Thinking of getting vaccinated? [Archive] - Page 15

eldog

17th June 2017, 12:16

I am open to be corrected, but i am pretty sure it was to keep the brims in shape.

Well I was always told it was to keep the hats shiny. Seemed to make sense, they always looked shiny and silvery.
then since your reply

I googled it out of interest

OMG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism
or
"this was common among old England felt-hatmakers who used mercury (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_(element)) to stabilize the wool in a process called felting, where hair was cut from a pelt of an animal such as a rabbit. The industrial workers were exposed to the mercury vapors, giving rise to the expression “mad as a hatter.”[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-1) Some believe that the character the Mad Hatter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mad_Hatter) in Lewis Carroll (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Carroll)'s Alice in Wonderland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_in_Wonderland) is an example of someone suffering from erethism, but the origin of this account is unclear. The character was almost certainly based on Theophilus Carter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_Carter), an eccentric furniture dealer who was well known to Carroll.[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-2)"

and
Especially in the 19th century, inorganic mercury (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_poisoning#Inorganic_mercury_compounds) in the form of mercuric nitrate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercuric_nitrate) was commonly used in the production of felt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felt) for hats.[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-Columbia_Encyclopedia-17) During a process called carroting, in which furs from small animals such as rabbits, hares or beavers were separated from their skins and matted together, an orange-colored solution containing mercuric nitrate was used as a smoothing agent. The resulting felt was then repeatedly shaped into large cones, shrunk in boiling water and dried.[13] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-Waldron1983-13) In treated felts, a slow reaction released volatile free mercury.[18] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-Neal1937-18) Hatters (or milliners (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliner)) who came into contact with vapours from the impregnated felt often worked in confined areas

quoted ex google

google interestingly also has this

There is a risk of mercury poisoning in the home in some cases. Exposure to mercury vapor may stem from cultural and religious reasons where mercury is sprinkled on the floor of a home or car, burned in a candle, or mixed with perfume. Due to widespread use and popular concern, the risk of toxicity from dental amalgam has been exhaustively investigated. Many studies have not revealed convincing evidence of toxicity .[7] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-7)[8] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-8) However, in 2015 research showed that an increased mercury release from dental amalgam restorations after exposure to electromagnetic fields is a potential hazard for hypersensitive people and pregnant women.[9] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-9)

But according to some people, you cant believe everything you read on the internet.
then again you can, some of it.

like life, there are always trade offs, extremes, compromises.

some people can smoke heavily and drink to excess all their life - no worries
others it affects much more.

seen the effects of terminal lung cancer at the very end - not a nice way to go.
felt both very sorry for and privileged to have know (and been able to share) part of the patients life.

husaberg

17th June 2017, 13:18

Well I was always told it was to keep the hats shiny. Seemed to make sense, they always looked shiny and silvery.
then since your reply

I googled it out of interest

OMG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism
or
"this was common among old England felt-hatmakers who used mercury (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_(element)) to stabilize the wool in a process called felting, where hair was cut from a pelt of an animal such as a rabbit. The industrial workers were exposed to the mercury vapors, giving rise to the expression “mad as a hatter.”[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-1) Some believe that the character the Mad Hatter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mad_Hatter) in Lewis Carroll (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Carroll)'s Alice in Wonderland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_in_Wonderland) is an example of someone suffering from erethism, but the origin of this account is unclear. The character was almost certainly based on Theophilus Carter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_Carter), an eccentric furniture dealer who was well known to Carroll.[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-2)"

and
Especially in the 19th century, inorganic mercury (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_poisoning#Inorganic_mercury_compounds) in the form of mercuric nitrate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercuric_nitrate) was commonly used in the production of felt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felt) for hats.[17] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-Columbia_Encyclopedia-17) During a process called carroting, in which furs from small animals such as rabbits, hares or beavers were separated from their skins and matted together, an orange-colored solution containing mercuric nitrate was used as a smoothing agent. The resulting felt was then repeatedly shaped into large cones, shrunk in boiling water and dried.[13] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-Waldron1983-13) In treated felts, a slow reaction released volatile free mercury.[18] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erethism#cite_note-Neal1937-18) Hatters (or milliners (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milliner)) who came into contact with vapours from the impregnated felt often worked in confined areas

quoted ex google

life.
So what does it all mean, ie what was the Hg for?
I understyand old miners also used to use there hats for processing the gold im not really sure how though, I have seen how Hg is attracted to fine gold and how it is burnt off, its nasty nasty stuff.
But far far diffeernt scale than the tiny ammounts used in vaccinations.

Katman

17th June 2017, 15:39

But far far diffeernt scale than the tiny ammounts used in vaccinations.

Used in tiny new born bodies.

Ocean1

17th June 2017, 16:11

In tiny new born bodies.

Dude, get a grip, by volume it's about half the amount of mercury contained in a 3 ounce can of tuna, and it's nowhere near as toxic.

You're not real good with this conspiracy shit, are you?

husaberg

17th June 2017, 16:16

Used in tiny new born bodies.

Yet, it has have been used For over 50 years without a single credible scientific study ever being able to proves it causes any harm.
It make me wonder why your own high levels of paranoia lead you to believe you know better.

Dude, get a grip, by volume it's about half the amount of mercury contained in a 3 ounce can of tuna, and it's nowhere near as toxic.
You're not real good with this conspiracy shit, are you?
Its rather surprising that he doesn't think having children is part of some global conspiracy to increase bank lending and sell diapers as well as inceasing big pharmas profits.:2thumbsup
The shapesfifting aliens are bound to be behind it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYfLlUlnH2c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoOxCMAc03M:weird:

Katman

17th June 2017, 16:31

Dude, get a grip, by volume it's about half the amount of mercury contained in a 3 ounce can of tuna, and it's nowhere near as toxic.

You're not real good with this conspiracy shit, are you?

How many times do I have to point out to you stupid cunts that there's a big difference between ingesting and injecting?

husaberg

17th June 2017, 16:33

How many times do I have to point out to you stupid cunts that there's a big difference between eating and ingesting?

oh do go on.............

bogan

17th June 2017, 16:34

How many times do I have to point out to you stupid cunts that there's a big difference between ingesting and injecting?

He is clearly aware of that, it'd be why he mentioned that 'it was nowhere near as toxic'; ie, injected thimersol is nowhere near as toxic as ingested methylmercury from fish. Perhaps you need be reminded that there is a big difference between the two compounds?

Ocean1

17th June 2017, 17:07

He is clearly aware of that, it'd be why he mentioned that 'it was nowhere near as toxic'; ie, injected thimersol is nowhere near as toxic as ingested methylmercury from fish. Perhaps you need be reminded that there is a big difference between the two compounds?

Seems likely all dem actual heavy metals he plays with every day have fucked his brain. :shifty:

Grumph

17th June 2017, 18:00

Seems likely all dem actual heavy metals he plays with every day have fucked his brain. :shifty:

If by heavy metals you mean harleys, you're probably right...I had a mate down here who made a good living for a while out of looking after gang bikes.
After a while the paranoia which is an integral part of the gang lifestyle rubbed off on him. It was sad, the intervention required an AOS callout as he habitually went armed. He came right in the end so there may be some hope for Katman....

Katman

23rd June 2017, 08:58

https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s11151-017-9579-7?author_access_token=xdJc7yQ9-k7QO0YmMuU1Lve4RwlQNchNByi7wbcMAY44NiQwIMAHy1pHPNI J-U5RYxXHbpf8uGKb4WhPiwWXkuNMOqqe-OTtdLKDj04p9Z1

Mike.Gayner

23rd June 2017, 09:17

Had my 12 week old boy vaccinated yesterday. Asked the doctor for the injection with extra mercury. Hopefully he doesn't catch the autisms.

RDJ

23rd June 2017, 15:28

Sadly there is no vaccine against anti-vaxxers' stupidity. Or more accurately stated, their selfishness in knowing they are protected by those who vaccinate, so they can both virtue-signal and choose irresponsibly.

bogan

23rd June 2017, 21:26

https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s11151-017-9579-7?author_access_token=xdJc7yQ9-k7QO0YmMuU1Lve4RwlQNchNByi7wbcMAY44NiQwIMAHy1pHPNI J-U5RYxXHbpf8uGKb4WhPiwWXkuNMOqqe-OTtdLKDj04p9Z1

Table 8 is worth looking into in that article. It shows the AEs (adverse affects) vs SAEs (serious adverse affects), the AEs outnumber the SAEs by a factor of 14, yet the AEs are used when comparing likelihood of catching the disease vaccinated against (which is generally of seriously adverse consequence). Giving that headline a quick google though, it's crazy just how many anit-vaccers are unable to see the big picture, republishing the abstract or quoting a comparison from the intro section as though it is meaningful science, it's utterly ridiculous, I wonder how many have even opened the full text article, let alone read it, let alone understood it.

Katman

23rd June 2017, 21:42

Table 8 is worth looking into in that article. It shows the AEs (adverse affects) vs SAEs (serious adverse affects), the AEs outnumber the SAEs by a factor of 14, yet the AEs are used when comparing likelihood of catching the disease vaccinated against (which is generally of seriously adverse consequence).

Bullshit.

Catching measles is generally a rather inconsequential issue these days - as long as it's contained.

bogan

23rd June 2017, 21:58

Bullshit.

Catching measles is generally a rather inconsequential issue these days - as long as it's contained.

You clearly haven't read what they categorised as Adverse Effects and Serious Adverse Effects, did you even make it passed the abstract?

riffer

23rd June 2017, 22:11

Measles is one of the leading causes of death among young children even though a safe and cost-effective vaccine is available.

In 2015, there were 134,200 measles deaths globally – about 367 deaths every day or 15 deaths every hour.

Measles vaccination resulted in a 79% drop in measles deaths between 2000 and 2015 worldwide.

In 2015, about 85% of the world's children received one dose of measles vaccine by their first birthday through routine health services – up from 73% in 2000.

During 2000-2015, measles vaccination prevented an estimated 20.3 million deaths making measles vaccine one of the best buys in public health.
Measles is a highly contagious, serious disease caused by a virus. In 1980, before widespread vaccination, measles caused an estimated 2.6 million deaths each year.

The disease remains one of the leading causes of death among young children globally, despite the availability of a safe and effective vaccine. Approximately 134 200 people died from measles in 2015 – mostly children under the age of 5.

Measles is caused by a virus in the paramyxovirus family and it is normally passed through direct contact and through the air. The virus infects the respiratory tract , then spreads throughout the body. Measles is a human disease and is not known to occur in animals.

Accelerated immunization activities have had a major impact on reducing measles deaths. During 2000-2015, measles vaccination prevented an estimated 20.3 million deaths. Global measles deaths have decreased by 79% from an estimated 651 600 in 2000* to 134 200 in 2015.

Ocean1

24th June 2017, 09:29

RDJ

24th June 2017, 11:33

In 2015, there were 134,200 measles deaths globally – about 367 deaths every day or 15 deaths every hour. Measles vaccination resulted in a 79% drop in measles deaths between 2000 and 2015 worldwide.

During 2000-2015, measles vaccination prevented an estimated 20.3 million deaths making measles vaccine one of the best buys in public health.

Measles is a highly contagious, serious disease caused by a virus. In 1980, before widespread vaccination, measles caused an estimated 2.6 million deaths each year.

Accelerated immunization activities have had a major impact on reducing measles deaths. During 2000-2015, measles vaccination prevented an estimated 20.3 million deaths. Global measles deaths have decreased by 79% from an estimated 651 600 in 2000* to 134 200 in 2015.

