The vast majority of people have no idea what goes into creating a vaccine. The overwhelming majority of doctors only get a cursory education on the subject (less than 6 hours.) Vaccines are created and produced by the lowest bidder, and are comprise the cheapest of ingredients. That alone should make everyone insist on the choice of vaccine brands. Not that they don't already exist. The vaccines a white affluent child receives are very different than those a poor ethnic children receive...if you are in an unregulated 3rd world country, the experimental concoctions you are injected with would make 'Hydra' blush, ^{and ironically are way more expensive.} AIDS, I'm looking at you... The big "win" for vaccine advertisers is the old bullshit narrative that vaccines have saved millions, if not billions...the truth is; Hygiene and processed food did all the work...granted, vaccines were used to either wipe out or neutralize the natives who refused to wash the shit off themselves and their food, it could even be argued that bullets did more of that than vaccines...

Regardless of education, everyone should have their genetic predisposition check prior to any inoculation. Now that the technology exist and is affordable, it's ridiculous not to screen everyone...I can't help but think what humans 100 years from now will think about the... God damn barbarians...Hundreds of years ago the vaccine shills would be the same people praising shit, urine and leeches as a cure-all....meanwhile burning witches and eating their charcoal remains for good tidings. Whatever the Holy Church of political funded theater deems sanctified is LAW, regardless of merit!!! "Oh," you say," it turns out that rubbing feces in your eyes doesn't cure your headache?" You are obviously a witch and need to be burned...turns out I am a tad bit peckish....Barbecue witch anyone? help me setup the pyre, I can't see well with all this shit in my eyes.../sayseveryvaccineshill.

Why are so many people anti- (every) vaccine?

Some vaccines are good / helpful. Some don't do much - no harm, no good. Some seem to do more harm than good.

Why is the anti-vac movement against ALL of them? Why is it all or nothing? Why is nobody on either side telling the truth?

We know the agenda of the "every vaccine is good" crowd - money at a minimum.

What's the agenda of the "every vaccine is bad" crowd?

This is really a big problem too. There is significant evidence against some vaccinations and poisons put in them. But not all. And some vaccines have clearly done much more good than harm. Some are suspicious as to how much good they actually do. We need to separate them instead of saying its just all bad all the time.

This is the argument of the "anti-vaccers" nice try Smith-Glaxo-Kline.

If you say on ill word about any vaccine the pro side puppets lump you in with the autism crowd.

I think you're confused about what I wrote there.

GSK would say that all vaccines are beneficial and harmless. What did I say?

No this is my point. People who say things against vaccines arent saying every single one is bad, well, at least the sane ones.

Try bringing up any vaccine trial or programme that has links to nefarious activity on one of the more popular subs and you will see.

When I was a kid there was less than a dozen vaccines, now look how many there are.. The point of most antivaxers seems to be that we are helping the sick and frail at the expense of the fit. Seems to go against nature.

People who say things against vaccines arent saying every single one is bad, well, at least the sane ones.

I agree with the sane part of your comment. However, if you look about the anti-vac movement - web sites and people spouting things in public - the vast majority of them call all vaccines bad. I have not yet found one that says, "these are bad for this reason but these are good". Not one.

Maybe I've just missed them?

When I was a kid there was less than a dozen vaccines, now look how many there are.

That is meaningless to the conversation. Science will progress. Technological and medical progress seem to be advancing on an exponential curve.

Again, that doesn't mean that everything is good. That just means that just because there are "more than before", they're not all bad, either.

we are helping the sick and frail

Humane, empathetic humans help the sick and the frail. It is a societal advantage. And it's the right thing to do.

at the expense of the fit

The whole of that - "we are helping the sick and the frail at the expense of the fit" - seems to assume that vaccines are good if you're sick or frail but harmful if you're fit.

How would vaccines that help sick people harm fit ones? Do they carry genetic markers to immunize only those with a low white blood cell count or something?

All that aside, what we ought to do as parents is understand every single thing we're considering putting into our children's bodies. Food, medicine, vaccines, everything. One at a time. And make a decision one at a time.

In a perfect world, we could trust the government to protect the people. That was theoretically its job at one point. But obviously that's not the case any more.

