who did have it.
'Just the fact of mutations and the very reasonable chance that having a shot won't provide protection anyway will keep me doing what I have been doing, or haven't, as the case may be
I never get a flu shot and I never get the flu. I try to avoid letting random people stick needles in me. If there was some massive illness I wouldn't be opposed to a vaccine but flu doesn't scare me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
