H1n1 Vaccine Debate Recently Inoculated May Spread Flu Virus

[webishqiptar 0]

my PERSONAL belief is that i don't trust ANY drug. NONE!!! drugs are big business. that's all they are. aside from big business, some actually work

Well, you are right that drugs are business, but to be or to succeed in a business, you must create or produce a good product. Otherwise the business will fail. So by this logic, all drug business are growing or earning lots of money worldwide. This means they are selling products, which have to do be good, otherwise they wouldn't sell.

I agree to the fact that, lesser drugs-> better health but sometimes our organism can't survive alone, so drugs are needed.

H1N1 vaccine must be taken to me, it takes 10 days for our immune system to react but it's not so much. This winter will have to be a tough one. We should be aware of.

[anwiii 17]

WRONG!!! not in the medical industry. this is why the medical industry has just recently put disclaimers on all their advertising content. to protect themselves. why do they sell if they don't work? because there is nothing better that works. one of the biggest disabilites in the world is depression. so let's use anti depressants as an example. name one drug that works, and i will argue that it doesn't....and i will have facts based on my arguement. don't even try to use logic in your arguement that drugs work because they sell.

This means they are selling products, which have to do be good, otherwise they wouldn't sell.

[shadowx 0]

It's true that a product doesnt have to be good to sell, think of horrible food for example, people still buy it because they have to.Windows is a good example, it's actually pretty bad but we still buy it because a) people are brainwashed into thinking its windows or nothing and people are stupid!

[webishqiptar 0]

WRONG!!! not in the medical industry. this is why the medical industry has just recently put disclaimers on all their advertising content. to protect themselves.

You can't relate complications with product quality. Complications is something every drug have, despite the fact that it is taken from a pharmaceutical company or taken by nature.

Well, let us suppose you have a tooth infection, so what would you do if your dentists prescribes you antibiotic? Would you rely on your organism to fight it? No you have to take it. It's another thing if antibiotics don't work now as they did before.

You can't just judge drug companies because they tent to make money, or make good business. Everything is business nowadays. In my opinion, drugs must be taken by professional medical advice, and not by Internet speculations.

Windows is a good example, it's actually pretty bad but we still buy it because a) people are brainwashed into thinking its windows or nothing and people are stupid!

What kind of argument is this?????!!!! You just can't say: Windows sucks, and people buy it because they're stupid...

[Parubilla 0]

I think they do work but not in all cases, so they have to put the disclaimer off course, so the people don´t think that the medicine is magical and is going to do a miracle in their bodies. Every body is different and assimilate the drugs different, that´s why nowadays we have a lot of different treatments for one disease.

WRONG!!! not in the medical industry. this is why the medical industry has just recently put disclaimers on all their advertising content. to protect themselves. why do they sell if they don't work? because there is nothing better that works. one of the biggest disabilites in the world is depression. so let's use anti depressants as an example. name one drug that works, and i will argue that it doesn't....and i will have facts based on my arguement. don't even try to use logic in your arguement that drugs work because they sell.

[Echo_of_thunder 1]

myself and this is only my feelings of this whole Swine Flu thing is this. M O N E Y!Myself I feel as they say, Oh we do not have enough vaccine just to drive the price up even more all throughout the world. It's sad to think that the world has come down to the all mighty dollar and who can and can not pay but it's sadly true. I could go into a certain person and his or her health care plan but will not do that here, even though Money has a lot to do with it just as it has with the H1N1 Virus AKA Swine Flu.

