News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Anti-Vaxers - They are everywhere!

Started by Aroura33, February 11, 2015, 03:32:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

chill98



Baruch

#167
Good question.  What is the purpose of society?  If we answer that, then we can decide what government is good for.  My goal is humanitarian ... secular or religious.

For some people the purpose of society is to find a good dictator, that you can goose-step behind with confidence.  An elected dictator, for 4-8 years, preferably with a military background as well.  I don't want to decide anything for myself, I want someone to tell me what to do.  Even how you build your house.

I have no ambitions to tell my neighbors what to do.  I don't crave order, don't desire Plato's Republic with Guardians of the Galaxy.  For other people, anarchy is anathema, they want to have a centrally planned society where everyone else is a social insect clone, with themselves as the Queen.  The communists are like that, we will all have shoes, but only a left shoe, and all the same size.  You must make your left foot conform comrade!  The Right is just like it, only the right shoe is kosher, not the left shoe.

Good for them ... the USA is a free country, even for uptight folks ... but I reject their totalitarian policies ... I am not going to be Assimilated.  I refuse to share their insecurity.  If they push too hard, I would strip them of citizenship and ship them off to Australia ;-)  The US has millions of laws, the first thing we need to do is cancel most of them.  No law is passed for the common good, it is passed to enable a particular constituency that has given campaign contributions (bribes).  Sometimes laws are passed to mess with a competitor, rather than to give oneself some unfair advantage.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Flanker1Six

Quote from: PickelledEggs on February 11, 2015, 04:36:14 PM
I see your "Fuck" and raise you a FUCKING HELL!

LOL!  +1

Anti-Vaxers--monkeys are a superstitious breed!   DDOOHH!! :banghead: I suppose that goes without saying, here!   

Well I'm no AVer.................I've got a small pox vaccination from a doctor who firmly believed if one was good.........................three (no shit, the guy actually spiked me three times; each one over lapping the other---it's a freakin' huge) was a LOT better.  Got the swine flu vax back in the '70s when that was a big deal one flu season. Then when I went over seas on my first project I got two multi spectrum vaxes, for like 8 or 9 things + several tabs of Cipro (in case we came down with Anthrax or something---I figured it was just safer to avoid having sex with sheep  :2thumbs:-------but what do I know.)  Then when I went to Iraq a few years later, the Army vaxed us for 8 or 9 things again plus one for Anthrax (Damn! What's with these Docs;  everyone knows BBAAHH!! means no!).       

Hakurei Reimu

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
That's the best you can do when faced with a journal article reflecting evolutionary change in a bacteria that seems to be caused by the very immunization program - via evolution/mutation survival of the fittest - implemented to eradicate the problem? 
As opposed to what? Not vaccinating? Just letting pertussus run rampant over us unchallenged? Fuck that noise.

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
1.  I didn't claim it came from the previous link.
2. How would you know?  You refused to read/watch videos I posted previously.
3. Google is your friend.  Figure it out for yourself.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4460821?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

The above is of particular note as the study was done on the old vaccine, rather than the newer one (dtap).   The waning immunity issue was not explored for many years.  Confirmation bias === over confidence in vaccine protection
Then let's go with the new one, huh? Still not seeing your point here.

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
More fallacious responses.
1. No where do I advocate Taking AWAY any sort of protection YOU would choose to undergo for YOURSELF or YOUR child.
Good.

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
2. Informing people that the shot isn't as good as advertised
!= instead of doing something
One would think that the shot is as good as advertised, that is, the shot is advertised to be as good as it's proven to be. If it's not, then the labels need to be corrected and the advice changed. That's it.

