I finally sat down and ordered my thoughts on this for some of my people to read and understand.

~~~

I began to notice it right around the first of the year - a strange trend of people posting memes in social media about anti-vax people being morons. "Well, yeah," I thought. As far as I was concerned that was proven and resolved a year or two ago, and I couldn't for the life of me figure out why it was cropping up everywhere. At first it was every fifth post in my feed, then every third. When it got to every other post, I began to grow concerned.

See, I understand what the purpose of social media is. It's free for a reason. Trends and marketing are assembled, deep-fried, and sold to the MSM here, and on other social media outlets. CNN, once a proud bastion of journalistic integrity (it would have you believe), now has pretty newsreaders quoting Twitter 5 times an hour. Social Media is an always on focus group, aided by people liking their favorite movies, bands, and political stances.

So when something begins to trend out of no where, seemingly with no corresponding news item or personal interest story - it's not out of the pale to conclude that an interest group is shaping the opinion of the public through social media. (For more on this, look into the HB Gary scandal)

I noted the trend, and people rolled their eyes (He's so paranoid) and everyone mostly forgot about it. THEN, about a week later, the Disneyland Measles outbreak started. And everyone lost their fucking minds.

The anti-anti-vax agitprop exploded (and continues to) from every internet orifice. The pump had been properly primed, and the "me too's" who think they're very clever people for parroting memes and pre-formed talking points vomited on every unsuspecting passerby, goading them into joining the fight against... what exactly? Does anyone really know at this point? Because a lot of you seem confused to me.

Even at it's height, the anti-vax movement was roundly and soundly shunned by the public at large for being uninformed twats. The first time I even heard about the anti-vax movement, it was someone saying "who are these nutbars?" It effectively put McCarthy's career in a coffin, and perhaps rightly so. The public coverage died down and people went on about their business. To the point where A 2014 OHIO OUTBREAK OF MEASLES, THE LARGEST SINCE 1996 came and went largely unnoticed by social media and the public at large. The unvaccinated Amish were determined to be responsible, and everyone learned some important lessons.

Here's what I'm seeing as a standard interaction now that special interests have taken a shine to promoting a divide: Someone throws up the latest anti-anti-vax meme claiming to be an advocate of science. Standard wording is IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT VACCINES YOU SHOULD BE LYNCHED IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE. Now, (and this part is crucial) anyone who deviates from the most emotional and non-scientific representation of that ideology is automatically and unrepentantly lumped in with anti-vax crunchy hippy nutters. Conversation over, you are a non-person, get your heathen ass up on this bundle of sticks because you're gonna burn tonight.

What I've found most interesting is that when I attempt to approach people about their emotional and non-scientific dogma, I find that they default to the stance that MMR's are non-negotiable.

I AGREE.

See that there? That's probably where most of you are going to stop reading. You're not interested in anything more nuanced than that. Because you are "pro-science" in bandwagon only. In this narrow polarized view, MMR's are the only vaccine. These people say 'vaccine' all the time, but they mean 'MMR'. Many, many Americans are very careless with their words. This is a "positive effect" of programming.

Here's where it gets difficult for the incurious and the thick to follow: There is NOTHING scientific about attempting to force others into groupthink. The best science in the world is done while spitting in the face of standing convention.

Most of the scientists that you read about now in history books, lauded as changing the world and visionary, were considered wrong-headed freaks and enemies of the state while they were alive. I see a lot of people arguing that they are "pro-science" and anyone who disagrees with them is not. These people would make horrible scientists. What kind of results do you think you get from a trial when you start off with not even previous data, but the editorialized conclusions drawn from that data?

Again, some of you are reading this and beginning to assume I am leading up to saying all vaccines are bad. This is because you have been programmed by professionals, they are very good at what they do. Binary thinking isn't just a tactic, it's perhaps the best single indicator that a body is reflexively repeating someone else's opinion, and have not let the topic thoroughly marinate in their brainpan so that it can become a three dimensional concept. Hell, I had to tell one woman THREE times I was not arguing in favor of anti-vax people, and she still felt the need to make a snarky post declaring that she had slain yet another anti-vaxxer with her propaganda sword and false intellectual shield. This needs to stop, in the name of the science you claim to defend.

Why do you think this issue is being so decidedly polarized where previously there was very little to no polarization? Why now? I've heard far FAR more from the anti-anti-vax crowd in the past thirty days than I have in a lifetime of anti-vax people. And it shows no sign of stopping. Reddit is glutted with it, no discussion allowed. It's all Facebook talks about when they can't find another remix of Uptown Funk to share. I don't even venture into Twitterland, because I'm not that cool. But I hear it's an endemic in need of a vaccine. (Ha!) These outlets have entire firms dedicated to shaping and analyzing traffic. Believe it. And right now, the hot button is anti-anti-vax agitprop. Why?

Here is my point. SOMEONE is paying for this massive ad blitz. No one needed to be told anti-vax people are nut jobs before the 1st of the year, and the fact that it started shortly BEFORE the Mickey Measles outbreak should raise a LOT of red flags for anyone paying attention. I am NOT anti-vax, I DO agree that MMR's are necessary, and I have been vaccinated myself. However, blind support of ALL VACCINATIONS AND SCHEDULING has the potential to be very very dangerous. And frankly, the attendant whispers of forced immunization are terrifying, and should have people who claim to be scientific gently applying the brakes.

Forced immunization brings a lot of potential demons to the table that should be obvious, but civility and clear-headedness about this topic have been long abandoned. Not all vaccines are created and tested equally, and those who are scientific should be advocating a multi-spectrum approach to improving standards and regulation while also encouraging those who may be on the fence or concerned about vaccinating their child with ACTUAL INFORMATION NOT MEMES. A sure sign you are talking to an Anti-Anti-Vax zealot is that they will claim to champion science without understanding that science or demonstrating even a working knowledge other than HAIL SAGAN HERETIC SCUM. There is no desire to educate, only to hate and make ugly internet threats to those who do not fall in line.

Some of ya'll have become the Spanish Inquisition of the Internet, and you're too busy being high on the fumes of self-righteousness to even allow someone to have this conversation in your presence. But I will not stoop to your level; instead of condemning you, I invite discussion.

EDIT: Many thanks for the gold!

As far as I was concerned that was proven and resolved a year or two ago, and I couldn't for the life of me figure out why it was cropping up everywhere. At first it was every fifth post in my feed, then every third. When it got to every other post, I began to grow concerned.

Yeah, I've never been more confused than when I started seeing anti-vax headlines everywhere. The reddit userbase seems to believe that anti-vaxxers are taking over the world, when as far as I can tell it's a fringe movement that peaked in the late 90s and has been dwindling in numbers ever since. Current vaccination rates are higher than at any point in history.

SOMEONE is paying for this massive ad blitz.

Who and why, in your opinion? The pharmaceutical industry? George Soros? Bill Gates?

Current vaccination rates are higher than at any point in history

Worldwide. In enclaves of schoolchildren in California and Texas they're the lowest they've been in a long time.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/09/wealthy-la-schools-vaccination-rates-are-as-low-as-south-sudans/380252/

Point taken, but do we know for sure (beyond the media's blanket pronouncements) that these low rates are specifically tied to the anti-vaxxer movement? The articles I found suggest that researchers are still working out the reasons behind the measles outbreak. For instance, here's a more recent NY Times articles stating:

Still, the California figure can be deceiving ... California has long been viewed as particularly prone to this kind of outbreak because of its population size and the number of people arriving from overseas.

and

“It’s premature to blame the increase in reports of measles on the unvaccinated when we don’t have all the facts yet,” said Barbara Loe Fisher, the president of the National Vaccine Information Center, a group raising concerns about inoculations. “I do know this: Fifty-seven cases of measles coming out of Disneyland in a country with a population of 317 million people is not a lot of cases. We should all take a deep breath and wait to see and get more information.”

I mean, yeah, there's some element of "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" to it, but I think the implicit argument is that the number of visitors from overseas isn't a new thing and the lower rates of vaccination are.

Who benefits from forced immunization the most?

Big pharma

Wouldn't big pharma rather you get sick and take the more expensive drugs?

No not really. And here's why. With forced vaccinations, they get a little bit of money from EVERYONE. In an "epidemic" of say measles, let's say as many as 100,000 get it (fucking MSM and gov shills are flipping out over 100 people getting it, essentially a rounding error in a country of 300 million). So without the vaccine, they can sell maybe something like Tamiflu to 100,000 people. No, they make WAY more money with the universal vaccines.

EXCEPT if that vaccine causes encephalitis, seizures, immune system deficiencies, gastrointestinal problems and so on. Which they do... and the truth about this is on the cusp of all coming out. All of these things lead to greater body instability and there are more and more highly trained doctors and people who have worked at the CDC stepping out and reporting their findings.

I totally agree with you. Except that I was addressing why they'd make more money with the vaccines than without the vaccines. Which is the main reason we have vaccines, so Big Pharma makes more money.

I would be interested to see how much money pharmaceutical companies actually make off vaccines. My understanding from rifling through various articles over many, many years is that most vaccine productions are not very profitable for the companies that make them. If you have information contrary to that I would like to see it, as my searches are only bringing up information on annual flu vaccine profits.

What this guy said

Cancer. I think vaccines may cause many types of cancer. Cancer is expensive to treat and then you die anyway. Big Pharma wins.

I don't think their thought process is that elaborate and malicious, but even if it were: most vaccine-preventable diseases have no expensive treatments, the only treatment is supportive care (fluids, etc).

Measles is treated with vitamin A. The bacterial infections are treated with common antibiotics. Chickenpox with acyclovir which is off patent.

is that logic? it tastes like logic...

The people who can't get vaccinated for one reason or the other? You know, the thing that's called "herd immunity"?

Oh, wait, circlejerk, right... Big pharma.

All answers are acceptable. Why do you assume this is a 'circlejerk'? What does that even mean?

Redditors all saying what they all want to hear

E: #3

What makes you think that's what's going on here?

I invite discussion.

Who and why, in your opinion? The pharmaceutical industry?

I notice a trend of horror stories always precedes a "solution" in the main stream media. In my city, they started pushing a steady stream of news stories across the board about how traffic accidents were such a deadly concern (even though there were no more accidents than usual for the time). All of a sudden, it was all anybody could talk about.

Next thing you know, the mayor is on TV announcing a photo-enforcement program for our city. Because "safety" is the number one concern. And everyone applauded. "It's about time somebody did something about all those crazy drivers!"

A few months later, there's all kinds of stories in the news about little kids being lured by predators online (though, once again, there was no more activity than usual in this area). Suddenly, the government is announcing a Cyber-Security bill that removes all kinds of privacy and freedom from the internet.

And then one day I saw them talking about how horrible cervical cancer is. For weeks, that was all you heard about. Then one day, Boom. The story is announced that all teenage girls are getting the HPV vaccine Gardasil for free at school. "Hooray! They're saving the children!"

So now I watch the main stream media, not for news, but as a predictor about what they're going to try to force on us next. And when I see vaccines being glorified as the savoir of all humanity, it makes me very worried. When I see people talking about how the unvaccinated will be segregated and ostracized, denied education and healthcare, I begin to wonder if the next move is simply loading them onto cattle trucks and shipping them off to concentration camps to be thrown into ovens, an idea i'm sure many redditors would mindlessly applaud.

http://ethics.wikia.com/wiki/Problem_Reaction_Solution

Measles cases have been growing over the past 3 years.

http://www.cdc.gov/measles/cases-outbreaks.html

Extrapolating from this month (for argument's sake), the bar for 2015 will be twice as high as the bar for 2014.

I realize I'm pretty late on this, but I was just wondering if we should fully trust the CDC? You probably think I'm sounding pretty crazy but there are connections like http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/12/21/us-merck-gerberding-idUSTRE5BK2K520091221

You never know if there could be connections between the CDC and large pharmaceutical companies. I mean after all this is /r/conspiracy.

Yeah, I've never been more confused than when I started seeing anti-vax headlines everywhere. The reddit userbase seems to believe that anti-vaxxers are taking over the world, when as far as I can tell it's a fringe movement that peaked in the late 90s and has been dwindling in numbers ever since. Current vaccination rates are higher than at any point in history.

If they got us to believe Muslims are trying to take over the world, they can get us to believe anything

It's almost like there's a current outbreak of Measles going on or something... Hmm.

You have been banned from /r/bestof

Great post, mate.

I'll wear it as a badge of honor.

haha WOW.

I agree with every point you made and I've noticed the same trends as you mention. I think they started using the "skeptics" and their "scientific" push of anything the government promotes and then you got the memes popping up all over facebook and reddit...

I've already had the retort "if the forced vaccination by government meant people's lives were saved, I'm all for it."

Wow, best post I've read possibly ever.

Beautiful.

Well thought out. I agree with you except for one point: MMR vaccines necessary.. . Perhaps they are a good idea, I don't know... but it is my opinion that it should be a decision of parents regarding the substances they add to their child's body. It is a philosophical discussion... Especially since the child has no say in the matter. So it really just comes down to your opinion on the matter. Sort of like abortion.

But abortion does not hurt others. If you have an abortion, its just mom dad and potential baby. When you don't Get the MMR it can, and WILL, effect others in school or Disneyland.

I have no way of arguing this point logically as I have insufficient statistical data to do so. But as it is, my opinion remains unchanged (due to my philosophy). It is matter of opinion. That is the way in which it is like abortion. ( I'm not literally comparing it to the act of aborting a baby)

My opinion arises from the forced medication vs rights of parents. I see forced medication as an indication of an overbearing government. This is not a nice thing to live under. Further, I am made suspicious by the fact that they would want to enforce this, but would allow cigarette smoke, pesticides, and other pollutants to continue.

I think education is the key. Provide solid, clear stats for vaccine safety relative to virus safety in a 1st world and controlled setting and more people will listen. But I still have my choice!

"I don't have any evidence but I have an opinion"

This is the problem

This is is not my opinion. (Mind you I do have an opinion on the matter but that is neither here nor there)

I am just pointing out, logically, why it is not silly to question these scientific authorities... they do not have solid evidence.

I don't disagree with the concept of choice, and freedom. But as it goes with freedom of speech and some of the other freedoms we have, those freedoms cannot come at the expense of others. Which is why this is different than abortion. And i too am "pro-choice". And while education exists for the masses, you, yourself, have pointed out that you don't know what the specific statistics are on this. So that is not ALWAYS the answer but mostly. No one can know everything, but everyone can. Collective knowledge, and that's why we have science, to do the heavy lifting for us.

Then it really just comes down to trusting the authority for some. If I were to Vaxi my non-existent children I would be putting my trust in these authorities because the statistics I have seen are not clear to me.

I understand what you are saying though and this is basically what the real polarized debate should be about :) because really there is no right answer in the end. Its a matter of moral beliefs.

We would still not be rid of our propaganda problem though he he.

If you want to inform yourself, the data is very accessible and makes it apparent that vaccinations are necessary for a healthier world. It's your choice whether you want to take the step to educate yourself and have a more informed opinion. We're in the year 2015 and the average life expectancy in 1st world countries for both genders is ~80. This is because of medical advancements.

A better parallel that your looking for is seat belt laws. It's not really an attack on freedom to require seat belts, because that law does actually save lives.

As for your point on people wanting to enforce vaccinations but allow cigarette smoke...you aren't really making any sense. People want to enforce vaccinations, reduce pollutants, and reduce smoking in public places. Cigarettes are product produced by private companies and have existed for awhile. In fact, in most public places now, you cannot smoke. Pesticides and other pollutants produced from factories have dramatically decreased because of environmental protection and regulation. The world has only gotten better in these areas.

What's more, if people want to argue against vaccinations for technical health reasons, they should actually argue against it for technical health reasons.

If you don't reference B-cells, memory b-cells, or even antigens or antibodies in your reasoning why you won't vaccinate your kid...you might not know enough on the subject to actually make an informed decision...

OP is pointing out a lot of the brainless pro-vax sentiment not because he's necessarily so skeptical of vaccines but because, well, it's brainless. Fine, point taken--brainless sentiment parroted by lots of people is worthy of skepticism. But at least it's on the side of medical evidence. When I see anti-vax people mindlessly reporting anecdotal information about vaccines and problems that might result from them without even referencing a high-school understanding of biology/immunology...well, I feel like that's even more brainless and worthy of skepticism.

Correct me if I'm wrong but once vaccinated your not supposed to get ill from what your vaccinated against so how does it harm people who are vaccinated?

The best information I have have about this say that non-vaccinated people can become a sort of breeding ground for the virus/disease. In this case, the measles might mutate and/or grow stronger and start to infect even vaccinated people.

In other words, non-vaccinated people provides the measles with the first inch it needs to start taking over the whole damn mile.

Do you have any statistics or evidence that unvaccinated people are likely to serve as a mutation station ("breeding ground") for viruses and diseases and then pass those new mutated versions onto vaccinated people? Honest question, truly curious. I'm having trouble finding anything trustworthy.

Nope. I don't have any of that.

So what your saying is there's a possibility it might mutate into a more virulent virus, much like there's a possibility Extraterrestrials visit earth and without future evidence the argument should be chucked in with the disclosure group due to lack of evidence?

?

The use of standards over the media's favourite double standards

I always thought this was kind of a kicker, in order to supply vaccines you need a culture of the culprit. So to completely eliminate any disease, say polio, there would be no vaccine existing for it.

While mutation is possible (as /u/virgule said), the main concern is that vaccines are not a guaranteed success. Different vaccines have different success rates, but they're almost always upwards of 90%. So if you have been vaccinated there's still a small chance that you're still vulnerable to the disease. Furthermore, some people can't be vaccinated due to a medical condition, like a compromised immune system or a bird allergy.

This is where herd immunity comes into play. Herd immunity is when enough of a population is immune to a disease that even non-immune individuals have an extremely low chance of contracting the disease.

Everything is fine until people start not vaccinating all together for no valid medical reason. Then there's no longer enough vaccinated people for herd immunity and non-immune individuals are once more at risk.

dude thank you for posting this. The other day I posted an article on facebook where someone was basically positing that the measles outbreak at disneyland could have come from someone who was recently vaccinated, so this person was suggesting that when people get vaccinated we should just basically act as though they are sick for a few days. Pretty interesting and obviously structured as someone's opinion.

When I posted it on facebook one of the friends I've basically known the longest told me he didn't want to talk to me for a while. WTF????? One of the most intelligent and well educated people I know.

Our society is VERY VERY strange. Thanks for your post, it's basically just what I was thinking.

People are getting polarized so hard, they can barely think.

I've had long conversations with people on a tuesday about the logic behind my stance (basically what I posted above), and we come to an agreement. Then on wednesday, they're right back to talking to me like I'm an anti-vaxxer.

It's mass madness.

And here's the point, I think. Because I've watched it happen with other topics already - The USG has already decided it's going to do mandatory vaccinations. Right now, there's an effort on to polarize people so much that they can't even talk about it because it causes disharmonious living conditions for both sides if they do. Then, once we've moved two or three media crisis events down the road, they will quietly announce a mandatory vaccination pogrom to the public. The segment that (legitimately) gets vocal and argues against it will be swatted down (Oh God, here comes ocket again with his anti-vaxxer bullshit... cue laugh track) by the public without any need for intervention from USG enforcers.

It's quite brilliant from the efficiency standpoint, but it's being used to potentially trick us into receiving something other than just proven and effective vaccines. And that's what I worry about the most.

I know man. Damn, I really really feel you so hard, that's all I can say. It's like if you point out the implications of mandatory vaccinations or even if you just want to talk about whether or not the state should have that right (which would be a very interesting philosophical discussion obviously) people have the exact reaction you described. Oh, it's that guy, with his crazy ideas again.

Procession of the simulacra is all I can think of for this kind of thing, they cast the archetype so hard into people's minds that they can't see you as anything but the archetype. It just surprises me when it's intelligent people who I know have spent a long time studying philosophy and thinking in general.

Procession of the simulacra

Exactly. I have to stop people all the time because I catch them arguing against things I never said or don't disagree with.

didn't want to talk to me for a while

I would never do that to someone. What does that accomplish?

nternet, and you're too busy being high on the fumes of self-righteousness to even allow someone to have this conversation in your presence. But I will not stoop to your level; instead of condemning you, I invite discussi

I've noticed the similarities between this behavior and the inquisition as well. In /r/atheism of all places!

Science is as of now a quasi religion.

There are mainstream views in science and anything that goes against the grain is ruthlessly suppressed.

For example, this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hueyatlaco

Now, this archeology "chick" and her group have run multiple tests to date the found stone tools - obviously human used.

However, her date was off the mainstream acceptable-as-of-now date by a couple hundred thousand years or so.

So her discovery was suppressed. She became an Orwellian "unperson". No one said "Well, lets run a few more tests, she is obviously wrong, but JUST in case, lets do some more digging and expeditions".

Nope.

Total suppression.

A dude, one Sam VanLandingham, two decades later has run dating tests on her dig site.

His conlusions were the same as hers and her teams:

"Sam VanLandingham has published two peer-reviewed analyses that confirm the earlier findings of ca. 250,000ybp for the tool-bearing strata at Heyatlaco. His 2004 analysis found that Hueyatlaco samples could be dated to the Sangamonian Interglacial period (ca. 80,000 to 220,000ybp) by the presence of multiple diatom species, one of which first appeared during this era and others that went extinct by the era's end.[9] VanLandingham's 2006 paper[10] refined and re-confirmed his 2004 findings."

And?

No big deal. Ignored. We have one version of history, that science (which means powerful people who make money off of this by publishing, etc) accepts and no heresy is tolerated.

Science used to mean "Scientific Method" - therefore something wacky as psychology could not be called a science.

But thanks to money, prestige, power - science is now basically an "old boys club".

Very insightful comment and i'm sure more and more notice what is happening.

When THEY that have all the power and no rules are running the "show" and do what ever they want while the rest just talk, talk, talk... and wait for things to get better, to be saved, stay idle or even WORSE join the "show". How do you think things will turn out for the most if this continues ?! Not good ! Also some would say "Hope for the best and expect the worst" well i say "Do the best and prevent the worst".

I understand that not all on The Net (Planet) are not like that but unfortunately MOST are but those numbers are getting smaller and smaller which is good yet time waits for no one and THEY know it, so THEY use fear, lies or any other tactic to get results... fast !

... and i'm not talking ONLY about vaccines or usa, actually all of this about vaccines could be just another distraction.

"The time for talk is at its end and there might not be enough time to act so react now before its too late or face of your misguided future"

-I think i read that quote on YouTube comments few years ago not sure if 100% might be missing few words.

Here is my point. SOMEONE is paying for this massive ad blitz.

Why is that worrying? Raising public awareness about health concerns isn't exactly the most radical thing to do.

It is when your goal is forced immunization.

In your opinion. But as an act, trying to inform the public about a topic in simple terms that might gain vital leverage isn't a rare thing with public health. It's the norm.

well reasoned and articulated. I've been trying to have this discussion on frontpage for the past two years since the increase in some international measles outbreaks has lead to higher instances of measles in the US.

The word "Science" has been misappropriated in the name of scientific dictatorship and this has been fueled by a distrust of religion (but not of blind faith) and the juxtaposition of Science vs Religion in politics and academics.

Extremes are for extremists, and the obedient masses have always been driven by this sort of dogma. If you are going to argue that all vaccines are automatically good because "it's science", then you don't understand how science works.

If you are going to argue that all vaccines are automatically good because "it's science", then you don't understand how science works.

This. This is all I've been saying since 2015 started, and there are so many otherwise intelligent people who claim to "support science" that want to burn me at the stake for my heresy.

Holy crap! I've been fighting people about this on the front page for weeks now. The blind anti-anti-vax hatred is downright scary. People talking like parents should have their children forcibly removed, and then be sterilized and shit. Can you say Sieg Heil, boys and girls?

It's nice to see somebody other than me noticing this crap and standing up for reasonable questioning of the "official reddit stance".

Jesus, I thought I was going crazy. I don't know a single anti-vac person, but everyone is just spewing anti-anti-vax shit all over social media. Glad I'm not alone, thanks.

amen.

I was like that before because I didn't know much about vaccines(still don't) and don't give a shit enough to learn about them. I just put trust into the scientific community. Also, all proponents with credentials have turned out to be frauds and the rest seem to be just soccer moms and Jenny McCarthy. But I am starting to have doubts because how much the government has lied.

Science is as of now a quasi religion.

There are mainstream views in science and anything that goes against the grain is ruthlessly suppressed.

For example, this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hueyatlaco

Now, this archeology "chick" and her group have run multiple tests to date the found stone tools - obviously human used.

However, her date was off the mainstream acceptable-as-of-now date by a couple hundred thousand years or so.

So her discovery was suppressed. She became an Orwellian "unperson". No one said "Well, lets run a few more tests, she is obviously wrong, but JUST in case, lets do some more digging and expeditions".

Nope.

Total suppression.

A dude, one Sam VanLandingham, two decades later has run dating tests on her dig site.

His conlusions were the same as hers and her teams:

"Sam VanLandingham has published two peer-reviewed analyses that confirm the earlier findings of ca. 250,000ybp for the tool-bearing strata at Heyatlaco. His 2004 analysis found that Hueyatlaco samples could be dated to the Sangamonian Interglacial period (ca. 80,000 to 220,000ybp) by the presence of multiple diatom species, one of which first appeared during this era and others that went extinct by the era's end.[9] VanLandingham's 2006 paper[10] refined and re-confirmed his 2004 findings."

And?

No big deal. Ignored. We have one version of history, that science (which means powerful people who make money off of this by publishing, etc) accepts and no heresy is tolerated.

Science used to mean "Scientific Method" - therefore something wacky as psychology which does not use the "scientific method" could not be called a science.

But thanks to money, prestige, power - science is now basically an "old boys club".

PS I tried to send it to you in a private message, but the text was too long for reddit's liking.

I've heard far FAR more from the anti-anti-vax crowd in the past thirty days than I have in a lifetime of anti-vax people

so true, one of the best comments I have seen in a while, thanks for taking the time.

Good post, and exactly what I've been saying as well about forced memes. But I'll give you something to chew on. The reason this is really being ratched up so quickly is because a lot of truth is on the cusp of finally being exposed. Obama granting whistle-blower status to Dr. Thompson the other day is going to expose a whole lot of lies and manipulated data about MMR and autism, and it's going to get ugly.

http://vaccineimpact.com/2015/obama-grants-immunity-to-cdc-whistleblower-on-measles-vaccine-link-to-autism/

Just spend 10 minutes and watch the video in the page.

When we can finally get some good information in front us, we'll be able to make informed good decisions. Right now, we're being lied to, and it is a conspiracy. There are people conspiring to mislead you for profits, and it's not really all that whacky. It happens all of the time.