[anwiii 17]

i am not saying medical research is bad in all cases. all i am saying is that are some medicines worth it. you use antibiotics as an example for some reason when everyone knows antibiotics only work for so long until until the body is immune to them.

i am also a believer in natural cures that can actually me found in medical journals...but you wont see doctors prescribing them. why? because insurance companies wont pay out. this leaves medicines big business without alternatives....when there really are. but alternatives isn't really the point to the thread

i have never taken a flu shot. EVER. and i have been ok. what about those in their 60's and 70's when their immune system is going to crap. should they take it? the whole point of the thread was why pushing a flu shot so hard? it's because of $. even when people don't need a shot, they encourage everyone to get one and they put fear in people stating the viruses are airborn and can be trasmitted to just about anybody.

is this true? can it be transmitted to just about anyone? if so, why isn't everyone gettin' it without even taking a shot? they talk about swine flu as an epedemic and it's not. it's being overexagerated by medical professionals that aren't looking for alternatives....even ones immune system as an alternative.

it does bother me that some shots aren't tested enough to know the true consequence and outcome for any specific type of person. wiuth the flu shot being pushed to every residence, it's really hard to know what the effects would be if they didn't take a shot and how usefull a flu shot really is to the common person.

antibiotics was given as an example. we might as well be talking about anesthetics. as they are required before someone goes in to surgery. problem is, they are unsafe as many people don't wake up from them and these anesthetics are a direct result in peoples death...but i do believe we have more knowledge in anesthetics and antibiotics than we do any flu shot when there are multiple strains out there ever year and to test a vaccine for a couple years would make the testing useless.

would i ever take a shot? not in my present condition because i believe i am healthy and do believe my body wont be letting me down any time soon to protect from viruses naturally. my mom believes in them wholehearedly and has encouraged her whole family to get them. even me. before this thread even popped up, i was arguing with my mom that it could be just as unsafe to have one as it is not to have one. the scarey part is that there are no facts to support either side. but i can see that if a person is tested to have a low immune system which would be harder for one to fight off a virus, that they have an option to take some precautions.

now i haven't researched what small amounts of mercury does to ones body....but it would be scarey to find out any bad effects it can have. i don'te trust medicines as i don't trust doctors...but if i were in a position to have to trust, i would pray first because i know even the doctors don't know fully what they are doing sometimes and it's scarey. a lot of doctors don't practice what has alreaady been recorded in medical journals as cures or a safer way to practice medicine because of the insurance companies wanting to go with a standard from people who are in the field to make a buck.

so for me, it doesn't just stop at a swine flu vaccination....although the vaccination is a good example of using scare tactics to make a buck and the ultimate reality that we have no choice sooner or later to TRUST what they give us without fully informing us of what they are giving us and the causes and effects of what they give us

you also talk about medical professional advice. please define that.....because there are still professionals in the medical field that will argue with one another about proper medical practices.

You can't relate complications with product quality. Complications is something every drug have, despite the fact that it is taken from a pharmaceutical company or taken by nature.
Well, let us suppose you have a tooth infection, so what would you do if your dentists prescribes you antibiotic? Would you rely on your organism to fight it? No you have to take it. It's another thing if antibiotics don't work now as they did before.

You can't just judge drug companies because they tent to make money, or make good business. Everything is business nowadays. In my opinion, drugs must be taken by professional medical advice, and not by Internet speculations.



What kind of argument is this?????!!!! You just can't say: Windows sucks, and people buy it because they're stupid...

[Watermonkey 0]

Windows sucks and people buy it because they're stupid. That's not just a quote, I'm repeating it because it's a truth for me too. The reason Big Pharma gets away with drugging up the people is people have stopped asking questions. And, from some of the responses here, I'd say that some people just don't give a damn. Are people suicidal or just so apathetic as to appear that way? The ingredients of the H1N1 and H5N1 vaccines have been listed in this thread on the original post and it's like a deer in the headlights reaction from some. I'm amazed that these ingredients can be listed and defined and anyone would still consider this vaccination a good idea. I mean, formaldehyde? Mercury? Squaline? Really? I'd bet you wouldn't put any of those things down your throat where they'd meet your bodies natural defenses. Go ahead, prove me wrong. Go down to the chemical supply house and find mercury and formaldehyde and pour a little vial of each down your throat. Can't? Then how the hell, pray, can you let someone inject those things into your arm? HOW???!

