Poll: What is your opinion of Vaccines/Vaccine Policy?
Vaccines saved the world. Bring them on.
I don't entirely trust big pharma, but vaccines have done more good than harm.
Some vaccines are effective and useful. Some are not.
Vaccines are of questionable value, like many pharmaceuticals, but I might want one if an epidemic hits.
Vaccines cause more health problems than they prevent. Parents and individuals should have the right to refuse any/all of them.
Vaccines are part of a population-reduction conspiracy on the part of the global elite and are intended to sterilize/kill as many as possible.
[Show Results]
 
Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-05-2014, 04:37 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(06-05-2014 04:27 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Here's something I find rather alarming/scary posted via a 'facebook' link.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=...154&type=1

Kind of relevant, given the topic under discussion.

Much cheers to all
An unintended consequence of using our best science to the best of our collective knowledge. My message here has been that there are unintended consequences with higher and higher rates of vaccination too, including mutation of pathogens that cause disease in spite of vaccine-induced antibodies.

I am not the enemy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2014, 04:40 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(06-05-2014 04:34 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(06-05-2014 04:21 PM)Magellan35 Wrote:  Let's use your situation as an example of how to apply reason to the decision-making process.

You want to have a baby, so you start looking at the odds of coming across a pathogen that might harm you or your child. That is wise. Let's take measles as an example.

Before introduction of the measles vaccine, there were 3-4 million cases of this very infectious disease per year in the U.S., with 95%–98% of children infected by age 18 (risk of becoming infected is approximately 90% per exposure for the unvaccinated, but for this exercised let's say it's 100%), and it was considered an inevitable rite of passage. In the years before the vaccine, of the 3-4 million for whom the disease was reported (many cases were so asymptomatic or mild that they went unreported), 450 people died, which placed the odds of death at 450/3,000,000, or a .015% chance of your child dying from measles, IF exposed.

Even that number is high, since the pre-vaccine mortality rate for measles by comparison with the U.S. population of 189,241,798 (in 1963) was actually .000237% .

Add to that the fact that if you, as the mother, have measles antibodies, you can pass them on to your infant to lower the risk even further. If, in spite of living in a country with access to good nutrition, clean water and public sanitation, your child contracts measles anyway, high doses of vitamin A (vitamin A deficiency has long been known to be the primary reason for measles morbidity/mortality where standards of living are poor) and decent nursing will aid in rapid recovery, with decades-long immunity as a result. Remember, your child can get measles even if vaccinated, so be prepared: "During the 1989-1991 U.S. outbreaks, 20% to 40% of those affected had received one to two doses. In a 2011 outbreak in Canada, over 50% of the 98 individuals had received two doses of measles vaccine." - http://business.financialpost.com/2014/0...outbreaks/

You can do the math and stop living in terror, or you can get the vaccine before you get pregnant, have a simple blood test done to make sure you have plenty of measles antibody to (hopefully) lower your risk of measles during pregnancy, and worry about whether or not the risk of contracting measles is equal to the risk of a vaccine that may be creating an autoimmune response in you that might show up just in time to make motherhood much less fun.

It's your choice, but please don't pretend I'm just spouting pseudoscience and abdicate your responsibility to act upon available information.

Yet more proof Magellan is totally incompetent to even begin discussing the subject. Here's some REAL stats, (as you see he just made his up).
http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html
I'm not home right now, but I can't wait to analyse the CDC's overhyped bullshit stats...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2014, 04:42 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(06-05-2014 04:40 PM)Magellan35 Wrote:  
(06-05-2014 04:34 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Yet more proof Magellan is totally incompetent to even begin discussing the subject. Here's some REAL stats, (as you see he just made his up).
http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html
I'm not home right now, but I can't wait to analyse the CDC's overhyped bullshit stats...

Don't even bother. *As if* you have the training or knowledge to debunk the CDC. You are an idiot. Please keep proving it, day by day.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
06-05-2014, 04:59 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(06-05-2014 04:37 PM)Magellan35 Wrote:  An unintended consequence of using our best science to the best of our collective knowledge. My message here has been that there are unintended consequences with higher and higher rates of vaccination too, including mutation of pathogens that cause disease in spite of vaccine-induced antibodies.

