An interview given by a healthcare worker from New York was presented on the Fox News Channel by Shepard Smith during his daily Studio B program (9/29/2009).  The woman was a nurse who had been in the medical field for many, many years.
The interview was conducted to address her issue with a law that is proposed and may pass in the state of New York.  This law was drafted with the intention of protecting those people who may or may not encounter or who may or may not, contract the H1N1 influenza virus.  The nurse is adamantly opposed to being forced to have any substance injected into her body, especially if mandated by the government.  Additionally, she is threatened with the loss of employment if this law is passed and she refuses to have this substance injected into her body.
Her concerns were due to the fact that historically, our federal government has assumed the role of intending to provide good health to all the people that live in America.  Far too many times, with all good intentions, the concerns of the individuals have been dismissed for “the greater good”.  This was evident with the mass immunizations that took place in the 1970s for the Hong Kong influenza virus and many people suffered from the effects of the immunization.  In fact, it created an illness called Guillan-Barr Syndrome.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/history/world/1875-a-brief-history-of-government-immunizations
Statistics do reveal that influenza viruses mutate constantly and have been a sickness that humanity has dealt with for centuries.  What the statistics never cover are the conditions of the environment around people.  From the time we are children, we are taught to drink lots of water, be clean, and to eat the proper foods.  These facts alone prevent more illnesses than any immunization could cure, regardless of close proximity to other people – unless they are not living within those teachings of cleanliness.  This manner of living is also the best prevention in the event a person does contract this virus.  The questions cannot be answered as to the quality of the water, the cleanliness of the patient and the true health of those people who lived in 1918 during the Spanish Flu epidemic.  We only have historical data resulting in statistics which are of course, only simple facts.  How can it then be assumed that in 2009, we must act and act quickly to inhibit H1N1s’ impact on people in America?  If insanity is commonly referred to as “doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results” then what is our government actually doing when it is expecting to pass a law to require individuals to inject an unknown chemical into their bodies?

Shepard Smiths’ manner of thinking which was also spoken aloud is exactly the mind-set that has inhibited the freedoms of all Americans.  This thought process considers the impact to the greater good and by its own logic, removes the importance of the individual to think for the individual.  This manner of thinking has impacted our public water supplies, our education system, our defence of America, American values and now, it is entering our very homes.  How?

When information is presented, it is up to the recipient to decide what valid information is or what simply opinion is.  Shepard Smith spoke from opinion.  His opinion supported “the greater good” even though he is expected to only present information.  The healthcare worker was simply presenting the information as she knew it as an individual.  She is an individual who also works and was trained in assisting those with medical issues.  She is someone who has worked with people from all walks of life.  She was stating her concerns, concerns that were based in reason, instinct and emotion, to those who need to make up their own minds about the government enacting a law that would require healthcare workers to be immunized if they want to remain employed.
It is obvious to any person who is aware of the threat of the H1N1 “pandemic”.  This pandemic has spread around the world, just as the yearly ritual of the various strains of influenza that races around the world does.  More people have died over the course of several years from this changing influenza than the H1N1 virus has killed.  It is understood that people will get sick, some sicker than others and many may die.  That possibility is very real.  It was just as real during the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic.  During that time, however, the world had been involved in a war that encompassed the globe.  Most people returning to the United States were young men, weary and wounded from battle.  Their immune systems were compromised already by this physical and emotional exhaustion.  This virus did also kill healthy men, women and children.  It is the very nature of influenza.  More information about influenza can be found at the following link, and only relays information to the reader.  It is up to the person who reads this information to act upon this information.  http://www.vaccines.mil/documents/Influenza_pandemic_QA.pdf

Where are those factors now with this recent influenza threat?  Could history repeat itself?  It is a real possibility.  Yet it is becoming expected that all people must consider the threat to the greater good, rather than the threat to their own personal lives.  The real threat that exists of injecting a substance, although it is being presented as “safe”, is being completely dismissed.  Yet again, even recent history supports the side of logic and reason.  Far too many drugs and medicines today have been recalled.  These were medicines that were approved by the FDA.  The most recent example is the drug called Yaz-Yasmin.  The FDA has determined that there is false advertising regarding curing acne and removing PMS symptoms.

What is also stated on in this same article are ALL the risks associated with this drug.  This drug was researched, manufactured and then approved for use by the FDA.  This drug was also brought to the market much quicker than other drugs have, but not as quickly as the H1N1 influenza vaccine.  It is only because of the false advertising claims from the FDA that have driven lawsuits by people who have used this drug.  Yet who was it that approved this drug for use?  Are the side-effects to the body when using this drug worth the risks associated with this drug?  Only the individual can decide that for themselves and should.

It cannot be discounted that we are all consumers and we are all concerned with our health.  However, our society has become dependent on relying on experts, although they are experts in their particular fields, who are simply as human as the next person.  Scientific data is simply a vast repository of information gathered with the intent of using it for the greater good of humanity.  That simply does NOT mean to imply that the results of that scientific research MUST be used for the greater good of society. Scientific knowledge cannot replace common sense, human instinct and human emotion.  Scientific knowledge is simply that, scientific knowledge.  No government or society can do anything other than present the information, explain the benefits and leave it to the person to decide what choice to make.

When did this choice begin to be made for the greater good and dismiss individual choice?