Edited November 28, 2009 by Watermonkey (see edit history)

[Misanthrope 0]

Following is my response to post #3:

The supposition the vaccine contains dead or weakened H1N1 virus doesnt preclude its danger or the contagious condition it renders the unfortunate recipient. A vaccine gives you a low level form of the illness to activate your bodys own defenses, thus giving it the resistance to the exact virus in question without (you hope) making you ill. The vaccine wouldnt work at all if you didnt get the illness, weather or not you actually exhibit symptoms. To illustrate, most children of 30 years ago got mumps from being exposed to others with mumps. After getting the mumps, the kid can go play with other kids all day long even if every one of them has mumps and he/she doesnt have to worry about getting it again because his/her body is now immune to that particular virus. The goal today is to give the child the mumps in a weakened state (vaccine) so the kid can get the mumps without being inconvenienced while still having acquired immunity to it. Sounds reasonable on paper and it perhaps can work much of the time without consequence. But there are those pesky, often deadly consequences that appear to rearing their uglier heads more often as of late

The extra ingredients documented in post #1 have absolutely no business in the vaccine, and make me wonder if perhaps the makers of the H1N1 vaccine have alterior motives. Since the vaccines are known to contain dangerous heavy metals (mercury and aluminum) that are also known to have high neuro-toxicity to humans and other mammals, and are also known to have residual toxicity (they are collected and contained within the fatty tissues of the brain and elsewhere for the life of the person) and interact with other chemicals in harmful ways (for example: fluoride has a much more deleterious effect upon the subjects intellect when combined with aluminum than it would alone), I am left wondering if someone somewhere wants children to be less intelligent than they were years ago. If so, they're doing a very good job attaining this goal!

The condition of asthma appears now at a much higher rate ever before in the history of breathing, and appears to be on the increase. One cause of asthma has been linked to vaccinations. Im betting poster #3 was vaccinated as a tot. Thats not the only known cause, but its been shown as a strong correlation in scientific studies. An article by a Medical Doctor, Dr. Horowitz, who supports this view can be read here: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

Of course there are numerous studies to counter this, but those studies were financed by the very entities Im speaking out against. So you can go ahead and believe the studies bought and paid for by mass murderers if so desired. Just like you can believe the studies paid for by the tobacco industry concluding their product isnt addictive. Or how about the latest scandal known as Climate-gate where its shown through emails and other documentation that real science was and is being subverted and marginalized by dirty politics and money in whats quickly becoming the biggest scandal of science in the history (modern) of science. But, to conclude my point, the necessary meds to control asthma are not in the discussion of vaccines in any way. Im happy the afflicted got control over this disease, but perhaps hed never have gotten it in the first place if not for the vaccination program in place during his childhood. This is only an assumption on my part, of course. I, like Anwiii, have never gotten a vaccination, and I get sick only on the rarest occasions. I never got sick as a youth, even when so many around me were coming down with the flu - miraculously after getting stuck.

When you inject any foreign material directly into the bloodstream, you bypass your bodys natural defenses thus putting blind faith in the creators (in this case, the highly suspect and criminal Baxter corporation) of the injected material instead of the divine wisdom of your own body. Theres no way to influence people who are controlled by the fear they have had instilled in them by the medical establishment. If thats you, gentle reader, at least have the courtesy of quarantining yourself so as not to give this abomination to the rest of us. If not, ask questions and research, research, research. Even the label on the vaccines indicates they are not safe to take.

Add to this the FACT the pharmaceutical companies were given immunity to law suits due to malpractice by federal law passed during the waning days of the Bush Administration (or Regime, if you prefer)( search engine: CONGRESS SET TO PASS LAW ELIMINATING LIABILITY FOR VACCINE INJURIES, or see this blog: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ ).

Im not going to document every last word I say on this, or any subject for that matter. My goal is to offer alternative viewpoints, and maybe, just maybe, instill the spark of inquiring discernment so many seem to have lost in this age of blind subservience to so-called authorities a subservience I find inexcusable in modern, industrialized society. We have a world of information literally at our fingertips. There is no excuse for blindly accepting what you see propagated as truth by controlled media and mainstream medicine. Dont believe me either! Question everything. In this age of the Internet, research can take a matter of seconds. Nonbiased information that hasnt been funded by pharmaceutical and insurance industries is there for the taking for anyone truly seeking to come out of the darkness.