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
3. Either you're immune or you're at risk.  People walking around with a mild case of whooping cough, beeleeving it must be something else because --wait for it-- they HAD their shots, are not willingly risking the health of their newborn nephew/niece when they all get together at the family function....  Mothers of young children taking them in for their annual check-ups at the clinic are not willingly exposing these kids to whooping cough because -- wait for it -- they think that herd immunity is an actual function of the vaccine programs; after all, the majority (more than 95%) of the people wandering that same clinic have been immunized (depending on location).
Herd immunity is a thing. If a diseased person only encounters people who are immune to the disease, then the disease doesn't get passed on and is fucked when the diseased person finally fights off the illness. Herd immunity is the reason while major outbreaks eventually burn themselves out, and the cyclical nature of many epidemics â€" they run out of significant pockets of susceptible people to infect. This is Epidemiology 101.

Now, if you have a mild illness, of course the first thing you think is not going to be whooping cough, not because you think you're "immune to whooping cough", but because there are literally thousands of very mild illnesses out there floating around that don't cause very much harm. If you have a mild illness, the self-diagnosis of "common cold" is going to be on your mind precisely because the common cold is very much more common than whooping cough. You'd have to get a blood test or some shit in order to find out that it's whooping cough, unless your presentation is quite obvious, but who the fuck's going to do that for every fucking illness they get?

Finally, immunity is not uniformly an all-or-nothing thing. This is because illnesses themselves are complex things, as is immunity. (Especially for bacterial infections like whooping cough â€" that's why they immunize against the poison; other regions are much more variable.) If you have partial immunity against a disease, the disease â€"if it takesâ€" will be much milder in you than if you had no preexisting immunity.

Again, the way of the world is that you choose your actions and you take your chances. You can mitigate some of your risk, but there will be some risk in any action you take. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, even if you make all the right descisions. Shit happens.

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
4. Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.
I am attacking the argument itself, you idiot. Read it again, and figure out where the implication points.

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
1. deflection regarding whether or not india is polio free is not the issue we are discussing.
Actually, yes, it is. If you are claiming that there are extra cases of AFP not caused by polio, you'd better have some good idea how to distinguish between NPAFP and PAFP, and it seems that the only criterion you are using is "India is polio free, yet it still has AFP."

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
2. Of the cases of acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) TESTED to confirm polio (if you would have retained the info in the links), you would understand how WHO (world health org) obtained their numbers.
I looked, and it turns out that a case of AFP confirmation does not depend on confirmed polio specimens. There's a route for "inadequate specimens" â€" which given the source, it would not be surprising if there are significant number of these â€" that lead to confirmation.

I'm not surprised: the 47,500 cases you claim is a lot of people to screen for poliovirus, especially in a developing country.

And you still haven't addressed the possibility I raised that it may be some other disease stomping around with similar presentation to polio. You know, being in the tropics and shit.

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
3. That's because you have never looked into the issue.  As is so typical for people in general, you just parrot what you've been taught.
:lol: If you mean, "because I never looked at the issue with the nievitee of someone with no grounding at all in biology or statistics," then guilty and fucking proud. None of the anti-vax arguments make a lick of sense.

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
See, this is a perfect example of your inability to objectively process the information provided.  You are confusing the REALITY -->  India testing cases of acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) to confirm whether or not it was polio vs what you
BEELEEVE YOU READ -->  becomes testing 80% of its vaccinated population.
Isn't "BEELEEVE YOU READ" what you are doing? You seem to have swallowed whole the anti-vaxer bullshit that you have come across. Seriously, DDT the cause of the polio epidemic? Fucksake.

Quote from: chill98 on April 23, 2016, 10:52:03 AM
Now to speak to you in a way you are accustomed (ad hominen):
The bullshit is somewhere between your optic nerve and your brain processing/interpreting the written word.... possibly reflected within your attraction to cartoons (unreality -- you can make it up as you go) or possibly it is a psychological thing for you- a need for an absolute right - Do you struggle with multi choice questions; those kinds of questions that have more than one right answer? 
:lol: Some questions have more than one right answer. This is not one of them. The anti-vaxers are either right on their biology, or they're wrong on that biology. There's no middle ground. So far, they don't have a very good track record.

