DD,
if you are not anti-vaccine then you are just being obstinate for the sake of doing so, if you think the vaccines are good and you get them you are pro-vaccine, if you think they are bad you are by nature against them so you are anti-vaccine. if you just don’t like the government telling you what to do then it is an entirely different thing.
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
DD,
if you are not anti-vaccine then you are just being obstinate for the sake of doing so, if you think the vaccines are good and you get them you are pro-vaccine, if you think they are bad you are by nature against them so you are anti-vaccine. if you just don’t like the government telling you what to do then it is an entirely different thing.[/quote]
"I will never understand how people think the government trying to stop a widespread transmission of disease is some egregious violation of our personal liberties. "
This is the quote that started this. It was about the government using coercion to force people to do something in the name of “public good”.
Are we changing the topic now?
DD,
Nope. this isn’t a hot button issue for me, i just think that sometimes people fight against their best interests, like when a kid refuses to eat his veggies, i guess since my family and i are all vaccinated what other people do is their business. it is clear that it is in societies best interest for everyone to get vaccinated, but …
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
like when a kid refuses to eat his veggies,[/quote]
This is the exact comparison I have a problem with. Are you my daddy making me eat my veggies?
Grant it I don’t expect an answer to that question, seeing as how you’ve ignored every direct question I’ve asked you.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
like when a kid refuses to eat his veggies,[/quote]
This is the exact comparison I have a problem with. Are you my daddy making me eat my veggies?
Grant it I don’t expect an answer to that question, seeing as how you’ve ignored every direct question I’ve asked you.[/quote]
That’s pretty much what he does. And after several posts of doing this he will then declare victory and walk away.
He’s a very odd dude.
Somehow I am now sitting on the fence when it comes to all this.
I mean, most people are milked, herded and coddled anyway and they like it so they have already given implicit approval to be treated as cattle.
Suddenly it becomes a tad too obvious and they freak out?
Whats that all about?
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Storey,
I suppose their is a risk of that, and I would think that the doctors are prepared for the eventuality, however since the vaccine is made up of dead/inactive strains I would imagine you are more concerned about infection or something with dirty needles? I’m pretty sure the autism connection is tenuous at best and a scam perpetrated by a seedy british doctor at worst.[/quote]
That is the point, doctors arent prepared to even acknowledge that. Im not saying that there is a 100% of the time direct link to autism as it is a multi-factorial thing but there are plenty of folks besides Andrew Wakefield that have pointed out a demonstrable link with autism expression and vaccinations. Also your internet ad hominem of Dr Wakefield is unwarranted really and his partner on the study has been fully exonerated. It is a classic example of having a very small amount of info spoon fed to you by the media and then forming a position on someone Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s Co-Author on Controversial Lancet “MMR Paper” Exonerated of All Charges of Professional Misconduct
Wakefield found what would be a VERY unpopular point if it were to be true (massive lawsuits, recalls, etc.) so no surprise he got his ass handed to him in the PR spin dept.
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
DD,
it is clear that it is in societies best interest for everyone to get vaccinated, but …[/quote]
actually it is not and that is the whole point
DD,
I am not the government, I do not care if you or your children are immunized, I wish everyone would, it is better to be safe than polio-ed, but feel free to not get it done. My question is why not? If you think they are bad that is one thing, if you don’t like being told what to do that’s another. I was under the impression your questions were answered via opinion rather than cold hard fact except the last one, I am pretty sure ( nearly 100%) I’m not your daddy and even if I was I would let you decide if you wanted to eat asparagus or not is that direct enough?
Storey,
And if people refuse to get vaccinated because of there fears fine, but keeping America safe from all of these nasty illnesses is easier if Americans get the vaccines, which is probably why the government wants us to do it.
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Storey,
And if people refuse to get vaccinated because of there fears fine, but keeping America safe from all of these nasty illnesses is easier if Americans get the vaccines, which is probably why the government wants us to do it.[/quote]
Government wants American citizens to stand in line to be fondled even though the evidence that that works is more or less zero.
So, do they want something and are just misguided or do they want something else entirely and are spot on?
