Nobel laureate joins anti-vaccination crowd at Autism One

[JettaKnight]

You are commenting about my post, about which you know not a thing! As usual, you have made gross assumptions.

My incredulity comes from my asking a question, which lead to a post stating my 'irrational fear' has 'caused' a child's death. I have stated no fears (rational,or irrational) about this topic whatsoever.

My irrational thinking is giving rise to pseudoscience? My power knows no bounds... WTF?

I will not comment on any more of your ignorant posts...and I have no further interest in addressing your assumptions.

I was using hyperbole, maybe it should have had a shade of purple. It's common around here - get used to it.

Seriously though, you contend that not vaccinating yourself or your family doesn't hurt others. That is wrong, and I think I have made my point.

 

[rambone]

Seriously though, you contend that not vaccinating yourself or your family doesn't hurt others. That is wrong, and I think I have made my point.

Do you think people should be forcibly vaccinated so that you will feel safer?

 

[JettaKnight]

I read the article and wasn't impressed since it wasn't, in any sense that I could tell, objective in its reporting. One look at the byline of the author tells you what his agenda is.

Sure, he was snarky, but it's hard not to be.

My sister has four children, #2 and #4 are autistic. The onset occurred after multiple vaccinations. My sister, who works in the medical field, is convinced that the multiple vaccinations played a role.

A lot of things happen very quickly at that age. My niece was potty trained shortly after getting a vaccine.

If there was some form of causality, then it would have be discovered in the massive numbers of trials (mostly in other countries). The problem with this is there's not any connection except for parents trying to find a reason.

I have a nephew who, while in Basic Training, received something on the order of 16 vaccinations at once. Later he had to be hospitalized, and a month or two later he was diagnosed with Type II Diabetes; his pancreas was no longer functioning. Although the Army denied any fault, it is likely he developed diabetes as a result of the multiple vaccinations; his twin brother has no symptoms and it doesn't run in either side of his family.

I'm sorry to hear this, but anecdotal evidence =/= scientific proof. Why do you say that it's likely? Simply because vaccinations preceded pancreas failure? Sounds like no medical professional will validate your claim.

I don't know what it is about vaccinations that ends up being toxic, but SOMETHING happens on occasion and it would be good to know what that something is. Fortunately, I'm at an age where I don't have to worry too much about normal vaccinations, but I'm going to be leery of anyone who wants to include me in a blanket immunization for just about anything.

And I can point to stories of people who didn't get vaccinated and contracted horrible diseases. The problem is we, as a society, haven't encountered the diseases we immunize against. We don't fully comprehend just how awful they are. So instead of focusing on the massively positive benefits of vaccines we listen to a few vocal outliers cry about suspected problems in a few cases. One thing the internet age has brought us in the magnification of the individual. We've lost our sense of scope and scale. Example - one youth dies in Florida by firearm, and now we have to reassess everything and completely ignore all the positives.

 

[JettaKnight]

Do you think people should be forcibly vaccinated so that you will feel safer?

No.

What I want is for people to look upon McCarthy and her ilk with a greater sense of skepticism and look at scientific rigor with more respect than how they look at Faceborg post and email chains.

And, if it's not asking too much, quit thinking you and your family is so much more important than everyone else.

EDIT: that's a collective "you"

 

[bobzilla]

Read about it if you want. More than a few people have said their autistic child improved after giving them an adjusted diet. If a drug could help someone, so can proper nutrition.

It can't be patented in pill form so I'm sure you'll continue to mock.

The Autism Diet - Dietary Treatment of Autistic Children

Being marriedto a woman who has daily exposure to Autism, and who shows signs of light Asberger's, diets can and do affect BEHAVIORS of all people. Proper diets will affect kids without autism as much as it affects those with.

As for the climbing diagnosis rates..... y'all do realize that there are many varying degrees of autism. Some are hardly recognizable in society, others are easily recognizable. A person with slight Asberger's will generally function quite well in society, but will seem "odd" to others.

Add in the fact that Autism is one of the highest mis-diagnosed syndrome out there and I am suprised it's only risen 57%.

 

[bobzilla]

[snipped]My experience could be anecdotal and not one of general applicability, but from my personal experience I don't believe that the rise can be due to better diagnosing it better; autism is occurring more often in children these days.

It is anectdotal. I can think of at least 3 people in my tiny high school that would, today, be siagnosed with autism. I graduated with 65 other people.

