Tweet
Originally posted by Roman
If the 0.3% statistic is right and it is given to 30 million people each year, that would make 9,000 death from the vaccine each year. If immunisation were made compulsory for the nearly 300 million people in the US, that would bring the numbers up to 90,000. That is not an insignificant number.
If the 0.3% statistic is right and it is given to 30 million people each year, that would make 9,000 death from the vaccine each year. If immunisation were made compulsory for the nearly 300 million people in the US, that would bring the numbers up to 90,000. That is not an insignificant number.
Flu is only an inconvenience unless one is either in a weakened state (such as soldiers after WW I), or one belongs to a vulnerable group of people.
The flu kills children, the elderly, and people who are already sick. The Swine flu of 1918, however, mostly killed healthy people in the prime of life. In America, half a million people died from it, and while it first started in an amry barracks, these were men who had not seen combat and were not in a weakened state.
Originally posted by Faded Glory
You are creating an epidemic in the making. Each time you get a flu shot your body becomes immune to that strain. The strains eventually warp and get more sophisticated as each year goes by. Eventually when you do get the flu again, it will many fold worse than what it was the first time you got it. So you Che are the only fool here.... Eventually 30 years down the road...they wont be able to make a vaccine for it.
You are creating an epidemic in the making. Each time you get a flu shot your body becomes immune to that strain. The strains eventually warp and get more sophisticated as each year goes by. Eventually when you do get the flu again, it will many fold worse than what it was the first time you got it. So you Che are the only fool here.... Eventually 30 years down the road...they wont be able to make a vaccine for it.
Virii don't work that way. Influenza changes constantly, which is why new vaccines are needed each year. Some years it is a mild, cold like flu, some years a serious illness, and every so often, it is a killer plague.
BTW, you are confusing bacterial and viral immunity. Bacteria can adapt to antibiotics and pass this immunity on to non-related bacteria. Virii are not known to either, since they don't actually live. They are simply replicating bits of code, and the changes in their RNA happens not in their viral stage but in the replication stage, which occurs in the living host cell. Since, in the case of a vaccinated person, there is no host cell, the virus cannot change since it cannot replicate.
I also take issue with Anti-Bacterial soap.
In this, I agree with you. The diference here is that the anti-biotics are affecting living cells which are capable of self-replication. Hence, any immunities they develop can be passed on immediately. Also, through bacterial sex, harmless and healthy bacteria which live on our skin and in our guts can pass on these immunities to harmful bateria, such as tuberculosis.
Fortunately, it seems that resistant bacteria can't reproduce as quickly as non-resistant, so staying away from unnecessary antibitoics helps defeat resistant strains.
BTW, Faded, do you only eat organic animal products? If not, you are getting doses of antibiotics in your meat, milk, cheese, eggs, etc.
That's pretty smart.
never mind, I just misunderstood your previous post on this. I thought you were suggesting that the vaccine kills off the host cells (ie. your lungs), so I could not understand how one could still carry on breathing. Sorry, just confused by the language. 
Comment