In a better world than we have today, we could trust watchdog groups to inform the people. But, as I've said, I haven't seen the group that tells the truth about vaccines - some are good and some might be harmful with real data to back that up. They're on either extreme.

In the absence of a protective government and legit watchdog groups, it falls to us individually.

First off is this how you do this in the flesh? because it is annoying.

The people who question vaccines do not all have blogs. Unfortunately thus world is run by the squeaky wheels and the people with agendas or extreme views squeak the loudest.

As for the weak bit... see for billions of years the weakest members of any given group dies out. We humans and our humanity seem to have an issue with this so all nurses must get flu shot or fuck off, wanna visit gramps in the hospital. ..flu shot.

13 dead and rising from the flu shot in Italy this season. 13 fit healthy people dead because they didn't want to get the fucking flu!!!!

Flu = natural event

Filling your body with who knows what = creation of modern times

A few hundred years from now they will look back on us with disdain

Hep trails on NYC spread hiv intentionally through the gay community.

If you went to a restaurant and asked what was in the soup they could tell you every ingredient yet ask the medical worker who is about to inject you what's in that syringe.

The people who question vaccines do not all have blogs.

I understand this. Yeah, squeaky wheels.

Go find a single web site that tells the truth about vaccines. None exists.

... the weakest members of any given group dies out. We humans and our humanity seem to have an issue with this...

YES! For fuck's sake YES! Life is important! It's the MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE UNIVERSE! It doesn't matter if you're too frail to move. Your life is important! So is the dude you don't know laying there on the stretcher, and who the fuck are YOU to put HIS life at risk?

If you want to enter into an environment in which your mere presence could KILL people, then you damn well better take every step you can to minimize that risk. If you're not willing to do that, don't enter the environment.

...yet ask the medical worker who is about to inject you what's in that syringe.

That's why I do the research ahead of time. The information IS out there.

Because science is scary and therefore evil!

[deleted]

No. You won't believe what I type anyway.

You need to do the research for yourself.

You could start by gaining an understanding of thermiosal, how it is similar and different from "raw" mercury, the relative dosages of it in the vaccines that carry it compared to the relative dosages in, say, tuna fish, and how the human digestive system processes metals into the bloodstream.

You could do the same with formaldehyde, especially comparing and contrasting the dosages in the vaccines with the amount the human body makes on its own each day or the amount in a simple pear, again informed by your research on how the digestive system processes food into the blood stream.

Finally, you might want to do the same with aluminum, the effects thereof on the human nervous system, and compare the dosages in vaccines that carry it (esp. those given in the first 6 months of life) with the dosages provided by mother's / breast milk.

Notice in that I haven't said which are OK and which are bad. You need to do the research and gain the understanding for yourself. It's the only way you'll learn.

[deleted]

Ah, but you're the one who posted the OP, so you seem to be bent toward the rampant, every vaccine is evil and will kill you crowd.

Or do you mean to tell me that you would believe the product of my research without me reproducing every bit of my research here for you to back it up?

[deleted]

Right. So I'd have to reproduce the entirety of my research here for you to convince you of something that I really, truly don't care whether or not you're convinced of.

Let me ask you this: Do you think it's reasonable to believe that EVERY SINGLE VACCINE is bad? Every one? No redeeming qualities in any of them. They either do nothing or are more harmful than good. 100%?

[deleted]

OK, I'll give you one to see how you react.

Formaldehyde content in a vaccine is not a valid reason to avoid the vaccine. Based on my research, the amount of formaldehyde in the vaccines is minuscule compared with the amount of formaldehyde an infant will get in their bloodstream from eating a jar of baby food pears, even when the digestive system's filtering is taken into account. It's even smaller than the amount of formaldehyde baby's body makes on its own over the course of a very small number of days.

The amount and type of formaldehyde created naturally in an infants body differs greatly from the type and concentration of formaldehyde in vaccines. Why would you lie about that very simple fact? It's like you have ZERO medical training and are merely shitting out propaganda from 2009. If you were current in your microbiological studies you would be familiar with the biochemical studies of the tracheobronchial epithelium. Which negates your dated "natural formaldehyde created by children make cheap additives okay" propaganda.