[quote]Cortes wrote:
Anybody here arguing against vaccines have kids and NOT vaccinate them?
I’m guessing not. [/quote]
I didn’t vaccinate my kids as prescribed. I’m not dead-set against all vaccines, but I do fear that vaccine injuries and negative side effects are grossly underreported. The happy medium for us was to forego the vaccines when the children were very young and get the bare minimum to get them into school when they were older (more mature immune systems). Our state does not have a legal provision “conscientious objection”. We would have had to home school.
read this Brian (and anyone else that is 100% sure that the polio vaccine worked as advertised and everyone is safer with it). Interested in your thoughts, counter points, etc. The document is well researched and cited so just comments hating on the site or whatever will be dismissed as intellectual immaturity
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
DD,
I am not the government, I do not care if you or your children are immunized, I wish everyone would, it is better to be safe than polio-ed, but feel free to not get it done. My question is why not? If you think they are bad that is one thing, if you don’t like being told what to do that’s another. I was under the impression your questions were answered via opinion rather than cold hard fact except the last one, I am pretty sure ( nearly 100%) I’m not your daddy and even if I was I would let you decide if you wanted to eat asparagus or not is that direct enough?
[/quote]
So you are against the government mandate of vaccines?
If you aren’t my daddy, who are the parents in your kids scenario?
And no, all of my questions were necessary information to fully flesh out your stance. If you are for government mandates for vaccines, who gets to decide which ones, when, what is safe, and what is in the best interest of the public?
[quote]storey420 wrote:
read this Brian (and anyone else that is 100% sure that the polio vaccine worked as advertised and everyone is safer with it). Interested in your thoughts, counter points, etc. The document is well researched and cited so just comments hating on the site or whatever will be dismissed as intellectual immaturity
http://www.thinktwice.com/Polio.pdf
[/quote]
Obvi didn’t read the whole thing, I’m at work.
But lets say it is 100% perfect, wonderful and all items in its cited page are science and void of an “op-ed” type bullbutter.
Are there similar papers for things like small pox, etc?
EDIT: Dude isn’t a DR… But whatever for sake of arguement.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
DD,
I am not the government, I do not care if you or your children are immunized, I wish everyone would, it is better to be safe than polio-ed, but feel free to not get it done. My question is why not? If you think they are bad that is one thing, if you don’t like being told what to do that’s another. I was under the impression your questions were answered via opinion rather than cold hard fact except the last one, I am pretty sure ( nearly 100%) I’m not your daddy and even if I was I would let you decide if you wanted to eat asparagus or not is that direct enough?
[/quote]
So you are against the government mandate of vaccines?
If you aren’t my daddy, who are the parents in your kids scenario?
And no, all of my questions were necessary information to fully flesh out your stance. If you are for government mandates for vaccines, who gets to decide which ones, when, what is safe, and what is in the best interest of the public?[/quote]
May I invite you to flesh out your stance?
If you are cared for by government, if everything you produce is basically theirs, if the can put fences wherever they please, why bitch and moan if they put a needle in your butt?
I mean, obviously, you have either accepted that they know better than you or that it is irrelevant what they know because they are your masters and you are livestock.
It seems to me that Brian is the only one who is consistent.
I might not like it, but if you are entertaining the government works for the people hypothesis (mwuahaha…, ahem), he is spot on.
Why the discombobulation?
Why here, why now?
What makes THIS magic?
If you want someone to explain to you how “society” and the “greater good” works, TB or Zeb will be happy to help you out.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]storey420 wrote:
read this Brian (and anyone else that is 100% sure that the polio vaccine worked as advertised and everyone is safer with it). Interested in your thoughts, counter points, etc. The document is well researched and cited so just comments hating on the site or whatever will be dismissed as intellectual immaturity
http://www.thinktwice.com/Polio.pdf
[/quote]
Obvi didn’t read the whole thing, I’m at work.
But lets say it is 100% perfect, wonderful and all items in its cited page are science and void of an “op-ed” type bullbutter.
Are there similar papers for things like small pox, etc?