Anyway, I think it's time for you to scoot along now. We both think of each other as idiots/mindless sheeple, so I don't really see the point of any further discussion.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

PickelledEggs


chill98

Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on April 24, 2016, 06:08:36 PM
As opposed to what? Not vaccinating? Just letting pertussus run rampant over us unchallenged?

It was never 'rampant' prior to vaccines either.  Now it is mutating to be more toxic to the host.  That was the point.

Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on April 24, 2016, 06:08:36 PM
Then let's go with the new one, huh? Still not seeing your point here.
Of course you don't see the point here.  Here is the simplest sentence from the abstract.  Even you should be able to comprehend it:

The proportion of cases of pertussis diagnosed and reported is low even when children present with classical symptoms.
end quote from paper on mis-diagnosis.

The Whooping cough vaccine was never as good as advertised.  Bias... well Indoctrination is a better term... prevented doctors from realizing cases of whooping cough were present because the individual had been immunized; this lead to many misdiagnosis of Bronchitis. 

And the vaccine did kill children.  I already told of the death in my school the 'system' tried to blame on an egg allergy.... a kid who ate eggs all the time...

Transcript from 1986:

http://www.nvic.org/CMSTemplates/NVIC/pdf/ACIP-May-12-1986-Transcript.pdf

Though I have know you will not read the above either.  They gave vaccines protection from lawsuit for a reason.  It was killing kids all over the country.  They changed the vaccine formula for a reason, it was killing kids all over the country.  And they banned the live polio vaccine for a reason, but its being used in india right now.  And AFP is rising during the current push to get rid of polio... 10 - 40K people getting afp vs 1500 (highest numbers) getting polio... 

Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on April 24, 2016, 06:08:36 PM
Now, if you have a mild illness, of course the first thing you think is not going to be whooping cough, not because you think you're "immune to whooping cough", but because there are literally thousands of very mild illnesses out there floating around that don't cause very much harm. If you have a mild illness, the self-diagnosis of "common cold" is going to be on your mind precisely because the common cold is very much more common than whooping cough. You'd have to get a blood test or some shit in order to find out that it's whooping cough, unless your presentation is quite obvious, but who the fuck's going to do that for every fucking illness they get?
Now that was quite the circle jerk around the actual point previously being introduced; the vaccine was never as good as advertised and doctors could not bring themselves to diagnose pertussis because of their inherent bias towards vaccines - that they are effective.

nejm.org = New England Journal of Medicine: 

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1200850#t=articleResults

quote from 2012 ~~ As of Aug. 10, there were 178 confirmed cases of pertussis in Vermont children between the ages of six months and 18 years. Of that number, 90 percent â€" or 160 kids â€" had received at least one dose of the child vaccination, while the majority had received five or six doses. According to the DOH, one child had received one or two doses, eight had received three doses, nine had received four doses, 74 had received five doses and 68 had received six doses.

http://vtdigger.org/2012/10/08/90-percent-of-whooping-cough-cases-in-vermont-among-vaccinated-children/

Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on April 24, 2016, 06:08:36 PM

I am attacking the argument itself, you idiot. Read it again, and figure out where the implication points.

Can't get through a single post without flaming.  Pissant.

Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on April 24, 2016, 06:08:36 PM
Actually, yes, it is. If you are claiming that there are extra cases of AFP not caused by polio, you'd better have some good idea how to distinguish between NPAFP and PAFP, and it seems that the only criterion you are using is "India is polio free, yet it still has AFP."

Idiot.  Its not me claiming it, its data from WHO -- World Health Org.  I am sure it brings you internal conflict, it goes against what you've been lead to beeleeve's.  But you wouldn't know that because its OBVIOUS you won't read information that conflicts with what you WANT to Beeleeve.

Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on April 24, 2016, 06:08:36 PM
I looked, and it turns out that a case of AFP confirmation does not depend on confirmed polio specimens. There's a route for "inadequate specimens" â€" which given the source, it would not be surprising if there are significant number of these â€" that lead to confirmation.
wtf??  My WHOLE POINT was we have no idea how many of the past polio was actually polio!  Of the 1% of usa alleged polio cases of the late 50s that was ACTUALLY TESTED over 50% did NOT indicate POLIO,  the WHO data in INDIA, Which is testing +80% of AFP cases to ensure it is NOT POLIO is finding even HIGHER incidents of NON-POLIO Paralysis!

inadequate specimens is covered under the column titled compatibles.  From the who page you claim to have read - indicating I am probably on the right path with your optic nerve/processing failures noted previously:

2: compatible cases indicate surveillance failures and should be monitored for clustering in space and time
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on April 24, 2016, 06:08:36 PM
I'm not surprised: the 47,500 cases you claim is a lot of people to screen for poliovirus, especially in a developing country.
Sigh.

I
w
i
l
l
t
y
p
e
s
l
o
w
e
r

Of the AFP cases, over 80% were tested for polio.
There is a polio column to represent these when the test is positive.
The far column is for the AFP cases that had a testing reliability failure now listed under compatibles.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on April 24, 2016, 06:08:36 PM
And you still haven't addressed the possibility I raised that it may be some other disease stomping around with similar presentation to polio.
well... handclap....  You are finally catching up to what I was saying all along!! 
Yay... i guess...

[
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on April 24, 2016, 06:08:36 PMSeriously, DDT the cause of the polio epidemic? Fucksake.
because you are soooo slow to comprehend what is written, I will quote exactly what I said again.
Reply #123 on: April 02, 2016:
When looking for graphs regarding polio, it is difficult to find a gov source including information for the pre-vaccine incidents.  Most begin at the peak of the 50's epidemic near the introduction of the vaccines....
Now moving towards the US version of above graph, I am relying on an anti-vax site - though I am sure they would prefer to be labeled a vaccine awareness site -- .  What is clear is the UK rise in polio is aligned with the US polio cases:...

In the above webpage, the information on DDT is interesting.  I remember these discussions in the late 60s/early 70s regarding the past polio epidemics and questions regarding how much of the paralysis was entirely disease caused.  There are fair questions being asked (imo), did DDT exposure increase the chances of polio becoming deadly and/or crippling?  How many of the polio cases were actually something else unrelated to the polio virus?

end repost.
Again we see your written word processing ability compromised.  No where do I say DDT caused the polio epidemic.

I remember these discussions because of a parent who had paralytic polio... well... we don't know that for sure because it was the late 40s and they were not testing then...  These questions were being raised across the media and via medical professionals, coinciding with the DDT ban efforts.  But you wouldn't know about that would you... preferring mcnugget sized info packets, dished up by some kind of cartoon character... your power animal chakra thingy.... 




Hakurei Reimu

Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
It was never 'rampant' prior to vaccines either.  Now it is mutating to be more toxic to the host.  That was the point.
We have different definitions of 'rampant.' 138,000 deaths a year in 1990. Do you think that this rate of death should be tollerated?

B. pertussis has evolved to be more toxic because that toxin is what facilitates its transmission. In any communicable disease (which are caused by organisms that can evolve), there is going to be a Red Queen scenario. It's always going to be a race against time, even if the race can take years, decades or centuries to play out. Of course B. pertussis is going to try to overcome our defenses. But we shouldn't simply sit back and take it precisely because it causes suffering and death.

Are you saying we should be smarter in our battle against pertussis and other diseases causing suffering and death? I'm on board with that, 100%. But if your argument is that we should have left well enough alone, then I am NOT with you. It's like arguing that we shouldn't rebel against the Daleks because if we do the Daleks will respond by killing more people. Fuck. That. Noise!


