people who skip vaccinations are incredibly selfish

[SMOGZINN]

I would like to know how many potential issues these vaccines have caused. My local paper had two parents who said vaccines caused autism in their kids. I would like to know nationally how many other parents say the same thing.

The problem is that autism is normally diagnosed around the same time as a group of vaccine is first administered. The correlation is very weak since we are talking about a couple of months period of time in a one year time frame. Diapers and talcum powder correlate just as strongly with autism. Weak correlations that have many factors are simply not good evidence of anything.

 

[disappoint]

The problem is that autism is normally diagnosed around the same time as a group of vaccine is first administered. The correlation is very weak since we are talking about a couple of months period of time in a one year time frame. Diapers and talcum powder correlate just as strongly with autism. Weak correlations that have many factors are simply not good evidence of anything.

Well said. If only there were a vaccine against cognitive deficiencies...but who would take it? Probably not the ones who need it most.

 

[Phoenix86]

I would like to know how many potential issues these vaccines have caused. My local paper had two parents who said vaccines caused autism in their kids. I would like to know nationally how many other parents say the same thing.

The more frightening question is why you're willing to dismiss decades of science for the medical opinion of two random local parents, or a celebrity.

 

[JimKiler]

The more frightening question is why you're willing to dismiss decades of science for the medical opinion of two random local parents, or a celebrity.

I am not dismissing the science, and I am aware that the autism starts to show at the same time as the vaccine but i think it would be interesting to know, what if there were only 50 total kids? That to me would make the case against vaccines even weaker. Second science is only right until proven incorrect. I am still for the vaccine but maybe a couple of these case are legitimate. I remember a cop putting a radar detector in his lap all the time for 10 years got cancer in his leg. Science said the radar detector was not the cause of hte cancer but that is a pretty strong coincidence. (again i know it may not have been the radar detector to blame)


Sometimes at the forefront of issues it takes a while to get back to say yes there is a link. I am not so quick to dismiss the parents's beliefs even though i am 99% certain it is coincidence.

 

[Phoenix86]

I am not dismissing the science, and I am aware that the autism starts to show at the same time as the vaccine but i think it would be interesting to know, what if there were only 50 total kids? That to me would make the case against vaccines even weaker. Second science is only right until proven incorrect. I am still for the vaccine but maybe a couple of these case are legitimate. I remember a cop putting a radar detector in his lap all the time for 10 years got cancer in his leg. Science said the radar detector was not the cause of hte cancer but that is a pretty strong coincidence. (again i know it may not have been the radar detector to blame)


Sometimes at the forefront of issues it takes a while to get back to say yes there is a link. I am not so quick to dismiss the parents's beliefs even though i am 99% certain it is coincidence.

You absolutely are. By considering "two parents who said it gave their child autism" you are completely ignoring the science that proves it doesn't. Current science shows 0 link between the two. These two people aren't doctors, they aren't qualified to make that statement. Their doctor almost certainly didn't say that.

Furthermore, you are dismissing the piles of studies that show NO link between the two by suggesting there is.

Now, I get that you should 100% trust science. It's been wrong in the past, so it's right to question. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Your evidence is "two people said it happened".

It's the equivalent of this:

 

[preslove]

You absolutely are. By considering "two parents who said it gave their child autism" you are completely ignoring the science that proves it doesn't. Current science shows 0 link between the two. These two people aren't doctors, they aren't qualified to make that statement. Their doctor almost certainly didn't say that.

Furthermore, you are dismissing the piles of studies that show NO link between the two by suggesting there is.

Now, I get that you should 100% trust science. It's been wrong in the past, so it's right to question. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Your evidence is "two people said it happened".

It's the equivalent of this:

Thing is, the one study that did show that MMR vaccines cause autism has been proven to be fraudulent. So no scientific, accurate studies show a link.

 

[Phoenix86]

Thing is, the one study that did show that MMR vaccines cause autism has been proven to be fraudulent. So no scientific, accurate studies show a link.

Exchange "one study" with "two parents" and it's even more ridiculous, just saying it's the same line of thinking.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

https://www.yahoo.com/health/people-who-skip-vaccinations-incrediably-selfish-108914416747.html



Very disturbing that this is happening in our country.

man peeps who make other peeps kids autistic are incredibly selfish

 

[OBLAMA2009]

You absolutely are. By considering "two parents who said it gave their child autism" you are completely ignoring the science that proves it doesn't. Current science shows 0 link between the two. These two people aren't doctors, they aren't qualified to make that statement. Their doctor almost certainly didn't say that.

Furthermore, you are dismissing the piles of studies that show NO link between the two by suggesting there is.

Now, I get that you should 100% trust science. It's been wrong in the past, so it's right to question. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Your evidence is "two people said it happened".

It's the equivalent of this:

yeah and there are tons of studies saying smoking doesnt cause cancer

 

[Phoenix86]

yeah and there are tons of studies saying smoking doesnt cause cancer

Be more concerned with the birth defects.

