I love the big pharma argument. As if big pharma couldn't find another way to make a shitton of money off of treating diseases if people as a whole just stopped vaccinating. I mean, someone holds the patent on the iron lung.
Isn't is supposedly common knowledge that treatment is 1000% more lucrative than prevention?
I love the big pharma argument. As if big pharma couldn't find another way to make a shitton of money off of treating diseases if people as a whole just stopped vaccinating. I mean, someone holds the patent on the iron lung.
I don't know about you, but this looks like SUCH a fun time!!
I love the big pharma argument. As if big pharma couldn't find another way to make a shitton of money off of treating diseases if people as a whole just stopped vaccinating. I mean, someone holds the patent on the iron lung.
I don't know about you, but this looks like SUCH a fun time!!
I need to repeat I'm vaccinated (well for everything that was recommended for me) and I don't have any kids so I'm not putting anyone's kids at risk. I am not and have not promoted not vaccinating. So in a lot of ways I'm an outsider observing this debate.
Unfortunately there are a lot of idiots like you with the same idiotic "arguments" who DO have kids and who are not vaccinating them. And if they continue to propagate we'll be back at shit creek with an epidemic on our hands
Hey guys remember the days when childhood death wasn't unusual at all? In fact it was actually very common? Let's go back to that! Good times
Nurse Cramer had stopped speaking to Nurse Duckett, her best friend, because of her liaison with Yossarian, but still went everywhere with Nurse Duckett since Nurse Duckett was her best friend....Nurse Cramer was prepared to begin talking to Nurse Duckett again if she repented and apologized.
And because more information never hurt anyone, here's an article that talks about how the measles affected (sometimes severely and, yes, sometimes by death) American children prior to the vaccine being developed: jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S1.long
Does my child deserve to get sick, be hospitalized, get brain damage or die because he is allergic to a component of the MMR vaccine, laterbloomer? I'm forced to rely on the community at large and people like you to keep my son safe and well because a vaccine designed to help him could kill him. That's why herd immunity is necessary.
And I think the number of children that cannot get the vaccine is higher than you would think. Allergies are one reason. But also children with weaker immune systems (on chemo or after a transplant) may not mount a strong enough immune response or have a delayed schedule due to their illness. People on my Facebook Moms group page freaked their freak about parents that send their kid to school with a fever - I'm sure there were some within that group that don't vaccinate. So frustrating.
Also infants too young for MMR etc. It's terrifying to think of your newborn getting something they are too young to be vaccinated against because the very young are also such a high risk group when it comes to complications and possible fatalities.
junieolive , you are speculating about why it happens in countries with weak health infrastructure. It could be that people have overall weaker health and a lot of things that wouldn't kill us kill them. I have gone to the WHO site and while they recommend vaccinations the statistics for US deaths don't back up the hysteria being promoted.
I'm not promoting not getting vaccinated. But I am sceptical of they hysteria that has come up around this issue. Having a captive consumer base of over 300,000,000 for their vaccinations seems like a good incentive for pharmaceutical companies to strongly promote this.
You're forgetting the rubella portion of the MMR. I dated a guy whose mom had rubella during her pregnancy with his older brother. The brother had severe learning disabilities and had lost most of his sight and hearing.
My immune system is not so hot so I've had mumps twice and measles and tested negative for chickenpox after having it. I want others to be vaccinated to help protect me and others who have similarly shitty immune systems.
My mom lost a baby because of rubella. She carried to term
laterbloomer - Aside from the "big pharma" issue, do you have a concern about the impact of vaccines on children/adults who receive them? Do you question the safety or efficacy of a vaccine?
I'm honestly asking. I have a hard time wrapping my head around the big pharma issue, because, frankly, I think it's ridiculous. As others have stated, the cost to treat any of these diseases we vaccinate against is infinitely more lucrative than a one-time shot to prevent. But, that aside, it's well-proven that vaccines work and, when used by the masses, we can prevent epidemics of measles, chickenpox, rubella, hepatitis, and many other diseases. Why would I not want to do my part as a member of our society to help prevent myself, my child, and others from getting sick? My insurance covers preventative care in full, so I don't even pay for the vaccines that my child receives.
I think @hannymarren made a great point about people on her mom board being up in arms about kids with fevers coming to school. Chances are there are at least a few non-vaxxers in that group. How is this any different? We all make choices, but those choices don't only impact us. If I send my child to school with a fever and he infects someone else, that parent is going to be pissed, and rightfully so. Why is that any different than an un-vaxxed child contracting measles and passing that along to an immunocompromised child or one who is allergic to the vaccine. That parent is also going to be pissed, but anti-vaxxers would say it isn't their responsibility to keep other children safe. How are the situations different?
I just have a hard time wrapping my head around the questions you're posing because they're not grounded in any of the science or research that has been done on vaccines. I'm not saying that in a shitty way, honestly. I just think you are getting responses like this because it's pretty tough for the women in this community to understand where you're coming from.
Post by laterbloomer on Mar 27, 2016 23:08:12 GMT -5
isabel I'm coming from a place where there was never this terror of measles and mumps when I was growing up and if I remember correctly a separate vaccine for rubella alone. And polio. We all heard the stories of the polio kids. I have other things in my life to research that are immediately relevant to me and something I need to make a decision on. This is not one of those things. Since the topic came up on a message board I came to the bizarre conclusion that it was something that could be discussed here. I didn't realise folks on this board only want you to comment if you agree with them and are already an expert on the topic.
I'm not sure how people got so confused when I said I don't understand the fear of mumps and measles and it's different than what I grew up with. I even asked what changed which some people could take as a prompt for information. You can call it anecdotal if you want but I was born in 1965 and as someone that lived in the era of pretty near every kid getting measles, mumps and chicken pox, we didn't have children dying in the streets or some kind of 3rd world conditions. I don't recognise the scenarios some of those sites are describing of the pre vaccination wasteland. I think being confused by the fear of these childhood diseases now is extremely understandable in the circumstances.
My reference to big pharma stems from a general distrust of the industry. To make money off of iron lungs people need to actually get those ailments. If the ailments never happen they don't make money. To make money off of vaccinations they only need to convince people that they need the vaccinations whether it is true or not. That is a long way of saying that if all this info is from Big Pharma I don't trust it. Before you all go nuts, yes I've seen the links to WHO and the CDC. Again many of you can ridicule it all you want, but the distrust is very real and has it's basis in other situations where the scientific answer wasn't necessarily a long term solution. The first thing that comes to mind are the anti biotic resistant super bacteria. That is a result of the overuse of antibiotics for every little thing.
Anyway, since you asked, that is where I am coming from. I have all the vaccinations myself, except for the ailments I have a naturally acquired immunity to. BTW those sites all say that going through the disease gives better immunity than vaccinations. I can see where people that are anti vaxxers are not all idiots and have made different choices than people on this board.
isabel I'm coming from a place where there was never this terror of measles and mumps when I was growing up and if I remember correctly a separate vaccine for rubella alone. And polio. We all heard the stories of the polio kids. I have other things in my life to research that are immediately relevant to me and something I need to make a decision on. This is not one of those things. Since the topic came up on a message board I came to the bizarre conclusion that it was something that could be discussed here. I didn't realise folks on this board only want you to comment if you agree with them and are already an expert on the topic.
I'm not sure how people got so confused when I said I don't understand the fear of mumps and measles and it's different than what I grew up with. I even asked what changed which some people could take as a prompt for information. You can call it anecdotal if you want but I was born in 1965 and as someone that lived in the era of pretty near every kid getting measles, mumps and chicken pox, we didn't have children dying in the streets or some kind of 3rd world conditions. I don't recognise the scenarios some of those sites are describing of the pre vaccination wasteland. I think being confused by the fear of these childhood diseases now is extremely understandable in the circumstances.
My reference to big pharma stems from a general distrust of the industry. To make money off of iron lungs people need to actually get those ailments. If the ailments never happen they don't make money. To make money off of vaccinations they only need to convince people that they need the vaccinations whether it is true or not. That is a long way of saying that if all this info is from Big Pharma I don't trust it. Before you all go nuts, yes I've seen the links to WHO and the CDC. Again many of you can ridicule it all you want, but the distrust is very real and has it's basis in other situations where the scientific answer wasn't necessarily a long term solution. The first thing that comes to mind are the anti biotic resistant super viruses. That is a result of the overuse of antibiotics for every little thing.
Anyway, since you asked, that is where I am coming from. I have all the vaccinations myself, except for the ailments I have a naturally acquired immunity to. BTW those sites all say that going through the disease gives better immunity than vaccinations. I can see where people that are anti vaxxers are not all idiots and have made different choices than people on this board.
1) I don't think people are in "terror" of these diseases. There are ways to prevent them. It is stupid to actively rail against medication that can save lives and prevent illness in millions of people.