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
Of course you don't see the point here.  Here is the simplest sentence from the abstract.  Even you should be able to comprehend it:

The proportion of cases of pertussis diagnosed and reported is low even when children present with classical symptoms.
end quote from paper on mis-diagnosis.
How low is 'low', scrub? Also, if it's a misdiagnosis, what is the disease misdiagnosed as? A bacterial infection? If so, the treatment would be with antibiotics, which is the only additional thing you can do if you have pertussis anyway.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
The Whooping cough vaccine was never as good as advertised.
But still good. Sure, we found out that it needs boosters even into adult life, but that occurs with many illnesses, including tetanus.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
Bias... well Indoctrination is a better term... prevented doctors from realizing cases of whooping cough were present because the individual had been immunized; this lead to many misdiagnosis of Bronchitis. 
Bronchitis is not a disease, but a condition that has many diseases associated with it, including pertussis. And if you're caughing up your lungs and puking afterward (classic pertussis symptoms), they're going to consider a bacterial infection of some kind.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
And the vaccine did kill children.  I already told of the death in my school the 'system' tried to blame on an egg allergy.... a kid who ate eggs all the time...
I NEVER CLAIMED IT DIDN'T.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
http://www.nvic.org/CMSTemplates/NVIC/pdf/ACIP-May-12-1986-Transcript.pdf

Though I have know you will not read the above either.  They gave vaccines protection from lawsuit for a reason.  It was killing kids all over the country.  They changed the vaccine formula for a reason, it was killing kids all over the country.
As was pertussis, bub. And yes, they're going to try to improve the vaccine to reduce side effects. We do this all of the time, with every drug. It's called the march of science. We improve our knowledge, and with it, the safety and effectiveness of our tools.

Furthermore, interesting thing about whole-cell pertussis vaccine, which was thought to lead to SIDS â€" the 'link' vanished:

https://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/174/Supplement_3/S259.full.pdf

From the abstract: "Whole cell pertussis vaccines are generally highly efficacious. All whole cell vaccines are reactogenic, causing fever and local reactions in many vaccinees. In the past, these vaccines were thought to cause infant deaths and brain damage. However, several large epidemiologic studies indicate that whole cell vaccines do not cause infant deaths or neurologic disease."

Now, how would I know that I would need a paper citing the absence of neurological illnesses and infant death if I didn't read your paper, hmmm?


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
And they banned the live polio vaccine for a reason,
But was it a good reason? We have many bans that don't make a lick of sense in retrospect. How's the drug war comming along?


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
but its being used in india right now.  And AFP is rising during the current push to get rid of polio... 10 - 40K people getting afp vs 1500 (highest numbers) getting polio... 
Again, you have asserted that figure without addressing why that figure should be believed.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
Now that was quite the circle jerk around the actual point previously being introduced; the vaccine was never as good as advertised and doctors could not bring themselves to diagnose pertussis because of their inherent bias towards vaccines - that they are effective.

nejm.org = New England Journal of Medicine: 

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1200850#t=articleResults
Which just shows that pertussis has to be treated like tetanus, needing occasional boosters. And we need better vaccines. So what?

Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
quote from 2012 ~~ As of Aug. 10, there were 178 confirmed cases of pertussis in Vermont children between the ages of six months and 18 years. Of that number, 90 percent â€" or 160 kids â€" had received at least one dose of the child vaccination, while the majority had received five or six doses. According to the DOH, one child had received one or two doses, eight had received three doses, nine had received four doses, 74 had received five doses and 68 had received six doses.

http://vtdigger.org/2012/10/08/90-percent-of-whooping-cough-cases-in-vermont-among-vaccinated-children/
What your cited paper gives you is the proportion of kids that had been vaccinated, given that they contracted pertussis. That is an irrelevant figure for knowing how effective the vaccine is. What you want is the probability that you will contract pertussis, given that you are vaccinated against pertussis.

