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
28-04-2014, 11:28 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(28-04-2014 11:00 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  Also, again, how does your theory account for countries like mine with nationalised health-care? It seems to rely on the Government looking the other way while pharmaceutical companies fleece the population. That means that over here the Government would have to look away while they themselves were fleeced doesn't it?

Is Australia the child vaccination are all free, so the government employees (which are voted out every 2- 4 years) must be letting themselves be ripped off in some grand conspiracy to receive kickbacks or shares, but wait, Australian politicians are forbidden to hold shares/investments in companies related to their portfolios, and the slightest overlap or links to their wives/relatives are constantly scrutinised in the media because of that law.

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
28-04-2014, 12:25 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(28-04-2014 09:19 AM)sporehux Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 08:52 AM)Magellan35 Wrote:  I am not the first atheist/evolutionist/father/science lover in the world to question vaccine safety, flawed pre-license trials, skewed marketing hyperbole, and large pharmaceutical companies and families/shareholders who own them running the schools, teaching hospitals, public institutions, and massive lobbying effort that push their particular agenda as the best means of maintaining health.

Some of the commenters here would like to pretend that a dissenting voice can be heard and would win a Nobel Prize if it could be proven that vaccines are dangerous, which is patently ridiculous under a paradigm in which so many powerful institutions are prepared to destroy dissent.

This thread is a case in point.

For some of you, the only proof that vaccines fall among compounds capable of inducing altered genetic expression - with resultant tissue and organ dysfunction - would be to see it happen with your own eyes in multiple labs. That is your right, though I have no idea how you function in a world in which pattern recognition is beneficial for survival. For others, even if it looks like there is clear enough evidence that vaccines are capable of causing tissue damage and disease states, fear of the pandemics of yesteryear cause you to feel that vaccines are the better of two evils (that is how I viewed things a few months ago). But maybe, just maybe, one or two people who read this thread will see that it is plausible that vaccines have a prominent role in "new epidemics" of autoimmune disorder, SIDS, and a number of cancers, and that statements regarding efficacy, risk/reward assessments, and herd immunity all come from sources with a vested interest in controlling public opinion and little interest in revealing problems that would affect market share or business as usual. Admitting, "We were wrong. We screwed up," is also absolutely unthinkable for the vast majority of public health workers, doctors, and scientists who have spent their lives supporting that system.

To the commenter who presumes to think he knows what I think about chemicals and vaccines: You don't. Humans shrug off and even incorporate into metabolism a number of compounds and elements that are deadly in high doses, so piss off with your one-assumption-fits-all bullshit.

I could do your work for you and cite the many studies demonstrating the chemical pathways by which vaccines lead to various disease states, but you all have Google. So why should I continue to bash my head against your immovable stance and dance to your requests for proof when you are as capable as I am of typing, "vaccine linked to MS" or "allergies and epigenetics" (See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/22451193/, lol....) as I am.

If confirmation bias is your m.o., you will only hear those voices that support your view. If seeing the world as it really is seems preferable, you just might learn that vaccines - and other interventions that contravene billions of years of species arising in the midst of a soup of microorganisms - have unintended consequences that even the finest scientists cannot foresee.

It's time to wake up and see that we have traded one monster for another.

Vaccines > plural :

Its a case by case basis, some are close to pointless and borderline placebo's, some may be promoted unethically for commercial reasons.
The overwhelming majority are the pinnacle of medical/scientific understanding that tangibly improves the quality and quantity of human life/dignity.

There is no secret cabal that administers them, they are open to criticism, as they should be, constantly and vigorously falsified.

Googling your claims results in many assertions with no citations, post a link that supports your conspiracy theory that lists its study sources.

I agree with a number of your points. It is improvement in pre-licensure trials and the peer review process, and a moratorium on funding from pharmaceutical companies for the CDC, FDA, and similar bodies internationally that I would like to see more than anything, although I know that such reasonable demands will never be met. There is no conspiracy except to protect business as usual, and that conspiracy is eternal.

All that being said, when some vaccines are little more than placebos, while others have much higher efficacy, there is clearly room for improvement.

In coming years, huge volumes of data will be accumulated regarding epigenetic triggers and their transgenerational effects. It isn't just "toxins" that should be the focus of that research, but diet, disease, malnutrition, radiation exposure, vitamin and mineral supplementation, and much, much more. We have the tools to finally understand how environment affects genetic expression at the molecular level.