2) If this is how you view everything, that we can't trust "Big Pharma" and other agencies that promote preventative health measures, then you probably have a lot of mistrust in your life. I don't understand the "everyone is out to get me" mentality. Nor do I give a fuck whether or not a pharmaceutical company makes a couple bucks off of me keeping my child safe and promoting herd immunity.
3) Sure, I don't know that anyone would argue that fact. But at what expense? Getting measles may bring better immunity than a vaccine, but what if that person dies? So much for immunity. What if they don't die, but get some other serious complication? Again, so much for the fantastic immunity brought on by having the actual disease. The reward does not outweigh the risk when we have a perfectly acceptable alternative to actually contracting a severely contagious disease. Vaccines work remarkably well and have done a great job for decades at keeping these diseases at bay. The only reason we have seen an uptick in outbreaks in recent years is due to people deciding, for whatever inane reason, that vaccinations are unnecessary.
4) You are so wrong about this that I can't even make a legitimate argument. You, and others like you, perpetuate this myth that there is something inherently wrong with preventing disease via vaccines. Whether your argument is that Big Pharma is out to get you, that vaccines cause autism and other terrible things, or that there are ingredients in vaccines that you don't want entering your child's body, you perpetuate myths and deny factual evidence to the contrary.
There is literally nothing we can say to make someone like you understand the importance of vaccinations and why your "arguments" are so detrimental to the importance of herd immunity. You incite and inspire others to rail against the status quo with your questions and it is appalling to me that you will admit that you have done very little research and know little about the topic, but are willing to make such bold and argumentative statements that are grounded in nothing but your own distrust and lack of understanding.
laterbloomer You are the problem with society. Anti "Big" Pharma. Sure they want to make money... They don't really make money off vaccines, but big alterna makes millions off of misinformed people who are scared of actual scientifically proven vaccines. Then when children get sick they turn to hospitals to help their violently ill children thankfully, and berate modern medicine.
Also, don't people who mistrust "Big Pharma" typically believe that there's totes a cancer vaccine but the industry is suppressing it os they can make the $$$$ off treatment? How does that correlate with the industry pushing vaccines for common childhood illnesses when they could just pedal meds to treat them, thereby making $$$$?
Crazy conspiracy theories should at least be consistent.
You can take issue with the prices "big pharma" charges for certain things but Jesus don't complain about the actual work they do. You know save lives and shit. The medical advancements that have come about in our lifetimes are nothing short of amazing. Thinking of what is to come in pharmaceutical r&d fills me with hope. Maybe I don't have to worry so much about my H getting the Alzheimer's that all the men in his family seem to get. Maybe if and when one or more of my family gets cancer there is actually a decent chance of it not being terminal.
We have come so far in our ability to prolong lives, save children and reduce pain for so many people.
I don't disagree that the industry like all profit centered industries can at times be guilty of price gouging, I'm not sure anybody can disagree with that. So you can take issue with that part, But the actual work they do and what they give us is fantastic.
There wasn't terror in my neighborhood about measles either. Nor was there terror about kids dying in car accidents while they were rolling around in the "back back" of the station wagon or in the flat bed of the pickup. My parents smoked in the house or the car with me with the windows up every single time, too. No terror there either. I still vaccinate my kids and put them in carseats, because even a half a percent risk of something very easily and harmlessly preventable is a really easy decision. It's like this: we learned from mistakes of previous generations. The good ole days were not so good from many standpoints. Progress is good.
I love it when we get to the point that the World Health Organization, countries all over the world, and Big Pharma are all involved in a vast conspiracy that's been so well covered up that only the best Google researchers have been able to crack it, and even then it's so subversive that all the real evidence has been destroyed. That's when it really gets good.
And I don't fear M, M, and R to the point that I'm a shut in. But I do get rightfully angry about willful stupidity, especially when it sickens and kills children and people who have no say.
I love it when we get to the point that the World Health Organization, countries all over the world, and Big Pharma are all involved in a vast conspiracy that's been so well covered up that only the best Google researchers have been able to crack it, and even then it's so subversive that all the real evidence has been destroyed. That's when it really gets good.
