Page 2 of 4 [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Phagocyte
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,757

18 Jan 2008, 4:35 pm

zendell wrote:
Everything hasn't been fully researched so no one can say for sure that the benefits exceed the risks. I hope this doesn't offend you but I think the Chief Vaccine Control Officer knows more about vaccines than you so I will agree with his opinion.


Offended? How dare you value the opinion of a renown virologist over that of a freshmen biology student! :wink:

But in spite of his qualifications I'm surprised you of all people took it at face value, especially considering your distrust of the government and large corporations that you explained from a previous topic. Had I offered an FDA member's opinion supporting vaccine you would have brushed it off as government-biased propaganda (I'm not trying to be antagonistic, but you made your stance about this very clear). :?

But obviously there's something to what he's saying and I'm curious to why he feels that way, though that webpage only featured isolated quotes. Can you give me a reputable link explaining his viewpoint? And what vaccine in particular is he referencing? Are we just talking about certain vaccines against childhood developmental phases, because I seriously doubt a medical professional would make a blanket-statement condemning all vaccines (how do you think polio was eradicated?).



Last edited by Phagocyte on 18 Jan 2008, 8:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.

jrknothead
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Aug 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,423

18 Jan 2008, 8:12 pm

definitely, kids are better off getting mumps, measles, and polio by the hundreds and thousands, to save a tiny minority from possible adverse reactions to the vaccines... and while we're at it, we should get rid of our sewage and water treatment facilities, because even though they save countless lives by preventing disease, once in a while someone gets killed in the sewers, not to mention the countless lost tennis balls...



AspieDave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 568
Location: Traverse City, Michigan

18 Jan 2008, 8:56 pm

Absolutely, get rid of the sewers!! ! After all sewage effluent is completely NATURAL!! So it must be HEALTHY!! !


_________________
I tried to get in touch with my feminine side.... but it got a restraining order.....


zendell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,174
Location: Austin, TX

18 Jan 2008, 9:45 pm

Phagocyte wrote:
zendell wrote:
Everything hasn't been fully researched so no one can say for sure that the benefits exceed the risks. I hope this doesn't offend you but I think the Chief Vaccine Control Officer knows more about vaccines than you so I will agree with his opinion.


Offended? How dare you value the opinion of a renown virologist over that of a freshmen biology student! :wink:

But in spite of his qualifications I'm surprised you of all people took it at face value, especially considering your distrust of the government and large corporations that you explained from a previous topic. Had I offered an FDA member's opinion supporting vaccine you would have brushed it off as government-biased propaganda (I'm not trying to be antagonistic, but you made your stance about this very clear). :?


My reasoning is that it's wise to be skeptical of sources in which a conflict of interest exists. I don't have a specific distrust of government and large corporations. I'm always skeptical when the source has a motivation to deceive. If there is no conflict, I won't be skeptical. For example, GlaxoSmithKline's package insert for their Hepatitis B vaccines says it may cause autoimmune disorders such as Guillian-Barre syndrome. There's no reason to lie about that. I read that Dr. Morris was fired after saying the flu vaccine was ineffective. He's not echoing the FDA line, he's speaking out against it and that makes him more credible.

Phagocyte wrote:
But obviously there's something to what he's saying and I'm curious to why he feels that way, though that webpage only featured isolated quotes. Can you give me a reputable link explaining his viewpoint? And what vaccine in particular is he referencing? Are we just talking about certain vaccines against childhood developmental phases, because I seriously doubt a medical professional would make a blanket-statement condemning all vaccines (how do you think polio was eradicated?).


I was unable to find a good source for his quotes. A few studies referred to him speaking out against flu shots. Regarding vaccine issues I was able to find a good paper on it which stated:

Quote:
According to the records of the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, from 1911 to 1935 the four leading causes of childhood deaths from infectious diseases in the U.S. were diphtheria, pertussis (whooping cough), scarlet fever, and measles. However, by 1945 the combined death rates from these causes had declined by 95 percent, before the implementation of mass immunization programs.

http://www.haciendapub.com/issues.html


Asthma and allergies in 10 year olds (based on a study of 1,265 children):

asthma rate in vaccinated children - 23%
asthma rate in unvaccinated children - 0%

allergy rate in vaccinated children - 30%
allergy rate in unvaccinated children - 0%

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9345669

Looks like only vaccinated people suffer from asthma and allergies. I'm not risking a 30% chance of lifelong allergies to protect against rare diseases that already declined by 95% before vaccines were even introduced. Another study found that autistics and their mothers are more likely to suffer from allergies.



beau99
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,406
Location: PHX

19 Jan 2008, 12:37 am

zendell wrote:
Phagocyte wrote:
Some people do experience adverse effects from vaccinations. However, their effectiveness greatly outweighs it.