Honest reporting of the findings should change the way we all live, eat, drink, procreate, and inject substances into our bodies, but let's face it -- most people will not change one iota in response to new information.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 12:51 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(28-04-2014 12:25 PM)Magellan35 Wrote:  -- most people will not change one iota in response to new information.

Information that impedes their (conspiracy theorist) self importance of a holder of "secret knowledge"
is either deflected with an ad-hominid, claimed to be a conspiracy to cover up the first conspiracy or just ignored outright.

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
28-04-2014, 02:22 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(28-04-2014 12:51 PM)sporehux Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 12:25 PM)Magellan35 Wrote:  -- most people will not change one iota in response to new information.

Information that impedes their (conspiracy theorist) self importance of a holder of "secret knowledge"
is either deflected with an ad-hominid, claimed to be a conspiracy to cover up the first conspiracy or just ignored outright.

I registered as a forum member because I'm an atheist who probably agrees with most people here on most points under discussion on the site. I don't buy into most of what people believe about conspiracies or anything else in popular culture.

If I was just here trolling, I wouldn't have put the effort into the research and resulting dissertation cited in my first post. The fact is that I would like a reasonable discussion about the possibility that our best science still has room for new insights that require rethinking of one-size-fits-all public health initiatives.

As just one example, if there was a simple blood test that could be done to indicate that a newborn has a gene for mitochondrial dysfunction that predisposed the child to suffer a severe adverse reaction to vaccination, it would actually benefit vaccination efforts by lowering adverse reaction rates.

Of course, I think the issue is more complex than that, but it would be a step in the right direction. As it stands, any attempt to begin the discussion brings immediate, vigorous attack and denial of any and all problems with the status quo. That usually only happens when something is granted the status of religious sacrament, which should not be happening on an atheist forum.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 02:28 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(28-04-2014 09:48 AM)Magellan35 Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 09:25 AM)Alex_Leonardo Wrote:  Is Magellan....

MISS WANG?
You got me! Congratulations!

....No idea WTF you're talking about....

I have a full day of work ahead. I'll get those citations listed this evening.

Congratulations on being very religious and dogmatic, virtually all of you who have commented. You'll be quoting Scripture in no time.

Um thanks?

Well since it seems to be time where we go around the table giving each other priase, congratulations on not being able to back up your claims with reliable evidence.

.....wait, who's the one being religious and dogmatic again? Consider

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Tartarus Sauce's post
28-04-2014, 02:32 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(28-04-2014 11:00 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  I reiterate, do you have any figures for the vaccination rates of the children of people who work creating and promoting these vaccines, or stand to profit for them?

Like I said, if these people are trading global health for profit then they surely wouldn't vaccinate their own children. That's your potential smoking gun, or a pretty strong piece of evidence that they do believe in what they are doing, depending on what the figures are.

Also, again, how does your theory account for countries like mine with nationalised health-care? It seems to rely on the Government looking the other way while pharmaceutical companies fleece the population. That means that over here the Government would have to look away while they themselves were fleeced doesn't it?

Is there any point me drawing attention to these questions, again?

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Hughsie's post
28-04-2014, 02:34 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(28-04-2014 02:28 PM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 09:48 AM)Magellan35 Wrote:  You got me! Congratulations!

....No idea WTF you're talking about....

I have a full day of work ahead. I'll get those citations listed this evening.

Congratulations on being very religious and dogmatic, virtually all of you who have commented. You'll be quoting Scripture in no time.

Um thanks?

Well since it seems to be time where we go around the table giving each other priase, congratulations on not being able to back up your claims with reliable evidence.

.....wait, who's the one being religious and dogmatic again? Consider

...wait, so you're saying there's such a thing as evidence that would change your mind? You aren't dogmatic?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2014, 02:40 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
Oh, man, I love it when the adorable skeptic-trolls jack off.

"Skepticism means not believing things, I don't believe anything (ie fuckin centuries of virology), therefore I win, and you are all DOGMATICALLY CLOSE-MINDED TROLOLOLOLOL"

Protip: what is asserted without effort (that means everything you said so far, for those keeping track) may be dismissed without effort.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
28-04-2014, 02:42 PM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(28-04-2014 02:34 PM)Magellan35 Wrote:  
(28-04-2014 02:28 PM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  Um thanks?

Well since it seems to be time where we go around the table giving each other priase, congratulations on not being able to back up your claims with reliable evidence.

