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.
If there were no vaccines, big pharma would be even bigger. It would be much more profitable to treat sick people than it is to prevent them from getting sick in the first place. You can pay for a lot of vaccine for what a single day in an ICU would cost.
The nurses who post here will tell you they have never seen a death from a vaccine. Some have seen babies die from whooping cough, though.
Every vaccine that is developed undergoes analysis to make sure it is economically advantageous to use it. If the cost cannot be justified, the vaccine will not be produced.
Thanks for explaining how the CDC estimates flu deaths. That you apparently do not understand the methodology does not mean it is not true. If the original illness is influenza and the patient dies from a superimposed bacterial pneumonia which he would not have had if the flu had not come first, that is legitimately counted as a flu death.
If one person in a thousand dies because he got the flu, that is very significant. It sounds as if you do not think an infant dying from influenza means anything. That's just sad.
Because vaccines are not 100% effective. Despite that, those who are not vaccinated are more likely to catch the disease and spread it. Also, there are those who cannot be vaccinated because they are too young or have true medical contraindications.
It is not just your "personal freedom". It affects everyone in the community.
I have already responded to this.
Both statements are untrue. Either support them or withdraw them.
- Mandatory flu shots for every single American are far more profitable. The 350,000,000+ flu shots are more profitable than the (unsubstantiated) 200,000 cases of the flu every year, most of which never see a Doctor or Emergency Dept, much less a hospital.
- Now you're lumping whooping cough into the flu discussion? They're not the same sickness or vaccine.
- As you said, it only gets produced if they can make a profit on it. It's not about keeping people healthy, it's about profits. So why push flu shots if they're going to make so much more money if people aren't vaccinated? Does not compute.
- So again, the CDC has no idea how many people die from the flu, they're just guessing. You're only speculating that the secondary infection was a result of the flu. You can not prove that and have no reason to believe that other than wanting to force your misguided beliefs on others.
- I don't think infants dying from the flu means anything? Ohhhhhhhhhhh Mason3000 hates babies!!!
how is Bloomberg going to enforce his immunization plan? is he going to come up to the door with the cops shoot everyone that refuses to get a flu shot?
will he force everyone to get a flu shot even if it is against their religious beliefs?
Understand that 60% figure is new and has been massaged to be persuasive. It's been debunked and the real figure is 1.5% Shock vaccine study reveals influenza vaccines only prevent the flu in 1.5 out of 100 adults (not 60% as you've been told) Also, it's important to understand how much money Big Pharma and the politicians stand to make in this deal, as well as understanding that Big pharma spends more on marketing (which includes propaganda and paying fr8iejndly scientists for friendly research) than they do on R/D. It's all a racket.
Translated .... the flu vaccine is WORTHLESS as a preventive measure since 1.5 % is statistically insignificant, falling within the margin of error that exists in all statistical analysis efforts.
But the truth is even worse, since this figure does not account for the adverse reactions associated with all vaccines, so not only is it worthless to all, it serves as a threat to those that WII EXPERIENCE ADVERSE REACTIONS ... some, way more severe than the flu would produce.
Translated .... the flu vaccine is WORTHLESS as a preventive measure since 1.5 % is statistically insignificant, falling within the margin of error that exists in all statistical analysis efforts.
But the truth is even worse, since this figure does not account for the adverse reactions associated with all vaccines, so not only is it worthless to all, it serves as a threat to those that WII EXPERIENCE ADVERSE REACTIONS ... some, way more severe than the flu would produce.
Your inability to understand medical statistics is embarrassing. You might want to take a course.
Now, if their unsubstantiated/enhanced figure of .001% of the population dies because of the flu (which it doesn't), but only a small fraction of those deaths are people outside of infants, the elderly and the already ill....how "significant" is that?
What you said is that deaths of infants, the elderly, and those who are already ill are insignificant. If that is not what you intended to say, perhaps you woul like to clarify your position.
About 105 children died from flu related illnesses last year. About 90% had not had the vaccine. Sixty percent of those who died had underlying health problems, but 40% were otherwise healthy. But according to you, those 105 deaths are not worth considering. I suspect their parents feel differently.
In children, flu vaccine is 77 to 90% effective. That means if those kids had been vaccinated, perhaps 77 to 90 of them would still be alive.
Well, that would depend on which chelator is used for the delivery, wouldn't it?
From mercury amalgam fillings constantly vaporizing.
Mercury, like bleach, has no biological friends. It doesn't play well with any.
Scientists study what they are funded to study. The CDC, however, is a bureaucratic organization, more than a scientific organization.
They really do have a hard time distinguishing a cold from a flu, don't they?
No, they understand quite well. You fail to understand basic statistics. Try the Khan course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Why do I keep mentioning thimerosal? I haven't. I mentioned it just once in this thread. Make that twice since I said it in this post as well.
The fact that you mention it at all means your sources of information are suspect. You are concerned about "substances" in vaccines for which there is no proven harm and trivialize the very real risks of the diseases prevented by vaccines.
To quote a poster in another forum, denying your children vaccines is akin to hiding them in a swamp full of alligators to save them from attacking ninjas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason3000
- Mandatory flu shots for every single American are far more profitable. The 350,000,000+ flu shots are more profitable than the (unsubstantiated) 200,000 cases of the flu every year, most of which never see a Doctor or Emergency Dept, much less a hospital.
- Now you're lumping whooping cough into the flu discussion? They're not the same sickness or vaccine.
- As you said, it only gets produced if they can make a profit on it. It's not about keeping people healthy, it's about profits. So why push flu shots if they're going to make so much more money if people aren't vaccinated? Does not compute.
- So again, the CDC has no idea how many people die from the flu, they're just guessing. You're only speculating that the secondary infection was a result of the flu. You can not prove that and have no reason to believe that other than wanting to force your misguided beliefs on others.
Have you finished the statistics course yet? Let us know when you have.
I mentioned whooping cough just as a reminder that infectious diseases kill babies. Anti-vaxers tend to push that fact under the rug.
Pharma makes vaccines because they work. They are content with the profit from them. Of course, that flies in the face of your argument that money is everything, does it not?
Last edited by suzy_q2010; 12-25-2013 at 10:48 AM..
how is Bloomberg going to enforce his immunization plan? is he going to come up to the door with the cops shoot everyone that refuses to get a flu shot?
He is secretly investing in a new company currently prototyping Vacazer guns, and surprise mistisizers (like those battery powered air fresheners, but scalable).
Tacit knowledge, fallible thesis.... Way to dodge the question. It's ok to admit you get your information from.natural news.....
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.
