Originally Posted By ecdc <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/07/01/3455131/childhood-vaccine-study-safe/">http://thinkprogress.org/healt...dy-safe/</a> That vaccines are totally safe. Not just safe, lifesaving. I spend a lot of time reading nineteenth century newspapers (you're jealous) and each day the papers would list the dead. Dozens of them. Most of the time they are children, and most of the time they've died from diseases that don't (or shouldn't) exist anymore - measles, diphtheria, rubella, etc. Vaccine denialists have gone from concerned parents, to stubbornly ignorant, to nutso over-the-top conspiracy theorists. And they're endangering the rest of us.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Some of these nuts don't even believe in broader germ theory, i.e. that bacteria or viruses can make us sick. Of course, not all bacteria or viruses do, by any means, but they don't believe that any disease is caused by a pathogen. As with global warming denialists or evolution denialists - or Holocaust denialists or birthers for that matter - it's maddening that they're even part of the conversation or that such a nutso position can have such outsize influence (i.e. any) based on its relationship with the truth (i.e. none).
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance I can't imagine someone putting their babies at risk when it flies in the face of proven facts. There are so many people in this world who should never, ever be parents, but are.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost I remember the days of the Polio scare. If you think the lines are long at Toy Story, you wouldn't believe the lines to get the Polio Vaccine. As a kid, it appeared to me that the needle was about a foot long, still I had seen pictures of iron lungs and had no desire to be part of that either. Hit me with the needle. The problem is that because of the vaccine we have not seen any of these diseases for a lot of years. I don't think it is that they think that the vaccines are a problem, it's that they think that it no longer lives. That there is no need for the vaccine because it no longer exists. Of course, this is an equally stupid way to think about it.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I hear tell from my wife it is one of the reasons why Jenny McCarthy was let go from the View. McCarthy is an ardent anti-vaccine person, and apparently she's caused a lot of people to regret having listened to her. ABC felt it was irresponsible of her to continue this crusade and for them to employ her.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/">http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/</a>
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Jenny McCarthy A air head not funny gross old minor fondling idiot." What???
Originally Posted By doombuggy <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://articles.latimes.com/2012/nov/19/entertainment/la-et-mg-mccarthy-kisses-bieber-amas-justin-bieber">http://articles.latimes.com/20...n-bieber</a> Thought he was under 18 when it happened but wasn't. Still gross and trollish on her and shows just what an idiot she is.
Originally Posted By Tikiduck With the amount of information available at their fingertips, stubborn ignorance of this sort is just unforgivable. Apparently a large number of Humans have no problem being misinformed idiots. Beam me up Scottie!
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: What it really boils down to is whom you have the most confidence in. There are all kinds of studies out there on all manner of different topics, which have been conducted on this or that. For every study that claims one thing, another study comes along to disprove the other. So you really have to make sure you choose the truth over the lie. It's more important than ever to do your homework, ducklings. There are so many deceivers out there in the world.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Okay, now the guy who pretends to be a with just needs to shut up. This is SCIENCE we're talking about, not some kind of situation where you still "need to do more research" or try and discern if people are lying for crying out loud. When it comes to vaccines, actually typing "For every study that claims one thing, another study comes along to disprove the other. So you really have to make sure you choose the truth over the lie." is THE most empty headed, dangerous, moronic thing a responsible person could type. I truly hope this person has no children, because anyone who has them and takes this approach to vaccines needs to have them removed from the home immediately.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I will forever be king of the typos. Okay, now the guy who pretends to be a witch just needs to shut up.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder To quote ecdc: "Vaccine denialists have gone from concerned parents, to stubbornly ignorant, to nutso over-the-top conspiracy theorists. And they're endangering the rest of us."
Originally Posted By ecdc >>For every study that claims one thing, another study comes along to disprove the other.<< No, that's not true. That's false equivalency. And in fact there are no scientific studies that show vaccines are harmful. There have been pseudo-scientific studies, but they, by definition, are not science. What's important is using your brain to understand the difference instead of throwing up your hands, saying "How can we know anything," and living in a postmodern party for the intellectually lazy.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox I'm not going to get sucked into this argument because it's going to escalate into something nastier in short order. But I will say my two cents before bowing out. There is a zone between the two ends of the debate that isn't being discussed, that gets completely overlooked by the media: the notion that vaccines can be and should be delivered more safely. In our country, the two camps dominate the discussion. You're either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine. There is a middle position, being pro-vaccine but not the way we're doing them now. Clinics exist for concerned parents who get their children vaccinated without insanely high levels of thimerasol preservative nor several different diseases all at once which their infants and toddlers cannot handle. Children with methylation gene mutations can't handle the mercury preservative andthose who are chronically ill with illnesses such as bronchial, gastrointestinal, and inner ear infections can't handle that many antigens at one time. And there are more of these children than you would first realize. I was one of those children, who was diagnosed with severe ADHD when I was seven years old. I was born with most of the "autism genes" of poor methylation, poor sulfation, defective catecholamine processing, as well as IgM and IgG deficiencies. My body doesn't make enough of the "front line" immunoglobulins, so it cannot mount an effective response against bacteria and viruses. And I still have this problem today. If I had been given vaccines back in the fifties the way kids today get them, my ADHD would have become autism. My body wouldn't have been able to handle the double whammy of mercury I was physiologically incapable of removing plus antigens my immune system would have been overwhelmed at trying to defend against. If you don't have the genetic makeup to deal with toxins and pathogens, your body breaks down and falls apart. And that breakdown most often is permanent. Up to 10% of the population has these problems. They are the very foundation of autism spectrum disorders, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, and a host of other lifelong conditions. Genetic testing is now quick and cheap, as well as immunity testing. And any family who has any one of the disorders listed above running through it, even second order relatives like aunts, uncles, cousins, should test their children before shoving these toxic cocktails into their tiny bodies. Vaccines can be done without mercury preservatives and on a schedule which immune deficient kids can handle. And truth be told, all children would be better off if vaccinated this way. It's easier on their systems, and keeps more toxins out of their bodies which they'll be subjected to later in life just living in the chemically ridden landscape we call "modern living." But Big Pharma and the health insurance industry doesn't want to take a hit on their profits by providing more expensive but safer options. That's why this debate is so polarized. It doesn't need to be. Everyone is attacking the wrong problem.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<And in fact there are no scientific studies that show vaccines are harmful.>> There are studies proving those vaccines are harmful for those children who don't have the necessary metabolism needed to remove thimerasol nor the healthy immune systems needed to defend against the antigens in the vaccine. And while those children aren't the majority of the population, they do represent between 5% and 10% of the population. That's a significant number when talking about financially draining diseases like autism, or even fibromyalgia, which cost the taxpayer billions every year in disability and Medicaid. For parents who want the safer options for vaccine scheduling without preservatives, they shouldn't have to pay hundreds of dollars out of their own pockets when everyone else gets the toxic cocktails for free. Providing this option would stop these pointless arguments and keep the populace safe. Period. And it would be much cheaper in the long run by reducing debilitating diseases which drain our social safety net coffers.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo The one respected journal (Lancet) that published the original study that started this whole deadly mess ended up retracting it. Noting that elements of the manuscript had been falsified.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>There is a zone between the two ends of the debate that isn't being discussed, that gets completely overlooked by the media: the notion that vaccines can be and should be delivered more safely.<< No, there's not. It is being discussed and the studies overwhelmingly show that the current vaccine schedule is acceptable for nearly all children. There may be children who have adverse side-effects, and some who should have a slower schedule, but that is up to their physician and it is extremely rare. There is no happy middle ground on this issue. There is no big pharma conspiracy. Staking out some middle ground is not being reasonable or somehow discussing issues that the "two extremes" are ignoring. The way vaccines are delivered is overwhelmingly safe and side effects are extremely rare. All medicines can have side effects, but that is no reason whatsoever to change or shift the way vaccines are delivered.
Originally Posted By ecdc An article by a physician who explains the vaccine schedule and debunks the last arrow in the vaccine denial quiver: too much too soon. <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/delaying-vaccines-not-a-good-idea/">http://www.sciencebasedmedicin...od-idea/</a> >>The optimal timing of vaccines and number of boosters to be given is an important question in order to optimize the benefit and minimize the risks of vaccines. The current schedule, while it requires ongoing research and monitoring, is based on the best evidence that we currently have. Popular delayed or alternate vaccine schedule are not based on evidence. They are based on fear and marketing.<<
