Ah, I see where this is going then. It's tough luck for the young and old (most susceptible to death or irreparable damage), we're not going to vaccinate anymore. If you survive your babyhood and toddlerhood with all the usual diseases, then you can live with the consequences until you die of secondary diseases after contracting the flu in your elder years. Sounds like fun. Age is a factor, not just nutrition. Age is more of a factor than nutrition. That is why vaccines exist, to protect those that need it most.
Thing is, even in the old days before vaccines there were people who found some diseases were tamer one year. They would try to get it that year, because they knew it wouldn't kill them, and they were protected the next time it came around. It's not hard to figure out you only get it once. This happened with smallpox. Then Jenner figured out cowpox was even milder.
We tackled smallpox before getting onto tough ones - like the flu that changes every year too much for us to gain long-term protection by getting it "naturally".
In the 1700s 1/3 of children died of smallpox before they were three. Others were blinded & pockmarked. Now we have no clue how bad it was. In 1801 people were lining up to get vaccinia scratched into their skin.
Other diseases with known fatality rates are also kept in check with modern vaccines. It's far too easy to take vaccines for granted.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. I don't know where I learned that, but I so get what it means. People who would rather try to stamp out a fire once it starts will get burned.
http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article24466
It is no coincidence that vaccinated children survive, but the unvaccinated die.
?