Considering they use an inactive form of the viruses, I’d say you are just fear mongering.
No surprise you'd say that.
What "fear" am I "mongering" here? Lol. I'm giving facts that are easily confirmed by combing through the govt websites. Feel free
The flu evolves so quickly that it is really hard to create an effective vaccine. That’s the reason why I do not get one. These inert vaccines are not going to make anything worse, however,
You, on the other hand, are parroting talking points, marketing, and CYA by the industry. Just like some are "mongering a fear" of not getting them.
Seeing as you're an anti-vaxxer, there's no point in talking to you about this.
if you have some evidence to counter my claim,
It's not an "if" situation. The govt has the "evidence" on their own public facing sites. You just have to not be lazy and disingenuous enough to go look for it yourself.
you’d completely revolutionize epidemiology and probably earn yourself some serious cash.
You're an absolute moron if you think that last part is true.
Epidemiology is not a hard and fast science that is by any means "solved" as any science wouldn't be. Most things you hear parroted as "fact" and "the science" in many sectors are just theoretical but as such have garnered the most popularity and following in industry. The current "settled science" taught in nearly every accredited institution of higher learning is germ theory, vaccine science, and allopathic treatment of dis ease.
That doesn't make it right and unerring any more than it made leaching/bleeding "settled science" hundreds of years ago even though so many in the profession swore by it.
There ARE other methods of care and treatment that have proven effective at not just lessening symptoms but also dealing with causes and shoring up immune systems against future issues. Since you're anti-science, I wouldn't expect you to have looked into anything besides what you've been told.