We won't get to truth until we think beyond A + B = C. If you think vaccines work 90% of the time, umm... good, must take. And you're aren't thinking about the other health consequences, even the fact that some diseases we need constant exposure to like chicken pox, or it comes back stronger and earlier as shingles, then we'll just continue to pop the pills, and inject ourselves, because well.. everyone's doing it right?

The truth is that ALL of these major diseases were near eradication or on massive decline well before vaccines were introduced. The reason people feared these diseases so much was because DEATH and other major adverse side effects were HIGHLY probable 100 YEARS AGO. In a time when disease could spread like wildfire because of a lack of clean water, access to good medicine, vitamins and shelters, it was high problematic. However now, most of these diseases are non-life threatening and the adverse reaction to vaccination versus natural contraction in a lot of cases is MUCH higher. In some cases, over 100x more likely. So why don't we have a discussion about that? We don't because none of this information is presented through the media, the primary way people get their information, even though most of it is right on the CDC website itself.

Swine flue, avian flu, ebola... be afraid! It's a scary world. But what happenes when the people claiming to protect you are actually the ones knowingly injuring you? What then?

Yeah I agree with you! We should always try our best to be potentially good scientists. I am sure that one of us at any moment will pop up with a new and far better vaccination method. In the mean time, let's hold our breath in and think highly of ourselves as free-thinking intelligent skeptics while people die.

You are making far more assumptions than what you claim your opponents do. The anti-vaccination topic has become hot again? then it's definitely planned by someone! It's a sign people!

In the mean time, let's hold our breath in and think highly of ourselves as free-thinking intelligent skeptics while people die.

No one's advocating that here. If they are, that's a shitty outlook to have.

You're generalizing and drawing too much information from reddit. People are posting anti-anti-vax memes because they think anti-vax people are ridiculous, and so, they are ridiculing them. It's a social thing.

The entire anti-vax movement is either based off of a falsified research paper by a British doctor that linked autism to vaccinations, or from religious parents who feel that vaccinations are too "invasive" or some other irrational reason.

If anyone does even an ounce of research, it's incredibly obvious that vaccinations have saved the lives of millions, that unvaccinated children have a significantly higher death rate to disease, and that vaccinations help to eliminate diseases entirely. People post memes ridiculing anti-vaxxers because anti-vaxxers base their entire argument on complete irrationality. And so, they are ridiculed. No one is paying for an "ad blitz". It's simply that people in the media chose to spoke out against vaccinations for irrational reasons, and the social media site of reddit did their thing and posted their memes.

If anyone does even an ounce of research, it's incredibly obvious that vaccinations have saved the lives of millions, that unvaccinated children have a significantly higher death rate to disease, and that vaccinations help to eliminate diseases entirely.

None of which I've refuted at any time. And I know it's anecdotal (and therefore worthless) but I can't recall ever seeing anyone refute that information.

Yes, I don't recall anyone refuting that information either. I said that to emphasize why people are so vehemently ridiculing anti-vaxxers who take in this scientifically information but decide not to accept it for irrational reasons. And by not accepting in it (after presumably doing their own research), it could result in the death of their child/children.

Sorry. It's s proven fact that Mercury and other poisonous toxic shit is in vaccines. I'm not letting my kids get injected with that shit. And I don't care how many stupid fucking "memes" you fuckers post. Fortunately for my kids' sake, I don't let the opinions of fascist know-nothing smartass dildos on the Internet deter me from protecting my kids from dangerous poisons. Anyone who worries about what idiot fucks on Facebook or reddit think of them, shouldn't be in charge of raising kids to begin with.

For one, mercury hasn't been in vaccines for years. And it is NOT a dangerous form of mercury either. You need to do detailed research on just WHAT is actually in the vaccines rather than just hearing a bunch of words and going "dangerous chemicals!" - for example one of the common ones raged against is formaldehyde. Your body naturally produces the stuff on its own anyway as a metabolic byproduct! You naturally produced more formaldehyde in your own body reading my post than you get from a whole vaccination schedule in the US.

emicals!" - for example one of the common ones raged against is formaldehyde. Your body natur

Does the body naturally produce aluminum too genius?

Babies that breast feed ingest more aluminum in their first 6 months of life than they get from a full schedule of vaccinations.

Also, did you know there's hydrochloric acid in your stomach? Lactic acid is produced by your muscles when you exert yourself, too. And we literally need iron in our diets to survive. Iron. Another toxic metal like aluminum!

or mercury

If you eat ripe fruits or fruit juices, you're exposing your body methanol which is converted to formaldehyde in your body.

If you ever drink alcohol, you're exposing yourself to large amounts of a related molecule, acetaldehyde, which is a metabolic product of alcohol.

Have fun when your children get measles and polio!

considering that my kids don't go to school with illegal immigrants, I'm not too worried about this.

Have fun with your forthcoming Alzheimers, asshole.

illegal immigrants

There it is again. People trying to blame immigrants. This is a very old propaganda tool. Seeing it starting to crop up means people are getting desperate.

The entire anti-vax movement is either based off of a falsified research paper by a British doctor that linked autism to vaccinations, or from religious parents who feel that vaccinations are too "invasive" or some other irrational reason.

No. It is much, much more than that. Pro-vaxxers always dumb things down to "vaccines have not been linked to autism", do some research on the matter, and you will realise the issue has many, many more implications than just the 'autism'. Altough, in my view, 1 in 68 child detected with autism sure is scare. This is the real epidemic people should be concerned with and the medias should be talking about.

This is how it all starts, man. It's like watching a terrible horror movie unravel that inevitably leads to total disaster. Mocking is the first step, dehumanizing and penalties, fines, jail next. Then we're looking at segregating and slaughtering many for questioning the vaccination industry in any capacity. I've seen it said many times already and when people are afraid enough, they'd allow horrific things to happen if it gave them the idea that they're now safe.

This is what frightens me. They will put whatever they want in my body with no resistance but the path this is headed down is a very dark one.

So when something begins to trend out of no where, seemingly with no corresponding news item or personal interest story

100+ cases of measles

So when something begins to trend out of no where, seemingly with no corresponding news item or personal interest story

The blitz on social media came before the Disneyland outbreak. I tried to make that point clear right at the top. The very first line is

I began to notice it right around the first of the year - a strange trend of people posting memes in social media about anti-vax people being morons.

I'm not sure why you're selectively quoting, but it doesn't make sense in context of what I actually said.

I like to be skeptical, but this is a pretty serious problem.
Even IF vaccines caused autism in a few children, how many children are saved as a result?

I give people arguing their point a chance to prove me wrong, just the other day an anti-vaxxer tried showing me he was right and we were all wrong by having me read over an article...

I pointed out to him the article made assumptions and flat out lies based on documents that the writer "said" had data to support his claims, but never actually listed what that data was.

spreading ignorance is what irks me, if you have a million people telling others that you are a child molester, you're going to be believed to be a child molester even if you aren't.

Sometimes you have to silence misinformation for the betterment of others.

I made sure to point out that I'm NOT an anti-vaxxer, and my agenda here has nothing to do with proving that vaccines cause autism.

Thanks for helping solidify my actual point, however.

Reddit is obsessed with vaccines...it's fucking weird. You can't even say, "maybe let's space them out further apart to lessen the burden on the child's immune system" or they freak out at you...not for any scientific reason...(though some will throw in some random web links) just because they MUST FOLLOW THE SCHEDULE!! WTF? I am not concerned that vaccines cause autism. I am concerned about overloading a little kid's immune system with the world's worst pathogens all at once. Although this may be fine for most kids - we don't know if a small % can develop problems...and we're not all the same (certainly, we don't all react the same way to the flu shot even).

Also, I questioned people why Hep B is SO necessary for babies - when it's really just an STD based on how it's transmitted. And, the vaccine wears off after 10-15 years, anyway - by the time the child WILL be sexually active, potentially (mine did & I had to get it again). ... but did I get an intelligent response? No. Just hysterics & propaganda craziness.

The incendiary reactions this topic receives should tell you something as to the honesty of the debate (or, in this case, the lack thereof). Suggest that maybe some vaccines can have negative side effects, or that some of them aren't tested properly, or that some are unnecessary, and you immediately hate science and want to kill babies.

...the fuck? How is that a logical mindset for a person to have?

Either you're with us or you're against us.

This mentality is perpetuated by the voting system of Reddit.

If you argue with the hive mind about vaccines, it means you think the moon landing was a hoax, lizard people run the government and wear a tin foil hat. That's pretty much the go-to insult for anyone trying to have a rational discussion... Of course lots of it is people from the sub full of morons and mentally ill people known as "conspiratard" who LOVE those threads because they get to bash this sub and anyone that doesnt gobble up government dick...you can see some of the usuals/people that stalk this sub trying to inject themselves into the conversation.

Earlier today I argued against the celebration of French troops killing Islamic militants. My specific point was to be against the celebration of death along with how everybody in the comments wants to dehumanize the enemy.

One user went through my comment history and found a comment chain in which I say that I'm skeptical about the truth behind the Holocaust. Specifically the amount of deaths that occurred being exaggerated. Of course that automatically pins me as a Holocaust denier and labeled as a "Nazi conspiracy theorist".

It's quite easy for somebody who doesn't want to stray from the hivemind to give themselves an excuse to ignore the words of a person with a disagreeing (or even skeptical) opinion.

Well yeah, when you don't actually have anything to say and know you've lost the argument...all they have left to do is to slander you and hope the gullible hive mind gets manipulated into down voting your opinion out of sight. It's standard procedure for them, they're too stupid to actually formulate an argument in an effort to challenge your opinion to try and change it, so they just fall back on 12 year old-like behavior...these are the people that got/get their asses beat in real life, get made fun of in real life, get cheated on/taken advantage of in real life...so they run to the internet where they can pretend to be tough, smart people and try to emulate the bullying they've received their entire lives...it's sad to see grown(?) men act like that, but that's what happens when you're a waste of life, you try to bring others down to your level...misery loves company.

these are the people that got/get their asses beat in real life, get made fun of in real life, get cheated on/taken advantage of in real life...so they run to the internet where they can pretend to be tough, smart people and try to emulate the bullying they've received their entire lives.

I agree with everything you have said before this. What I do not necessarily agree with is that everybody who uses those tactics are what you described in the quoted text.

I think it's easy to think that is the case but I think that anybody can have trouble accepting an opinion that threatens one's belief structure. It's human nature. In fact humans are even likely to double down on their beliefs when faced with information that threatens their beliefs. It's silly but part of our psychology.

So it's not just the person that got their asses beat in real life...it could just as well be the person who beat their ass.

Just my opinion.

Fair enough, i kinda made it out to be black and white buts it's far more analog than it is binary...that being said, people that are weak minded are the ones most frightened by having their belief/opinion structures challenged because it causes their house of cards to collapse.

I think that we're all weak minded just some more so than others. I'm assuming that you had a moment in which your house of cards collapsed. It's not the easiest feeling in the world. There is a reason that so many people have trouble seeking out information that may challenge their beliefs. It's simply unfortunate that we have such flawed psychological tendencies. I wonder what the evolutionary aspect is to them.

Always makes me think of that quote: It's easier to fool a man, than convince him he's been fooled.

Oh yeah absolutely dude...I've done many psychadelics, and my house of cards has been shattered and rebuilt so many times lol, always stronger each time as you're able to shed some illusions and reevaluate things. Life is all about evolving and trying to matain a stable state of mind that's harmonized with natural laws and being aware of your surroundings...a kind of homeostasis, I guess. But you can't ever pretend that the current version of your personal equilibrium is the one, true version. I consider myself a life long learner,I'll never stop reading and researching...but I already know I'm gonna die with SOOO many questions unanswered still.

Oh yeah absolutely dude...I've done many psychadelics

That's one life experience that I have yet to have but look forward to when the time comes.

Life is all about evolving and trying to matain a stable state of mind that's harmonized with natural laws and being aware of your surroundings...a kind of homeostasis, I guess. But you can't ever pretend that the current version of your personal equilibrium is the one, true version.

Exactly this. We are constantly changing who we are just by every moment and experience we have. We're not the same people we were a year ago and next year we will be different than we are now.

I consider myself a life long learner,I'll never stop reading and researching...

Agreed and this is the mentality that every single person should have.

yeah, the thing thats always said about psychadelics is...they somehow find you when you're ready for them. Its something that should be treated as sacred, and with a lot of respect. People that do psychadelics as a party thing kinda bum me out, they have so much more potential for human consciousness both on an indivual level and for society as a whole.

Oh god they always do that to me. "Hey! He post to a racist subreddit! Everything he says is invalid!" Then you can't have a conversation anymore, they just throw insults.

I should visit that cancerous sore of a sub and tag them in RES so I can recognize them when they're in here vomiting up their bile

Never thought of this! Care to explain how to do this, if possible?

I imagine we can "tag" users somehow?

Thanks friend.

Hey, no problem, happy to help. First, download Reddit Enhancement Suite and once you have that working, you'll see a little nametag icon next to everyones username on reddit. Click on that, and you can tag each individual user with whatever you would like to tag them as. I've been tagging people in here that I respect the opinion of so I can spot them outside of this sub, but you could also go to conspiritard and tag the shills. I haven't actually bothered to do this yet.

As a sidenote, I recently discovered that if you come across them in a future thread (someone you have tagged), you can click on the tag and RES will show you the thread in which you tagged them in the first place.

Going to try this out right now. Thanks mate, I appreciate!

The moon landing was a hoax.

Ok. I wasnt trying to make that argument. I was just making a point about the general perception of people who question vaccines.

Maybe. I'm not so sure. Check out both sides thoroughly.

No it wasn't.

If you argue with the hive mind about vaccines, it means you think the moon landing was a hoax, lizard people run the government and wear a tin foil hat.

I like the concession there that they no shoot the messenger for being paranoid about the government watching you (thanks Edward Snowden).

I don't have a dog in this fight about vaccines, however I choose to take care of myself (and further, I am more up to date on vaccines and flu shots than the most rabid of keyboard warriors of either stripe) is a decision I make for myself.

Further; it is one that I hope every other person who reads a debate on vaccination takes under the advice of a few (in hopes of finding one that isn't bought out by the pharmaceutical companies) doctors as opposed to blindly following those not qualified to give medical advice.

To the 'Hurr durr get vaccinated!!!1!1!' crowd I have only one comment for you: Don't give medical advice.

The moon landing was a hoax, and the current theory of evolution says humans evolved from lower species, the legacy of which is the "lizard brain" we all still have.

So either you believe in evolution and lizard brains, or you hate science.

Ok, I get that there's a reptilian part of the brain...thats juuuust slightly different than saying shape shifting lizard people run the world.

Precisely. Which is why it's so easy to steer the narrative on this website. Control the votes, control the discussion.

It is actually very amazing how powerful it is.

Sad too because the voting system was what made reddit so unique and so great back in the day. A content aggregator where the community decided what stayed and what went, what was hot and what wasn't. And now look at what it's become.

Well at least they still try and pretend that's what it is now.

Yeah. Thats why I don't browse reddit so much now. Just glance at the front page and go to my specific subs. Ever since I saw this site praising Obama during his elections but now really don't like him. I knew reddit was full of it. I mean, reddit is just the opinion of the masses. And we knew the masses are stupid and uninformed.

Actually, Facebook has refined the system and Reddit followed suit to only show the numbers of "those that are with us".

Downvotes count is no longer shown, one cannot see if the trend is balanced.

I'm with you

It's not. Strangely though that's how the skeptics and intelligentsia have trained people to react. It's the ultimate ignorance.

Rest assured, the people jerking about this on Reddit aren't educated on the subject. They just have an unwavering faith in established medicine and they viciously attack anyone who questions that faith the same way a religious person would defend their God if you told them it wasn't omnipotent.

I've seen upvoted comments saying anti-vaxxers should be killed and all other kinds of hate speech. I was even downvoted for suggesting that 'sending anti-vaxxers to rot in guantanimo' is harsh.

The funny part is that every time I've actually been able to engage an adamantly pro-vaxxer, they end up abandoning their argument. Example. A lot of these people claim to be scientific and knowledgeable but clearly have no knowledge on the matter and just blindly accept the vaccine circlejerk.

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.

The very worst part is that these cheerleaders claim universally to be championing science.

It's really fucking infuriating.

I feel your pain. I've never seen more dogmatists than scientists my entire life. All of them running around like mini junior climatologists trying to tell people to stop asking questions because everything is settled.

because everything is settled

Totally not understanding that's NOT the nature of science at all.

to be honest, i dont believe the vaccines cause autism debacle. partly becuse the percentages are so low. however i would definitly be intrested in a study done on various forms of vaccine storage, and sterilization techniques. has it occurred to anyone that maybe the 7% of kids that suffer lifestyle altering illnesses had something other then getting vaccines in common? correlation does not imply causation 100% of the time, maybe there is something relating to the metal in the needle, some change in storage practices, or the iodine sometimes used to sterilize injection sites.

arguing that 7% chance of lifestyle altering illnesses with low risk of mortality is some how worse then 20% risk of infection with something that can kill you is what boggles my mind.

there needs to be a study done on more then just the vaccines so we can get to the root of the increase in autism recently. i mean during vaccination you are exposed to

the vaccine - mostly proven NOT to be the source

the metal in the needle

immune system stress due to close time frame of vaccine administrations

the plastic in the syringe

whatever they used to sterilize your injection site.

heck maybe theres a brand name of syringe that got used in ALL the documented autism cases.

its always possible something got overlooked and it is a scientists job to leave no stone unturned and examine every possibility. science is meshing with politics nowadays and i think thats giving us some issues.

My guess is it's the cumulative effect of aluminum being ingested and deposited in the brain, not only through vaccines but various other external sources as well. Which could be why isolated studies determine no direct cause from vaccines if it's just the tipping point.

It just so happens that certain vaccines have an incredibly high concentration of aluminum salts injected directly, bypassing the bodies' natural filters. It's a common adjuvant.

Coincidentally, you'll find loads of aluminum salts in antacids (300-600mg!) and soy based baby formulas. Great for expectant mothers with heartburn. After following a standard vaccination schedule (some 20 or so over two years) a child is exposed to quite a bit aluminum in their first few years of life.

Autism is often determined when a child is around 3 years old. I haven't culled through all the vaccination ingredients to determine how much Aluminum is used, but it's not nothing.

Aluminum is agreed upon as being neuro-toxic, but really hasn't been adequately studied, excluding its role in possibly causing Alzheimer's. Since there are studies going both ways, I'd take the middle ground and say it's still inconclusive.

For some light reading, here's the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry's Statement on Aluminum I used as a quick reference.

(Edit: Duplicated a sentence >.>)

Your link says I eat 8mg of aluminium a day, and that any that makes it into my blood is quickly filtered out of my body. It also says an antacid contains ~150mg of aluminium and a vaccine contains less than 1mg.

Even assuming it can somehow "bypass the body's filters" by being injected(this medically and scientifically has no basis, but we're in /r/conspiracy so that's to be expected) and assuming "the body's filters" can get 99.9% of the aluminium ingested by other means(despite the fact that aluminium absorbed through the skin literally "bypasses the body's filters" by the same definition as an injection), I'm still getting more aluminium in my brain from antacids than anyone ever will from a vaccine.

Now you've probably stopped reading by now, because I'm obviously a sheeple, but in case you ARE still reading, I have a simple question of logic for you- We have been making aluminium for over 160 years. If I believed it contributed to autism/asd/asperger/whatever I would just pull up the medical records for any of the MANY major aluminium manufacturing facilities employees and have a quick look, since anyone working in one of these plants is virtually guaranteed to have MUCH higher amounts of aluminium absorbed daily then there should be easy to spot trends of vastly increased autism cases for kids born to mothers that work in aluminium plants.

The fact that this easy to check/nearly impossible to hide metric exists and hasn't been used to support the argument that aluminium causes a specific disorder or group of disorders shows there is little truth to this idea, if any.

Then again, maybe the hundreds of world governments over the past 150 years has colluded on this one single thing to collectively hide the truth from the people of the world.. Yeah that makes sense.

We wouldn't have access to their medical records, let alone employee records...

How do you propose we check this?

Well... it's just a guess, no need to go volatile. Sorry I'm slacking on the response time, I'm not much of a keyboard commando these days.

To some degree, dermal absorption of particles could end up in your lymph system, or directly to the blood vessels depending on the pathway. A study I found back from the aluminum antiperspirant wars found that out of 84mg of Aluminium chlorohydrate applied to the skin, about 0.012% aluminum entered the blood stream. (~10mcg if I did the math right.) Your skin acts as the filter in this scenario.

Medical records would be great, but they typically fall under doc-patient confidentiality. I wonder the statistic of women working in the aluminum industry with direct exposure to aluminum, and in relation to those, working while pregnant.

I also read up that autism may possibly be caused as a result of encephalitis, an unfortunate side effect that can occur after administering vaccines. Could be a legit source, too.

I truly believe (not guess this time) that intense scrutiny and more testing needs to be done on vaccines. It would make sense, at the very least, for titer tests (test to check antibodies vs virus/pathogen) to be offered prior to any vaccine treatment to determine if the person even needs it. Wouldn't personalized immunization plans be far more effective (and less risky) than the current carpet-bomb approach?

I'm not anti-vax, I'd much rather prefer vaccines that don't have a host of auto-immune diseases as their side-effects and unnecessary toxic chemicals. Also, ones not made from pharma companies currently under lawsuit for reporting fraudulent effectiveness rates. (Looking at you, Merck)

I agree with you here that more testing needs to be done, but that's kind of my point. More testing does need to be done, more research, more transparency, less appeals to emotion, less appeals to authority, less Big Pharma influence, more independent study, less black and white "you're either pro-vaxx or anti-vaxx, you either like science or you want to see children killed".

I by no means think that vaccines in their entirety are automatically bad or evil by default. What I question is any subject that is so polarizing that the very mention that the truth may fall somewhere in the middle immediately leads to you being attacked and ridiculed and called a moron and babykiller.

These reactions should tell us something about this subject and the way it's being (and has been) framed in the public's mind.

And Big Pharma/the US gov. are proven corrupt liars at this point so their motives should always be questioned, regardless of the subject.

Yes they put people who have the tiniest question about vaccines into the same camp as the people who completely deny Western medicine.

Same with any alternative medicine. The line is "there is no such thing as alternative medicine, because if it worked, it would be medicine."

Well, no. THC works for seizures and it is schedule 1. Particularly with mental stuff, homeopathy is pretty rad, at least compared to the pharma nightmare shit they gave my sister.

It's like the whole apparatus of big pharma has cheerleaders who actually bully you into buying the lifestyle even though it has serious unknowns and also proven side effects.

Same with any alternative medicine. The line is "there is no such thing as alternative medicine, because if it worked, it would be medicine." Well, no. THC works for seizures and it is schedule 1. Particularly with mental stuff, homeopathy is pretty rad, at least compared to the pharma nightmare shit they gave my sister.

Well that's odd, my doctor says cannabis is a medicine and even gave me a recommendation to use it as such.. Meh we'll just disregard him, guess we'll also disregard the thousands of other doctors that say/do the same so this conspiracy holds up..

The Federal Vaccine Court has awarded millions in damages to kids who developed autism directly from vaccines.

CBS news a good enough source for you: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/ ?

I don't believe vaccines cause autism, but the adulterants that pharma corporations use as preservatives are already known to to cause brain damage among other things.

I.e., Mercury and aluminum, both still found in common vaccines.

I really wish this ignorance would stop being propagated. Ethyl mercury is not the same as methyl mercury. It's as different as methanol and ethanol. Do your research, don't just believe what people tell you.

To clarify, look at the sources of what you're reading. Otherwise it's opinions. You'd be surprised at how many articles source other opinion articles as their primary sources. My favorite was an article that quoted a site claiming that yetis were real and aliens abducted one of their editors.

I never said they didn't my point is and continues to be it's way more risky and potentially lethal to NOT get a vaccine, even taking the antivax paper I found into account.

Vaccines need to be made safer, and people smarter then me need to get to the bottom of why there is a correlation between vaccines and autism.

arguing that 7% chance of lifestyle altering illnesses with low risk of mortality is some how worse then 20% risk of infection with something that can kill you is what boggles my mind.

This is very vague. Did you make these numbers up or is there a specific response/illness you are referring to?

I posted the sources in the response.

Calculation for the 7.5% and the 20% was done by getting an average of the mortality rates. Etc. I don't think I know how to properly phrase that. And I might have used the wrong calculation. The other percentages posted were simply copied from the source of the information. Regardless 2 out of 100 kids getting autism is still better then most of the fatality rates I see.

If you can improve my maths here or show me how a 2% chance of developing autism is somehow worse then developing liver cancer that will kill you in 5 years 90% of the time if you contract hepatitis.

It's a matter of calculating risk and it seems MORE risky to avoid all vaccines, even taking the information provided by antivaxers as fact into account.

Could you provide a study or a document that is more specific about vaccine related injuries?

There is definitely a need to do more research into vaccines due to the correlation between increased vaccine use and autism rates. However correlation does not always mean causation. There may be something else at work. Hell for all we know these kids that got autism had the injection site sterilized with the same brand of iodine.

improve my maths

Sure, you are missing a variable:

You have your 2/100 negative side effect; with universal vaccines that means ~2% of the population has a negative side effect.

Then you have 90/100 with negative outcomes. But the disease is not universal: your missing variable. You will not have ~90% unvaccinated with negative outcomes.

it seems MORE risky to avoid all vaccines

Closed minded of you, this all-or-nothing attitude.

Why must you accept all vaccines? Why insist people deny all vaccines? They are all carry different risks and rewards: let's not treat medicine like a sporting event with rigidly defined teams.

I said 'all' but I am not close minded.

The hpv vaccine has been connected to injuries and obviously there is a correlation between Vaccines and autism rates. Now someone smarter then me has to figure out the why. Hell maybe it's not the vaccines at all, but the iodine some places use to sterilize Injection sites. Or maybe it's a specific type of vaccination, or maybe just that we have them so close together in a childs development.

I think some vaccines should be required, but others are unnecessary, influenza is one example as long as I'm fit and healthy. But saying that the risk of vaccinations causing developmental disabilities is somehow worse then potential fatalities is dishonest to the facts if you don't also say which vaccines one should avoid. Because that way I can calculate risk on a per vaccine basis instead of having to go all or nothing, more studies need to be done, period.

I think some vaccines should be required

Which ones?

More importantly, why?

There should be a requirement to vaccinate against things such as polio, tetanus, hepatitis, and other highly contagious, lethal or debilitating illnesses.

Things such as the flu (at least in healthy individuals), Rotavirus and other non life threatening non debilitating illnesses should be at parent discretion, as they generally are rarely lethal if treated properly.