[webishqiptar 0]

Windows sucks and people buy it because they're stupid. That's not just a quote, I'm repeating it because it's a truth for me too. The reason Big Pharma gets away with drugging up the people is people have stopped asking questions. And, from some of the responses here, I'd say that some people just don't give a damn. Are people suicidal or just so apathetic as to appear that way? The ingredients of the H1N1 and H5N1 vaccines have been listed in this thread on the original post and it's like a deer in the headlights reaction from some. I'm amazed that these ingredients can be listed and defined and anyone would still consider this vaccination a good idea. I mean, formaldehyde? Mercury? Squaline? Really? I'd bet you wouldn't put any of those things down your throat where they'd meet your bodies natural defenses. Go ahead, prove me wrong. Go down to the chemical supply house and find mercury and formaldehyde and pour a little vial of each down your throat. Can't? Then how the hell, pray, can you let someone inject those things into your arm? HOW???!

So you are saying that thousand of people are stupid. There would be one thousand reason to prove you're wrong. I agree that windows is not good, but its popular so you can find support everywhere.

The h1n1 vaccine is just a weak virus, that doesn't cause the flu so that making immune system generate some antibodies which can help(fast answer) if you get real flu.

The problem is that all of the ingredients(chemicals) in the world if taken overdose cause harm. Not just mercury, formaldehyde or whatever.

[Parubilla 0]

Well off course natural medicines are wayyy better than the artificial ones, but I completely agree with you the regular doctors don't prescribe those medicines because the regular medical insurance don't cover those medicines, but there are certain companies that in their doctor list have like regular doctor with the alternative specialization, and those are the doctors I personally choose, because they have this especial training where they can prescribe the regular drug and then they can give you also the alternative one the natural one (homeopathic), and there is this german laboratory that produces all of this drugs I have been taking the alternative drugs for a while and they work really good, better than the others, the problem is that obviously the insurance doesn't cover this drugs and some of them are really expensive, but definitely if you have the possibility to buy them, does wonders for your body.

I also agree with you with the flu vaccine, I have never taken the flu shot, because I've seen a lot of people that has taken it, and get the flu more often than before. I can't say i don't get any flu, actually It's really common in me but it past whitin days so it's not that horrible I can live with it. haha

i am not saying medical research is bad in all cases. all i am saying is that are some medicines worth it. you use antibiotics as an example for some reason when everyone knows antibiotics only work for so long until until the body is immune to them.
i am also a believer in natural cures that can actually me found in medical journals...but you wont see doctors prescribing them. why? because insurance companies wont pay out. this leaves medicines big business without alternatives....when there really are. but alternatives isn't really the point to the thread

i have never taken a flu shot. EVER. and i have been ok. what about those in their 60's and 70's when their immune system is going to crap. should they take it? the whole point of the thread was why pushing a flu shot so hard? it's because of $. even when people don't need a shot, they encourage everyone to get one and they put fear in people stating the viruses are airborn and can be trasmitted to just about anybody.

is this true? can it be transmitted to just about anyone? if so, why isn't everyone gettin' it without even taking a shot? they talk about swine flu as an epedemic and it's not. it's being overexagerated by medical professionals that aren't looking for alternatives....even ones immune system as an alternative.

it does bother me that some shots aren't tested enough to know the true consequence and outcome for any specific type of person. wiuth the flu shot being pushed to every residence, it's really hard to know what the effects would be if they didn't take a shot and how usefull a flu shot really is to the common person.

antibiotics was given as an example. we might as well be talking about anesthetics. as they are required before someone goes in to surgery. problem is, they are unsafe as many people don't wake up from them and these anesthetics are a direct result in peoples death...but i do believe we have more knowledge in anesthetics and antibiotics than we do any flu shot when there are multiple strains out there ever year and to test a vaccine for a couple years would make the testing useless.