You're bringing facts into this? That won't sit well with those who mental armamentarium apparently consists of two neurones linked by a spirochaete :-)

But seriously, yes. Like Moi is doing elsewhere in a riding thread, we do need to attempt to rebut misinformation in case someone is swayed by it to a damaging or lethal outcome... Thank you.

husaberg

24th June 2017, 16:37

You clearly haven't read what they categorised as Adverse Effects and Serious Adverse Effects, did you even make it passed the abstract?

With statements like that he obviously didn't make it past finger painting in primary school.
https://conchapman.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/lizard.png
He gets all his information directly of conspiracy sites, he’s extremely gullible like that................

Katman

24th June 2017, 17:47

He gets all his information directly of conspiracy sites, he’s extremely gullible like that................

How long has the National Center for Biotechnology Information been regarded as a conspiracy site?

husaberg

24th June 2017, 18:14

How long has the National Center for Biotechnology Information been regarded as a conspiracy site?

Of course not but you do....
According to multiple posts of yours, any government agency they be trusted and are in on a conspiracy.. Unless what they say or what you think they meant somehow suits your agenda
But of course the links that you post are all from you reading conspiracy sites, they take what is in the papers and documents and take them totally out of context and misrepresent the information as somehow being proof of whatever ludicrous conspiracy you have currently fallen for.

Katman

24th June 2017, 18:19

Of course not but you do....
According to multiple posts of yours, any government agency they be trusted and are in on a conspiracy.. Unless what they say or what you think they meant somehow suits your agenda
But of course the links that you post are all from you reading conspiracy sites, they take what is in the papers and documents and take them totally out of context and misrepresent the information as somehow being proof of whatever ludicrous conspiracy you have currently fallen for.

The information on the NCBI site is just information.

People can make of it what they will.

bogan

24th June 2017, 18:35

The information on the NCBI site is just information.

People can make of it what they will.

Exactly, which is where the problem lies. People need to learn to make the truth of it, not just that which they wish it to be. Hence my suggestion that you read further into it than the title or abstract.

husaberg

24th June 2017, 18:57

Exactly, which is where the problem lies. People need to learn to make the truth of it, not just that which they wish it to be. Hence my suggestion that you read further into it than the title or abstract.

for instance the Vaxxed Movie Taupo troll was masturbating on about a few weeks ago
he never mentioned this..................
Cast
Andrew Wakefield ... As Himself
Director
Andrew Wakefield
Screenwriter
Andrew Wakefield
Producer
Andrew Wakefield

Production Company
Autism Media Channel, of which Wakefield is a director.

bogan

24th June 2017, 19:26

for instance the Vaxxed Movie Taupo troll was masturbating on about a few weeks ago
he never mentioned this..................
Cast
Andrew Wakefield ... As Himself
Director
Andrew Wakefield
Screenwriter
Andrew Wakefield
Producer
Andrew Wakefield

Production Company
Autism Media Channel, of which Wakefield is a director.

That's not even close to what I meant. Look beyond what you want to see, and beyond who is doing the presenting, to find the truth.

husaberg

24th June 2017, 19:29

That's not even close to what I meant. Look beyond what you want to see, and beyond who is doing the presenting, to find the truth.

I am pretty sure you will find no truth in the movie vaxxed.
Especially if you read the credits which were for some reason never mentioned by the people promoting it here.
Deliberate and calculated omissions of details are often more telling than the details included themselves

https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.297606308.7887/poster%2C210x230%2Cf8f8f8-pad%2C210x230%2Cf8f8f8.lite-1u2.jpg

Maybe katspam might want to share why Andrew wakefeilds involvement not conveyed by him in any of his posts about the movie.

Katman

24th June 2017, 19:40

Exactly, which is where the problem lies. People need to learn to make the truth of it, not just that which they wish it to be. Hence my suggestion that you read further into it than the title or abstract.

Dude, you're clearly convinced that you recognise 'the truth'.

But there are medical professions, university professors and research scientists who would disagree with you.

I'm not so sure you really know what 'the truth' is.

bogan

24th June 2017, 19:48

Dude, you're clearly convinced that you recognise 'the truth'.

But there are medical professions, university professors and research scientists who would disagree with you.

I'm not so sure you really know what 'the truth' is.

Just as there are medical professionals et al who would disagree with them. You really honestly 100% still don't get it do you??? The search for truth is about examining the content of somebody's argument, not simply how well their conclusion (or abstract/title as the case may be) fits with what you want to believe.

Katman

24th June 2017, 19:52

The search for truth is about examining the content of somebody's argument, not simply how well their conclusion (or abstract/title as the case may be) fits with what you want to believe.

Dude, you simply have an opposing viewpoint.

That doesn't make it 'the truth'.

bogan

24th June 2017, 19:59

Dude, you simply have an opposing viewpoint.

That doesn't make it 'the truth'.

:facepalm: It's a viewpoint made by examining the science in search of the truth, I've never my viewpoint was 100% the truth. However, since it is made by examining the science, and since it is made by someone willing to discuss the science as well; it is a far, far, far more educated viewpoint than someone who doesn't even bother to read past the abstract of a journal article. And that's about all there is to say on the matter, if you still can't figure it out, then you are lost to reason, and we can only seek to limit the thankfully already minimal damage your misguided ideas can do to wider society.

Katman

24th June 2017, 20:02

:facepalm: It's a viewpoint made by examining the science in search of the truth, I've never my viewpoint was 100% the truth. However, since it is made by examining the science, and since it is made by someone willing to discuss the science as well; it is a far, far, far more educated viewpoint than someone who doesn't even bother to read past the abstract of a journal article. And that's about all there is to say on the matter, if you still can't figure it out, then you are lost to reason, and we can only seek to limit the thankfully already minimal damage your misguided ideas can do to wider society.

Is it far, far, far more educated than the medical professionals, the university professors and the research scientists who disagree with you?

husaberg

24th June 2017, 20:24

Is it far, far, far more educated than the medical professionals, the university professors and the research scientists who disagree with you?
In case you never noticed the vast overwhelming majority of scientists and medical professional all agree vaccination is safe.

Woodman

24th June 2017, 22:08

Is it far, far, far more educated than the medical professionals, the university professors and the research scientists who disagree with you?

Do they say that we are better off without vaccination?

TheDemonLord

25th June 2017, 09:34

Is it far, far, far more educated than the medical professionals, the university professors and the research scientists who disagree with you?

What? All 20 of them?

Katman

25th June 2017, 09:38

What? All 20 of them?

Did you run out of fingers and toes?

husaberg

25th June 2017, 11:02

Did you run out of fingers and toes?

So you are only intersted in medical professionals opinions if they belong to a luntic fringe minority that agree with your own conspircy

TheDemonLord

25th June 2017, 11:45

Did you run out of fingers and toes?

Not really - I can count to 31 on one hand....
and 1023 on 2 hands....

(I wonder if you can work out how)

Also of interest is how many of those 20 or so 'researchers' either:

a: don't have a degree in epidemiology or Virology or other relevant medical field
b: Have had whatever qualifications or authority they did have revoked for their behavior
c: Have a direct, vested, financial conflict of interest with their 'research' (the kind of thing that according to Conspiracy logic 101 - if someone has something to gain from something, they are in on it and cannot be trusted)

Ocean1

25th June 2017, 11:48

Not really - I can count to 31 on one hand....
and 1023 on 2 hands....

(I wonder if you can work out how)

Also of interest is how many of those 20 or so 'researchers' either:

a: don't have a degree in epidemiology or Virology or other relevant medical field
b: Have had whatever qualifications or authority they did have revoked for their behavior
c: Have a direct, vested, financial conflict of interest with their 'research' (the kind of thing that according to Conspiracy logic 101 - if someone has something to gain from something, they are in on it and cannot be trusted)

Don't forget d: fuckwits.

Woodman

25th June 2017, 13:37

husaberg

25th June 2017, 13:44

They are probably the same sort of expert as the aviation engineers in the 9/11 thread. Most were not experts at all when you drilled down Some were air hostesses/cabin crew, and pretty sure one was the guy who said "its a plane" when superman flew overhead.
yes the old Pilots For 9/11 Truth, Most that were not even pilots but baggage handlers and sniffer dogs.
Also the same as his proported Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Most that had no quailifications at all, Almost none of them would be quailified to design a multi story building.

Katman

25th June 2017, 18:19

Ocean1

25th June 2017, 18:54

For those who are unable to read anything more than the first page abstract of the study I previously linked, the full study can be accessed via a link on this page.

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2017/06/23/does-liability-protection-lead-to-unsafe-vaccines-why-are-vaccine-manufacturers-legally-exempt-from-any-wrong-doing/

We don't have to read it, dude, we know it's shit simply because you posted it.

But let's see... http://americanloons.blogspot.co.nz/2015/11/1531-gayle-delong.html

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/tag/gayle-delong/

So, not an actual "doctor" eh? More yer lunatic accountant with a theory on autism induced breast cancer. :laugh::laugh:

Go away fuckwit.

Katman

25th June 2017, 19:27

But let's see...

Dude, I'm well aware that the internet has no shortage of cocksuckers like yourself who immediately seek to assassinate someone's character rather than examine the content of their argument.

I'm convinced you're berkboy's twin.

Ocean1

25th June 2017, 19:30

Dude, I'm well aware that the internet has no shortage of cocksuckers like yourself who immediately seek to assassinate someone's character rather than examine the content of their argument.

Give it up, fuckwit, I'm not sucking your cock, OK?

No matter how many of your fuckwit friends you link to your cretinous conspiracy theories.

bogan

25th June 2017, 21:00

Katman

25th June 2017, 21:09

Excellent work. Now that you have read past the abstract, do you wish to discuss the AEs vs SAEs misapplication I pointed out earlier?

Perhaps you'd like to explain that 'misapplication'.

Katman

25th June 2017, 21:20

Bogan.
331471

bogan

25th June 2017, 21:52

Perhaps you'd like to explain that 'misapplication'.

Never mind, I misread that bit of it, objection withdrawn. Some of the table 6 data population size seems a bit iffy though, why are deaths from a disease only counted against a population size of a certain age range?

Katman

25th June 2017, 21:55

....seems a bit iffy though......

:killingme

Refer post #3557.

bogan

25th June 2017, 22:15

:killingme

Refer post #3557.

Not quite sure you've got the gist of this education thing yet; accepting one's own errors is an integral part of the process. But look, since you've done really well by actually finding the article in question in its full text; I'll follow through on it's main point (that you neglected to even make, tbh I remain unconvinced you have read it yet) about "The risks from newer vaccines may outweigh the beneﬁts: The likelihood of reporting a serious side effect from a vaccine reaction is greater than of suffering a serious complication from the disease in the 5 years before the FDA licensed the vaccine." cos that seems pretty damning if true.

PS, I'm not an atheist, nor named adam...

Katman

25th June 2017, 22:19

.....accepting one's own errors is an integral part of the process.

I'm sure it's becoming second nature to you.

bogan

26th June 2017, 19:25

I'm sure it's becoming second nature to you.

Of course it is, for it to be otherwise is to impede learning. For example, today I learned that the VAERS database used by DeLong to make her conclusions about the statistical risk of harm from a vaccine is entirely user submitted, so there is no requirement for a medical diagnosis that the vaccine cause any adverse affect in the data used. So the data is utter garbage, as are any conclusions gained from it.

Katman

26th June 2017, 21:05

Of course it is, for it to be otherwise is to impede learning. For example, today I learned that the VAERS database used by DeLong to make her conclusions about the statistical risk of harm from a vaccine is entirely user submitted, so there is no requirement for a medical diagnosis that the vaccine cause any adverse affect in the data used. So the data is utter garbage, as are any conclusions gained from it.

If the VAERS database is 'utter garbage' why would the CDC and the FDA bother to co-sponser it?

flyingcrocodile46

26th June 2017, 21:11

No it isn't theory. It is recent history. You are lied to continually and you forget continually. Go back to sleep now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfaAtdTgBGk

bogan

26th June 2017, 21:15

If the VAERS database is 'utter garbage' why would the CDC and the FDA bother to co-sponser it?

Doesn't matter. The reason it is garbage is because there is no verification of diagnosis, that's 1461 deaths, 2768 serious complications, and 7924 hospitalizations attributed to vaccinations which have never needed to be confirmed by any sort of medical professional. So address that reason as the content rather than the source which is, as always, inconsequential by comparison.

TheDemonLord

26th June 2017, 23:16

No it isn't theory. It is recent history. You are lied to continually and you forget continually. Go back to sleep now.

Indeed - did you notice how the news clip mentioned a single Vaccine, but when the video maker re-emphasized the point, it was Vaccines.

Nice bit of bait-and-switch propaganda there....

Continually lied to Indeed....

flyingcrocodile46

27th June 2017, 17:41

Indeed - did you notice how the news clip mentioned a single Vaccine, but when the video maker re-emphasized the point, it was Vaccines.

Nice bit of bait-and-switch propaganda there....

Continually lied to Indeed....

Those with eyes wired shut will never see.
1. A confirmed worthless (but CDC and big pharma promoted) vaccine.
2. A Cold (not Influenza) vaccine that was verified as causing cancer but still promoted by the CDC and big pharma until persecuted whistle blowers and the media put an end to it.
3. A polio vaccine that was verified as causing cancer but still promoted by the CDC and big pharma until persecuted whistle blowers and the media put an end to it.

But that is really beside the point isn't it. Nothing changes because too many people are sheep, and sheep are idiots.

Yes, That's right folks. Big pharma and Govt are looking out for your interests. After all, Cancer is better for you than Polio or a cold. Right?

Not saying don't take them. Just saying beware the risks and take them if you must (but not just because people like Demonade will otherwise wee their pants in fear). I would.

bogan

27th June 2017, 19:51

Those with eyes wired shut will never see.
1. A confirmed worthless (but CDC and big pharma promoted) vaccine.
2. A Cold (not Influenza) vaccine that was verified as causing cancer but still promoted by the CDC and big pharma until persecuted whistle blowers and the media put an end to it.
3. A polio vaccine that was verified as causing cancer but still promoted by the CDC and big pharma until persecuted whistle blowers and the media put an end to it.

But that is really beside the point isn't it. Nothing changes because too many people are sheep, and sheep are idiots.

Yes, That's right folks. Big pharma and Govt are looking out for your interests. After all, Cancer is better for you than Polio or a cold. Right?

Not saying don't take them. Just saying beware the risks and take them if you must (but not just because people like Demonade will otherwise wee their pants in fear). I would.

So to summarise, big pharma fucked up a few vaccines, which were then rectified through good science and logical argument. So there is a precedent for intellect and logic making a positive difference (in the removal of vaccines, obviously their provision to begin with has made a massive positive difference on the whole), is there a precedent for illogic and hysteria making a positive difference? I mean, that is the barrow anti-vaccers like yourself are pushing, so I just have to wonder why?

TheDemonLord

27th June 2017, 19:52

Those with eyes wired shut will never see.
1. A confirmed worthless (but CDC and big pharma promoted) vaccine.
2. A Cold (not Influenza) vaccine that was verified as causing cancer but still promoted by the CDC and big pharma until persecuted whistle blowers and the media put an end to it.
3. A polio vaccine that was verified as causing cancer but still promoted by the CDC and big pharma until persecuted whistle blowers and the media put an end to it.

Is that the same Media that you are always telling us are part of the issue? The same ones that can't be trusted when they say you are wrong?

Funny how you believe them when they say something you agree with....

But that is really beside the point isn't it. Nothing changes because too many people are sheep, and sheep are idiots.

Yes, That's right folks. Big pharma and Govt are looking out for your interests. After all, Cancer is better for you than Polio or a cold. Right?

Not saying don't take them. Just saying beware the risks and take them if you must (but not just because people like Demonade will otherwise wee their pants in fear). I would.

Yeah, a Cold isn't the Flu....

And that just about rules out your opinion on anything regarding Medical Matters, but since I'm not done.

We are Aware of the risks*.

*The actual risks, not the made up risks by fraudsters and Conmen.

Katman

27th June 2017, 21:45

So to summarise, big pharma fucked up a few vaccines, which were then rectified through good science and logical argument.

Sounds like Merck's Vioxx scandal.

(Except for the good science and logical argument bit).

bogan

27th June 2017, 22:07

Sounds like Merck's Vioxx scandal.

(Except for the good science and logical argument bit).

Despite the despicable lies and fabrications from the company or personnel employed there, it was pulled due not to illogic and hysteria, but good science and logical arguments. However frustrated you may get because such tools are beyond your grasp, they do remain the only ones that work.

Katman

27th June 2017, 22:32

Despite the despicable lies and fabrications from the company or personnel employed there, it was pulled due not to illogic and hysteria, but good science and logical arguments. However frustrated you may get because such tools are beyond your grasp, they do remain the only ones that work.

Dude, you've shown time and time again that you don't have the faintest clue about anything you're flapping your gums about.

husaberg

28th June 2017, 05:45

Dude, you've shown time and time again that you don't have the faintest clue about anything you're flapping your gums about.
You should have followed that with your rigueur invitation to suck your cock
Indeed the greatest irony is your narcissism actually causes you to continue to swallow your own cock and ball stories...........:2thumbsup

bogan

28th June 2017, 07:43

Dude, you've shown time and time again that you don't have the faintest clue about anything you're flapping your gums about.

Dude, I'm well aware that the internet has no shortage of cocksuckers like yourself who immediately seek to assassinate someone's character rather than examine the content of their argument.

How interesting, please do go on :facepalm:

Doppleganger

28th June 2017, 09:33

Dude, you've shown time and time again that you don't have the faintest clue about anything you're flapping your gums about.

:killingme:killingme:killingme and he accuses someone else of this :killingme:killingme:killingme:lol:

Katman

28th June 2017, 12:07

How interesting, please do go on :facepalm:

Well you clearly know absolutely nothing about Merck's Vioxx scandal.

RDJ

28th June 2017, 14:42

Woodman

28th June 2017, 18:29

:killingme:killingme:killingme and he accuses someone else of this :killingme:killingme:killingme:lol:

This is why Katman is so entertaining.

husaberg

28th June 2017, 19:12

This is why Katman is so entertaining.
331499331500

Katman

28th June 2017, 19:22

:killingme:killingme:killingme and he accuses someone else of this :killingme:killingme:killingme:lol:

The irony. Is it burning him yet? There's ointment for that. Scientifically tested and proven to help. Oh, wait...

This is why Katman is so entertaining.

(standard berkboy shit)

<img src="http://cdn.bloody-disgusting.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/humancentipede2banner.png"/>

TheDemonLord

28th June 2017, 19:45

image

Dude, you should keep that shit private, we don't want to know what you do on the weekend.

husaberg

28th June 2017, 19:45

http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp349/i-love-nerds/kirkfit.gif

331501...............

Katman

8th July 2017, 09:28

TheDemonLord

8th July 2017, 15:15

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/295562-if-only-half-of-america-is-properly-vaccinated-where-are-the

https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/dispelling-myths-regarding-use-thimerosal-vaccines/

oh Look, more half-truths, out of context quotes and fabrications by vested interest parties with no Medical training.

It's nice to see Consistency, even if that means it's consistently crap.

Katman

8th July 2017, 15:45

oh Look, more half-truths, out of context quotes and fabrications by vested interest parties with no Medical training.

I'm intrigued to know what you think those 'vested interest parties' stand to gain from questioning vaccine safety.

'Cos I'd love to know whether they stood to gain more than the pharmaceutical industry does by preaching that vaccines are perfectly safe.

husaberg

8th July 2017, 15:47

bogan

8th July 2017, 19:49

'Cos I'd love to know whether they stood to gain more than the pharmaceutical industry does by preaching that vaccines are perfectly safe.

Why not simply love to know if vaccines are safe or not? Stop focusing on the conspiracy drivel. We've been over all the points those bloggers have made, there is nothing in them showing vaccines are unsafe. If you think there is, how about listing the specific point which shows it.

TheDemonLord

8th July 2017, 22:26

I'm intrigued to know what you think those 'vested interest parties' stand to gain from questioning vaccine safety.

'Cos I'd love to know whether they stood to gain more than the pharmaceutical industry does by preaching that vaccines are perfectly safe.

Well, if you actually looked at the sources you posted, you'd know...

Katman

8th July 2017, 22:30

Well, if you actually looked at the sources you posted, you'd know...

Yeah, I didn't expect you'd have an answer.

TheDemonLord

8th July 2017, 23:12

Yeah, I didn't expect you'd have an answer.

I've got several - but at this point, I'd just be copying and pasting things I've said previously.

The comment about consistency was very deliberate.

The fact, however that you either don't know (or are feigning ignorance) shows how much effort you don't put into reading your own sources:

"Yes. The agrees with my Conspiracy! I will post it on Kiwibiker forthwith"

Katman

9th July 2017, 09:23

I've got several - but at this point, I'd just be copying and pasting things I've said previously.

The comment about consistency was very deliberate.

The fact, however that you either don't know (or are feigning ignorance) shows how much effort you don't put into reading your own sources:

"Yes. The agrees with my Conspiracy! I will post it on Kiwibiker forthwith"

Refer my previous post.

nzspokes

9th July 2017, 11:12

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/mumps-outbreak-in-auckland-reaches-25-reported-cases

Katman

9th July 2017, 16:14

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/mumps-outbreak-in-auckland-reaches-25-reported-cases

Oh no, 25 people who now have a lifetime immunity to mumps.

The horror!

Ocean1

9th July 2017, 16:26

Oh no, 25 people who now have a lifetime immunity to mumps.

The horror!

I wonder if they're now immune to the fuckwits that told them vaccination was a bad idea...

Katman

9th July 2017, 16:48

I wonder if they're now immune to the fuckwits that told them vaccination was a bad idea...

Do you know for a fact that none of the 25 have ever been vaccinated for mumps?

Ocean1

9th July 2017, 17:43

Do you know for a fact that none of the 25 have ever been vaccinated for mumps?

Stop it, dude. Anyone that continually believes the sheer quantity of crap you do in order to maintain a completely farcical persecution complex has absolutely no business demanding justification for anyone else's perception of your perfectly obvious fuckwittedness.

Katman

9th July 2017, 18:17

Stop it, dude. Anyone that continually believes the sheer quantity of crap you do in order to maintain a completely farcical persecution complex has absolutely no business demanding justification for anyone else's perception of your perfectly obvious fuckwittedness.

I'll take that as a 'no' then.

bogan

9th July 2017, 18:46

I'll take that as a 'no' then.

Just in case you wanted an answer relevant to the question you should be asking, around 80% were not fully vaccinated.

Katman

9th July 2017, 18:52

Just in case you wanted an answer relevant to the question you should be asking, around 80% were not fully vaccinated.

I pretty much did ask the question, you stupid fuck.

So according to you, 5 of those 25 were vaccinated for mumps.

Fat lot of good the vaccination did them then.

bogan

9th July 2017, 18:58

I pretty much did ask the question, you stupid fuck.

So according to you, 5 of those 25 were vaccinated for mumps.

Fat lot of good the vaccination did them then.

You were pretty much not even close :laugh:

25? The figure is 148 cases. Instead of getting your information from all these blog sites, go for the source and you can skip these angry and misdirected questions.

Yes, clearly the vaccine is not 100% effective; does anything less than 100% somehow make it not worth getting? :scratch:

Katman

9th July 2017, 19:03

You were pretty much not even close :laugh:

25? The figure is 148 cases. Instead of getting your information from all these blog sites, go for the source and you can skip these angry and misdirected questions.

Yes, clearly the vaccine is not 100% effective; does anything less than 100% somehow make it not worth getting? :scratch:

My comments are clearly related to the link nzspokes provided.

If you've got further information, feel free to share it.

Ocean1

9th July 2017, 19:18

I'll take that as a 'no' then.

Which, as I said, is exactly how someone needing to support a completely farcical persecution complex needs to take everything: Wrong.

bogan

9th July 2017, 19:19

My comments are clearly related to the link nzspokes provided.

If you've got further information, feel free to share it.

This is one of your major problems, you make it all about the people and seek to pass the blame or pass insults. You are to blame for your own ignorance, your comments are related to the outbreak referenced; why the fuck would you only want to limit the discussion about it as it is described on some MSM blog? The article spoke's posted was clearly dated mid march this year, and the first 5 words provided the source you could go for more information (http://www.arphs.govt.nz/managing-the-mumps-outbreak).

TheDemonLord

9th July 2017, 19:26

I pretty much did ask the question, you stupid fuck.

So according to you, 5 of those 25 were vaccinated for mumps.

Fat lot of good the vaccination did them then.

Did you know that some motorcyclists died who were wearing Helmets?

Fat lot of good wearing a helmet did them.

We should 'question' the safety of motorcycle Helmets and stop encouraging people to wear them.

- Katman 'logic'

Katman

9th July 2017, 19:56

Did you know that some motorcyclists died who were wearing Helmets?

Fat lot of good wearing a helmet did them.

We should 'question' the safety of motorcycle Helmets and stop encouraging people to wear them.

- Katman 'logic'

I'd happily ride without a helmet.

Moise

9th July 2017, 20:03

You were pretty much not even close [emoji23]

25? The figure is 148 cases. Instead of getting your information from all these blog sites, go for the source and you can skip these angry and misdirected questions.

Yes, clearly the vaccine is not 100% effective; does anything less than 100% somehow make it not worth getting? :scratch:

That's one of the issues. There are a number of measures of vaccine effectiveness, and how well you are protected against the disease in the wild isn't of them. The reasons for that should be fairly obvious.

It's also worth noting that people are not generally regarded as fully vaccinated unless there is documented proof. So some of those classified as unvaccinated may have had all of the shots, but have no evidence.

People are also classified as unvaccinated if they didn't have all of the shots. That's not right, as a percentage of those will be fully vaccinated.

So when they say that 20% were vaccinated, the real number is likely to be significantly higher.

Sent from my SM-G9208 using Tapatalk

Honest Andy

9th July 2017, 20:11

I'd happily ride without a helmet.

clearly...

bogan

9th July 2017, 20:22

That's one of the issues. There are a number of measures of vaccine effectiveness, and how well you are protected against the disease in the wild isn't of them. The reasons for that should be fairly obvious.

It's also worth noting that people are not generally regarded as fully vaccinated unless there is documented proof. So some of those classified as unvaccinated may have had all of the shots, but have no evidence.

People are also classified as unvaccinated if they didn't have all of the shots. That's not right, as a percentage of those will be fully vaccinated.

So when they say that 20% were vaccinated, the real number is likely to be significantly higher.

Sent from my SM-G9208 using Tapatalk

Not quite sure how much stock you think we should be putting in such baseless conjecture? (unless you have some to supply)

Even if it were significantly higher, say 30%, do you feel that means we should not be vaccinated?

Moise

9th July 2017, 20:53

bogan

9th July 2017, 21:01

Well, if you think that's "baseless conjecture", then you're not that well informed.

Most people think vaccination is 100% effective. They might be disappointed to find there is a chance they don't have immunity if there is an outbreak.

Don't know if you saw the interview on TV with Dr Julia Peters from Auckland Public Health, but she more or less said that adults who'd had mumps as a child had full immunity but adults who'd had the vaccine as a child should consider a "booster".

I'll piss off now. I'm definitely not against vaccination, but I think we're all over the "trust us, we know what we're doing" BS.

Sent from my SM-G9208 using Tapatalk

I think it baseless conjecture because while the conjecture may be logical in some situations, there is no basis showing that it applies in this case.

Obviously I agree that they are not 100% effective, but we're clearly not over the 'trust us, we know what we're doing' BS, just look at the anti-vaccer's arguments; absolute garbage but people trust them anyway.

Katman

9th July 2017, 22:26

The article spoke's posted was clearly dated mid march this year, and the first 5 words provided the source you could go for more information (http://www.arphs.govt.nz/managing-the-mumps-outbreak).

The article you've linked doesn't exactly provide any further info though, does it?

TheDemonLord

10th July 2017, 00:46

I'd happily ride without a helmet.

Then, by all means....

nzspokes

10th July 2017, 06:30

The article you've linked doesn't exactly provide any further info though, does it?

You stupid fuck.

:baby::baby:

bogan

10th July 2017, 07:59

The article you've linked doesn't exactly provide any further info though, does it?

Than what? Clearly it provides more info than the article you were basing your info off, did you actually read it?

Katman

11th July 2017, 09:06

https://www.organicconsumers.org/essays/how-mainstream-media-insults-public%E2%80%99s-intelligence-vaccines

TheDemonLord

11th July 2017, 12:09

https://www.organicconsumers.org/essays/how-mainstream-media-insults-public%E2%80%99s-intelligence-vaccines

Oh Look.

More of the same stuff repeated.

I particularly liked her critique, citing the Association Fallacy - and then whilst trying to critique Vaccines, cites a number of drugs that have had adverse side effects - her lack of self-awareness (and Medical training/Degrees) is astounding.

Katman

11th July 2017, 12:21

....her lack of self-awareness (and Medical training/Degrees) is astounding.

I doubt your medical training/degrees are any more impressive.

At least she's not autistic.

TheDemonLord

11th July 2017, 12:54

I doubt your medical training/degrees are any more impressive.

At least she's not autistic.

Indeed - but then I'm not posting blogs, being cited by Idiots as proof of their insane Conspiracy Theories....

And again your obsession with Autism - but you should be really careful there - afterall Sir Isaac Newton is widely held to be Autistic, and so based on your comment above:

Who would you trust more:

Some random Journalist vs one of the top 3 Scientists of all time.

I dunno about you - but I'd put my money on the Autist.

Every.
Single.
Time.

Katman

11th July 2017, 13:04

....afterall Sir Isaac Newton is widely held to be Autistic....

Retrodiagnosis at it's most desperate.

:killingme

TheDemonLord

11th July 2017, 13:28

Retrodiagnosis at it's most desperate.

:killingme

There's quite a lot of contemporary accounts written of Newton that point to a very strong case for him being on the Autistic spectrum.

And that strong case is made by actual Doctors, who actually diagnose Autism.

As opposed to some clueless nutjob, with no medical training from Taupo.

Again, I know where I'd put my Money.

But seeing as you are so adamant - how about Temple Grandin?

"Grandin is a prominent and widely cited proponent for the humane treatment of livestock for slaughter"

bogan

11th July 2017, 19:51

Oh Look.

More of the same stuff repeated.

I particularly liked her critique, citing the Association Fallacy - and then whilst trying to critique Vaccines, cites a number of drugs that have had adverse side effects - her lack of self-awareness (and Medical training/Degrees) is astounding.

It's hilarious in its hypocrisy though, the only way the public would believe that unsubstantiated drivel is if they were lacking intelligence. That sort of article preys on the intellectual weaknesses of people like katman, the whole tone of 'believe what I say and you'll be grouped with the intelligent people' is fucking retarded. Intelligence results in consensus, not the other way around.

Katman

11th July 2017, 20:45

It's hilarious in its hypocrisy though, the only way the public would believe that unsubstantiated drivel is if they were lacking intelligence.

Which bits do you think are unsubstantiated?

I may be able to help point you in the direction of some substantiation.

bogan

11th July 2017, 20:49

Which bits do you think are unsubstantiated?

I may be able to help point you in the direction of some substantiation.

Which bits do you think are? It's probably a shorter list.

Katman

11th July 2017, 20:53

Which bits do you think are? It's probably a shorter list.

Did you not follow any of the links that she provided throughout the article?

bogan

11th July 2017, 20:56

Did you not follow any of the links that she provided throughout the article?

It's the same shit, just been through a different colon. So I'd ask again, which bits do you think are substantiated? You did post it after all, one should be able to assume you have read it, followed the appropriate links, and understood it; so it must be but a trivial matter to highlight the substantiated points. Or you've done none of the above and shall continue to bluster and fuck around as per normal.

Katman

11th July 2017, 21:01

Or you've done none of the above and shall continue to bluster and fuck around as per normal.

<img src="http://wickedreport.com/images/2009/10/extreme-ironing-02.jpg"/>

TheDemonLord

11th July 2017, 21:07

What's it you always say when you think you've got me painted into some form of Corner?

Ah yes:

So that's a No then....

bogan

11th July 2017, 21:19

What's it you always say when you think you've got me painted into some form of Corner?

Ah yes:

So that's a No then....

Certainly looks like it.

Still, as long as we ensure there is not even a semblance of rational discussion showing vaccines to be dangerous, it matters not if he attempts to rationalise his irrational beliefs or not.

Katman

11th July 2017, 21:36

Still, as long as we ensure there is not even a semblance of rational discussion showing vaccines to be dangerous, it matters not if he attempts to rationalise his irrational beliefs or not.

Why? Are you afraid of rational discussion?

TheDemonLord

11th July 2017, 22:27

Why? Are you afraid of rational discussion?

Not at all, you're just incapable....

bogan

12th July 2017, 07:59

Why? Are you afraid of rational discussion?

I am afraid of dangerous irrational misinformation masquerading as rational science. Luckily, and simply by attempting to engage in rational discussion, it is but a trivial matter to expose your drivel as the irrational misinformation that it is.

Katman

12th July 2017, 08:03

I am afraid of dangerous irrational misinformation masquerading as rational science.

Does it set off your anxiety disorder?

bogan

12th July 2017, 08:04

Does it set off your anxiety disorder?

No, it promotes ignorance and actions harmful to society.

Katman

12th July 2017, 08:35

No, it promotes ignorance and actions harmful to society. (https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/p/8/005/08f/02d/139764f.jpg)

You poor wee delicate thing.

TheDemonLord

12th July 2017, 15:27

You poor wee delicate thing.

But god forbid the people getting hurt are in a 3rd world country, getting terrorised by a brutal dictator (who is just misunderstood according to you).

If they are getting hurt by so much as a hint of collateral damage - you're all up in arms with riiiiiiighteous anger.

Katman

12th July 2017, 16:19

If they are getting hurt by so much as a hint of collateral damage - you're all up in arms with riiiiiiighteous anger.

Whereas you don't appear to give a fuck - even if it's completely innocent children being sacrificed in the name of collateral damage.

bogan

12th July 2017, 17:39

You poor wee delicate thing.

What do you hope to achieve with such a post like that? Are you determined to show us how bent out of shape and enraged you are getting? Just chill out, meditate on why it is you cling to irrational notions like anti-vaccerism...

TheDemonLord

12th July 2017, 17:50

Whereas you don't appear to give a fuck - even if it's completely innocent children being sacrificed in the name of collateral damage.

Except it's not in the name of Collateral damage, is it?

There's an old Phrase - made in relation to Operation Jericho in WW2 that sums up my thoughts:

"We would rather they die by British bombs than German Bullets"

Katman

12th July 2017, 18:05

There's an old Phrase - made in relation to Operation Jericho in WW2 that sums up my thoughts:

"We would rather they die by British bombs than German Bullets"

I'm sure that's a great comfort to the children unlucky enough to find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You repugnant fuck.

bogan

12th July 2017, 18:05

Except it's not in the name of Collateral damage, is it?

There's an old Phrase - made in relation to Operation Jericho in WW2 that sums up my thoughts:

"We would rather they die by British bombs than German Bullets"

That'd be a great phrase without the 'they', and spoken by the oppressed, obviously.

TheDemonLord

12th July 2017, 22:32

I'm sure that's a great comfort to the children unlucky enough to find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You repugnant fuck.

Is that more or less comfort than the Children unlucky enough to find themselves infected with deadly and preventable Viruses get?

Is it also more or less comfort than the Children who are/were regularly Tortured (deliberately), Raped (deliberately - see Bacha Bazi), Mutilated (deliberately), Orphaned (deliberately) by their own dictatorships/theocracies get?

It's funny how your moral compass only ever points in a direction that conveniently has one of your conspiracies associated with it.

Katman

12th July 2017, 22:34

Is that more or less comfort than the Children unlucky enough to find themselves infected with deadly and preventable Viruses get?

I'd rather contract measles than have a bomb dropped on my house while I slept.

TheDemonLord

12th July 2017, 22:37

That'd be a great phrase without the 'they', and spoken by the oppressed, obviously.

I'll see if I can find the actual quote - my memory is that is was said by the commander who OK'd the Raid.

I'd also point out that the principle that it is better to attempt to help (even if that results in death and suffering) than stand by and do nothing is substantiated by Good Samaritan Laws and Duty to rescue laws.

TheDemonLord

12th July 2017, 22:42

I'd rather contract measles than have a bomb dropped on my house while I slept.

And if the net result was the same:

Death or lifelong complications?

And then what if the bomb dropped on your house was in an effort to stop a local Mongrel Mob/Black Power chapter who were regularly torturing the local populace?

Would you rather that everyone turned a blind eye to the crimes of said Gang?

Katman

12th July 2017, 22:43

And if the net result was the same:

Death or lifelong complications?

And then what if the bomb dropped on your house was in an effort to stop a local Mongrel Mob/Black Power chapter who were regularly torturing the local populace?

Would you rather that everyone turned a blind eye to the crimes of said Gang?

There's that fucking autism again.

:facepalm:

TheDemonLord

12th July 2017, 22:54

There's that logical point that I'm unable to argue against again.

:facepalm:

Fixed for you.

You know that every time you resort to name-calling, you are pretty much confirming that you are incapable of actual discussion and have no counter-argument to make (and by extension are therefore conceding the point)

And on that note:

Autists 2, Conspiracy fuckwits 0.

Doppleganger

13th July 2017, 07:38

Fixed for you.

You know that every time you resort to name-calling, you are pretty much confirming that you are incapable of actual discussion and have no counter-argument to make (and by extension are therefore conceding the point)

And on that note:

Autists 2, Conspiracy fuckwits 0.

Mate! 244 pages!!! don't feed the troll, he's at home wanking his brains out over all the attention.......

Katman

13th July 2017, 14:29

You know that every time you resort to name-calling, you are pretty much confirming that you are incapable of actual discussion and have no counter-argument to make (and by extension are therefore conceding the point)

And on that note:

Autists 2, Conspiracy fuckwits 0.

Oh dear, there's that unmistakable odour of extreme ironing again.

bogan

13th July 2017, 17:40

I'll see if I can find the actual quote - my memory is that is was said by the commander who OK'd the Raid.

I'd also point out that the principle that it is better to attempt to help (even if that results in death and suffering) than stand by and do nothing is substantiated by Good Samaritan Laws and Duty to rescue laws.

Which gets to be a bit of a grey area, who decides who is giving freedom, and who is giving oppression? especially when both are delivered through the use of weaponry. I read some interesting sci-fi dealing with this point, the upshot was that a population could vote (anonymously, through tech) for armed intervention to overthrow the current govt and join a union thing, but had to have 80% majority or something like that to offset the destruction such an intervention would cause.

TheDemonLord

13th July 2017, 20:53

Oh dear, there's that unmistakable odour of extreme ironing again.

Well, it is the season for the common Cold....

TheDemonLord

13th July 2017, 21:01

Which gets to be a bit of a grey area, who decides who is giving freedom, and who is giving oppression? especially when both are delivered through the use of weaponry. I read some interesting sci-fi dealing with this point, the upshot was that a population could vote (anonymously, through tech) for armed intervention to overthrow the current govt and join a union thing, but had to have 80% majority or something like that to offset the destruction such an intervention would cause.

You got the name of that Sci-fi?

For sure though, its a massive moral and ethical quagmire - Me personally, I think there are a reasonable set of standards:

Not using NBCs on your own population
Not being complicit in the torture of your own population
Not committing Genocide
Not allowing criminal or terrorist elements to operated unabated.

I'm sure there's others that could be listed - but the above covers off the worst of the worst. Then it becomes not who is free and who is oppressed, more a case of who is meeting the minimum standard to not get carpet bombed and who is volunteering for a B52 sized TNT delivery.

bogan

13th July 2017, 21:12

You got the name of that Sci-fi?

For sure though, its a massive moral and ethical quagmire - Me personally, I think there are a reasonable set of standards:

Not using NBCs on your own population
Not being complicit in the torture of your own population
Not committing Genocide
Not allowing criminal or terrorist elements to operated unabated.

I'm sure there's others that could be listed - but the above covers off the worst of the worst. Then it becomes not who is free and who is oppressed, more a case of who is meeting the minimum standard to not get carpet bombed and who is volunteering for a B52 sized TNT delivery.

Might have been some Neal Asher I think.

Yeh but it is still reliant on an agreement or judgement from those outside the population being 'freed', which I don't disagree with as an unfortunate necessity, but it shouldn't be touted as the way things should be.

bogan

14th July 2017, 18:04

Good News (http://aplus.com/a/france-mandatory-vaccines), the conspiracy morons are not allowed to harm kids in france!

Katman

14th July 2017, 18:54

Good News (http://aplus.com/a/france-mandatory-vaccines), the conspiracy morons are not allowed to harm kids in france!

10 deaths from 24,000 cases over an 8 year period.

Like I've said, more kids die in their parents swimming pools.

And more New Zealand kids were beaten to death by their parents in that period.

bogan

14th July 2017, 19:33

10 deaths from 24,000 cases over an 8 year period.

Like I've said, more kids die in their parents swimming pools.

And more New Zealand kids were beaten to death by their parents in that period.

Indeed, now there is legislation to prevent all 3 of those things! What wonderful times we live in :sunny:

Katman

14th July 2017, 19:39

Indeed, now there is legislation to prevent all 3 of those things! What wonderful times we live in :sunny:

And the only downside seems to be that we have to put up with an ever increasing number of retarded cunts like you, TDL and berkboy.

bogan

14th July 2017, 19:56

And the only downside seems to be that we have to put up with an ever increasing number of retarded cunts like you, TDL and berkboy.

Not quite seeing the link there, do you think those who point out other's irrationality is a sign of retardism?

Katman

19th July 2017, 09:19

https://worldmercuryproject.org/what-we-do/hiding-vaccine-related-deaths-semantic-sleight-hand/

bogan

19th July 2017, 19:31

https://worldmercuryproject.org/what-we-do/hiding-vaccine-related-deaths-semantic-sleight-hand/

We've been over this, the VAERS database is user submitted data, and does not require any medical diagnosis for cause of adverse effect. It's basically a popularity contest for vaccination, but one where they don't bother counting the votes of people who think vaccines are a good thing.

Katman

19th July 2017, 20:23

We've been over this, the VAERS database is user submitted data, and does not require any medical diagnosis for cause of adverse effect. It's basically a popularity contest for vaccination, but one where they don't bother counting the votes of people who think vaccines are a good thing.

And if you'd read the government report that the article links to, you'd have seen that less than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported to the FDA.

But we're well aware of your aversion to reading about stuff you choose to comment on.

pritch

19th July 2017, 20:34

I thought this thread had met a timely end. Sadly that does not appear to be the case. Today I read that 45% of Trump voters do not believe that Trump Jr met with Russians. Despite his admitting to it on Fox News, their channel of choice, and despite his releasing the emails setting up the meeting.

I'm aware that has fuck all to do with vaccinations, but the comprehension skills exhibited by the vaccination deniers and the Trump voters are similar. Similar as in non-existent.

Carry on. If you must :whistle:

bogan

19th July 2017, 20:43

And if you'd read the government report that the article links to, you'd have seen that less than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported to the FDA.

So there's a shit-tonne of unverified reports, and a shit-tonne of allegedly verified reports that aren't on there. Why the fuck does anyone use VAERS? It's clearly up to fuck all. Why not just use the system that has the other 99% in it?

Katman

19th July 2017, 20:56

I'm aware that has fuck all to do with vaccinations....

You'll be telling us a Mills and Boon story next.

TheDemonLord

19th July 2017, 21:59

You'll be telling us a Mills and Boon story next.

I'm hard pressed to decide if that would be better or worse than the drivel you write.

Tough Decisions....

Doppleganger

20th July 2017, 07:54

You'll be telling us a Mills and Boon story next.

Prob got more hard and substantiated fact in there than the anti vax conspiracy weirdos

Katman

29th July 2017, 09:38

https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/mercury-lead-fallacy-safe-levels/

Ocean1

29th July 2017, 10:35

https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/mercury-lead-fallacy-safe-levels/

Also: https://www.gopetition.com/petitions/ban-dihydrogen-oxide.html

bogan

31st July 2017, 18:45

https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/mercury-lead-fallacy-safe-levels/

There's a clear difficulty in establishing causality though, I mean, it's possible that children's behaviors increased their exposure, rather than the other way around.

Studies are contradicting the overly simplistic approach 'worldmercuryproject' is taking:
"We found no evidence of simple associations between blood Hg exposure and neurodevelopmental/psychological impairments"
http://sci-hub.cc/10.1016/j.envres.2017.06.03

Katman

11th August 2017, 08:31

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs11011-017-0077-2.pdf

PrincessBandit

11th August 2017, 17:29

We have two cases of two highly contagious diseases (which are traditionally vaccinated against) that have presented in our student population at school. I was informed via email (given that I am apparently one of the teachers in close contact with at least one of them) that "as you were born before 1981 you are considered to have immunity and therefore can remain at school". (Oh, joy joy, lucky me). Several of our students (and younger staff) who have been unable to provide proof of immunisation have had to stay home meaning (1) they have had to stay away from school for several days, and (2) teachers have been asked to provide these students with work they can do at home while they are absent. Often easier said than done. This is the first time that I've been aware of this happening in the few years I've been teaching and wonder if it will become more prevalent if numbers of non vaccinated children increase ???

Ocean1

11th August 2017, 19:27

http://www.thebeatlesneverexisted.com/

bogan

11th August 2017, 19:46

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs11011-017-0077-2.pdf

"It would seem prudent to try to find an alternative to aluminium adjuvants as soon as possible and phase out their use."

Good work on finding the source article KM. It makes a lot of sense, and I like how their conclusion is not 'the sky is falling' like a lot of anti-vaccer blog sites would read into it.

We have two cases of two highly contagious diseases (which are traditionally vaccinated against) that have presented in our student population at school. I was informed via email (given that I am apparently one of the teachers in close contact with at least one of them) that "as you were born before 1981 you are considered to have immunity and therefore can remain at school". (Oh, joy joy, lucky me). Several of our students (and younger staff) who have been unable to provide proof of immunisation have had to stay home meaning (1) they have had to stay away from school for several days, and (2) teachers have been asked to provide these students with work they can do at home while they are absent. Often easier said than done. This is the first time that I've been aware of this happening in the few years I've been teaching and wonder if it will become more prevalent if numbers of non vaccinated children increase ???

You'd expect so, both in incidence, and in the number of people disaffected by it. Here's hoping the resurgence in preventable diseases will stem the antivaccer movement and avoid such an occurrence though.

Katman

11th August 2017, 19:50

"It would seem prudent to try to find an alternative to aluminium adjuvants as soon as possible and phase out their use."

Good work on finding the source article KM. It makes a lot of sense, and I like how their conclusion is not 'the sky is falling' like a lot of anti-vaccer blog sites would read into it.

What do you have against the idea of producing safer vaccines?

You stupid cunt.

bogan

11th August 2017, 20:48

What do you have against the idea of producing safer vaccines?

You stupid cunt.

Nothing, I literally just agreed with exactly that sentiment as expressed by the conclusion in the paper you posted. What the actual fuck are you on to somehow read the exact opposite of what I posted?

Katman

11th August 2017, 21:31

Nothing, I literally just agreed with exactly that sentiment as expressed by the conclusion in the paper you posted. What the actual fuck are you on to somehow read the exact opposite of what I posted?

So you agree that certain ingredients in vaccines have a significant possibility of contributing to neurological damage?

Thank fuck we've finally found some common ground.

bogan

11th August 2017, 22:13

So you agree that certain ingredients in vaccines have a significant possibility of contributing to neurological damage?

No, and that paper you posted finds no such thing either.

Katman

11th August 2017, 22:18

No, and that paper you posted finds no such thing either.

How the fuck would you know?

You've not read it.

bogan

12th August 2017, 09:22

How the fuck would you know?

You've not read it.

My first post regarding it contained a direct quote from it. Figured you might have noticed that, but then, perhaps (like the previous one as well) it is you who has not read it...

Katman

12th August 2017, 09:29

My first post regarding it contained a direct quote from it. Figured you might have noticed that, but then, perhaps (like the previous one as well) it is you who has not read it...

Did you really just skip to the very last sentence in the study? :facepalm:

If not, you should have noticed this bit too....

"Also detailed are several mechanisms whereby significant quantities of aluminium introduced via immunisation could produce chronic neuropathology in genetically susceptible children."

Now I'm quite prepared to admit that I don't understand half the words in that study, but of the half that I do understand, it quite clearly shows that they give explanations of a possible connection between aluminium exposure and ASD.

bogan

12th August 2017, 10:09

Did you really just skip to the very last sentence in the study? :facepalm:

If not, you should have noticed this bit too....

"Also detailed are several mechanisms whereby significant quantities of aluminium introduced via immunisation could produce chronic neuropathology in genetically susceptible children."

Now I'm quite prepared to admit that I don't understand half the words in that study, but of the half that I do understand, it quite clearly shows that they give explanations of a possible connection between aluminium exposure and ASD.

What makes you think I skipped the rest? the conclusions are the most conclusive part, and the since a lot of conclusions were not to do with vaccination I quoted the most relevant one.

The bit you quoted has no less than 3 conditional qualifiers whose possibility has not been substantiated, so the conclusion you drew of it representing a 'significant possibility' is erroneous.

Speaking of words "possible connection between aluminium exposure and ASD" and "certain ingredients in vaccines have a significant possibility of contributing to neurological damage" mean very different things.

Katman

12th August 2017, 11:33

What makes you think I skipped the rest? the conclusions are the most conclusive part, and the since a lot of conclusions were not to do with vaccination I quoted the most relevant one.

The bit you quoted has no less than 3 conditional qualifiers whose possibility has not been substantiated, so the conclusion you drew of it representing a 'significant possibility' is erroneous.

Speaking of words "possible connection between aluminium exposure and ASD" and "certain ingredients in vaccines have a significant possibility of contributing to neurological damage" mean very different things.

Did you see the bit where they cited a study that showed higher levels of aluminium in the hair and urine of children with ASD than the control group?

bogan

12th August 2017, 12:02

Did you see the bit where they cited a study that showed higher levels of aluminium in the hair and urine of children with ASD than the control group?

See post #3668.

Katman

12th August 2017, 12:13

See post #3668.

Do you know the difference between mercury and aluminium?

bogan

12th August 2017, 12:26

Do you know the difference between mercury and aluminium?

Do you know the difference between correlation and causation? In both mercury and aluminium cases "There's a clear difficulty in establishing causality though, I mean, it's possible that children's behaviors increased their exposure, rather than the other way around." Have a nap or something dude, you've gone extra far off the deep end this weekend.

Katman

12th August 2017, 12:31

Do you know the difference between correlation and causation? In both mercury and aluminium cases "There's a clear difficulty in establishing causality though, I mean, it's possible that children's behaviors increased their exposure, rather than the other way around." Have a nap or something dude, you've gone extra far off the deep end this weekend.

It's equally possible that their exposure to aluminium or mercury has influenced their physiological or neurological condition.

The fact that you're so cock-sure of yourself when actual scientists are suggesting otherwise is fucking hilarious.

bogan

12th August 2017, 12:39

It's equally possible that their exposure to aluminium or mercury has influenced their physiological or neurological condition.

The fact that you're so cock-sure of yourself when actual scientists are suggesting otherwise is fucking hilarious.

Equally possible? I think you mean also possible. It's this constant and slight changing of words here and there which gets the unscientific anti-vaccers and conspiracy theorists et al from true statements like "possible connection between aluminium exposure and ASD" to falsehoods "like certain ingredients in vaccines have a significant possibility of contributing to neurological damage". At this point I'm not sure if you either know the difference, or know that you are doing it; the search for validation of your belief simply over-rides any ability you might have to understand the articles at hand.

Cock sure of what exactly? That there is no proven, causal link between mercury or aluiminium in vaccines and ASD? Scientists are in complete agreement with that, that you think either of those things are untrue is fucking sad.

Katman

12th August 2017, 12:54

Cock sure of what exactly? That there is no proven, causal link between mercury or aluiminium in vaccines and ASD? Scientists are in complete agreement with that, that you think either of those things are untrue is fucking sad.

And the fact that you seem to consider yourself qualified to speak on behalf of all scientists is even more fucking hilarious.

Ocean1

12th August 2017, 13:44

And the fact that you seem to consider yourself qualified to speak on behalf of all scientists is even more fucking hilarious.

Whereas you're qualifications to speak for conspiracy fuckwits worldwide is simply unparalleled.

bogan

12th August 2017, 14:22

And the fact that you seem to consider yourself qualified to speak on behalf of all scientists is even more fucking hilarious.

They've repeatedly spoken for themselves, I simply quote them and understand what their conclusions actually mean. Take the last two articles you've posted for example, neither disagrees with the scientific consensus I just illustrated.

"We found no evidence of simple associations between blood Hg exposure and neurodevelopmental/psychological impairments"

Katman

12th August 2017, 15:02

They've repeatedly spoken for themselves, I simply quote them and understand what their conclusions actually mean.

Really?

All of them?

bogan

12th August 2017, 15:18

Really?

All of them?

A scientific consensus does not require unanimity.

Try looking at the science, the conclusions from the studies (start with the ones you've been posting) and see if you can understand why. Or just keep clutching at straws to find one study you can round down to agreeing with your baseless conspiracy theorist notions...

husaberg

12th August 2017, 17:53

Whereas you're qualifications to speak for conspiracy fuckwits worldwide is simply unparalleled.

True he is a great example of the lunatic fringe... all baseless rumour and conjecture with no actual evidence.:laugh:

TheDemonLord

12th August 2017, 21:05

Do you know the difference between mercury and aluminium?

67 Protons and 67 Valance Electrons, One is liquid at room temperature, one is solid, one is a transitional metal, the other a post-transitional metal, One is highly reactive, the other not so much, an atomic weight difference of about 173, one has only one other known isotope (which is extremely rare) whilst the other has 11 known isotopes, of which 5 are stable etc. etc.

oldrider

22nd September 2017, 09:51

Apparently Baker regularly consults KB to base and form her opinions:- https://www.infowars.com/professor-well-just-get-rid-of-all-the-whites-in-the-united-states/ :eek:

flyingcrocodile46

29th September 2017, 15:46

Is that the same Media that you are always telling us are part of the issue? The same ones that can't be trusted when they say you are wrong?

Funny how you believe them when they say something you agree with....

Obviously not. Things change over time and that was quite some time ago. But thank you for your pointless question that you so elegantly followed with a face plant.

Yeah, a Cold isn't the Flu....

And that just about rules out your opinion on anything regarding Medical Matters, but since I'm not done.

We are Aware of the risks*.

*The actual risks, not the made up risks by fraudsters and Conmen. As long as you are talking big pharma (the proven fraudsters and conmen that they are) I accept your rather ungracious reassurance that my advice hasn't found entirely deaf ears.

Katman

5th November 2017, 08:42

How we viewed measles 45 years ago.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/47RUl5xqs_s" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Then some people discovered there were vast sums of money to be made by promoting hysteria.

TheDemonLord

6th November 2017, 08:22

How we viewed measles 45 years ago.

Then some people discovered there were vast sums of money to be made by promoting hysteria.

You mean like Dr Wakefield?
Or perhaps Dr. Mark Geier?

Katman

6th November 2017, 09:00

You mean like Dr Wakefield?
Or perhaps Dr. Mark Geier?

Don't be silly - I'm talking vast sums.

Ocean1

6th November 2017, 10:03

Don't be silly - I'm talking vast sums.

Whereas everyone else thinks you're talking shit.

TheDemonLord

6th November 2017, 10:07

Don't be silly - I'm talking vast sums.

Glad to know you take such a principled stand on the matter.

/sarcasm

Katman

6th November 2017, 10:52

Glad to know you take such a principled stand on the matter.

You wouldn't know what a principled stand was if it fucked you up the arse.

Woodman

6th November 2017, 10:59

wouldn't stand if fucked up the arse.

Fixed for ya

Just bored really.................:laugh::laugh::laugh:

TheDemonLord

6th November 2017, 11:25

You wouldn't know what a principled stand was if it fucked you up the arse.

So, it's okay to create a hysteria in order to profit from it, if it's only a little bit of profit and not (as you said) "vast sums."

That's even if I take your original premise to be correct (which I don't).

I'm just loving the Hypocrisy.

And on an aside - I see your homoerotic fantasies about me have progressed from Cock Sucking to full blown sodomy (I hope you know, I'm flattered, truly) - you know that it's been decriminalised in NZ since 1986 - you can come out of the Closet now, It's warm, sunny and Fabulous.

husaberg

6th November 2017, 18:05

Glad to know you take such a principled stand on the matter.

/sarcasm
Sometimes you just have to laugh at Steve's utter hippocracy.

Wakefield charged at the extraordinary rate of £150 an hour- billed through a company of his wife's - eventually totalling, for genericwork alone, what the UK Legal Services Commission, pressed by Deer under thefreedom of information act, said was £435,643 (then about $750,000 US), plusexpenses. These hourly fees - revealed in The Sunday Times in December 2006 -gave the doctor a direct personal, but undeclared, financial interest in his researchclaims: totalling more than eight times his reported annual salary and creatingan incentive not only for him to launch the alarm, but to keep it going for aslong as possible.
In addition to the personal payments, Wakefield was awardedan initial £55,000, which he had applied for in June 1996, but which, like thehourly fees, he never declared to the Lancet as he should have done, for theexpress purpose of conducting the research later submitted to the journal. Thisstart-up funding was part of a staggering £26.2m of taxpayers' money (more than$56m US at 2014 prices) eventually shared among a small group of doctors andlawyers, working under Barr's and Wakefield's direction, trying to prove thatMMR caused the previously unheard-of "syndrome". Yet more surprising, Wakefield hadasserted the existence of such a syndrome - which allegedly included what hewould dub "autistic enterocolitis" - before he performed the researchwhich purportedly discovered it.

Dr. Wakefield, who, as we know was ultimately paid Â£435,643 in fees, plus Â£3,910 expenses by Barr. But that was chump change compared to the amount of money that Wakefield and his cronies envisioned based on the work they were doing at the Royal Free Hospital. Even while Child 2 was still in the hospital undergoing a grueling workup including an MRI of his brain (which, for children that young usually requires general anesthesia), electroencephalography and evoked potentials, a radioactive Schilling test, blood and urine tests, and a lumbar puncture, all of which had been specified in an agreement with Barr. Then, while the child was still in hospital (as the British say), having just undergone an ileocolonoscopy two days before that 14 years later the British General Medical Council would conclude had not been medically indicated, this happened:
And on Wednesday, with the news that the boy–still on the ward–might have Crohn’s disease, the doctor produced a remarkable document. It was an 11 page draft of a scheme behind the vaccine scare, now revealed for the first time in full.
The document was headed “Inventor/school/investor meeting 1.”15 Based on a patent Wakefield had filed in March 1995 claiming that “Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis may be diagnosed by detecting measles virus in bowel tissue, bowel products or body fluids,”16 it proposed starting a company that could reap huge returns from molecular viral diagnostic tests. It predicted a turnover from Britain and America of up to £72.5m a year.
“In view of the unique services offered by the Company and its technology, particularly for the molecular diagnostic,” the document noted, “the assays can command premium prices.”
To help finance the scheme, Wakefield looked to the government’s legal aid fund–meant to give poorer people access to justice. For the previous seven months, child 2 had been enrolled with Barr’s firm,17 which since February 1996– two years before the paper’s publication– had been paying the researcher undisclosed fees of £150 an hour, plus expenses.8

Wow. £72.5 million a year. That’s a lot of cash that Wakefield was planning on trying to make using his patent claiming that detecting measles virus in the gut is diagnostic for Crohn’s disease. Indeed, where other researchers saw suffering children they wanted to try to help, Wakefield apparently saw an amazing profit opportunity. Indeed, he even cranked out the prospectus for this amazing profit opportunity while investigating children referred to him by trial lawyers. This is a massive undisclosed conflict of interest (COI) that beggars imagination. It’s huge compared to most COIs that individual investigators who seek to commercialize their products have, because most such investigators don’t envision making anywhere near as much money as Wakefield apparently thought he could make from developing a diagnostic test. He even wrote that “the ability of the Company to commercialise its candidate products depends upon the extent to which reimbursement for the cost of such products will be available from government health administration authorities, private health providers and, in the context of the molecular diagnostic, the Legal Aid Board.” In other words, Wakefield was already thinking of ways to obtain reimbursement from third party payers for his device, recognizing quite correctly that the success of any such test is utterly dependent upon this.

Ocean1

7th November 2017, 11:59

Akzle

7th November 2017, 12:20

Do we get to forcefully quarantine the fuckwits yet?

vote akzle.

i'll build big facilities, where all the fuckwits will be kept. with reticulated air. and they never get to leave. so they can have their supervirii to themselves. i might instigate a programme of hosing them down with bleach just to make sure i breed the sikkest resistant microorganisms.
and they can inject each other with as much shit as they like. (for free, because fuck jews)

Katman

7th November 2017, 12:43

Do we get to forcefully quarantine the fuckwits yet?

Which ones? The vaccinated fuckwits or the unvaccinated ones?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/well/family/mumps-makes-a-comeback-even-among-the-vaccinated.html

Fuckwit.

Ocean1

7th November 2017, 14:09

Which ones? The vaccinated fuckwits or the unvaccinated ones?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/well/family/mumps-makes-a-comeback-even-among-the-vaccinated.html

Fuckwit.

So what? Of course there's diminishing returns, only fuckwits like you hold that as some sort of proof of a conspiracy for BIG PHARMA to make money.

Given that immunisation rates have dropped as a direct result of fuckwits like your main squeeze Wakefield and morons like you then of course you're going to get pandemics, even the most rabid anti-vax fuckwits admit that, and as no vaccine is 100% effective then of course the number who who are vaccinated are also affected.

So yes, the blame falls squarely on the anti-vax fashionista. Trendy wee fuckwits like you and your hairdressing circle of advisors. None of this is secret shit, dude, the biology has been been proven time and again for half a century, the arithmetic continues to prove the efficacy of the science.

Now fuck off and deal with something you have a clue about. You do have a clue about something doncha? Only it's not obvious from your traditional vacuous, recycled bullshit.

Katman

7th November 2017, 14:15

Given that immunisation rates have dropped as a direct result of fuckwits like your main squeeze Wakefield and morons like you then of course you're going to get pandemics, even the most rabid anti-fax fuckwits admit that, and as no vaccine is 100% effective then of course the number who who are vaccinated are also affected.

Did you miss this bit?

Dr. Patricia Quinlisk, the medical director and state epidemiologist for the Iowa Department of Public Health, dealt with an outbreak at the University of Iowa and surrounding area in 2015 to 2016 of more than 450 cases of mumps. The students involved had all had their childhood M.M.R. shots, she said, as required by the university, and the decision was made to hold a series of clinics offering a third dose of vaccine.

That goes way beyond "not 100% effective".

In fact, it's a 100% abject failure.

RDJ

7th November 2017, 15:06

Did you miss this bit?

That goes way beyond "not 100% effective".

In fact, it's a 100% abject failure.

You have, again, beclowned yourself.

You could go to the source (a published paper by Dr Q and 2 others) for the science - but it wouldn't fit your narrative.

METHODS
Of 20,496 university students who were enrolled during the 2015–2016 academic year, mumps was diagnosed in 259 students. We used Fisher’s exact test to compare unadjusted attack rates according to dose status and years since receipt of the second MMR vaccine dose. We used multivariable time-dependent Cox regression models to evaluate vaccine effectiveness, according to dose status (three vs. two doses and two vs. no doses) after adjustment for the number of years since the second dose.
RESULTS
Before the outbreak, 98.1% of the students had received at least two doses of MMR vaccine. During the outbreak, 4783 received a third dose. The attack rate was lower among the students who had received three doses than among those who had received two doses (6.7 vs. 14.5 cases per 1000 population, P<0.001). Students had more than nine times the risk of mumps if they had received the second MMR dose 13 years or more before the outbreak. At 28 days after vaccination, receipt of the third vaccine dose was associated with a 78.1% lower risk of mumps than receipt of a second dose (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.12 to 0.39). The vaccine effectiveness of two doses versus no doses was lower among students with more distant receipt of the second vaccine dose.
CONCLUSIONS
Students who had received a third dose of MMR vaccine had a lower risk of mumps than did those who had received two doses, after adjustment for the number of years since the second dose. Students who had received a second dose of MMR vaccine 13 years or more before the outbreak had an increased risk of mumps. These findings suggest that the campaign to administer a third dose of MMR vaccine improved mumps outbreak control and that waning immunity probably contributed to propagation of the outbreak. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.)

Does 'waning immunity' ring a bell in your belfry?

TheDemonLord

7th November 2017, 15:09

Does 'waning immunity' ring a bell in your belfry?

I think the Bell has long since crumbled to Dust...

Katman

7th November 2017, 15:15

Does 'waning immunity' ring a bell in your belfry?

Yeah, it's what you get if you don't gain a lifetime immunity from the disease itself.

Ocean1

7th November 2017, 16:06

Yeah, it's what you get if you don't gain a lifetime immunity from the disease itself.

Dude, you've got this perpetual hole going where you continuously recycle the same shit.

You wrung the last dregs of conspiracy nutrition out of it all years ago, for the love of god stop digging.

mashman

7th November 2017, 16:46

https://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/98615452/mumps-outbreak-hits-lost-generation-hardest-over-740-cases-in-auckland

"Herman said people between the ages of 10 and 29 represented a lost generation to MMR vaccinations and was the likely reason behind the outbreak this year.

A generation born in 1988 reached the age where they would be eligible for their second MMR vaccination at age 11 in 1999, one year after a study published in British Medical Journal The Lancet falsely linked the vaccination to autism."

Do we get to forcefully quarantine the fuckwits yet?

There's entirely too much of this "Do we get to forcefully quarantine the fuckwits yet?" shit going on. Stop it.

Allow me to introduce the Rational Anarchist:

"I am free, no matter what rules surround me.
If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them.

I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible For everything I do."

- Robert A. Heinlein

:killingme... mob rule only when it suits eh. Someone's a sanctimonious hypocrite.

Katman

7th November 2017, 17:22

:laugh:

Perfect!

Ocean1

7th November 2017, 17:46

There's entirely too much of this "Do we get to forcefully quarantine the fuckwits yet?" shit going on. Stop it.

Allow me to introduce the Rational Anarchist:

"I am free, no matter what rules surround me.
If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them.

I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible For everything I do."

- Robert A. Heinlein

:killingme... mob rule only when it suits eh. Someone's a sanctimonious hypocrite.

That'd be you in the mirror, there.

And unlike you I don't require a mob to validate my behavior. Which is perfectly simple: Anti vax fuckwits are perfectly free to do whatever they like, but when their behaviour threatens the safety of me and mine I am also free to kill them for it. That's the foundation of personal responsibility, right there.

I suspect that when the first of the inevitable pandemics with widespread fatalities arrive, however most of the rest of us will suddenly find that they're rational anarchists at heart also.

mashman

7th November 2017, 18:05

That'd be you in the mirror, there.

And unlike you I don't require a mob to validate my behavior. Which is perfectly simple: when Anti vax fuckwits threaten the safety of me and mine I will kill them.

I suspect that when the first of the inevitable pandemics with widespread fatalities arrive, however most of the rest of us will do exactly the same.

Then you're not a Rational Anarchist. You're a fascist. Every 10 seconds a child dies of hunger. Hunger, as it turns out is the biggest killer on the planet, still. Yet you support a system that makes money scarce enough for that to happen and your religion allows you to accept that. If you were as honourable as you claim, then you'd have to be ok with a parent coming to kill you for letting their child die of something that is 100% avoidable.

You suspect what when a pandemic arrives? Actually, don't answer that. I suspect that when the next decent pandemic arrives, all of our vaccinations will mean diddly squat. Madagascar plague outbreak: WHO helps countries prepare for further spread after death toll rises to 124 (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/madagascar-plague-outbreak-mauritius-seychelles-south-africa-who-africa-world-health-organization-a8031591.html).

Katman

7th November 2017, 18:07

......but when their behaviour threatens the safety of me and mine I am also free to kill them for it.

What an irrational fuckwit you are.

Ocean1

7th November 2017, 18:15

Then you're not a Rational Anarchist. You're a fascist. Every 10 seconds a child dies of hunger. Hunger, as it turns out is the biggest killer on the planet, still. Yet you support a system that makes money scarce enough for that to happen and your religion allows you to accept that. If you were as honourable as you claim, then you'd have to be ok with a parent coming to kill you for letting their child die of something that is 100% avoidable.

You suspect what when a pandemic arrives? Actually, don't answer that. I suspect that when the next decent pandemic arrives, all of our vaccinations will mean diddly squat. Madagascar plague outbreak: WHO helps countries prepare for further spread after death toll rises to 124 (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/madagascar-plague-outbreak-mauritius-seychelles-south-africa-who-africa-world-health-organization-a8031591.html).

My children aren't dying of hunger.

Anarchists don't have "systems"

I'm not in any position to "let" someone else's child die of hunger, that would be the parents.

And your "suspicions" are worth about as much as your drivel about most things, dude: sweet fuck all.

Ocean1

7th November 2017, 18:23

What an irrational fuckwit you are.

Dude, anyone with your capacity to believe six mutually impossible things before breakfast doesn't have the rational wherewithal to be evaluating the intellectual capacity of anyone.

Katman

7th November 2017, 18:27

Dude, anyone with your capacity to believe six mutually impossible things before breakfast doesn't have the rational wherewithal to be evaluating the intellectual capacity of anyone.

So let me get this straight.....

You think that anyone who isn't vaccinated is a threat to your family and therefore you are entitled to kill them - yet you question my rationality?

What an absolute fuckwit.

mashman

7th November 2017, 18:31

My children aren't dying of hunger.

Anarchists don't have "systems"

I'm not in any position to "let" someone else's child die of hunger, that would be the parents.

And your "suspicions" are worth about as much as your drivel about most things, dude: sweet fuck all.

Why do you care? A rational anarchist wouldn't give a shit about his kids.

You're not an anarchist. You're a fascist.

Of course you are. You choose not to, and that is entirely up to you.

Oh, I thought the article evidenced my suspicion quite well. Rational anarchist indeed. I doubt they'd have you.

Ocean1

7th November 2017, 18:39

Why do you care? A rational anarchist wouldn't give a shit about his kids.

You're not an anarchist. You're a fascist.

Of course you are. You choose not to, and that is entirely up to you.

Oh, I thought the article evidenced my suspicion quite well. Rational anarchist indeed. I doubt they'd have you.

You appear to believe that repeating yourself produces some sort of truth.

Which makes you wrong on all fronts.

Again.

Ocean1

7th November 2017, 18:41

So let me get this straight.....

You think that anyone who isn't vaccinated is a threat to your family and therefore you are entitled to kill them - yet you question my rationality?

Correct on both counts.

Finally.

mashman

7th November 2017, 18:44

You appear to believe that repeating yourself produces some sort of truth.

Which makes you wrong on all fronts.

Again.

You're the one who quoted yourself as a rational anarchist and then threatened to kill any unvaccinated person coz they threaten the security of someone you're pretending to care for. You stated it yourself. So actually, I'm repeating you. Deny it as much as you like, but you Son, are a fascist of epic proportions.

Ocean1

7th November 2017, 18:50

You're the one who quoted yourself as a rational anarchist and then threatened to kill any unvaccinated person coz they threaten the security of someone you're pretending to care for. You stated it yourself. So actually, I'm repeating you. Deny it as much as you like, but you Son, are a fascist of epic proportions.

Which is both perfectly rational and completely in keeping with the principle of personal responsibility.

Not that I expect a whining incompetent that wants everyone else to buy his lunch to spot the difference.

Katman

7th November 2017, 18:51

Deny it as much as you like, but you Son, are a fascist of epic proportions.

You spelt fuckwit wrong.

mashman

7th November 2017, 19:25

You spelt fuckwit wrong.

ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa...

Which is both perfectly rational and completely in keeping with the principle of personal responsibility.

Not that I expect a whining incompetent that wants everyone else to buy his lunch to spot the difference.

Yeah, but you're doing that at the expense of someone else's personal responsibility. Firstly, your kids. Secondly, you're removing the choice to self-determination of what they consider personal responsibility, because you don't like it. A fascist by any other name etc...

Who's that then?

Ocean1

7th November 2017, 19:33

ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa...

Yeah, but you're doing that at the expense of someone else's personal responsibility. Firstly, your kids. Secondly, you're removing the choice to self-determination of what they consider personal responsibility, because you don't like it. A fascist by any other name etc...

Who's that then?

Said the whining incompetent that wants everyone else to buy his lunch.

And I'm personally responsible for someone else's personal responsibility now? :laugh:

You're just arguing for the sake of it now, aincha? 'Cause you sure as fuck don't have an actual argument.

Katman

7th November 2017, 19:38

You're just arguing for the sake of it now, aincha? 'Cause you sure as fuck don't have an actual argument.

Do you remember posting this....
What I suggest is in fact the reality, completely unrecognised officially (and usually otherwise), is that people behave in such a manner that THEY believe represents a level of risk to both themselves and others that’s acceptable to THEM. This is nature’s default setting, and I can’t see anything in society’s attempts to the contrary that makes me believe there’s a better way.

TheDemonLord

7th November 2017, 19:39

Then you're not a Rational Anarchist. You're a fascist.

It would. Ironically I want you to be a clone of me.

Who is the Fascist again?

And for bonus Irony points - The Fascists started off as Socialists...

mashman

7th November 2017, 19:48

Said the whining incompetent that wants everyone else to buy his lunch.

And I'm personally responsible for someone else's personal responsibility now? :laugh:

You're just arguing for the sake of it now, aincha? 'Cause you sure as fuck don't have an actual argument.

Where did I state that?

Well you claimed that you'd kill someone else because their personal responsibility would impact on the personal responsibility of someone that wasn't just yourself. So yeah, that's exactly what you did :weird:

No, I'm just calling you on your irrational bullshit... but love the way you retreat everytime you've been pegged.

Ocean1

8th November 2017, 06:07

Do you remember posting this....

Do you remember having had a point?

Ocean1

8th November 2017, 06:19

Where did I state that?

Well you claimed that you'd kill someone else because their personal responsibility would impact on the personal responsibility of someone that wasn't just yourself. So yeah, that's exactly what you did :weird:

No, I'm just calling you on your irrational bullshit... but love the way you retreat everytime you've been pegged.

You're a communists, you state that pretty much everywhere, any chance you get.

Of course. If you wave a machete around kids I am personally responsible for then I will remove the threat to them. The fact that you believe you have a right to wave that machete around and can't see a problem with it is irrelevant.

In spite of your constant whining to the contrary I'm not responsible for the consequences of your actions, the fact that you're confused about who that would be is also not my problem.

Katman

8th November 2017, 06:31

Do you remember having had a point?

So do you think "people should behave in such a manner that THEY believe represents a level of risk to themselves and others that's acceptable to THEM" or in a manner that's acceptable to you?

'Cos it sounds like you don't know what the fuck to think.

Ocean1

8th November 2017, 06:46

So do you think "people should behave in such a manner that THEY believe represents a level of risk to themselves and others that's acceptable to THEM" or in a manner that's acceptable to you?

'Cos it sounds like you don't know what the fuck to think.

Well of course it does, you've repeatedly demonstrated that you can't rationally interpret anything you hear/read.

You're obviously having trouble with the concept of "personal responsibility", not entirely unheard of among fuckwits, let me help:

If you believe there's less risk in not vaccinating yourself then by all means don't bother. Your responsibility.

If it turns out you were wrong, and your actions pose a threat to me and mine then that makes you responsible for any injuries they incur as a result.

And I will then be personally responsible for removing that threat. My responsibility.

Or did you figure the consequences of your choice would be somehow limited to some pesky rash?

mashman

8th November 2017, 07:00

You're a communists, you state that pretty much everywhere, any chance you get.

Of course. If you wave a machete around kids I am personally responsible for then I will remove the threat to them. The fact that you believe you have a right to wave that machete around and can't see a problem with it is irrelevant.

In spite of your constant whining to the contrary I'm not responsible for the consequences of your actions, the fact that you're confused about who that would be is also not my problem.

hee hee. I've never stated that I was a communist, coz I R a Resource Based Economy advocate. The differences between the two are well documented.

Of course if I'm waving a machete around kids I would welcome such an intervention. That's just silly.

It is your problem, coz you're making shit up, projecting it and then repeating it as if it were true. Mirror mirror on the wall, who is the fairest of them all. Why you are Ocean.

Ocean1

8th November 2017, 07:11

hee hee. I've never stated that I was a communist, coz I R a Resource Based Economy advocate. The differences between the two are well documented.

Of course if I'm waving a machete around kids I would welcome such an intervention. That's just silly.

It is your problem, coz you're making shit up, projecting it and then repeating it as if it were true. Mirror mirror on the wall, who is the fairest of them all. Why you are Ocean.

Well you wouldn't, would you? I mean you'd be clearly seen for a fuckwit were that the case. By merely espousing communist policy you completely fool... what was that voter count again?

Not vaccinating for potentially fatal contagions = waving machete around kids. That's just obvious.

In spite of your constant whining to the contrary I'm not responsible for the consequences of your actions, the fact that you're confused about who that would be is also not my problem.

Katman

8th November 2017, 07:14

Or did you figure the consequences of your choice would be somehow limited to some pesky rash?

Yes Chicken Little, that's usually the extent of it.

Woodman

8th November 2017, 07:56

What about that Wakefield guy who is basically a criminal that is behind the antivax movement? Katman?

mashman

8th November 2017, 07:58

Well you wouldn't, would you? I mean you'd be clearly seen for a fuckwit were that the case. By merely espousing communist policy you completely fool... what was that voter count again?

Not vaccinating for potentially fatal contagions = waving machete around kids. That's just obvious.

In spite of your constant whining to the contrary I'm not responsible for the consequences of your actions, the fact that you're confused about who that would be is also not my problem.

Of course I would if I were :weird: It's not communist policy. You're fooling yourself by choice. My vote count was 214. And yours was?

I knew what you meant but removed the following (well, similar): Capitalism is directly responsible for the greatest number of deaths on this planet. It holds entire continents hungry, applies sanction and embargo and brings about artificial scarcity. Capitalism is a machete I see you doing nothing about. In fact, you claim it as a right. Where's your personal responsibility now? You're full of shit, Son. Nothing rational about it. Nothing anarchistic about it. Just another fascist telling others what your rules are and expecting everyone else to live by those rules else you claim you'd have the right to kill such. Kind of sad, but really really funny.

Yet you'd stop me from wielding a machete even though I hadn't touched anyone with it? bwaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaa. Yup, not your problem at all when you step in, claim you're a rational anarchist and then proceed to act like a fascist by preventing someone from exerting their own personal responsibility. Anarchist indeed :killingme. Your religion sounds a bit flakey to me. If you can't stick to it, then stick with fascist as it suits you perfectly.