After all we are talking about things that contain mercury and aluminum salts, And while one shot might not do it, it could be the volume of the shots in a certain timeframe plus environmental factors that lead to autism. So therefore if we could avoid unnecessary shots, we could conceivably compare patients who got all the shots vs patients who got maybe 70% of the shots offered vs patients who only got the minimum requirements all at the same period of time. And then we would have a more educated way of knowing if in fact vaccines are involved in causing autism. if that was the case then you would expect to find more autism cases percentage wize in the population that got all the shots then you would find in the population that got the bare minimum requirements during the same time frame. If that is done and we don't see that split, it would be safe to say that vaccinations are not involved. If we do, then we have to look deeper to figure out what precisely is doing it, how it is doing it, and how we can both have the vaccine AND avoid the risk of developmental disabilities.

There should be a requirement to vaccinate against things such as polio, tetanus, hepatitis, and other highly contagious, lethal or debilitating illnesses.

But these things are not highly contagious, highly lethal, or likely debilitating. They are contagious, potentially lethal, and potentially debilitating, but not to the degree you may think.

Polio is usually spread by infected fecal matter entering the mouth. It is not airborne or readily transferred by blood (that doesn't enter the mouth). Increased sanitation has reduced the risk tremendously.

Second, it's not very lethal or debilitating. Fewer than .02% (2% of 1%) develop paralytic polio, which is generally temporary.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/polio.html

Tetanus is just plain non-contagious. No argument for herd immunity to be made here and since the onset is visible (open wound) and preventable (no dirty knives for baby) as well as treatable and fully recoverable "lethal and debilitating", while still possible, is not a likely scenario.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/tetanus.pdf

Onto hepatitis. As a fun fact, the first recorded instance was thought to be related to a smallpox vaccine in Germany don't take my word for it :

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/hepb.pdf

Hepatitis is only contagious through semen and saliva-into-blood action, hardly the sort of thing your child needs to worry about for their first 15 years (after which the vaccine has worn off). Children also tend to be asymptomatic as opposed to adults who contract the illness (similar to how chicken pox is worse as an adult). Infants are most likely to contract chronic hepatitis in the womb, which is currently unpreventable.

According to the CDC, the vaccine has been unsuccessful because those who are actually at risk are avoiding the vaccine (those with multiple partners, homosexual men, IV drug users: your typical 14 year old stuff, right?)

This vaccine is recommended before the child first leaves the hospital and carries the same exact dosage for a newborn as an 11 year old child.

So why should these vaccines be required?

And how do you feel about your previous maths being more aware of missing variables like rate of infection, contagion, progression, and lethality? You basically had a starting point where everyone was infected and some where everyone had an advanced case.

Still vaccinating my kids till a proper study is done.

D-Did you even read the links?

Like fuck opening them, did you even look at them? They are from the freaking CDC.

Beyond that, I don't care how you choose to abuse your kid, the closing question is why should those be required as you said before, in light of the fact that they don't posses the qualities you attributed to them.

...the center of disease control is the authority on illnesses....

I'm done here there is no reasoning with you people

Um, so you don't trust the CDC's data? Are you one of those kooky conspiracy theorists?

Clearly you have not even bothered to read my post (which cites exclusively your so-called authority on illness to prove you incorrect.).

You are either suffering from the most obscene cognitive dissonance I've ever encountered or are just a troll.

Either way, your claims of wanting more peer-reviewed mainstream information on the subject have been exposed as lies.

Still vaccinating my kids till a proper study is done.

do you understand english. i am vaccinating my kids, when i get kids.

i didnt say NOT vaccinating i said VACCINATING

on TOP of that if you actually read my posts else where in this thread. you would see i came out in FAVOR of vaccines. here is a quote of it . go ahead and read my history

edit formatting is hard.

Okay so you also didn't read my post where I corrected your maths either (corrections you specifically requested).

You are simply here to spout bullshit with no interest in learning.

You claimed that three particular vaccines should be mandatory, and I provided evidence from the CDC why this would be patently silly to do.

You are ignoring everything that anyone writes to you and continuing to wallow in and spread your ignorance. It's disgusting.

Honestly, what subreddit do you think you are on where "the government should force every citizen to [x]" is acceptable?

im done. hope you have a good night sir.

Stay pleb, bro.

meh. kinda embarrasing making a fool outof myself like this. guess ill have to look into it more before i open my mouth again

I already did the looking for you, you should actually read my posts. I both corrected your maths and cited evidence against your claim using your preferred source.

Admitting one made a mistake is difficult, but it's certainly better than living a lie in absolute denial of reality.

obviously there is a correlation between Vaccines and autism rates.

This is the part you're gonna need a source on, because this is the part conspiracy folks keep repeating but have not managed to back up short of one flawed retracted study.

Now, if I were a scientist and believed that something in vaccines caused autism or increased it's frequency I would start with a logical search- I'd get a list of the ingredients in vaccines, then one by one I would look up these ingredients manufacturing methods. Why? Because every single ingredient has at one point or another been made in a way that humans are exposed to it in larger doses than the general public. What does this mean? This means that if any of it DOES cause autism, then whichever ingredient does would leave behind a clear trail of evidence in the medical records of the employees at the facilities making the substances. Think about it, if the aluminium salts caused autism then just go back to the time around the world wars and look at the medical records of the women who primarily staffed manufacturing plants, you would see a clearly increased level of autism in their kids. Do we? Obviously not or anti-vaxxers wouldn't still be relying on the retracted Wakefield study.

Notice I said correlation. NOT causation as the document reports. Correlation=/=causation

Untrue... I used to be on both sides of this issue at one time or the other. I think the main problem is both sides are wrong to some degree. Vaccines can't cause autism. Autism is a psychological disorder and one that has DNA roots. So the argument stops there with scientist and medical doctors when you say vaccines cause autism. It can't. But what it can do is cause autism like problems. And I think if we changed our perspective to one of a medical epidemic happening with our kids, and we put together some of the good research that has been done on this, we'll be close to a solution. The problem is there's been so much fraud and deception occurring, it's hard to sort through and find good information. Just read and watch this 10 minute video.

http://vaccineimpact.com/2015/why-is-the-mainstream-media-ignoring-measles-vaccine-fraud-cases/

My issue (im fairly anti-vaccine) with anti-vaxxers is some of them just give the rest of us a bad name.. Think about the autism thing logically. That is a disorder that affects the human biological system...which is INSANELY complex. No ONE thing can be the sole cause of autism. There are dozens of factors. Genetics...what nutrition the mother had during pregnancy...what nutrition baby had at and after birth...yes, then vaccines play a role, i believe. It has substances in it that have no place in a human body. Sure, small amounts. Aluminum, formaldehyde etc. most of the ones with mercury have been phased out. But a baby gets up to 7 or so on the FIRST DAY of its life, and many boosters after 6 months etc. these are the prime years of brain development. Then you factor in tons of other shit. Pollution, air quality, toxins the kid might be exposed to in his environment... There are so many goddamn factors that all coalesce into a disorder...you canNOT fucking pin it on one thing. Be reasonable. Human biological systems are way too complicated and complex to start popping disorders from something that is arguably bad for you but insignificant. Bodies are pretty resilient and evolution has designed us to withstand a shitload of situations. I have my theory and it needs an organic chemist to verify, probably other experts that will never work on it as well. I gave up trying to talk to people about it.

That all being said, i still dont like vaccines, but i dont care if others want them. It should be treated like any other medical procedure. You get it if you want it, you dont if you dont. Informed consent. I feel the same way about fluoridated water.

this is why there has to be more studying done.

etc. these are the prime years of brain development. Then you factor in tons of other shit. Pollution, air quality, toxins the kid might be exposed to in his environment... There are so many goddamn factors that all coalesce into a disorder...you canNOT fucking pin it on one thing. Be reasonable. Human biological systems are way too complicated and complex to start popping disorders from something that is arguably bad for you but insignificant. Bodies are pretty resilient and evolution has designed us to

Once "Science" solves autism, cancer, and cripping autoimmune syndromes, then maybe I'll let them shove another needle in me.

Once eastern medicine or homeopathy solves ANYTHING then maybe I'll go with a witch doctor over a guy with 12-16 years schooling in how my biology works.

who the fuck said anything about eastern medicine or homeopathy? not me. fucking stupid either/or black/white thinking is what you got buddy.

A few of the other things that reddit has been known to 'freak out at you' about:

• Critical thought applied to the dogma of 'Evolution' (especially back in 2008, this was the divisive issue of that election season on reddit)

• Criticism of Israeli policy

• Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

• Wariness of the solutions presented for Anthropogenic Global Warming

• Skepticism of the safety of genetically modified foods (GMOs)

• Skepticism of the safety of introducing fluoride to the bloodstream

• Expressing the suspicion that reddit is manipulated by government employees, be they military, intelligence, law enforcement, etc.

• Skepticism of the "history" of modern warfare, especially WWII

• the dangers of nuclear power and/or the effects of Fukushima and the massive cover-up surrounding it

• chemtrails

• morgellons being anything other than a psychological delusion

A few more off the top of my head.

• Extraterrestial involvement on Earth

• Lizard people from the center of the earth

• abortion is murder
• mainstream religion

[deleted]

[deleted]

One and only warning for trolling.

morgellons

What are morgellons?

I don't have a definitive answer to that, according to wikipedia it's a "delusional belief that (you) are infested with disease-causing agents described as things like insects, parasites, hairs or fibers, while in reality no such things are present". This is blatantly false, at least some sufferers are not delusional at all. You can see the condition with your own two eyes.

Check out a few of the images of it in a google search, like this one or this one. There are also quite a few compilation videos/interviews/documentaries about it on youtube if you're interested in looking into a bit further. Here's one of the ones I've personally watched.

The speculation is that it's somehow related to chemtrails and/or nanotechnology. Either way, it's really sketchy and anyone who suggests that there may be more to it than meets the eye, and that maybe the people claiming to suffer from it aren't totally full of shit and crazy, is immediately denigrated as a lunatic conspiracy theorist and idiot - a telltale sign that they're probably onto something.

That is maximum nope.

I know man, it's really fucked up. And doctors, for the most part, seem to tell sufferers that they're just imagining it or that it's just a rash/minor skin condition. Oh, the fibers seem to move on their own and respond to touch/magnetism? Nevermind that, wipe some ointment on it and shut up.

Yeah that part of it is especially absurd.

But nuclear power is the clean way to go.(until we find something better) We are fucked when oil runs out.

The "clean way to go" that produces toxic waste that in many cases will take thousands or millions of years to dissipate? Waste that can't be cleaned or eliminated but is instead just buried in the dirt, where it's been shown to contaminate the ground water and surrounding areas in many cases?

Fission is not the way to go at all in my opinion, and also nuclear and oil aren't the only two options.

Yeah, so put it in a sealed tomb. Done.

• gun laws
• tipping waiters
• relationship advice

Gun laws inbetween us citizens. Almost all of the rest of the world already have a ban on them

Don't forget abortion. You're not allowed to question the ethics of abortion, especially as an atheist.

This one gets me, I'm pretty much a atheist I guess but I fully think abortion is terrible. I would never support making it illegal I am pro choice, but I still think it's a very depressing and terrible thing/

I'm okay with it as long as its done very soon. And I would be a hypocrite if I said I wouldn't tell a girl to get an abortion if I got her pregnant.

Try being a vegan here, that is nearly impossible to discuss. Even /r/vegan is weird about it.

roflmao, you aint kiddin!

Question. What is the point of being a vegan? You can still live just as long and be healthy too being an omnivore. What is the point of life if you can't enjoy the pleasures of it?

I like it. That's my point.

Critical thought applied to the dogma of 'Evolution'

What "dogma" are you referring to? Common ancestry? That's pretty much undeniable at this point. Natural selection as the most significant cause of evolution? That is at least closer to dogma than common ancestry. Many reputable evoutionary biologists (See the book Evolution, the Extended Synthesis) have argued for a less central role for natural selection due to things like epigenetics, developmental plasticity, genetic assimilation, etc. But really, common ancestry is as close to certain as anything can be in science.

This is slightly off-topic, but I am curious:

What is your "Critical thought applied to the dogma of 'Evolution'"?

[deleted]

What are you even rambling about? Go away.

What are you even rambling about?

Literacy problems?

no worries bro, i know what you mean.

And Bob Ross. Don't say a bad word about Bob Ross... the thieving weasel.

Any sort of empathy toward women's issues or feminism is also liable to get you dog-piled. Especially in the gaming subreddits.

[deleted]

Yeah scientific evidence that GMOs as a whole are harmless.

Thank you for this post. It's very refreshing to read something reasonable on Reddit.

It makes me feel like the world is crazy reading through posts in other subreddits. The debate just feels very controlled, dogmatic and off. "Science" truly is the new religion. ANY discussion can be shut down using the science card.

The exact same problem also exists in this sub. If you go against the main circlejerk of "they-are-controlling-us" or some other favorite topics then you will also downvoted as hell. From time to time you see people trying to bring some reason into the discussion if it becomes too bizarre and they get downvoted without discussion.

Thats unfortunately just how reddit is designed. People always just downvote what they don't believe in. I don't think this is a conspiracy, but the majority of people (including myself) are pro vax, so if you post something anti vax you will likely get downvoted. Majority of reddit is also pro cat and pro Beiber. Guess what? If you post something hating cats or hating Beiber, you will also get downvoted!

This has even spread to /r/medicine. Usually they are level headed when it comes to medical issues, but recently it has been filled with hysteric vaccination related posts.

Just hysterics & propaganda craziness.

It's gotten absurd. Let it never be said that people are rational in groups. Holy shit, I've never seen this kind of insanity in my entire life. This is like watching monkeys getting more and more frustrated in their enclosure at the zoo.

We're barely out of the jungle on this planet.

For me, I have no knowledge on who is right or wrong. But this vaccine obsession just seems really fucking weird. It's all that's on the front page. Who are they yelling at? The majority agrees on this website so why keep talking about it?

Who are they yelling at?

If it's any place on the site it's us. People here question vaccines and even questioning vaccines is a horrible thing to do (to them).

The argument is targeted at true anti-vaxxers but they're most likely a rarity on the site. Hence our skepticism is the biggest threat to this circlejerk.

It is a way to keep the true critical thinkers in this sub, contained to this sub, and preferably ridiculed off the site all together.

By posting all that propaganda in the cancerous subs, it pits them against us.

Now we can't educate anyone on the site about anything.

True critical thinkers? Thinking a bit highly of this sub I think. That's a good example of using a "Us vs Them" mentality.

It's like idiots who think everyone in a thread is a homophobe when it was just 2 or 3 downvoted comments out of hundreds. They love to imagine boogeymen.

They freak out at you

They just want to let you know that they're intellectually superior to Jenny McCarthy.

The driving force seems to be primarily the social stigma.

One minute they're posting cat and pokemon pictures and the next minute they're epidemiology experts repeating pharmaceutical PR talking points.

That's why it looks like a black and white issue - it's out of fear of not belonging to the right club. To them you're either in the club or not, thus against it.

Anti-vaxxers are the new Hitler. People compare things they don't like to anti-vaxxers just because they know how overwhelmingly people side against them on reddit.

I'm definitely spacing out the vaccinations for my kids, hysteria or not.

Way to come in here and appear to be a productive member of the community but really only pushing the vaxxer agenda.

Very slick.

But not really.

So, do I have to conform to your view in order to be a member here?

Sorry if I'm getting in the way of your circlejerk, but go fuck yourself. Unlike most people here, I actually have to deal with the reality of making the choice, because my wife is due in just a couple of months.

I'm not here just to be counterculture, I'm interested in actual critical thinking. Asking people to have the same opinion as you just to be part of the conversation is how we get the hivemind bullshit that you seem so interested in fighting.

This user right here. He knows, we all know but some of us are in positions were we have no choice. All it takes is one of these anti vax haters to make a phone call allegation of abuse and your whole life is in the toilet.

The simple fact is if you are anti vax you are fucked. You basically HAVE to do it. Look at the anger it already generates. They have well and truly won this war. Every year they get better at manipulating the masses and we sit here at our computers, me included.

We are fucked because we did nothing, and neither did previous generations, maybe its testament to the fact we truly are sheep.

edit; and also proof you can't disagree on this sub either.

I'm sorry, but I don't see the evidence that vaccinations are a sham. I'm not making this decision because I'm afraid of the reaction, it's just the best decision I can make with the information available. I would be very comfortable not getting vaccinated if I thought it was actually the best decision. Millions of pro-vaxxers don't sway me in the least. They can go fuck themselves if they disagree with any choice I make for my children.

I may be pro-vaxx but I'm willing to look at all of the information, even if it challenges common beliefs - which is something most people aren't interested in. I come here specifically so I can get both sides of one-sided issues.

I'm starting to feel like you guys are just counterculture sheep instead of the critical thinkers that I thought you were.

it's just the best decision I can make with the information available

Same for us anti vax people. This is why we come here. For the discussion, well some of us, but every comment is either totally dismissive of the others views or trying to belittle. Even you have just talked about the fact you are pro vax, and stating no evidence just tried to belittle people. Prime example. Where is the discussion? Its just people jerking each other off on either side of the fence.

I'm not going to spend time posting research when replying to posts challenging me that supply no research and accuse me of pushing an agenda.

What research should I post? The almost complete elimination of polio? The extreme decline of many deadly diseases? The benefits seem obvious. The counterargument is dubious at best. The one study about autism has been thoroughly debunked.

I would be happy to have an actual discussion if anyone acted like it was a discussion instead of just telling me I am wrong.

Even you have just talked about the fact you are pro vax, and stating no evidence just tried to belittle people.

The sheer amount of studies done on vaccines proving their efficacy is basically infinite. Start here or here

You don't have any evidence they work as designed, either, except for authoritative statements from academia and medicine. That's fine but it's not critical thinking and not any real informed decision. It's just "this guy has a better education", in the end.

That's the best we can do, probably, most of us. Even the most ardent of the curious likely haven't the training or the time or maybe even the brainpower to actually learn how it works and read the research papers, and I don't think it's fair to expect them to do so. I think it's enough that we have the CDC admitting to dishonesty in research results for me to respect anyone's decision on the matter.

I think it's enough that we have the CDC admitting to dishonesty in research results for me to respect anyone's decision on the matter.

So maybe you can explain then why you hate science and want to kill babies.

Edit: If it wasn't obvious, that was sarcasm.

Bro there is tons of evidence that they work, at least some of them. I mean, measles is a pretty distinctive disease that can't be confused with anything else. It had been reduced to a few dozen cases per year in the US.

The issue I have is its all or nothing. Some of these vaccines are damn near 100 years old. We know they are fine. The HPV vaccine... well. I have heard a few things that make me scratch my head.

Right, you have heard a few things that have made you scratched your head. Basically something has made you say "huh?" and it wasn't enough to make you start questioning and finding out for yourself? and you accuse others of being sheep? calling someone a sheep is saying they blindly follow, which is wrong they are terrorised into following in a way, which is much more accurate, but you have admitted to knowing something is not right and you still vaccinate blindly. well done, you are king of the sheep.

Didn't say sheep. Not a once. Nor do I blindly vaccinate. I make a reasoned choice each time.

I would kindly recommend a thorough reading of the CDC's Pinkbook to help you decide how and when to vaccinate your child.

Several scheduled vaccines are unnecessary and a couple are downright silly. Informed decision making is your best friend here, don't just let a stranger make a decision that affects your child's entire life.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/index.html

Learn. Do it for your child.

Edit: Since you mentioned it further down, I'd recommend polio as a good starting point for your reading.

A few highlights:

Up to 95% of all polio infections are inapparent or asymptomatic.

Fewer than 1% of all polio infections result in flaccid paralysis. Paralytic symptoms generally begin 1 to 10 days after prodromal symptoms and progress for 2 to 3 days. Generally, no further paralysis occurs after the temperature returns to normal.

The death-to-case ratio for paralytic polio [which are one percent of all polio cases] is generally 2%–5% among children

The duration of immunity with IPV is not known with certainty, although it probably provides protection for many years after a complete series.

From 1980 through 1998, 152 cases of paralytic polio were reported in the United States; 144 (95%) of these cases were VAPP [Vaccine-Associated Paralytic Poliomyelitis ], and the remaining eight were in persons who acquired documented or presumed wild-virus polio outside the United States.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/polio.html

In the meantime, you parrot the government propaganda without doing any research.

I did the research. You keep talking about research but you haven't posted anything that resembles research. Why the fuck should anyone listen to you?

my research: gummint sez

That's not research, kiddo.

I looked through your posts to see if you have any justification at all for your view and I see literally nothing of any substance. Do you think you are accomplishing anything?

You sound sane. I feel like anonbtc whatever is just a shill to make anti vaxxers look crazy and keep the discussion pointed that way, considering they've pretty much just started spamming conspiracy with this bullshit like three days ago. Don't take it to heart, they'll drop this account and make a get a new one to push more propaganda soon.

As a new father I couldn't believe the Hep B either. I looked at my wife like "are you kidding me? How the hell is this baby going to contract Hepatitus B?" Needless to say my child did not get that one. And boy are they pushy on all of them...

When I looked into why the hep B was given at birth vs to an older child/baby, it was because it was slightly more effective when given so young. Don't quote me on the numbers but it was like 91% effective (at birth) vs 87% effective (at some older age). (With effectiveness being measured by still having antibodies at some period after immunization). I didn't look any further into how THAT data was actually obtained.

I still think it's a ridiculous one to give a newborn unless someone in the household actually has hep B. We put that one off until my kids were several months old.

Hepatitis B is incredibly easy to spread. My father had it and is now clear of it after receiving a very long and very painful regiment of treatments. Before being treated he had to keep everything that touched his mouth or could have blood on it in a container and heavily sanitized (razors, forks, knives, toothbrushes, floss).

Thing is, he wasn't diagnosed for many many years. Me and my sister, whom has downs and is immune deficient, could have contracted it at any point during this period. Luckily, me and her had both been vaccinated for it very early in our lives.

This is just an anecdote from my life, but I hope you see how just because you think something will never affect you doesn't mean it's true.

I appreciate what you said. But from what I read on webmd it's not so easily spread. Unless the baby is having sex, sharing drug needles or getting tattoos. http://www.m.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/hepatitis-b-cause

Because its transmitted through bodily fluids. Sex isn't required. The mother who has Hep B transmits it unknowingly.

Same with herpes.

To be fair 'Reddit' could also be defined as a bunch of shill accounts up-voting each other.

The problem is the conversation is very boring to read being so one-sided and there usually just circle-jerk one line responses which are the same every time.

I can't see how much longer this is going to be successful.

Best approach right now is to point out that it is a trust issue. "Anyone in their right mind would opt for a vaccine that would help them. Solve the trust issue and the problem solves itself."

It boggles my mind that people cannot see the logical fallacies being used in all this propaganda. Do I just take for granted that I can spot propaganda/manipulation i n an instant? Are these people 100% trusting of all authority? What is so difficult about questioning things that are obviously being shoved down your throat.

The big question is, what is the motive? There is always a motive, otherwise it would not be propaganda.

Possible motives:

A: honest concern for our health and this is really important to keep us all healthy.

B: more profit/more power

C: mess with our biology/experimenting on us.

D: any combination above

If you have trust issues, of course you will consider rejecting A. Rejecting A is a perfectly legitimate standpoint to have.

It boggles their minds that people cannot see the incredibly simple steps that could be taken to prove that something in a vaccine causes autism if such a link existed.

Example? Lets say you think thiomersal's ethylmercury causes autism. Ok well a quick check tells us it was used as a preservative in tattoo inks for a period, all we've got to do is a single study looking at the birth records of kids born to parents that got tattoos during a certain time frame, if there's any science to it at all we will see clearly elevated levels of autism in these kids.

Think it's the aluminium salts? Well then lets pull up medical records from women employed at the plants producing it during the world wars, they will definitely have elevated levels of it in their system and there should be a clear indication of increased autism in kids born to those women.

See how easy it would be to find some better evidence than a retracted study by Wakefield?

In short, what is the point of a motive or even looking for one if nobody can even show us evidence that a problem exists? I can spend 3 minutes thinking about it and already I've come up with ways to show a possible link if there is one, why haven't anti-vaxxers managed this feat in the past 30 years?

I'd tell you why they haven't, but you probably wouldn't trust me.

Wait, what is this scientific method you're implying here?

This is what drives me crazy. There's no attempt to investigate the question, or attempt to even know anything about the molecules involved.

Instead you have people quoting a bunch one-off scientific/clinical studies (which never, never have any follow-up) to spread FUD around a substance. Hey, I work in biomedical research. If a result is interesting and real, other researchers follow it up and develop the question. There's not really any pharma/gov interference in the actual choosing of research questions on a day-to-day basis. When you see a paper published even 5 years ago, with no follow-up--you should wonder if there's anything in that first result to begin with.

I doubt people would freak out at your idea of adjusting the schedule. Most people recognize that this is not the forum to discuss such things, a peer reviewed medical journal would be one.

Don't try to bring reason into this subreddit. The people here say that they are critical thinkers but they are as closed-minded as the people they complain about. Just look around in this thread. It's pure black and white thinking. Nothing is nuanced. All of reddit is bad. All of reddit is controlled. all vaxers are crazy nazis who try to kill your child with toxins. And so on. Do you see critical thinking in here? I don't see much.. Only the same circle jerk which happens all over reddit. Try to question some of their theories about 9/11? Here come the downvotes. You don't think that every last news outlet is controlled by 'them'? Well, have some downvotes.

Heard immunity is a real scientific term and Hep B can be transferred through any bodily fluid swap such as saliva, blood, ect.

Have you heard? Immunity.

I heard you can get immunity from herd immunity.

correlation doesn't imply causation, but i do think a study should be done on these vaccines to see if the rate of autism is effected by how close a timeframe the vaccines are administered. im also interested in a study done on the containers and storage methods of said vaccines. maybe the scientific community is over looking an effect possibly caused by certain storage methods or the type of needle/plastic used in the syringes. heck maybe the iodine often used to sterilize the injection site has something to do with this. has anyone looked into THAT?

Can be contracted through toothbrush, blades, blood transfusion if you are very unlucky. Point is kids are playful and I'd rather be safe than sorry, I do very much believe in spacing vaccines out.

why Hep B is SO necessary for babies

So your brisk goes off without a hitch.

And, the vaccine wears off after 10-15 years, anyway

How did you reach this conclusion?

It's true that Hepatitis B is more likely to be transmitted through sexually intercourse. While that is a major means of transmission, it is not the only one. Hep B can be spread from infected mothers to their infant at birth. The Hep B Vax given within 12 hours of birth helps to prevent it being spread to the infant.

