Autism isn't fatal. Not vaccinating your child might be.

Post Reply New Topic

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

Yeee! No offense to you lau, but I won't even LOOK at wikipedia anymore, unless it's to check out the resources. Way too much misinformation there.

I've never understood people who will not read anything... "in case something may not be correct".

It has nothing to do with "in case." it has everything to do with "LIKELY to contain misinformation". Wikipedia is in constant flux. The articles there are constantly being argued over, changed by anyone that has a mind to change them, and frequently are inaccurate. I do not know of a single college instructor that will accept it as a source. I knew of one who would automatically grade a paper "F" if you use even one article from them as a source.

Just because I won't read Wikipedia anymore, does not mean I will not read "anything." I read a LOT my friend. I just don't waste my time with that site anymore.

Well, I read the article, and I think it would be difficult to make a case for brainwashing. After all, I've been a teacher. An exercise commonly used to encourage critical thinking skills is to get students to all debate the same paper. It doesn't mean you're saying that the original paper is wrong. You're just trying to get students to think.

Anyway, yeah, a lot of the cases of whooping cough could have been because the vaccine isn't 100% effective. The Psychology Today article presented info otherwise, but it could be both. Regardless, this whooping cough thing has shown people that it IS still possible to come down with illnessed the children are normally vaccinated for.

Many parents I've talked to really don't believe vaccines are that important, because the diseases haven't shown up in so many years. It's kind of bizzarre reasoning, because they probably haven't shown up because of vaccines.

BTW, I just asked my friend about this news source, because I thought it so odd they used such biased sounding language. He confirmed my suspicion that it was a tabloid.

Why are you talking about Wikipedia, rather than the mathematics of epidemiology?

just to clarify.. I was responding to aspZ's statement about that article link and not the wikipedia..

but it's true there is no proven link between the rise in whooping cough and parents not vaccinating. It just makes sense that there very well could be.. and even if not, parents need to think about how not vaccinating could make the child more vulnerable to whooping cough, since it getting more prevalent.

You commented on my supposed unwillingness to read anything. I responded. Pretty much all there is to it.

The topic here is vaccinations and Autism. Not epidemiology or Wikipedia. The term vaccination occurs but once in the entire Wikipedia article. While I understand the subject is somewhat related and why you brought it up, it's beside the point of the OP's discussion.

May I suggest we both let this go, and allow the conversation to resume on topic?

As a psychology student, it pains me to know that people still believe that vaccinations still cause autism...It's a sad world we live in sometimes, so much bad science and so many ignorant people that just want someone to blame...

-Biz

I agree 100%. I don't see how the communication deficits from AS or autism could ever come from a vaccine; it just defies logic.

Parents need to know that. They need to know, that there isn't any harm in vaccinating their children. If they choose to go the other way, they're saying that they'd rather that their child be dead, than autistic, because they believe all the crap, that CAN, DAN and Autism Speaks preaches - all the organizations from The Dark Side.

No, they're not saying that. I've heard it said that vaccines don't work at all, and that there's a 100% chance of becoming autistic if you're vaccinated. That's mind-numbingly stupid, but it's not saying it's better to be dead; it's just saying it's better to be NT than autistic. In some situations, that's even true.

You have to realize that they don't think there's a significantly increased chance of getting sick if you miss shots. In that case, they don't see the choice as being between autistic and dead; they see it as being between autistic and NT. There's no shame in taking the easy way out.

The reasoning is idiotic (if 100% of children developed autism after being vaccinated, the prevalence would be equal to or greater than the percentage of children vaccinated, rather than significantly lower), but you're taking more offense than you should. They're too stupid to see it the way you do.

So, what's the next claim on mental health going to be: The link between tuna fish and depression? Schizophrenia and conch shells?

Sorry, it's my cynicism coming out. But to make a parent feel that if they want a "normal" child, they should forget about giving them the same life-saving vaccines that have elongated their own lives or even those of their peers? The reality is that medicine can't solve everything and in the future, new problems will arise. If there were a way to actually increase the chance of their own child living beyond 10, then why would they deny them that chance? With the way the advocacy groups that want to end vaccination, I fear that some of them will wind up mourning at young ages and the idea of the reintroduction of some of those fatal diseases that they were protected from.

Epidemiology has everything to do with this topic; it is not "somewhat related". It is needed to survey a large population of people to see if there actually is a cause. It is extremely accurate and proved smoking caused lung cancer when no laboratory test could do so. Epidemiology is the centerpiece and final authority of if there is a connection. The only reason I can claim (very loudly) that MMR and thimerosal do not cause autism is because of epidemiological studies. Your statement shows complete ignorance of how the process actually works. If you are saying epidemiology has nothing to do or very little to do with this topic, no one should believe anything you say here.

And you used Wikipedia to try to prove your claim too...just like to point that out.

I think in most situations, being alive in any situation is better than being dead. Death is utter nothingness, and it is about as boring as it gets. I would rather feel pain than nothing, because pain, be it emotional, psychological, or physical, is stimulating. I prefer suffering to boredom.