Thinking of getting vaccinated?

[Drew]

Dare I say it - including Andrew Wakefield.

You mean the guy who was considerably less than open with his science. Deliberately skewed results. And took payment from big pharma for a vaccine he'd designed?


You are a fucking moron. You don't deserve to share air with the people who make working vaccines, let alone pick holes in what they do.

Fuck off and die.

[Virago]

And do I take that to mean other countries don't include stillbirths in their infant mortality figures?

Correct. Even the US doesn't.


Well, you know what they say - "every person cured is a customer lost".

Source?

[Katman]

The US's early gestational death rate includes any premature baby that is born alive, no matter how briefly. In other countries babies that are born alive but below certain survival parameters are classified as stillborn. This variance in classification makes an appreciable difference to the US mortality figures.


Correct. Even the US doesn't.

Well now you've got me confused.

So which are the ones that the US count - which the other countries don't - which would skew the figures?

[TheDemonLord]

Faaaaark

I go on-call for one week and suddenly there's a flurry of Posts!

[Katman]

Faaaaark

I go on-call for one week and suddenly there's a flurry of Posts!

We've seen you checking it out periodically.

[TheDemonLord]

We've seen you checking it out periodically.

Yup, when I restart my browser as part of testing something or when I've left a tab open.

[Virago]

Well now you've got me confused.

So which are the ones that the US count - which the other countries don't - which would skew the figures?

The ones that are born alive, however briefly, which fall below the accepted survivable limits (21 weeks gestation and 400 grams from memory).

[Virago]

So you seem to be saying that in other countries, premature babies that are born alive but below certain survival parameters (which I assume means that they go on to die) are classed as stillborn and are included in the infant mortality rate, but in the US, premature babies that are born alive no matter however briefly that fall below accepted survivable limits, are also included in the infant mortality rate figures.

What part am I not getting?

One last attempt...

In any country (as far as I know) any baby which is delivered dead is not included in infant mortality statistics. This includes the US.

In most countries a baby which is delivered alive but is below the accepted survivable limits, is deemed to be either a miscarriage or stillbirth. As such it is not included as an infant mortality.

However, this is not the case in the US. They classify such live but non-survivable preterm deliveries as legal births, and as such also as legal deaths. This adds quite significantly to their official infant mortality statistics.

It's all down to semantics - and perhaps views about the legal status of the unborn.

[Katman]

One last attempt...

Yeah, I'd actually managed to work it out - so I'd deleted the post.

Thanks for your perseverance though.

[Virago]

Yeah, I'd actually managed to work it out - so I deleted the post.

Thanks for your perseverance though.

No problem - I've been trying to reply all morning.

Clarification of thought - it's entirely possible that many other countries classify their preterm baby deaths in the same manner as the US - I'm not aware of any available stats. However, it is confirmed that in this issue, the US is at odds with their comparable western counterparts.

[Katman]

Does anyone else think that the fact the CDC sells vaccines shows something of a conflict of interest?

[Katman]

And in 2002 Dr Gary Goldman, resigned from his position as Research Analyst at the CDC, when his investigation and findings of inconsistencies in vaccine test data was stonewalled by the CDC - stating, "When research data and information concerning potential adverse effects associated with a vaccine used in human populations are suppressed and/or misrepresented by health authorities, not only is this most disturbing, this goes against all accepted norms and compromises professional ethics".

[Ocean1]

Does anyone else think that the fact the CDC sells vaccines shows something of a conflict of interest?

Don't you sell bike paraphinalia?

[Katman]

Don't you sell bike paraphinalia?

Not really the same thing though, is it?

I'm not the one who gets to mandate what motorcyclists have to wear.

[Katman]

And let's not forget that even Andrew Wakefield has never said "do not vaccinate your child".

In regards to the MMR vaccine he only ever said that it would be preferable to go back to the single shot vaccines or put the triple dose vaccine off till the child was slightly older.

[Katman]

And if you want to talk unethical behaviour......

http://articles.latimes.com/1996-06-17/news/mn-15871_1_measles-vaccine

[Katman]

And speaking of conflicts of interest, Dr Paul Offit, who is a pediatric professor at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (which has very close financial connections with Merck) sat on the advisory committee who were voting whether to include the Rotavirus vaccine to the schedule.

Turns out Dr Paul Offit already owned a patent (in conjunction with the Children's Hospital) to a Rotavirus vaccine but instead of excusing himself from the vote, he voted for it and then went on to sell the patent for $182 million.

[bogan]

Well, you know what they say - "every person cured is a customer lost".

Source?


Faaaaark

I go on-call for one week and suddenly there's a flurry of Posts!

If by posts you also mean posts that KM's horse has gish galloped past, then yes. The fucker must be on steroids to be running so strongly :whistle:

He was trying to address technical stuff for a while too, rather than the normal he said she said, or this bloke is corrupt therefore all big pharma have kitten smoothies for breakfast or whatever; I even taught him about how important the basic technique of control groups were.

[husaberg]

Source?



If by posts you also mean posts that KM's horse has gish galloped past, then yes. The fucker must be on steroids to be running so strongly :whistle:

He was trying to address technical stuff for a while too, rather than the normal he said she said, or this bloke is corrupt therefore all big pharma have kitten smoothies for breakfast or whatever; I even taught him about how important the basic technique of control groups were.

He will have forgotten it by now.
Viragos a patient bugger,, he told him the same thing almost 7 times before it permeated through stevo’s tin foil hat.

[Katman]

He will have forgotten it by now.
Viragos a patient bugger,, he told him the same thing almost 7 times before it permeated through stevo’s tin foil hat.

Well, before you go crowing too loudly we should take a closer look at that study you linked.

The authors chose 2 countries to compare against America's infant mortality rate and concluded that it showed the US figure could be skewed by 40%.

That's 2 countries. Remember the derision expressed over the fact that Andrew Wakefield's study included only 12 children?

Do we know whether the authors chose those 2 countries specifically because they classify certain early gestation births as stillborn?

In order for the study to stand up to close scrutiny we would need to know how many other countries classify those births similarly. (I'm sure if the study does contain that information someone will be kind enough to point it out).

I mean, heaven forbid that an author might be selective in their comparisons in order to knowingly misrepresent a conclusion.

[husaberg]

Well before you go crowing too loudly we should take a closer look at that study you linked.

The authors chose 2 countries to compare against America's infant mortality rate and concluded that the US figure could be skewed by 40%.

That's 2 countries. Remember the derision expressed over the fact that Andrew Wakefield's study included only 12 children?

Do we know whether the authors chose those 2 countries specifically because they classify certain early gestation deaths as stillborn?

In order for the study to stand up to close scrutiny we would need to know how many other countries classify those births similarly. (I'm sure if the study does contain that information someone will be kind enough to point it out).

I mean, heaven forbid that an author would be selective in their comparisons in order to knowingly misrepresent a conclusion.
Incorrect there were two reasons the data is skewed one is economic relative wealth race variation. the other is the different way the US birth stats are listed. PS they also still use feet inches and yards as well.
Andrew Wakefield handpicked the patients to suit his result , made up where they were from, made up diagnosis, paid for samples, ordered tests he had no good reason, and failed to disclose a huge conflict of interest. plus many more things as well. He did so, as he was developing his own Vaccine and was getting paid by lawyers in a lawsuit. all undisclosed.
He also made up results all these facts were proven. Funny enough not one person has been able to replicate his results.
Those studies refer to all the birth in the usa all the births Finland etc
The three countries were chosen as the US was ranked poor Finland and i think Demark were ranked high.
You yourself started on the USA as an example.

Interesting to note too, America has the highest number of vaccines for children within their first 12 months (26 vaccines) and yet they also have one of the highest infant mortality rate for first world countries.


Because you asked so nicely.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170075/

As i am feeling sorry for you here is an article written for someone who lacks basic understanding of case studdies and data.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/29/our-infant-mortality-rate-is-a-national-embarrassment/?utm_term=.240e87de3f17

[Katman]

The fucker must be on steroids to be running so strongly


I've got you to thank for encouraging me to educate myself by watching the video series.

[bogan]

I've got you to thank for encouraging me to educate myself by watching the video series.

If your horse wasn't so afraid to drink, you would be able to skip the middle man, and just thank me for educating you.

[Ocean1]

Not really the same thing though, is it?

I'm not the one who gets to mandate what motorcyclists have to wear.

Yeah, I'm afraid it is. You get to pass / fail a WOF doncha?

Fuuuuge conflict of interest there, innit.

You hypocritical cunt, you.

[husaberg]

Yeah, I'm afraid it is. You get to pass / fail a WOF doncha?

Fuuuuge conflict of interest there, innit.

You hypocritical cunt, you.

He no doubt doesn't do warrants on account of "The MAN"
Plus the "BIG VTNZ"" conspiracy in conjuction with "BIG LTSA"
Maybe he could make a "video" about it all

[Katman]

Yeah, I'm afraid it is. You get to pass / fail a WOF doncha?

And if I fail a bike I make absolutely no sales pitch whatsoever. I leave it entirely up to the customer to make the inquiry as to whether I can take care of what needs addressing.

I'm integrous like that.

[bogan]

And if I fail a bike I make absolutely no sales pitch whatsoever. I leave it entirely up to the customer to make the inquiry as to whether I can take care of what needs addressing.

I'm integrous like that.

I don't think you quite understand the concept of 'conflict of interest' you see, the person it applies to, is not simply allowed to say there is none because they will act with integrity; because you know what that would be right? A conflict of interest :laugh:

[husaberg]

And if I fail a bike I make absolutely no sales pitch whatsoever. I leave it entirely up to the customer to make the inquiry as to whether I can take care of what needs addressing.

I'm integrous like that.

Sounds like a conspircy cover up.......
Thats totally what you wold say if you wwere trying to c=over up,
Lets be honest here,You wouldn't believe that post now would you.

[Katman]

If your horse wasn't so afraid to drink, you would be able to skip the middle man, and just thank me for educating you.

A question for you....

Do you think Science ever reaches a point where it can say it's 'done'? (Done as in concluded)

[TheDemonLord]

A question for you....

Do you think Science ever reaches a point where it can say it's 'done'? (Done as in concluded)

To ask that question, is to demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding as to the Nature of Science.

[Katman]

To ask that question, is to demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding as to the Nature of Science.

Well that didn't really answer the question though, did it?

[husaberg]

Well that didn't really answer the question though, did it?

He did answer it, the problem is you don't seem to grasp what, for most people is a very simple concept of what science is.

[Virago]

Well that didn't really answer the question though, did it?

Very occasionally a question is asked which is so spectacularly silly, it defies all attempts at furnishing a sensible answer.

[Katman]

Very occasionally a question is asked which is so spectacularly silly, it defies all attempts at furnishing a sensible answer.

Well the reason I asked was, I'm trying to figure out why the Institute of Medicine would say something as spectacularly unscientific as "no further testing should be done" with regards to investigating any sort of link between vaccines and neurological disorders.

'Cos I'm assuming that the correct answer to my question is that Science is never 'done'.

(But I was giving him another chance to think he was educating me. It seems to give him a boost).

[Katman]

Whoa, this looks like a worthwhile read.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4046551/

[husaberg]

Well the reason I asked was, I'm trying to figure out why the Institute of Medicine would say something as spectacularly unscientific as "no further testing should be done" with regards to investigating any sort of link between vaccines and neurological disorders.

'Cos I'm assuming that the correct answer to my question is that Science is never 'done'.

(But I was giving him another chance to think he was educating me. It seems to give him a boost).

Well maybe you need to become a scientist and prove them wrong, or better still just chase down blind alleys the rest of your life.
Maybe you should show them where they have exhausted all the avenues of through educated research conducted by peer reviewed professionals and yet somehow still came up with answers you don't agree with based on your own paranoia that’s based on one fraudulent trial conducted by a conman.
Lets be honest here you don't agree that Wakefeild is a conman do you? Do you think that's becuase you deperately want to buy the idea he was selling.

[TheDemonLord]

Well the reason I asked was, I'm trying to figure out why the Institute of Medicine would say something as spectacularly unscientific as "no further testing should be done" with regards to investigating any sort of link between vaccines and neurological disorders.