Of course the mother should and is usually tested for Hep B during her pregnancy as many people can have Hep B and not know it.

Also, the immunologic memory of the today's Hep B Vax remains intact for at least 20 years. This information is based on studies of children who have received the Hep B Vax from 6 months and up. More long-term studies still need to be completed before the gains from vaccination at birth will be known.

I'm all for questioning why the government says we should be putting certain chemicals in our bodies. Though you might want to think what would be more beneficial for the government, sick citizens dying off or healthy citizens working and paying taxes?

Maybe they are expecting Hep B carrying agents of the state to molest their children.

Reddit is based around the herd mentality, therefore it would make perfect sense that you see them behave like a herd on this topic of herd defense.

Science is about admitting what you don't know and the OP is absolutely correct in that its a "with us or against us" mentality. I find that to be keenly distressing.

Humans have made it this far promoting science as a tool with openess, transparency and not forcing itself on anyone as if it were dogma. This epic push to herd opinions online is striking because I don't know anyone in reality that doesn't do major vaccinations anyways.

Do they really expect to reach the Amish here or on facespace/twitter? Are we marching inexoribly towards state sponsored medicine? I for one do not believe the sky is falling.

Hep B is passed mother to child through bodily fluids. Sex is just the most common method.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/109/1/124.full

Sadly, some babies are sexually active whether they want to be or not.

While true and incredibly disgusting and sad, this has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion about vaccine efficacy/safety.

I dont think that would justify giving all babies Hep B vaccinations, just because some babies might get raped...

Hepatits because kids are constantly shoving things into their mouths that have been in other kids mouths.

Well, I know you can't get it from kissing. There would have to be blood in the mouth, in sufficient quantity. Oh ok - here I just googled it - I'm pretty sure it's not in saliva. link

Ok, I am probably wrong.

Let me make a correction. Hep B is a blood-borne disease that infects through blood and bodily fluids. It is NOT "just" an STD. In fact, Perinatal infection (infection at birth from the mother) is a very common way to get it. Additionally, the people who get infected before the age of 5 have a significant chance to develop the chronic version of the illness which has a mortality rate of 15% to 25%.

People think of it as "just an STD" because of widespread use of the vaccine. You said it yourself, the vaccine wears off after 15 years, and that's when people start becoming sexually active. It's only because of the effectiveness of the vaccine that the disease is rare.

You think of it as an STD because that's the most common way to get it in a population that has been immunized through vaccination. I suggest you do a little research on the disease itself and the vaccine for it before you go sprouting nonsense in the future. Below are a few links that might help educate you:

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs204/en/ http://www.webmd.com/vaccines/what-you-should-know-11/hepatitis-vaccines

You mean spouting nonsense...not "sprouting" nonsense. (And thanks).

And, your links do not support many of your comments at all (just like the vaccine squad - how meta..).

And, I said "really just" and STD - but not "PURELY AN STD". Combined with your "sprouting (sic) nonsense" comment, I can only assume your reading comprehension isn't that great. "Really just" = "is typically" or "acts like" or "has similarities to". "Really just" does NOT = "just", which is how you quoted me. Though, perhaps some of the fault is mine - and I apologize for my slightly imprecise language on reddit confused you.

Anyway, Hep B is transmitted through the same vectors that HIV is transmitted through. We don't have an HIV vaccine. How many babies get HIV randomly? The only exception is contaminated food... in HEP A - and that's why I didn't say Hep A, deliberately (because I am edumacated on these diseases, believe it or not!).

It's only because of the effectiveness of the vaccine that the disease is rare.

No - that is not why. It's rare because it's hard to transmit. Before 1982 (the vaccine introduction date) - there were no mass hepatitis epidemics in children - unlike smallpox, polio, measles, etc... because it's not airborne & doesn't linger in the atmosphere for 2 hours like measles virus in cough droplets. I did not get the shot at birth (nor did anyone born when I was, in the 80s). I got it in 1995...and again in 2010. In the 80s and 90s, they didn't enforce giving it at birth, but Merck & friends successfully convinced the AAP to do so. From the WHO:

Hepatitis A and E are typically caused by ingestion of contaminated food or water. Hepatitis B, C and D usually occur as a result of parenteral contact with infected body fluids. Common modes of transmission for these viruses include receipt of contaminated blood or blood products, invasive medical procedures using contaminated equipment and for hepatitis B transmission from mother to baby at birth, from family member to child, and also by sexual contact.

It is extremely rare to have "contaminated" medical / blood products in the USA. So, that option is out. So, we're left with the mother, as you said. So, why not just give the mother a hepatitis test rather than vaccinating EVERY baby? Less money for Merck, but more common sense. And, don't use the baby rape argument please, because if you do the math on how many babies are raped & the ones that are raped by Hep B+ people, that will be extraordinarily low...not justifying 100% population vaccination for something that happens 0.0001% of the time. And in the rare rare rare case that a child gets Hep B, we have far more treatments now (antivirals and interferon) than 1982 (and funny that it's pushed so more now than 1982).

In addition, the disease is rare, but it's still a lot more common than the 0.0001% you mentioned. It's actually closer to 1% of the population.

The vaccine is a cheap, reliable way to prevent the disease, that has next to no lasting side effects. In addition, it will protect the child from the rare chance that they will be infected by the disease when they grow up (unlikely, but increasingly likely given the increased globalization of the world, since the disease is very common in less developed parts of the world).

Also, treatments for Hep B consists of mostly supportive therapy. Antivirals are approved for it, but the effectiveness of them are still nowhere near the effectiveness of the vaccines.

Besides, in regards to your previous posts, there are no studies that have shown that spacing vaccines out have any benefits compared to taking them all at the recommended time. In fact, you only increase the risk of infection.

I am not concerned that vaccines cause autism.

You should be.

Personally on reviewing the scant evidence I have come to the conclusion that autism is likely caused by environmental factors, such as aluminium and other metals. It may even be a knock on genetic flaw from the previous generation from damage caused by chemical exposure. I can't rule it out entirely but I think our air and water is a greater source of awful things for us than a few injections (with small quantities of what have you.)

On the other hand... I don't have any issue with those who want to space the vaccines, I know my body runs hard after a vaccine (family all got h1n1 shot, mainly for my mother's peace of mind as the disease stuff always scares her pretty good.)

Well aluminum is a common adjuvant in vaccines now.

Here again, we have disinformation, misinformation and logical fallacies, all concluding with "vaccines are good, if you question anything, just space them out"

Critical thinkers should not be falling for this type of bullshit.

Whether or not you can also get autism from the chemicals they pump into the air, has nothing to do with the link between autism and vaccines.

Go troll elsewhere.

Except there isn't a link between autism and vaccines...the doc that did the "research" was proven to have lied and misrepresented.

Then why the cover-up??

Are you not exactly what you accuse others of being by responding the way you do? Everyone like you keeps screaming "muh reasonable discushuns" and then when someone states their opinion in a reasonable tone, you and others respond with utter contempt... I suspect, whether you're actively aware of it or not, that you only want your own contrarian opinions regurgitated back to you by other users. That's at least the way you come off. Even if someone wanted to have a reasoned discussion, what motivation would they have to talk to someone like you? You're just going to go out of your way to be an asshole.

[deleted]

Stop with these shit comments dude, for real, you've littered this thread with them and they add nothing at all to it but negativity and more discord. If you have nothing to say besides calling other users trolls, perhaps consider not commenting at all.

Not trolling. Wanna try this time? Otherwise you're just hiding from legitimate criticism. Also feel free to look through 2+ years of comment history and tell me if I'm a troll or just a person who jokes, debates and nostalgizes about silly shit like realistic people do. If anyone is trolling, albeit too vehemently, it's you. And if that's the case: sad b8 m8, I give it a pathetic/8.

legitimate criticism

Not quite kiddo.

Bye now.

Nit picking, moving the goal post, not even trying to respond intelligently to criticism, calling people kiddo. Keep it on 4chan where at least one 12yr old might kek.

criticism

You mean government propaganda? Yeah, keep it in /r/politics with the rest of the zionist scum.

Hahaha, okay. Now I know you aren't serious, just bored. Enjoy yourself.

Don't you have homework to do?

You go troll elsewhere. His comment is perfectly fine.

[deleted]

As soon as someone has an opinion you get scared and hide behind calling them a troll. Not even good. Try harder.

[deleted]

I thought you said "bye"? But you're back.. that's cute.

Some vaccines. Some. Whatever man lol.

Edit : been a part of this community for years now under various monikers, one of which is approved for nolibswatch, I find it amusing you think I am a troll.

Double edit : actually whether or not environmental factors are playing a role in the rise of autism is pretty critical to determining any links with vaccines, because if they are a source it may be either masking or being conflated with autism from vaccinations. Shit, it could be a combination of all of those factors, and vaccines only cause it in those who have been compromised from anti biotic and other things before the immune response or other from the shot tips the balance. If you want to encourage critical thinking than be critical in your own thinking. IMO with this issue we ate likely at worst dealing with a soft conspiracy of well meaning group think combined with incomplete data. If the link was as strong as some people act like it must be it would be easy to suss it out with a study or statistically, the link must be weaker than that or rely on other additional factors.

I'm not being pro Vax, I'm being pro logic. Just like this sub doesn't really get into lizard people usually, I choose to not get into ''vaccines are here to reduce the population'' because I just don't see how such a conspiracy could reasonably reach fruition without someone noticing.

[deleted]

No one said it was 100% either way.

They're spreading all types of disease under the guise of vaccinations.

Who is to say if these kids are even getting "vaccines" it could be something else entirely. The whole point is, we are being forced to allow the government to stick a needle in our arm every month, and no one has any real clue what is going on. What IS very clear, is that diseases like cancer, autism and ADHD are skyrocketing. There have also been whistleblowers exposing the CDC's attempts to cover-up these links.

People need to quit with this "Science says this, and the other science was disproven". That is not addressing the actual issue. If there is nothing to cover up, why is there a cover-up?

Adhd isn't a real disease. It comes from the pathologizing normal males behavior. Did you ever wonder why the overwhelming number of cases of add are male? There's nothing wrong with these kids. Normal kids shouldn't be expected to sit down for hours on end. Adhd meds smooth the transition into an obedient little wage slaves.

I don't keep track of every disease they distribute through those needles, to be perfectly honest. One week it's aids, the next it's cancer, sometimes it's just a little autism.

I'm sure if they could give them something that would then require them to be prescribed pharmaceutical meth, they'd do it.

Whatever the various methods may be to arrive at that result.

Oh I see what you mean.

Do you have a link for that? A source? Studies? Actual science?

The Patterson papers should be especially troubling for those who have continually dismissed a vaccine/autism connection. I don't think the Patterson papers "prove" vaccines cause autism, but they lay solid groundwork for the biological explanation of a vaccine/autism connection.

Activation of the Maternal Immune System During Pregnancy Alters Behavioral Development of Rhesus Monkey Offspring

Maternal immune activation yields offspring displaying mouse versions of the three core symptoms of autism

Use google to research the CDC coverup.

If there's nothing to cover up, why is there a coverup?

Good luck kiddo.

Is the only evidence of a cover up still just that one guy who claims there's a cover up?

Using this logic, we can all dismiss everything Edward Snowden revealed, right? It was just one guy. We can't seriously trust JUST THAT ONE GUY, can we?

Snowden had proof. There were plenty of whistle blowers before him, he was just the only one taken seriously because he had proof.

except snowden had actual evidence. The guy claiming there's a cover up is as reliable as Rob Schneider.

JIDF to the rescue!

so, yes?

[deleted]

There has never been a point in the history of any species where inactivated pathogens (that incite immune responses) were injected at this volume ... in high enough concentrations to produce lifetime immunity. Of course there could be nothing to worry about with doing that...to infants, right? There's no point to even investigate it either, hmm?

There has never been a point in the history of any species where they were moved around by methods not of their own creation. But I can't imagine you'd understand the implications of that - or even the potential implications.

Back to the caves, ammirite?

False equivalence

WORDSSSSSSSSS. You know them.

You are literally saying "X has never existed previously in history, therefore why should it exist now" - not sure how I can false equivalence that statement.

You are literally saying "X has never existed previously in history, therefore why should it exist now"

I didn't "literally" say that at all - or you could scroll up and it would literally say that. Where do I say "why should it exist now"?

Following from my original post - above, I've been talking about doing more research to understand the (potential) danger of injecting 25 pathogens into an infant because it has not been done before & there were inherent dangers from the very first vaccine ever created.

I did not say that we shouldn't vaccinate because it hasn't been done before (and we should go back to caves...which, like I said, is a false equivalence).

If you want to make an actual analogy, you can say "then why don't we do a study on every modern innovation then, from the effects of watching TV to GMO foods" - and that would be an analogy that would actually make sense.

The reason I said this is that there is a lot about the immune system we don't know (specifically, autoimmune diseases still have unknown causes). There's a lot less research needed to determine the safety of "moving around by methods not of our own creation".

Ok, fuck my life... I am not teaching basic logic & analogical reasoning skills on reddit...

You said, and I quote, "There has never been a point in the history of any species where inactivated pathogens (that incite immune responses) were injected at this volume"

And then, since you edited your post, you stated "But I can't imagine you'd understand the implications of that..." - Well gee golly, implications. Whenever I hear that word I am just full of goodwill and cheer and naturally assume that we should continue the course regardless of the implications.

In all seriousness, you implied heavily that we should not be vaccinating because of untold implications - well here are some implications for you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox

Go look at those pictures. Then look back to Vaccines. Then look to those pictures. Of children. Children dying at up to a 50% mortality rate. Then look back to Vaccines. Implications.

Do you know how many billions of dollars are spent researching, producing and manufacturing vaccines each year? Each decade? Do you think if they were worse than the alternative, we would be using them? Even if - and this is not true - but even if Vaccinations caused Autism in 1 in a million children that would be completely acceptable because the alternative is that child, and a load more, would be dead from diseases that we could prevent.

We do need to continue doing more research, but we understand that vaccinations are not hurting people - we use literally millions of doses of them each year and 99%+ of us are completely unaffected by them. What possible more research would we need to prove on them? What hidden side effect do you foresee that a generation of use hasn't uncovered?

This thread is great to find. I've been thinking the same things over the past few days. I'm not anti vax but I'm definitely a believer of the idea that people should make their own choices. I mostly gave up on these discussions because they make me sick. Not only are they not productive, but they hinder the pro-vaccine movement because instead of actually educating anti-vax people, they are calling them morons, murderers, etc.

If they want to get through to people, why not show some respect for their position? People don't anti-vax to be assholes. They do it because some experience(s) have left them with a distrust for mainstream medicine. I have had a number of horrible experiences that has made the "Trust your doctor" statement meaningless to me.

Recognizing WHY someone holds a belief will help people better understand it. But no... anyone who is concerned about vaccines is just a huge asshole. What I've seen on reddit has made me truly disgusted with the world.

There's plenty to distrust in a government that consistently says they are doing the right thing for everyone, then it turns sideways, rolls down the side of a hill and bursts into flames. Credibility is what I'm referring to.

• cigarettes were sold to us as something safe. Ads for 9 out of 10 doctors smoke Camel cigarettes. Or have a Camel cigarette after every course for thanksgiving. This were real ads.
• Poor black farmers were given syphilis by the government as human guinea pigs. Caught red handed and had to fess up.
• How many armed conflicts this century were we dragged into for the good of the nation that turned bad in the end. Iraq, Libya, and Egypt come to mind. Those are going to shit now after us liberating them.

I only mention these three as examples because we as a nation were convinced by our government they were doing the right thing, but in the end turned out to be wrong. So you'll have to accept my skepticism of thinking maybe anti-vaxxers are on to something that the collective minds in Washington aren't telling us.

And yes to everyone else who says pro-vaxxers want to be in the hating on anti-vaxxers club on social media.

Not only are they not productive, but they hinder the pro-vaccine movement because instead of actually educating anti-vax people, they are calling them morons, murderers, etc. If they want to get through to people, why not show some respect for their position? People don't anti-vax to be assholes. They do it because some experience(s) have left them with a distrust for mainstream medicine

This has always been my line of reasoning as well. By forcing or threatening to force, you play right into what these people fear and they become defensive. It's not a good place for the debate to be. I would argue that it's going to drive suspicious people further away from vaccines and make the anti-vax people more likely to dig their heels in, thus hurting vaccination rates.

Redditors and people like them will have no one to thank but themselves. Vaccination rates were still extremely high before all of this bullshit propaganda, and it wouldn't surprise me if the people who are negative on vaccines use this as an opportunity to gather more followers and thus lower vaccine uptake.

Irony abounds.

If they want to get through to people, why not show some respect for their position?

This should be quite telling; after all, you rarely see an "anti vaxxer" behave so aggressively, do you?

So whose position are they respecting? It makes more sense when you see they are trying to get a message through to those who already agree rather than those who dissent.

educating anti-vax people

I think you're confused about who needs to be educated.

Nice try though.

Do some research. Then come back.

I'm not taking a stance on vaccines. I'm just saying, if anyone wants to educate someone on anything, they won't get very far if all they do is call the person names.

Very true, and an important comment to make. I see someone is downvoting everything you post out of spite, which doesn't help anything. Whoever is indiscriminately downvoting you is a cancer to the idea of open, rational debate.

Yeah sounds like you need to do yours. Being anti vax is not a defendable or educated position.

Says the least educated person on Reddit.

Neat!

That's a baseless claim and completely not true. Anti VAX is a position of ignorance. Like many other anti science claims.

That's a baseless claim and completely not true. Pro VAX is a position of ignorance. Like many other "science" claims.

Yeah pretty sure you are a troll, but vaccinations have been proven an effective technique since before modern medicine. Diseases can and have been eliminated like Small pox. Vaccines are easily one of the greatest accomplishments of man kind and we owe it to our descendants to get rid of as much disease as possible.

Vaccines prevent disease, therefore they cannot possibly be the cause of any.

Flawed logic is flawed. Please try again after completing middle school. Thank you.

Never said that although almost everything can cause disease. Hardly a valid criticism of something that prevents magnitudes of harm more than it could possibly cause.

more than it could possibly cause.

It's OK that you don't understand, but please don't confuse others.

Want to tell me what your possible concerns are? Really failing to to see the harm in a few inactivated viral particles and a few preservatives and chemicals that are encountered by people in their daily lives regularly.

possible concerns

Autism, Cancer, ADHD, HIV, etc

Do some research instead of just parroting Fox News.

HIV? Are you kidding? Wow I can't believe I let you waste my time. Those aren't concerns you listed off random ass diseases. What is in a vaccine that would be so harmful? Please tell me one of the components that is so so awful. Yeah I don't see how this has anything to do with Fox News, I didn't even know they were pro vaccine.

I didn't even know they were pro vaccine.

And yet they are. And so are you? So what does this tell us?

Please go figure out what is actually going on before parroting any more bullshit.

Well I think it is obvious. We are both pro vaccine. Seriously though, ever heard of the phrase even a broken clock is right twice a day? Nice attempt to somehow discredit me by associating me with Fox news and acting like me being aware of Fox's position is somehow relevant or that Fox's position lends any evidence to either side. You just keep on coming with ad hominems and distractions. The fact you think it is at all relevant shows you don't have a grasp on the actual issue at all and you fail to come up with any criticism of any vaccines based on what chemicals they contain. What makes vaccines so terribly toxic? Why can't you answer the question?

Mercury for one. You can read the details about the rest in my other submissions. Assuming you know how to read.

Keep parroting that government propaganda though. Maybe you'll fool someone eventually.

Mercury? You mean what was removed from most vaccines? Also I hope you never ate a fish or anything else that naturally has mercury in it. You are just parroting little blurbs you heard online like no one has ever thought about that before. The internet is not smarter than all the scientists in the world. Sorry to burst your bubble. Mercury toxicity isn't some mind blowing revelation to anyone.

Mercury toxicity isn't some mind blowing revelation to anyone.

And that makes it OK.

Beat it kiddo, you must get tired of getting BTFO.

Go spread your government propaganda somewhere else.

And yet you can't come up with a meaningful response to anything I've said. Makes it okay? What are you even trying to imply. I love these shallow responses. Well since you know vaccines have a total volume of about .5ml. When eating fish the recommended limit is up to about 1 mg per kilogram. In addition to the fact that the form of mercury in vaccines is far safer and is cleared from the body faster than others. Face it you really have no argument.

[deleted]

Rule 10. Removed. Final warning.

[deleted]

You read through my comment history? Nice. Then you'll see I just stick to the facts.

[deleted]

You guys were missing the point I was trying to make. I'm not necessarily pro or anti vax. I really don't have my mind made up. But in THEIR minds, they feel anti vax people need to be educated and they sure as hell don't appear to be trying to do that. If this was really about the good of the world, why aren't they showing compassion for people with this "misled" opinion and providing real education?

There are many ways to steer public discussion. This is one of them. You can find more examples of this type of bullshit if you follow /u/flytape's comments. Great mod, right?

I agree. Everyone should be left to make their own decisions. If I want to go 150 MPH around schools and playgrounds then why can't I? If people don't want their kids to be exposed to my speeding maybe they shouldn't be taking them to school!

My personal experience has left me with some vague distrust of speeding limits, so therefore I should be justified in doing whatever I want, and showing reckless disregard for the lives of children.

The point you are making is illogical, fuck off.

Wouldn't it be crazy if not all vaccines worked equally? Not all pills work the same, but you don't hear people debating, "Take No Pills Ever!" "Screw you, take all the pills!"

Maybe some ARE safe and effective, and others are not.

Someone with a Scientific Background In Science explain why this is not and cannot be the case.

It's more complicated than that. Some individuals have severe side effects from commonly used medications. That doesn't mean the medication is absolutely bad. The thing with vaccines is that even if all the awful stories you've heard are true, it's still a only a problem very rarely, and if it's not your kid then it's just anomalous "collateral damage" so to speak. The benefits far outweigh the risks, unless it so happens that your child is one of the unlucky ones.

Unlucky one here. When I was 6, I had a chicken pox vaccine, reaction: I got bels palsy and half my face froze up, inflated tongue and ear, throwing up every hour, terrible headaches. Most terrifying 2 months of my life, I went to the emergency room because i couldn't even lift my head one day. Wtf vaccines

Sorry man, but this happens with peanuts for some people too. You're unlucky and it is really terrible what happened to you at such a young age, but we can't just stop vaccinating people. We don't make peanuts or bees illegal.

Those kids who got the measles are now having their own scariest time of their life. The diseases vaccines are preventing affect the entire population, not just the 1 in a million of the population who have severe reactions to vaccines. You took one for the team, and people should really recognize that.

Maybe we can find better ways to test for people who will have a bad reaction to vaccines. I'm surprised there's not more talk about that.

Damned unfortunate, but I have to wonder... If you skipped the vaccine and caught chicken pox, wouldn't it have likely been the same reaction?

No. It would have been chicken pox, which isn't even that severe. What that guy went through was 100x worse than chicken pox. Also, with the chicken pox vaccine, even if it "works" it wears off after like 20 years, and chicken pox is far worse on an adult than a child. So it makes no sense to even vaccinate against chicken pox. let the kids get it naturally and then they're immune for life. The only reason we have a chicken pox vaccine is that some drug company saw dollar signs, and now they've made a shitload of money from it because it's "mandatory." My kids were not vaccinated against chicken pox and they've each gotten it "naturally" and so they're immune for life.

Shingles is chickenpox coming back as an adult. AFAIK you can't get shingles without having a full blown chickenpox infection, which is why the vaccine's the supposedly better option.

Hmmm. When I was a kid, shingles was supposedly due to herpes. Now they're saying its chickenpox?!? I call bullshit on this whole "chickenpox causes shingles" business.

Varicella(the virus that causes chickenpox and shingles) is a herpesvirus.

I think you're missing the point.

When you get a "flu vaccine" have you ever looked at the bottle? Have you ever seen any tests done on what is actually in that bottle?

Who is to say, when you get a flu vaccine, that you are actually getting a flu vaccine, regardless of how effective the flu vaccine might be.

People need to stop letting the "Doctor" stick a needle in his arm whenever the government says you need one.

Look at all the disease that follows the Bill and Melinda Gate Foundation around Africa. You think they're just giving out "vaccines"?

Look at all the disease that follows the Bill and Melinda Gate Foundation around Africa.

I'd like to see any evidence of this. To be meaningful it would have to include data from before they visited and from nearby regions, otherwise there's no comparison. You may read about the flu after they visit, but for all we know it's only being reported because of their visit and generally isn't remarked upon.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bill+gates+eugenics

I see zero headlines about him causing disease.

More of this "I don't know what wrote mean in context" BS. Go listen to what he said again, and don't post such nonsense.

As someone in the medical field myself, most vaccines are drawn (directly from the bottle) into the syringe in front of the patient. The exception being pre-packaged vax. If the patient would like examine the bottle, that's obviously absolutely fine.

Why are doctors so reluctant to give the vaccine package insert to me if I ask for it?

but you don't hear people debating, "Take No Pills Ever!" "Screw you, take all the pills!"

Because if you are taking pills you are already paying for them, and have decided they are necessary for you. Regardless of what BigPharma PR attempts to mandate, you can go through life without getting vaccinated, and so can your children. That hurts the bottom line, and we can't have it.

I've been working on at least trying to make people think in at least one of them. I've just been trying to present rational ideas, nothing more. Should anyone like to read through my history, I feel like focusing on this type of insightful and reasonable presentation of an idea is a very good way to reach people.

We cannot just be diving in screaming "lol fuckin shills /r/politics is leaking" and expect to reach anyone, though I'm sure many of these commenters are shills who exist to discredit us. We need to be reasonable and informed in what we say.

I feel like the best way to do this, is simply to point out how irrational it is to polarize the issue so hard. I am for some vaccines, and have questions about others. That does not rationally translate into me wanting babies to die, nor can you label me "Anti-vaxxer". Get people to ask why they're saying it does. Get people to ask why there can be no discussion or question about the topic.

If they make claims about the government always wanting to look out for our health and prevent disease, so vaccines must all be good, get them to ask themselves why cigarettes are legal. Make people think. Don't tell people what's true and what's not true. I for one am tired of seeing people bombard 10 links and excerpts from assorted alt-news sites as a contribution to the discussion or a rebuttal. Fucking please, learn to formulate your own thoughts and opinions, without vomiting links at people to support your claim. Support your statements with irrefutable logic that makes people think for themselves. If more people would start doing that, things would change.

Maybe only a couple people see it and start to think about it when we comment. But that's a couple people more than yesterday.