P(V|P) ≠ P(P|V)

What the paper has committed is a classic error in probability.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
Can't get through a single post without flaming.  Pissant.
Oh, look at the high and mighty idiot who can't understand that the observation that "following stupid advice makes someone an idiot" is not an ad hominem, no matter what he may believe. Sorry, chum, if you keep spouting stupidity, people are going to start thinking that you are an idiot. And they'd be right to do so.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
Idiot.  Its not me claiming it, its data from WHO -- World Health Org.  I am sure it brings you internal conflict, it goes against what you've been lead to beeleeve's.  But you wouldn't know that because its OBVIOUS you won't read information that conflicts with what you WANT to Beeleeve.
Badly gathered data is badly gathered data, even if the WHO does it. Being published by the WHO does not make a figure reliable. It's the veracity of the data gathered and the analysis that makes a figure reliable. What you have presented is a tally. It's an interesting bit of trivia, but without some sort of context, it's worthless.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
wtf??  My WHOLE POINT was we have no idea how many of the past polio was actually polio!
As long as there is some wild polio out there in the world, it can make a comeback. The goal of world eradication is to wipe out polio as we did smallpox so that no one need be vaccinated ever again, which avoids the risk of polio and the polio vaccine in one fell swoop.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
Of the 1% of usa alleged polio cases of the late 50s that was ACTUALLY TESTED over 50% did NOT indicate POLIO,
:histerical:

And yet somehow this NOT-POLIO experienced a near total collapse of cases in this country just when a vaccine specific to it started mass distribution? Do you realize how insane you sound right now?

No, of course not. If you did, you would have shut up long ago.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
the WHO data in INDIA, Which is testing +80% of AFP cases to ensure it is NOT POLIO is finding even HIGHER incidents of NON-POLIO Paralysis!
They tested 80% of the claimed 47,500? In a developing country? BULLSHIT!


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
inadequate specimens is covered under the column titled compatibles.  From the who page you claim to have read - indicating I am probably on the right path with your optic nerve/processing failures noted previously:

2: compatible cases indicate surveillance failures and should be monitored for clustering in space and time Sigh.
And what do you do in the meantime? Just sit on your hands? No, you report the AFP. All the while, your "monitoring" falls by the wayside.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
Of the AFP cases, over 80% were tested for polio.
Yes, 80% of the claimed 47,500 were claimed tested for polio. Again, I say bullshit. The WHO monitors out there are still largely going to be pulled from the rank and file Indian doctors, who are already under stress from the fact that they are practicing medicine in a developing country. Furthermore, to have a good statistical analysis, you don't need to test 80% of them. A few thousand is enough, with good bias squeezers. Why are they testing this many people? The WHO ought to know statistics as well as I. I smell a rat.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
well... handclap....  You are finally catching up to what I was saying all along!! 
Yay... i guess...
Fucksake, you're a smarmy asshole. Are you saying that there was never polio in India, or that it would be only localized? A disease as old as civilization itself, and is provably linked to growing population in cities, as is happening now in India? Yeah, bullshit. Sure, the polio may have been masking the effects of another disease in India, but just because the new disease has been unmasked doesn't mean you don't do anything about the polio. No, you just add the new disease to the hitlist.


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
because you are soooo slow to comprehend what is written, I will quote exactly what I said again.
Reply #123 on: April 02, 2016:
When looking for graphs regarding polio, it is difficult to find a gov source including information for the pre-vaccine incidents.  Most begin at the peak of the 50's epidemic near the introduction of the vaccines....
Irrelevant. My argument didn't rely on anything that the graphs do not show. In the specific example of DDT, you lack the specific epidemiology that would be indicative of a mass-poisoning. Furthermore, DDT itself may have been banned, but it was replaced by chemicals that had the exact same toxicology in humans as DDT â€" banning of DDT would have done NOTHING for the polio epidemic! Finally, while DDT went away, the subcutaneous residues stayed, some because of the fact that DDT was replaced by its chemical cousins, but mostly because the residues have a long half-life in fatty tissue.

Together with the fact that polio all but vanished in the US when a specific vaccine against it was developed and distributed en masse, the above puts the last nail in the coffin of any case that polio == DDT poisoning.