'Cos I'm assuming that the correct answer to my question is that Science is never 'done'.

(But I was giving him another chance to think he was educating me. It seems to give him a boost).

Law of Diminishing Returns.

[Katman]

Law of Diminishing Returns.

The only returns Science should be interested in is knowledge.

And even negative tests can add to knowledge.

[TheDemonLord]

The only returns Science should be interested in is knowledge.

And even negative tests can add to knowledge.

But since we have limited resources (such as Time), there comes a point where the expected return is so small or negligible and the investment of Time, Money etc. So large that other things where the gaps in knowledge are larger and the required investment is smaller.

[Katman]

But since we have limited resources (such as Time), there comes a point where the expected return is so small or negligible and the investment of Time, Money etc. So large that other things where the gaps in knowledge are larger and the required investment is smaller.

And that answer would suggest it's you that has the 'fundamental misunderstanding as to the Nature of Science'.

[TheDemonLord]

And that answer would suggest it's you that has the 'fundamental misunderstanding as to the Nature of Science'.

No, Try again.


I'll give you a hint - despite your attempts to assert it so - those 2 answers are NOT mutually exclusive.

[Ocean1]

The only returns Science should be interested in is knowledge.

And even negative tests can add to knowledge.

Bollox, it's not "science" that funds scientific knowledge, it's commercial entities. And strangely enough they tend to drop dead if they spend more than they earn.

Go ahead, try it, flog all your tyres at cost.

And as far as the cost of adding knowledge by "answering" the deluge of mindless Big Pharma conspiracy accusations is concerned it's long since exceeded any rational budget in terms of it's value. Worse, the associated anti-science bullshit can really only be expressed in terms of "negative knowledge".

[Katman]

Bollox, it's not "science" that funds scientific knowledge, it's commercial entities. And strangely enough they tend to drop dead if they spend more than they earn.

Go ahead, try it, flog all your tyres at cost.

And as far as the cost of adding knowledge by "answering" the deluge of mindless Big Pharma conspiracy accusations is concerned it's long since exceeded any rational budget in terms of it's value. Worse, the associated anti-science bullshit can really only be expressed in terms of "negative knowledge".

Refer post #3040.

[Katman]

No, Try again.


I'll give you a hint - despite your attempts to assert it so - those 2 answers are NOT mutually exclusive.

Please explain how time, as a resource, is limited.

[Ocean1]

Refer post #3040.

Refer post #3041

[TheDemonLord]

Please explain how time, as a resource, is limited.

We've been through this before.

[Ocean1]

Please explain how time, as a resource, is limited.

That question would suggest you have a fundamental misunderstanding as to the nature of pretty much everything.

[Katman]

We've been through this before.

Did science die with Aristotle? Did it die with Galileo? How about Einstein - did it die with him?

Perhaps you think science will die with Stephen Hawking.

For someone who loves to tell us how intelligent he is, you present yourself as spectacularly stupid sometimes.

[Zedder]

Bollox, it's not "science" that funds scientific knowledge, it's commercial entities. And strangely enough they tend to drop dead if they spend more than they earn.

Go ahead, try it, flog all your tyres at cost.

And as far as the cost of adding knowledge by "answering" the deluge of mindless Big Pharma conspiracy accusations is concerned it's long since exceeded any rational budget in terms of it's value. Worse, the associated anti-science bullshit can really only be expressed in terms of "negative knowledge".


Science is funded by Government grants, companies and non profit organisations not just commerical entities.

[TheDemonLord]

Did science die with Aristotle? Did it die with Galileo? How about Einstein - did it die with him?

Perhaps you think science will die with Stephen Hawking.

For someone who loves to tell us how intelligent he is, you present yourself as spectacularly stupid sometimes.

Here's a thought experiment (which might be difficult for you) to show why your statement is moronic (which, in light of your last retort is hilariously ironic)

Imagine that Sir Isaac Newton decided to spend all of his time on something that was already well understood, as opposed to tackling something that WASN'T understood at all.





Whilst science is a process of learning, recording and passing on to the next generation - it is still people (with finite time to do things and make discoveries) that drive science forward.

[Ocean1]

Science is funded by Government grants, companies and non profit organisations not just commerical entities.

All of which use money.

Any of which cease to exist if they spend more than they earn.

The notion resources are infinite and that medicine or it's related fields should supply everything possible to everyone possible regardless of cost is childish drivel.

[Katman]

Here's a thought experiment (which might be difficult for you) to show why your statement is moronic (which, in light of your last retort is hilariously ironic)

Imagine that Sir Isaac Newton decided to spend all of his time on something that was already well understood, as opposed to tackling something that WASN'T understood at all.

Whilst science is a process of learning, recording and passing on to the next generation - it is still people (with finite time to do things and make discoveries) that drive science forward.

<img src="https://img.memesuper.com/3e71bcf6989c083154eb0e6a1460b767_list-of-best-bottom-ends-i-dug-a-hole-meme_500-373.jpeg"/>

[Zedder]

All of which use money.

Any of which cease to exist if they spend more than they earn.

The notion resources are infinite and that medicine or it's related fields should supply everything possible to everyone possible regardless of cost is childish drivel.


Whoa there, all I'm replying to is your incorrect statement about science funding.

[TheDemonLord]

...

Well, when you decide to stop digging, let me know....

Afterall - how many times have you suggested that something needs to be dug into....

[Ocean1]

Whoa there, all I'm replying to is your incorrect statement about science funding.

As I was replying to your incorrect statement that grants, companies and npos weren't commercial entities.

[Zedder]

As I was replying to your incorrect statement that grants, companies and npos weren't commercial entities.


Commercial entities are involved in selling goods or a service plus they pay tax, duties and fees. A grant doesn't come under this nor does a npo.

[Ocean1]

Commercial entities are involved in selling goods or a service plus they pay tax, duties and fees. A grant doesn't come under this nor does a npo.

Not a conventional description.

They trade, they use commercial assets, and indeed most of them sell shit and buy shit. They compete, (often unfairly) with other commercial entities. They are, in fact commercial entities.

More to the point, if they fail to manage their cash flow as a commercial entity they die.

[Zedder]

Not a conventional description.

They trade, they use commercial assets, and indeed most of them sell shit and buy shit. They compete, (often unfairly) with other commercial entities. They are, in fact commercial entities.

More to the point, if they fail to manage their cash flow as a commercial entity they die.


Commercial entity:http://www.gs1.org/1/tlkeys/index.php/p=asset/aid=36

[Ocean1]

Commercial entity:http://www.gs1.org/1/tlkeys/index.php/p=asset/aid=36

Pretty much exactly what I said innit?


They trade, they use commercial assets, and indeed most of them sell shit and buy shit.

So what exactly do you think the difference is?

[Zedder]

Pretty much exactly what I said innit?



So what exactly do you think the difference is?


So where do npos and grants come in if they don't pay taxes etc as my definition states commercial entities do?

[husaberg]

The only returns Science should be interested in is knowledge.

And even negative tests can add to knowledge.


Please explain how time, as a resource, is limited.


The only returns Science should be interested in is knowledge.

And even negative tests can add to knowledge.


Well the reason I asked was, I'm trying to figure out why the Institute of Medicine would say something as spectacularly unscientific as "no further testing should be done" with regards to investigating any sort of link between vaccines and neurological disorders.

'Cos I'm assuming that the correct answer to my question is that Science is never 'done'.

(But I was giving him another chance to think he was educating me. It seems to give him a boost).
So lets use an analogy
You are doing a WOF
you give the head bearing a yank and cheek for notchiness yes.
After satisfying yourself they are in decent condition you move on.

But what you are suggesting is that even if they pass the test.
You should then remove the forks disassemble the steering head
Degrease the bearing look at then under an Electron microscope for possible pitting and micro-abrasion.
Measure each ball/roller with a Micrometer.
Then send samples away to check to see the depth of hardness on the race and rollers/balls
Do a check on the bearing numbers in a FBI fraud database to check if they are not cheap knock offs.
ETC etc etc........

[Ocean1]

So where do npos and grants come in if they don't pay taxes etc as my definition states commercial entities do?

They indulge in commercial activities.

Not paying income tax is easy enough for any commercial entity: don't make a profit.

The only entities I'm aware of that don't pay any taxes by default are churches and some charities.

Which are you suggesting should be responsible for scientific research?

[Katman]

So lets use an analogy
You are doing a WOF
you give the head bearing a yank and cheek for notchiness yes.
After satisfying yourself they are in decent condition you move on.

But what you are suggesting is that even if they pass the test.
You should then remove the forks disassemble the steering head
Degrease the bearing look at then under an Electron microscope for possible pitting and micro-abrasion.
Measure each ball roller with a Micrometer.
Send samples away to check to see the depth of hardness on the race and rollers/balls
Do a check on the bearing numbers in a FBI fraud database to check if they are not cheap knock offs.
ETC etc etc........

The sheer stupidity of that 'analogy' would do TDL proud.

[Zedder]

They indulge in commercial activities.

Not paying income tax is easy enough for any commercial entity: don't make a profit.

The only entities I'm aware of that don't pay any taxes by default are churches and some charities.

Which are you suggesting should be responsible for scientific research?


Commercial activities by your definition.

Try the Cancer Society of NZ, a charity and a research organisation.

[husaberg]

The sheer stupidity of that 'analogy' would do TDL proud.

I will conclude then that you don't grasp the concept of rational thought and logic then.
Comparing my anology of your idiotic suggestions To TDL rational highly logical thought process doesn't worry me one iota.

[TheDemonLord]

The sheer stupidity of that 'analogy' would do TDL proud.

There is only one source of Sheer Stupidity here, and I'm replying to it.

[Ocean1]

Commercial activities by your definition.

Try the Cancer Society of NZ, a charity and a research organisation.

If they exchange goods or services for money or vice versa they're a commercial entity. Period.

And good on 'em. Like I said Your tax exemption criteria is completely irrelevant.

[Zedder]

If they exchange goods or services for money or vice versa they're a commercial entity. Period.

And good on 'em. Like I said Your tax exemption criteria is completely irrelevant.


Hardly relevant if it's not a primary activity to make profit.

Lol, so Cancer Society NZ isn't a not for profit and a research company then?

[bogan]

A question for you....

Do you think Science ever reaches a point where it can say it's 'done'? (Done as in concluded)

Of course not.

Now don't go using that as an excuse to just decide what you want to believe, then assume that must be the case cos science isn't done yet :facepalm:


(But I was giving him another chance to think he was educating me. It seems to give him a boost).

Of course it does, the ignorant are such a burden on society; I've ranted about this many times, so of course educating them makes me feel good.


The sheer stupidity of that 'analogy' would do TDL proud.

It's actually a pretty good analogy, way better than TDLs normally are, and a pretty good post compared to the other drivel husaberg has been spouting of late.

[Katman]

It's actually a pretty good analogy, way better than TDLs normally are, and a pretty good post compared to the other drivel husaberg has been spouting of late.

Ok, I'll spell out why it's a fucking retarded analogy.

The consequences of me missing a microscopic speck of oxidation on a steering head bearing amounts to zero.

Failure to detect a retro-virus in a vaccine could have consequences that affect millions.

[bogan]

Ok, I'll spell out why it's a fucking retarded analogy.

The consequences of me missing a microscopic speck of oxidation on a steering head bearing amounts to zero.

Failure to detect a retro-virus in a vaccine could have consequences that affect millions.

What if it is the start of cage failure, leading to the steering head locking up, sounds consequential...

The focus of the analogy was also clearly that there is a certainty-to-time ratio that is more practicable to aim for than an absolute certainty one. Especially considering we just fucking outlined the science is never done, so absolute certainty isn't even a thing that is practical to strive for.

[Katman]

What if it is the start of cage failure, leading to the steering head locking up, sounds consequential...

Seriously dude, you should probably stick to manufacturing Flintstones pop-up stands.

[bogan]

Seriously dude, you should probably stick to manufacturing Flintstones pop-up stands.

What, was coming up with outlandashly unlikely scenarios ending in a 'bad thing' not the aim of the game? I mean, I've seen tapered roller bearings with cracked cages fairly often, have you ever seen a harmful retrovirus in a vaccine?

