Absolutely – so long as you will be staying inside and not having any contact with other people.

By way of analogy, you have a right to not wash your hands before making dinner, unless you’ll be feeding someone else in which case you’re putting them at risk.

I’m sorry, are you saying that people WITH the vaccine are in danger from people WITHOUT the vaccine?
Please explain the logic

Vaccines are not 100% effective – some people don’t respond as well as others, or to different strains, and rely in part on the protection of the ‘herd’.

Everyone who doesn’t get the vaccine represents a risk to those who did get it because they form a reservoir for the disease, increasing the chances of vaccinated people coming up against a strain they can’t fight.

Thanks Eoghan,

I don’t have the knowledge to question the accuracy of your statement (i.e increased chances of infected hosts developing mutated versions of the virus and so on)

On top of that, so many stories appearing lately where vaccines are causing more severe symptoms than the virus itself (such as H1N1 and sleep apnea on the low end of the scale)

All in all I can’t shake the general feeling that Pharmaceutical companies are more concerned with maintaining a massive revenue stream as opposed to actually immunizing people and the more I find out about vaccines destroying a person’s immune system and causing further complications requiring further doctor’s visits and pharmaceutical medication to heal and so on.

I think we should focus more on the general health of the residents as opposed to the vaccinations they have received. Giving them good food, supplements and mental stimulation would be far better for residents than vaccinations MANY of which are poorly tested – but I must stress this is just uneducated opinion.

The number of stories in the hysterical media about vaccine side effects grossly overrepresents the problem. Vaccine-preventable illness is an inexcusable burden on the health service, and the misinformation put out by the media verges on the criminal, in my view.

The reality is that you have far greater chance of suffering serious harm from these illnesses than you do from any potential adverse reaction to a jab in the arm.

I’m not arguing that point Eoghan – my point is why spend so much money vaccinating people for every possible variant of a known virus rather than maintaining or improving the patients immune system instead?

The obvious answer is money and in regards to criminal misinformation, M.D’s like Russel Blaylock have a different and respectfully to you and myself a more educated point of view on the subject and Dr. Baylock and many more M.D’s share the same opinion about the current vaccination culture in the West.

We actually vaccinate against very few things – the seasonal “flu” vaccine for example includes a handful of strains, chosen on the basis of expert opinion as to the ‘trendy’ variants at a given time.

If we want to blame conspiracies by big pharma, the conclusion must be that they’re idiots – it costs a fortune to develop and produce vaccines. They could make much more money by not bothering, and then just rake in easier cash supplying the critical care facilities that are then needed to deal with the unvaccinated hordes.

I’m wrapping up with this comment because I’m not an expert, but to say the companies would be better off running after care facilities is not true, the recent H1N1 vaccination proves this. How many doses of the vaccination did Ireland alone pay to Bakster for unused shots?

Didn’t they produce and get paid for ~80 Million units for 3 countries alone (Ireland, New Zeland and the UK)

Clearly vaccinations for “different” strains are extremely profitable, after care requires rent, staff wages, power and so on.
If your isolating the scenario where they treat the infected “hoardes”, they have to worry about a very large customer base reduction due to deaths so they do not want that.

Sorry for double post, the original comment didn’t show up for a while.