Post: #176

(02-03-2015 07:53 PM)Geomann180 Wrote:  

(02-03-2015 06:31 PM)Texas_Tryhard Wrote:  Anti-vaxxers are maladjusted adults who are too arrogant to realize that the 12+ years of schooling doctors have to go through makes them much more qualified to supply worthwhile medical care to their children than themselves. They're so confident in the fact that their "research" (which of course never actually involves reading a peer-reviewed source paper, but does involve extensive viewings of a few popsci pieces written by conspiracy quacks) is more thorough than the combined weight of the entire medical establishment's that they are willing to bet the lives of their children and the overall health of the country on it.

I'm a little skeptical of the value of the supposed "education" doctors have.

G

If you weren't in such a tremendous hurry to pat yourself on the back and use the Word of Roosh as gospel, you'd have noticed that he specifically highlighted the scientific method in his post. Unfortunately for you, as usual Roosh's writing is on point. High school is largely a waste of time and a significant amount of undergrad college is as well. Luckily I spent less than the average time in both of those environments. You'll find that a lot of doctors mostly blitzed through undergrad just to check off a few boxes and get started on real school.

I'll bite. What's particular about your education that is of such relevance to vaccines?

Post: #177

Even if vaccines do cause (and I'm reaching here) autism, the people that deny taking them are already retarded. So what's the harm?

Post: #178

Well, the harm is that your child gets autism. That's generally understood to be a bad thing.

Post: #179

(02-03-2015 09:53 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  Well, the harm is that your child gets autism. That's generally understood to be a bad thing.

I am genuinely curious about this - how many children get autism from vaccinations?

I hadn't realized the anti-vaccination movement had grown so much. I had heard or read somewhere Jenny McCarthy talking about it a few years ago but it's Jenny McCarthy so obviously I didn't take her seriously. I am inclined to believe that there's more good than bad in vaccinations for most.

Post: #180

(02-03-2015 10:01 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  I am genuinely curious about this - how many children get autism from vaccinations?

Zero. Children don't get autism from vaccinations. The cause of autism may be poorly understood, but it seems possible that it has something to do with age of the mother and father.

Post: #181

(02-03-2015 10:07 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(02-03-2015 10:01 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  I am genuinely curious about this - how many children get autism from vaccinations?

Zero. Children don't get autism from vaccinations. The cause of autism may be poorly understood, but it seems possible that it has something to do with age of the mother and father.

Figures and that's what I thought but some in this thread are echoing the sentiments of the anti-vaccination "activists", so I asked.

Post: #182

(02-03-2015 10:07 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(02-03-2015 10:01 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  I am genuinely curious about this - how many children get autism from vaccinations?

Zero. Children don't get autism from vaccinations. The cause of autism may be poorly understood, but it seems possible that it has something to do with age of the mother and father.

Then, how about the fact that vaccines use mercury?

http://www.safeminds.org/mercury-and-autism/

https://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/merc.html
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs361/en/
http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/h...rcury.html
http://www.env-health.org/IMG/pdf/mercury_chapter1.pdf

Post: #183

(02-03-2015 10:23 PM)Tim in real life Wrote:  

(02-03-2015 10:07 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(02-03-2015 10:01 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  I am genuinely curious about this - how many children get autism from vaccinations?

Zero. Children don't get autism from vaccinations. The cause of autism may be poorly understood, but it seems possible that it has something to do with age of the mother and father.

Then, how about the fact that vaccines use mercury?

http://www.safeminds.org/mercury-and-autism/

https://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/merc.html
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs361/en/
http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/h...rcury.html
http://www.env-health.org/IMG/pdf/mercury_chapter1.pdf

They don't. Thiomersal, which was the mercury-containing preservative used in some (not all) vaccines, was removed decades ago on the precautionary principle. That aside, seven separate studies found no link between thiomersal and autism; indeed Andrew Wakefield had to fake his numbers in order to try and show a link between autism and the MMR, for which he was struck off as a medical practitioner.