 

[Meghan54]

Those people read misinformation somewhere that came from some piece of shit doctor's fraudulent studies that were published in order to push his alternative vaccine.

From what I understand about that, the ex-physician (he's had his med. license revoked) the produced the fraudulent study was doing it to generate some sort of scientific "proof" in a case against a vaccine manufacturer wherein he was the "expert" for the plaintiffs. He needed some sort of proof, a "scientific study", so he ginned up one, tossing negatives out, only taking his "positives". Was done for money completely.

I could have misunderstood.

 

[Meghan54]

yeah and there are tons of studies saying smoking doesnt cause cancer

None that were done without the tobacco companies doing the research.

But back to the autism crap. Sweden removed mercury from vaccines in 1999. Guess what happened?

In 2008, they looked again at autism rates in the country and found the numbers of kids diagnosed with autism didn't decrease, but kept increasing as quickly as ever. Didn't make one difference if mercury was there or not.

They even spaced the vaccinations out more than we do in the U.S. and fewer vaccinations with multiple antigens being administered at one time.

Guess what happened?

Didn't effect autism rates at all....still climbed as fast as anywhere else.

 

[preslove]

From what I understand about that, the ex-physician (he's had his med. license revoked) the produced the fraudulent study was doing it to generate some sort of scientific "proof" in a case against a vaccine manufacturer wherein he was the "expert" for the plaintiffs. He needed some sort of proof, a "scientific study", so he ginned up one, tossing negatives out, only taking his "positives". Was done for money completely.

I could have misunderstood.

I think you might be right. It's been a while, but he did get his license revoked

 

[mmntech]

The problem is that autism is normally diagnosed around the same time as a group of vaccine is first administered. The correlation is very weak since we are talking about a couple of months period of time in a one year time frame. Diapers and talcum powder correlate just as strongly with autism. Weak correlations that have many factors are simply not good evidence of anything.

Yep. Rule #1: Correlation is not causation. It's specious reasoning at best.

I think I said it earlier in the thread, but part of the reason why autism rates are increasing is because the DSM has broadened the definition over the last few decades

I do understand parents of autistic kids wanting to find out what cased it. It's a natural human reaction. Truth is we don't know what causes it. We have a good idea of what doesn't. The current science points to genetics or some other factor inside the womb. Symptoms just happen to manifest at time of first inoculation because that's when baby's brain is developed enough to interact and communicate with the outside world. Problem is the human brain doesn't really like Rule #1.

 

[JimKiler]

You absolutely are. By considering "two parents who said it gave their child autism" you are completely ignoring the science that proves it doesn't. Current science shows 0 link between the two. These two people aren't doctors, they aren't qualified to make that statement. Their doctor almost certainly didn't say that.

Furthermore, you are dismissing the piles of studies that show NO link between the two by suggesting there is.

Now, I get that you should 100% trust science. It's been wrong in the past, so it's right to question. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Your evidence is "two people said it happened".

It's the equivalent of this:

I would like someone to investigate these cases and dismiss or confirm what the parents say.

 

[preslove]

I would like someone to investigate these cases and dismiss or confirm what the parents say.

We have, SEVERAL TIMES!

Thing is, the one study that did show that MMR vaccines cause autism has been proven to be fraudulent. So no scientific, accurate studies show a link.

Just shut the fuck up, you imbecile.

Oh, and please never vote, you are obviously too fucking stupid to ever come to an informed decision on anything.

 

[Phoenix86]

I would like someone to investigate these cases and dismiss or confirm what the parents say.

A... Are you mentally challenged? Because the next thing I'd have to say would be awful to say someone without their mental faculties.

 

[artemicion]

I would like someone to investigate these cases and dismiss or confirm what the parents say.

CDC Summary of Scholarly Articles
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/autism/

If you don't trust the government, Google Scholar Search Results:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?...a=X&ei=llvaVNH5MY7ToATAqIK4DA&ved=0CBsQgQMwAA

 

[SMOGZINN]

I would like someone to investigate these cases and dismiss or confirm what the parents say.

As has been said, several times in this thread, any suspected side effect of a vaccine is reported to the CDC and the CDC is constantly monitoring and investigating these claims and does yearly reviews of vaccines and vaccination schedules to determine if they are still effective, safe, and being used appropriately.

 

[artemicion]

I am 100% in favor of people getting vaccinated, but I will say one thing about the anti-vaccination crowd. They aren't malicious. They are very probably wrong. They are very probably endangering the lives of others by encouraging others not to get vaccinated. They are very probably endangering the lives of innocent third parties who are unable to be vaccinated by reducing herd immunity.

However, they truly believe they are doing the right thing because they truly believe vaccines are harmful. With that in mind, I do think we should be more polite in trying to convince them otherwise, because being mean about it will only lead to stonewalling.

Engage in the debate, because the science is in favor of vaccinations. Show them the research when they ask for it, ask them for their research because it can be rebutted.