Also you suggest the chemical composition of the formaldehyde humans make in their bodies is different from that in the vaccines.

I was aware that thimerosal is not mercury - the chemical composition is different. But this is the first I've learned that the formaldehyde is different. In all the searching and reading I've done, and it was quite a lot of hours, I've never seen that stated about formaldehyde.

Can you provide a link to a reasonably reputable site (read: not an anti-vac site) that describes how formaldehyde produced in humans is different from the formaldehyde used in vaccines?

The problem with just your assertion is that it makes you the same, less than really, the doctors who say, "Trust me, vaccines are good."

You're saying, "Trust me, vaccines are bad."

No data from either side makes it hard to convince a non doctor (the people making decisions about whether or not to vaccinate their kids) of either argument.

Plus... you SAY you're a doctor. If I go to my doctor's office, I can at least see his credentials.

[deleted]

I don't want you to write. I want you to link. Can you link? Or is there no information aside form your assertion?

The problem with just your assertion is that it makes you the same, less than really, the doctors who say, "Trust me, vaccines are good."

You're saying, "Trust me, vaccines are bad."

No data from either side makes it hard to convince a non doctor (the people making decisions about whether or not to vaccinate their kids) of either argument.

Plus... you SAY you're a doctor. If I go to my doctor's office, I can at least see his credentials.

I never said vaccines were bad. You want a link to a medical education? My assertion is based on knowledge. I never asked for your trust. I never claimed vaccines were bad. I presented no data. I merely pointed out your ignorance of the subject matter. I never claimed to be a medical doctor...yet you admit that anyone could fool you with a framed piece of paper. Like I said, please contact me when you are done with your medical education so we can have a cogent conversation on the subject. It's too frustrating to spoon feed and address ever single propaganda talking point...especially since it comprises the majority of your present education on the subject. Do yourself a favor and stick to things you can grasp. Like weed or whatever...deep thinking/memorization might not be your strong point. If you are afraid of vaccinations, or concerned about any side effect for you and your family, get a genetic predisposition check...they only cost about $1000. If your family was properly vaccinated in the past, there is a good chance you genetically past on the immunity...Case closed.

Like weed or whatever

It's very entertaining how my handle throws people off. You're corresponding with a man who does physics calculations in his head.

So please remove your own head from your ass and remove your ass from your high horse.

If you're interested in jumping into someone else's conversation and refuting information, provide information that refutes it.

How hard can it be, really, to link a site that explains the differences between 2 types of formaldehyde you assert? It's really easy to find one that explains the differences between thimerosal and mercury.

didn't you just agree to this...and what does your ability to calculate physics "in your head"(who can't preform that simple task?) have to do with your wanton ignorance of medicine/physiology/biophysics? Why not calculate a method of to educate yourself on the subject instead of relying on propaganda and hearsay. I merely pointed out how ignorant you seem on the subject. I didn't make any arrangement to educate you. Get back to your weed and nostalgia of the late 60's...and "physics"(in your mind)...medicine might be out of your wheelhouse.

didn't you just agree to this...

I agreed that most people are like that. In the very same post, I said I prefer evidence, of which you have provided none. Did you read the whole of what I wrote or cherry pick?

wanton ignorance of medicine/physiology/biophysics

Interesting how in this thread you've demonstrated less knowledge than I.

Why not calculate a method of to educate yourself on the subject instead of relying on propaganda and hearsay.

As I mentioned, I've done quite a bit of research on formaldehyde in vaccines and found nothing like what you stated. I asked you for a link, which you have still failed to provide. After so long now leaves me believing you're FOS on that particular subject.

Get back to your weed and nostalgia

Still overwhelmed by letters and numbers you don't understand, I see.

[deleted]

Done trolling yet?

[deleted]

No you make assertions you can't back up with a simple link and resort to childish name-calling when called out on it, therefore you're trolling.

[deleted]

I must have really struck a nerve, calling you out on the bullshit you're spouting that obviously you can't back up.

[deleted]

And only by someone spewing actual bullshit.

Thought you were done?

[deleted]

I'm not mad.

I'm laughing at your credibility. Spouting assertions that you can't back up.

[deleted]

Not at all mad. Entertained.

