The Term 'Anti-Vaccine' Explained
52 2015-12-11 by lucycohen
If you want safe, non-neurotoxic vaccines for everyone, given in an independently tested and verified schedule and combination, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you want transparency, accountability, and ethical science when it comes to vaccines, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe those who profit from vaccines should not be in charge of vaccine policy or research, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe you should have the right to informed consent, and that not all vaccines are created or needed equally, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe we should study those who have reacted negatively to prevent problems for others in the future, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe you have the right not to inject yourself with something made using aborted fetal cell lines because it goes against your faith, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe the program has been derailed by special interests ever since they received federal liability protection, and that liability protection should be amended to apply only in times of emergency (if at all), you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe science can easily be bought and paid for, and that you have not only the right but also the responsibility to read it and question it, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you are a journalist investigating or reporting on CDC malfeasance regarding vaccine policy and research, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you are a politician doing the same, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you tell others to educate themselves about the risks and benefits of vaccines, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you tell others what happened to someone you know or love after they vaccinated, you are “anti-vaccine” (and a liar and dangerous).
If you believe corruption is possible in any entity, private or public, and that it needs to be exposed and weeded out wherever it is, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe 100 years is long enough to start studying the vaccinated versus never vaccinated to see if maybe, just maybe, we have created some unintended consequences, such as swapping infectious disease for chronic disease . . . and hey, you’d really like to know that . . . you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe ALL children’s lives are valuable, not just those who appear to have tolerated the vaccine program well, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe the science you paid for as a taxpayer should be available to you and not shipped overseas or destroyed or withheld because the results are suspicious, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you think a wanted felon’s research being used for policy and legal decisions on something as important as the vaccines that you are giving to your children is a problem, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe a parent knows his or her child better than anyone, and that your first responsibility is to him or her and not society, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you would object to a public health official coming to your house today and saying you can’t leave your home for any reason until you get all of your adult boosters, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you believe a person shouldn’t be forced to have a medical procedure that could possibly hurt or kill them, or go against their conscience, in order to keep their job, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you think it’s insane that you can go to a grocery store and get a vaccine from a person who doesn’t know you or your health history, and who doesn’t tell you your rights, what to do if something goes wrong, or that you can’t sue them, the store, or the pharmaceutical company if they maim or kill you, you are “anti-vaccine.”
If you think it’s equally insane that if a Thimerosal-containing flu shot vial is dropped or spilled in that grocery store, the store has be evacuated and a Hazmat team has to come and clean it up because of the mercury in it, but that grandma should roll up her sleeve and inject it for 10% off her bill because it’s the “safe mercury,” you are “anti-vaccine.”
I could go on and on and on. If any of these descriptions applies to you, YOU ARE “ANTI-VACCINE.” I need you to really get that. This isn’t “autism parents” or “Gardasil moms.” This is any consumer who questions the status quo — any American who says, “Hey, wait. Hold up. This is craziness. This is irrational. I’m concerned. I don’t trust this science or this system.
Let’s get an independent investigation going and an independent vaccine safety council established. Being responsible for high vaccine uptake and for assuring its safety are conflicting roles, especially when there is profit involved.
Let’s get the data sets and check their work. Let’s find that felon and throw out his work. Let’s put the pause button on and start looking at those who have gotten sick or hurt. It bothers me vaccination has turned into such a profitable business. Have you driven past a Walgreen’s lately? I’m worried our best interest isn’t at heart. This seems off.”
Nope. You are a dirty anti-vaxxer who hates humanity. No room for discussion. Nothing to see here. Move along. You are either with or against, and if you are against (by their definition)? Well, they want to END you.
The Extreme Vaccine Machine, full of online bullies and propagandists — vaxtremists, if you will — who will stop at nothing to shut down discourse, dissent, and debate, (because according to them, there simply is no discourse, debate or reason to dissent) just said so themselves this week.
This same group of people who give themselves permission to slander people, twist their positions to fit their agenda, go after the livelihoods of people who disagree with them, cyber stalk them, and take screenshots of their kids and make fun of them on Facebook pages made for the sole purpose of shaming them all in the name of “public health.”
