Lucky Us, A Shingles Vaccine!

Well we just get luckier and luckier here in the UK

As Prof Adam Finn, vaccine expert at the University of Bristol, is quoted as saying 'We are getting close to perfect' with our vaccination programme.

I can hardly believe our good fortune.......

So the next shot that is coming the way of some, is a shingles vaccine.  This is such a brilliant vaccine, that even by the manufacturers own admission, it is only 50% effective. So a 50/50 chance of protection but 100% absorption of yet more adjuvents.

Not only is this superb vaccine only 50% effective. It will cost £25 Million to administer, but save the NHS, £20 Million.   So we are only £5 Million out of pocket for a vaccine that isn't even better than a 50/50 chance of protection.

Golly aren't we lucky?

Can anyone else see a problem with this? My maths isn't the best but!

So of course there must be another reason for this vaccine and it would help to vaccinate the older generation for shingles if we are set to have the chicken pox vaccine rolled out soon. Yet another for our poor children's immune systems to cope with.

As chicken pox is a precursor to possibly contracting shingles later in life, should you come into contact with the chicken pox virus, well we could see an epidemic ( to use the BBC scare tactic word)  of shingles in older people, where probably about 90% have had chicken pox.  Those that haven't could fall victim to chicken pox and as we know chicken pox and measles are childhood illnesses, best had in childhood.

Vaccination can prevent this from happening at its rightful time. Getting either as an adult is by far worse.

If we saw a backlash of shingles on the government programme for C/pox vaccination, I can imagine that would be very politically damaging.  After all the 'grey' vote is quite large and for governments to be creating a rise in illness wouldn't look good!

So a canny move hey!  vaccinate the 70 ++ for one thing (Don't forget it is only 50% effective they say) and then introduce the chicken pox vaccine for children.

By which time, much like the measles, i'm sure we will see a lot of reporting that the incidences of chicken pox has risen and that suddenly it has gone from a very innocent childhood disease to a possible 'killer'

There will then be the stories that we need to vaccinate children to protect vulnerable older people who can't have the shingles vaccine, so grandchildren will have to have this to protect grandparents - a good play on the emotions, as that is part of the usual format to get people to uptake unnecessary vaccines.

Does it ever occur to anyone, that if these vaccines are so safe, why is it that people with compromised immune systems seem to the very ones that can't have them, yet on the NHS logic, should indeed be the first to have them, as we are told they offer such great protection.

The Vaccine News website lists 20 facts about vaccines.

On one of them, the question is asked why do vaccines need to contain formaldehyde, aluminium, phenol, mercury etc etc.  The answer is to make them work better!!!

The virus itself needs nothing to make it work, just a slightly immune compromised recipient at the time. The body then sets too and deals with it. May be that is because that is how nature intended. We are not infected with measles, chicken pox, rubella etc etc by injection. The proper route is through the nasal passages, where a whole host of lymph nodes kick in and start to deal with it.

Enter through the muscles and the body doesn't respond in the way nature intended.

The justification for the adjuvents is that the limits are below the government recommended safety levels - so that's ok then is it?

As we don't naturally contain these things, I guess it's because our bodies don't need them, or nature has made one giant boo boo!  So even a small amount isn't desirable.

Lets look at Aluminium, it too is found in safe doses in deodorants, yet even cancer specialists advice women not to use deodorants with aluminium in, as many breast tumours are found to contain it.  So it enters the body, the body doesn't know what to do with it, so it dumps it away from major organs and where better than breast tissue. A great place for a tumour to develop, a possible dumping ground for these chemicals found in such things as vaccines.

So yeh!! how many more vaccines do we need?

Especially when they are so effective (50%!!!) and so cost effective  (Loss of £5million)

Detrimental to health????  Well given that ethically you can not trial vaccines on children, drug companies do not know what the effects are on our babies, short or long term.