What's the flintstone's pop up stand reference to anyway? I would have thought stone/wood don't lend themselves to pop-up stands too well...

[Katman]

.......have you ever seen a harmful retrovirus in a vaccine?

Not personally - I'm relying on the word of scientists.

[bogan]

Not personally - I'm relying on the word of scientists.

Source?...

[Katman]

Source?...

Check out some of Dr Judy Mikovits's work.

[Ocean1]

Hardly relevant if it's not a primary activity to make profit.

Lol, so Cancer Society NZ isn't a not for profit and a research company then?

No, it's succinctly relevant in describing a commercial entity though. Which is what I was doing.

And I didn't suggest Cancer NZ wasn't either a npo or a research company.

You really are having trouble with comprehension aincha?

[husaberg]

Ok, I'll spell out why it's a fucking retarded analogy.

The consequences of me missing a microscopic speck of oxidation on a steering head bearing amounts to zero.

Failure to detect a retro-virus in a vaccine could have consequences that affect millions.
Note They sceen for vaccine contaimanation.
Science rationally looks at the results of experiments and then makes logical conclusions based on the repeatable results without bias.
You on the other hand first select what you think the outcome should be, based predominantly on paranoia. Then you selectively interpret information. You do so by only acknowledging information that suits your desired outcome, while ignoring any and all facts that don’t suit your desired outcome.


Check out some of Dr Judy Mikovits's work.
lolololololol
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2011/11/controversial-cfs-researcher-arrested-and-jailed
WOW A NEW CONSPIRACY
http://retractionwatch.com/2016/02/16/court-dismisses-lawsuit-by-xmrv-chronic-fatigue-researcher/

[bogan]

Check out some of Dr Judy Mikovits's work.

The scientist who validated the process of contamination screening in vaccine batches by identifying contaminated vaccine? Just how is that relevant to the time-limited nature of pre-production vaccine trials?

[Katman]

lolololololol
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2011/11/controversial-cfs-researcher-arrested-and-jailed
WOW A NEW CONSPIRACY
http://retractionwatch.com/2016/02/16/court-dismisses-lawsuit-by-xmrv-chronic-fatigue-researcher/

How incredibly typical that instead of focusing on the findings of someone who spent 30 years with the Cancer Research Institude that you instead focus on a court case over the fact that she refused to hand over her research notes that expose the reason she was fired.

[husaberg]

How incredibly typical that instead of focusing on the findings of someone who spent 30 years with the Cancer Research Institude that you instead focus on a court case over the fact that she refused to hand over her research notes that expose the reason she was fired.

Really not only was she was laughed out of court
Read the second link.............
I read the findings, you clearly did not.

How about this one sounds similar to Andrew Wakefraud

After Mikovits and her research team's Science study appeared in October 2009, many other groups around the world reported that they could not find the mouse retrovirus, dubbed XMRV, in people who had CFS. Mikovits and colleagues subsequently participated in a multilab study that resulted in a September Science Express paper describing how none of the teams could reliably find XMRV in blinded samples from CFS patients. One lab Mikovits collaborated with in the 2009 Science report simultaneously retracted its contribution after discovering that a contaminant explained its XMRV findings.

[bogan]

How incredibly typical that instead of focusing on the findings of someone who spent 30 years with the Cancer Research Institude that you instead focus on a court case over the fact that she refused to hand over her research notes that expose the reason she was fired.

How incredibly typical you focus on the unprovable conspiracy aspect, instead of the rationally discussable science...

And how does that even work though? she had research notes exposing the reason she was fired, but instead of handing them over to show the corruption and exonerate herself, she chose to keep them and go to jail? To what end?

Sounds a lot more like the notes didn't show that at all, and she was going to jail anyway...

[Katman]

How incredibly typical you focus on the unprovable conspiracy aspect, instead of the rationally discussable science...

And how does that even work though? she had research notes exposing the reason she was fired, but instead of handing them over to show the corruption and exonerate herself, she chose to keep them and go to jail? To what end?

Sounds a lot more like the notes didn't show that at all, and she was going to jail anyway...

Did you study at the same School of Investigation as berkboy?

[bogan]

Did you study at the same School of Investigation as berkboy?

Did you? You exhibit the same irrational traits of focusing on conspiracy theories and personal attacks.

So I'll ask again, how does Judy Mikovits's work relate to the time-limited nature of the vaccine test/trials process?

[Katman]

Did you? You exhibit the same irrational traits of focusing on conspiracy theories and personal attacks.

So I'll ask again, how does Judy Mikovits's work relate to the time-limited nature of the vaccine test/trials process?

Why don't you actually look into Judy Mikovits's work instead of relying on a smear campaign from Kiwibiker's resident retarded cunt?

[husaberg]

Why don't you actually look into Judy Mikovits's work instead of relying on a smear campaign from Kiwibiker's resident retarded cunt?

Steve from Taupo.....:first:

[bogan]

Why don't you actually look into Judy Mikovits's work instead of relying on a smear campaign from Kiwibiker's resident retarded cunt?

I have done, that is why my summary of her work differs from husabergs, and did not make any comment about her integrity as a scientist. I'm not sure how you could possibly conclude I am relying on husaberg's smear campaign. The work she did, is simply not relevant to the time-limited nature of vaccine test/trials, now is it?

[Katman]

The work she did, is simply not relevant to the time-limited nature of vaccine test/trials, now is it?

Are you trying out for berkboy's title?

I brought up Judy Mikovits's name in response to your question of whether I have found retroviruses in vaccines.

[bogan]

I brought up Judy Mikovits's name in response to your question of whether I have found retroviruses in vaccines.

So that's a no then. The reason I asked the question, was to categorise the likelihood of additional test trials you seem to be asking for, as fuck all benefit, like a microscope examination would be of steering head bearings for a wof.

[husaberg]

Are you trying out for berkboy's title?

I brought up Judy Mikovits's name in response to your question of whether I have found retroviruses in vaccines.

Do you have any proof that she found a mouse retrovirus in a vaccine.
Hint........

After Mikovits and her research team's Science study appeared in October 2009, many other groups around the world reported that they could not find the mouse retrovirus, dubbed XMRV, in people who had CFS. Mikovits and colleagues subsequently participated in a multilab study that resulted in a September Science Express paper describing how none of the teams could reliably find XMRV in blinded samples from CFS patients. One lab Mikovits collaborated with in the 2009 Science report simultaneously retracted its contribution after discovering that a contaminant explained its XMRV findings.

She alledged it was part of a conspiracy
this is what the court said

This case has a long backstory. Mikovits filed the original complaint in 2014. The lawsuit was scheduled for November, then taken off the calendar. According to the minutes, the court advised Mikovits to revise the complaint to comply with a rule that says complaints must be factual, plausible, and concise; however, according to the court, the second complaint that Mikovits submitted was a “largely a recycled version” of the first.
Defendants, including the Whittemore-Peterson Institute, filed a motion to dismiss the second complaint on January 5th, which states six reasons to dismiss, including:
that the statute of limitations has long since run with regard to each and every factual allegation underlying the causes of action, save one unrelated allegation regarding a bankruptcy proceeding; second, the Plaintiff fails to allege a conspiracy sufficient to subject the Whittemore Defendants, none of whom are State actors, to liability under 42 U.S.C. §1983

[Zedder]

No, it's succinctly relevant in describing a commercial entity though. Which is what I was doing.

And I didn't suggest Cancer NZ wasn't either a npo or a research company.

You really are having trouble with comprehension aincha?


Maybe in your mind but not in the real world.

Nah, just having trouble with how you wrote that the tax exemption critera was wrong even though it does apply to my example of the Cancer Society as a non profit, charitable, research company.

[Ocean1]

Maybe in your mind but not in the real world.

Nah, just having trouble with how you wrote that the tax exemption critera was wrong even though it does apply to my example of the Cancer Society as a non profit, charitable, research company.

You have yet to offer a coherent rebuttal.

As I did in pointing out that tax criteria has nothing to do with an entity's status as commercial, or otherwise.

So you're batting zero for two.

[Zedder]

You have yet to offer a coherent rebuttal.

As I did in pointing out that tax criteria has nothing to do with an entity's status as commercial, or otherwise.

So you're batting zero for two.


Rubbish, you've put the typical Ocean1 "School of Business" spin on it.

[Katman]

Bearing in mind that mitochrondria play an important role in maintaining the integrity of the blood/brain barrier, and that Polysorbate 80 is used to transport certain compounds across the blood/brain barrier (as well as being an ingredient in some vaccines), I found this article interesting.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3179978/

[Virago]

http://s.quickmeme.com/img/29/290d466ee46fc01131f6ffd33df5287459dbfab1acd926f88c 1ca34c0b76cec9.jpg

[husaberg]

And therein lies the problem.

You can't question deep sea oil drilling without being accused of wanting to fuck dolphins.

The list is seemingly endless.
http://cdn.ebaumsworld.com/thumbs/picture/2398279/84721542.jpg

[Katman]

So that's a no then. The reason I asked the question, was to categorise the likelihood of additional test trials you seem to be asking for, as fuck all benefit, like a microscope examination would be of steering head bearings for a wof.

You seem to think that once a pharmaceutical product is approved for the market, no further testing or scrutiny should be needed.

On the contrary, as new testing methods are perfected or advanced equipment is developed, even existing products should be subject to constant re-analysing and re-evaluating to ensure that nothing was missed in earlier trials.

That's how improvements are made.

It also shows a willingness to put concern for people's health and well-being ahead of profits.

[bogan]

You seem to think that once a pharmaceutical product is approved for the market, no further testing or scrutiny should be needed.

On the contrary, as new testing methods are perfected or advanced equipment is developed, even existing products should be subject to constant re-analysing and re-evaluating to ensure that nothing was missed in earlier trials.

That's how improvements are made.

It also shows a willingness to put concern for people's health and well-being ahead of profits.

Not at all, I've mentioned numerous times that ongoing testing is essential, and that vaccines should be continually evaluated and improved based on new research. The point TDL, husaberg, and myself are making is that to continue test trials and otherwise over-test existing product is to waste the time that would be far better spent doing that new research, to thus improve the vaccines...

[Katman]

The point TDL, husaberg, and myself are making is that to continue test trials and otherwise over-test existing product is to waste the time that would be far better spent doing that new research, to thus improve the vaccines...

What makes you think you're qualified to determine what constitutes 'over-testing' of existing products?

[Virago]

What makes you think you're qualified to determine what constitutes 'over-testing' of existing products?

What makes you think you're qualified to determine what constitutes under-testing of existing products?

[Katman]

What makes you think you're qualified to determine what constitutes under-testing of existing products?

I'm not suggesting anything of the sort.

But if people in the field of medical research feel it is worthwhile conducting further tests on a product, they should be free to do so - without having the pharmaceutical industry threatening to withdraw funding from their institute if they go ahead with that testing.

[bogan]

What makes you think you're qualified to determine what constitutes 'over-testing' of existing products?

What makes you think I think I am? I rely on the scientist's determination that the current testing methods do not constitute over, or under testing; this is why I haven't called for any changes.

[Katman]

Here you go, have a watch of this.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uDbQNBla6aU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Now I haven't watched it yet (I'm about to start), so I can't be accused of pushing something that 'fits my agenda' - I don't know what is in the presentation.

[Katman]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/business/despite-warnings-drug-giant-took-long-path-to-vioxx-recall.html?_r=0

[Katman]

Seriously, instead of ignoring the link above, some of you should take a read of how pharmaceutical giants handle adverse claims about their products.

After repeatedly rubbishing any claims that Vioxx presented a significant health risk, Merck ended up paying out almost 5 billion dollars in fines and lawsuits.

Now handing over 5 billion dollars would normally spell the end of any business - but not Merck. They were back showing obscene profits within a couple of years.

[Katman]

http://www.ebiomedicine.com/article/S2352-3964(17)30046-4/fulltext

[Katman]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23932735

[pritch]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/anti-vaccine-activists-spark-a-states-worst-measles-outbreak-in-decades/2017/05/04/a1fac952-2f39-11e7-9dec-764dc781686f_story.html?utm_term=.74c088575a6d&wpisrc=nl_most-draw8&wpmm=1

[oldrider]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/anti-vaccine-activists-spark-a-states-worst-measles-outbreak-in-decades/2017/05/04/a1fac952-2f39-11e7-9dec-764dc781686f_story.html?utm_term=.74c088575a6d&wpisrc=nl_most-draw8&wpmm=1

Interesting! - Just happened upon this http://preventdisease.com/news/17/012717_Biologist-Proves-Measles-Isnt-Virus-Wins-Supreme-Court-Case.shtml after reading your post!