It's also demonstrable also from cases where autism shows up without any vaccination at all. What is generally happening with people who think autism is connected with vaccines is because the first gross symptoms are generally only detected around the time vaccines are administered. However, autism often is diagnosed at ages well ahead of the usual administration date of children's vaccines because its symptoms are subtle at very early ages, so it is simply chronological coincidence, not cause and effect. Parents do not detect the first signs of autism because they generally don't know what they're looking for. There hasn't been an autism "epidemic", simply because it wasn't diagnosed as often before the 1980s because the illness was not understood.

Post: #184

(02-03-2015 10:23 PM)Tim in real life Wrote:  

(02-03-2015 10:07 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

(02-03-2015 10:01 PM)TheSlayer Wrote:  I am genuinely curious about this - how many children get autism from vaccinations?

Zero. Children don't get autism from vaccinations. The cause of autism may be poorly understood, but it seems possible that it has something to do with age of the mother and father.

Then, how about the fact that vaccines use mercury?

http://www.safeminds.org/mercury-and-autism/

https://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/merc.html
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs361/en/
http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/h...rcury.html
http://www.env-health.org/IMG/pdf/mercury_chapter1.pdf

Vaccines contain less than 1 microgram per dose of thimerosal (mercury is in this compound) except for inactivated flu vaccines. There are special flu vaccines for children under 6 for this very reason.

Pure sodium or pure chlorine will KILL a child. But yet you'd give a child sodium chloride (table salt)?!

You have to understand that compounds containing an element are different than the element by itself. In this case, thimerosal disassociates into ethylmercury, which has close to the same toxicity but clears the body much quicker. We're talking about a vanishingly small dose. If you give your child a tuna sandwich you're probably delivering a far greater dose of mercury (yes, its a different route of mercury consumption, so its different). Calm down, your precious bodily fluids are fine.

Post: #185

(03-18-2014 09:52 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  The fact that the public is even debating the utility of vaccines is a testament to the declining educational standards in the US, and the slow but steady corrosion of reason in the face of emotion.

And the sad thing is that, for the most part, the abandonment of education and embrace of ignorance and superstition is voluntary.

As I've said, the New Age of Barbarism dawns.

I watched a documentary that is anti-vaccination. It seems that they are not objecting to the positive effects of weakened pathogens ensuing stronger immune systems. But the extra stuff they put into vaccines like aluminum and the like that are detrimental to a person's body due to their toxicity.

Post: #186

(02-04-2015 12:12 AM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 09:52 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  The fact that the public is even debating the utility of vaccines is a testament to the declining educational standards in the US, and the slow but steady corrosion of reason in the face of emotion.

And the sad thing is that, for the most part, the abandonment of education and embrace of ignorance and superstition is voluntary.

As I've said, the New Age of Barbarism dawns.

I watched a documentary that is anti-vaccination. It seems that they are not objecting to the positive effects of weakened pathogens ensuing stronger immune systems. But the extra stuff they put into vaccines like aluminum and the like that are detrimental to a person's body due to their toxicity.

Yeah, but see Texas's post about toxicity above - it depends on the quantity. You'd probably ingest more aluminium while sucking down a Coke than you do in a vaccination.

Post: #187

(03-19-2014 05:37 AM)placer Wrote:  

(03-19-2014 01:38 AM)Rotisserie Wrote:  Lo and behold, a few people asked themselves this same question, and found a correlation between infant mortality rate and number of vaccine doses. Meaning, the higher the vaccination doses, the higher the infant mortality rate (among these chosen nations).

The study was flawed. To summarize http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/vacc...-movement/

• The authors of the study (Neil Z Miller and Gary S Goldman) have an anti-vaccination ax to grind
• There were flaws in how they counted vaccinations (Japan, as just one example, has a lot more vaccinations, but multiple vaccinations are given in the same "shot", artificially reducing their numbers to make them fit in the chart better)
• They removed four nations from the data to make their hypothesis fit better
• Comparing infant mortality rates across nations is not an apples-to-apples comparison (The US has higher numbers because they consider more infant deaths "infant mortality" than other countries)
  

Scientific Misconduct. Makes my blood boil.

