Oh no they don't!! Stop being silly.
That is what organisations like the FDA and WHO are for. To vet these vaccinations prior to human usage.
Speculation and conspiracy.
Do you have proof of this?
I doubt it.
That's great. Were they immunologists or just practice general medicine?
I am not saying that H1N1 is a mutation of Spanish Flu, if that is what you are saying.
But here is some info anyway..
The 1918 flu pandemic (commonly referred to as the Spanish Flu) was an influenza pandemic that spread to nearly every part of the world. It may have been caused by an unusually virulent and deadly influenza A virus strain of subtype H1N1[citation needed]. Historical and epidemiological data are inadequate to identify the geographic origin of the virus.[1] Most of its victims were healthy young adults, in contrast to most influenza outbreaks which predominantly affect juvenile, elderly, or otherwise weakened patients. The flu pandemic has also been implicated in the sudden outbreak of encephalitis lethargica in the 1920s.[2]
The pandemic lasted from approximately March 1918 to June 1920,[3] spreading even to the Arctic and remote Pacific islands. It is estimated that anywhere from 50 to 100 million people were killed worldwide which is from three to seven times the casualties of the First World War (15 million), making it the deadliest natural disaster in human history.[4][5][6][7][8] An estimated 50 million people, about 3% of the world's population (approximately 1.6 billion at the time), died of the disease. An estimated 500 million, or 1/3 were infected.[5]
. ALL basic viruses are thousands, if not millions of years old, depending on your view of new earth creationism.
It is how they mutate through the process of adaptation which dictates their threat to our health.
Fortunately, only a few, so far, have proven nasty enough to cause a world-wide epidemic.
Viruses that affect domesticated livestock are no different. Check out Foot and Mouth for example.
Now this is where you are really stretching.
Why is it more dangerous to a pregnant healthy woman than a healthy non-pregnant woman?
Pregnancy actually STIMULATES the immune system. So there is one very large flaw in your argument.
Why do young children who are seemingly healthy and have no medical issues suffer so badly?
Surely it is the sick kids who have suppressed inmmuno systems and are more at risk.
But this is not the case if you study all of the available data.
I am not saying that you know nothing.
I am just saying that you have a lot to learn.
Your simplistic analysis of this issue is a case in point.
Back up the truck a bit there son. You may be getting ahead of yourself.
Either that, or you know some pretty stupid 30 yr olds.
If you say so. But based on this, you appear right on average to me.
Hubris much?
No. I base that on your knowledge of the topic at hand and the manner by which you articulate your argument.
That is what organisations like the FDA and WHO are for. To vet these vaccinations prior to human usage.
Speculation and conspiracy.
Do you have proof of this?
I doubt it.
That's great. Were they immunologists or just practice general medicine?
I am not saying that H1N1 is a mutation of Spanish Flu, if that is what you are saying.
But here is some info anyway..
The 1918 flu pandemic (commonly referred to as the Spanish Flu) was an influenza pandemic that spread to nearly every part of the world. It may have been caused by an unusually virulent and deadly influenza A virus strain of subtype H1N1[citation needed]. Historical and epidemiological data are inadequate to identify the geographic origin of the virus.[1] Most of its victims were healthy young adults, in contrast to most influenza outbreaks which predominantly affect juvenile, elderly, or otherwise weakened patients. The flu pandemic has also been implicated in the sudden outbreak of encephalitis lethargica in the 1920s.[2]
The pandemic lasted from approximately March 1918 to June 1920,[3] spreading even to the Arctic and remote Pacific islands. It is estimated that anywhere from 50 to 100 million people were killed worldwide which is from three to seven times the casualties of the First World War (15 million), making it the deadliest natural disaster in human history.[4][5][6][7][8] An estimated 50 million people, about 3% of the world's population (approximately 1.6 billion at the time), died of the disease. An estimated 500 million, or 1/3 were infected.[5]
. ALL basic viruses are thousands, if not millions of years old, depending on your view of new earth creationism.
It is how they mutate through the process of adaptation which dictates their threat to our health.
Fortunately, only a few, so far, have proven nasty enough to cause a world-wide epidemic.
Viruses that affect domesticated livestock are no different. Check out Foot and Mouth for example.
Now this is where you are really stretching.
Why is it more dangerous to a pregnant healthy woman than a healthy non-pregnant woman?
Pregnancy actually STIMULATES the immune system. So there is one very large flaw in your argument.
Why do young children who are seemingly healthy and have no medical issues suffer so badly?
Surely it is the sick kids who have suppressed inmmuno systems and are more at risk.
But this is not the case if you study all of the available data.
I am not saying that you know nothing.
I am just saying that you have a lot to learn.
Your simplistic analysis of this issue is a case in point.
Back up the truck a bit there son. You may be getting ahead of yourself.
Either that, or you know some pretty stupid 30 yr olds.
If you say so. But based on this, you appear right on average to me.
Hubris much?
No. I base that on your knowledge of the topic at hand and the manner by which you articulate your argument.