Wouldn't have read it if it hadn't been that I had just finished looking on KB and was fresh in my memory!

Claim / counter claim etc etc what is one to believe? :scratch:

I am not anti vaccination in principal - very suspicious of vaccine companies though - they fill them up with shit that does not do me or mine well - not nice! :oi-grr:

[bogan]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/anti-vaccine-activists-spark-a-states-worst-measles-outbreak-in-decades/2017/05/04/a1fac952-2f39-11e7-9dec-764dc781686f_story.html?utm_term=.74c088575a6d&wpisrc=nl_most-draw8&wpmm=1

Sure illustrates the dangers of allowing the antivaccer misinformation to spread.


Interesting! - Just happened upon this http://preventdisease.com/news/17/012717_Biologist-Proves-Measles-Isnt-Virus-Wins-Supreme-Court-Case.shtml after reading your post!

Wouldn't have read it if it hadn't been that I had just finished looking on KB and was fresh in my memory!

Claim / counter claim etc etc what is one to believe? :scratch:

I am not anti vaccination in principal - very suspicious of vaccine companies though - they fill them up with shit that does not do me or mine well - not nice! :oi-grr:

That's an incredibly misleading title. There is no proof measles isn't a virus, the court case overturned a previous ruling that determined there was beyond a shadow of a doubt, evidence that measles is a virus.

[Katman]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/anti-vaccine-activists-spark-a-states-worst-measles-outbreak-in-decades/2017/05/04/a1fac952-2f39-11e7-9dec-764dc781686f_story.html?utm_term=.74c088575a6d&wpisrc=nl_most-draw8&wpmm=1

Seriously, that rivals even your standard Mills & Boon offerings.

:killingme

[Ocean1]

Seriously, that rivals even your standard Mills & Boon offerings.

:killingme

Aye. Perhaps he's forgotten this is your personal wee fact-free zone.

How dare he!

[pzkpfw]

Just had my free-organised-by-employer flu shot.

If it turns me autistic or I die, I'll be sure to come back and report.

[oldrider]

Just had my free-organised-by-employer flu shot.

If it turns me autistic or I die, I'll be sure to come back and report.

I like that you had the choice and you realised your preference! - Nice! :niceone: - let everyone else exercise the same freedom of choice! :yes:

[Oakie]

Me and 35 of my colleagues get ours done this Friday / next Tuesday.

[RDJ]

Updated with this year's quad-antigen flu shot today.

Did shingles and yellow fever 2 months ago.

Still current for MMR & DTP and hep A & B with Twinrix. Also, polio.

Not renewing JEV or cholera as not planning that sort of travel.

Old enough now to have naturally acquired typhoid immunity on top of long-ago Typhim vax.

[bogan]

Had ours done last friday, so much better getting them done at work to minimise the pissing around with waits before and after.

[Katman]

<img src="http://asheepnomore.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/vaccine-sheep.jpg"/>

[RDJ]

A nasty combination: malignantly narcissistic virtue-signalers lying to paranoid uneducated religionists.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/minnesota-measles-outbreak-vaccine-misinformation-targeting-somali-americans/

[Katman]

A nasty combination: malignantly narcissistic virtue-signalers lying to paranoid uneducated religionists.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/minnesota-measles-outbreak-vaccine-misinformation-targeting-somali-americans/

Go sit in the corner with pritch.

[Ocean1]

A nasty combination: malignantly narcissistic virtue-signalers lying to paranoid uneducated religionists.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/minnesota-measles-outbreak-vaccine-misinformation-targeting-somali-americans/


Go sit in the corner with pritch.

Aye, unless you can supply a Uchoob cartoon Katflap won't have a fucking clue what you're talking about, now fuck off.

[Ocean1]

Do you have an aversion to reading scientific/medical studies?

I have an aversion to technically illiterate fuckwits, and I'd rather you didn't try to pretend you're capable of reading anything scientific/medical in any other capacity.

[Katman]

I have an aversion to technically illiterate fuckwits, and I'd rather you didn't try to pretend you're capable of reading anything scientific/medical from any other capacity.

They're only the Abstracts but I'm sure you can find the full texts if you're sufficiently interested.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25428645

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17114826

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22099159

[TheDemonLord]

They're only the Abstracts but I'm sure you can find the full texts if you're sufficiently interested.

Did you notice who authored those papers?

I'll give you a hint - there is one name common to all of the above Articles....

Call me a Cynic - but maybe this 'wealth of scientific/medical journals' is actually the work of a single crank....

[Katman]

Did you notice who authored those papers?


Yes - researchers at the University of British Columbia.



Call me a Cynic - but maybe this 'wealth of scientific/medical journals' is actually the work of a single crank....

Or maybe a specialist in that field of research.

[RDJ]

Or maybe a specialist in that field of research.

Wait, what? I thought you don't trust specialists.

[TheDemonLord]

Wait, what? I thought you don't trust specialists.

Only if they say something he agrees with...

[Katman]

Only if they say something he agrees with...

And how is that any different from you?

[Ocean1]

And how is that any different from you?

They're not fuckwits.

[TheDemonLord]

And how is that any different from you?

The ones I agree with actually do experiments....


(2/3 of your studies didn't do any form of experimentation)

[Katman]

http://www.cmsri.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/MawsonStudyHealthOutcomes5.8.2017.pdf

[TheDemonLord]

http://www.cmsri.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/MawsonStudyHealthOutcomes5.8.2017.pdf

It's almost like, when a kid is Homeschooled, they don't get the proper social interactions (that can lead to generating ADHD - Jordan Peterson has published work on this, here's a PDF extract, there is a full lecture somewhere on youtube where he talks about ADHD in Rats and how Play regulates that (http://www.academia.edu/20521715/Play_and_the_regulation_of_aggression)) and aren't exposed to the low level bugs (the ubiquitous 'sniffles') that help regulate the immune system preventing Allergies (a la the East Germany Paradox - where children who grew up in east germany had lower levels of Allergy and Auto-Immune disease when compared with West German).

[Katman]

It's almost like, when a kid is Homeschooled, they don't get the proper social interactions (that can lead to generating ADHD - Jordan Peterson has published work on this, here's a PDF extract, there is a full lecture somewhere on youtube where he talks about ADHD in Rats and how Play regulates that (http://www.academia.edu/20521715/Play_and_the_regulation_of_aggression)) and aren't exposed to the low level bugs (the ubiquitous 'sniffles') that help regulate the immune system preventing Allergies (a la the East Germany Paradox - where children who grew up in east germany had lower levels of Allergy and Auto-Immune disease when compared with West German).

Both the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups of the study were from a home-schooled environment.

[husaberg]

I wonder why he ignore that actually more kids with ADHD and ASD are home scholled in the first place compared to the general population as school struggle to cope with their needs.

[Katman]

I wonder why he ignore that actually more kids with ADHD and ASD are home scholled in the first place compared to the general population as school struggle to cope with their needs.

Do you have anything to back that claim up or did you just pluck it out of your arse?

[husaberg]

Do you have anything to back that claim up or did you just pluck it out of your arse?

No i just used simple mathematics
You first pick a place
You then need to find the figures for the % of children with Autism in this same place
You then need find the figures for the percentage of these same autistic children that are enrolled in Mainstream education.
You then find the figures for the number that attend specialist learning institutions
You then compare the remainder to the actual number of children with Autism remaining.
This is then compared to the sum total of all the total percentage of children that are home schooled in the same place.
Of course that would require you to do some actual research rather than spouting of endless conspiracy gospel.
It’s rather funny how you also don't consider that as there is a far greater number of children that are actually vaccinated than there is that are not vaccinated. ergo there will also be a greater number of children that are vaccinated that actually have autism. It’s very simple maths.

[Katman]

No i just used simple mathematics
You first pick a place
You then need to find the figures for the % of children with Autism in this same place
You then need find the figures for the percentage of these same autistic children that are enrolled in Mainstream education.
You then find the figures for the number that attend specialist learning institutions
You then compare the remainder to the actual number of children with Autism remaining.
This is then compared to the sum total of all the total percentage of children that are home schooled in the same place.
Of course that would require you to do some actual research rather than spouting of endless conspiracy gospel.
It’s rather funny how you also don't consider that as there is a far greater number of children that are actually vaccinated than there is that are not vaccinated. ergo there will also be a greater number of children that are vaccinated that actually have autism. It’s very simple maths.

Except you haven't got any figures.

So it's safe to assume you just plucked it out of your arse.

[husaberg]

Except you haven't got any figures.

So it's safe to assume you just plucked it out of your arse.
Your assumptions make an arse of you..........
I left it open to you to do your own research, so i could not be accused of cherry picking data. Because thats your area of expertise.
You can yourself pick anywhere you like in the developed world, do so and feel free to prove that more children as a percentage with autism are not home schooled than the general population percentage that are home schooled.
Go on what do you have to lose.....

[Katman]

Go on what do you have to lose.....

I'm not the one who made the claim.

[husaberg]

I'm not the one who made the claim.

Well you could attempt to prove me wrong or you could just go back to posting about shapeshifting lizzards.
Your choice of course as your tin foil hat is designed to block out their mind control.

[RDJ]

Hey Katman. Why don't you go see a kid who caught a preventable disease from an un-vaccinated child and ended up with crippling (as in permanently disabling) encephalitis? And talk to her mom. And then try and keep spewing your sanctimonious virtue-signalling narcissistic science-free anti-vaccine BS.

[Katman]

Hey Katman. Why don't you go see a kid who caught a preventable disease from an un-vaccinated child and ended up with crippling (as in permanently disabling) encephalitis? And talk to her mom. And then try and keep spewing your sanctimonious virtue-signalling narcissistic science-free anti-vaccine BS.

More kids drown in their parents swimming pool.

And what about when vaccinated people pass on a disease?

[RDJ]

Oh, go boil your ego in a vase of lavender oil.

People like you want to signal your virtue by being edgy and challenging what you think is dubious science.

What you actually do, is sway people who are doubtful, onto your side of the stupidity fence.

You are of course not alone - Jenny McCarthy and Andrew Wakefield are just two of your cretinous idols.

But your feelgoodness comes at the expense of people's - often childrens' - health and capability to lead a good life when appropriately protected against chance of preventable nasty illness.

There is a risk of vaccination, and there is a benefit from vaccination, and the risk-benefit calculation is hugely in favour of vaccination and that is supremely evident for all but lack-witted idiotic effwits like you.

[husaberg]

More kids drown in their parents swimming pool.

And what about when vaccinated people pass on a disease?

Do you have anything to back that claim up or did you just pluck it out of your arse?

[Katman]

Do you have anything to back that claim up or did you just pluck it out of your arse?

https://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/water-safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.html

[husaberg]

https://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/water-safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.html

Yet you suggested that more kids down in their parents pools than die from being unvaccinated or end up with crippling diseases.
In case you missed your link contains no such facts.
So you did just go pull that comment out of your arse then.

[Katman]

Yet you suggested that more kids down in their parents pools than die from being unvaccinated or end up with crippling diseases.
In case you missed your link contains no such facts.
So you did just go pull that comment out of your arse then.

An average of about 700 children under 14 die from unintentional drowning every year - in America alone.

[RDJ]

And what about when vaccinated people pass on a disease?

Your usual idiocy on extra-high stilts.

People who have been vaccinated and develop immunity do not get infected and are not carriers other than - in a minority - in the very short term; short term: do you understand that concept?

Unvaccinated people can get infected and carry / distribute infection / contagion in the long term and be the index case for wide dissemination of infection.

Do you understand the difference? Gah.

[Katman]

....other than - in a minority - in the very short term; short term:

Thanks for confirming my point.

[husaberg]

Thanks for confirming my point.

So you believe you are an idiot as well then. Thats more honest than everyone expects from you.

[RDJ]

Thanks for confirming my point.

