Quote:
Originally Posted by zookester
I don't take offense at all. It was he who published the article but, the studies behind the information did not come from that doctor. I'm just of the thought that many things are done to save a dollar and though the effort to might seem innocent enough on its face, there are countless reasons why it wouldn't be public knowledge on how this vaccine might adversely affect those that are suffering from long term health issues. Even a small % of mortality would save insurance companies millions of dollars annually. We see it every day in our own illness where things that could potentially help are denied in order to save a dollar. Again, it is just something worth thinking about. Not saying I wholly agree but, the information is thought provoking either way.
|
Makes me think of the MMR vaccination in the UK.....loads of parents chose NOT to vaccinate their kids because of the negative press about the MMR vaccine. Lots of unvaccinated children now getting measles, mumps and rubella because of it, and passing it on to their friends - and some of those kids develop it badly and have nasty reactions, pass it to their children etc. Now they are lining up for it again, and there's a big push to get kids safe again. Turned out actually the risks of the vaccination WERE a lot less (as a population) than crossing fingers and hoping.
I'm not saying 'you've got to have the flu shot', but there are always two opposing points of view on these things....and pretty often the scientists are right.
Bram.