You're spending an awful lot of time corresponding with someone you keep calling a retarded stoner. Maybe you're a retired doc? Or a chiropractor?

[deleted]

Oh, I know exactly what chiropractors are. That you didn't understand what I was inferring is a testament to your intellect.

[deleted]

Hey, at least I don't get confused by user names.

[deleted]

I'll let you have the last word if you can manage something I might attribute to a person with > 120 IQ.

Good luck.

also, this... you hypocritical infant.

Name-calling now? Brilliant, doctor!

As I said, I've done the research into formaldehyde and found nothing like what you asserted. Therefore, I'm asking your to back your assertion up with a simple link.

But why would I think you can read that or produce a link the Nth time if you couldn't any previous time?

[deleted]

questioned if weed made people retarded

Still as brilliant as ever, confused over those three letters in my handle.

Your level of retardation is epic. I was wrong to blame the weed...it was obviously your parents failure to direct your education.

Talk about a pear for a bit, please?

Most of your comments appear to be abusive in nature.

Are you unable to debate people without insulting them too?

You should realise that by abusing people you will make them notice the insult, and not see the information in your words.

Which are you most interested in conveying?

Doesn't sound like you've done any researching at all besides making this post and reading the one in /r/Michigan. Which isn't research.

Do you like not having to worry about dying of smallpox or getting polio? You can thank vaccines for that. Don't forget about Whooping cough, Measles or Tuberculosis. All of these have seen the amount of case drop dramatically because of the development of vaccines.

You aren't fighting some experimental treatment here. Vaccines for these diseases have been around for decades, and have been shown to save millions of lives annually. We are literally using them to systematically destroy some of the worst illnesses in the history of mankind.

You ask "how can anyone be pro-vaccine". I would ask "How can you not be?"

Do some vaccines do more harm than good? Maybe, although I haven't heard a compelling scientific case for any of the ones being used commonly today. Perhaps you could show me some.

[deleted]

Well, first of all, there are outliers in any situation. There could be a myriad of reasons why the whooping cough outbreak effected the people the way it did in Massachusetts. It appears that in this situation, the vaccine hasn't been as effective as initially expected, and requiring a booster. Not exactly a giant blow to the massive amount of proof for the effectiveness of vaccines.

One case like this doesn't invalidate more than a century of successful vaccination, backed up by a massive quantity of peer-reviewed data. One case that was blown out of proportion by anti-vaxxers doesn't invalidate all of that. I noticed you didn't respond to what I said about Smallpox or Polio. Vaccines literally eradicated smallpox off the face of the earth. This is a disease that nearly wiped out civilizations, now completely destroyed thanks to our development of vaccines.

As for your laughable citing of the long ago debunked connection between autism and vaccines, here is a summary conducted by the American Academy of Pediatrics of scientific studies that looked for a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. The amount of people in these studies combined are in the millions, spanning a variety of countries over the course of many decades. No correlation found.

edit: added some stuff I meant to say originally. (2 minutes after original post)

While not required, you are requested to use the NP domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by prefacing your reddit link with np.reddit.com.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Because we're individually pretty happy to never have had to experience polio, diphtheria, rabies, tetanus, meningitis, and so on.

Yeah, SV40 tainted polio vaccine that caused this massive cancer outbreak. Sounds just ideal.

Cancer rates appear to be falling.

And if people see sense and stop smoking, they'll only fall further.

Cigarettes aren't the cause of lung cancer. that was the legal cover lie for the open air radiological testing. It still harms humanity today, and is blamed on smoking. Cancer rates could only be down because people aren't getting SV40 tainted (purposefully) polio vaccines.

Cigarettes aren't the cause of lung cancer.

So the carcinogens in tobacco don't really make the case for you? Or that 90% of lung cancer occurs in people who smoke?

There are plenty of non-smokers out there - the numbers would be an instant giveaway if they were getting lung cancer at anything like the same rates.

[deleted]

No, I'm not reading that shit. And no, I'm not just sticking my fingers in my ears and saying "la la la." I've worked in health care, pharma, etc., for many years. I'm educated. I'm not about to give credence to a site with an agenda such as that.

[deleted]

Unfortunately, it's not really a good argument. At least, this website isn't. All of the links are directly back to their website. There seem to be no outside evidence at all. It doesn't make for a very believable argument.

