On 02/16/2015 02:52 AM, Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 15 Feb 2015 23:39:35 -0800, T wrote:

On 02/15/2015 12:47 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 15 Feb 2015 12:12:51 -0800, T wrote:

This is what I don't get. Why risk those in poor health
with the flu twice instead of once? Would it not be better
just to teach them how to treat the flu and send them
home with a print out on how, a recipe for real chicken
broth, and a bottle of olive leaf?

The vaccine is to make antibodies to some of the more
prevalent viruses antigens. So if you catch a different strain of
virus, but it has one or more antigens in common with the vaccine, you
will get flu, but a much weaker version.

I have never know that to be the case. You either have immunity
or you do not.

IOW, it might or might not diminish the number of cases, but
it will certainly reduce the severity of the disease.

Not that I have seen. As far as I can tell, it is all marketing.
The researchers on the flu vaccine, state openly that the reason
that it *does not work* is because the outside of the virus is
always changing on them. And that the inside that stays the same,
your body can't get at it. And the researchers wording was
very clear: "Don't work". Not "works barely a little".

Think about it, if the above marketing were true, no one would
ever get the flue after they got the initial variations of it.
And their are only about 10 variations on it. I forget the exact
number. (Cold viruses, which can be just as deadly as the flu
and get diagnosed as the flu all too often, have way more
variations.)

Just two of the influenza antigens can have almost 200
variations. Each one will produce a different antibody. So if you are
infected by a particular influenza and you have antibodies to, say, 1
of it's antigens, the disease will be much more mild than if you had
none at all. (I am oversimplifying, there are the "killer" genes to
take into account, none of which were present in avian or swine flu,
which were a hoax)
You will, of course, still catch the flu. And once you catch
it, make antibodies to that strain. But the virus will do an antigenic
shift while traveling from person to person, and when it reaches the
point that you do not recognize (have enough specific antibodies for)
enough of the antigens, you will "catch it" again.
OMG, it's not rocket science.
The standard vaccine is OK, for people at risk. The Asian and
swine vaccines cause encephalitis in children, specially Orientals (I
believe it was made to "dumb down" China, but all races are affected).
Which is why "H1N1 vaccine" is a keyword in NSA searches, it's a
weapon.
[]'s


Hi Shadow,

If I am remembering college biology, it is "lock and key".
When a virus alerts your immune system, your body creates (or
reuses) keys to the virus and tries key after key until it
gets it right. When your body finally finds the proper
key, it is race as to who kills who first.

This is why I don't buy the flu shot argument that a
shot that doesn't work on the flu in the wild will
help you with a virus it does not match up to. Lock
and key means it has to be specific.

And, those out here that I spoke with that got the flu
the worst and went into phenomena all got the stupid shot.
Which matches what the researches say and my understanding of
lock and key. I wonder if the shot did not temporarily
diminish their immune system and cause the lock and key
process on the wild virus to take longer. Just
wondering.

And yes, sometime if the shell of a virus has something
in common with a similar virus, the keys will work.
Cow pox for instance. But, then again if the key
works, it works. Not half way.

Of interest, I was taught we are always sick. What we
recognize as symptoms are when the lock and key process is
taking its sweet time and symptoms manifest themselves that we
recognize. (The human body is a really hostile place for
foreign bodies.)

You are a good sport.

-T

I am surprised you did not tag me on my remark about
the healing properties of a fever. My favorite ER
Allopath had to tell an astonished nurse about the
research where children get over colds 1/3 faster
if a safe fever is allowed to proceed. I asked
him how high up I could let my fever go.

Not to poke your profession in the eye too hard (I
know I do a little), if you need to measure a
temperature to know someone has a fever, you are
in the wrong profession (to quote America's greatest
herbalist -- Dr. John R. Christopher).