You are crazy. To think that a flu VACCINE protects a mother and her baby best. Remember the Hippocratic Oath. First, do no harm.
If the pregnant woman has therapeutic levels of vitamins (and minerals) in her, and if she is unstressed and able to get enough sleep, she will not get a bad case of the flu even if exposed. That would meet the criteria of first, doing no harm.
It’s insane to buy into giving a pregnant woman a shot into her muscle (bloodstream) filled with immune adjuvants, and all the other vaccine ingredients, believing it is somehow “protective,” while at the same time forbidding her an Advil or a drink of wine. It’s not biologically logical.
The idea of vaccines is genius. The formulation is PRIMITIVE SCIENCE. The dosing, the recommendations, are outmoded and dangerous to some. And no one is able to know to whom a vaccine is dangerous just yet. It’s quite the risk.
I do not deal in anti-vax conspiracy theories. I deal only with scientific facts that are verifiable by experimentation.
I saw the heartbreak first hand of the loss of a newborn baby to a vaccine preventable disease. My friend was devastated. There is no way I would ever want to inflict that heartache on anyone. I will accept the well-characterized adverse effects of vaccines, which are orders of magnitude less severe than the diseases those vaccines prevent.
When a vaccine contains an adjuvant, it means that less of the toxic component—the antigen—can be used in the vaccine. That’s a win-win, in terms of cost and adverse events. Why would anyone prefer their child to get sick with microorganisms that continuously produce those toxins that cause severe illness and even death, when they can prevent that from happening in the first place. Answer: people who want more kids to die because they think that increased child death will prevent overpopulation prefer that option.