While I agree/acknowledge the "unintentional side effects" comment. Pretty much everything else typed leaves me with a 'Wait...what tha' ? "

Pathogens ALWAYS mutate/adapt/evolve/ This is a known thing/trait. Always has been (Well...relatively always has been) . Hence, my posting of showing some of the currently really resistant (TO the point of immune) little bastard critters.

Much cheers to all,
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2014, 05:20 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
Hmm... I voted so I could see the results, but I wasn't very enthusiastic about something in the options.

One option links two separate premises:
Vaccines cause more health problems than they prevent. Parents and individuals should have the right to refuse any/all of them.

Yet there is no option for, say:
Vaccines have done more good than harm. Parents and individuals should have the right to refuse any/all of them.

I really dislike the trend toward thinking in terms of:
good --> should be law requiring
bad --> should be law prohibiting

Just because something may be good / bad for someone or society as a whole, we shouldn't automatically default to the implication that we have the right or obligation to legislatively force it upon those who disagree or don't consent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes djhall's post
06-05-2014, 11:57 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(06-05-2014 04:42 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(06-05-2014 04:40 PM)Magellan35 Wrote:  I'm not home right now, but I can't wait to analyse the CDC's overhyped bullshit stats...

Don't even bother. *As if* you have the training or knowledge to debunk the CDC. You are an idiot. Please keep proving it, day by day.

Your reliance upon the CDC and other institutions with strong ties to special interests groups - rather than upon your own research and math - will make a fool of you for a lifetime.

And yes, all of my numbers came from public records, but I don't have time to coddle the naysayers who respect neither logic nor any source that disagrees with their views. Look up numbers and do some grade 8 math to see that the CDC rely upon estimates and guesses for their statistics.

Tomorrow I'll show you a few examples of CDC bungles, Pollyanna.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-05-2014, 12:00 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
“Oh, I make sure we never wear seat belts! I heard that once a guy was wearing his seat belt, and he went into a lake, and he couldn’t get it off, and he drowned! I’m not wearing anything that isn’t 100% safe!”

Seatbealt s kill more people then vax, shouldn't they be optional .
And your kids cant die from playing with kids who don't wear them.

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like sporehux's post
07-05-2014, 05:23 AM (This post was last modified: 07-05-2014 05:48 AM by Cathym112.)
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(06-05-2014 04:21 PM)Magellan35 Wrote:  
(06-05-2014 11:16 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  Although I have not read the entire thread, I am astounded at the sheer idiocy.

You cannot use Science to disprove Science, first of all. Any studies you cite must be peer reviewed and be endorsed by a credible scientific college or they will be rejected outright.

Your message is dangerous, because it contains inaccurate information that jeopardizes the health of the GLOBAL population, if anyone is unable to see through your pseudo science nonsense.

I hate America's lawsuit culture....but I'm actually hoping that a parent sues an anti-vaxx parent for willfully and negligently exposing their child to a potentially deadly virus. The vulnerable depend on the herd immunity of the strong to protect them.

I'm currently trying to become pregnant and spending a great deal of money trying to do so. If I do get pregnant, and I am exposed to Measles through an unvaccinated child, and my fetus is miscarried, I would sue those parents for negligence. We all have a duty to not be a danger to other people. Period.

Let's use your situation as an example of how to apply reason to the decision-making process.

You want to have a baby, so you start looking at the odds of coming across a pathogen that might harm you or your child. That is wise. Let's take measles as an example.

Before introduction of the measles vaccine, there were 3-4 million cases of this very infectious disease per year in the U.S., with 95%–98% of children infected by age 18 (risk of becoming infected is approximately 90% per exposure for the unvaccinated, but for this exercised let's say it's 100%), and it was considered an inevitable rite of passage. In the years before the vaccine, of the 3-4 million for whom the disease was reported (many cases were so asymptomatic or mild that they went unreported), 450 people died, which placed the odds of death at 450/3,000,000, or a .015% chance of your child dying from measles, IF exposed.

Even that number is high, since the pre-vaccine mortality rate for measles by comparison with the U.S. population of 189,241,798 (in 1963) was actually .000237% .

