It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Important -- how to in 10 sec shut up a ProVaccine person

page: 15
24
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: skoalman88
a reply to: Prezbo369

Appreciate the link but the argument still makes no sense to me. (Below is not addressed to Prezbo)

Regarding this genesis of this whole debate, the measles "outbreak," 145 cases in 14 states (out of 300+ million people living in 50 states), this whole thing seems overblown. An outbreak was once defined to me by a doctor as 2 cases. Seems like the emotional response to the word doesn't really match the definition.

It's funny that people who go along with something would have such hatred toward those who disagree with them. My kid is on a staggered vaccine schedule. I see no need to shoot up the young fella with so many of the recommended vaccines at once. If you disagree with that, too bad, I really couldn't care how you feel about my parenting decision. I'm sure you stuff your kid with McDonalds and other fast food trash at the same time you chastise me for my vaccine decision.


When you consider that just in the month of January of this year there has been more cases than all but 3 of the last 10 years it starts to make sense. And given how the incidence shot up last year well that just adds to it.
Measles if left unchecked will spread exponentially.

No, I don't really agree with a staggered schedule as I don't see any evidence which makes that better than the standard schedule but at least you're getting them done.




posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: skoalman88

Thimerosal is no more mercury than table salt is volatile sodium and poisonous chlorine.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Pardon?

The FDA really does nothing except threaten vitamin (and almond) sellers for making "false" medicinal claims. The fact that they removed the stuff, despite whatever evidence would convince you it is bad, should make you wonder.

Again, whichever side you fall on in this debate is fine. But this is all about protecting our rights to make decisions without those who disagree with us begging for a law requiring us to go along with them.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: skoalman88




posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
GetHyped: I never claimed the two were the same, I'm just pointing out that they removed it.

Pardon: maybe the virus has mutated and the current vaccine is insufficient? Maybe the mutated virus was brought from someone overseas? 145 out of 300 million isn't that much and the amount of anger some on the other side have is unwarranted.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 09:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: skoalman88
GetHyped: I never claimed the two were the same, I'm just pointing out that they removed it.

Pardon: maybe the virus has mutated and the current vaccine is insufficient? Maybe the mutated virus was brought from someone overseas? 145 out of 300 million isn't that much and the amount of anger some on the other side have is unwarranted.



No, the genotype of the "Disneyland" virus is known and will be protected by the current vaccine as this will protect against the measles serotype (of which there is only one) irrespective of the various genotypes.

jid.oxfordjournals.org...

It's not so much someone bringing the virus in as that will probably always happen.
It's arresting the spread of that disease and that's where herd immunity plays its part.

And believe me, there's plenty of vitriol thrown by both sides, not just one.

edit on 9/2/15 by Pardon? because: Corrected link.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: skoalman88
a reply to: Pardon?

The FDA really does nothing except threaten vitamin (and almond) sellers for making "false" medicinal claims. The fact that they removed the stuff, despite whatever evidence would convince you it is bad, should make you wonder.

Again, whichever side you fall on in this debate is fine. But this is all about protecting our rights to make decisions without those who disagree with us begging for a law requiring us to go along with them.





Look at the upside, when someone sues you for not getting vaccinated, you can sue the government for not making you!



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 09:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: yuniorsan
My child is 2 an we no longer vaccinate her, her reactions to Vaccination was 0 due to the fact that we space the vaccination and that we let the immune system grow before putting it for stress.


I fully agree with that. Our children are overdosed with vaccines, I'm not saying they are useless but they are abused.
Great post, don't mind the haters.

In fact, for a forum like ATS I'm mezmerized by the number of people agreeing with big pharma and the number of people that are against pro-choice.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Ben Swann on the issue

Vaccine Hearings in Congress

Doesn't really matter that they never study autism rates in vaccinated vs non-vaccinated I guess.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: theMediator

ATS slogan should be changed to "DENY BIAS!"
I remember my first week here I got into an argument with OverlySkeptic about wage disparity.

Let's just say NLBS & the member communities responses to this thread no longer surprise me.
There's conspiracy forums, & there's lunatic fringe forums. I feel more at home with the posters of GLP, & like to think I can provide some relief to the lurkers of ATS.

Newerish thread on autism/cancer in relation to vaccines:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 9-2-2015 by Eunuchorn because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: deadeyedick

Yes, dick, it DOES mean they are actually refusing service.

Experts said there’s been a growing number of people in the last decade that have decided against immunization. As a result, some pediatricians across the country have become frustrated with parents who are opting out of childhood vaccinations.

“There are a lot of pediatricians who are worried about this,” said Arthur L. Caplan, who heads the division of medical ethics at New York University Langone Medical Center. “Most pediatricians will still work with you even if you don’t vaccinate. But the percent that won’t is growing, and the measles outbreak is accelerating it.”

The pediatricians who are now refusing unvaccinated patients are doing so out of mounting frustration, because measles is a vaccine-preventable disease, Caplan noted.
www.ibtimes.com...


During a prenatal interview, the doctor asked whether Katona planned to vaccinate her child because his office had a strict policy against treating unvaccinated children and those who delay vaccinations.

“That’s important to me because I didn’t want my newborn child in an office with someone who may have whooping cough or be shedding measles,” said Katona, who now has two children ages 4 and 5. “Why wouldn’t you get them vaccinated? It’s what you do -- to make sure your children are safe and not going to be sick.”

In the wake of the worst measles outbreak the U.S. has seen in decades, some doctors are turning away unvaccinated children to protect individuals, such as cancer patients and young babies, who cannot receive live vaccines and depend on the health of others. It’s a choice that every parent must make, and one that has launched a national conversation that could have dire social, medical and even legal consequences for parents and children alike.