You're confirming your idiocy.

[RDJ]

Thanks for confirming my point.

Don't thank me you self-beclowner (yes I know you were being Katman-ironic) I see your ilk as partly responsible for serious damage to children (and their parents). Get a grip on reality or shut up.

[husaberg]

You are of course not alone - Jenny McCarthy and Andrew Wakefield are just two of your cretinous idols.

But your feelgoodness comes at the expense of people's - often childrens' - health and capability to lead a good life when appropriately protected against chance of preventable nasty illness.

There is a risk of vaccination, and there is a benefit from vaccination, and the risk-benefit calculation is hugely in favour of vaccination and that is supremely evident for all but lack-witted idiotic effwits like you.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/scott-whitlock/2014/04/14/rabid-conspiracy-theorist-jenny-mccarthy-desperately-spins-im-not

[Katman]

People like you want to signal your virtue by being edgy and challenging what you think is dubious science.

What you actually do, is sway people who are doubtful, onto your side of the stupidity fence.

If that's the case, maybe it just suggests I have a rather more compelling argument than you.

[husaberg]

An average of about 700 children under 14 die from unintentional drowning every year - in America alone.

yet since the introduction of vaccinations hundreds of thousands of children in the the same country have or caught polio or died from it.
20000 cases less in the first year alone.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/e/reported-cases.pdf
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/polio/index.html

[RDJ]

Quoth Katman: If that's the case, maybe it just suggests I have a rather more compelling argument than you.

Srsly? That's what you conclude? Please reassure us that you are not active in any industry that involves safety, logic, and progress. (But you probably are).

[Woodman]

If that's the case, maybe it just suggests I have a rather more compelling argument than you.

Yet you have been proven wrong in this thread over and over.

[Katman]

Please reassure us that you are not active in any industry that involves safety, logic, and progress. (But you probably are).

You're a perfect example of how just deeply the medical profession has become indoctrinated by the pharmaceutical industry.

[husaberg]

You're a perfect example of how just deeply the medical profession has become indoctrinated by the pharmaceutical industry.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/4f/7f/6a/4f7f6ac72d9c64bff1bedcfbe10bb89a.jpg

http://scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/e35/12519431_1025167584228802_47246628_n.jpg

[Banditbandit]

If that's the case, maybe it just suggests I have a rather more compelling argument than you.

No, my friend, I am sorry. That's a "100 million blowflies can't be wrong" argument ...

[Katman]

No, my friend, I am sorry. That's a "100 million blowflies can't be wrong" argument ...

Within the context of RDJ's comment that I was replying to, why else do you think some people might be 'swayed'?

[Ocean1]

Within the context of RDJ's comment that I was replying to, why else do you think some people might be 'swayed'?

It's been growing problem ever since cheap vaccinations suspended the Darwin effect.

Up until then fuckwits didn't get the chance to be "swayed", they just dropped dead.

[F5 Dave]

211 pages of this thread - good grief. Had my flu shot week ago. Don't think there are any side effects.

However, oddly, I'm pretty sure that I can smell in colour since then.


[unsubscribe]
See you in another 100 pages.

[RDJ]

If that's the case, maybe it just suggests I have a rather more compelling argument than you.

FFS.

Y'see Katman this is the problem right here. You appear to think there is a compelling argument to be made against vaccination. You probably also think, given your approach to logic and evidence, there is a compelling argument to be made against gravity and only if you present a very compelling argument you could float like a vacuous stream of detached consciousness far above the ground the rest of us actually inhabit. (Oh, wait...).

Anyway, I don't look for a compelling argument in the debate against the existence of gravity, because were I to choose to avoid the physics of kinetic energy and deceleration in favour of a lusciously compelling argument that I can come to an immediate stop when hitting immovable objects at speed without any personal damage, I don't think that would work out well.

You persist in wanting to have an emotion-based debate about the effects of bacteria and viruses. They are basically like The Terminator. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they will absolutely not stop, ever, until you are infected, unless you are dead and its host dies, or we manage to kill it. And there are many viral illnesses for which there are simply no cure. Like measles. So we are better off stopping it from ever infecting you.

If that's not compelling enough, well, not a problem. I'll go and collect my bi-weekly cheque from big Pharma for following my "indoctrination"*.

* I'm actually curious though, do you really believe that all the people who advise in favour of vaccination do so simply because of indoctrination? That's a really strange space-time continuum you live in.

[Katman]

Y'see Katman this is the problem right here. You appear to think there is a compelling argument to be made against vaccination.

And yet you choose to ignore every study that I've linked.

[Ocean1]

And yet you choose to ignore every study that I've linked.

Well, face it, dude, why wouldn't we? You're a sort of walking Anti-Snopes.

Thanks for that, btw.

[RDJ]

Well, face it, dude, why wouldn't we? You're a sort of walking Anti-Snopes.

Thanks for that, btw.

You're right. I completely missed that he has A Purpose.

I appreciate the head's-up!

[husaberg]

You're right. I completely missed that he has A Purpose.

I appreciate the head's-up!

The trolls only purpose is to indulge his narcissism.

[Katman]

And let's be perfectly clear.....

I have never said that all vaccines are evil and vaccinations should be completely stopped immediately.

All I have ever questioned is whether the current array of vaccines are absolutely necessary and whether it is sensible to be bombarding new-born and infant immune systems with the volume of toxic ingredients that the current vaccine schedule requires.

Studies that look into the safety of certain ingredients in combination with each other are virtually non-existent and, until further research is done in that respect, I believe that we should be erring on the side of caution rather than blindly accepting the doctrine of the pharmaceutical industry that their products are perfectly safe.

Because, quite frankly, over the years the pharmaceutical industry has repeatedly proven that they don't really give a fuck about safety - as long as they're making copious amounts of money.

[TheDemonLord]

And let's be perfectly clear.....

I have never said that all vaccines are evil and vaccinations should be completely stopped immediately.

All I have ever questioned is whether the current array of vaccines are absolutely necessary and whether it is sensible to be bombarding new-born and infant immune systems with the volume of toxic ingredients that the current vaccine schedule requires.

Studies that look into the safety of certain ingredients in combination with each other are virtually non-existent and, until further research is done in that respect, I believe that we should be erring on the side of caution rather than blindly accepting the doctrine of the pharmaceutical industry that their products are perfectly safe.

Because, quite frankly, over the years the pharmaceutical industry has repeatedly proven that they don't really give a fuck about safety - as long as they're making copious amounts of money.

And all we are saying is that every time we get a population (City, Town, Country etc.) that has a decrease in their vaccination rates, they experience an outbreak of the things we vaccinate against. Often resulting in serious illness, longterm consequences or Death.

That alone, in of itself, should be enough to refute your premise that it isn't sensible to "be bombarding new-born and infant immune systems with the volume of toxic ingredients that the current vaccine schedule requires."

Real, proven, repeatable risk of Death vs imagined, exaggerated or unproven risk of Autism.

Take your pick.

[Katman]

Real, proven, repeatable risk of Death vs imagined, exaggerated or unproven risk of Autism.


Fuck off Chicken Little.

As has been previously shown, the risk of death these days is extremely minimal.

And as I also pointed out, more children die from drowning.

Let's ban swimming pools.

[Ocean1]

And all we are saying is that every time we get a population (City, Town, Country etc.) that has a decrease in their vaccination rates, they experience an outbreak of the things we vaccinate against. Often resulting in serious illness, longterm consequences or Death.

That alone, in of itself, should be enough to refute your premise that it isn't sensible to "be bombarding new-born and infant immune systems with the volume of toxic ingredients that the current vaccine schedule requires."

Real, proven, repeatable risk of Death vs imagined, exaggerated or unproven risk of Autism.

Take your pick.

I was talking to an anesthetist, (zombie drug pusher) a couple of weeks ago. He also, (obviously) thinks fuckwits like Katflap have zero credibility.

More to the point, he observed that the quantity and variety of evel adjunctive, (a noun he figures said fuckwits have little understanding of) ingredients in most of his arsenal of professional tools make those in vaccinations look like
that division of Big Pharma are a bunch of pussies, and simply aren't taking this completely unnecessary and arbitrary toxic poisoning of innocent people thing seriously at all.

And not only has he never once had anyone spontaneously burst out in a case of autism but he's never had a single complaint about the efficacy of said toxic brew, in spite of the price being a couple of orders of magnitude greater than any vaccine.

But, fuckwits, y'know? Whacha gunna do?

[Ocean1]

Fuck off Chicken Little.

As has been previously shown, the risk of death these days is extremely minimal.

And as I also pointed out, more children die from drowning.

Let's ban swimming pools.

Which is true. Because vaccines.

Seriously, dude, you don't have the wherewithal to have this "discussion", stop embarrassing yourself.

[Katman]

Which is true. Because vaccines.

Wrong.

It was shown a number of pages ago that the death rate from measles declined enormously over a 30-40 year period prior to the vaccine even being discovered.

Do try to keep up.

[TheDemonLord]

Wrong.

It was shown a number of pages ago that the death rate from measles declined enormously over a 30-40 year period prior to the vaccine even being discovered.

Do try to keep up.

And it's also been shown that the UK experienced its first fatality from Measles in something like 15 years, when the Vaccination rates fell below 80%

Do try to keep up indeed.

[TheDemonLord]

Fuck off Chicken Little.

As has been previously shown, the risk of death these days is extremely minimal.

Because most people aren't fucking retarded raving conspiracy loons and get vaccinated




And as I also pointed out, more children die from drowning.

Let's ban swimming pools.

Well, the Council has mandated that all swimming pools have fencing around them....

[Katman]

Because most people aren't fucking retarded raving conspiracy loons and get vaccinated


And many of them are autistic.

Co-incidence?

Maybe not.

[TheDemonLord]

And many of them are autistic.

Co-incidence?

Maybe not.

Many more of them also drive cars.

So clearly according to the above logic - Vaccines cause people to drive cars....

There is not enough Face and Palms in the known universe for your level of failogic.

[Katman]

Many more of them also drive cars.

So clearly according to the above logic - Vaccines cause people to drive cars....

There is not enough Face and Palms in the known universe for your level of failogic.

I've pointed out a number of studies that appear to show a connection between vaccines (or vaccine ingredients) and neurodevelopmental disorders.

The fact that you choose to ignore those studies doesn't alter the fact that they exist.

[TheDemonLord]

I've pointed out a number of studies that appear to show a connection between vaccines (or vaccine ingredients) and neurodevelopmental disorders.

The fact that you choose to ignore those studies doesn't alter the fact that they exist.

You've posted studies with small sample sizes, that are not representative of the wider population, by biased researchers, that don't control for any other environmental factors.

And then we would have to weigh those against the overwhelming mountain of evidence we have for the safety of Vaccines.

And this brings back to the point - even if everything you say is true - does it outweigh the verifiable risk of Death (from preventable disease)?

[Katman]

And this brings back to the point - even if everything you say is true - does it outweigh the verifiable risk of Death (from preventable disease)?

<img src="http://savvysleever.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/chicken-little.jpg"/>

[TheDemonLord]

an image

You know what is fucking hilarious?

If it's kids being blown up by US bombs in middle eastern parts of the world (preventable death) - you are all up in arms
If it's kids suffering from preventable disease based on a supposed miniscule possibility of a neurological condition (and some autists do quite well for themselves in later life) - suddenly you are completely ambivalent.

All in the name of maintaining a narrative eh Katman?

[Katman]

You know what is fucking hilarious?

If it's kids being blown up by US bombs in middle eastern parts of the world (preventable death) - you are all up in arms
If it's kids suffering from preventable disease based on a supposed miniscule possibility of a neurological condition (and some autists do quite well for themselves in later life) - suddenly you are completely ambivalent.

All in the name of maintaining a narrative eh Katman?

What's equally hilarious* is that you don't appear to give a fuck about innocent children dying in the Middle East - but just let one child die from Measles and your world seemingly falls apart.

What was that you were saying about maintaining a narrative?

*(What's even funnier is that you seem completely oblivious to the extreme ironing).

[Ocean1]

Wrong.

It was shown a number of pages ago that the death rate from measles declined enormously over a 30-40 year period prior to the vaccine even being discovered.

Do try to keep up.

