It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Young not taking swine flu vaccine

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Young not taking swine flu vaccine


www.independent.co.uk...

"The only thing is, younger people can't be persuaded to have the vaccine."


Asked why fewer young people are getting inoculated, he said: "The problem is that on websites like Twitter people are saying we're all going to die from the vaccine, but that is utter nonsense."


The virologist said people should listen to expert advice, rather than rumours from unqualified sources on the internet.

(visit the link for the full news article)


edit on 19-12-2010 by DimensionalDetective because: Fixed broken url link




posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Good!

Sounds like this incoming generation is actually thinking for themselves for a change, and not allowing hype and fear-mongering of an extremely overblown campaign to line people up to get jabbed with mega-pharm garbage to influence them!

I would not be surprised if this 'professor' or this school was getting some sort of kick back from the pharma reps to encourage everyone to run down and get their shot.

I recently reported the following...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

...Where 2/3 of the entire lot of people being 'vaccinated' actually CAUGHT the disease they were being vaccinated FOR!

As anyone who has ever gotten a flu jab can tell you, often times the junk they shoot in you CAUSES you to get the flu.

These vaccination campaigns are primarily about making the pharma industry rich, and they DO NOT CARE about people being a casualty in their agenda. My advice is to do plenty of research before subjecting yourself to these endless vaccines to combat every disease that pops up, and also try to build up your own auto-immune system through the use of anti-oxidants and supplements.



www.independent.co.uk...
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 19-12-2010 by DimensionalDetective because: Fixed broken url link



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:12 PM
link   
this years flu jab is egg based which means that people who are allergic to eggs wont be offered the jab. just thought i put that out there for anyone who is considering the flu jab and has an allergy



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
I would be skeptical about vaccination for a 'flu'-type virus not because of what could be in the vaccine (there are some vaccines that I have found VERY handy in the past... tetanus, rabies etc), but because infuenza changes so fast that you are very likely to encounter a strain not being vaccinated for.

As much as there are typically conserved elements in any virus, which you can target with the vaccine, influenza is mostly only a risk to the elderly, very young, or immunocompromised. Swine 'flu' had lower mortality rates than normal influenza, and as with normal influenza, the immunocompromised were most at risk.

So meh, 'flu' vaccines can get stuffed.




[size=-3] By the way, I don't think you meant auto-immune system. I think acquired immune system, or just immune system, was more along the lines you meant should be encouraged (auto-immune is when your immune system starts thinking that your cells are foreign and lysing them. Type I diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis etc. come under this heading)
edit on 19/12/2010 by TheWill because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWill
 


Heh, yep, you are likely correct.

Time for DD to break out the old biology book once again and get his systems down right.


Good points TheWill.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   
I haven't had a flu shot since I left the military, haven't had the flu since the either. Hmmmmm........



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Weird thing happened today... sort of on topic:
Checking out in Walmart (I hate walmart, but it's been over a year, at least) I swiped my card, and it asked me if I wanted to add $25 for a flu shot, or $35 for another shot, (not sure exactly) before it totaled my purchase.
I was wondering if it knew from the bank card that I had not had my shot, or if everyone was asked this every time?



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


I listen to the experts..!!!
They told me that more people in Australia died from the vaccine than from the virus...

That did it for me..I'll take my chances with the virus thank you..



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
I like this one
pharmaexecnews.com...
Recent data presented to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Children’s Vaccines has revealed some shocking information about the effects of the H1N1 / swine flu vaccine on pregnant women. According to the National Coalition of Organized Women, the rate of miscarriage among pregnant women during the 2009 H1N1 / swine flu pandemic soared by over 700 percent compared to previous years, pointing directly to the vaccine as the culprit — but the CDC denies the truth and continues to insist nobody has been harmed.

Stop some of the next generation to promote population control.
It is not a conspiracy if the government is behind it. It has to be illegal to be a conspiracy.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Doctor G
 


Read that article - since minnimata bay, how can any justify giving mercury (in the thimerosal) to pregnant women? We already KNOW what mercury-based chemicals do to developing fetuses - damage and/or destroy the brain.

Urgh to pharmaceutical companies and their ruthless profits...



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Good for them! It is good to see more people waking up. There is absolutely no evidence ANY vaccines work period! IN fact the evidence points to them doing more harm if people will do thier research.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 07:02 PM
link   
I hardly ever catch anything these days, it's great.

And it's most likely because I caught everything that was going in my younger days.

This is the robust immunity that's enabled some of our oldies to live to such ripe old ages.
And it's the robust immunity that we are denying to the young when we keep immunising them.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Hate to break it to you but Smallpox begs to differ.

Not to mention rabies, tetanus, polio, yellow fever... the mortality of unvaccinated humans and domestic animals exposed to rabies when exposed to the virus is more than significantly higher than those vaccinated... it's a death-sentence (a horrible, horrible death sentence) without the vaccine. Not so much with it.

That said, our vaccination-developing ability has plummeted since Jenner first came up with the smallpox vaccine, either because the diseases are harder to treat, our methods aren't as good or (I suspect) pharmaceutical companies have recognised that you can make more out of selling a sometimes effective vaccine than an always effective one.

Jenner had no business sense (sic).



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWill
 
Exactly right. There is more money in treating disease than in curing disease. I suspect that is why AIDS and Cancer will never be cured, or at least the cures will never be released to the public.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWill
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Hate to break it to you but Smallpox begs to differ.

Not to mention rabies, tetanus, polio, yellow fever... the mortality of unvaccinated humans and domestic animals exposed to rabies when exposed to the virus is more than significantly higher than those vaccinated... it's a death-sentence (a horrible, horrible death sentence) without the vaccine. Not so much with it.

That said, our vaccination-developing ability has plummeted since Jenner first came up with the smallpox vaccine, either because the diseases are harder to treat, our methods aren't as good or (I suspect) pharmaceutical companies have recognised that you can make more out of selling a sometimes effective vaccine than an always effective one.

Jenner had no business sense (sic).


If you look up records, many diseases were on the decline due to better sanitation..
Like with polio and a few others..
Vaccines did not increase the rate of decline..
Better sanitation and cleaner living did....
Maybe some vaccines do help but the majority do more harm than good and are simply money spinners for big pharma..

Me? All I've ever had is a tetanus shot once when I was too young to say no...
Sincle then I would not have taken more that 4 tablets a year...
Mainly aspirin for a REALLY bad headache..



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


My point was mostly that saying "no vaccine is effective" was a little... well, iffy.

Of course people can survive without vaccines - individuals always vary in their responses to pathogens, which is how innate immunity comes about... those that aren't immune, die, and those that are, live to breed. We know that this happens because diseases like the common cold have very minor effects on previously unexposed europeans, but they brought other nations to their knees when Britons went abroad to sneeze and thereby conquer. Everyone varies in their response to most pathogens - rabies and Trypanosoma brucei rhodesienses (the other trypanosomes less so), almost always fatal if untreated, are highly unusual, and even they leave some (small) margin alive and relatively undamaged. However, as someone particularly good at standing or leaning on unnoticed sharp objects, indoors or outdoors, I'd rather be vaccinated than risk being one of those whose innate immunity is poor.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join