This is the best comment I've read in a long time. Well said, and thank you for the important contribution. The entire vaccine "debate" (more like debacle) boils down to mankind's fundamental irrationality and need to defend oneself. We defend ourselves instinctively whenever we perceive there to be a threat to our status as a loving and caring parent, similar to how we would defend ourselves against a perceived threat to our survival (the act of self-defense would be very different in the two scenarios, of course).

We all want to believe we are so smart and well informed, but an honest look to our own individual pasts will reveal a lifetime of misunderstandings and ignorance. Why do we believe we are above all that now? In 20 years, we'll all be looking back at our collective insanity and we'll think to ourselves "times sure have changed, we'll never fall for that trap again" and yet we will indeed fall into the next trap that lies in wait...

Indeed. Great advice. I have been trying lately to avoid references to external alt sites, and keep it down to plain old common-sense. This technique, if done correctly ( with great calm and confidence ) may not seem to work at the moment, but sometimes you sow a seed in a person's head, and that seed will grow.

People have to think it out for themselves. Convince someone to agree with you by force, and he will return to his initial belief the minute you turn around.

It's not just reddit. It is the top story on Google Finance right now too.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/03/chris-christie-rand-paul-under-fire-for-vaccine-remarks/

http://www.chron.com/business/article/Hillary-Clinton-on-vaccines-The-science-is-6059232.php?World_Business_News=

http://www.philly.com/philly/health/20150203_Vaccine_controversy_takes_unpredictable_turn.html

Looks like a full court press by the Obama administration.

How dare they suggest that medical ethics and informed consent are a thing?

I'll tell you what, this is some scary shit right here. I've never seen a mob so eager to piss on their personal liberty in my entire life.

Yeah it's very concerning. Here in Arkansas we are lucky to have a Federal judge who about 12 years ago held that forcing vaccinations to go to school violated kids fundamental freedoms over their body, a la Roe v. Wade. And so we can avoid having to vaccinate by filing an affidavit with the school district that we philosophically object to vaccines. Which is what I've done for my kids.

Honestly it looks like things are gearing up for forced inoculation. This is just the wind up to get everyone on board.

Not going to be too difficult to eliminate 2/3 of us when 95% of us let them stick a needle in our arm every month because science.

Blind faith in science is just as dangerous as blind faith in anything else.

Do you guys even read the journals/articles/data or do you just spout bullshit?

Well first of all, yes. But not just the headline "study confirms vaccines don't cause autism." I think that is the extent of what most of reddit reads. Aside from that, "autism" isn't the whole issue. Forced medication is. Also, have you read the potentiometer side affects of vaccines on the CDC website? Funny thing is, the way they have their insurance set up, they don't have to report the actual claims. So my question is to you, have you read the studies?

Why on earth would I ask for people to read studies if I haven't? That's hypocritical.

http://m.pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/109/1/e2.full

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC557899/

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/Mobile/article.aspx?articleid=1733704

I'm not saying that vaccines can't have bad side effects, that's just stupid. I'm saying that they have enough of a positive effect that considering mandatory immunization for the greater good (medical reasons excluded of course) isn't such a wild idea.

Of course there's problems with the studies. That's why there needs to be more done. But where does the evidence conclusively point?

Imagine. The sheeples,all lined up at the doors of the slaughterhouses, fighting for the front of the line, cursing at the fools that do not understand the importance of it all, to protect "others".

At least it's Darwinian. How fucking ironic is that? Live by the "science", die by the "science."

I would agree with you but these things come in waves. It's like there's a big vaccine PR push a few times a year, trying to nudge public opinion a little bit more in favor of forced inoculations.

Reddit isn't a reliable indicator of public opinion, especially considering how manipulated it is now. But I did see a comment unironically calling for unvaccinated people to wear armbands and be barred from public buildings get a couple dozen upvotes.

The fuck is this? Nazi Germany?

Yes. Your average American would LOVE Nazi Germany.

That checks out considering that Germans living under the NSDAP had a hell of a lot more privacy and freedom than Americans living under Obama and the NSA.

Heil!

I would agree with you but these things come in waves. It's like there's a big vaccine PR push a few times a year, trying to nudge public opinion a little bit more in favor of forced inoculations.

I agree with this - in that I see the same crap...but the thing is, people have been saying this about gun control too (after every public / school shooting) - and nothing ever changes with that. Maybe this is easier to sway people on...but so far, it seems similar to the "omg we just had a huge disaster, everyone has to get vaccinated / get a more detailed bg check before buying guns" and then it just gets voted down by enough of congress (or state/local government) to make it die.

Was forced in my case. Get it or get fired. was out nearly a week with the flu.

After getting the shot? A dude I went to highschool with had his mom die from getting a flu shot.

I personally know of a guy who has post influenza vax ADEM... my wife also saw a 4 year old have an EM responce post vax. The gentleman i know luckily has an increadible family, but he cant walk and can barely talk. I know its anecdotal; but it scared the fuck out of us.

Sorry you're getting downvoted.

I hear they recently started trials of the new ebola vaccines in Libya. Wonder if the "ebola threat" will suddenly pop back up immediately prior to the attempted passage of forcible innoculation laws.

I hate that they're using this to discredit rand paul. What he said was extremely rational and they're just twisting it. He's like the only potential candidate that seems reasonable and this is what they do.

There's a thread on /r/politics talking about how dumb he is because of this statement and it's so ridiculous.

All complexity and nuance removed, upvote if you love science and being alive and downvote if you dare to question a government

This sums it up really well actually. +1.

Non native english here, can you explain this, I cannot make sense of it.

This sums it up really well actually. +1.

Does this imply ... you love science, being alive, but would not dare to question a government?

It really is on a whole 'nother level. I got downvoted just for suggesting that a healthy diet can help to prevent disease. I mean, it honestly makes me uncomfortable being on this site, like under the fluffy kittens are a group of mad circle jerkers just looking for a good 'ol witch hunt against whoever it is that isn't currently on board with "the agenda of science".

The irony of the modern age is that the triumph of science was triumph over superstition and dogma, and happened because of critical thinkers who went against the vast majority of popular opinion. What the scientific age shows us is that this lesson has been largely lost, and people far prefer confirmation bias and sheep mentality to actually questioning the world around you. I mean, I get being miffed about creationism being taught in school, and stuff like that. While I think evolution has some holes in its theories, and that there is something else going on with the life process, I certainly don't believe that a magic man in the sky created all the birds and beasties in 7 days. But the magic of hivemind circlejerk parties is that they froth at the mouth and create the "for us or against us" mentality where it's either all correct, or all incorrect, and if you raise any questions, whether it be about vaccinations, the theory of evolution, or what have you, you are a caricature that they have prefabricated to defame you as a person.

I don't know exactly where all this come from, I feel like it's the same kind of thing where when you get on the road, all the social norms of politeness seem to fly out the window and people get super aggressive. The pent up urge for violence that society does not provide release for, and the urge to conform to the tribe... Regardless it is disturbing and whenever a massive circlejerk envelopes reddit I find myself retreating to here to find actual discussion. I haven't even posted in these vax threads, other than the one innocuous comment at the top. Why bother? They're looking for a witch and I'm not interested, and also not informed enough to really weigh in while I see that certainly doesn't stop most of the rabid hordes.

also not informed enough to really weigh in

The fact that you know that makes you more intelligent than 99.99999% of the people circle jerking about this issue. There's no rationality left in this discussion. Just monkeys in a shit fight.

My only hope is that the more rational people start realizing how fucking ridiculous this is and start asking questions.

I am in the same boat of persecution for suggesting diet and water intake can prevent disease. People are so disconnected from food they can no longer make the leap that what you actually put inside your body is the number one factor in determining your health. It is terrifying. He amount of diseases associate with the western diet should be a major clue..

If people want to be brainwashed and sick, I can't really help that. I can only help myself

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.

"Whether you're pro-vaccine, anti-vaccine, or fall somewhere in the middle, the questions you need to ask yourselves are as follows:

Do you want to live in a world, where you cannot freely refuse a medical procedure that carries risk of injury or death? I'm not questioning your comfort level with today's vaccine schedule, because today's vaccine schedule will change. New vaccines and additional doses are added all the time. children today receive as many as 49 doses of 14 vaccines before they reach age six, which is roughly 12 times higher than the number of vaccines administered to children back in 1940. With more than 220 new vaccines in the developmental pipeline for children and adults...and no end in sight..the question you must ask yourself is ARE YOU CERTAIN you will be 100% comfortable with vaccines that are added to the mandated list in the future? If you say that yes, you're comfortable, then you're either a) not expecting to be a parent or grandparent, b) don't have to worry about it because your kids are grown and out of the house, or c) lying to prove a point. No critical thinker, no honest person, would ever sign off on the sight-unseen vaccine schedule of the future. And yet that's what you're doing when you condemn the people who are fighting for your right to refuse. YOU have the right to refuse, should you ever choose to use it, because the very "anti-vaccine" people you demonize have been fighting for us all. Right now, the burden of "herd immunity" falls on small children, but that is changing. Vaccine manufacturers see an untapped market in adult vaccines and are coming for you next. What will you do if your state, your employer, or your insurance company forces you to get a vaccine that you simply don't want? It hasn't happened to you yet, but if the right to refuse is eroded, it will happen to you sooner than you might think. Who then will you turn to? Your legislators who get campaign donations from pharmaceutical companies? The CDC that has former pharma executives sitting on the board? Who will you turn to if you ever want to say no? There will be no one. Once we enter the slippery slope of removing and individual's right to refuse medical procedures that carry a risk of injury or death, once we remove an individual's right to speak for him/herself and his/her children, we open ourselves up to an insidious new era, where other drugs and other procedures can be mandated. I heard (on NPR, interestingly enough) that there are people who want to test for a gene marker that's been found in mass shooters in the hopes that they can put the carriers of that gene on medications in early childhood. Sounds great, right? But many of us carry genes that will never be expressed. You could be a carrier of that gene. Or your child could be a carrier. So if we follow the "for the greater good" mentality behind vaccines (or the Nazi's "for the greater good" mentality behind eugenics (breeding out illness), we are looking at forcing people who may never express a sociopathic gene to take antipsychotics, just in case. Because that's what forced vaccination does. It asks children who may never come into contact with a particular virus to accept a vaccine just in case. And that's what eugenics was all about. It sterilizes people who can pass on a genetic disease just in case. Forced vaccination is a human rights violation, and to support it when you know that the government's own Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System exists and lists people who have died as a result of vaccines is unethical at best, sociopathic at worst. The ethical thing to do is to allow people their right to refuse and leave it up to doctors and big pharma (who have marketing budgets larger than the GDP of some countries) to do a better job of convincing parents that vaccines are safe. We can start by reversing the law that grants vaccine manufacturers total immunity from vaccine injury lawsuits. Because as it stands, you can't sue a vaccine manufacturer if your child is injured or killed by a vaccine, even in cases where they could've made a safer vaccine and chose not to or when they failed to recall a contaminated lot# in a timely manner. Think about that. You can't sue the manufacturer. That immunity from liability does more to shake parents' confidence in vaccines than anything else out there." --Magnolia Crawford.

I have no idea who Magnolia Crawford is, but that is an absolutely fantastic quote. Thanks.

this might be the worst I've ever seen it get concerning one topic. it's beyond karma whoring at this point, and attempts to call out the circlejerk don't receive 1/10th the upvotes.

I think it's great. Trying to label vaccination as a negative by those who don't understand is terrible. The average person is finally unifying their voice against the anti-vacinators.

Trying to label vaccination as a negative by those who don't understand is terrible.

So let me guess, you and 95% of reddit are fucking vaccinologist!? Medical professionals? No, you just repeat the shit that you hear as it's the word of God.

Confirmation bias all over the Internet is a huge problem. We seek the "truths" we want to find to confirm our own preconceived beliefs.

So let me guess, you and 95% of reddit are fucking vaccinologist!? Medical professionals? No, you just repeat the shit that you hear as it's the word of God.

No, we just repeat the word of vaccinologists. The scientific evidence is clearly with one side of the debate.

The debate has been framed wrong.

I personally would just like to see the vaccination schedule spread out more, and MUCH stricter quality testing on all vaccine producers.

Yet, if I try to say something along those lines, I'm Jenny McCarthy ... and I don't even get to fap to my own rack :(

I personally would just like to see the vaccination schedule spread out more, and MUCH stricter quality testing on all vaccine producers.

Why do you think this? Do you have a qualification in the area? Would spacing the schedule out improve or worsen public health? I feel like they must've tested this.

and MUCH stricter quality testing on all vaccine producers.

Considering there's little to no evidence of vaccines doing any harm, I dunno why we'd do that. It would just up the cost and cause delays in treatment.

But yeah, if that's all anti-vaxxers were demanding, I think that even with a few negative health effects, the scientific community would take that deal any day. More rigourous testing and regulation is far better than a minority population that is denying modern medicine and slowly trying to turn their area into sub-saharan africa

You're the problem though. You don't want to have an intelligent conversation, you want to belittle someone. By straw-manning me into some evil anti-vaxxer, you can allow yourself to do that, and even get the added benefit of telling yourself you're doing something good for mankind.

It would just up the cost and cause delays in treatment.

I'm not really sure how something for which demand can be anticipated would be affected by some added qa/qc, but sure. On the topic of costs, FUCK MERCK AND PHIZER' cost. They'll pass the cost along, but at least we'll know what's being injected into us.

You're the problem though. You don't want to have an intelligent conversation, you want to belittle someone. By straw-manning me into some evil anti-vaxxer, you can allow yourself to do that, and even get the added benefit of telling yourself you're doing something good for mankind.

I just explained why anti-vaxxers were bad, you may or may not be against vaccines. you're certainly not in a position to demand a change to the vaccine schedule when you have literally no qualifications or knowledge of vaccinology. and neither would I - that's why I don't. Removing anti-vaxxers or forcing them to vaccinate would definitely be something good for mankind though, I agree with that part. I don't really think I ahve much effect on it sadly, it's a change that will probably only come when we see the anti-vaxxers children start dying from preventable diseases, and then they'll realise why we have vaccines in the first place. It's been so long since anybody has died of whooping cough, but it wouldn't take too many cases to make people realise "hey, maybe I SHOULDN'T disagree with modern science at the risk of my childs and other childrens life".

I'm hoping the situation gets better before it gets worse, in any case.

They'll pass the cost along, but at least we'll know what's being injected into us.

We already do, the ingredients lists for vaccines are available, and none of the ingredients have been proven harmful except in extremely high and non-vaccine-like doses.

the fact is that people just don't understand that vaccines are about as well documented and proven as gravity. That's why it's kinda baffling to me that people want to change this or that or think it should be less or more - why would they get to make that decision, and not a trained professional?

I get the fear of seeing your baby stabbed with injections, that would feel horrible to witness. But that doens't relaly give you the right to deny all scientific reasoning. I don't really like the speed limits or the fact that I have to wear a seat belt constantly - it doesn't mean I get to take it off and feel opressed that people try to convince me it's a good idea to wear it.

I don't know if there's such a thing as an "anti-vaxxer". It sounds like the kind of title people assign to other people to shoe-horn them into a mold. It does give you something which you can point your finger at and say "that's bad", that's about it.

We already do, the ingredients lists for vaccines are available

Until processed food manufacturers start listing a percentage of rat feces in their ingredient lists, I'm going to say those aren't 100% accurate. Again, you've got me straw-manned to Jenny McCarthy.

I'm actually 100% for vaccinations (due to the fact that I understand them, thank you very much), and I've never denied scientific reasoning in my life (at least since I broke free of Christianity as an adult). This shit is moving towards forced vaccinations though, and I'm 100% against that.

As for your comments about stabbing babies http://imgur.com/NOECI0s

I don't know if there's such a thing as an "anti-vaxxer".

It's someone who doesn't believe vaccines work, or that they cause autism, or that Big Pharma is trying to get them sick on purpose.

til processed food manufacturers start listing a percentage of rat feces in their ingredient lists, I'm going to say those aren't 100% accurate.

That's just an assumption on your part. So you just ASSUME there's bad stuff in vaccines despite no evidence supporting it?

I'm actually 100% for vaccinations (due to the fact that I understand them, thank you very much), and I've never denied scientific reasoning in my life (at least since I broke free of Christianity as an adult). This shit is moving towards forced vaccinations though, and I'm 100% against that.

Why? Personally I think it's become clear that not everyone is smart enough to vaccinate their kid. I think it's the same as speed limits and seatbelts - if we're allowed to force people to do that, why not force them to vaccinate? Seeing as we both agree theres no downside.

This whole "freedom" thing is a state of mind, nobody is actually free. You can't go yell "fire" in a movie theatre, you can't speed wherever, you can't walk through a school wtih a gun. And IMO you shouldn't be able to knowingly contribute to bringing back diseases.

How do you know who jenny mcarthy is, but not think there's such things as an anti-vaxxer? It's a huge movement that is growing steadily. I could find various comments on /r/conspiacy supporting anti-vax positions, but it would be witch hunting to do so. I dunno how you haven't seen this.

Why?

I'll be damned if anyone is going to force me to take a flu vaccine, and any mandatory vaccine is a slippery slope to that.

You can't go yell "fire" in a movie theatre, you can't speed wherever, you can't walk through a school wtih a gun.

You sure can! There's just consequences to those actions. I'm free to bust your jaw for ruining my movie experience, to which there are also consequences. Freedom doesn't come without consequence, quite the opposite.

TBH I really don't know who she is, I just know people bring her up any time I say anything other than "vax everyone!@! omg i fucking llove sciecne".

You sure can! There's just consequences to those actions.

Yes, but they only effect you. Once they effect others and their children it becomes a public safety issue.

TBH I really don't know who she is, I just know people bring her up any time I say anything other than "vax everyone!@! omg i fucking llove sciecne".

she's an anti-vaxxer. One of many.

Present your evidence.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/index.html

Monitoring health problems after vaccination is essential to ensure the United States continues to have the safest, most effective vaccine supply in history.

CDC's Immunization Safety Office identifies possible vaccine side effects and conducts studies to determine whether a health problem is caused by a specific vaccine.

So does this scream out to you that vaccines are safe for everyone?

No, that is not evidence that vaccines are harmful in any way. Everything can have possible side effects or allergies. It's possible to be allergic to vaccines, but that just means you are relying on others to be vaccinated around you.

Monitoring health problems after vaccination is essential to ensure the United States continues to have the safest, most effective vaccine supply in history.

I have no idea how you can read this as a negative sentence.

'Monitoring health problems after vaccination is essential'

right, as with anything else. you're just listing reasons they're effective and showing evidence they're monitored for safety. Which are both good things.

For the record- I'm not anti-vaccine, all of my kids are vaccinated. That doesn't mean that I think that everyone should be forced to be so. I think there should be an open debate about it. I do not however get flu shots because they seem to be pretty useless, if other people want them I'm fine with that also.

I think there should be an open debate about it

Why? Personally, I don't think childrens health should be up for debate. we both know vaccines are a good thing, so why should we sit back and let people infect others just because it's some childish idea of "freedom".

I go back to speeding limits. I think that everyone should be forced to go a certain speed limit. If anything, mandatory vaccines would save just as many lives.

Why is public safety a public decision only when it comes to vaccines? With everything else we have limits and requirements of people to make sure they're not mistreating their children or effecting others. How come we can't apply the same logic to vaccines that we apply to say, car licences or speed limits?

If people being forced to take vaccines would increase peoples health and save lives, then I'm all for it. I can't relaly think of an argument against it except giving someone an exercise in freedom in an otherwise not-free society.

Would you be ok with the government installing a one-size-fits-all piece of equipment in your car to reduce its maximum speed? Doesn't really matter if it isn't compatible with your vehicle, they' ll just bang it in as hard as it takes to go in. Oh, and if it breaks your car and it can only go 5mph because it has slightly incompatible parts, that's just the price of safety. You and the other unlucky car owners who own incompatible cars can just stay on the shoulder and watch everyone else pass you.

When it comes down to issuing an edict on safety, even IF vaccines caused health problems (which overwhelming scientific evidence indicates that it DOES NOT, and one whole doctor saying it might), even IF it caused 0.00001% of the population a bad side effect, giving the people the freedom to spread lethal, highly preventable diseases into the population based on the 0.00001% chance that something bad might happen is beyond irresponsible.

Already, there has been an outbreak of measles where people have died (starting with someone who was not vaccinated, too!). Shall we cluck and shake our heads as we watch an outbreak turn into an epidemic (that we could have prevented) and chalk hundred of thousands of (preventable) deaths up to the cost of freedom?

There are cases where we give up personal freedoms for the cost of general public safety. I do not have the freedom to slaughter people at will. I do not have the freedom to shout fire in a movie theater. I do not have the freedom to beat children or dogs. No matter how religiously I believe I have the right to do such things.

Like all of the other idiots and criminals above, anti-vaxxers should not have the freedom to infect the population by refusing to vaccinate their kids. This is for the protection of everyone else and THEIR kids.

Please take a look at this and give me your feedback:

http://questioning-answers.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-rat-model-of-early-immune-stimulation.html

Certainly. Luckily I work in a field of science where I actually understand what they're saying, and I can tell you the author (of the article and the paper) has taken a paper that states some incredibly complex terminology and tries to tie it to a possible icrease in the possiblity of something like scizophrenia and autism based on the amounts of some neurotransmitted and inhibitory neurotransmitters in "post-birth" rats (What? Such twisty terminology. Even you and I are "post birth"). The proper medical term is neonate.

What these guys did is examine some male adult rats' brains and test them for neurotramsitters to get a baseline, then inject some younger rats with a modified endotoxin (which is what bacteria secrete that causes us "illness"). Okay, so far, sound enough.

So they inject this endotoxin every day at 2mg/kg of modified endotoxin for a period of what looks like 90 straight days. They then cut open the rats with the endotoxin, and they looked at their neurotransmitters and found a difference.

The study was not repeated or replicated in any way.

What's questionable about this? They used the same methods of testing that would be used in a pharmocological study to give large overdoses of a substance in order to determine the LD50 (at what points 50% of the test population dies).

They make the assumption that the stimulation of the immune system in a neonate is responsible for these "changes in the neurotransmitters", and NOT the overdose of endotoxin they happened to be using to stimulate them with.

So to give you some medical background, overdosing someone with water will cause severe neurological signs and death due to electrolyte imbalances. Let alone dosing someone with a bacterial endotoxin, which we know causes diseases.

Rats do not experience brain development the same way we do. We give vaccines at a certain time for a reason, since science has determined (through repreated testing), which time is appropriate. They fully admit that they give these rats the endotoxin at an inappropriate time frame of brain development to correlate to the same time frame where we even give vaccines.

The introductory sentence of the paper in question states that negative environmental circumstances can impact the development of the brain in regards to neurotransmitters. Negative environmental influences are things like stress, malnutrition, improper cleanliness ..... let me repeat the stress part. They've taken a bunch of baby rats in a lab setting, admitted that things like stress tend to cause changes to the brain on a chemical level, then proceeded to perform extremely stressful testing on them. Assuming that the levels of neurotransmitter alteration would not be attributed to the stress.

Despite all of this (and I could go on and on), they've concluded that it was the early immune stimulation (not the endotoxin, not the stress, not the age of administration, not any of the many flaws in this experiment) that was the cause of the "differences" seen in neurotransmitters.

Differences that may contribute to neurological changes in people, like schizophrenia and autism.

And since the number of pirates in the sea has decreased remarkably similarly to the increase of the climate, it's likely they may be responsible for the recent changes we've seen.

I'm assuming you can't see the extreme logical fallacies used in making all of these broad conclusions, (which were not even replciated in any other study), so I'm not going to waste my finger-time any more than I already have. But keep on preachin', bruh.

Thanks for your input. (well everything except the last, emotionally-driven, hateful sentences)

Emotionally driven is darn skippy, though I will apologize and state that it's not directed at you in particular (since I do not know you). But anyone who is out there not vaccinating their kids is really taking some incredible license with the meaning of a scientific study that was done, then later thoroughly disproven. (For the life of me, I cannot fathom how they took a study that at most may have shown that vaccination too early was bad, then concluded that is shouldn't be done at all - I don't even know).

Initially, no amount of physical evidence and "guys, this is not true and potentially dangerous" that was provided could convince people of anything. But now as a results of their actions, kids have died, adults have died, and other kids and other adults are at risk.

All because of "the latest trend" in safety, and alarmist behaviors. This is sad, and contemptable. It's even worse because it never needed to happen in the first place. Of course I'm angry. Most of the scientific world is angry.

Emotion has no place in science.

Science comes from human curiosity and the urge to appease it, which is in itself an emotion. If there are no emotions in science, there are no humans in science.

which is why we should let the scientists decide whether to vaccinate, rather than someones emotional parents. What do scientists overwhelmingly support?

you don't really get to criticise his tone when you basically are admitting he's correct on all points and you have no counter

Hm...I don't get to criticize someone's tone, I don't get to refuse someone injecting a substance into my body...I see a trend here.

You don't get to talk about things you have no knowledge of. and your one sentence strawman responses to someone who clearly knows some stuff about vaccines kinda proves that.

I don't get to refuse someone injecting a substance into my body

you don't get to refuse to pay taxes or obey the speed limits either. We don't live in anarchy.

I will guarantee you that no one is going to force a needle into my arm for the rest of my life.

well it would probably be more for children, I don't think full grown adults need vaccines. More reason to leave it to the experts.

If it became mandatory and there were regular adult vaccines (I can't remember the last time I had one and I'm pro-vaccine), you wouldn't really have a choice though. Not realy worth fleeing the country or fighting for your life over. It's just a life-saving medical proceudre with no evidence it causes harm. I don't get why people are so terrified of it.

Well I didn't want part of my dick cut off, but that happened based on the best medical advice of the time.

And yes, I probably would flee the country or accept a fine or jail sentence, but forcing a substance into my body against my will is where I will draw the line. I'd rather die than have my body be violated like that.

I think one medically mandated procedure done to my body is enough.

And yes, I probably would flee the country or accept a fine or jail sentence, but forcing a substance into my body against my will is where I will draw the line.

so what do you do about the fluoride in the water supply? Or the preservatives in your food? or medicine you take when you're sick (or do you just let yourself be sick)?

I'd rather die than have my body be violated like that.

That's pretty selfish.

I think one medically mandated procedure done to my body is enough.

The difference is that there's no medical consensus that circumcision is beneficial. It's a religious practice. However, vaccines are purely medicinal and are based on 100% science. The two things are not even remotely comparable.

[deleted]

There's plenty of people in prison whose only crime was deciding what to put in their own body. Welcome to the land of the free.

See, you say that, but...

[deleted]

just the intention of finding more about this argument is painted as "crazy, crazy he don't want vaccines, this person is crazy"

clear propaganda tactic.