Add to that the fact that if you, as the mother, have measles antibodies, you can pass them on to your infant to lower the risk even further. If, in spite of living in a country with access to good nutrition, clean water and public sanitation, your child contracts measles anyway, high doses of vitamin A (vitamin A deficiency has long been known to be the primary reason for measles morbidity/mortality where standards of living are poor) and decent nursing will aid in rapid recovery, with decades-long immunity as a result. Remember, your child can get measles even if vaccinated, so be prepared: "During the 1989-1991 U.S. outbreaks, 20% to 40% of those affected had received one to two doses. In a 2011 outbreak in Canada, over 50% of the 98 individuals had received two doses of measles vaccine." - http://business.financialpost.com/2014/0...outbreaks/

You can do the math and stop living in terror, or you can get the vaccine before you get pregnant, have a simple blood test done to make sure you have plenty of measles antibody to (hopefully) lower your risk of measles during pregnancy, and worry about whether or not the risk of contracting measles is equal to the risk of a vaccine that may be creating an autoimmune response in you that might show up just in time to make motherhood much less fun.

It's your choice, but please don't pretend I'm just spouting pseudoscience and abdicate your responsibility to act upon available information.

I don't give a shit that it was once so prevalent that it was considered a rite of passage. Female circumcision was once considered a rite of passage...as was foot binding. Doesn't mean it's a fucking good idea to go through it.

If I spent 30k to get pregnant, and you knowingly exposed me to the virus that killed my fetus, you would be negligent for that.

The same way that if I knew I had was carrying whooping cough, I wouldn't go into a nursing home to see my grandma and knowingly expose the vulnerable to the virus.

This make me so mad because you are ignorant. I can still get measles even though I've been vaccinated as a child. That's why there have been outbreaks in college dorms. 100% of those infected had been previously vaccinated. Your ignorance is astounding!!

It's extremely dangerous for a pregnant woman to get any virus. If her fever gets too high, she can literally cook her child. If it doesn't die, it can face a life of disability.
I know too many people with cerbral palsy to say that this doesn't happen.

Further, you are Jenny McCarthy right now. Zero medical training, or science degree, with the IQ of a turnip. What qualifies you to try to interpret the data to people that might confuse your logomachist trickery with actual knowledge?

If you reject the scientific process (the vaccine is just the end result) that brought you the vaccine, you must also reject antibiotics and gene therapy since it's the same process.

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Cathym112's post
07-05-2014, 05:34 AM (This post was last modified: 07-05-2014 05:50 AM by Cathym112.)
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(07-05-2014 12:00 AM)sporehux Wrote:  “Oh, I make sure we never wear seat belts! I heard that once a guy was wearing his seat belt, and he went into a lake, and he couldn’t get it off, and he drowned! I’m not wearing anything that isn’t 100% safe!”

Seatbealt s kill more people then vax, shouldn't they be optional .
And your kids cant die from playing with kids who don't wear them.
Actually, if a child not wearing a seatbelt is in a collision, they can kill the person wearing the seatbelt. Since we all understand physics, we know that the occupants of the vehicle are also traveling at the same speed as the car. A body, weighing 60 lbs, hurling around the car at 70 mph will kill you.

My friend was in a car accident. She was wearing her seatbelt. The backseat passenger, not wearing one, slammed into the back of her seat and broke her back. She is paralysized from the waist down. She would have walked Away if her friend wasn't negligent in her decision to forgo the seatbelt.

Shit, I belt in my tv when I'm moving it. Because if the crash doesn't kill me, the tv slamming into my head will.

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Cathym112's post
07-05-2014, 05:59 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(06-05-2014 05:20 PM)djhall Wrote:  Hmm... I voted so I could see the results, but I wasn't very enthusiastic about something in the options.

One option links two separate premises:
Vaccines cause more health problems than they prevent. Parents and individuals should have the right to refuse any/all of them.

Yet there is no option for, say:
Vaccines have done more good than harm. Parents and individuals should have the right to refuse any/all of them.

I really dislike the trend toward thinking in terms of:
good --> should be law requiring
bad --> should be law prohibiting

Just because something may be good / bad for someone or society as a whole, we shouldn't automatically default to the implication that we have the right or obligation to legislatively force it upon those who disagree or don't consent.

When your decision affects everyone around you, then it's no longer about personal choice, is it?

It may be my choice to ignore the advice of my mechanic to fix my brakes because I think that there is a conspiracy about auto obsolescence.

But if I chose to continue to drive that car with bad brakes, it's no longer just about my choices now is it?

Not vaccinating your kids affects EVERY. SINGLE. PERSON. Around them.

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Cathym112's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: