more likely you got the shot too late. If you get the virus a day after you get the shot, then the shot is useless. Thats another thing to add on to my cost-benefit post above.

(on that note, given that H1N1 is now running rampant, and an H1N1 shot only helps if you avoid the real thing for a week, then the value of an H1N1 shot is probably a lot less than it would have been a month ago)

actually I had not been sick for 3 years prior-not even a cold.

If you arent around large groups of kids or sick people, you have better than a 50-50 chance of not getting the flu virus. Lets call it 60%

(0.60)^3 = 21.6%, so its not strange at all to miss the flu 3 years in a row. You cant get the flu from the shot, and not getting the shot doesnt make your immune system "better". Its a crapshoot that youll even get the virus at all.

exactly..avoid people at work with little kids. (sorry they are germ carriers).

our whole office got flu shots free on the company. I'm still avoiding people with kids.

NY Health care workers don''t want to get the shot? Say it isn't so.

http://www.naturalnews.com/027259_he..._vaccines.html

link to your chances of this happening? do you enjoy injecting people with mercury or causing the body to attack naturally occurring oils in your body? do some research on the shit your pushing.

Bingo: another great read on the subject..........

Ten questions about flu vaccines that doctors and health authorities refuse to answer..........

(NaturalNews) Vaccine mythology remains rampant in both western medicine and the mainstream media. To hear the vaccination zealots say it, vaccines are backed by "good science," they've been "proven effective" and they're "perfectly safe."

Oh really? Where's all that good science? As it turns out, there's isn't any. Flu vaccines (including swine flu vaccines) are based entirely on a vaccine mythology that assumes all vaccines work and no vaccines can be scientifically questioned. Anyone who dares question the safety or effectiveness of vaccines is immediately branded a danger to public health and marginalized in the scientific community.

Here are ten questions vaccine-pushing doctors and health authorities absolutely refuse to answer:

#1) Where are the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies proving flu vaccines are both safe and effective?

Answer: There aren't any. (http://www.naturalnews.com/027239_v...)


#2) Where, then, is the so-called "science" backing the idea that flu vaccines work at all?

Answer: Other than "cohort studies," there isn't any. And the cohort studies have been thoroughly debunked. Scientifically speaking, there isn't a scrap of honest evidence showing flu vaccines work at all.


#3) How can methyl mercury (Thimerosal, a preservative used in flu vaccines) be safe for injecting into the human body when mercury is an extremely toxic heavy metal?

Answer: It isn't safe at all. Methyl mercury is a poison. Along with vaccine adjuvants, it explains why so many people suffer autism or other debilitating neurological side effects after being vaccinated.


#4) Why do reports keep surfacing of children and teens suffering debilitating neurological disorders, brain swelling, seizures and even death following flu vaccines or HPV vaccines?

Answer: Because vaccines are dangerous. The vaccine industry routinely dismisses all such accounts -- no matter how many are reported -- as "coincidence."


#5) Why don't doctors recommend vitamin D for flu protection, especially when vitamin D activates the immune response far better than a vaccine? (http://www.naturalnews.com/027231_V...)

Answer: Because vitamin D can't be patented and sold as "medicine." You can make it yourself. If you want more vitamin D, you don't even need a doctor, and doctors tend not to recommend things that put them out of business.


#6) If human beings need flu vaccines to survive, then how did humans survive through all of Earth's history?

Answer: Human genetic code is already wired to automatically defend you against invading microorganisms (as long as you have vitamin D). (http://www.naturalnews.com/027231_V...)


#7) If the flu vaccine offers protection against the flu, then why are the people who often catch the flu the very same people who were vaccinated against it?

Answer: Because those most vulnerable to influenza infections are the very same people who have a poor adaptive response to the vaccines and don't build antibodies. In other words flu vaccines only "work" on people who don't need them. (And even building antibodies doesn't equate to real-world protection from the flu, by the way.)


#8) If the flu vaccine really works, then why was there no huge increase in flu death rates in 2004, the year when flu vaccines were in short supply and vaccination rates dropped by 40%? (http://www.naturalnews.com/027239_v...)

Answer: There was no change in the death rate. You could drop vaccination rates to zero percent and you'd still see no change in the number of people dying from the flu. That's because flu vaccines simply don't work.


#9) How can flu vaccines reduce mortality by 50% (as is claimed) when only about 10% of winter deaths are related to the flu in the first place?

They can't. The 50% statistic is an example of quack medical marketing. If I have a room full of 100 people, then I take the 50 healthiest people and hand them a candy bar, I can't then scientifically claim that "candy bars make people healthy." That's essentially the same logic behind the "50% reduction in mortality" claim of flu vaccines. (http://www.naturalnews.com/027239_v...).


#10) If flu vaccines work so well, then why are drug makers and health authorities so reluctant to subject them to scientific scrutiny with randomized, placebo-controlled studies?

Answer: Although they claim such studies would be "unethical," what's far more unethical is to keep injecting hundreds of millions of people every year with useless, harmful vaccines that aren't backed by a shred of honest evidence.


Vaccine voodoo?

The vaccine industry is about making money, not actually offering immune protection against the flu. Whether people get the flu or not is irrelevant to the bottom-line profits of the drug companies. What matters most is that people continue to take the flu shots, and making that happen depends entirely on pushing the vaccine mythology that infects the minds of doctors and health authorities today.

There was a time when all "good" doctors believed in bloodletting. Sickness was caused by evil spirits, they thought, and releasing pints of blood from the patient would clear the evil spirits and accelerate healing. Any doctor who questioned the science behind bloodletting was called a "denier." All the "good" doctors said, "We know bloodletting works, so we don't need science to back it up."

Today, you hear the exact same thing about vaccines. "We know they work," doctors claim, "so we don't need any real science to back it up." Anyone who questions the safety of flu vaccines (or H1N1 vaccines) is branded a "denier." Anyone who asks for solid scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of vaccines is called a troublemaker. They don't need any evidence. They already know vaccines work.

With that being the case, why bother calling it medicine at all? Why not just call it VOODOO? Why not accompany vaccines with the wave of a magic wand and some shamanic chanting? Maybe doctors should tell their patients to cross their fingers before being injected with a vaccine because "that makes it work better."

Seriously. Everything that doctors accuse "quacks" of doing with homeopathy, or herbs, or energy medicine is now being done by the doctors themselves when it comes to vaccines. They are following the exact same "quackery" they accuse other of pursuing.

This brings me to an important observation about modern medicine: MY quackery is okay, but YOUR quackery isn't!

That's the attitude of vaccine-pushing doctors and health authorities. As long as the quackery is widely agreed upon by the medical masses, then to heck with actual scientific evidence.

Quackery only needs good company, not good science, to be accepted as true.


Why natural medicine is inherently safer

Of course, these vaccine devotees might say, well, you don't have any good evidence to support your anti-viral herbs, or your medicinal teas, or your vitamin D nutrition either. But in saying that, they miss the whole point: Foods, herbs and nutrition are all natural, biocompatible healing elements that have been part of the human experience for as long as humans have roamed this planet. A chemical injection with a sharp needle that pierces the skin, on the other hand, is extremely interventionist. It's unnatural and in many ways quite radical. As such, it demands a higher burden of scientific proof than something that human beings have evolved with over time.

Foods, herbs and natural medicines have been around for millions of years. Vaccines have existed for less than a hundred years, and routine season flu vaccinations have really only been pushed hard for less than twenty years. They have no track record of success. They aren't natural, they aren't compatible with human biology, and they contain extremely toxic substances that clearly do not belong in the human body.

Given such extremes, the burden of proof for both safety and efficacy of vaccines falls onto those who would advocate them. And yet, to this day, no such proof has been offered... or is even pursued. There isn't even a plan in place to someday find out if flu vaccines really work. The whole plan is to just pursue "business as usual" and keep injecting people whether it really works or not.

Vaccine needles would be far more honest if they were shaped like question marks.

Flu vaccines are the voodoo of modern medicine.

Seriously. You would have the same level of protection from the flu if you brought your own personal voodoo doll to the clinic and had them inject that with the vaccine instead of you!

That's an interesting idea, actually. We could really reduce national health care costs if we just administered western medicines to our voodoo dolls instead of our actual bodies. Got cancer? Just poison your voodoo doll with chemotherapy. Side effects are almost non-existent. Need heart bypass surgery? Just have them operate on the doll (it's far less complicated). Want some protection from the winter flu? Just vaccinate the doll. It's quick and painless.

The results would be no worse than what people are experiencing right now. In fact, in most cases they might actually be better.

http://www.naturalnews.com/027258_va...u_vaccine.html

I'm sure the websites naturalnews.com and fluscam.com are completely unbiased and don't have an agenda they're trying to push. No chance.

Great sources.

That and the fact that they don't really stop the flu and the shots themselves are filled with poisons. NEVER get a flu shot!

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar...etter-way.aspx

When the source is "naturalnews dot com", you've got problems.

Apparently these folks have never heard of the CDC.

To say these studies have been debunked is silly. There are a ton of studies showing the effectiveness of vaccines, but there is no credible peer-reviewed study or paper "debunking" the effectiveness of vaccines that I'm aware of.

From an article answering this one: "Thimerosal is ethyl mercury, not methyl mercury which is a critical difference as ethyl mercury doesn’t accumulate in the body like methyl mercury. Regardless of that, almost all evidence points to no ill effects from thimerosal in vaccines."

From wikipedia: "Most conclusively, eight major studies (as of 2008) examined the effect of reductions or removal of thiomersal from vaccines. All eight demonstrated that autism rates failed to decline despite removal of thiomersal, arguing strongly against a causative role."

These nutty "vaccines cause autism!!!" folks never provide solid credible studies showing the link. Meanwhile, here are eight different studies showing no link.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

This is an actual argument? Correlation is not the same thing as causation. I’m sure hundreds of people have got in car accidents after getting a flu vaccine as well. Is that the flu vaccine’s fault?

Cool, a conspiracy theory. It’s not an either/or situation. Vitamin D does strengthen the immune system. However, a strong immune system doesn’t keep you from getting the flu.

strawman argument. No one is saying that "human beings need vaccines to survive". It can help a few people survive but by and large we are talking about avoiding the flu, not avoiding the plague.

Human beings also survived without blood transfusions too. Sure, a few people who got cut and bled out may have died, guess it sucks to be them. Human beings as a species dont NEED blood transfusions, chemotherapy, or good hygiene while preparing food.

This is nonsense. The first paragraph is simply dead-ass wrong. As for the second, the only difference between getting a killed virus and a live one in the wild is the former is not going to give you the flu. In both cases, the body's response is the same.

First, when your talking about deaths you are talking about a pretty small number so thats not really even the concern.

If they want to go there though, I guess these idiots cant explain H1N1 in 2009, then. The vaccine came too late to be a lot of help, and death among children from the flu is startlingly high compared to most years. We still have a few months to go, and we already have more deaths from young people than in most seasons.

From the CDC: "86 US children have died from the H1N1 swine flu since the virus emerged last spring, with 43 of those deaths coming in September and early October alone. During the past three years, deaths among children from the regular seasonal flu ranged from 46 to 88 annually."

50% may be fairly high, but to say it is zero is simply not believable considering that we are basically in a season where vaccination is much less than normal due to the H1N1 flu coming earlier than vaccines for almost everyone. Its clear this is going to be the deadliest flu for children we've seen in a long time, and probably for the population as a whole when this is finished in a couple months.

To say this is untested is simply wrong. The method used to make vaccines has not changed in years.

ROFL

As apposed to big pharmaceutical companies? Yeeeeeeeeeah, no agenda there right? :shake:

On a side note, it looks like you have been "lurking" for 8 month's. I'm glad you decided to post, but am surprised a thread on the flu is what drew you out of the closet.

Al: legitimate points can be made for or against both sides of the debate, as well as an argument that both sources “have an agenda.” I can see I am not going to change your mind on the subject, which is all good and not my intent. I can also assure you that you won’t swaying my position on the subject. I just wanted to throw out a few points that may, or may not be in the mainstream. <O:p

<O:p
I have been around here for several years and you have seen thousands of my posts. Do I come across as a Euell Gibbons, nut and granola cruncher type? I’m not on some kind of a crusade to knock modern society back into the dark ages and forgo all prescription drugs, not by any means.<O:p
<O:p

My main point is, with modern medicine, they are times it comes at a high cost. I know you have seen the looooooooooong list of side effects every time a pharmaceutical company advertises one of their products on TV. They have some person in the commercial with a, “I just won the lottery grin” telling you how great their product is. Meanwhile, down at the bottom of the screen (or at the lightning fast speed of an auctioneer at the end of the commercial) they enlighten us of the “possible side effects.” It’s generally a rather extensive long winded list.<O:p

That being said, I will go to the doc and get a prescription, if I really need it. I don’t even like to take ibuprofen unless I’m really hurting and avoid prescription drugs if at all possible.

<O:p
As stated above, there is an argument for both cases and people are certainly welcome to there own opinion and choices.<O:p
<O:p

peace<O:p
<O:p
Out <O:p

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...piditburns.jpg

Pretty simple:

1) There is ZERO evidence vaccinations cause autism.
2) The side effects of flu shots (specifically H1N1) are no worse than your average aspirin. Hell, any drug lists about every side effect there is. How many do most people normally get? One or two max.
3) Sometimes there are adverse reactions to vaccines. It doesn't mean we should discard them altogether. Polio, anyone?

And there is "zero" evidence they don't. I don't trust the medical profession or FDA to tell me the sky is blue. How many mistakes have there been? Thalidimyde (sp.), toxic shock syndrome, too many drugs to count that have been recalled, etc.,. They told us saccharin was evil so they invented aspartame, which has a lot of bad press and side effects but saccharin was recently exonerated. I barely trust a drug that's been in release for 10 years, never mind a newly-designed flu shot.

You can't get through polio with orange juice and a box of Kleenex for the most part.

It's funny. Nobody mentioned this.

Pics.