EDIT: Dude isn’t a DR… But whatever for sake of arguement.[/quote]
Good thing he isn’t a Dr, that means he has more time to actually research and look at proper statistical information! Im glad you deferred that but just know that an MD has almost no more advantage to gather research and analyze it in regards to this kind of historical epidemiology than someone who wasn’t other than familiarity with terminology and an obvious academic aptitude.
There is still controversy around Jenner and smallpox as well and we do know we’ve had outbreaks since it’s “eradication” in the 70’s that were originally from a vaccinated person but smallpox probably has the strongest argument for its use. That being said, even experts on the subject feel that mass vaccination isn’t the answer.
http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/vaconlyinoutbreaks.html
“We are operating with some pretty big unknowns here,” said Dr. Bill Foege, former chief of the CDC.
The risks of the smallpox vaccine are too high unless there is an imminent threat of an outbreak
“There are a lot of circumstances today that didn’t exist 30 years ago when we were still vaccinating to control the natural spread of the disease,” he said.
Today, he said, many people have suppressed immune systems because of cancer treatment or other therapies. Millions of people with skin disorders could be at risk of serious disease if they come into contact with someone vaccinated against smallpox.
[quote]storey420 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]storey420 wrote:
read this Brian (and anyone else that is 100% sure that the polio vaccine worked as advertised and everyone is safer with it). Interested in your thoughts, counter points, etc. The document is well researched and cited so just comments hating on the site or whatever will be dismissed as intellectual immaturity
http://www.thinktwice.com/Polio.pdf
[/quote]
Obvi didn’t read the whole thing, I’m at work.
But lets say it is 100% perfect, wonderful and all items in its cited page are science and void of an “op-ed” type bullbutter.
Are there similar papers for things like small pox, etc?
EDIT: Dude isn’t a DR… But whatever for sake of arguement.[/quote]
Good thing he isn’t a Dr, that means he has more time to actually research and look at proper statistical information! Im glad you deferred that but just know that an MD has almost no more advantage to gather research and analyze it in regards to this kind of historical epidemiology than someone who wasn’t other than familiarity with terminology and an obvious academic aptitude.
There is still controversy around Jenner and smallpox as well and we do know we’ve had outbreaks since it’s “eradication” in the 70’s that were originally from a vaccinated person but smallpox probably has the strongest argument for its use. That being said, even experts on the subject feel that mass vaccination isn’t the answer.
http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/vaconlyinoutbreaks.html
“We are operating with some pretty big unknowns here,” said Dr. Bill Foege, former chief of the CDC.
The risks of the smallpox vaccine are too high unless there is an imminent threat of an outbreak
“There are a lot of circumstances today that didn’t exist 30 years ago when we were still vaccinating to control the natural spread of the disease,” he said.
Today, he said, many people have suppressed immune systems because of cancer treatment or other therapies. Millions of people with skin disorders could be at risk of serious disease if they come into contact with someone vaccinated against smallpox.
[/quote]
Still waiting for an argument why THIS is especially outrageous.
It fits right in, why worry?
Come on guys, a principled argument why this is bad.
[quote]storey420 wrote:
“We are operating with some pretty big unknowns here,” said Dr. Bill Foege, former chief of the CDC.
[/quote]
I feel like this is the major crux of the issue for both sides really.
Modern medicine isn’t perfect, and (at least at the individual doctor level) doesn’t seem to pretend it is.
Monday morning, the QB always knows the right throws to make.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]storey420 wrote:
“We are operating with some pretty big unknowns here,” said Dr. Bill Foege, former chief of the CDC.
[/quote]
I feel like this is the major crux of the issue for both sides really.
Modern medicine isn’t perfect, and (at least at the individual doctor level) doesn’t seem to pretend it is.
Monday morning, the QB always knows the right throws to make. [/quote]
This is different from every other government program HOW EXACTLY.
Ah, fuck it, I am declaring this for Brian, he has won on the grounds of not only his basic beliefs but also those of his opponents.
Well done Brian, it is not often that someone stabs right into the heart of his opponents reasoning.
It is like Judo or Aikido, just with a touch of mental rape.