THESE are the people who successfully got Rob Schneider removed as a spokesperson for an insurance company, just like they successfully got Chili’s to stop a fundraiser aimed at helping families keep track of their kids who wander from home.
And now, they want to end you. And me. And anyone who thinks they are fear-mongering jackasses, the very thing they accuse others of being. And how are they doing it?
By simply calling people anti-vaccine. That’s all they have to do. Never mind the facts. Never mind the nuances. Never mind that a person who advocates for safer car seats isn’t “anti-car seat” or safer cars, “anti-car.” Never mind thousands of parents had a front row seat to vaccine injury in their children and have no other agenda than making sure it doesn’t happen to another child.
Nope, they know better. And they know they don’t have to tell the truth. They know they can manipulate the public with that one little label. The label that has become equivalent to being called homophobic or racist or worse
64 comments
9 Tunderbar1 2015-12-11
A lot of very good points.
4 lucycohen 2015-12-11
I'm glad you liked it, it needed to be said!
-1 [deleted] 2015-12-11
Agreed on most of them. But disagree on the right to refuse based on religion. This is a health issue. The last significant time that this type of thinking resulted in serious pandemic was when cats were destroyed because they were deemed Evil. The rat population expanded spreading fleas carrying bubonic plague.
-1 glugglug 2015-12-11
Recent research has shown that the plague was spread not by rats but rather by hamsters. Yes, seriously.
4 911bodysnatchers322 2015-12-11
Any time you negate something with anti- you phrase the issue in negative terms of the other thing. Anti-abortion, anti-war. Notice they don't use anti-abortion any more, they use pro-life. Why? Rove. Because they are trying to get away from the negativation of the issue, because they know people will always react negatively to negativized labels. This is why the media always refers to the peace movement as 'anti-war' movement. It's inherently framing war as good and anti-war as bad, instead of being honest. Advertisers have known about this one neat trick for many decades, and legitimate anti-war people will refer to themselves as pro-peace or doves if they know what they are doing.
So if you want to reframe this politically, then find the one core value of vaccines and then reframe it. I'll take a stab at it (pun intended):
Truth injection movementmost of those are dumb, sorry. you can surely do better.
1 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Thank you, I thought I was alone here. You are very eloquent
0 lucycohen 2015-12-11
sanistrofus,
Yet this isn't in line with any of your previous posts in the thread, you've now switched sides, or you were being disingenuous all along
2 nonorat 2015-12-11
You mean like the time liverpoolwins pretended to be pro-vaxx in another subreddit, which lasted all of ten seconds until they looked at her history and tore her to shreds?
That was really funny.
1 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Not really, my initial comment was exactly about what "anti" means... It's kind of impossible to reason with you
2 lucycohen 2015-12-11
I wasn't born yesterday sanistrofus
1 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Well, the comment is there if you want to read it again! I can paste it here too if you want...
Edit: here it is:
-1 lucycohen 2015-12-11
Yes, and your reply was completely out of context, as I stated in reply to that, stop being disingenuous. The point of this thread is to show that the term 'anti-vaccine' is not being used in it's literal sense. Of course, you already know that, no doubt you appeared from when 'Top Minds' started brigading the thread.
"The point of the thread is that the label 'anti-vaccine' is placed by pro-vaccine people onto anyone believes any of the list above. This has nothing to do with how the terms anti-tobacco and anti-war are used. Anti-vaccine is being used as a term of propaganda, it's intended to close down debate."
0 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Here we go again... Let me ask you directly: are you against vaccines?
1 lucycohen 2015-12-11
I'll refer you back to the answer I gave you 50 minutes ago, stop playing games, nobody is falling the act, you'll only end up banned from the sub
https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/3wea2q/the_term_antivaccine_explained/cxvltue?context=3
"I wouldn't be against good vaccines if they had solid science behind them, if the science really was there (which would take decades), I'm talking long-term science, every base covered, I wouldn't be against them. I'm against the current vaccines which are tested less well than Thalidomide"
-6 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
So you're anti-vaccine... Screw what the media says, I paint you in a bad light too...
Effort without knowledge, that's you!