 

[CarmelHP]

It is anectdotal. I can think of at least 3 people in my tiny high school that would, today, be siagnosed with autism. I graduated with 65 other people.

I was thinking this also. 40 years ago there were things people didn't just.did.not.talk.about. I've seen documents given to children at that time, who would now probably be diagnosed as Asperger's or other form of autism, sending them home from school and told not to come back with a school nurse's "diagnosis" as "brain damaged." Children with severe forms were likely quietly "put away" in mental hospitals as "retarded" or hopelessly mentally ill. People forget that a different world existed not that very long ago. And adding to the post above, I know plainly "odd" people who graduated college as little as 10 years ago who are likely undiagnosed autistic. The new diagnoses are certainly part of the higher incidence rate reported today.

 

[bobzilla]

I was thinking this also. 40 years ago there were things people didn't just.did.not.talk.about. I've seen documents given to children at that time, who would now probably be diagnosed as Asperger's or other form of autism, sending them home from school and told not to come back with a school nurse's "diagnosis" as "brain damaged." Children with severe forms were likely quietly "put away" in mental hospitals as "retarded" or hopelessly mentally ill. People forget that a different world existed not that very long ago. And adding to the post above, I know plainly "odd" people who graduated college as little as 10 years ago who are likely undiagnosed autistic. The new diagnoses are certainly part of the higher incidence rate reported today.

Agreed. Hell, I graduated just under 20 years ago and what we had for "special education" would be LAUGHED at by today's standards. Hell, you'd get your ass sued today.

Mental health is a fast growing area of medicine right now. There are a lot of good things that we have learned and are doing, there are also bad. As with any new medical field, you will have a rough going of misdiagnosis and poor treatment initially.

 

[Carmelbythecorn]

And, if it's not asking too much, quit thinking you and your family is so much more important than everyone else.

Do I understand your point correctly? If I believe that a vaccination (such as Guardasil) is not right for my child, I should put an unknown, unnamed persons interests ahead of my own child?

Isn't self interest at the core of rational thinking?

 

[Expat]

You are commenting about my post, about which you know not a thing! As usual, you have made gross assumptions.

My incredulity comes from my asking a question, which lead to a post stating my 'irrational fear' has 'caused' a child's death. I have stated no fears (rational,or irrational) about this topic whatsoever.

My irrational thinking is giving rise to pseudoscience? My power knows no bounds... WTF?

I will not comment on any more of your ignorant posts...and I have no further interest in addressing your assumptions.

You were commenting on what someone else had posted and said it was irrational. I addressed point by point what he said and demonstrated there was nothing irrational in his post. I apologize if I made you feel bad.

 

[JettaKnight]

Do I understand your point correctly? If I believe that a vaccination (such as Guardasil) is not right for my child, I should put an unknown, unnamed persons interests ahead of my own child?

Isn't self interest at the core of rational thinking?

[STRIKE]It's the core of Christian thinking.[/STRIKE]

DOH! I misread your post - That's what I get for trying to post and leave the office quickly.

The interrest of others is a core tenet of Christianity. Paul calls for the death of self interest in favor of the interest in other. There's even a key player in the Bible that sacrifices his child for a bunch of worthless losers...



PS - I was keen to make sure my post included the phrase "much more important". Protecting them from harm is your duty as a father. Looking out for your family is important, so teaching them not to be a narcissistic a-hole is important too.

 

[Carmelbythecorn]

It's the core of Christian thinking.

That's what I said...rational thinking

 

[Carmelbythecorn]

[STRIKE]It's the core of Christian thinking.[/STRIKE]

DOH! I misread your post - That's what I get for trying to post and leave the office quickly.

The interrest of others is a core tenet of Christianity. Paul calls for the death of self interest in favor of the interest in other. There's even a key player in the Bible that sacrifices his child for a bunch of worthless losers...



PS - I was keen to make sure my post included the phrase "much more important". Protecting them from harm is your duty as a father. Looking out for your family is important, so teaching them not to be a narcissistic a-hole is important too.

If I'm reading my Bible correctly, we are allowed to look after and care for ourselves, we are just to treat others as well as we treat ourselves.

A free market requires citizens to look after our self interests...it's the reason entrepreneurs ply their craft.