There's that Inverse Snopes thing again...

https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/graph-us-measles-cases

And you wonder why nobody listens to anything you say. The extent to which you're full of shit is painfully obvious, you're not just failing to keep up, you're headed in completely the wrong direction.

[Katman]

There's that Inverse Snopes thing again...

https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/graph-us-measles-cases

And you wonder why nobody listens to anything you say. The extent to which you're full of shit is painfully obvious, you're not just failing to keep up, you're headed in completely the wrong direction.

Do you understand the difference between incidence of measles and death from measles?

Here, I'll help you out.

http://www.healthsentinel.com/joomla/images/stories/graphs/us-measles.jpg

[Ocean1]

Do you understand the difference between incidence of measles and death from measles?

Here, I'll help you out.

http://www.healthsentinel.com/joomla/images/stories/graphs/us-measles.jpg

Yes.

So what?

[Katman]

Yes.

So what?

So you'll notice that the rate of death from measles started to fall dramatically over a 30-40 year period prior to the vaccine being discovered then.

Just like I said.

[Ocean1]

So you'll notice that the rate of death from measles started to fall dramatically over a 30-40 year period prior to the vaccine being discovered then.

Just like I said.

Yes. And as I said: so fucking what?

[husaberg]

So you'll notice that the rate of death from measles started to fall dramatically over a 30-40 year period prior to the vaccine being discovered then.

Just like I said.
Yeah whatever
The rubella vaccine was first licensed in 1969

Rubella is a common infection in many areas of the world. Each year about 100,000 cases of congenital rubella syndrome occur.
Rubella can cause congenital rubella syndrome in the newborn. The syndrome (CRS) follows intrauterine infection by the rubella virus and comprises cardiac, cerebral, ophthalmic and auditory defects.It may also cause prematurity, low birth weight, and neonatal thrombocytopenia, anemia and hepatitis. The risk of major defects or organogenesis is highest for infection in the first trimester. CRS is the main reason a vaccine for rubella was developed.
Many mothers who contract rubella within the first critical trimester either have a miscarriage or a stillborn baby. If the fetus survives the infection, it can be born with severe heart disorders (patent ductus arteriosus being the most common), blindness, deafness, or other life-threatening organ disorders. The skin manifestations are called "blueberry muffin lesions". For these reasons, rubella is included on the TORCH complex of perinatal infections.



The vaccine is now usually given as part of the MMR vaccine. The WHO recommends the first dose be given at 12 to 18 months of age with a second dose at 36 months. Pregnant women are usually tested for immunity to rubella early on. Women found to be susceptible are not vaccinated until after the baby is born because the vaccine contains live virus.
The immunisation program has been quite successful. Cuba declared the disease eliminated in the 1990s, and in 2004 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that both the congenital and acquired forms of rubella had been eliminated from the United States



Vaccination has interrupted the transmission of rubella in the Americas: no endemic case has been observed since February 2009.[ Since the virus can always be reintroduced from other continents, the population still need to remain vaccinated to keep the western hemisphere free of rubella. During the epidemic in the U.S. between 1962–1965, rubella virus infections during pregnancy were estimated to have caused 30,000 stillbirths and 20,000 children to be born impaired or disabled as a result of CRS. Universal immunisation producing a high level of herd immunity is important in the control of epidemics of rubella.
In the UK, there remains a large population of men susceptible to rubella who have not been vaccinated. Outbreaks of rubella occurred amongst many young men in the UK in 1993 and in 1996 the infection was transmitted to pregnant women, many of whom were immigrants and were susceptible. Outbreaks still arise, usually in developing countries where the vaccine is not as accessible

[Katman]

Yes. And as I said: so fucking what?

Just to refresh your memory.....


As has been previously shown, the risk of death these days is extremely minimal.


Which is true. Because vaccines.


Wrong.

It was shown a number of pages ago that the death rate from measles declined enormously over a 30-40 year period prior to the vaccine even being discovered.


There's that Inverse Snopes thing again...


Do you understand the difference between incidence of measles and death from measles?


Yes.

So what?

[Ocean1]

Just to refresh your memory.....

So you don't actually have a point.

[FJRider]

Wrong.

It was shown a number of pages ago that the death rate from measles declined enormously over a 30-40 year period prior to the vaccine even being discovered.

Do try to keep up.

Known Infectious diseases were treated by keeping patients in isolation. And it worked.

Vaccine's were for prevention ... not cure.

Do try to think.

[Katman]

So you don't actually have a point.

My point was to show you where you were wrong.

[FJRider]

So you don't actually have a point.

He loves quoting himself.

That ... is the point.

[Katman]

Known Infectious diseases were treated by keeping patients in isolation. And it worked.

Vaccine's were for prevention ... not cure.

Do try to think.

Who the fuck ever suggested vaccines were designed as a cure?

[husaberg]

He loves quoting himself.

That ... is the point.
http://momsgetwealthy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/cat-sees-lion-mirror-300x300.jpg
Narcissistic personality disorder

individuals with NPD have most or all of the following symptoms, typically without commensurate qualities or accomplishments:
Grandiosity with expectations of superior treatment from others
Fixated on fantasies of power, success, intelligence, attractiveness, etc.
Self-perception of being unique, superior and associated with high-status people and institutions
Needing constant admiration from others
Sense of entitlement to special treatment and to obedience from others
Exploitative of others to achieve personal gain
Unwilling to empathize with others' feelings, wishes, or needs
Intensely envious of others and the belief that others are equally envious of them
Pompous and arrogant demeanor

[Ocean1]

My point was to show you where you were wrong.

And yet the mortality rate is completely irrelevant in evaluating the efficacy of vaccinations.

As opposed to the rate of infection, which is not only directly relevant but shows exactly how effective the vaccine is.

[Ocean1]

Who the fuck ever suggested vaccines were designed as a cure?

Well they've sure as fuck cured smallpox.

And without fuckwits like you spouting unsubstantiated drivel they'll cure more.

[TheDemonLord]

What's equally hilarious* is that you don't appear to give a fuck about innocent children dying in the Middle East - but just let one child die from Measles and your world seemingly falls apart.

What was that you were saying about maintaining a narrative?

*(What's even funnier is that you seem completely oblivious to the extreme ironing).

There's a difference between a child dying due to their parents being duped by fuckwits like yourself and a child being killed in an attempt to stop a genocidal dictator.

But then, you'll respond with the usual drivel about the Jews, Israel and according to plan.

Something Something Maintaining a narrative to a T.

[TheDemonLord]

Do try to think.

He'd be dangerous if he did that....

[FJRider]

Who the fuck ever suggested vaccines were designed as a cure?

I certainly didn't ... but isolation wards helped stop the spread of the disease.

And with the introduction of the vaccine ... reduced the number of outbreaks in far greater numbers than the isolation wards could. So should be given more credit for preventing more deaths.

Prevention is better than cure ... apparently.

[FJRider]

He'd be dangerous if he did that....

But would mean he had a brain (that functions) ...

[Katman]

I certainly didn't ... but isolation wards helped stop the spread of the disease.

And isolation still works as a very effective means of containing a disease.

[RDJ]

There's a difference between a child dying due to their parents being duped by fuckwits like yourself and a child being killed in an attempt to stop a genocidal dictator.

Perfectly stated.

[Katman]

There's a difference between a child dying due to their parents being duped by fuckwits like yourself and a child being killed in an attempt to stop a genocidal dictator.

Yeah, one dies through a personal choice of their parents and the other dies due to a repugnant foreign policy agenda.

[TheDemonLord]

Yeah, one dies through a personal choice of their parents and the other dies due to a repugnant foreign policy agenda.

What is more repugnant?

Standing by and doing nothing, allowing over a hundred thousand to die?
Or attampting to do something, causing thousands to die?

Of course - your response will be your usual line about Israel, Jews etc. etc.

[Katman]

What is more repugnant?

Standing by and doing nothing, allowing over a hundred thousand to die?
Or attampting to do something, causing thousands to die?

Of course - your response will be your usual line about Israel, Jews etc. etc.

If America's foreign policy (read, doing Israel's bidding) was really anything other than a repugnant agenda driven process, we might have seen some intervention in Rwanda, don't you think?

[Katman]

And don't get me wrong, I couldn't give a fuck whether people choose to get themselves vaccinated.

I don't even give a fuck if they choose to vaccinate their children. After all, that is their right as a parent.

But anyone calling for mandatory vaccination can fuck right off with their Nazi eugenics program.

[TheDemonLord]

If America's foreign policy (read, doing Israel's bidding) was really anything other than a repugnant agenda driven process, we might have seen some intervention in Rwanda, don't you think?


Of course - your response will be your usual line about Israel, Jews etc. etc.

Called it.

But to answer your question - yes, we should drive into Rwanda, drag the dictators out to the street and execute them like the dogs they are.

However, It's risk to effort and Risk to reward.

And think about this - everytime you and your ilk berate America for interfering in the Middle East - do you think that increases or decreases the likelyhood that they will go to interfere in places like Rwanda?

I can see it now, the first shot on CNN of a mud hut getting vaporized by Hellfire missle, fired from 2 Km away by an Apache, replete with Civillian casualties and dead children - you would be just as up in arms as you are now.

[Katman]

However, It's risk to effort and Risk to reward.

Yeah, Rwanda never offered any reward.

[TheDemonLord]

I don't even give a fuck if they choose to vaccinate their children. After all, that is their right as a parent.

But anyone calling for mandatory vaccination can fuck right off with their Nazi eugenics program.

Love the false equivalence there.

But I have to ask - IS it your right as a parent?

It's illegal to withhold Medical care to a child (with some states in the US having an exception on Religious grounds).
There have been several cases where parents who subscribe to loopy dietry fads have been prosecuted where their child has either died or suffered from serious malnutrition, based on their parents attempts to feed them a Vegan diet (for example)

The question then boils down 2fold:

1: Do you agree with both of those legal precedents as being just and valid?
2: Does the opting out of a Vaccine constitute withholding Medical Care (it isn't currently, but it could be argued that it is)

[TheDemonLord]

Yeah, Rwanda never offered any reward.

And thus, we get to a point of agreement.

There is plenty of risk: Dead servicemen and women, Downturn in popular opinion, Global accusations of 'world police', the cost of military equipment and ordinance etc. etc.

And for what? People like you aren't going to be grateful that they intervened. So why would they?

This is the bed that you made.

[Katman]

But I have to ask - IS it your right as a parent?

Are you asking if it's your right as a parent to vaccinate your child?

Perhaps you should learn to read.

[TheDemonLord]

Are you asking if it's your right as a parent to vaccinate your child?

Perhaps you should learn to read.

I guess the concept of a hypothetical question eludes you.

Me personally (as a parent mind you) - I have no right to endanger other peoples children.

I've accepted that there are a few very rare instances where either a pre-existing medical condition or allergy makes vaccination for a specific child unfeasible. As such, the only people that should be allowed to opt-out of being vaccinated are those that do so on valid medical grounds, certified by a qualified Doctor. Everyone else...

[Katman]

I guess the concept of a hypothetical question eludes you.

Bullshit it was a hypothetical question.

The post below was directly addressing my post that you quoted.


But I have to ask - IS it your right as a parent?

You just mis-read the post the way you wanted to read it.

[Katman]

As such, the only people that should be allowed to opt-out of being vaccinated are those that do so on valid medical grounds, certified by a qualified Doctor. Everyone else...

Fuck off you Nazi.

[RDJ]

If America's foreign policy (read, doing Israel's bidding) was really anything other than a repugnant agenda driven process, we might have seen some intervention in Rwanda, don't you think?

FFS here you go again.

"Israel's bidding?"

What about the Americans spilling their blood and spending their treasure to intervene after the Bosnian Muslims were massacred? Was Israel asleep that day and the Joos hadn't sent orders to the White House to stand down? (That was sarcasm in case you hadn't noticed). After all the s**t the US cops for intervening from lackbrain spatterwits like you is it any wonder they do not intervene everywhere?

And do you remember what happened when the US intervened in a previous African atrocity committed by one group of tribes against the other? Yes, in 1993 - just one year before the Rwandan genocide in 1994 - the US tried to help starving Somalians and ended up watching their dead soldiers being dragged through the streets. Black Hawk Down ring a bell in that vacuum skull of yours? So maybe, just maybe, the US figured out that when it tries to help two or more tribes then pretty soon after it puts boots on the ground the tribes turn on the helpers.

BTW, where were the OAU and the UN in Rwanda? Oh that's right, 5 years after the massacre the OUA released in 1999 a report that said it was preventable. But at the time they did sod-all to prevent it. The UN did a little more but after losing 10 Belgian soldiers in another butchery of people trying to help, they stopped.

And maybe you want to try and pass this thought between the two neurones in your cranium; the US like the rest of the world has made a lot of foreign policy mistakes. But one damn good way of noting where is a good place to live and where is not is to see how many people try to ENTER your country - even illegally - rather then LEAVE it. For being the Great Satan and attracting the opprobrium of bien-pensant virtue-signallers like yourself, it sure is funny how people still wanna go there and not, say, the DRC or Riyadh...

[Katman]

What about the Americans spilling their blood and spending their treasure to intervene after the Bosnian Muslims were massacred?

If you actually think they were there out of nothing but the goodness of their hearts, you're a dumber fuck than I ever imagined.

[RDJ]

There are a few very rare instances where either a pre-existing medical condition or allergy makes vaccination for a specific child unfeasible. As such, the only people that should be allowed to opt-out of being vaccinated are those that do so on valid medical grounds, certified by a qualified Doctor. Everyone else...

Yes, this.

There is a small percentage of people both adults and children who should not be vaccinated especially with live vaccines, either ever or for a specific time duration.

There is also a small percentage of people both adults and children who with good immune systems, in good health, and not undergoing any other treatment, do not "seroconvert" and develop measurable antibodies after effective vaccination. (In clinical practice however most people who have been properly vaccinated even if you can't measure their antibody response, turn out to have protection in vivo. But I digress).

If we vaccinate everybody else then the resulting herd immunity will protect the people in the first group. We have seen this over decades.

If we don't vaccinate enough of everybody else that we can, we see the stupidities and morbidities and mortality that are unnecessarily occurring in for example Somali Minnesota and metro upper-middle-class California.

[Katman]

If we don't vaccinate enough of everybody else can we see the stupidities and morbidities and mortality that are unnecessarily occurring in for example Somali Minnesota and metro upper-middle-class California.

What mortalities, Chicken Little?

See this is half the problem - when there's no deaths you invent deaths to try bolstering your argument.

[FJRider]

And isolation still works as a very effective means of containing a disease.

Prevention is STILL most effective means to stop the spread of an infectious disease ... even more than isolation.


Always was ... and always will be.

[FJRider]

... Me personally (as a parent mind you) - I have no right to endanger other peoples children.

But do you have the right to "endanger" your own children ... ??? In the past ... plenty of parents have let their child die (by not accepting treatment for their child) ... because it was Gods will if they lived or died.

[QUOTE=TheDemonLord;1131046773]... As such, the only people that should be allowed to opt-out of being vaccinated are those that do so on valid medical grounds, certified by a qualified Doctor. Everyone else...

Is the freedom to choose ... is just as valid as the freedom of speech. Regardless of how stupid their choice is ... ???

[TheDemonLord]

Bullshit it was a hypothetical question.

The post below was directly addressing my post that you quoted.


You just mis-read the post the way you wanted to read it.

Of course Katman.
You are right Katman.
You can read minds Katman.

(that is sarcasm btw, since you don't seem to understand written conventions)

[TheDemonLord]

Is the freedom to choose ... is just as valid as the freedom of speech. Regardless of how stupid their choice is ... ???

To use the allusion to Freedom of Speech - the classic limitation is that yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre (where there is no Fire) is NOT protected as free speech, as it is known and designed to cause harm and suffering to others.

So to, do I draw a limitation on Freedom of Choice - you are not free to do things that harm and cause suffering to others.

In that line of reasoning - The freedom of choose IS just as valid as the freedom of speech, with the same reasonable restrictions.

And it is my position that choosing not to vaccinate (with the exception being as I intimated before) eventually causes harm and suffering to others.

[Katman]

Of course Katman.
You are right Katman.
You can read minds Katman.

Of course I'm right.

Claiming it was a hypothetical question is simply you trying to cover up the fact that you misread my post.

Anyone with a basic grasp of English can figure that out.

[FJRider]

To use the allusion to Freedom of Speech - the classic limitation is that yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre (where there is no Fire) is NOT protected as free speech, as it is known and designed to cause harm and suffering to others.

Even an idiot knows doing such like ... has nothing to do with "Freedom of speech". Are you so desperate to prove a point .. ???


So to, do I draw a limitation on Freedom of Choice - you are not free to do things that harm and cause suffering to others.

I'm NOT talking about others ... I'm talking about your own kids.


In that line of reasoning - The freedom of choose IS just as valid as the freedom of speech, with the same reasonable restrictions.

The freedom of choice as a parent ... exists. You need a court order to change that parents choice ... if it is considered wrong. Not just because of some others opinion that it is wrong.


And it is my position that choosing not to vaccinate (with the exception being as I intimated before) eventually causes harm and suffering to others.

Stupidity of parents has shown plenty of wrong decisions made with good (but flawed) intent.

[Katman]

And it is my position that choosing not to vaccinate (with the exception being as I intimated before) eventually causes harm and suffering to others.

And there's yet another example of your supreme stupidity.

What about all the unvaccinated people who have never caused harm and suffering to anyone else?

[Kickaha]

But anyone calling for mandatory vaccination can fuck right off with their Nazi eugenics program.

Why single out the Nazis, they were well behind the English and Americans and several other countries with eugenics

Several countries pretty much still practice it albeit in a limited way it with aborting downs syndrome babies

[oldrider]

Several countries pretty much still practice it albeit in a limited way it with aborting downs syndrome babies

By all accounts that is an established option right here in God's own! :shifty: Source: 2 Individuals (that we know of) who had that option offered!

One took it the other did not - nothing wrong with the child once delivered - very unsettling for the other prospective mother! :confused:

[TheDemonLord]

And there's yet another example of your supreme stupidity.

What about all the unvaccinated people who have never caused harm and suffering to anyone else?

They tend to get together and suddenly we have Measles outbreaks.

It may not be a conscious harm, it may not be intentional - but we have repeated instances where a group or society has a decrease in vaccination rates, then once that un-vaccinated generation suddenly intermingle with their peers (like going to school) - we see outbreaks.

[Katman]

They tend to get together and suddenly we have Measles outbreaks.

It may not be a conscious harm, it may not be intentional - but we have repeated instances where a group or society has a decrease in vaccination rates, then once that un-vaccinated generation suddenly intermingle with their peers (like going to school) - we see outbreaks.

Are you trying to suggest that every single un-vaccinated person has been (or will be) responsible for a measles outbreak?

[TheDemonLord]

Even an idiot knows doing such like ... has nothing to do with "Freedom of speech". Are you so desperate to prove a point .. ???

You raised the idea of Freedom of Speech, my point was that even that ideal has some reasonable and practical limitations.


I'm NOT talking about others ... I'm talking about your own kids.

Who are still others... The point being there are restrictions on what you can do


The freedom of choice as a parent ... exists. You need a court order to change that parents choice ... if it is considered wrong. Not just because of some others opinion that it is wrong.

Hold your horses there bud. You prove my point - the freedom of choice of a Parent is NOT absolute. There are certain reasonable limitations on you as a parent that a higher power (the tyranny of the state) can enforce upon you.

Thus, there is not absolute freedom of choice as a parent - there is a limit.

My question then is whether or not the enforcement of Vaccinations should fall within that Limit. As stated, it is my position that it should.


Stupidity of parents has shown plenty of wrong decisions made with good (but flawed) intent.

There is Stupidity, there is negligence and there is wilful negligence.

I'm not too concerned with the former, it's the latter 2 that I'm more concerned with.

[TheDemonLord]

Are you trying to suggest that every single un-vaccinated person has been (or will be) responsible for a measles outbreak?

No, I'm saying if you have enough of them, then they collectively become responsible:

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Herd-Immunity-Take-2.png

[Katman]

My question then is whether or not the enforcement of Vaccinations should fall within that Limit. As stated, it is my position that it should.

Refer post #3217.

[nzspokes]

What about all the unvaccinated people who have never caused harm and suffering to anyone else?

Thats because they are dead.

[FJRider]

You raised the idea of Freedom of Speech, my point was that even that ideal has some reasonable and practical limitations.

True ... with freedom of speech ... you are not allowed to offend anybody's sensibilities ... but they can offend yours. Apparently.


Who are still others... The point being there are restrictions on what you can do

True. but what you can't do is too often found out in a Court of Law. When it's you in the dock.


Hold your horses there bud. You prove my point - the freedom of choice of a Parent is NOT absolute. There are certain reasonable limitations on you as a parent that a higher power (the tyranny of the state) can enforce upon you.

Thus, there is not absolute freedom of choice as a parent - there is a limit.

As the years pass in the new PC world ... the limit is getting much lower.


My question then is whether or not the enforcement of Vaccinations should fall within that Limit. As stated, it is my position that it should.

Not your position. it is your opinion. There is a difference.




There is Stupidity, there is negligence and there is wilful negligence.

I'm not too concerned with the former, it's the latter 2 that I'm more concerned with.


It' ALL stupidity ... just different levels of stupidity.

[RDJ]

No, I'm saying if you have enough of them, then they collectively become responsible:

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Herd-Immunity-Take-2.png

That's exactly it. Great pic BTW.

[Katman]

That's exactly it. Great pic BTW.

So what exactly is it that you're blubbering about?

Are you worried that unvaccinated people will pass on an illness to vaccinated people? (In which case, what is the point of being vaccinated?)

Or are you worried that unvaccinated people will pass on an illness to unvaccinated people? (In which case, it was still their choice to be unvaccinated anyway.)

[Katman]

Herd immunity.

Herd Immunity is a term that is bandied around in defense of mass and mandatory vaccination. What is it and why is it important?

Let’s set out a working definition of what Herd Immunity is at a functional level in the population: Herd Immunity is the presence of adequate immunity within a population against a specific infection that operates to protect those at high risk of serious infection and consequently, reduce morbidity and mortality from that infection.

Now let’s separate out Herd Immunity, comparing what it meant in the pre-vaccine era compared with what it means in the vaccine era, using specific infections as examples.

Measles: Herd Immunity in the pre-vaccine era

When measles first enters a population that has not been exposed to measles before, Herd Immunity is zero and there is, initially, a very high morbidity (illness) and mortality.
This occurs in large part as a consequence of high dose exposure.
High dose exposure occurs because, in the absence of viral immunity, viral replication is unimpeded in the multiple susceptible human reservoirs in which it thrives. High doses of measles virus are transmitted from one person to the next. Added to this, socioeconomic circumstances contribute to high dose exposure. This includes high population density (easy transmission) and poor antiviral defenses (e.g. low vitamins A, D, and C). An example is the ravage of measles in Confederate soldiers amassed in barracks and hospitals in the American Civil War.
Over time, as measles becomes endemic (constantly circulating) in a population with typical 2-yearly epidemics, Herd Immunity increases rapidly. Natural exposure leads to long term immunity. Immunity limits viral transmission and opportunities for viral replication. Concomitantly, developed countries have experienced an improvement in nutritional status and consequently antiviral immunity. Dose of exposure falls and a dramatic reduction in morbidity and mortality is observed.
As a consequence of natural Herd Immunity, in the developed world measles mortality had fallen by 99.6% before measles vaccines were introduced. A fall in morbidity will have paralleled the fall in mortality (mortality is the extreme of morbidity).
Let us look at an example of how natural Herd Immunity operated to provide age-appropriate immunity.

Infants less than one year of age have a limited ability to generate adequate immunity and are susceptible to serious measles infection.
In the pre-vaccine era mothers conferred good passive immunity on their infants by transplacental and breast milk transfer.
This passive immunity protected infants through a period of vulnerability until they were better able to cope with measles through the generation of their own active immunity.
The vaccine era

Measles vaccine has destroyed natural Herd Immunity and replaced it with a temporary and inadequate quasi Herd Immunity that necessitates a dependence on vaccination along with an increased risk of severe adverse outcomes. Here are some examples of how natural Herd Immunity has been destroyed.

