Thanks, I needed a laugh. Perhaps you were purposefully being centric to appeal to, and save the lives of, his followers and their children.

To me, this is the Darwin Awards, writ large.

Pity the children tho…

I’m not totally clear on whether you are (1) questioning the safety [and presuming : the efficacy] of the H1N1-2009 vaccine specifically or (2) vaccines in general, and/or the (3) current administration’s handling of the pandemic.

Since I feel it is reasonably safe to assume you question #1 above I will say that the vaccine is exactly the same as our seasonal influenza vaccine. Our injectable vaccine has been manufactured and administered for more years than I have been alive [I am 50 years old]. I’m sorry, I simply cannot see how something more than half a century old is “new”, “untested”, “experimental” or “of unknown safety and efficacy”.

To the issue of vaccines in general: I do not know about you but I enjoy having lived a life free of the threat of some pretty awful infectious diseases. Diseases that were part of the very warp and weft of their early lives.

Now, the issue of safety can be variable person-to-person. There is a statistical chance, extremely small of an adverse reaction. There is also a small statistical possibility of dying in a car crash because you are wearing your seat belt, whereas had you not been wearing it you would have very likely survived. Does this mean we should all forgo the wearing of our seat belts in our vehicles?

There is a statistically small possibility that I will die getting out of bed in the morning, especially on a Monday morning. Does this mean that I should be allowed to lay abed all Monday [and not go to work] because of that small danger? Should we all remain abed on Mondays because of that small statistical threat? Never mind that the threat would simply shift to Tuesday mornings.

In a nutshell: I have complete confidence in the pandemic vaccine. The pandemic vaccine is independent of what political party occupies the White House.

Specific to pregnant women and their unborn children: Doing a search on the benefits of influenza immunizations during pregnancy to both the mother and the unborn child will yield all the results I would ever need to receive one should I be faced with that decision, not a possibility in reality. Irrespective of that, the science supporting efficacy is solid, as is the safety.

The science stating that an infection of influenza during pregnancy risks the lives of both mother and unborn child is also readily available with a quick search of the scientific and medical journals accessible online.

Shunning an infinitesimally likely risk while embracing one that statistically meaningful is not logical.

People are not infallible, they are human. And humans can often make choices, choices they believe are in the best interest of the rest of humanity, but in order to make those decisions they often choose to overlook facts, overlook “minor complications”, and make tradeoffs. All because they are in the best interests of the People. And these are the good, smart, well-meaning people (leaving out those who might not be as good, smart, or well-meaning for the sake of argument).

“This is the best we’re going to get”
“Due to political concerns this is the way it had to be done”
“Don’t mention this as it could raise liability issues”
“Which is worse, a few deaths or complications or a pandemic”

There are many that place infinite trust in the Institutions that are supposed to protect them. But then there are some who look behind the walls of the Institution and realize that it is simply a building full of human fallibility.

Is it really as clear-cut as the Media and Institutions would like us to believe? Is it as necessary, is it as safe, and is it tested as it needs to be for someone to make the decision to possibly endanger the life of their unborn child?

Perhaps we’ll never have a 100% answer to that question, but just because you put faith in the Institutions doesn’t mean that someone who questions those Institutions is on the fringe.