Post: #188

(02-04-2015 12:20 AM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(02-04-2015 12:12 AM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 09:52 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  The fact that the public is even debating the utility of vaccines is a testament to the declining educational standards in the US, and the slow but steady corrosion of reason in the face of emotion.

And the sad thing is that, for the most part, the abandonment of education and embrace of ignorance and superstition is voluntary.

As I've said, the New Age of Barbarism dawns.

I watched a documentary that is anti-vaccination. It seems that they are not objecting to the positive effects of weakened pathogens ensuing stronger immune systems. But the extra stuff they put into vaccines like aluminum and the like that are detrimental to a person's body due to their toxicity.

Yeah, but see Texas's post about toxicity above - it depends on the quantity. You'd probably ingest more aluminium while sucking down a Coke than you do in a vaccination.

Seems like its the misuse of vaccines that is causing the opposition:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...later.html

I wouldn't rule out faulty practices causing such problems.

Post: #189

If you think about it, anti-vaxxers sound a lot like the "paleo" and "no shampoo" people.

Post: #190

http://www.westonaprice.org/press/studie...d-disease/

The evidence for it is overwhelming. I read something to that effect from a soldier in the trenches in World War One, that troops dumb enough to let the medics at them with their inoculations were instantly quarantined by the other soldiers and often died not soon afterwards.

Doctors from just a couple decades back would consider "modern" vaccine theory to border on Dark Age pagan witchcraft. If doctors discovered that their vaccines carried live cultures, they could explain to you in one second why you were sentencing your patients to death by injecting them. You would be bypassing their natural immune system to go right to their bloodstream. It is utterly insane and vaccination is actually becoming a kind of white man's voodoo it is so irrational. They don't even try to make sense of what they are doing anymore, they just plunge that thing into your veins if you don't stop them. Even they can no longer explain the theory of what they think is happening. They don't think that deeply on any subject. They just push the plunger if you don't stop them.

A while back one of them was swabbing my arm with alcohol during a routine checkup. He was tapping the syringe before he decided to tell me what was in it. I asked him, did he know I was strong enough to force that syringe in one ear and out the other side of his head without breaking it? He deferred my treatment. Otherwise God only knows what he was about to stick me with. I think he was mumbling about tetanus. I told him I would take my chances but he better put the syringe away. Turns out that tetanus is afraid of Neanderthals, not the other way around. The tetanus germs, if they were there, appear to have died before I did. They fell on their own swords when they realised they were in the courtyard of a Neanderthal immune system. I left their bodies piled beside a million other victims that day, none of them stopped by a vaccination. Turns out the body left to it's own devices if healthy wipes out billions of these critters each day without blinking an eye. It is just that easy.

I just don't know how people survived before doctors. They probably had to endure the slings and arrows of life to a much older age, wistfully looking forward to a day when advanced scienmajists would jab them and their kids with mercury, formaldehyde and aluminium.

Post: #191

(02-04-2015 12:43 AM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  If you think about it, anti-vaxxers sound a lot like the "paleo" and "no shampoo" people.

Isn't Roosh a ''no shampoo'' guy?

http://www.rooshv.com/why-men-shouldnt-use-shampoo

Post: #192

(02-04-2015 12:48 AM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  

(02-04-2015 12:43 AM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  If you think about it, anti-vaxxers sound a lot like the "paleo" and "no shampoo" people.

Isn't Roosh a ''no shampoo'' guy?

http://www.rooshv.com/why-men-shouldnt-use-shampoo

Not sure what point you're trying to make. I'm a no shampoo guy, too lazy/sleepy to not use shampoo daily for the past decade.

Post: #193

Anti-vaxxers are a disease of the modern age, hilariously made possible by vaccination. If you'd never seen or heard of a plague decimating your entire population you might care to indulge in unwarranted skepticism.