.....wait, who's the one being religious and dogmatic again? Consider

...wait, so you're saying there's such a thing as evidence that would change your mind? You aren't dogmatic?

You do know what skepticism is, don't you?

I thought people made it pretty clear they refute your arguments due to flimsy evidence, not because they don't allow evidence to shape their viewpoints.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tartarus Sauce's post
28-04-2014, 04:40 PM (This post was last modified: 29-04-2014 06:30 AM by Magellan35.)
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(28-04-2014 11:00 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  I reiterate, do you have any figures for the vaccination rates of the children of people who work creating and promoting these vaccines, or stand to profit for them?

Like I said, if these people are trading global health for profit then they surely wouldn't vaccinate their own children. That's your potential smoking gun, or a pretty strong piece of evidence that they do believe in what they are doing, depending on what the figures are.

Also, again, how does your theory account for countries like mine with nationalised health-care? It seems to rely on the Government looking the other way while pharmaceutical companies fleece the population. That means that over here the Government would have to look away while they themselves were fleeced doesn't it?
1. Where on earth would I find numbers for vaccination rates among those who create and promote vaccines? Are you going to pretend that such "data" would be reliable even if it exists?

2. It would only serve as a smoking gun if those who know exactly what happens in the lab are the ones who refuse to vaccinate. Peripheral public health personnel by and large believe what they are told by their superiors.

3. Countries with nationalised health care, like yours and mine, do pay for vaccines; they simply do so out of public coffers (i.e. we the people pay for them). The chief public health officers in our respective governments are heavily lobbied to support initiatives of pharmaceutical companies. They are generally not scientists and by and large believe what they are told, although in your country they are likely stockholders in GlaxoSmithKline and don't care much whether vaccines are safe, as long as they keep selling. It would be nice to see such conflicts of interest eliminated.

Now, on to the studies:

Known vaccine reactions:
- Widespread inflammation:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23337946
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17643770
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21945263

- Encephalitis/ encephalomyelitis/encephalopathy: http://home.smh.com/sections/services-pr...050309.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles...48/?page=1 http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/article....eid=578962
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007...009-1498-9
http://www.neurology.org/content/68/16_s....abstract)

- Autoimmunity:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10648110
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ado...ne.0008382
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/765271_1:
http://www.landesbioscience.com/special/...f#page=124

Regardless of the fact that Thimerosal is no longer in most pediatric vaccines, the fact remains that it was commonly used in most vaccines until the early 21st century. Here are some of the studies concluding that thimerosal is very damaging for particularly susceptible individuals (note that Chile just became the first country to ban mercury products in all pharmaceuticals, including all vaccines -- http://topinfopost.com/2014/02/03/the-re...vaccines):

http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Activit...ucier.ashx (note Conclusions section)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4091651
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3264864/
http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/41/1/79.full

Epigenetics and the means by which vaccines and other substances are capable of affecting methylation, gene transcription and protein synthesis, and mitochondrial function, with disease states as a potential result:
http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage...ssion-1070
http://vaccinesafetyconference.com/pdf/D...tation.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3179978/
http://autismepigenetics.org/

Neurological impairment linked causally to vaccines:
Too many to list here. See http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.ca/20...-link.html

Those are the studies. Frankly, I cannot control whether or not you choose to read them, care that they exist, or even care about the victims, should you come to the conclusion that vast swaths of the population are damaged to one extent or another by vaccines.

I play poker. I also engage in high-risk adrenaline sports. Assessing and preparing for risk are essential to success in both endeavours. For me, the risk of pandemic disease must be weighed against the preventatives/cures available to us from the pharmaceutical industry and the effectiveness of measures such as quarantine of the sick, improved sanitation, and access to clean water, nutritious food, and skillful nursing. To date, I have never seen reliable evidence of a looming epidemic on the order of the Bubonic Plague or Spanish Flu in our era, and those who die most often from infectious disease are those who are already most vulnerable (most often due to age or malnutrition, and most often in 3rd-world nations with deplorable living conditions and overcrowding). For such persons, vaccination is akin to slapping a bandaid on a heart attack victim.

For the rest of us, we already survive countless billions of encounters with potential pathogens in our lifetimes. I refuse to panic every time the news media tells me we're all going to die because of the child-murdering, science-hating, Christ-loving non-vaccinators in our midst, because I know bullshit when I'm waterboarded with it.

Flame on.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: