Thinking of getting vaccinated?

[Ocean1]

IF you had the choice between your child being autistic or having the measles, which would you choose?

You're not fucked in the head enough to believe it's that simple. I think.

Asses the risk properly.
What are the chances of damage from measles or autism if immunised?
What are the chances of damage from measles or autism if not immunised?
If you're serious about understanding the risk of immunisation you need those numbers.

Another thing, for immunisation to work in protecting the population 95% of that population need to be immunised.
What are the ethics involved in a personal decision to allow everyone else to take whatever risks immunisation may involve while taking advantage of the passive protection it gives the whole population? What if 6% of the population decide to allow everyone else to take those risks for them?

[Akzle]

You don't get over death either. Bit early for the home brew innit?

its been a long day!

Hakuna matata!

[mashman]

What about whooping cough or polio?

Are any of the vaccines for whooping cough and polio linked to autism? Edity: more people die of starvation and the it 100% avoidable.

Hmmm those not vaccinated against measles risk deafness, eye disorders, brain damage or possibly death....

just sayin...

They do. Surely that's their choice. Just sayin too

You're not fucked in the head enough to believe it's that simple. I think.

Try not to think, it doesn't suit you.

Asses the risk properly.
What are the chances of damage from measles or autism if immunised?
What are the chances of damage from measles or autism if not immunised?
If you're serious about understanding the risk of immunisation you need those numbers.

Another thing, for immunisation to work in protecting the population 95% of that population need to be immunised.
What are the ethics involved in a personal decision to allow everyone else to take whatever risks immunisation may involve while taking advantage of the passive protection it gives the whole population? What if 6% of the population decide to allow everyone else to take those risks for them?

I agree to an extent, but I don't blame people for their reasoning that artificial inoculation just ain't right... and given that science cannot put it's hand on it's heart and confirm that 100% (ok 99.99% recurring ) of people will not have an adverse reaction, then I can't blame them. They run the risks of their kids catching measles etc... (according to mum I've been inoculated and have had measles 5 times, Dad has had mumps and still lives). However it is their choice to take the risk of inoculation or not.

I fail to see how the population that has been inoculated has a concern, because they have been inoculated... and if those who haven't had their kids inoculated, they know the risks. People take risks every day that affect the lives of others. I see no reason why the decision to vaccinate or not is any different.

[Ocean1]

Try not to think, it doesn't suit you.

Praise indeed, from the resident imbecile.

I agree to an extent,

I wasn't expressing an opinion. I was simply pointing out that without the numbers you don't actually know. So either find the numbers or stfu.

I don't blame people for their reasoning that artificial inoculation just ain't right... and given that science cannot put it's hand on it's heart and confirm that 100% (ok 99.99% recurring ) of people will not have an adverse reaction, then I can't blame them.

Becha the "reasoning" about inoculation not being "right" would vanish pretty fucking fast if an epidemic arrived.

And "science" can indeed confirm that 99.99% of the population will not have an adverse reaction to the most common inoculations.

according to mum I've been inoculated and have had measles 5 times.

That is possible. Maybe. Numerically. Still, best you check out the east window of your house for weird looking stars.

I fail to see how the population that has been inoculated has a concern, because they have been inoculated... and if those who haven't had their kids inoculated, they know the risks. People take risks every day that affect the lives of others. I see no reason why the decision to vaccinate or not is any different.

They're concerned because as I said, with less than 95mumble% uptake the viral vector is still viable. The likelihood that virus is still resident in the population is still high. Yes they've been inoculated and are relatively safe, but that's not as ideal as having the virus completely eradicated. In refusing to inoculate you're essentially requiring everyone else to cover your arse. You're also requiring future generations to require inoculation, whereas successful eradication removes that requirement for everyone.

Found those numbers yet?

[mashman]

I wasn't expressing an opinion. I was simply pointing out that without the numbers you don't actually know. So either find the numbers or stfu.

Your pointing anything out IS opinion.

Becha the "reasoning" about inoculation not being "right" would vanish pretty fucking fast if an epidemic arrived.

And "science" can indeed confirm that 99.99% of the population will not have an adverse reaction to the most common inoculations.

Why would it?

bwaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa... stick with 100% then (the 99.99% recurring was a wee giggle at an earlier noobi comment)

That is possible. Maybe. Numerically. Still, best you check out the east window of your house for weird looking stars.

I can only see Uranus.

They're concerned because as I said, with less than 95mumble% uptake the viral vector is still viable. The likelihood that virus is still resident in the population is still high. Yes they've been inoculated and are relatively safe, but that's not as ideal as having the virus completely eradicated. In refusing to inoculate you're essentially requiring everyone else to cover your arse. You're also requiring future generations to require inoculation, whereas successful eradication removes that requirement for everyone.

Found those numbers yet?

Right, so once a virus has been removed, it'll never come back again? I warned you about that thinking thing. It's a beautiful idea, everyone inoculated, the virus gone, no need to vaccinate in the future etc... and I'm sure it is believed to be possible. Where do measles come from?

[Ocean1]

Why would it?

Because all of a sudden the risk involved in not being inoculated reverts to you're preferred "natural" default setting. Without it you're fukt.

bwaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa... stick with 100% then (the 99.99% recurring was a wee giggle at an earlier noobi comment)

I know. I'd have thought you'd have though twice about exposing your ignorance of statistical matters after that hideous fail.

Hint: She was 100% correct.

Right, so once a virus has been removed, it'll never come back again? I warned you about that thinking thing. It's a beautiful idea, everyone inoculated, the virus gone, no need to vaccinate in the future etc... and I'm sure it is believed to be possible. Where do measles come from?

Measles come from an unvaccinated, infected person.

The virus gone is a nice idea, eh? And it is believed to be possible. Probably because it's already been done.


Found those numbers yet?

[mashman]

Because all of a sudden the risk involved in not being inoculated reverts to you're preferred "natural" default setting. Without it you're fukt.

You seem so sure of what everyone else would do. Funny how people don't get themselves inoculated for the simplest of things. Without it you're taking a risk, but certainly that's no guarantee of being fukt.

I know. I'd have thought you'd have though twice about exposing your ignorance of statistical matters after that hideous fail.

Hint: She was 100% correct.

It must be annoying when you read percentages greater than 100%. You're the one using statistics, I'm using numbers.

Measles come from an unvaccinated, infected person.

The virus gone is a nice idea, eh? And it is believed to be possible. Probably because it's already been done.

Found those numbers yet?

And where do they come from before that?

It has already been done?

Nope, not looking either.

[Ocean1]

You seem so sure of what everyone else would do. Funny how people don't get themselves inoculated for the simplest of things. Without it you're taking a risk, but certainly that's no guarantee of being fukt.

No guarantee. Just several hundred times the risk. Today. Almost infinitely higher risk for future populations.

It must be annoying when you read percentages greater than 100%. You're the one using statistics, I'm using numbers.

No. Unless you're referring to a specific numerical set.

And I must admit the numbers suit you. Moronic.

And where do they come from before that?

Last free one, from now on you can do your own research.

Historically, measles was prevalent throughout the world, as it is highly contagious. According to the National Immunization Program, 90% of people were infected with measles by age 15. Before the vaccine was introduced in 1963, there were an estimated 3–4 million cases in the U.S. each year.[87] In roughly the last 150 years, measles has been estimated to have killed about 200 million people worldwide.[88] In 2000 alone, measles killed some 777,000 worldwide. There were some 40 million cases of measles globally that year.

It has already been done?

Twice. It's been mentioned several times in this thread. Smallpox. Extinct. As a result of immunisation a parasite that has killed and blinded people for more then 10000 years is gone, and billions upon billions of future generations won't suffer it's effects.

Nope, not looking either.

Then you've no right to expect anyone to take your opinion seriously, do you?

[mashman]

[QUOTE=Ocean1;1130583752]No guarantee. Just several hundred times the risk. Today. Almost infinitely higher risk for future populations.

True. No doubt some will take that risk. No doubt some will die that are inoculated. No doubt some will live who aren't. The projected numbers for that may well spur what you class sensible people to get the vaccine... however some will run that risk.

No. Unless you're referring to a specific numerical set.

And I must admit the numbers suit you. Moronic.

I am. Every single person on the planet. I'm not dealing in projections and even at that, the percentages that are derived are derived against a numeric dataset.

If looking at statistics instead of human life gets you hard and gives you the answers you seek, then on ya man, nobody dies and nobody gets hurt where it's all statistics.

Last free one, from now on you can do your own research.

So, not from hoomans then. Coz if that's the case, will there ever come a time where hoomans won't need to be inoculated?

Twice. It's been mentioned several times in this thread. Smallpox. Extinct. As a result of immunisation a parasite that has killed and blinded people for more then 10000 years is gone, and billions upon billions of future generations won't suffer it's effects.

"However, supposing the eradication of smallpox was one big hoax to completely convince the public that a vaccine had eradicated a disease. In doing this the WHO could brainwash the world into believing that vaccines could eradicate all diseases and therefore push worldwide vaccination. Many believe that smallpox is still with us but under a new name. Meryl Doyle � Australian Vaccine Network is convinced that smallpox is still around and she is not alone. She says: -

�At that time (1960s) , testing for the (smallpox) virus became more sophisticated. You no longer were suffering necessarily from smallpox. They would test it and find that it had different DNA. You�d have monkeypox or camelpox or some other form of pox. But it was still called variola, which is smallpox. And that�s what monkeypox in Africa is called. Clinically, the disease is exactly the same as smallpox. It has the same progression. It looks exactly the same. If you put a smallpox victim next to a monkeypox victim, you will not be able to tell the difference. As a matter of fact, with this outbreak of monkey pox in Africa�I think there have been over 500 cases in a very short time�.�Meryl Dorley - See more at: http://vactruth.com/2011/03/28/news-of-smallpox-outbreak-in-india-raises-fear/#sthash.deDrlu8Q.dpuf"

Research indeed (there are plenty of other report should you wish to get yer head out of uranus)... baa baa baaaaaaaa

Then you've no right to expect anyone to take your opinion seriously, do you?

Nope. And I don't. They read and then make their own minds up. Some have a little look around at where the diseases comes from as well as the fact that people who are vaccinated still die and have the realisation that those who are swallowing the official story and using it as a hammer as nothing more than mindless fucknuggets and shouldn't be taken any more serious than those who don't care about the numbers.

[Akzle]

you two need to spend a night in a motel room.
With a suitcase full of cocaine and midgets.

[Ocean1]

If looking at statistics instead of human life gets you hard and gives you the answers you seek, then on ya man, nobody dies and nobody gets hurt where it's all statistics.

So, you're still batting from a platform of ignorance and rumour eh?

I can see why you're scared of the numbers, dude. they make you look like a complete idiot.

[mashman]

you two need to spend a night in a motel room.
With a suitcase full of cocaine and midgets.

Acid and hookers... may as well see who's got what it takes

So, you're still batting from a platform of ignorance and rumour eh?

I can see why you're scared of the numbers, dude. they make you look like a complete idiot.

... you're entitled to your opinion. She really must have scared you with her analysis eh.

[Kickaha]

http://hollywoodlife.com/2010/02/26/...er-had-autism/

[Berries]

Where do measles come from?

I blame the Germans.

[mashman]

I blame the Germans.

Measles is now on the list with chippy's.