I'm not "american", my govt is waaaaay too preoccupied with stealing money to mess with anything else. Your govt has a more hands on approach in manipulating minds and opinions in a macro way. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if your govt were trying to dumb down people with an assortment of methods (by talking to you, it works!) including the medical field. The problem is you go beyond reason. You believe " vaccines" (theory) don't exist! That's impossible to argue with. It's denying reality.
Just because they piss in your water doesn't mean water is bad for you...
To recap: yep, my initial post was about your use of "anti". I still stand by it. You pushed it to the vaccine side... And in that side, yep, I think you're nuts!
You can think of me as a troll if you want. Doesn't bother me. Honestly, I think the same of you.
3 lucycohen 2015-12-11
sanistrofus "You can think of me as a troll if you want. Doesn't bother me. Honestly, I think the same of you."
I post here to get important information out for the greater good of humanity, whereas you go around posting disingenuous comments, deliberately taking an OP out of intended context
1 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
You said I was trolling... So, you see me as a troll, cool, no problem. That's how I feel too about you.
You can think whatever you want, including that you're doing some kind of service to humanity. You can think the sky is green too if you want. I see what you do as a disservice. And it's a shame too, cause it's not at all a crazy thought that "vaccines are being manipulated for nefarious reasons".
1 Qushi 2015-12-11
shhh now
2 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Exactly
(I guess you get it why both answers are the same, right? wink wink)
1 badfonts 2015-12-11
Know when you've lost
1 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Exactly
1 heuheu 2015-12-11
I've gotten in 20 arguments with this person and destroyed her every, single, time.
She does not have the ability to understand anything, you're wasting your time.
She's probably one of the few anti-vaxxers I won't take time out of my day to trash on here anymore, just low hanging fruit.
One time she linked me a video called "CDC HEAD CONFIRMS VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM" and it was a poorly edited video of the CDC head in no way saying that, just absolutely taken out of context.
When confronted with this she just stopped replying, and I saw her link the same exact video a day later.
1 lucycohen 2015-12-11
If you believe that then it shows you weren't paying proper attention, I've been down that road with many pro-vaxxers, the 'poorly edited' argument is a cheap shot, as when you watch the full video it demonstrates that it's not poorly edited. However, I'm sure you just want to create the perception the random passers-by here that you've some successful history of debating me, yet you've already shot yourself in the foot with your first example, by showing that you didn't watch and listen to the video properly.
Thanks for reminding me to once again post such an important piece of evidence.
CDC Chief Admits that Vaccines Trigger Autism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh-nkD5LSIg
The reality is that the pro-vaxx people don't win debates on Reddit, instead they try to censor people, get their posts removed or even get them banned, and if they can't they resort to name-calling. The pro-vaxx side use dirty tactics, they are not interested in debate, as they know they lose on that side, instead they just want their opposition silenced.
4 heuheu 2015-12-11
First of all, the video is her saying "vaccines could possibly trigger autism symptoms in people with a very rare disorder possibly doesn't = does, my friend.
The truth is you've never won a single debate on this subject, and this comment proves it.
There's no scientific evidence behind this, it was her saying there might be a small possibility that some vaccines might trigger autism symptoms in people with a VERY RARE disorder already, but they don't know for sure.
And this everyone, is exactly what I was talking about.
Words have meanings, you can't just apply your own meanings to words to fit your narrative that's ridiculous.
"pos·si·bly ˈpäsəblē/Submit adverb 1. perhaps (used to indicate doubt or hesitancy)."
"does dəz/Submit third person singular present of do1."
Notice the difference here?
Now this is what she actually said, can you point out to me where she says vaccines trigger autism?
She's saying kids with a rare mitochondrial disorder can maybe get symptoms of autism from a fever they might get from a vaccine, the same is true for the common cold or anything else that stresses them.
So by your logic, the common cold triggers autism?
This is a great example of someone being taken out of context, and then having people apply their own meaning to it to fit a narrative.
You tried to tell me vaccines contain mercury once dude, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
You just embarrass yourself every single time, and what's crazy is this is the EXACT SAME THING I TOLD YOU LAST TIME and you're still linking the video, why? any rational person can see why it's bullshit.