Yet none of this occured to you at all. I found every piece of relevant information in about an hour on the web, yet you had several days to do the same and didn't find this stuff. It didn't occur to you to say to yourself, "Okay, let's see if we can find a graph that maps DDT production to polio cases." It didn't occur to you to check the toxicology of DDT's relatives that replaced it. Because if you did, even if you restricted yourself to anti-vaxer sites, you would have found the same graph I did. Furthermore, if the graph showed that DDT production led polio cases, it would indeed be extremely interesting, and the claim of DDT poisoning harder to dismiss.

But you didn't do any of this. You didn't do any of this even though I was pointing out to you that, if any of what the anti-vaxers were saying was true, would reduce the entirety of medicine to a smoking ruin. It makes hash of epidemiology â€"whose first task ever was to prove that a disease (cholera) was transmitted though the water like polio. It makes hash of the law of dosage-response. It makes hash of everything we know about the immune system. And it makes the perfect the enemy of the good, demanding vaccines be perfectly safe when literally nothing else in medicine is.

And, no, you don't get away with that shit when you say:
Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
No where do I say DDT caused the polio epidemic.
because to even consider it a possibility is stupid. No, they are NOT fair questions to anyone with curiosity enough to even visit another anti-vaxer website. The entire anti-vax movement is a big exercise in moving the goalposts. They want to find any reason at all to discount the efficacy of vaccines, but all of them are bad.

So why aren't you the one finding these holes, when they are a short google search away? It's exactly because it is you are the one who is not curious about polio or the anti-vax movement or why they are so derided. You would have found that the entire movement began with a fake research paper by Andrew Wakefield, and spiraled out from there with increasingly outlandish and ultimately false claims, which any sane person would take as a caution to do a bit of digging on any of their claims before even entertaining the notion that they may "have a point."


Quote from: chill98 on April 24, 2016, 10:56:56 PM
I remember these discussions because of a parent who had paralytic polio... well... we don't know that for sure because it was the late 40s and they were not testing then...  These questions were being raised across the media and via medical professionals, coinciding with the DDT ban efforts.  But you wouldn't know about that would you... preferring mcnugget sized info packets, dished up by some kind of cartoon character... your power animal chakra thingy.... 
Now that IS a fallacy. My choice in avatar has nothing to do with the quality of my arguments, any more than having a bald-eagle avatar proves your a patriot.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

aitm

so I popped in too say what sup? And then I………er……..ah……….never mind.. wrong  er   world..carry on
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

Baruch

Remember ... doctors get credit for all the lives they save, but they don't have to think twice about the lives they took.  Comes with the spandex super-suit.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Hijiri Byakuren

Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on April 25, 2016, 08:20:04 PMNow that IS a fallacy. My choice in avatar has nothing to do with the quality of my arguments, any more than having a bald-eagle avatar proves your a patriot.
Cirno 9:9 - He who must insist intelligence shall bear the number of the Baka.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

marom1963

Quote from: Baruch on April 25, 2016, 10:16:11 PM
Remember ... doctors get credit for all the lives they save, but they don't have to think twice about the lives they took.  Comes with the spandex super-suit.
Are you accusing them of murder - or of being human w/limited skills against an enemy that is more powerful and craftier than they are? If the latter, then good for them; being able to "forgive" themselves allows them to carry on, so that they can save more lives, when they do win the battles ... In my experience - and it is not inconsiderable, given that both of my parents took a long time to die from serious illnesses and I myself am mentally ill - most doctors do care a great deal about their patients. And they do suffer when their patients suffer. What more do you want from them?
OMNIA DEPENDET ...

Baruch

#177
Quote from: marom1963 on April 26, 2016, 04:25:51 AM
Are you accusing them of murder - or of being human w/limited skills against an enemy that is more powerful and craftier than they are? If the latter, then good for them; being able to "forgive" themselves allows them to carry on, so that they can save more lives, when they do win the battles ... In my experience - and it is not inconsiderable, given that both of my parents took a long time to die from serious illnesses and I myself am mentally ill - most doctors do care a great deal about their patients. And they do suffer when their patients suffer. What more do you want from them?