Post: #194

(02-04-2015 12:45 AM)Blobert Wrote:  http://www.westonaprice.org/press/studie...d-disease/

The evidence for it is overwhelming. I read something to that effect from a soldier in the trenches in World War One, that troops dumb enough to let the medics at them with their inoculations were instantly quarantined by the other soldiers and often died not soon afterwards.

Doctors from just a couple decades back would consider "modern" vaccine theory to border on Dark Age pagan witchcraft. If doctors discovered that their vaccines carried live cultures, they could explain to you in one second why you were sentencing your patients to death by injecting them. You would be bypassing their natural immune system to go right to their bloodstream. It is utterly insane and vaccination is actually becoming a kind of white man's voodoo it is so irrational. They don't even try to make sense of what they are doing anymore, they just plunge that thing into your veins if you don't stop them. Even they can no longer explain the theory of what they think is happening. They don't think that deeply on any subject. They just push the plunger if you don't stop them.

A while back one of them was swabbing my arm with alcohol during a routine checkup. He was tapping the syringe before he decided to tell me what was in it. I asked him, did he know I was strong enough to force that syringe in one ear and out the other side of his head without breaking it? He deferred my treatment. Otherwise God only knows what he was about to stick me with. I think he was mumbling about tetanus. I told him I would take my chances but he better put the syringe away. Turns out that tetanus is afraid of Neanderthals, not the other way around. The tetanus germs, if they were there, appear to have died before I did. They fell on their own swords when they realised they were in the courtyard of a Neanderthal immune system. I left their bodies piled beside a million other victims that day, none of them stopped by a vaccination. Turns out the body left to it's own devices if healthy wipes out billions of these critters each day without blinking an eye. It is just that easy.

I just don't know how people survived before doctors. They probably had to endure the slings and arrows of life to a much older age, wistfully looking forward to a day when advanced scienmajists would jab them and their kids with mercury, formaldehyde and aluminium.

First, it's widely acknowledged that most vaccines do not have a 100% efficacy rate in that there is a tranche of individuals whose bodies don't develop the immunity even though the vaccination is administered for whatever reason. So it's intellectually dishonest for the authors of that article to assert that 'THE VACCINATED SPREAD DISEASE TOO!' -- there is no followup on vaccination to see if the vaccine took as such. Not to mention that being vaccinated against one variant of a disease does not necessarily prevent you from being a carrier or infected with other serotypes. Not to mention that some vaccines eradicate being a carrier of the disease and some do not.

The main reason you're not kicking and screaming from a tetanus infection is because the vast majority of people are immunised against it. It has little to do with the supposed strength of your constitution. This is called herd immunity; when a certain proportion of a population are vaccinated against a disease, the disease simply cannot spread because it can't find enough carriers or hosts to propagate itself across a population and while it theoretically remains in the environment, its capability to cause mass death is greatly reduced. And it's seen again and again where there are outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases, across the world, from England, to Sweden, to Japan, the outbreaks are always in populations that refuse to or have low vaccination rates.

I might also add that the standard argument that "these diseases were on the decrease, all due to better sanitation and/or better nutrition" is a crock of shit, too.

As an example, consider measles. Here's a graph of the recorded cases in the US from the 1920s onward:



Similar graphs crop up when you look at the number of cases of diseases against time. Again and again, there's a permanent dropoff in cases as vaccines come out and are widely distributed through the population. Also, if improved sanitation or better nutrition was responsible for the dropoff in cases of vaccine-preventable respiratory illnesses, it should also have reduced cases of non-vaccine-preventable respiratory illnesses such as the cold or flu, transmitted the same way. That hasn't happened.

Or take Hib. Hib disease was prevalent until just a few years ago, when conjugate vaccines that can be used for infants were finally developed. (The polysaccharide vaccine previously available could not be used for infants, in whom most of cases of the disease were occurring.) Since sanitation and nutrition is no better now than it was in 1990 (if anything, nutrition is worse given the obesity rate) it is hard to attribute the virtual disappearance of Hib disease in children in recent years (from an estimated 20,000 cases a year to 1,419 cases in 1993, and dropping) to anything other than the vaccine.