That's why we simply need to start presenting reasonable and infallible counter-arguments that nobody with a shred of logic could ignore. The more of us who start doing this, the more people will start to question the motives behind it. Posting a link to a website is not a counter-argument. Presenting a well-written idea that one can be for the polio vaccine, but have questions about the flu vaccine, is a valid counter-argument to the idea that this is a black and white issue. People here need to start learning to explain their thoughts clearly and without being so provocative and absolute.

That is, we need people to ask themselves "Why is this issue polarized to 100% unquestionably pro vaccine, or 100% unquestionably anti-vaccine who wants babies to die."

It becomes very illogical when a person actually thinks about it that way. Then the truth starts to become clear.

the "ignore these crazy conspiracy nuts" tactic is used against what you are saying above. There are strong arguments that can't be ignored and no amount of shill or debunk can counter them.

So the need to go with the "black and white" tactic.

They cannot use the "Ignore these crazy conspiracy nuts" rebuttal if a commenter has laid out his thoughts precisely and clearly. It does not work. They have to resort to downvote brigading, check my comment history and you'll see no responses claiming me to be a conspiracy nut, because the way I presented my ideas was rational and not based in conspiracy. Yet it still begs people to question what is going on in these vax threads lately. Instead of focusing on whether or not vaccines are good or bad, I'm focusing on why the topic is off the table entirely to be discussed and explored.

could you point me in the direction of the strongest arguments, in your opinion? I'm just looking around now.

scientific studies about vaccines having something to do with autism. the specifics should be around google

Because the message the media is sending is anyone who questions this is an idiot. So even if you do have questions about it, you don't go public with it because, who wants to be thought of as an idiot?

This stuff is getting incredibly old. It's not just Reddit either, it's all over every nook and cranny of the internet right now. I've been watching this issue for over a decade and I've never seen anything like this. I'd have to spend 50 million dollars to get this much press for my perspective.

Since this is the only sane place left that sees how ridiculous this circlejerk has become, I'm going to outline some things about vaccines and vaccination policy that are relevant to the issue that the people, completely immersed in their circle jerk, refuse to discuss. Perhaps if you find yourself in the wild and you want people to understand a more balanced argument you can use some of the below to make your case.

The vaccine discussion is not just about autism and the Wakefield study...it's just not.

I'm more concerned with a number of factors that should raise anyone's eyebrows. The FACT is that governments, not just in the US, have essentially made it impossible to sue vaccine manufacturers if their child has a legitimate reaction to their product is pretty damn shady. Accountability should be a thing, regardless of the industry. No exceptions.

The relationship that pharmaceutical giants have with regulatory bodies like the CDC and the FDA EXISTS and it's highly suspect as well, especially when we live in a time where money influences policy so much and shit gets "Classified", brushed under the rug, and fast-tracked all the time. Money now completely and totally controls policy, these fucking people are not to be trusted and everyone knows it. Yet when it comes to their precious vaccinations it's, all of sudden, a sin to mention what is clearly corruption? Fuck that.

While everyone is spending all of their time spinning their wheels discussing autism and Wakefield there are still some pretty serious questions about a number of other health problems that have cropped up in children and, for some reason, it's conveniently been labelled COMPLETELY INSANE to simply ask ask that long term, independent studies be done on vaccines and the vaccine schedule itself. Even doing a placebo controlled study of the vaccinated vs the unvaccinated and then monitoring health problems is considered "unethical". It's fucking bullshit logic.

We've handed over our childrens health and safety to governments married to corporations while intelligent, highly educated people just keep on pounding away at the science as if there is NO FUCKING WAY that their precious science could ever become corrupted by financial interests. It's nonsense. I'm sick of seeing this circle jerk on Reddit day after day.

At this point, the scariest thing is all of the dickhead armchair scientists, doctors, skeptics, and soccer moms who think that FORCING PEOPLE, a complete and total violation of medical ethics, is the way to go.

This is the attitude that needs to be pissed on. It needs to be fought. I will not let a hysterical mob of idiots who only understand one side of an issue tell me what I am required and not required to inject into my child. I do not care how much faith they have in establishment medicine...it's not about them.

Strangely enough, my only hope here is that this jerk continues into the absurd and the bullshit piles so high that more reasonable reading this stuff start getting suspicious and pushing back. I want them to star asking themselves "Wait, this seems a little strange that we're hearing solutions that involve forcing medical procedures on people yet we're only hearing our own echoes and not hearing a single solitary word from the opposition.

Edit: The vote brigade is even strong in /r/conspiracy. Fuck, this website is about to jump the shark.

Thanks for this post. I must admit, I initially fell in to the trap of buying in to this circlejerk. I am one of the rational people that you mentioned that noticed a massive pile of one topic being rammed down my throat - and started wanting to know more / the truth.

Unfortunately, for reasons that you mentioned, finding objective scientific studies on this is damn near impossible - which raises red flags. Even in this thread, there isn't much of a discussion on the issues of vaccinations. Where are all the posts that point to facts and evidence, rather than complain about being downvoted in other threads?

Either way - there seems to be a suppression of people who are asking legitimate questions and trying to get to the bottom of this, and that situation should ALWAYS alarm you - regardless of the subject matter.

Do you even read the journals/scholarly data that has been published for decades?

Like, Google it? It's not hidden away or anything, there are so many studies that discuss this

It terrifies me that I live in a society where seemingly so many believe forced inoculation is a good idea. I work in health care, and I do not think vaccines are a bad thing necessarily. But the sudden rash of people pushing for mandatory vaccination is suspicious and concerning at the least.

I don't think vaccines are a bad thing either. I just think the policy surrounding them should be quite different.

The question is, why should there be forced inoculation?

I mean it's not like people want needles in their arms just to have needles in their arms, so there must be a reason behind it, no?

Maybe a reason that, oh I don't know, studies have been done on?

Like this one maybe?

http://m.pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/109/1/e2.full

Or this one?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC557899/

Or maybe this?

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/Mobile/article.aspx?articleid=1733704

Yeah, when I posted a simple logical argument for spacing out vaccines to attempt to curb the potential negative side effects, and that it's scary now because you can't sue the vaccine manufacturers, I got nothing but conditioned responses.

conditioned responses.

Great term. Succinctly describes the nature of most people's "opinions".

Conditioned responses, opinions, beliefs, attitudes, propaganda...is there even a difference anymore?

Sadly, even this sub is being targeted.

For example, I submitted this post 30 minutes ago in response to the outrageous propaganda at the top of /r/pics.

It had 6 points, with 100% upvotes, after only a few minutes.

99% of the time, whenever that happens, that means the post is destined for at least the top 5 positions on the sub.

However, since the topic is vaccines, it automatically attracts a certain "element" and it gets ruthlessly targeted.

I predicted that it would be hit hard, and sadly this predication came true.

After briefly surfacing on the front page of /r/conspiracy, the downvotes came swiftly. It currently has 2 upvotes at around 50% upvoted.

Here's the key part: there are zero skeptical comments. These are drive-by downvoters who specifically target certain topics.

It's sad that certain discussions aren't "allowed" even in /r/conspiracy. It's getting worse every day, and I'm starting to lose hope.

it's just bots doing bot things, it really means you are over target though.

Let Glaxo Smith Kline think health for you. They clearly know how to maximize your health benefits.

I know GSK have my son's best interests at heart. They never want him to get ill, else they'll have another tedious customer to deal with. What a hassle that would be! I <3 GSK!

Just saw a great quote from PJW:

Empowering the state to inject you or your children against your will is a bigger threat than measles OR the vaccine.

Truer words have never been spoken. I'm starting to get the feeling that the propaganda surrounding this issue really isn't about vaccines at all, it's TPTB testing the waters and seeing how easy it is to get the barbarian hoards to give up their medical right to informed consent.

The hive needs to make up its mind.

We either support people's right to make medical decisions that affect their bodies, even if the death of a child occurs. (Abortion)

Or we make choices for people in the name of protecting the children (vaccines).

You can't have it both ways. Its either rights or requirements.

Your ignorance is showing.

The argument isn't "should you have the right to kill a child" it's "is an unborn child considered alive, and if so, at what point"

Whichever side you fall, I don't care. You're entitled to your opinion, but to think that the discussion is about killing children is just stupid.

I would counter that questioning whether or not a foetus is alive is intellectually dishonest. In scientific terms, life literally begins at conception. At what point that unborn child becomes a person is certainly debatable.

To be clear, I am pro choice. Whichever side you fall, I don't care. You're entitled to your opinion, but to think that the discussion isn't about killing children is just stupid.

Approved.

Watch for /u/Flytape censoring this shit. He's an obvious vaxxer, which is typical of him. I'm sure you're aware of how he tries to sway opinion in this sub.

We have to approve this guy's comments because he's on a new account, not because he's being censored by anyone. I appreciate your concern but I haven't seen anything to suggest that Flytape has been silencing discussion about this subject. The massive amount of downvotes for every vaccine post in the new queue are doing a pretty good job of that on their own.

He goes through and purges the submissions that don't break any rules, and are only meant to draw attention to the vaccination propaganda. Says that they are removed because "the sub doesn't like certain things". Not because any rules were broken. See my submission history for pink submissions.

:-)

Fair enough. I see the post you're referring to and I personally wouldn't have removed it but I don't think it's the "flytape is going on a censorship rampage and deleting everything I post" situation that you seem to be implying. For what it's worth, if you feel a post or comment was removed unjustly, send a modmail and we will discuss amongst ourselves. We mods don't always see eye to eye on everything and we aren't always on the same page.

based mod

Had to go to urbandictionary to confirm that you weren't insulting me, saw this definition, got happy.

That's the one, boss.

Just remember that when /u/Flytape tries to ban me (again?)

What are you talking about?

Hmm... if only every pro-choice person was as open minded as you....and if only every pro-life person was as open minded as you. Maybe then we'd have a world where people could debate. Thank you for being you and saying what you believe. Please, continue.

Scientists haven't even agreed upon whether viruses are technically alive or dead. cancer is scientifically alive,so your point is absolutely worthless

More enlightened entities understand that abortion is inconsequential before the soul enters the bodies. These entities understands when that happens.

You may want to look into that.

before the soul enters the bodies. These entities understands when that happens.

I'm assuming you're referring to when DMT enters the brain?

any recommendations?

Your ignorance is showing.

This is a stupid comment that doesn't add anything to the discussion.

Moving on...

The argument isn't "should you have the right to kill a child" it's "is an unborn child considered alive, and if so, at what point"

The argument has nothing to do with the life status of an unborn child.

The argument on both subjects, abortion and vaccination, is about a person's right to choose for them self. Can one choose to have an abortion or not? Can one choose to have a vaccine or not?

The children dying in both scenarios are hypothetical children.

The anti-abortion fanatics are standing on hypothetical dead children.

The pro-vaccine fanatics are standing on hypothetical dead children.

In reality, being forced by law to carry a child full term (the anti-abortion dream) is forcing the mother to put her body at risk to satisfy the wishes of people who don't share her risk.

Being forced by law to have all vaccines as scheduled by the government (the pro-vaccine dream) is forcing the recipients to put their bodies at risk to satisfy the wishes of people who don't share their risk. Example is that some children can't be vaccinated because of compromised immune systems, so everyone else should be forced to vaccinate to reduce the risk of this immune-compromised child of getting ill. Without regard to the risks now being forced onto the healthy children who are forced to be vaccinated.

Next time you wish to blurt out about someone being ignorant you may want to double check that you comprehend the comparison.

I haven't even attempted to discuss the "when is a baby really alive" debate. Its unimportant in the context of this discussion, which is about living, walking people being able to decide for themselves if they want a medical procedure such as an abortion or a vaccine.

Toodles.

Toodles.

Be a little more pompous, I don't think I'm and to grasp just how big your head is yet.

forcing the mother to put her body at risk to satisfy the wishes of people who don't share her risk.

John has a mental disorder. When he gets upset, he harms himself. John should murder people who upset him so that his body is not at risk.

forcing the recipients to put their bodies at risk to satisfy the wishes of people who don't share their risk.

John has a mental disorder. He murders people who upset him. John should be killed.

They are literally opposite thought processes. Anti-abortion is sacrificing the health of one for the life of one. Pro-abortion is sacrificing potential life for the health of one. Anti-vaccines are sacrificing the potential health of many for the potential health of one, and pro-vaccines are sacrificing the potential health of one for the potential health of many.

Your bias is so painfully obvious because of how you portray the opposing side. You want to believe that the opposing side is so obviously wrong that you have created a straw man to attack.

John has a mental disorder. When he gets upset, he harms himself. John should murder people who upset him so that his body is not at risk.

That would be a crime.

John has a mental disorder. He murders people who upset him. John should be killed.

That would be justice as defined by capital punishment.

These things have nothing to do with making medical decisions for yourself.

Because you didn't seem to understand the analogies;

John has a mental disorder.

John is analogous with a woman and the mental disorder is analogous with being fertile.

A woman is fertile.

When he gets upset

In this sentence, upset is analogous with unintentionally pregnant.

when she gets unintentionally pregnant

he harms himself.

Here, we are using self-harm to represent the negative affects associated with pregnancy.

She suffers from unwanted pregnancy symptoms.

John should murder people who upset him

Here is where we get into the bias of the argument. (I am using a biased argument because my argument is not for either side of the argument, but simply to show that the two arguments you are comparing are not the same)

Here, "murder people who upset him" compares to the act of terminating (murder) the pregnancy (people) that causes pregnancy symptoms (upset).

A woman should terminate a pregnancy that causes pregnancy symptoms.

Bringing us to

A woman is fertile. When the woman gets unintentionally pregnant, she suffers unwanted pregnancy symptoms. She should terminate the pregnancy that causes unwanted pregnancy symptoms.

As for the second:

John has a mental disorder

Here, John is any person, and the "mental disorder" is analogous with the ability to transmit diseases.

A person can transmit diseases.

He murders people who upset him

Here is the bias of this sides argument; "murders people" represents transmitting the diseases, and "people who upset him" are people susceptible to the disease. (Which anyone pro-vaccine will say includes people with the vaccine because of "herd immunity and other reasons. (Again, I'm not stating my opinions, I'm stating the opinions of people with the views I'm describing))

They spread diseases to people

John should be killed.

In this case "killed" is analogous with vaccinated. Which may make it sound anti-vaccine, but it isn't.

They should be vaccinated.

This brings us to the statement

A person can transmit disease. The spread diseases to other people. They should be vaccinated.

I'm not trying to say "HAHA you got tricked into supporting vaccines," or "HAHA I got you to support abortion," because you may not agree with the postulates.

However, Anti-abortion people view their opinion in the same way that you viewed our first scenario with John murdering people. Pro vaccine people view the situation the same was as you viewed our second scenario.

Anti-abortion thinks abortion is a crime

That would be a crime.

and pro-vaccine thinks it would be justice

That would be justice

They are as opposite of opinions as the first two scenarios.

Is this real life?

John is analogous with a woman and the mental disorder is analogous with being fertile.

DUDE WTF AM I READING.

I have no idea either.

You should be very suspicious of this mod.

Killed my parents

no homo

Wat?

Hey look at this, it's another mod who is subtly supporting the bullshit propaganda that is all over the front page. Subtly suggesting that if you are anti-vaccine you are killing children.

Hopefully the critical thinkers don't fall for this bullshit.

Well said. The front page is infuriating with every other posts being a meme on vaccines

how much money is pharma spending to frame this argument in a way that blames parents? how sad that the same liberals who demand we fight corporate corruption in every other industry willfully ignore this. i am so tired of starting off conversation with "i vaccinate my kids but..." /venting

Parenting and pregnancy forums are FULL of vaccination propaganda, too.

In fact, many people actually post the topic, "should I allow unvaccinated people into my home?" As in, they actually want to request the vaccine papers and status of anyone stepping foot in their house. These people aren't even in California trying to preemptively quarantine their kids. Then, the rest of the comments are filled with, "that's what I'm doing. Coming across as rude is no small price to pay if it means protecting my child." Others say how they've refused to allow their best friends to come over, and how they've lost relationships over the problem.

Just today, my spouse received an email from "What to Expect" (though interestingly, she opted out of their emails via the unsubscribe button). The content? "Measles special report!" With a link to 4 articles:

1) Measles outbreak: the time to check your little one's vaccinations is now

2) What happened when my infant was exposed to measles

3) 2015 Measles Outbreak: special coverage

4) And perhaps my favorite one of all: How doctors can win the vaccine debate with patients

It's astounding.

You know I kind off get it that you vaccinate for polio and very dangerous deceases that are known to be preventable by vaccine.

But I once got downvoted to oblivion for stating that in my opinion, vaccinating for the children deceases (or even flu) is totally unnecessary.

Most of these children deceases are pretty harmless if you get them as a child and you become immune after you have had it.

However there were reports a few years ago of adults in holland getting these deceases, these guys/girls were vaccinated as children. I don't know if this is because the vaccine is ineffective or because you need booster shots to keep your immunity. What I do know is that as an adult it is much more dangerous to get these diseases.

But as stated before in this thread its all black and white on reddit. All anti vaxxers are bad and stupid, and all smart respectable people know that vaccines are the way to go...

It's because of herd immunity, while some children can make it through childhood diseases unharmed others may not, or may not be able to be vaccinated against them.

Herd immunity is fiction.

That's a pretty big claim to make, got anything to back it up with?

I am looking for some peer reviewed studies about herd immunity. Can you direct me to any?

Hint: there are none.

That goes both ways you know...

Search this sub for "herd immunity."

Start here.

This is common knowledge. First search result - http://kellybroganmd.com/uncategorized/herd-immunity-fact-fiction/

Herd immunity is possibe. If something actually gave you ~95% immunity, lasted forever, and everyone had it, large outbreaks would be extremely unlikely. Whether vaccines provide this or not? I'm not sure.

What Obama Said About Vaccines and Autism in 2008

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYkluT1GbAc

This is solid gold.

You should post this to some defaults.

Good luck OP. Big Pharma has the net crawling with trolls and the inherently brainwashed. YOU guys can go get all the shots you want from these SCUM Big Pharma companies.

It boggles my mind how all these people GET MAD and attack people who don't get vaccines from Corrupt Corporations which have literally committed dozens of crimes and been convicted of these crimes.

Ignorance is bliss I guess.

Let's trust big PHARMA GUYS! I wouldn't trust these companies to wash my car let alone INJECT an unknown highly toxic cocktail into my body.

http://www.naturalnews.com/036417_Glaxo_Merck_fraud.html

According to U.S. federal investigators, GlaxoSmithKline (http://www.naturalnews.com/036416_GlaxoSmith...):

• Routinely bribed doctors with luxury vacations and paid speaking gigs • Fabricated drug safety data and lied to the FDA • Defrauded Medicare and Medicaid out of billions • Deceived regulators about the effectiveness of its drugs • Relied on its deceptive practices to earn billions of dollars selling potentially dangerous drugs to unsuspecting consumers and medical patients

Books for further research,

http://www.amazon.com/Vaccine-nation-Poisoning-Population-Shot-Time/dp/0984595422/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1418724787&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=vaccine+conspiracy

http://www.amazon.com/Dissolving-Illusions-Disease-Vaccines-Forgotten/dp/1480216895/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_z

It's mostly encouraged by the lynch mob that gets formed over at /r/skeptic.

Skeptards, basically.

Beware the screams for 'Peer Reviewed Studies'

that's just anti-science

What's even worse is the obvious agent provocateurs who bash vaccines blindly. They're not interested in any discussion, only to make those who support blanket vaccination feel more correct.

I see what you're saying, and black propaganda is an incredibly effective technique, but point me to one of these "obvious" agents you're referring to. Because most people I see questioning vaccine safety/testing/efficacy/etc. are doing simply that: they're asking questions. I don't really see people "bashing vaccines blindly".

Then you didn't read this thread. There's plenty of bashing here and while most of it isn't blind .... the overwhelming majority is "justified" with bogus pronouncements and bullshit rhetoric.

I think it's against the rules here to single people out. Just keep your eye on the /new queue. There are a couple people who search reddit for vaccine-related posts and then cross-post them here. They never add anything of value to their posts and regularly ridicule anyone who comments. Plus they neglect to use .np links, so they're most likely trying to get people banned from this sub or shadowbanned from reddit.

Wrong.

I am pointing out to the people who don't subscribe to the cancer subs, and don't visit /r/all that there is a huge propaganda campaign going on, which should make them very curious as to why it is so necessary.

It's people like you who don't think about it critically and pretend to be a "conspiracy theorist" and yet blindly propagate all the bullshit.

Wrong.

I'm a free-thinking individual who isn't scared to go against the hive mind.

Go away, troll.

Posted this just yesterday. The shit is absolutely insane.

Yes, I'm clearly not interested in a discussion.

Give me a break /u/Drytruth. You've already exposed yourself in previous vaccine threads in this sub.

I went through all of their comments. Is there something I'm missing here? I didn't get what you're saying based on that accounts comment history.

/u/Drytruth is one of the many users that spends an ungodly amount of time carefully shitting on posts in this sub.

He comes out of the woodwork much more frequently on vaccine-related posts.

He claims to be a "skeptic" but refuses to take the time to look at alternative points of view.

So I'm on mobile, and when I checked the link to their account I didn't realize it doesn't show ALL of their responses to comments, just the ones in response to an actual post. I now have a better idea of what you're talking about.

You will notice a lot of people, even in this thread, who pretend to be "one of us" and then say things like "well, I'm definitely going to space out the vaccines I give my kid".

They are trying to sway public opinion here by "being a part of the team" and then making it seem like "the team" actually supports vaccinations. This makes others who are actually critical thinkers wonder if they're missing something. The weaker ones will want to be a part of the herd, and will then start parroting this clown's advice.

Indeed!

[deleted]

Most of the mobile apps only show comments they've made to posts. So in other words, when they enter a thread and comment directly to the OP, that would show up. This exchange we're having here would not.

But if you're on the computer you should see all comments show up.

It's simple yet hard to explain. Normally when you check out a persons user history on your computer you can see every comment they've made, whether or not it was in response to another comment or not. It's the "or not" part that's difficult to express, but I just mean comments responding to a post, not another comment. Those are the only comments I saw when I checked the persons user history on my phone. I didn't see the large number of comments they made in response to other comments. That's all I meant.

When people like him don't have anything to say, they go through a user's history to find ammunition for their "argument".

No, I actually would tend to agree with them after I started seeing ALL your comments (which I explain further down). As it is I'm at work and don't have the time to go too deep into your user history, nor do I really feel the need to, but the little bit did look at was enough to cause raising of at least one eyebrow.

Am I questioning too much?

Quack like a duck...

No, thanks.

I'm talking about what you do.

I quack like a duck?

The saying is : Walk like a duck, quack like a duck, probably gonna be a duck.

Engligh not your first language, or do you struggle with figures of speech?

I don't get what your figure of speech is referring to.

Dense....

What have you been accused of, and what are you attempting to deny? PERHAPS THIS???

Asking questions?

Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

Alright

No, the problem is you offer nothing to the conversation. You offer nothing to the conversation here and you offer nothing to any conversation you take part in.

EDIT: And I would assume you ask if you're questioning too much because you think people think you're someone who questions....you don't. So you don't question very well....neither do you add....you basically take up space.

You question why others are asking so many questions, subtly suggesting that everyone should just keep their heads down and drink the government flavoraid.

What makes you think that?

Please go troll in a different sub, no one is buying your bullshit here.

I'm not trolling. I don't know why you think I am.

Then ignore me if you don't like me. I wasn't referring to you in that post, but you clearly feel victimized.

Actually, I'd rather engage with you and offer my own research and point of view.

If you choose to ignore the material I've presented to you, then that's on you.

It only further exposes your agenda.

My only agenda is "Be skeptical."

Part of being skeptical is educating yourself on both sides of the debate.

You've refused to do that by ignoring the research I've presented to you.

Until you actually take the time to read it, this conversation is over.

How have I ignored anything? Please tone down your aggressive rhetoric.

Take this shit offline, nobody wants to hear you guys bitch back n forth.

Don't worry, I'm not engaging anymore, he's shown his true colors.

If you don't want to "hear" it, don't "listen."

I am glad to see that this his being talked about. But You know the simple question is..

If the Injection protects people from getting sick.. Then what is the problem with people who don't want the injections!?

The injection doesn't protect people from getting sick - vaccinated people frequently catch illnesses they've been vaccinated against...

Bird, That's Exactly the point. This shows that the injections do not keep people healthy. ..The only benefit to getting a injection, is frequently becoming infected with a condition like flu, measles, diabetes, autism, cancer etc.. If you are into those kind of benefits.. It is like trying find an example of some one on antidepressants that isn't still depressed, or significantly worse than they had been before starting their FDA encouraged drug .

What exactly is wrong with vaccines? What makes them so dangerous?

You're aware you're asking a loaded question, yes?

Wow, what a helpful and insightful answer.

I guess I'll go collect my paycheck from my corporate overlords for calling your bullshit bullshit.

So you're confirming you're not interested in discussion?

^{see? that's how you do it.}

Well I am, what makes them so dangerous?

What makes debate so dangerous?

I wasn't saying that it's dangerous, you asked the other guy if he's not interested in discussion, I wanted to say that I am interested for discussion.

Well, I was making the point that no one here has said that vaccines are dangerous, and that this topic is about how "There is no actual debate allowed"; which is why I stated that asking why vaccines are dangerous in such a topic is a loaded question.

It would have gone over better if the person in question had simply stated a stance and waited for reply instead of attempting to bait people into the response they were already prepared to argue against.

The MSM teaches the incurious that this is the proper way to engage debate, but they only wind up debating other incurious people. And actual debate gets drowned out in the ensuing fracas of shit flinging. Which was the actual point of this thread.

Now does it make sense?

I hope you get black bagged.

Yes. Americans do pine for Nazi Germany openly and with orgasmic abandon.

In Hitler's defense, eugenics probably would've spared the world from your dumb ass.

Good thing he payed close attention to all that American research, yeah?

Without my dumb ass, you'd have died from rickets or Tay-Sachs. Biodiversity is yet another thing anti-science morons can't get their heads around, despite all the evidence to the contrary. They just bash their heads against the debunked "Bell Curve" until they're dumb enough to buy it.

Way to be bold, victim! You'll go far.

Acting like we need the mentally disabled to ensure biodiversity.