Ever read the Hammurabi Code for medical mal-practice?  Manslaughter doesn't require intent.  Doctors are the new high priests ... who offer you salvation.  But really, all we have is the high tech version of a carney selling patent medicine off the back of a wagon ... that and a barber with really sharp knives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospital-acquired_infection

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_malpractice_in_the_United_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overmedication

Doctors over-test as well but usually those tests are not risky for the patient.  And of course in the US we have advertising of medications ... which is boon for hypochondriacs.  The doctor and nurse aren't always the problem, sometimes it is the patient.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypochondriasis
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Flanker1Six

#178
First of all I am compelled to say Hakuei Reimu's posts are just fucking awesome!   :agreenod:

Secondly; in regards to Baruch's post (above--which I agree with): 

My Mom died of metastasized ovarian cancer in '81.  She been complaining of stomach aches, pains, bad digestion etc for an extended period of time.  She'd been in to see her/our family physician (osteopathic general practitioner) on several occasions for her condition.  Anyway.............the months dragged on with Doc trial ballooning a number of "interesting medical hypothesis" (none of which were accurate) as the possible cause of her condition, as well as prescribing a number of dietary changes, OTC homeopathic remedies, and prescription digestive meds (none of which worked).  Unfortunately, Mom resolutely ignored her sister's advice to "get a second opinion"!   It got so bad; Doc finally relented and consulted a specialist (oncologist?) who did whatever his specialty called for, and rendered the medical opinion of "Holy fuck me, Batman; get her to surgery"! 

Totally cancered ovary..............uterus all fucked up, and it had spread to some other organs as well.   So Doc (with the specialist observing/assisting WTF??!!) ends up snatching a bunch of stuff out of her; sews her up and sends her home.  Where she got worse over the next year, ended up in the hospital in hospice care, and died one year to the day after surgery.   

Within a day or so of her death; my Dad took a call at home; it was a woman who said she had been an attending RN at Mom's surgery.  She was VERY upset and told Dad she wanted us to know that when Doc had removed Mom's cancered ovary....................he'd dropped it (internal organs are pretty slippery IMO); it fell back into her abdomen, where it exploded like the rotten balloon it was.  Doc, and the specialist wiped the ovarian goo off the other organs (the ones they weren't snatching out) as best they could and commenting (for the benefit of the other ER Team Members?) they thought they'd gotten it all. The woman told Dad NONE of that was reflected in the medical records.  Dad told me about the phone call several years after the fact.............he was always very old school stiff upper lip. 

Within the last two years I had occasion to bring the incident up with my Aunt (the second opinion one); the first time I'd ever spoken of it with her.  She's a life long Christian, who attends church every week, and I've never heard her use bad language (don't worry----I made up for it for her).  When I brought up Mom's death; she blew her stack, and went off on a swearing tirade about Doc, and his blowing Mom off for all those months with osteopathic theories, and Mom's obstinancy on getting a second opinion.  Gotta admit...................I was shocked at the vitriol of her response. When I asked if she knew about Dad's phone call/dropped ovary tale...........she said no, and stated her recollection was Doc had simply NOT removed the second ovary, and she'd always thought he was a bleeping incompetent anyway.

Was either version of events true?  Fuck if I know. 

Which get's back to   "But really, all we have is the high tech version of a carney selling patent medicine off the back of a wagon ... that and a barber with really sharp knives."

If it still hurts and they're blowing you off...................for God's sake.................GET A SECOND OPINION! 

Hydra009

Quote from: Flanker1Six on April 28, 2016, 02:35:25 PMprescribing a number of dietary changes, OTC homeopathic remedies
An actual doctor prescribing homeopathic snake oil?!  WTF!