Chickenpox (varicella) can also be used to illustrate the point, since modern sanitation has obviously not prevented nearly 4 million cases each year in the United States up to about 2012. If diseases were disappearing, we should expect chickenpox to be disappearing along with the rest of them. But a huge proportion of children in the United States get the disease today, just as they did 20 years ago or 80 years ago.

Chickenpox used to be very common in the United States. In the early 1990s, an average of 4 million people got varicella, 10,500 to 13,000 were hospitalized (range, 8,000 to 18,000), and 100 to 150 died each year. In the 1990s, the highest rate of varicella was reported in preschool-aged children.

Chickenpox vaccine became available in the United States in 1995. In 2010, 90% of children 19 to 35 months old in the United States had received one dose of varicella vaccine, varying from 72% to 97% by state and city. Among adolescents 13 to 17 years of age without a prior history of disease, 90% had received 1 dose of varicella vaccine, and 58% had received 2 doses of the vaccine.

And the result?

Varicella incidence in 26 states, which had adequate and consistent reporting to the National Notifiable Disease Surveillance System (NNDSS), declined by 45% from 2000 to 2005 with an additional 77% decline from 2006 to 2010 after the second dose of varicella vaccine was recommended. Overall, varicella declined 82% from 2000 to 2010.

National hospitalization rates for varicella declined overall by 71% during 2000 to 2006 compared with rates from 1988 to 1995. In people younger than 20 years of age, hospitalization rates declined by approximately 95%.

Varicella deaths declined by 98.5% in children and adolescents less than 20 years of age during 2008 to 2009 compared with 1990 to 1994. Deaths declined by 96% in adults less than 50 years of age and by 49% in adults 50 years of age or older.

Varicella incidence among HIV-infected children declined 63% during 2000-2007 compared to 1989-1999.

Varicella vaccination provides indirect benefits to people who are not eligible for vaccination. Varicella incidence among infants, a group not eligible for varicella vaccination, declined by 90% from 1995 to 2008. This is herd immunity at work.

That material on chickenpox/varicella is all from the CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/chickenpox/hcp/monito...cella.html

There's no debate. Vaccines caused the major drops in incidence of these diseases. Arguing anything else is reading from Melanie's Marvellous Measles.

Post: #195

(03-18-2014 11:34 PM)MidniteSpecial Wrote:  Some really great points here on both sides. Learned a lot from this thread. I have kids. Gave them all their vaccines except for measles mumps rubella, hep c (why they give new born babies hep c vaccines is disturbing) and no hpv vaccines or flu shots.

Here's an interesting article on where doctors go to die: http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240...2?mobile=y

There is no Hep C vaccine, it does not exist.

Post: #196

Another licensed health professional trained in research methods here. Anti-vaccination propaganda is paranoid junk.

Read some history on polio for one, and google some pictures of people with polio, and thank the spaghetti monster you never got it.

Post: #197

(02-04-2015 02:58 AM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 11:34 PM)MidniteSpecial Wrote:  Some really great points here on both sides. Learned a lot from this thread. I have kids. Gave them all their vaccines except for measles mumps rubella, hep c (why they give new born babies hep c vaccines is disturbing) and no hpv vaccines or flu shots.

Here's an interesting article on where doctors go to die: http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240...2?mobile=y

There is no Hep C vaccine, it does not exist.

I believe this is true, but for travel to 3rd world countries vaccination for A and/or B, I forget which are available, is recommended.

I went to a great travel medicine clinic in San Francisco with specially trained nursed who know travel medicine, I got a vaccination for Yellow Fever I think which I knew nothing about but if someone took the trouble to make a vaccine it's probably not a lot of fun to have.

Post: #198

(03-19-2014 12:02 AM)BIGINJAPAN Wrote:  Yeah Big pharma and doctors are always looking out for the patient. That is why they give newborns a Hep B shot. Gotta make sure those newborns are protected from sexually transmitted diseases at the age of 6 hours.

Also its not like a pharmaceutical company to knowingly infect thousands of people with AIDS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_E6d3KGqek

you guys keep believing in big pharma without doing your own research.