And I don't fear M, M, and R to the point that I'm a shut in. But I do get rightfully angry about willful stupidity, especially when it sickens and kills children and people who have no say.
yes because if such a vast conspiracy existed, the real news folks wouldn't have gotten wind of it at all! No way! only a verrrrry small group of strange folks you've never heard of on the internet know about it. So odd ... how can it be! It's as if there is NOT a conspiracy or something! But that can't be it. There must be some other explanation ...
laterbloomer, people aren't terrified it's just that it is idiotic to risk your child getting a serious disease when there is a safe and effective vaccine to prevent it. It makes no sense to allow your kid to get sick and have to suffer and potentially have lasting consequences if you don't have to.
People weren't terrified before because there was no option you had to deal with it and hope for the best, many people did loose children to these diseases or had children injured by them you just had to pray it wasn't your child.
Now we have better options that can keep our children safe and healthy why wouldn't you protect your child? It's no different then RFing until 2, information has increased and we now know that RFing until 2 is significantly safer then forward facing. We have better options and better info so it makes sense to listen to that info.
My reference to big pharma stems from a general distrust of the industry. To make money off of iron lungs people need to actually get those ailments. If the ailments never happen they don't make money. To make money off of vaccinations they only need to convince people that they need the vaccinations whether it is true or not. That is a long way of saying that if all this info is from Big Pharma I don't trust it. Before you all go nuts, yes I've seen the links to WHO and the CDC. Again many of you can ridicule it all you want, but the distrust is very real and has it's basis in other situations where the scientific answer wasn't necessarily a long term solution. The first thing that comes to mind are the anti biotic resistant super viruses. That is a result of the overuse of antibiotics for every little thing.
I sincerely hope that was an accident and you're not actually that stupid.
ETA: Stupid feels kinda harsh, so let's go with "profoundly misguided" instead.
Post by sugarglider on Mar 28, 2016 10:16:14 GMT -5
I think this controversy brings to light an issue those of us who watch documentaries on need to remain cognizant of: just because the documentary is popular or screened at a major film festival does not make it accurate.
I'm all about animals rights and a vegetarian / vegan lifestyle. But Blackfish is a one-sided expose, and Forks Over Knives is completely silent on the criticisms of the China study and other data promoted in the film. I don't like watching a documentary, wanting to agree with the premise, and arguing "yes, but..." to the screen with the criticisms left unaddressed.
I'm glad but not surprised this one was caught, though still shockingly late in the game. This is not just a study with flaws but one that has been outright discredited and proven to be fraudulent. Films like this shouldn't be given any type of legitimacy. And film festivals must hold documentaries to higher standards of truthfulness.
You are the most defensive argumentative uninvested person ever.
I'm defensive about being called names. I'm the problem with society? Seriously?
I've been open and honest about my thoughts on the topic and given all of you a chance to address them in a sensible way. Some of you have and thank you. To the rest of you, your approach is only going to make people that see this differently than you dig in their heels. As I explained previously, this is not something I usually have any reason to discuss. Thanks for making one of the first so pleasant.
You are the most defensive argumentative uninvested person ever.
I'm defensive about being called names. I'm the problem with society? Seriously?
I've been open and honest about my thoughts on the topic and given all of you a chance to address them in a sensible way. Some of you have and thank you. To the rest of you, your approach is only going to make people that see this differently than you dig in their heels. As I explained previously, this is not something I usually have any reason to discuss. Thanks for making one of the first so pleasant.
I'm done with this thread.
As a supposed outsider, with no real skin in the game, why is the onus on all of us to prove ourselves right rather than poking holes in the weak arguments you've presented? You've continued to be argumentative and hostile toward the responses you're getting without acknowledging any of the facts we've given and while ignoring the fact that this is a serious and important issue for many of the women here.
You can come in here and espouse whatever theories you have, but please don't insult the intelligence of the women here by pretending that you couldn't care less about this topic or that it doesn't matter to you. You've formed your own opinions and theories with no research or science to back it up and have declined to consider the counterpoints being made to you. I too am done with this thread, but I sincerely hope that you'll take a minute to really think about what I and others have said here. The replies may not be light and airy, but people have given you concrete information that is worthy of your time. If you disagree with this information being worth your time, then don't come in here and throw around antagonistic comments and opinions.
Post by debatethis on Mar 28, 2016 10:48:53 GMT -5
laterbloomer at 51 years of age you absolutely should be concerned about vaccines for your own personal health as well as the health of aging relatives. You know, stuff like shingles? Pertussis? Pneumococcal disease? Influenza? All of those are things for which your vaccine immunity has probably waned (if you ever had it in the first place) that you could catch or spread to aging parents or even just coworkers.