I powered through the downvotes trying to show people that it isnt black and white, but a fuck lot of gray area. They kept trying to argue that there are no side effects. I cannot understand how people cannot understand they arent 100% safe, and that the for profit corporations that make the shit make more money of return visits. Side effects encourage return visits.

Check out this article from the CBC (Canadian Broadcast Company) our major news source here in Canada.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/flu-vaccine-paradox-adds-to-public-health-debate-1.2912790

Really interesting information they are finding out. Seems like the more shots you get, the less your immune system is able to handle infections and diseases.

I personally don't take the Flu shot, its worthless, even the CDC admitted to it this year. I am on the fence about some of the others until further investigation.

Seems like the more shots you get, the less your immune system is able to handle infections and diseases.

See, this what drives scientists crazy. The result you're describing is discussed in the literature and believed to be real so far since it's been replicated in laboratory animals.

But going from that to the conclusions that "the more shots you get, the less your immune system is able to handle infections and diseases" is a huge and kind of crazy jump. It's speculation, but it's not informed speculation. If you put it in context, it's difficult to imagine how "vaccination burden" could be a thing, considering that there are several million viruses in a given cubic meter of air so we probably inhale hundreds of thousands every minute.

Likely there's some population genetics/epitope specificity explanation related to how the flu virus is evolving, but there's no reason to generalize from this to other vaccines.

Thanks for the link!

So this paper actually points to something much more interesting and much less serious than the vaccine burden idea. From the manuscript: First, the full spectrum of possibilities

"The increased risk of non‐influenza respiratory viruses among TIV recipients could be an artefactual finding, for example measurement bias could have resulted if subjects were more likely to report their first ARI episode but less likely to report subsequent episodes, while there was no real difference in rhinovirus or other non‐influenza respiratory virus infections following the winter influenza season. The increased risk could also indicate a real effect. Receipt of TIV could increase influenza immunity at the expense of reduced immunity to non‐influenza respiratory viruses, by some unknown biological mechanism."

Second, what they actually think is going on:

"Alternatively, our results could be explained by temporary nonspecific immunity following influenza virus infection, through the cell‐mediated response or, more likely, the innate immune response to infection [21‐23]. Subjects who received TIV would have been protected against influenza in February 2009 but then would not have had heightened non‐specific immunity in the following weeks...The duration of any temporary non‐specific immunity remains uncertain [13] but could be of the order of 2‐4 weeks based on these observations.

So basically, with any infection you have an innate immune response (i.e. the way your cells individually fight off the virus) and your adaptive immune response (involving antibodies, the way your whole body fights off the infection).

Vaccines affect, and ramp up, the adaptive response to infection, and this response is specific to the virus vaccinated against. It's functionally the more important method of immunity to clear infections. However, any viral antigen (live or dead) injected into the body will also trigger the innate immune response, which is a general antiviral response by the cells that come in contact with the virus.

The authors think that basically the viral antigens included in the vaccine might be temporarily soaking up the innate immune response (so to speak) leading the patients temporarily more susceptible to minor respiratory infections. In the case of the flu virus, which is generally a severe respiratory infection, it's easy to say this is a reasonable price to pay.

The honest truth of the matter is my wife is way more antivax than I am, I can see a net potential benefits from having pathogens removed from possibly infecting people. But I listen to her and hear her words, and see her points.

And then I came on reddit with questions and I am called Hitler, like, the absolute worst human possible. For questions. For asking nothing but fucking questions, I have people calling for me to die and my gene pool to be erased.

I know reddit and most of the other social media is one huge paid for, bought and gamed platform aimed at dispersing propaganda, societal and cultural context. It's obvious. So when I see sites like reddit, which are completely bought out by the powers that be, have such a huge propaganda push to demonize me, it really gives meaning to the phrase "To learn who rules over you... Simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

funny you're called Hitler but wouldn't Hitler be in favor of forced vaccinations?

Preaching the word! Hit them with axolotl's post on the subject:

War and Peace of vaccine skepticism

Another one. #2 on /r/all .

http://np.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/2unklr/history_repeats_itself_antivac_comic_from_the/

Might be interesting to sticky a mega-thread containing all the front-page vaccine posts from the last week and continuing on through the weekend. You know, for science.

Just came here to post this.

Might be interesting to sticky a mega-thread containing all the front-page vaccine posts from the last week and continuing on through the weekend.

I think that's a fantastic idea.

Thank you sir, may I have another.

#6 http://np.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/2unokj/am_i_doing_this_right/

Make a list. You're on it. This is crazy.

Approved because I happened to be scrolling through this thread just now. But just FYI, we don't get notified when you respond to a post, even if it's one of our own. And it seems like making you an approved submitter doesn't have any effect on whether automod picks up your posts or not.

https://www.reddit.com/user/AnonBTCShoppin/submitted/

There are 3 types of people out there. 1. Those who blindly believe w/e is fed to them by the gov, may that be lies about the safety of vaccines. 2. Those who don't trust the gov one bit and provide sources to countless studies about the dangers of vaccines. and 3. Those who are on the fence, don't know what to believe . These random burst of "vaccine propaganda" is only targeting #3. And this applies to everything out there that needs to be fed to the masses, not just vaccine disinformation.

That's pretty black and white, considering number 2 is completely and utterly outweighed by the majority of scientific findings.

I'd rather die of sickness than trust people who are proven in historical context, to be murderers and manipulators.

And not to mention... if your child became sick from an unvaccinated one, what does that tell you ?

I'm glad people are realising that reddit has been wholly compromised by thought controllers

http://naturalnews.com/images/Infographic-Vaccine-Circular-Logic-600.jpg

I am pro vaccination for children. But i havent had a flu shot for 20 years and i havent had the flu in 20 years. The wife gets one every year and gets the flu every 2 to 3 years. So i really don't think the flu shot is necessary.

That's a pretty small sample size

Wasn't there a post just recently about how their was zero testing on the latest flu shot? My sample size is bigger than the official one already.

If she's surrounded by a lot of people with the flu, then decides to get the vaccine then that's not the best way to do it. Because you'll likely come down with the flu before the vaccine can get the body to manufacture sufficient antibodies (two weeks).

If people want to get the flu vaccine they need to do it as soon in the "flu season" as possible when it's more effective to do so.

Vaccines have a lot of aluminum in them too. That's especially bad for small kids and babies.

How much is "a lot"?

This much New borns get hep b, polio, Hib, and DTaP. All of these have high levels, none lower than 0.17mg, most having more, up to 0.8mg. For some babies more than 0.01mg can be harmful, or .35 in adults.

Parts per million! there are like, millions of parts of aluminum that they're injecting into you!

We are living in a time of mass deception. The majority of individuals are duped and are allowing another entity to think for them then turn around and tell them what to think. This is what happens when you let your planet be overruled by satanists. As delineated by the absolute drivel spewed all over this website, I see there is no glimmer of hope for the vast majority of people in this world. There is no 'waking up' or any mass consciousness shift bound to happen any time, it is too late. To put it bluntly, people are fucking too stupid to seek truth. You can't formulate an argument anywhere on this site without being down voted into oblivion because your evidence does not match up with the nonsensical scientism (not real science) that easily manipulates the minds of the spiritually immature and lazy masses. Sure, all these diseases that run rampant in the world today is cause of plenty premature deaths but the MAJOR killer is the lack of knowledge individuals possess because they accept lies right from the mouth of the beast.

Your comment is truer than most will ever realize. Michael Aquino was the tip of the iceberg, but his story was sufficiently covered up so most people don't know about his Presidio District scandal. Satanists infiltrate all power groups in government and media/entertainment.

Anyone need a mainstream media source to back these claims? You're using the Internet right now, try searching "Aquino Presidio satanism" and get some popcorn, because you're in for some life-changing perspective.

So, here is the /r/askscience megathread link:

http://np.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2urird/raskscience_vaccines_megathread/

Why not take your arguments there, where they have a policy for sourced arguments?

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.

Fixed i think, although i do want people to participate in the mega-thread.

Since when does the government care about our well-being? These mandatory vaccinations are absolutely sinister, why would there be any doubt?

I'm in my 3rd year of obsessive research relating to vaccines and I'm not sure anymore that they even work. I think their preventative effects have been grossly exaggerated while harmful effects have been ignored; belief, diagnostic criteria changes and renaming of diseases can explain the statistics. My only question now is why? Surely money isn't the only factor. Not something I ever wanted to get involved with, but it found me after I had my own reaction to a vaccine and after no help from doctors I did my own research. Lets just say the history of vaccination has some skeletons you won't ever hear about in the mainstream media. What I have learnt they do to the body is what I believe to be a crime against humanity given there is no prior screening. "Clearly, defining protective efficacy of an Ab molecule in a predictive fashion is currently beyond the state of immunological science and may not be possible with current reductionistic approaches to scientific problems." pg 30 https://www.einstein.yu.edu/uploadedfiles/casadevall/2006/8.pdf

Suzzan Humphries gives an excellent lecture on vaccines which answers many questions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFQQOv-Oi6U

seeing how volatile everyone is in this thread, everyone needs to take a few weeks off of reddit, including myself. peace.

You must be new here, if so, then a few weeks off is probably healthy. I've been here for awhile and know what to expect....I'll be here for awhile.

I've been here a bit longer than you have.... good luck.

Did you really not consider the possibility that this isn't my first account....?

I have a separate account for porn also. Sorry i might have come off a little cold. Good day to you sir

They say standards were established to control.

[deleted]

It's funny, the same is true for things like circumcision.

It's obviously a stupid and barbaric practice, but the only folks that defend it these days happen to be circumcised males.

Go figure.

It's true. It's extremely rare to see a grown uncircumcised man suddenly say "Hey, I did the research and I've decided I want my foreskin sliced off!"

yeah the lack of high infant mortality rates is a good indicator and the subduing of common childhood diseases that in fact got us to a point where the ages of 1-5 were survivable is a good enough indicator to me that the vaccines work.

Where as "muh autism!" is as stupid as stupid gets. No one says you need to sit around with quantified and qualified evidence and listen to some twit rant on about how it's not real.

that's jut ridiculous and has nothing to do with personal experience and has everything to do with qualified and quantified data built up over decades.

real world medicine for real world disease prevention.

Funny you mention infant mortality rates, as the US has the highest rate of vaccination in any developed county and the highest rate of infant deaths by quite a large margin.... Just sayin'.

Replace ebola with measles, let's see what happens!

Of course the front page is filled with vaccine articles. The president of the united states just made comments about vaccination.

Also, there will be the inevitable saddoes who think - hey, vaccine posts are gettng a lot of karma... I'll post something and see if I get lucky.

Why people even care about karma is beyond me. You can't cash it in for bread.

For the Autism Debate.

Call it what you want, but don't call it Autism.

Donna Gates on Body Ecology.

You know, I kinda understand the "those who don't think are steak on the table" (or whatever the quote is), because if they don't think, they are weapons to be picked up and used against you. Therefore, the logical thing to do with populations that don't think is to turn them against other populations that don't think, or else they'll be turned against you.

That's not to say I agree with the idea, but rather observing how fucking difficult and dangerous unthinking people are. They're basically weapons that are left on the table, and it's a constant battle to think for them so they're not turned against you. The obvious (although cruel) thing to do is to is to trick them into killing each other so they don't end up killing you... and that's probably exactly how those at the top of the pyramid feel and think.

Do you recommend any material to read about the legitimate concerns of anti-vax?

Has there ever been proof of vaccines used to deliver something else?

Sign the petition:

PROHIBIT ANY LAWS MANDATING THE FORCE AND REQUIREMENT OF VACCINATIONS OF ANY KIND.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/prohibit-any-laws-mandating-force-and-requirement-vaccinations-any-kind/HW1B3YKz

OK, I'll sign it. You don't have to yell.

But seriously, did anyone else notice that the only 2 'ALL CAPS' petitions are vaccine related?

Okay, perhaps the wrong place to say this but I am in favor of some vaccines, MMR vaccines are a must because everyone has it 'ass backwards', people who don't vaccinate should seek to ensure their children catch mumps and measles asap. You can't live an entire lifetime and never catch these two and the older you get, the nastier both the diseases are. So, yes vaccinate for MMR, also the risk of damage and death from those diseases outrun risks of autism. However, other shots do seem a bit pointless. TB has now mutated and vaccines are of no use, flu mutates fast so there's no point taking a flu shot, tetanus still happens whether you're vaccinated or not.

I think prior to having a shot you should read as much as you can about the effectiveness of the shot at protecting you from the disease. If you need a shot but you check online only to read hundreds of cases where people had the shot but still got the disease then find out why, see if the shot is worth having, how high a risk is it really?

Doctors are in the sales racket, they want to push their shit onto you, just as a dentist wants to find fault in your teeth. That's another one, how many of you were told you had cavities when you were in your teens? You got these fictitious cavities filled or root canaled right? If you have children (and the money) book your child in to three different dentists for a check up, I guarantee at least two will find teeth with cavities, but they'll be in different teeth. It's all a fucking con, and you are the medical profession's ATM.

First, I think it's important to keep in mind that all medical treatments have potential risks. The choice may be pretty clear cut with measles, but it may be fuzzier with other diseases, and it might be a lot fuzzier for families with a history of bad reactions to vaccines. I hate the idea of sincere, intelligent anti-vaccine people being forced to give their kids shots. I think the people who ridicule the parents who have concerns are being jerks.

Second, I've had all my shots, and my kid's had his shots. I'd prefer that my kid be around other kids who've had their shots.

But, finally: my feeling is that the anti-vaccination hysteria was amplified by some interest group that's scared its members sell products that actually do cause autism. Maybe, say, makers of a food additive, or a type of plastic.

If I'm right, the group might be using vaccines to draw people's attention away from whatever it is that actually hurts kids' brains.

Oh yeah I got attacked on /r/triangle for telling people to do whats right for their families and don't worry what everyone else is doing.

this has me breathing again.great stuff

OK so let me just start this post off by saying that I am by no means a drone to the government and I know full well that tons of fucked up shit is done by this nations elite, that said, I still feel like vaccines are a good thing and would rather have my child have a chance of being autistic then straight up dying. Can anyone link me some reputable sources to change my view on this subject? Until that happens I'm going maintain my stance that people completely against vaccines are just jackasses making wild speculations.

Note: by reputable source I don't mean some MSM but I also don't want a site for complete crackpots either. Thanks.

Ever read any of this or its sources?

Thanks for the link. This is exactly the kind of information that I wanted to see and I may actually buy those books. Thanks again!

Why are vaccinated people worrying about non-vaccinated people making them sick?

Because children of certain ages might not have the proper vaccination.

Because mass vaccination relies a lot on herd immunity and they don't check to make sure that the vaccine produces an antibody titer sufficient to protect you from infection in most cases.

There are a low number of people that have been vaccinated that aren't strictly immune because of a sub-optimal response to the vaccine.

Many posts on /r/conspiracy are moronic (such as mine on dragons), but I agree on this one. Rarely things are black or white, and in this particular case there could be good vaccines and bad or unnecessary vaccines. The discussion could be more uselful if it wasn't for all of this hate and propaganda, instead it's all about vaccine cause autism bullshit that few people anti-vaccine actually believe.

I don't get the whole anti vaxxer hysteria. I've never heard of a single doctor saying that you should avoid vaccinations. Pretty sure there is not a worldwide conspiracy of evil doctors trying to kill all human life on the planet...

There is and always has been a world wide conspiracy of American progressivists trying to kill all disobedient to their leaders and paymasters forms of human life on the planet.

Most doctors I know are Republicans.

Yes and most supporters of social reengineering and eugenics have been progressivists and Democrats whose only hope for personal advancement was not from any middle class skills they had but on their being tools of elites. White Van hipsters and the MSM for example.

Progressive American Presidents

Lincoln - Civil War, Conscription

TDR - Wanted Conscription

Wilson - World War I, Conscription, FED

FDR - World War II, Conscription

Truman - Korea, Conscription

JFK - Vietnam, Conscription

LBJ - Vietnam Max, Conscription

Carter - Kicked out for getting nowhere with Iran

Clinton - Fall of the Soviets, no one to fight

Obama - has signed Conscription and National Service back into law

ok, i will be approaching this from a blank slate and an open mind like i do everything else. i will use public information and statistics from both sides to reach a verdict.

This document correlating effects of vaccines with disabilities claims the following. i will put calculated percentage risk in italics, as well as lethality of the illness.

• 1 in every 50 kids develop autism 2% (as of 2013) non fatal

• 1 child in 9 develop asthma 11% (as of 2013) can be fatal if not treated, no figure available

• 1 in 6 develop learning disabilities 16% (as of 2013) not enough information on lethality due to vagueness on what this paper considers a learning disability. expected to be low

• 1 in 400 develop diabetes less then 1% (as of 2013) lethal in time, early death possible. no rate i can find

so according to this paper: worst case 30% of kids can be negatively effected by vaccines, the average would be 7.5% since these illnesses can overlap. most would be quality of life reductions and early death without proper treatment.

now lets see the mortality rates for illnesses we are vaccinating against

• hepatitis B causes 80% of all primary liver cancers. 500,000 people die each year from this lethal cancer. Currently, primary liver cancer has a 5-year survival rate of only 10%. source

• Diphtheria can be severe or fatal in unvaccinated persons; even with appropriate treatment, 5%-10% of patients with diphtheria die. source

• Tetanus, a disease characterized by painful muscular spasms that can lead to respiratory failure and, in up to 40% of cases, death. source

• Pertussis also known as Whooping cough, about 1 out of 4 25% will get pneumonia and 1 or 2 out of 100 will die 2% lethality source

• Polio: Between 2% and 10% people who have paralysis from poliovirus infection die because the virus affects the muscles that help them breathe. source

• 3%-6% of Hib (Haemophilus Influenzae Type b) cases in children are fatal. source

• Rotavirus: if treated properly, non fatal. source

• pneumococcal meningitis: About 1 out of 15. 6% fatality rate. source

• Influenza: highly variable depending on the strain. will not include due to wide range of lethality

• Measles : 0.3% with proper care. source

• Mumps: rarely fatal. Source

• Rubella: rarely fatal source

• Varicella (chicken pox) : 0.7% lethality source

• Hepatitis A: rarely fatal source

• HPV - causes cancer, but the virus itself is not deadly if treated. too many strains to get an accurate number but depending on location of the cancer, may be fatal. not included n my calculations due to high variability. HPV VACCINES can however result in death in rare cases due to medical malpractice. mostly due to wrong injection site or unrelated complication. source

so, thats a worst case of more then 75% of children being infected with often fatal illness. on average it will be around 20% with DEADLY illnesses.

7.5 % chance of life altering illness, rare chance of death if I DO vaccinate my kid, vs 20% chance of infection, high chance of death if I DONT.

ill take my chances with vaccines. im more scared of incompetent doctors and poor vaccine storage practices. perhaps theres another thing at work here other then these children being vaccinated? maybe the iodine?

am i afraid of the unvaccinated? no. why would i be, im vaccinated. and id be careful to make sure my kid is too. if they catch it because of someones kid not being vaccinated, tough luck for me that my kid caught it before he could be safely vaccinated.

Thanks for one of the only responses in this thread that is informed and not just dumb people reading too much into bullshit.

This is no different than the Ebola panic created by the conservative media (that died down immediately after elections). Except this one is driven mostly by liberal media. Three weeks from now, they'll be on to the next manufactured panic.

I'm happily childfree, but if I had a kid they would get only the shots that prevent fatal or disfiguring diseases. MMR, whooping cough and polio? Yes. Gardasil, chicken pox and annual flu shot? Fuck no.

Opinion time: Some shots should be mandatory and others should not. We don't need a resurgence of nasty diseases like polio or mumps. If you are healthy enough to get the shots, you should get them before being allowed in public schools, daycares, etc. However, shots that prevent routine illnesses like chicken pox--or those with a shitty success rate like the flu jab--should be totally optional.

Gray areas, people.

Except that chicken pox (varicella) is connected to a lot of nerve damage/nerve pain in older adults ad a result of shingles outbreaks

Yeah, and shingles is no joke. But only about 1/3rd of people ever get it. If someone wants to take that chance, that should be their option since they will be the ones having to live with the pain. And since 2/3rds of people will never get shingles, there's a good chance it won't happen.

I think I draw the line at vaccinating against things that "could" happen, especially if the possible disease is not fatal or disfiguring. Personal opinion only.

Except lots of diseases like measles and mumps used to be routine childhood illnesses just like chicken pox.

Yeah, but I still don't want to worry about catching them. They're still not a fun or positive experience.

Measles was thisclose to being eradicated in 2000, now it's back. It's not that I think the disease is some huge plague, it's that it shouldn't exist at all if we can help it. Most of the side effects people worry about with the MMR (encephalitis, fever, febrile seizures, etc) are even more severe when you catch the actual measles virus naturally. Not for everyone, but for some.

What I do is say stuff like

"Antivaxxers are really dangerous, they really should be removed from society for all of our sake. In today's day and age, I can't see how anyone would not implicitly trust our government on this."

This tends to net me upvotes from the bots/shills/whatever is controlling the narrative and context. However in the next paragraph I will be as roundabout anti-vax as possible just to see if I can fool the bots. Like I will mention the existence of Vaccine Courts or I will talk about the Guatemala Syphilis Experiment where the STD was deliberately injected into people without their knowledge or consent.

I'm not even anti-vax, but the more the propaganda is slam dunked down my goddamn throat the more I look into the fucking thing.

I don't swallow group think, I regurgitate it, inspect it, analyze it and come to my own conclusions.

I do this in r/depopulation to some degree. But honestly I think getting vaccinated would be a wise thing to do especially with the amount of virus coming out.

I didn't know that sub was a thing, good find. I will have to look into that. It is creepy the degree the propaganda has gotten. Yeah I am definitely pro-vax, one could almost call me anti-anti-vax with how pro I am. I think everyone should get vax.

Because of the anti-vaccine campaign the biggest group who are dismissing vaccines and are not getting advocacy needed because the kids are getting it is the older people. Most of these virus's are stealth and can reactivate or over power weakened immune systems.

HPV, Chicken pox, Herpes, AIDs

http://www.m.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/features/shingles-chickenpox

http://www.ccid.org/stealth/stealthviruses.htm

I remember back when vaccination conspiracies and those unwilling to get vaccinations were out of fears of nano-tech being injected into ones person for sinister means. plus other spooky sci-fi-ish stuff.

I honestly can't stand seeing pro-vaccination ads these days due to it almost always being hate spam.

Can we get links to actual studies and scholarly articles, no matter which position?

All of these opinions are meaningless without evidence.

http://m.pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/109/1/e2.full

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC557899/

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/Mobile/article.aspx?articleid=1733704

This is /r/conspiracy, so you might get people distrusting the legitimacy of those resources...

As opposed to the legitimacy of theirs?

Well, but their resources aren't tainted by the pharma industrial complex that controls the government. Their resources are written by citizen patriots doing their duty just trying to investigate the hard questions (with variable understanding of basic biology and immunology, of course).

Not every source is tainted by 'big pharma'. In fact, the original article linking autism to vaccine was published in The Lancet, a very reknown and scholarly journal. There are many journals out there that are meant for the betterment of humanity, and not just as a journal for "hey look at this new drug we developed".

The thing is that citizen patriots investigating the hard questions without proper scientific training (it's a different story if this is a person in graduate school who's graduated with a B.S. in Biochemistry or Molecular Bio, or even Biology, etc.) generally aren't always going to arrive to the right answers. This is a subject that requires a good amount of expertise and schooling to understand, not just any concerned citizen can.

Maybe I forgot to add the /sarcasm tag ;)

Honest question: If one of the main objectives of the ruling elite is global depopulation, why push Vaccinations? Wouldn't an outbreak "solve" this population issue for them?

Unless there's an agenda to use vaccines to actually spread disease, of course.

https://np.reddit.com/r/YouShouldKnow/comments/2v3odx/ysk_that_if_youre_an_adult_without_a_record_of_a/

I'm still over here waiting for someone to show me why I shouldn't get vaccinated in certain terms.

I see it as nothing more than myth and superstition. In the English language they supposedly cause autism, in France multiple sclerosis, in Nigeria Infertility. These sort of myths have been going on since the beginning of vaccinations.

Few here is telling anyone not to get vaccinated. Just that we want the right on an individual vaccine by vaccine basis to decide the risk rewards associated with them for ourselves. If you want your vaccine you can keep your vaccine.

Well said.

I have sought knowledge though. I'm not turning up anything solid. Believe me I've tried. When I someone should show me I'm saying I don't think anyone can.

https://np.reddit.com/r/axolotl_peyotl/comments/23og48/the_skeptics_guide_to_vaccines_part_i_poxes_polio/cgyz6pn

I have sought knowledge though.

quit your bullshit

From all the research that's gone in to vaccines and the results, it shouldn't be surprising that the default position is very pro-vaccine. This backed with the anti-vax movement and the reemergence of vaccine preventable diseases will solidify that position. That's my opinion

I'll take "hitting on all the obvious troll answers"

Survey says, "/u/pigly_two earns 1,000"

You know Jerry, /u/pigly_two even talked about anti-vaxers and he mentioned "the reemergence of vaccine preventable diseases"... give him an extra thousand for hitting on every catch phrase in the world.

He even said, "That's my opinion" to give him that extra dose of credibility. Why not give him 2,000 extra points!?

I'm still over here waiting for someone to show me why I shouldn't get vaccinated in certain terms.

You make it out to seem like you're the lone voice of reason, like everyone is telling you vaccines are evil ...yet no one told you to never get vaccinated. No one here gives a shit if you chose to get vaccinated. They only care if you force them to. Do you want to force people to get vaccinated?

I see it as nothing more than myth and superstition

You offer no reason why it is "myth and superstition" you just say it is. Offer reasons why it's just "myth and superstition" and I might remember to take you seriously.

EDIT: I spelled a word wrong.

Start at this post.

Okay. That's a lot of info.

Yep, all sourced too - there's a lot of information out there from over the decades.

http://www.fourteenstudies.org/index.html

https://np.reddit.com/r/rage/comments/2v49y8/antivaccination_comments_on_national_geographic/

There are two types of vaccines on record, clean ones they give to wealthy people and the bad ones they give to you.

I'm no where near wealthy but have received vaccinations throughout my life that have worked (e.g. chicken pox vaccine as a child.) What even is a "bad" vaccine?

edit - weird that so many people in this thread complain about not getting a chance to discuss their view and then downvote me right away for asking a question..

received vaccinations throughout my life that have worked

implying no autism
implying

Autism is present from birth.

Is that what the CDC told you to believe?

No. I'm from the UK, and so the CDC aren't important to us.