Here's, even more reading, as a final nail in the coffins, if after this point you still link this video you're doing it because you want it to be true, no matter what. Because I've educated you here.
http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/mitochondrial-faq.html
Q: Do vaccines cause or worsen mitochondrial diseases?
A: As of now, there are no scientific studies that say vaccines cause or worsen mitochondrial diseases. We do know that certain illnesses that can be prevented by vaccines, such as the flu, can trigger the regression that is related to a mitochondrial disease. More research is needed to determine if there are rare cases where underlying mitochondrial disorders are triggered by anything related to vaccines. However, we know that for most children, vaccines are a safe and important way to prevent them from getting life-threatening diseases.
1 lucycohen 2015-12-11
The Top Minds sub is brigading this to keep the votes down, keeping it away from the top of the front page, why is this still allowed? Post was obviously a good one which they don't want the masses to see.
https://np.reddit.com/r/TopMindsOfReddit/comments/3wd7g1/antivaccine_top_mind_explains_what_it_means_to_be/
0 AutoModerator 2015-12-11
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.
1 glugglug 2015-12-11
+1 for vax veritas
0 lucycohen 2015-12-11
Good solid post 911bodysnatchers322!
2 migrod1 2015-12-11
great post
2 [deleted] 2015-12-11
[removed]
5 lucycohen 2015-12-11
A term of propaganda being used to close down vital debate
-6 H1N11 2015-12-11
All i saw was "if you agree with this reasonable standpoint, you are anti-vac." I mean sure, the sentiment is nice, and being anti-vac is definitely being painted in an overly negative light, but this post proves absolutely NOTHING. Its an opinion post. Fuck opinions. Opinions arent worth dick. This is the cold truth. The only thing worth anything is fact. It seems this godawful subreddit has come to value opinion more than fact.
8 wearealllittlealbert 2015-12-11
I didn't realize a post was supposed to "prove" something. Is that the standard for a post on this sub? A post must prove something?
-3 H1N11 2015-12-11
There doesnt seem to be much standards anymore imo but a post should at least offer some factual evidence of the OP's point in one way or another. But hey, maybe its just me. Shitposting has been encouraged in this sun for months. I really dont even feel like arguing this bullshit anymore. See you on the frontpage, this shit is sure to be upvoted. Have a good one OP
7 lucycohen 2015-12-11
It's all gone completely over your head, you're obviously new to this topic, it's going to be too hard to explain it all to you today, perhaps keep coming back from time to time to learn more
-3 H1N11 2015-12-11
Are you patting yourself on the back? "You're obviously new to this topic" lol you sound like you are trying lecture me from atop your high horse! If you took your head out of your ass you would have realized i agree with your sentiment, but not with the way you have chosen to convey it. And here we are at the grand conclusion, where you boil it down to insulting my fucking comment history and talking down to me. Once again, fuck you dude, and keep up the shitposting because you are truly very good at it
4 lucycohen 2015-12-11
If ever you do want to learn more on the topic here's an award-winning documentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_nWp6ZHA2Q
7 lucycohen 2015-12-11
The context of the post has flown completely over your head
-4 H1N11 2015-12-11
What context did i miss? You call for people to do something in a post where you do nothing? What a helpful contribution
4 lucycohen 2015-12-11
This thread is not for you I'm afraid...you might enjoy yourself more back in your gaming subs
-4 H1N11 2015-12-11
Hahahahhaa fuck you dude
7 lucycohen 2015-12-11
If you ever want to learn more on the topic, start off by watching a documentary such as The Greater Good
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_nWp6ZHA2Q
3 Nandinia_binotata 2015-12-11
You're correct. This sub is like 99% bullshit and occasionally you find a gem here or there.
1 H1N11 2015-12-11
Thank you! It makes me feel better that at least 1 other person sees this crap for what it is. But if you bring up such a valid point, you're a shill/troll/whatever other creative name the drones in this sub can come up with. This kind of crap is why i try to browse only voat's conspiracy sub, but even that one has its problems
1 SolanaceaeEnthusiast 2015-12-11
A gish gallop of self righteous points
0 drewshaver 2015-12-11
A bit long winded but a good read nonetheless.
