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.
Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Applesandoranges
I am not totally sure of your point, but there would most likely only be a small percentage that this vaccine wouldnt work on or would have negative side effects. Even the one from the 70's only had negative consequences on a tiny percentage of the people that took it.
So there is no two sides unless you mean one side is 99% and the other is less than 1%. I mean if I was gambling and you gave me a 99% chance of winning I would definitely take that bet over and over again.
Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Applesandoranges
Nobody is telling us what we HAVE to do with our bodies. If you want to up your chances of dying from the flu, if it spreads to a greater extent, then do not take the shot.
Look unless you are a trained scientest or doctor AND you have the resources to test and/or create a vaccine then you have to take someones word for it.
It is really not in any drug companies interest to create a vaccine to kill you on purpose, because they dont want to get their rearends sued off. Plus the CDC and other countries agencies would test and approve it. But if some group of people want to die from their own paranoia that is fine with me. That is just less crazy people in the world and a plus for natural selection in my book.
Originally posted by Nickmare
Also, I'll note that they prevent natural selection/survival of the fittest.
Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Applesandoranges
Well in a perfect world you could take years to develop a vaccine and test it. But when you have something that has a great potential to spread and a relatively high mortality rate then the drug companies and the health officials from around the world do the best they can with what time they have. Would you rather have half the population die off while they spend the next 2-5 years testing it?
A high mortality rate? Says who! Since you believe in statistics then why dont anyone ever care about the normal flu death rates, but surely the nation has taken a standstill for the safety of others then. The nation has also taken a standstill for the many cancer victims.
Like I said, if people dont want to take the vaccine for whatever reason be it not liking chemicals in their body or whatever then that is no concern of mine. Life is full of choices and consequences. I wish you the best of luck with whatever choice you make.
Thankyou and i wish the best of luck to you too. So the interest and no concern of yours is that only of yourself and you do not care if other people die just so your own life is saved from a miracle drug. Is it not the pupose of the scientists to save peoples lives? So if its no concern of yours then why do you care what they have to offer in the first place.
Also, a vaccine is not chemicals, but rather a less deadly and lower concentration of the viral strain. The only chemicals would be in whatever they needed to preserve it and deliver it in. Plus, whenever you eat, drink, or breathe you are taking chemicals in your body.
Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Applesandoranges
Like almost everything in life there is a balance. If you eat nothing but junk food and you drink alcohol to excess most of your life or if you smoke for 40 years then yeah it is going to take a toll on you.
Life is full of choices and you succeed or fail by them. I dont know if our bodies are temples but they are biological "machines" that need proper care and maintenance. Nobody forces people to eat bad or make poor life choices. It is personal choice. We all make the choices we think are best for us, sometimes we are right and sometimes wrong. As far as the flu shots go if it starts spreading in my area and they are available then I amd my family will take them under my direction. If I am wrong then one or more of us may suffer the consequences. If I am right we might survive something we might not have otherwise.
Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by unityemissions
Though this could be true in some rare cases, an effective vaccine would only help to eradicate the virus because it will not have enough time to adapt before your body defeats it. By having a sufficient number of people that are not vaccinated and do not die quickly enough from the virus then you create an environment for more mutation.
Originally posted by dizziedame
What is the source of your information?
Polio and measles are caused by a virus and the vaccines have worked very well to combat both viruses.
So, what makes the flu vaccine not work properly?
Originally posted by Lookingup
The U.S. is Polio-free today because of ........vaccinations. Global Polio Eradication Initiative You folks do what you want, but I am am vaccinated up to the hilt with everything except the flu vaccine. I figure it mutates rapidly, everybody I know who gets it, gets sick, and what the heck, it's just the flu. Tetanus--I'm vaccinated. I work at home tearing down old, rusty fences, etc.. Dying from a preventable neurotoxin isn't my idea of fun. YouTube Hepatitis B--I'm vaccinated. I work around blood. If I could get a rabies vaccination, I would. I might step on a sick rat while tearing down an old, rusty fence.
Originally posted by grapesofraft
It is really not in any drug companies interest to create a vaccine to kill you on purpose, because they dont want to get their rearends sued off. Plus the CDC and other countries agencies would test and approve it. But if some group of people want to die from their own paranoia that is fine with me. That is just less crazy people in the world and a plus for natural selection in my book.