Ultimately, both sides are trying to do thing right thing. When the human lives are the wager, are you going to bet on the side that the majority of scientific research supports, or are you going to bet lives on a minority belief supported almost entirely on sporadic anecdotal stories from people you barely know and science which has largely been discredited?

Anti-vaccine folks believe that the pro-vaccine groups are acting for selfish reasons. They are right. The selfish reason is SELF PRESERVATION.

What we need to do is convince the anti-vaccine people that if they want to cast suspicion, DO IT ON BOTH SIDES. The anti-vaccine "research" has been shown to have come from self-interested individuals who fabricated the research for self-promotion and to sell books.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield

If you're suspicious of the motives of the people telling you to get a vaccine, it's only fair to be equally suspicious of the motives of the people telling you not to get a vaccine.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I am 100% in favor of people getting vaccinated, but I will say one thing about the anti-vaccination crowd. They aren't malicious. They are very probably wrong. They are very probably endangering the lives of others by encouraging others not to get vaccinated. They are very probably endangering the lives of innocent third parties who are unable to be vaccinated by reducing herd immunity.

I agree with you here. I think they are gullible, but not malicious. But I also think that there are a core group that is malicious in this debate, that is intentionally spreading false information, falsifying research, that is profiting off of these people's gullibility.

However, they truly believe they are doing the right thing because they truly believe vaccines are harmful. With that in mind, I do think we should be more polite in trying to convince them otherwise, because being mean about it will only lead to stonewalling.

A lot of the problem here is that both sides are getting frustrated with the other because both believe that lives are literally on the line.

Engage in the debate, because the science is in favor of vaccinations. Show them the research when they ask for it, ask them for their research because it can be rebutted.

The challenge here is to make the research we have accessible to the people that need it in a method they are capable of understanding. It does not help that so much of it is behind very high paywalls, written in very dense format, and so badly misrepresented so often by the people that are supposed to be reporting it.
The Anti-vaccine crowd has very simple information supporting their claim, the sort of information that speaks to their emotions instead of their brains. It is wrong, but that doesn't matter because they are not analyzing it they are emoting it.

Ultimately, both sides are trying to do thing right thing. When the human lives are the wager, are you going to bet on the side that the majority of scientific research supports, or are you going to bet lives on a minority belief supported almost entirely on sporadic anecdotal stories from people you barely know and science which has largely been discredited?

I would bet on the research, but that is not true for everyone, maybe not even for most people. People like their feels, people trust their feels. If you can make people FEEL that it is unsafe they will accept that as having more weight than a ton of research. That is what we are really facing here. People don't like vaccines because they don't understand them, they don't like needles, they feel insecure and scared around doctors, and there is a group of people that are very good at manipulating the emotions of the public using that against us. We need more than facts to overcome this.

 

[JimKiler]

A... Are you mentally challenged? Because the next thing I'd have to say would be awful to say someone without their mental faculties.

you don't have to be rude. I see others on here are nicer than you and provided links.

 

[WT]

Sorry, I read thread title as 'People who skip vacations are incredibly selfish'. Carry on ..

 

[Phoenix86]

you don't have to be rude. I see others on here are nicer than you and provided links.

I'll gladly be rude to people who are intentionally ignorant.

Let's count how many times you were informed and ignored statements that disagree with what you say.

1.

Autism is not a potential issue with vaccines, it's just something idiot parents have been parroting that camebout of scientific/medical fraud

2.

You basically have to be an idiot who knows nothing about medicine or medical science to think that vaccines are dangerous.

3.

pretty much this

4.

Autism is not a potential issue with vaccines, it's just something idiot parents have been parroting that camebout of scientific/medical fraud

5.

The problem is that autism is normally diagnosed around the same time as a group of vaccine is first administered. The correlation is very weak since we are talking about a couple of months period of time in a one year time frame. Diapers and talcum powder correlate just as strongly with autism. Weak correlations that have many factors are simply not good evidence of anything.

6.

Well said. If only there were a vaccine against cognitive deficiencies...but who would take it? Probably not the ones who need it most.

7.

The more frightening question is why you're willing to dismiss decades of science for the medical opinion of two random local parents, or a celebrity.

8.

Furthermore, you are dismissing the piles of studies that show NO link between the two by suggesting there is.

9.

But back to the autism crap. Sweden removed mercury from vaccines in 1999. Guess what happened?

They even spaced the vaccinations out more than we do in the U.S. and fewer vaccinations with multiple antigens being administered at one time.

Guess what happened?

Didn't effect autism rates at all....still climbed as fast as anywhere else.

That doesn't include Preslove's comment basically saying the same thing I am here.

You have had every opportunity to do a basic google search, or watch literally any news program, which has at least one measles story in it. You have been informed multiple times by multiple people that research has indeed been done and no link was found, yet you're still think it should be investigated.

 

[TechBoyJK]

man peeps who make other peeps kids autistic are incredibly selfish

How are peeps making other peeps kids have autism?