would i ever take a shot? not in my present condition because i believe i am healthy and do believe my body wont be letting me down any time soon to protect from viruses naturally. my mom believes in them wholehearedly and has encouraged her whole family to get them. even me. before this thread even popped up, i was arguing with my mom that it could be just as unsafe to have one as it is not to have one. the scarey part is that there are no facts to support either side. but i can see that if a person is tested to have a low immune system which would be harder for one to fight off a virus, that they have an option to take some precautions.

now i haven't researched what small amounts of mercury does to ones body....but it would be scarey to find out any bad effects it can have. i don'te trust medicines as i don't trust doctors...but if i were in a position to have to trust, i would pray first because i know even the doctors don't know fully what they are doing sometimes and it's scarey. a lot of doctors don't practice what has alreaady been recorded in medical journals as cures or a safer way to practice medicine because of the insurance companies wanting to go with a standard from people who are in the field to make a buck.

so for me, it doesn't just stop at a swine flu vaccination....although the vaccination is a good example of using scare tactics to make a buck and the ultimate reality that we have no choice sooner or later to TRUST what they give us without fully informing us of what they are giving us and the causes and effects of what they give us

you also talk about medical professional advice. please define that.....because there are still professionals in the medical field that will argue with one another about proper medical practices.

[kobra500 1]

What debate? take the Vaccine or Don't; the latter means you risk contracting H1N1 and then spreading it on to your family, friends, colleagues who won't appreciate it. Taking the Vaccine means you get injected with a needle and thats about it. It's no different from a seasonal flu virus and if you aren't going to take it then don't it is your choice but there is no real reason not to, people will always say "IT WILL GIVE YOU AIDS" or something similar but it doesn't make it true, but I'm sure they know best with there years of Training: oh wait thats the scientist, my mistake. Take the damn jab, if something bad happens as a result at least you get gloat that I was wrong.

[Baniboy 3]

Shots for regular flu? Damn, that's so stupid. No offense to anyone personally but taking a shot for flu is just dumb. I would rather get the flu. The only problem is, I'm not getting the flu. Ironic, isn't?As for H1N1 vaccine. It increases the risk of some kind of brain disorder.shadowx:Nice numbers, but you analyze them in a wrong way. 0.4% of people who get the virus die. 0.03% percent(in your example) of people WHO GET THE VACCINE, die. You can't say that those getting the vaccine would have gotten the virus. Thus, you can't compare the danger. Here in Finland, there have been 11 deaths caused by the virus. All victims were already sick, the virus just kind of finished them off. I'm healthy, I almost never get any flu and if I do, I'm not puking, having fever and screaming from pain all the time. The doctor told my mother that she or my 6 yr old bro shouldn't get the vaccine, because they are totally healthy. I am too, and I would rather kill that son of a bleep virus myself :)With this kind of vaccine, made in a hurry and tested on monkeys, we don't know the long term effects. There is also no data of how the vaccine behaves when injected into under 3 year olds and children between age 10 to 17. All the recommendations for these age groups are not backed up by ANY DATA. Mind you, I would rather go with normal drugs designed for influenza treatment which are tested and used many times and are proven to be effective.If a lot of people around you get the virus, you have a greater chance of getting the disease than a rare vaccine side effect. But as most kids in my school will take the shot, the risk of me getting the piglet is small(hahaha, now that's a smart freaking move). And even if I did get the virus, there's even a smaller chance of dying because I'm in good condition(well, can you run 3 km in 12 minutes?).

Edited November 28, 2009 by Baniboy (see edit history)

[shadowx 0]

What kind of argument is this?????!!!! You just can't say: Windows sucks, and people buy it because they're stupid...

I can, i do, i did and i will. Windows is developed for those who dont know how to use other operating systems. Microsoft will tell you it does everything a computer can possibly do. False. It allows the user to do very little in actual fact. But that's another debate.