Also i forgot to mention in order to show reduced infections of say a virus like polio the government and the medical community would never change the names of a virus to make you think it was on decline. Perhaps a scientist on the forum could break down the difference between AFP, Viral meningitis, guillian barre syndrome and polio.

Viral meningitis is caused by the Coxsackievirus and has a fecal oral transmission, and is prominent in children. the leptomeninges become inflamed.
Guillian Barre is an auto immune condition that destroys Schwann Cells and is associated with infections like Campylobactor Jejuni and CMV, it it usually called acute inflammatory demylinating polyradiculopathy.
Poliomylitis is due to the RNA picornavirus family, it is an enterovirus and has a fecal oral transmission, it damages the anterior motor horn causing flaccid paralysis and muscle atrophy.
I don't know what AFP is abbreviated for or I would break that down for you let me know.

Post: #199

(03-23-2014 08:03 AM)kosko Wrote:  Being indoctrinated by pharmaceutical funded medical schools for 6-10 years does not make one "smarter" than another. It makes one knowledgable, but like any education system you end up parroting back commands given to you. Education means nothing since some of the dumbest folks I know have PhDs and degrees out the ass but have zero ability to think for then selves. The least corrupted part of medicine is bio-engineering where hard un-corrupt disciplines of mechanics and engineering are blended with medicine. Every other standard area has become infiltrated and the modern MD is nothing more now then a monkey whom scribbles prescription commands for Big Pharma prescriptions. So many "advances" and so much money thrown at the field yet we continue to get even more sick, weak, and frail.

If Doctors were by default the smartest people in the room then you would see all if then speak out against obvious health combatants such as GMO foods, blood and puss filled Frankenstein mass produced Milk, chemical exposures and the effects in make health, etc. Anybody with a critical mind can see these issues but yet the majority of the medical community is inept to act and/or knows nothing, or simply stays ignorant on the subjects.

Milk is a perfect example. From their training they should know that commercial milk, minus the enzymes is useless. The vitamin D is added, nobody knows the true bio-Availability of it, while the calcium present in the milk is bio-available another due to the proteins in milk and the lack of proper enzymes. Studies have been done showing that populations with increases dairy consumption of milk actually have the HIGHEST rates of osteoporosis in women, not the lowest. There gets to a point where your body leeches it's reserves from its own bones due to the lack of sufficient proper absorbable calcium being introduced into the system from diet. This should be common knowledge and it used to be before Big Pharma and Big Agra corrupted it all. Yet ask a doctor and they will parrot the line that you should get drunk of gallons of puss water from dirty cows for your "bones and health" yet the evidence shows otherwise.

Some of the most educated are the most delusional and stupid. "Schools" were never supposed to teach true smarts, only indoctrinate you on certain fields. If doctors were the smartest guys in the room the majority of them would know game to leverage those massive salaries and prestige they posses to get laid. Enough said.

The primary source of vitamin D is exposure to sunlight, which in turn aids with calcium homeostasis in the body. Vitamin D as a supplement cannot replace exposure to sunlight.

Post: #200

(03-23-2014 05:16 PM)Vroom Wrote:  

(03-23-2014 03:52 PM)Rotisserie Wrote:  

(03-21-2014 08:40 PM)Vroom Wrote:  How many people have actually read a single study about any vaccine? ...
Of those, how many have the expertise in immunology and statistical analysis to make sense of it one way or the other?

I'm going to take a wild guess and say on this forum, and in wider society, the number is very close to zero.

There are medical doctors and scientists who understand immunology who have already weighed in with their opinion on this thread.

No, immunology is a highly specialised field. Your GP only gets a basic introduction, about as much as they get on diet.

Immunology is essential to medicine and well covered in Medical School and prominently covered on the USMLE Step 1. You cannot understand pathology without a deep understanding of immunology/microbiology/physiology as they interplay in the clinical treatment of disease. That is a fact and indisputable. Go to a USMLE forum and you will see that your above statement is factually inaccurate.