That's debatable.

No, it's not.

I hate needles, but if it means protecting myself from tuberculosis and Avian bird flu, I'll gladly let them inject me.


_________________
Agender person.

Twitter: http://twitter.com/agenderstar


zendell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,174
Location: Austin, TX

19 Jan 2008, 2:48 pm

beau99 wrote:
zendell wrote:
Phagocyte wrote:
Some people do experience adverse effects from vaccinations. However, their effectiveness greatly outweighs it.


That's debatable.

No, it's not.


Maybe if you work for one of the companies that makes vaccines it's not debatable. But if you look at the research and the scientific evidence, there are plenty of reasons to question the benefits and risks of vaccines. My above post shows that the diseases they protect against already declined by 95% without vaccines (evidence vaccines weren't responsible - limited, if any effectiveness). It also shows that allergies don't exist in unvaccinated people (based on a study of 1,265 children, there were no allergies or asthma in children who didn't receive vaccines) but are 30% in people who got vaccinated (that's a large, probably unnecessary risk). There are natural, effective ways of building up the immune system to protect against these extremely rare diseases without dangerous, artificial vaccines.



AspieDave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 568
Location: Traverse City, Michigan

19 Jan 2008, 2:53 pm

zendell, ask parents from a third world s**thole that don't have ACCESS to vaccines if they want to debate about a third of their children dying from easily avoided diseases. If you do, I'd suggest standing back aways... :wall:


_________________
I tried to get in touch with my feminine side.... but it got a restraining order.....


zendell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,174
Location: Austin, TX

19 Jan 2008, 3:56 pm

AspieDave wrote:
zendell, ask parents from a third world s**thole that don't have ACCESS to vaccines if they want to debate about a third of their children dying from easily avoided diseases. If you do, I'd suggest standing back aways... :wall:


Why don't you look at the evidence? They're dying due to their living conditions. Poverty, lack of access to clean water, sanitation, etc. is the problem. Please explain how vaccines reduced these diseases by 95% BEFORE the vaccines even existed?



zendell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,174
Location: Austin, TX

19 Jan 2008, 3:57 pm

AspieDave wrote:
zendell, ask parents from a third world s**thole that don't have ACCESS to vaccines if they want to debate about a third of their children dying from easily avoided diseases. If you do, I'd suggest standing back aways... :wall:


Why don't you look at the evidence? They're dying due to their living conditions. Poverty, lack of access to clean water, sanitation, etc. is the problem. Please explain how vaccines reduced these diseases by 95% BEFORE the vaccines even existed? I'm not trying to frustrate you, I just don't understand why you seem to reject science. I prefer scientific evidence over anecdotal reports from parents in third world countries.



beau99
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Nov 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,406
Location: PHX

19 Jan 2008, 4:03 pm

zendell wrote:
AspieDave wrote:
zendell, ask parents from a third world s**thole that don't have ACCESS to vaccines if they want to debate about a third of their children dying from easily avoided diseases. If you do, I'd suggest standing back aways... :wall:


Why don't you look at the evidence? They're dying due to their living conditions. Poverty, lack of access to clean water, sanitation, etc. is the problem. Please explain how vaccines reduced these diseases by 95% BEFORE the vaccines even existed? I'm not trying to frustrate you, I just don't understand why you seem to reject science. I prefer scientific evidence over anecdotal reports from parents in third world countries.

Um, no.

They're dying because they don't have vaccinations.


_________________
Agender person.

Twitter: http://twitter.com/agenderstar


AspieDave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 568
Location: Traverse City, Michigan

19 Jan 2008, 4:11 pm

Clean water, sanitation, better food all cost MONEY, these countries are dirt poor that's why it's the THIRD world... vaccines cost pennies per dose. THAT they can afford.... if they can get access. Hell, developed countries can afford to PAY for them to be vaccinated and often do. What we can't do is pay to bring their development up to the level where they HAVE clean water, sanitation etc. THEY have to be able to develop and sustain their own infrastructure or it WON'T WORK. We can't or more accurately WON'T pay to sustain our own infrastructure much less someone else's.


_________________
I tried to get in touch with my feminine side.... but it got a restraining order.....


zendell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,174
Location: Austin, TX

19 Jan 2008, 4:39 pm

beau99 wrote:
zendell wrote:
AspieDave wrote:
zendell, ask parents from a third world s**thole that don't have ACCESS to vaccines if they want to debate about a third of their children dying from easily avoided diseases. If you do, I'd suggest standing back aways... :wall:


Why don't you look at the evidence? They're dying due to their living conditions. Poverty, lack of access to clean water, sanitation, etc. is the problem. Please explain how vaccines reduced these diseases by 95% BEFORE the vaccines even existed? I'm not trying to frustrate you, I just don't understand why you seem to reject science. I prefer scientific evidence over anecdotal reports from parents in third world countries.

