Now this is just one vaccine, and its not wise to extrapolate wholesale.
However, this one clearly states: there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza from using this product.
Note: Its curious I'm being downvoted for actually posted an actual insert, which has real scientific information. You would think all the "science lovers" would applaud that. Ho hum, I guess I should've posted a Merck marketing ad instead.
Well I'm not downvoting you since 1) I can't, you responded to me; and 2) you're not being offtopic. And you're at least defending your position without memeing even if I disagree with it.
That being said, I'm glad you clarified because I figured the implication you were getting at is these are harmful vaccines. Am I correct in saying your grievance is a lack of evidence that they're helpful?
> Am I correct in saying your grievance is a lack of evidence that they're helpful?
Part of the second picture that the user has highlighted basically says that said vaccine contains a mercury derivative and that it has not been tested for "carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility". So I would say that this is also part of his issue.
don't expect them to enjoy facts. They just want their cult to prevail. They'd love to delete your "anti-vaccination" comment. Facts that go against their desires are evil propaganda and should be deleted too.
However, this one clearly states: there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza from using this product.
Note: Its curious I'm being downvoted for actually posted an actual insert, which has real scientific information. You would think all the "science lovers" would applaud that. Ho hum, I guess I should've posted a Merck marketing ad instead.