There seem to be no outside evidence at all.

Whale.to is actually a repository for information. It links back to itself but it's always outside content, they just dump it there.

Sometimes it will provide an outside link, sometimes it just dumps the info there. It's all outside evidence.

For example, I just picked a random link and got this page which is full of citations.

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/failures.html

It sounds to me like you've chosen to ignore this site for a reason that does not exist.

It sounds to me like you've chosen to ignore this site for a reason that does not exist.

Not at all. I apologize for the mistake. I'm at work, and admittedly, I didn't take a super close look at things. I looked at a few pages, and noticed the self-links. I should have looked around more, and of that I am guilty.

No worries, I just dislike seeing people rag on a website when it doesn't even post its own content. It's basically an aggregator, so I thought I'd point it out.

Thanks for the correction, I wasn't aware of that. I prefer not to come off like a pretentious douche, but hey, I'm human like everyone else, and I make stupid mistakes. Thanks for the understanding.

But... but... but... circular reference as proof works for The Bible!

Uhhhhh...about that...

;)

[deleted]

I'm always interested in new ideas, I'm just pointing out that this website in particular isn't good evidence at all. I am more than happy to read other things you have.

Hopefully everyone on this sub is open to their current state of thinking being challenged.

However, in my year+ here, I have noticed that some are not. Some people simply cannot shake their deeply held belief on some topics regardless the evidence presented (or lack of evidence, evident).

Personally, I'm a "show me the evidence" type of thinker. Real evidence. Peer reviewed scientific studies get my attention. Information published directly by the producer of goods get my attention. Truly independent studies are the best.

Assertions of fact that rely upon circular references or wild ass, already disproven theories earn my ridicule.

On vaccines, I've already stated my stance based on quite a bit of research that I've done.

Some are helpful without harm. Some are harmful without help. Some are the same as injecting saline - neither harmful nor helpful.

And both sides of the issue are lying through their fucking teeth, so BOTH sides of the issue cannot be trusted. We have to research each one ourselves to figure out the benefit or chance of harm present in each vaccine.

It's the same reason so many people are pro-circumcision. They've been vaccinated themselves, and had their children vaccinated, and they don't like to admit to themselves that maybe they made the wrong decision.

Blind faith, conformity, fear

Blind faith in the "anti-" movement also exists.

Blind faith in your leaders or anything else can get you killed. Pretty sure Bruce Springsteen said that.

The people aren't. The shills, however, are.

Wow - your "intelligent and thoughtful discussion" in the comments almost appears as if it isn´t a shameless attempt to marginalize and insult people who want no part of any vaccine. You still can´t quite get there. The "sane" comment from both "sides" gave that one away. Try again in a week or so.

No matter how you cut it, if vaccines were so great, people would all want to get them. Kind of like cars. Since you both are most likely sitting near each other at the office, you should discuss your failing and try with even more subtlety next time.

Pathetic.

Because not dying of preventable disease is pretty good.

Yeah, SV40 tainted polio vaccine that caused this massive cancer outbreak. Sounds just ideal.

Talk about a pear for a bit, please?

Also you suggest the chemical composition of the formaldehyde humans make in their bodies is different from that in the vaccines.

I was aware that thimerosal is not mercury - the chemical composition is different. But this is the first I've learned that the formaldehyde is different. In all the searching and reading I've done, and it was quite a lot of hours, I've never seen that stated about formaldehyde.

Can you provide a link to a reasonably reputable site (read: not an anti-vac site) that describes how formaldehyde produced in humans is different from the formaldehyde used in vaccines?

The problem with just your assertion is that it makes you the same, less than really, the doctors who say, "Trust me, vaccines are good."

You're saying, "Trust me, vaccines are bad."

No data from either side makes it hard to convince a non doctor (the people making decisions about whether or not to vaccinate their kids) of either argument.

Plus... you SAY you're a doctor. If I go to my doctor's office, I can at least see his credentials.

Most of your comments appear to be abusive in nature.

Are you unable to debate people without insulting them too?

You should realise that by abusing people you will make them notice the insult, and not see the information in your words.

Which are you most interested in conveying?