Um, no.

They're dying because they don't have vaccinations.


That may be your opinion or what your employer has told you to write but I'll side with the scientific evidence. I haven't seen any scientific evidence to support the belief that they're dying due to a lack of vaccinations.



Phagocyte
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Oct 2007
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,757

19 Jan 2008, 5:07 pm

zendell wrote:
My reasoning is that it's wise to be skeptical of sources in which a conflict of interest exists. I don't have a specific distrust of government and large corporations. I'm always skeptical when the source has a motivation to deceive. If there is no conflict, I won't be skeptical. For example, GlaxoSmithKline's package insert for their Hepatitis B vaccines says it may cause autoimmune disorders such as Guillian-Barre syndrome. There's no reason to lie about that. I read that Dr. Morris was fired after saying the flu vaccine was ineffective. He's not echoing the FDA line, he's speaking out against it and that makes him more credible.


It doesn't work like that. A source is either credible or it isn't, you cannot discard what goes against your view and take at face value what doesn't. Even if it is a credible source (which I have not found supporting Morris's statment), I need an explanation, not just a statement that I'll trust due to his education and status. The Nobel-winning scientist Paul Berg supports cloning and knows much more about the matter than you, but I doubt his stance on the matter will sway you.

zendell wrote:
That may be your opinion or what your employer has told you to write but I'll side with the scientific evidence. I haven't seen any scientific evidence to support the belief that they're dying due to a lack of vaccinations.


There's evidence on both sides.

What do you think eradicated polio?



zendell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,174
Location: Austin, TX

19 Jan 2008, 5:24 pm

Phagocyte wrote:
zendell wrote:
That may be your opinion or what your employer has told you to write but I'll side with the scientific evidence. I haven't seen any scientific evidence to support the belief that they're dying due to a lack of vaccinations.


There's evidence on both sides.

What do you think eradicated polio?


According to one scientific paper I read at http://www.haciendapub.com/article37.html

sanitation through public health measures
improved nutrition
better housing with less crowded conditions
the virulence of microorganisms tends to become weakened or attenuated with the passage of time and serial passages through human hosts



AspieDave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 568
Location: Traverse City, Michigan

19 Jan 2008, 5:32 pm

zendell wrote:

Quote:
the virulence of microorganisms tends to become weakened or attenuated with the passage of time and serial passages through human hosts


Soooooo..... you think we can basically wipe out polio and... say smallpox by WEARING THEM OUT???

Do I hear any volunteers to try that with Ebola? Or Marburg??

You can acclimate a POPULATION to a disease, like the apes did with SIV, or humans did with Bubonic Plague, there are people who inherited a genetic structure from villagers in England who don't get infected with plague... they're ancestors were the ones who didn't get sick, the natural immunes, they survived and had kids, who inherited their immunity. The area plague binds to on cells was just different enough in those people that plague couldn't get INTO their cells... they didn't catch it.


_________________
I tried to get in touch with my feminine side.... but it got a restraining order.....


zendell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,174
Location: Austin, TX

19 Jan 2008, 5:33 pm

Phagocyte wrote:
zendell wrote:
My reasoning is that it's wise to be skeptical of sources in which a conflict of interest exists. I don't have a specific distrust of government and large corporations. I'm always skeptical when the source has a motivation to deceive. If there is no conflict, I won't be skeptical. For example, GlaxoSmithKline's package insert for their Hepatitis B vaccines says it may cause autoimmune disorders such as Guillian-Barre syndrome. There's no reason to lie about that. I read that Dr. Morris was fired after saying the flu vaccine was ineffective. He's not echoing the FDA line, he's speaking out against it and that makes him more credible.


It doesn't work like that. A source is either credible or it isn't, you cannot discard what goes against your view and take at face value what doesn't.


My view is based on logic. I don't know how to convince you of it. I'm not discarding what goes against my view and taking at face value what doesn't. Someone who echo's what their employer tells them to protect their profits isn't a credible source. When someone speaks out and risks losing their job, it increases their credibility. For example, if President Bush stated that 9/11 was an inside job, it increases his credibility because his incentive is to support the official theory. He wouldn't choose to suffer consequences of exposing the truth if there wasn't evidence for it. I don't blindly believe quotes like the alleged one from Dr. Morris. The quote motivates me to further research the topic and the research I've done agrees with him.