The increasing Herd Immunity associated with natural measles and the accompanying decrease in morbidity and mortality, has been interrupted by vaccination. This makes it difficult to predict how vaccinated populations might respond to, say, a new strain of measles virus that has escaped the ‘protection’ conferred by measles vaccine (escape mutant). Because that population is not immune to the escape mutant we risk high morbidity and mortality from measles once again.
Vaccinated mothers do not confer adequate passive immunity upon their infants (< 1 year of age). Infants are unable to generate an adequate immune response to measles vaccine and in the absence of passive maternal immunity, are unprotected during the first year, putting them at risk of serious measles infection.
Unlike natural measles, measles vaccine does not provide lasting immunity and a substantial proportion of measles cases are reported in those who have been vaccinated against measles.
Boosting of immunity using repeated doses of measles vaccine is not sustained and falls off rapidly. The only answer to this diminishing return that is offered by the regulators and manufacturers is to give more and more vaccines. The vaccine is highly profitable in terms of volume of sales, precisely because it is inadequately effective.
Mumps and Herd Immunity

Mumps is acknowledged to be a trivial disease in children; many do not even know they have had mumps the symptoms are so mild. Mumps is not a trivial disease in post-pubertal males where it can cause testicular inflammation and sterility.

Mumps vaccine does not work. Protection is way below the 96% claimed by Merck and mumps epidemics are occurring worldwide in highly vaccinated populations. Merck is accused of fraudulently misrepresenting the efficacy of their mumps vaccine in order to protect their US monopoly on the MMR vaccine. I would suggest that everyone who has suffered mumps and particularly its complications despite mumps vaccination, has a valid legal claim against Merck.

Mumps vaccine failure is associated with inadequate immunity following vaccination (primary failure) and rapidly waning immunity after vaccination (secondary failure). These factors mean that populations are at greater risk as they grow older. Since severe side effects are more common in mature males, mumps vaccine has made mumps a more dangerous disease.

Natural Herd Immunity, that is, lifelong immunity following exposure of children to mumps in the pre-vaccine era, has been destroyed by mumps vaccination.

Chickenpox and Herd Immunity

The chickenpox virus (varicella zoster) causes a mild self-limiting disease in healthy children. The virus frequently establishes latent infection in the cell bodies of sensory nerve roots where it has the potential to episodically reactivate and cause shingles, a very painful and debilitating condition. Shingles can cause blindness. Historically, shingles was an uncommon disease occurring in, for example, people with immune deficiency due to cancer or immunosuppressive drug therapy.

Reactivation of zoster is inhibited by an adequate level of immunity to this virus which, in turn, is maintained by boosting of immunity in parents and grandparents by re-exposure via children with chickenpox. Natural epidemics of chickenpox maintained Herd Immunity by ‘wild-type boosting’ (referring to the natural virus) of adults which prevented shingles in otherwise healthy individuals. This is no longer the case.

Widespread chickenpox vaccination has removed natural Herd Immunity by preventing epidemics, eliminating ‘wild-type’ boosting, and allowing immunity to fall in individuals to the point where shingles is now much more common, occurring in young, apparently healthy people. Vaccination has created a new epidemic to which Merck’s response is, ‘we’ve created a market; now let’s make a vaccine to prevent shingles.’

[Katman]

http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2012/02/18/the-deadly-impossibility-of-herd-immunity-through-vaccination-by-dr-russell-blaylock/

[TheDemonLord]

Herd immunity.

Herd Immunity is a term that is bandied around in defense of mass and mandatory vaccination. What is it and why is it important?

Let’s set out a working definition of what Herd Immunity is at a functional level in the population: Herd Immunity is the presence of adequate immunity within a population against a specific infection that operates to protect those at high risk of serious infection and consequently, reduce morbidity and mortality from that infection.

Now let’s separate out Herd Immunity, comparing what it meant in the pre-vaccine era compared with what it means in the vaccine era, using specific infections as examples.

Measles: Herd Immunity in the pre-vaccine era

When measles first enters a population that has not been exposed to measles before, Herd Immunity is zero and there is, initially, a very high morbidity (illness) and mortality.
This occurs in large part as a consequence of high dose exposure.
High dose exposure occurs because, in the absence of viral immunity, viral replication is unimpeded in the multiple susceptible human reservoirs in which it thrives. High doses of measles virus are transmitted from one person to the next. Added to this, socioeconomic circumstances contribute to high dose exposure. This includes high population density (easy transmission) and poor antiviral defenses (e.g. low vitamins A, D, and C). An example is the ravage of measles in Confederate soldiers amassed in barracks and hospitals in the American Civil War.
Over time, as measles becomes endemic (constantly circulating) in a population with typical 2-yearly epidemics, Herd Immunity increases rapidly. Natural exposure leads to long term immunity. Immunity limits viral transmission and opportunities for viral replication. Concomitantly, developed countries have experienced an improvement in nutritional status and consequently antiviral immunity. Dose of exposure falls and a dramatic reduction in morbidity and mortality is observed.
As a consequence of natural Herd Immunity, in the developed world measles mortality had fallen by 99.6% before measles vaccines were introduced. A fall in morbidity will have paralleled the fall in mortality (mortality is the extreme of morbidity).
Let us look at an example of how natural Herd Immunity operated to provide age-appropriate immunity.

Infants less than one year of age have a limited ability to generate adequate immunity and are susceptible to serious measles infection.
In the pre-vaccine era mothers conferred good passive immunity on their infants by transplacental and breast milk transfer.
This passive immunity protected infants through a period of vulnerability until they were better able to cope with measles through the generation of their own active immunity.
The vaccine era

Measles vaccine has destroyed natural Herd Immunity and replaced it with a temporary and inadequate quasi Herd Immunity that necessitates a dependence on vaccination along with an increased risk of severe adverse outcomes. Here are some examples of how natural Herd Immunity has been destroyed.

The increasing Herd Immunity associated with natural measles and the accompanying decrease in morbidity and mortality, has been interrupted by vaccination. This makes it difficult to predict how vaccinated populations might respond to, say, a new strain of measles virus that has escaped the ‘protection’ conferred by measles vaccine (escape mutant). Because that population is not immune to the escape mutant we risk high morbidity and mortality from measles once again.
Vaccinated mothers do not confer adequate passive immunity upon their infants (< 1 year of age). Infants are unable to generate an adequate immune response to measles vaccine and in the absence of passive maternal immunity, are unprotected during the first year, putting them at risk of serious measles infection.
Unlike natural measles, measles vaccine does not provide lasting immunity and a substantial proportion of measles cases are reported in those who have been vaccinated against measles.
Boosting of immunity using repeated doses of measles vaccine is not sustained and falls off rapidly. The only answer to this diminishing return that is offered by the regulators and manufacturers is to give more and more vaccines. The vaccine is highly profitable in terms of volume of sales, precisely because it is inadequately effective.
Mumps and Herd Immunity

Mumps is acknowledged to be a trivial disease in children; many do not even know they have had mumps the symptoms are so mild. Mumps is not a trivial disease in post-pubertal males where it can cause testicular inflammation and sterility.

Mumps vaccine does not work. Protection is way below the 96% claimed by Merck and mumps epidemics are occurring worldwide in highly vaccinated populations. Merck is accused of fraudulently misrepresenting the efficacy of their mumps vaccine in order to protect their US monopoly on the MMR vaccine. I would suggest that everyone who has suffered mumps and particularly its complications despite mumps vaccination, has a valid legal claim against Merck.

Mumps vaccine failure is associated with inadequate immunity following vaccination (primary failure) and rapidly waning immunity after vaccination (secondary failure). These factors mean that populations are at greater risk as they grow older. Since severe side effects are more common in mature males, mumps vaccine has made mumps a more dangerous disease.

Natural Herd Immunity, that is, lifelong immunity following exposure of children to mumps in the pre-vaccine era, has been destroyed by mumps vaccination.

Chickenpox and Herd Immunity

The chickenpox virus (varicella zoster) causes a mild self-limiting disease in healthy children. The virus frequently establishes latent infection in the cell bodies of sensory nerve roots where it has the potential to episodically reactivate and cause shingles, a very painful and debilitating condition. Shingles can cause blindness. Historically, shingles was an uncommon disease occurring in, for example, people with immune deficiency due to cancer or immunosuppressive drug therapy.

Reactivation of zoster is inhibited by an adequate level of immunity to this virus which, in turn, is maintained by boosting of immunity in parents and grandparents by re-exposure via children with chickenpox. Natural epidemics of chickenpox maintained Herd Immunity by ‘wild-type boosting’ (referring to the natural virus) of adults which prevented shingles in otherwise healthy individuals. This is no longer the case.

Widespread chickenpox vaccination has removed natural Herd Immunity by preventing epidemics, eliminating ‘wild-type’ boosting, and allowing immunity to fall in individuals to the point where shingles is now much more common, occurring in young, apparently healthy people. Vaccination has created a new epidemic to which Merck’s response is, ‘we’ve created a market; now let’s make a vaccine to prevent shingles.’

If all that is true - how do you explain that the UK had 0 Measles deaths for something like 15 years whilst the Vaccination rate was above 90%, with the first measles death occuring a few years after Andrew Fuckfields bogus article (and the drop in Vaccination rates)

If all that is true - how do you explain that smallpox isn't an issue?

If all that is true - how do you explain what happened in Japan?

Again - we've got multiple, real world examples that show the above to be conspiratorial flights of fancy...

and to answer your question about unvaccinated people infecting vaccinated people:

The Viruses are present everyday, all around us in very low concentrations - such that a person who is vaccinated (but with a weak immune system) can fight it off without developing an infection.
However, expose that same person to someone with a full blown measles infection (a high concentration) and they may not be able to fight it off - they develop the infection.

[mada]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/92918260/doctor-leaps-on-stage-at-antivaccination-movie-and-blasts-those-gathered

Spot on Dr Sullivan.

[nzspokes]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/92918260/doctor-leaps-on-stage-at-antivaccination-movie-and-blasts-those-gathered

Spot on Dr Sullivan.

That was some funny shit. And why are those retards paying to see a movie thats free on You Tube?

[mashman]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/92918260/doctor-leaps-on-stage-at-antivaccination-movie-and-blasts-those-gathered

Spot on Dr Sullivan.

:killingme@anti-vaccination movie. It isn't.

[Katman]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/92918260/doctor-leaps-on-stage-at-antivaccination-movie-and-blasts-those-gathered

Spot on Dr Sullivan.

If he'd watched the movie before throwing his little tantrum his opinion might warrant some degree of respect.

Instead he choose to preach from a position of ignorance.

He reminded me of bogan.

[husaberg]

If he'd watched the movie before throwing his little tantrum his opinion might warrant some degree of respect.

Instead he choose to preach from a position of ignorance.

He reminded me of bogan.

Of course you would think you would be a better judge of the pros and cons/merits of vaccination than a mere Doctor would be.:clap:
Outine for us all again your extensive medical training and university degrees

[Katman]

Of course you think you would be a better judge of the pros and cons/merits of vaccination than a mere Doctor would be.:clap:

Since he didn't watch it, he clearly hasn't the slightest idea as to the merits of the movie.

[husaberg]

Since he didn't watch it, he clearly hasn't the slightest idea as to the merits of the movie.

As he is an extensively trained medical professional, i am pretty sure he is able to judge the facts of the merits of vaccination without watching a conspiracy theory movie
But you don't have that same ability now do you. Which is why you yet again gullibly and naively jump on the conspiracy band waggon.

So outine for us all again your extensive medical training and university degrees that allows you to be a better judge of the effectiveness and risks of vaccinations. than a doctor is?

[Katman]

As he is an extensively trained medical professional, i am pretty sure he is able to judge the facts of the merits of vaccination without watching a conspiracy theory movie


At the risk of repeating myself, he clearly doesn't have a clue what information is contained in the movie.

[nzspokes]

If he'd watched the movie before throwing his little tantrum his opinion might warrant some degree of respect.

Instead he choose to preach from a position of ignorance.

He reminded me of bogan.

Its been on Youtube for a year or so. Are they charging people to watch it? Do you know he hasn't watched it on Youtube?