A vaccine causes the illness: FALSE
The h1n1 vaccine and all other flu vaccines are made by modifying a harmless virus. they take some virus (cant remember its name) which humans cant be affected by and modify it by adding the h1n1 genetic data, hence making a hybrid virus. This is then injected into eggs (or into another carrier for egg-allergy sufferers) and once the egg attacks the hybrid virus it will produce antibodies which will kill the original h1n1 virus. Think of anti bodies as armour piercing rounds. You dont need to face a tank full of crew and ammo to develop a round to use against it. You simply need to see its empty, dead shell. Its armour. Your body doesnt need to fight an active infection, it simply needs to "see" the genetic data and "shape" of the attacker to form an effective defence. This is why there is no vaccine for the common cold. Every single cold you catch is different from the last. Your body becomes immune to the cold you had last week but is still unaware that the cold you will catch next year even exists, so it cant defend against it.

Back in the day when they were vaccinating against cow pox i think it could indeed cause cow pox in the patient simply because they took active, living pox virus and inserted it straight into the patient (i think, my history is shaky) . But nowadays a real, living virus is NOT used and cannot infect you.

You can however develop symptoms of a general infection. Eg a slight temperature increase or perhaps a runny nose but this is NOT a viral infection. When your body is under attack it will do a few things, one is to heat up to try and cook the virus to death, the other is to product mucus in your airways which is then sent up your throat to your nose and mouth to be spat out or swallowed. This mucus, or phlegm ( said "flem") is meant to carry the virus out of your body away from your lungs. So, your body sees a virus being injected into the skin and panics, it sends defenders to the attacks to fight it off and sometimes over-reacts causing the temperature, runny nose etc... But you will NOT develop the illness and you can NOT infect others.

As for my wrong facts... I never claimed they were perfect, i was working on the assumption that 100% of people either caught the virus or were vaccinated. Even without that assumption my facts show that overall, in the world today, right now, the virus is much more dangerous than the vaccine and more people worldwide have died of the virus.

To those that think i am a fool for wanting the vaccine...

I ask you, do you know children? old people? Those with health conditions? That you personally meet, even on a weekly or less basis? Given the fact that a recent study said only 1/10 of the people infected knew it (eg, if 100 people have symptoms then 900 still have the virus but dont know) and the fact that the virus, as with any flu, can be deadly to those with bad health or weak immune systems then YOU, could cause the death of one of those people by not having the jab when offered. Obviously there are precautions like general hygiene but im just giving you that thought.

Swine flu is no more dangerous than ordinary flu, and i do agree that the global community is panicking here, but given the bird flu scare and then the spanish flu epidemic humankind does have a reason to be afraid of flu. however, let's not get this out of proportion. If you are never offered the normal flu jab or you have had the flu before and just felt pretty rough then you have nothing to worry about. you have a tiny, tiny chance of complications. Still, it wont be pleasant but i agree, natural vaccination through infection is best. I imagine the jab isnt 100% effective and actually getting immunity through infection is probably more effective, however for those in the "at risk" group, this isnt an option. Infection could easily cause death or hospitalization, faced with that i would much rather have the jab.

Wouldnt you agree?

With relevance to the ingredients in the vaccine, i have directed you to the article showing that a fillet of salmon has more mercury than the jab, so yes, yes i would happily injest that amount of mercury, I'm already full of it from the trace amounts in everyday life so why not.

With relevance to the other toxins i would rather have them than the flu thank you very much (*rolls up sleeve*)


Quote time...

The doctor told my mother that she or my 6 yr old bro shouldn't get the vaccine, because they are totally healthy. I am too, and I would rather kill that son of a bleep virus myself

Good, i too would suggest not having the jab. Your body can easily fight off the infection, though i hope that hypothesis isnt tested

What debate? take the Vaccine or Don't; the latter means you risk contracting H1N1 and then spreading it on to your family, friends, colleagues who won't appreciate it. Taking the Vaccine means you get injected with a needle and thats about it. It's no different from a seasonal flu virus and if you aren't going to take it then don't it is your choice but there is no real reason not to, people will always say "IT WILL GIVE YOU AIDS" or something similar but it doesn't make it true, but I'm sure they know best with there years of Training: oh wait thats the scientist, my mistake. Take the damn jab, if something bad happens as a result at least you get gloat that I was wrong.