-7 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
So if you're anti-tobacco it means you want safe tobacco? And if you are anti-war you want a war with independently tested wars?
It's just semantics... If you're "anti" you're "against". If you want to communicate thru language, you have to abide to the meanings and definitions.
I do understand your points lucycohen, but for as long as I've been seeing your posts all you do is hurt your own cause... Or so it seems. I wonder tho...
6 lucycohen 2015-12-11
The point of the thread is that the label 'anti-vaccine' is placed by pro-vaccine people onto anyone believes any of the list above. This has nothing to do with how the terms anti-tobacco and anti-war are used. Anti-vaccine is being used as a term of propaganda, it's intended to close down debate.
-6 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Well, agreed it's being used as propaganda. You're doing it, imo.
Pro-vaccine = in favor of vaccines. Anti-vaccine = against-vaccines. Don't embrace a label you disagree with... That fact that you do is just weird when looking at you as an honest concerned human.
Edit: forget tobacco and war. It's the "anti" we're talking about...
4 lucycohen 2015-12-11
I don't like that term that's why I'm pointing out how it's being abused, I'm highlighting the problem with the term which is being used all over the mainstream media in the sense described in this post.
-2 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Again: anti = against... If you don't want vaccines, you're anti-vaccines. Honesty, you are against vaccines, I read your posts. That makes you anti-vaccine. I've argued time and time again with you using my previous account (sbrahbows - don't know why I can't access it anymore. Oh well) and you always jump the boat when your arguments are contested. Remember? I'm the one who used to ask you if you were talking about vaccine (product) or vaccine (theory). You failed to answer it every time and just dropped out of the discussion. You never answered but your position is very clear. You're against vaccine (theory) and vaccine (product). You are the definition of "anti-vaccine" that is propagandized. So, what's your point?
5 lucycohen 2015-12-11
I wouldn't be against good vaccines if they had solid science behind them, if the science really was there (which would take decades), I'm talking long-term science, every base covered, I wouldn't be against them. I'm against the current vaccines which are tested less well than Thalidomide
-2 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Sure Lucy...
3 lucycohen 2015-12-11
It's the same with all of the so-called 'anti-vaxxers'
-1 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Yep... Pretty sad
4 lucycohen 2015-12-11
Now you're just being silly, you were being disingenuous all along, just because we don't always point it out doesn't mean we don't realize it
-2 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Oh Lucy, yes, you are always right about everything!!!!!!!
6 lucycohen 2015-12-11
You just here to troll today?
-2 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Not really. But it's kind of futile right? You just said on the other thread that I changed sides... I mean... Who's trolling?
1 Tunderbar1 2015-12-11
What you wrote is semantics and really bad and unrelated analogies. Read the OP. It isn't semantics.
0 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Sure
-9 cawclot 2015-12-11
You posted this a few hours ago.
7 wearealllittlealbert 2015-12-11
Glad she reposted. Would have missed it otherwise. Great post!
3 lucycohen 2015-12-11
This was my concern, I'm glad you found it and liked it
1 sanistrofus 2015-12-11
Thank you, I thought I was alone here. You are very eloquent
0 lucycohen 2015-12-11
Good solid post 911bodysnatchers322!
1 lucycohen 2015-12-11
The Top Minds sub is brigading this to keep the votes down, keeping it away from the top of the front page, why is this still allowed? Post was obviously a good one which they don't want the masses to see.
https://np.reddit.com/r/TopMindsOfReddit/comments/3wd7g1/antivaccine_top_mind_explains_what_it_means_to_be/
-3 H1N11 2015-12-11
Are you patting yourself on the back? "You're obviously new to this topic" lol you sound like you are trying lecture me from atop your high horse! If you took your head out of your ass you would have realized i agree with your sentiment, but not with the way you have chosen to convey it. And here we are at the grand conclusion, where you boil it down to insulting my fucking comment history and talking down to me. Once again, fuck you dude, and keep up the shitposting because you are truly very good at it
1 glugglug 2015-12-11
+1 for vax veritas