There is a tension between these two that is undeniable. This is where liberty comes in. We have the freedom (currently) to vax or not. That's all I've advocated since the OP.

Ultimately safety is an illusion. Risks exist and bad things happen. It's the fallen world in which we reside.

 

[vitamink]

After i saw this on the internet and i said no shots for me!
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ztiAN9k584[/ame]

Then i thought, did i just believe what i saw on the internet...that's not like me. So i dug a little and found this.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOmNuIYFD7g[/ame]

Then i went back to using the internet for what it's best for... comedy and porn.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qELbA6cKrPc[/ame]

 

[rambone]

Have an extra flu shot on me, bro.

 

[handgun]

Juat wash your organic foods.. wtf.. kind of malarkie is dont eat organic foods.. gee.. build up a tolerance..
start eating your mucas today... those people are healthier, dont try to make your living quarters like a lab clean room. Get outside spend time outside.. let venom enter your veins in a while you will build an immunity..

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Rambone - I know you have very personal reasons for hating vaccines. I'm not going to say that you are right or wrong on that. I haven't walked in your shoes. Let's take a step back and approach this issue with a bit of logic, shall we:

Question 1) Assuming that you had no moral objections, and the person was otherwise totally hot and willing, would you engage in sex with a person that you KNEW to have a major life threating STD, if you used a condom?
Question 2) Can you name ANY medicine that does not produce some kind of allergy or unwanted side effect in some portion of the population?
Question 3) Does question #2 hold true whether the "medicine" in question is medicine or food or whatever? I can't thing of one thing other than pure water, that doesn't have an allergic reaction or nasty side effect for SOMEBODY.
Question 4) Do the benefit of these things often outweigh the risks of the side effect? Consider penicillin? The Salk vaccine, etc. etc.


Given the above, do I believe that any given medicine/vaccine often makes sense? YES
Do I believe that the Government should force it? NO
Rambone, one of the things that you repeatedly say is: "Well your vaccine should protect YOU, so why do you care if I take the vaccine?" Consider question #1 - except in the case of some diseases, intimate contact is not required. Just breathing the same air can do the trick. Replace condoms with vaccines and you'll see my point.

Should the government force you to take the vaccines? NO, but it shouldn't force me to associate with a person who chooses to engage in risky behavior, either! Therein lies the issue. This presents an ethical dilemma for the Libertarian. You have the right to not take the vaccine and you have the right to be in public. But by so doing, you put my life at higher risk. Without my consent. Is that not initiating force? Are you not violating my rights?

I ask this as an honest ethical dilemma. Libertarian purists and thinkers (Fletch, Prometheus, et al) what say you? I ask this honestly as someone who tends to take a libertarian view of things. I am not trying to be a wise ass here. This one appears to fall squarely in a gray area, no?

 

[Prometheus]

The biggest problem we have is the people who say all vaccines are bad and all of them don't work along with those who say all vaccines are good and always work.

The fact is, some vaccines work for some people and don't for others. Some vaccines work for almost everyone with minimal and acceptable side effects.

Some have horrendous side effects, cause debilitating conditions and kill people.

Unfortunately people on both sides turn a blind eye to other side of the coin. Be it the positive or negative side.

People love to talk about the Polio vaccine. Setting aside the data that points to the disease being eradicated by other forms of modern medicine and hygiene, the vaccine did work.

Of course the polio vaccine, in it's various stages, killed thousands and infected tens of thousands with the actual virus itself due to improper production procedures.

Flash forward to today and we see vaccines such as gardasil (which prevents about 5 of the 40 types of sexually transmitted cancers) being forced upon 11 year olds by state mandates (Texas) and only after over 100 girls die and thousands develop painful and scarring genital warts do people start getting concerned.

We are still in the dark ages of vaccines. To make a blanket statement of saying they are safe is as absurd as they saying they kill everyone. It's a ridiculous notion either way.

The bottom line is: Vaccines Save Lives and Vaccines destroy and ruin lives.

If we had a more transparent pharmaceutical industry and an FDA that wasn't bought and paid for, I do believe we could have much safer and effective vaccines.

People need to make educated decisions and not force their views on others. It's really that simple.

Also it's important to note the difference between vaccine and inoculation.

Vaccines are stop gaps, foolers if you will, and you need boosters. Inoculations provide actual immunity. Today the two are used almost interchangeably. Like Rights vs privileges, they are NOT the same thing.