In the words of Jim Carey: "And the TRUTH, shall set you free..." Well done.
Though i concede that scientists have massive holes in their knowledge they have enough experience here for my mind. Science has been fighting the flu every year for many, many years now. It isnt 100% safe, but you PC might short circuit and blow your face off right now, its a game of numbers.

Well off course natural medicines are wayyy better than the artificial ones,

Disagree. In many ways the medicines we take now ARE the natural ones, but they are highly refined and combined with other natural remedies to make them more powerful. Aspirin and paracetamol are classic examples. Both originally found and made from natural plants, but concentrated and enhanced to give more power. Some things however are better naturally, even down to meditation and yoga. Medical treatment doesnt have to be drugs

The problem is that all of the ingredients(chemicals) in the world if taken overdose cause harm. Not just mercury, formaldehyde or whatever.

True, however dosage is the important factor here. Measure the atmosphere where you are right now. It will contain ozone, at the very least, which is a toxic gas that is formed when uv light hits oxygen molecules, it is often formed a lot in the summer which is why a lot of people with asthma suffer more in the summer. Of you breathe in a lot of ozone it will kill you. However, you are breathing it in right now and you are fine. You are also being bombarded with radiation, but you arent dying from it because the dose is so low.
I dont know the lethal doses for those chemicals, however they are obviously well below that level in the vaccine otherwise it would have a huge mortality rate. I also dont expect they are anywhere near the harmful level. There is no need to put them that high as it's not as if baxter have a formaldehyde vaccine that they can then sell to the people who buy the flu jab. They cant generate extra income from it.

The condition of asthma appears now at a much higher rate ever before in the history of breathing, and appears to be on the increase. One cause of asthma has been linked to vaccinations.

I was vaccinated with the standard jabs here in the UK, it's probably a few, about 5 or 6 including the flu jab i got last year for the first time. However, i cant argue against your theory, i dont have the facts to use, i can however offer a few alternatives... polution in the last 100-150 years has been at its highest ever thanks to human activity, this includes of course exhaust gasses. Smoke and other pollutants (i mentioned ozone) are a major cause in asthma attacks, in fact it is probably the biggest cause, after perhaps general allergies including dust mites. You are referring to a trend whereby as time increases so does asthma incidence. If you were to draw this as a graph over the last 200 years and then overlay two other graphs for the same time period showing atmospheric pollution and the rates of increase in other reported disease you would almost certainly see all these lines following the same trend. Upwards. People are now more health conscious than ever, going to the doctor about every little thing, so more and more people are diagnosed. think back to before asthma was known of, the doctor would say its a cough and be done with it. a 0% incidence of asthma, doesnt mean it didnt exist of course, just that no-one was diagnosed with it. Your facts are based on diagnosis which is fairly intendant of actual illness, it depends on whether the victim goes to a doctor and what the doctor subjectively thinks the problem is.

I may look into this later though, its an interesting thought and like i said, i dont have the facts to say you are wrong, but my alternatives are fairly convincing.

I'm going to end my post on a few notes:

i do not trust drug companies. I do not distrust them either. I have yet to see evidence of either verdict but i do believe they are chasing the money and curing disease comes second. That's pretty much a fact.

I do not advocate healthy people getting the jab unless they are in contact regularly with at risk groups (eg carers) or are front line emergency staff (hospitals mainly). These groups can easily pass the virus on and lead to the death of someone, and in the case of emergency workers, who do you go to when all the doctors and nurses are ill? Who is more important in a fire, the emergency personnel or the victims? If the emergency works were all out of action through illness or injury then there would be no-one to save the countless thousands later on.

[kobra500 1]

@Baniboy: There is no proven link between Flu Vaccines and brain disorders; and any of the disorders that could in theory be caused such as Guillain-Barre Syndrome is less dangerous than the disease and highly treatable, and this is a possible side affect of any kind of vaccine because it is your bodies auto-immune response, Thymerisal was believed to cause Autism in Children such that it was taken out but then the Scientist realised that mothers don't know best when it comes to disease, did some research and boom! no it doesn't, there is no link between the two. Just people creating conspiracies as usual.