Get a grip, sir - they really ARE refusing treatment to anti-vaccers, and that is a good thing.

On NPR I heard an interview about this issue (last Thursday). The 'ethics professors' (regular guests on the show "Up to Date" out of Kansas City) discussed this.

What, pray tell, is the difference between SEAT-BELT LAWS, and CHILD-SEAT laws (you can NOT drive around with your kid on your lap, and you CAN NOT LEGALLY drive without your seatbelt). And what about helmet laws?

Helmet laws and seat-belt laws are just as 'controversial' to SOME people as 'vaccines' are to others.

My kids got all their shots. My son is NOT circumcised (but if he wants to have it done, he has that right). I don't get flu shots (because of the KNOWN inefficiency of each year's formula to protect against whatever strain the doctors are "guessing" will be this year's model)...
but some people ARE protected by those things.

Aren't 'seat-belt' laws and texting-while-driving and drinking-while-driving laws ethical? Not using a seat-belt puts the drivers and passengers of risk. Fine, their choice. Like smoking and voting - your choice. Jury duty - COMPULSORY without a valid excuse. CIVIC DUTY.

License to drive: REQUIRED. Insurance on vehicle: REQUIRED. These things protect others from the irresponsiblity of a FEW. CIVIL CRIMES - not to be licensed and insured. No option.

VACCINATIONS: CIVIC DUTY for the well-being of the entire populace. It IS our government's job to protect us (even from ourselves). Do people bitch about seat-belt and helmet laws? Yes. Do they bitch about car-seats? Some of them, I'm sure.

Think this over. Your "trust" issues would magnify exponentially if you could not "trust" that others were not drinking before driving, or texting while driving, or even obeying the speed-limit, for that matter.

Anti-vaccine hysteria is just that - hysterica. You think you're paranoid NOW? lol! Wait til they get rid of all those darned "safety laws" that protect people.

It is a law that children must be schooled. It it ALSO a law that children attending PUBLIC SCHOOLS be vaccinated.
Do you see driving and traffic laws as 'nanny' behavior?
Are they ways the government is trying to REDUCE our population?

Just think about these things.


Drinking or Texting while driving puts OTHERS at risk.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   
double post

edit on 2/9/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)


But now I'll add what was added to the original -

Finding Nemo

This is for the people who think they are protecting their children:


Marlin: I promised I'd never let anything happen to him.

Dory: Hmm. That's a funny thing to promise.

Marlin: What?

Dory: Well, you can't never let anything happen to him. Then nothing would ever happen to him. Not much fun for little Harpo.


So - don't vaccinate as long as you intend to keep your child isolated for his whole life. Until, of course, he or she turns 18, and THEN you can unleash them on the world. Hopefully by then the rest of the herd will have sucked it up and done their civic duty.

Trust, indeed.


edit on 2/9/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 11:00 AM
link   
How would the people demanding its a civic duty & responsibility to societies well being that vaccinations be compulsory feel if we put anyone who doesn't get vaccinated into a fema camp?



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Nice to see someone talking some sense, along with a few others.

The one thing I've learned since the Internet became popular and my exposure to people was no longer largely limited to friends and acquaintances, is that people as a whole really do need - to put it mildly - a guiding hand. Especially when their uneducated 'beliefs' put others and society as a whole in jeopardy.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: skoalman88
Ben Swann on the issue

Vaccine Hearings in Congress

Doesn't really matter that they never study autism rates in vaccinated vs non-vaccinated I guess.


They've done this one though.
www.sciencedirect.com...

And this one.
www.medicine.ox.ac.uk...

And this.
www.sciencedirect.com...

What about this?
iaomt.org...

And there are plenty more.
If you look for them that is.
Not so much on Youtube though...


And what exactly has congress got to do with medicine please?
Especially when Dan Burton (noted scientist that he is) tropes on about a link which has been soundly debunked (see links above).
I don't know how Dr Boyle keeps her cool.

Regardless of what you may think of this site, it's worthwhile reading it.
Puts a lot in perspective (and you can always source what's been said via the links).
www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Eunuchorn

Fine with me, except then when natural disasters or war breaks out, there's nowhere to protect the reasonable population.

How about this: leper colony style isolation. No access to public systems at all. Good luck.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
How would the people demanding its a civic duty & responsibility to societies well being that vaccinations be compulsory feel if we put anyone who doesn't get vaccinated into a fema camp?


How about this:

If you don't get yourself or your family vaccinated due to personal beliefs (as opposed to medical grounds) and the unvaccinated person acts as a vector infecting someone else who is subject to one or more of the following conditions:
i) Can not have a vaccine on medical grounds
ii) Is in a vulnerable state
iii) is subject to the vaccine being ineffective
iv) Is below the age of receiving vaccines

The person responsible for the vector patient not receiving the vaccine will receive the appropriate prison sentence for manslaughter/negligent homicide.
edit on 9-2-2015 by AgentSmith because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

Exactly. Just like it is ILLEGAL for an HIV patient to KNOWINGLY infect others - it's a murder charge, I believe. Isn't it?



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Thread title: Important -- how to in 10 sec shut up a ProVaccine person

Thread score: FAIL

lol!!



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Please remember that herd immunity is a theory for a simple reason that its effect has never been confirmed.

Why? Because even in places where vaccination is mandatory, there are groups of people who can not, for one technical reason or another, be vaccinated.

Even if you manage to vaccinate 95% of the population (which is wildly generous), with a 90% effective vaccine, then you end up with approx 85% coverage, which is below the threshold for this theory to take effect.

So the herd immunity argument really is a waste of time because it's mathematically impossible to achieve with today's technology.

But hey, don't let a little detail like math stop your delusion. After all , anything is possible as long as you just want it hard enough because you are special...




top topics



 
24
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join