Re: Flu Jab time
The mercury in your teeth is in the form of an amalgam. That said the time will come when the medical industry will be forced to admit that mercury fillings have been one of the primary causes of illness.
It is notable that if you have a mercury filling removed, the dentist is under strict orders to confiscate that tooth because of its toxicity and danger. No worries that it's been in your mouth for years !! Take it out and suddenly it's hazardous waste.
Originally Posted by Megs
When we had flu outbreaks at work I was frequently the only person left standing thanks to the flu vaccination.
Flawed reasoning I'm afraid. Like saying, I won the lottery so it must be good thing. Unfortunately for every lottery winner there are 13,999,999 losers. For every person who bats away 1 strain of flu virus there are 99 others for whom the jab was utterly useless. Even if you are that lucky 1 person, the jab will likely have made you much more susceptible to other strains of virus.
Regardless, the fact remains that if you allow someone to inject you with a flu vaccine you are voluntarily putting toxic chemicals/compounds into your body that ought not be there.
Originally Posted by Megs
Whatever your opinion you will not change mine.
This is just emotional stubbornness. None of this is my opinion. My opinion on this matter is utterly insignificant. No-ones "opinion" matters one iota. What matters is the irrefutable factual evidence borne out of controlled scientific study. I provided links to those studies in an earlier post, systematic reviews which can be read in the highly respected Cochrane Database.
Cochrane Reviews are systematic reviews of primary research in human health care and health policy, and are internationally recognised as the highest standard in evidence-based health care
Those reviews are categorically telling you that the flu jab is largely useless, that the jab improves your chances of not catching the flu by a mere 1% !!!!
1 person in 100 will benefit from the jab.
That's not opinion, it is factual evidence from systematic review.
Presumably you have good reason to refute such highly respected research ?