So what is your excuse for being so ignorant then?

Yeah calm down people. Reddit just likes to hate on something and they really froth at the mouth when it is justified or anti scientific. That's all. Some serious paranoia is this thread.

It's because the measles outbreak is on every major news outlet and the euphoric people of Reddit are trying to karmawhore.

I think that any generalized statement made by a person in a position of power or authority comes with the disclaimer that the world is a nuanced and variable place. When Obama says everyone should be vaccinated, intelligent folks would interpret that as meaning everyone should to to the doctor to get vaccinated. At which point your physician would point out any reasonable concerns regarding your individual person being vaccinated.

If President Obama read aloud a detailed explanation of all of the reasons for not getting a vaccine then he'd lose his audience. The short version is to just ask your doctor and do what he says. The overwhelming problem here is people thinking they know better than scientists or their doctor and deciding they shouldn't get their kids vaccinated based on ignorant understanding.

There might be a conflict of interest between Big Pharma and doctors.

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/drug-companies-paid-billions-doctors-hospitals-2013-n215646

There might be Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Safety Research too.

Advisers on Vaccines Often Have Conflicts.

Japan panel misled over cervical cancer vaccine decision

I don't think its unreasonable to ask for an impartial or firewalled vaccine research administrative body. The problem now is even if such a system was developed, questioning the infallibility of vaccines is a near guaranteed career killer.

Yes, vaccinations are the sacrament of modern medicine.

How bad is this subreddit? Your comment is actually down voted despite being a voice of reason.

The major issue is the idea of herd immunity though. Vaccines are much less likely to work as more individuals in the herd/society refuse vaccinations because of the increase in cases of illness. Measles had all but been eradicated before people started being afraid of vaccination. Just look up how many people use to die on a yearly basis from diseases such as polio and measles, which until recently we have rarely seen high numbers of cases. Vaccines may have negative impacts in some ways, but they have still saved far more lives than they have taken or destroyed. Which is why the government needs/ wants population control now. We have over come many of our natural risks of mortality.

Please read this:

The deadly impossibility of herd immunity through vaccines.

Just look up how many people use to die on a yearly basis from diseases such as polio

and this

and measles

Working on that one right now. Stay tuned. You're going to be stunned.

Ok, that is a valid point and not one that I really disagree with. based on how I interpret this though, correct me if I'm misguided, but it does seem that vaccination helps in younger years. Even if the baby boomer population has been living with 50% vaccination in recent years, most of them were vaccinated as children, which is the most crucial time in regards of disease risk. So my point is, while vaccines may not help once a person is healthy and has a developed immune system, do they not help babies and young children survive the period of their life when most of these diseases are a risk? If we relied solely on natural development of the immune system, would we not experience the natural selection process again in that sense? Only genetics leading to a strong immune system would survive in the long run. I am just asking questions at this point, not trying to argue by any means.

Thanks for the polite and well-reasoned response (so rare with topics like this!).

do they not help babies and young children survive the period of their life when most of these diseases are a risk?

Babies are too young for most vaccines.

In a perfect world, with actual regulation of vaccines and actual accountability of the pharmaceutical companies that make vaccines, this would be true for children, but only children who are malnourished and in extremely poor countries.

However, there are far more effective ways of treating certain disease than preventative vaccination.

For example, Vitamin A is crucial in preventing and treating measles.

It's much safer to make sure you're getting enough Vitamin A in the prevention of measles than to receive the vaccine.

Most vaccines are so poorly manufactured that they cause more problems than they fix.

Again, if the big pharma was actually held up to scrutiny, then things might be different.

For example, Vitamin A is crucial in preventing and treating measles.

This cannot be overstated. Even the AAP is starting to agree with this. It would be a shame that after all of this fuss it turns out we just needed to give kids Vitamin A to reduce measles death rates and transmission.

Great link!

I'm working on a massive measles post right now, and I'm including a huge section on Vitamin A.

It's the most important key to the entire measles vaccine debate.

I heard of a study that showed Vitamin A serum levels drop off a cliff with certain types of infections. Trying to find it.

We can get into the different vitamins...and that deserves it's own subreddit in my opinion, but what about the Thyroid gland and iodine?

From my studies Iodine helps the body in numerous ways including getting rid of fluoride.

The Dr. Russell Blaylock article is very vague. It mentions that many vaccines lose effectiveness over time and most people lost protection within 2-10 years. Which vaccines are "many"? Does this include the more dangerous diseases? Is there any real sources for this besides "learning in medical school" because there are plenty of other people who have gone to medical school which contradict him. I could go on and on with questions thay this excerpt brings up as it is very vague, but I think asking for actual sources would be a good start, as these sources may answer some of the questions.

Actually this is recently been found to be untrue. Seems the more we are vaccinated, the less immunity we have. Check out this CBC article, it just came out on Jan 16th of this year. http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/flu-vaccine-paradox-adds-to-public-health-debate-1.2912790

http://www.np.reddit.com/r/axolotl_peyotl/comments/23og48/the_skeptics_guide_to_vaccines_part_i_poxes_polio/

This same logic would imply that the staunch, unwavering, black and white opposition to teaching "Intelligent Design" in public schools is really just evidence of some conspiracy to keep the country godless; or that the medical community's outright denunciation of homeopathy is evidence of some conspiracy to silence Big Pharma detractors; or that people laugh at moon landing hoaxers (I dunno what they call themselves) because the hoaxers are actually on to something!

It appears to be so black and white and oversimplified because people are tired of arguing with people who have no idea what they are talking about, people who would rather come up with post hoc rationalizations for their opposition (e.g., that somehow vaccines can overload an infant's immune system). No one is going to take the time to delve into the minute specifics (e.g., not everyone should get vaccines) when large chunks of the population are irredeemably wrong about vaccine science and efficacy.

Amen.

So here's the thing. A lot of the anti-vax commentary is perfectly reasonable speculation. But it's not informed speculation. They're theories that people come with to explain a phenomenon they heard, but most of the time do not involve any attempt to rationalize that theory in terms of what we know about immunology.

You have people postulating about "vaccine burden" from getting too many shots causing immunosupression, recombinant vaccines giving people live illnesses, injection site reactions morphing into brain disorders...

It's like they get step 1 of the scientific method, but not the other parts. Another important part involves choosing among hypotheses that are consistent with other evidence, and then explaining a theory in terms of what else is known in the field. Vaccines are extremely well studied medical instruments, that are used on astoundingly large numbers of people (more than most medical agents) so we have very good medical data to suggest that the ones we commonly use are safe. No, it's not a common feature of vaccines (note, the original oral polio vaccine gave people a mild version of the live illness at a rather low rate, and isn't used anymore), but the ones we use commonly have very good data.

In this situation, it takes more than just a feeling that "we get too many vaccines and it burdens our immune system" (especially when it doesn't jive with other existing medical evidence) to justify making carveouts to well-established public health policy. It's like arguing that, because some people don't get lung cancer from smoking, the smoking bans should be overturned.

I notice that on wednesdays and fridays my computer overheats. I don't postulate that there's some as-yet-undiscovered temporal deviation to the laws of E&M, I look for explanations that make sense in terms of what we know affects electronics. Maybe I tend to work late on those days because those are days with meetings, and the extended use causes my computer to overheat.

I've watched the anti-vax crowd completely back off the claim that vaccines cause autism after it got buttfucked into mythology. So the claims have weakened and have splintered. The most vague claims that I've seen now is that "vaccine burden", as you call it, causes SIDS. The goal posts have moved so far now that I also see parents concede that vaccines work and are safe, but fuck the government won't tell them what to do. I've pretty much given up trying to reason with these types of people.

What I find further amazing and telling about Obana's statements on this, is the fact that he clearly does not have the health and well being of the American people at heart, as evidenced by his refusal to deny entry to the U.S. by people flying in from Ebolaland. Motherfucker wants to expose us all to a horrible, deadly disease but vehemently insists everyone get vaccinated against mild, non-deadly diseases. WTF?!?!?!

Are you saying the measles are not deadly?

At least do a Wikipedia search before commenting-- The measles is still a major cause of infant death. It was responsible for killing an estimated 93000 in 2013.

Edit: Note I never said they were US deaths. Don't change the goal post.

That's such bullshit it's not even funny. You're claiming 93,000 deaths when it kills 1 in 45k yet the MSM is bemoaning an "outbreak" of 100 cases. Did it infect all 7 billion people on Earth in 2013?!?

http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html

• As many as one out of every 20 children with measles gets pneumonia, the most common cause of death from measles in young children.

• About one child out of every 1,000 who get measles will develop encephalitis (swelling of the brain) that can lead to convulsions and can leave the child deaf or mentally retarded.

• For every 1,000 children who get measles, one or two will die from it.

your math is off ... 1/20 children get pneumonia, but not every child that gets pneumonia dies.

find out that stat and your math will work

What math are you talking about? All of the information in the post you responded to was directly from a Government website.

Oh, the CDC! Well there's a reliable source for you. I'm sorry, but if the CDC says the sky is blue, I'm going outside to look up and verify.

Source?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measles#cite_note-7

Help me out, I don't even see the word "MEASLES" in the Lancet article, much less 93,000 deaths.

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2814%2961682-2/abstract

FYI, I had the measles as a child, so did all my friends and siblings. It was a mild illness without even a trip to the doctor.

Measles is listed 10 times in the article, and that number is from table #2.

FYI measles is an illness that can cause permanent brain damage or death. Most cases do not result in harm, but complications are common in about 30% of infections. Death occurs in 0.1 - 0.2% of infections (malnutrition can raise it as high as 10%).

This is all in the Wikipedia article. There is a certain amount of self responsibility to educate yourself on a topic before discussing it-- skimming a wiki article is not too much of a burden.

I found the info you cited. The statistic is for 3rd world countries, immune-compromised people with probable vitamin A deficiencies.

There were 0 us measles deaths in the US in 2013.

I never claimed there were. In 2013 the measles was considered eradicated in the US-- so expecting deaths there is pretty fucking stupid.

It's almost like you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

2013 there were 159 reported cases with 0 deaths. Mortality rate 0.

2014 there were 644 cases with 0 deaths. Mortality rate 0

In contrast fungal Meningitis cases in 2013, 751 with 64 deaths, aprox 9% mortality.

http://www.cdc.gov/hai/outbreaks/meningitis.html

And you think fungal meningitis is in any way relevant because?...

So you can't argue that the number of cases is too statistically small to show mortality.

Since 2003 there have been aprox 1700 reported measles cases in the US, with no mortality.

Hahahahaha.... Either you're fucking with me or too stupid.

Good day.

US measles deaths in 2013 per the CDC - Zero 0

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6236a2.htm

Because the first time someone told me not to get vacinated it came from Jenny Mcarthy, religious idiots, and cheap hackjob sites... The times when I was told trust the vacinations it came from doctors, scientists, and now the president of the free world....

gummint sez vax gud, so vax gud

celebrity sez vax gud, so vax gud

[deleted]

99.99% of the time it's a good idea

Wrong.

This is, likely, the most off-base thing to be found in here.

This being stickied makes you look very foolish. That makes me doubt the intentions of the mods of this subreddit.

They are making you all looks like fools.

Im commenting here to prove your point. You said no discussion is allowed and is always downvoted. So Im here to disagree with all of you. Its so black and white because there is literally no reason to not get vaccinated. (medical reason are the exception obviously) You guys are trying to make bad light of something that keeps everyone safe.

Holy shit, you people really are fucking crazy. I'm speechless

Most conspiracy theorists are. Then they die alone, never seeing the fruition of their grand conspiracy.

I just think that if vaccines were a method of culling or manipulating the herd used by governments, wouldn't it make much more sense for them to push for no vaccinations so we start having high mortality in populous areas due to disease outbreaks? Not to say there is no agenda, but it isn't very effective at killing people if that's it.

It's more effective at growing populations and having them live longer because of the dropping child mortality rates that are inclusive to vaccinations.

The jews are responsible for pushing the vaccine stories all over the front pages and headlines. They are trying to desperately make this a "LOL stupid Christians who are so extreme they won't vaccinate their kids" argument but fail to realize that its not a partisan issue, both liberals/conservatives are equally represented here.

You started out correct, but it is not an anti-christian agenda, it's an anti-goy agenda.

They promote vaccines so the goy are diseased/retarded. You can bet your sweet ass that they wouldn't stick a needle in their arm that was meant for the goy. They have their own clean vaccines (if there are such a thing).

Pretty much what i was getting at, Christians are the target though since they are a majority here. But yes, every non-Jew religion is targetted here. Jews believe that non-jews should serve them so this is another means to an end.

What posts on the front page are referencing Christians?

Oh of course. It is the Jews again! Damn they are everywhere.

ok anti vaxxers show me some peer reviewed analysis vaccines that support your viewpoint,oh wait of course not every scientist is controlled by the government

peer reviewed

Yeah! Show me a government funded study that proves the government did something wrong! If you can't, you have to trust the government!!

Invoking the peer review process often subjects you to an invalid argument from authority. Unless we both mutually recognise the authority of the peers in question, peer review is useless. Even when we both agree on the validity of the authority of the peers, the peer review itself can come to its conclusions using poor science.

Example

Study 1 is peer-reviewed. It concludes that dietary cholesterol increases the risk of heart disease.

Study 2 is peer-reviewed. It concludes that dietary cholesterol does not increase the risk of heart disease.

Examples just like this happen all the time. They can't both be right about their conclusions. Maybe study 1 was funded by Big Pharma^TM ? Maybe study 2 was funded by Big Joe's Lard Imporium^TM ? It's not that black and white. Peer review doesn't automatically make something a fact.

Peer review can be useful. It's certainly not infallible.

This whole thread is fucking idiotic. Unsubscribing. I don't understand how so many people can be so fucking stupid. Sometimes the person elected to lead has to make decisions, not all of them are a conspiracy, maybe, just MAYBE, once in a while, it could be for the general good of the countries well being. I've seen some dumb shit here but this tops it. I'm out

Too bad you couldn't simply make an argument. Do you think anyone gives a fuck that you're "out"? Maybe you wife cares, but no one else I can be sure of that.

There is no point in arguing with a group of people whose heads are shoved so far up there own asses. Whether I argue or not, or whether you agree with vaccines or not, within the next 5 years they will be mandatory and anything you or I have to say won't mean shit. The science says it all. It's like arguing over whether or not the sky is blue.

The day they try that crap is the day a shot is fired and many more will follow. Believe me on that.

Hopefully you die of a preventable disease before that happens :)

Well, being that I am simply now a watcher , to die of a preventable disease would only render my struggle my complete [edit:incomplete] before viewing those still poisoned by mirages of good and evil's slow descent into violence and sadness. Unfortunately one day I feel, like a journalist, I will be taking photographs of those who fight amongsthemselves and trying to understand the point of it all. I have said it before. I will take their syringe should it come to steel and law... however I know that others will not so likely comply.

Yeah uh, the anti vaccine crowd needs to get their heads right. It's pretty clear that the jenny mccarthy effect is creating new outbreaks. It's being recorded daily and these parents are the failures for thinking that reading internet articles gives them any medical authority or understanding at all. It's absurd.

If you think your mind is so easily manipulated, may I suggest you turn off your tv for a couple of days. see how you feel.

Few here is telling anyone not to get vaccinated. Just that we want the right on an individual vaccine by vaccine basis to decide the risk rewards associated with them for ourselves. If you want your vaccine you can keep your vaccine.

Start at this post.

Oh of course. It is the Jews again! Damn they are everywhere.

What posts on the front page are referencing Christians?

Herd immunity is fiction.

Watch for /u/Flytape censoring this shit. He's an obvious vaxxer, which is typical of him. I'm sure you're aware of how he tries to sway opinion in this sub.

There are many ways to steer public discussion. This is one of them. You can find more examples of this type of bullshit if you follow /u/flytape's comments. Great mod, right?

Please go troll in a different sub, no one is buying your bullshit here.

Either you're with us or you're against us.

This mentality is perpetuated by the voting system of Reddit.

You guys were missing the point I was trying to make. I'm not necessarily pro or anti vax. I really don't have my mind made up. But in THEIR minds, they feel anti vax people need to be educated and they sure as hell don't appear to be trying to do that. If this was really about the good of the world, why aren't they showing compassion for people with this "misled" opinion and providing real education?

You started out correct, but it is not an anti-christian agenda, it's an anti-goy agenda.

They promote vaccines so the goy are diseased/retarded. You can bet your sweet ass that they wouldn't stick a needle in their arm that was meant for the goy. They have their own clean vaccines (if there are such a thing).

I've seen upvoted comments saying anti-vaxxers should be killed and all other kinds of hate speech. I was even downvoted for suggesting that 'sending anti-vaxxers to rot in guantanimo' is harsh.

The funny part is that every time I've actually been able to engage an adamantly pro-vaxxer, they end up abandoning their argument. Example. A lot of these people claim to be scientific and knowledgeable but clearly have no knowledge on the matter and just blindly accept the vaccine circlejerk.

I don't know if there's such a thing as an "anti-vaxxer". It sounds like the kind of title people assign to other people to shoe-horn them into a mold. It does give you something which you can point your finger at and say "that's bad", that's about it.

We already do, the ingredients lists for vaccines are available

Until processed food manufacturers start listing a percentage of rat feces in their ingredient lists, I'm going to say those aren't 100% accurate. Again, you've got me straw-manned to Jenny McCarthy.

I'm actually 100% for vaccinations (due to the fact that I understand them, thank you very much), and I've never denied scientific reasoning in my life (at least since I broke free of Christianity as an adult). This shit is moving towards forced vaccinations though, and I'm 100% against that.

As for your comments about stabbing babies http://imgur.com/NOECI0s

I'm still over here waiting for someone to show me why I shouldn't get vaccinated in certain terms.

You make it out to seem like you're the lone voice of reason, like everyone is telling you vaccines are evil ...yet no one told you to never get vaccinated. No one here gives a shit if you chose to get vaccinated. They only care if you force them to. Do you want to force people to get vaccinated?

I see it as nothing more than myth and superstition

You offer no reason why it is "myth and superstition" you just say it is. Offer reasons why it's just "myth and superstition" and I might remember to take you seriously.

EDIT: I spelled a word wrong.

That's a pretty small sample size

It's not. Strangely though that's how the skeptics and intelligentsia have trained people to react. It's the ultimate ignorance.

Rest assured, the people jerking about this on Reddit aren't educated on the subject. They just have an unwavering faith in established medicine and they viciously attack anyone who questions that faith the same way a religious person would defend their God if you told them it wasn't omnipotent.

The very worst part is that these cheerleaders claim universally to be championing science.

It's really fucking infuriating.

Thats unfortunately just how reddit is designed. People always just downvote what they don't believe in. I don't think this is a conspiracy, but the majority of people (including myself) are pro vax, so if you post something anti vax you will likely get downvoted. Majority of reddit is also pro cat and pro Beiber. Guess what? If you post something hating cats or hating Beiber, you will also get downvoted!

If she's surrounded by a lot of people with the flu, then decides to get the vaccine then that's not the best way to do it. Because you'll likely come down with the flu before the vaccine can get the body to manufacture sufficient antibodies (two weeks).

If people want to get the flu vaccine they need to do it as soon in the "flu season" as possible when it's more effective to do so.

to be honest, i dont believe the vaccines cause autism debacle. partly becuse the percentages are so low. however i would definitly be intrested in a study done on various forms of vaccine storage, and sterilization techniques. has it occurred to anyone that maybe the 7% of kids that suffer lifestyle altering illnesses had something other then getting vaccines in common? correlation does not imply causation 100% of the time, maybe there is something relating to the metal in the needle, some change in storage practices, or the iodine sometimes used to sterilize injection sites.

arguing that 7% chance of lifestyle altering illnesses with low risk of mortality is some how worse then 20% risk of infection with something that can kill you is what boggles my mind.

there needs to be a study done on more then just the vaccines so we can get to the root of the increase in autism recently. i mean during vaccination you are exposed to

the vaccine - mostly proven NOT to be the source

the metal in the needle

immune system stress due to close time frame of vaccine administrations

the plastic in the syringe

whatever they used to sterilize your injection site.

heck maybe theres a brand name of syringe that got used in ALL the documented autism cases.

its always possible something got overlooked and it is a scientists job to leave no stone unturned and examine every possibility. science is meshing with politics nowadays and i think thats giving us some issues.

I agree with you here that more testing needs to be done, but that's kind of my point. More testing does need to be done, more research, more transparency, less appeals to emotion, less appeals to authority, less Big Pharma influence, more independent study, less black and white "you're either pro-vaxx or anti-vaxx, you either like science or you want to see children killed".

I by no means think that vaccines in their entirety are automatically bad or evil by default. What I question is any subject that is so polarizing that the very mention that the truth may fall somewhere in the middle immediately leads to you being attacked and ridiculed and called a moron and babykiller.

These reactions should tell us something about this subject and the way it's being (and has been) framed in the public's mind.

And Big Pharma/the US gov. are proven corrupt liars at this point so their motives should always be questioned, regardless of the subject.

No. It would have been chicken pox, which isn't even that severe. What that guy went through was 100x worse than chicken pox. Also, with the chicken pox vaccine, even if it "works" it wears off after like 20 years, and chicken pox is far worse on an adult than a child. So it makes no sense to even vaccinate against chicken pox. let the kids get it naturally and then they're immune for life. The only reason we have a chicken pox vaccine is that some drug company saw dollar signs, and now they've made a shitload of money from it because it's "mandatory." My kids were not vaccinated against chicken pox and they've each gotten it "naturally" and so they're immune for life.

My guess is it's the cumulative effect of aluminum being ingested and deposited in the brain, not only through vaccines but various other external sources as well. Which could be why isolated studies determine no direct cause from vaccines if it's just the tipping point.

It just so happens that certain vaccines have an incredibly high concentration of aluminum salts injected directly, bypassing the bodies' natural filters. It's a common adjuvant.

Coincidentally, you'll find loads of aluminum salts in antacids (300-600mg!) and soy based baby formulas. Great for expectant mothers with heartburn. After following a standard vaccination schedule (some 20 or so over two years) a child is exposed to quite a bit aluminum in their first few years of life.

Autism is often determined when a child is around 3 years old. I haven't culled through all the vaccination ingredients to determine how much Aluminum is used, but it's not nothing.

Aluminum is agreed upon as being neuro-toxic, but really hasn't been adequately studied, excluding its role in possibly causing Alzheimer's. Since there are studies going both ways, I'd take the middle ground and say it's still inconclusive.

For some light reading, here's the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry's Statement on Aluminum I used as a quick reference.

(Edit: Duplicated a sentence >.>)

My issue (im fairly anti-vaccine) with anti-vaxxers is some of them just give the rest of us a bad name.. Think about the autism thing logically. That is a disorder that affects the human biological system...which is INSANELY complex. No ONE thing can be the sole cause of autism. There are dozens of factors. Genetics...what nutrition the mother had during pregnancy...what nutrition baby had at and after birth...yes, then vaccines play a role, i believe. It has substances in it that have no place in a human body. Sure, small amounts. Aluminum, formaldehyde etc. most of the ones with mercury have been phased out. But a baby gets up to 7 or so on the FIRST DAY of its life, and many boosters after 6 months etc. these are the prime years of brain development. Then you factor in tons of other shit. Pollution, air quality, toxins the kid might be exposed to in his environment... There are so many goddamn factors that all coalesce into a disorder...you canNOT fucking pin it on one thing. Be reasonable. Human biological systems are way too complicated and complex to start popping disorders from something that is arguably bad for you but insignificant. Bodies are pretty resilient and evolution has designed us to withstand a shitload of situations. I have my theory and it needs an organic chemist to verify, probably other experts that will never work on it as well. I gave up trying to talk to people about it.

That all being said, i still dont like vaccines, but i dont care if others want them. It should be treated like any other medical procedure. You get it if you want it, you dont if you dont. Informed consent. I feel the same way about fluoridated water.

Mercury for one. You can read the details about the rest in my other submissions. Assuming you know how to read.

Keep parroting that government propaganda though. Maybe you'll fool someone eventually.

The Federal Vaccine Court has awarded millions in damages to kids who developed autism directly from vaccines.

CBS news a good enough source for you: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-to-receive-15m-plus-in-first-ever-vaccine-autism-court-award/ ?

I don't believe vaccines cause autism, but the adulterants that pharma corporations use as preservatives are already known to to cause brain damage among other things.

I.e., Mercury and aluminum, both still found in common vaccines.

arguing that 7% chance of lifestyle altering illnesses with low risk of mortality is some how worse then 20% risk of infection with something that can kill you is what boggles my mind.

This is very vague. Did you make these numbers up or is there a specific response/illness you are referring to?

considering that my kids don't go to school with illegal immigrants, I'm not too worried about this.

Have fun with your forthcoming Alzheimers, asshole.

This is is not my opinion. (Mind you I do have an opinion on the matter but that is neither here nor there)

I am just pointing out, logically, why it is not silly to question these scientific authorities... they do not have solid evidence.

because everything is settled

Totally not understanding that's NOT the nature of science at all.

If you are going to argue that all vaccines are automatically good because "it's science", then you don't understand how science works.

This. This is all I've been saying since 2015 started, and there are so many otherwise intelligent people who claim to "support science" that want to burn me at the stake for my heresy.

Untrue... I used to be on both sides of this issue at one time or the other. I think the main problem is both sides are wrong to some degree. Vaccines can't cause autism. Autism is a psychological disorder and one that has DNA roots. So the argument stops there with scientist and medical doctors when you say vaccines cause autism. It can't. But what it can do is cause autism like problems. And I think if we changed our perspective to one of a medical epidemic happening with our kids, and we put together some of the good research that has been done on this, we'll be close to a solution. The problem is there's been so much fraud and deception occurring, it's hard to sort through and find good information. Just read and watch this 10 minute video.

http://vaccineimpact.com/2015/why-is-the-mainstream-media-ignoring-measles-vaccine-fraud-cases/

I know GSK have my son's best interests at heart. They never want him to get ill, else they'll have another tedious customer to deal with. What a hassle that would be! I <3 GSK!

Unless there's an agenda to use vaccines to actually spread disease, of course.

Yeah, so put it in a sealed tomb. Done.

Well, being that I am simply now a watcher , to die of a preventable disease would only render my struggle my complete [edit:incomplete] before viewing those still poisoned by mirages of good and evil's slow descent into violence and sadness. Unfortunately one day I feel, like a journalist, I will be taking photographs of those who fight amongsthemselves and trying to understand the point of it all. I have said it before. I will take their syringe should it come to steel and law... however I know that others will not so likely comply.

http://ethics.wikia.com/wiki/Problem_Reaction_Solution