Next person to post something against vaccines while I'm at my computer and not my phone is going to get a wall of piss ed off text. You have been warned
If I were faced with a life threatening virus, and I knew for sure I needed a vaccine or I was going to die, then sure I would take one!
What I am arguing against is the whole "call the ambulance before I hurt my self mentality", and I guess also, quoting web sites as if that is any different than quoting a scripture that was being misused by a dishonest high priest.
Anyhow, if you can't keep up, I guess I'll admit "defeat" according to your terms and definition.
Citation extremely fucking needed.
So uh... You planning on getting vaccinated against the Bubonic Plague?If I were faced with a life threatening virus, and I knew for sure I needed a vaccine or I was going to die, then sure I would take one!
Sorry to be pedantic, but bubonic plague is neither viral nor life-threatening (in developed countries).So uh... You planning on getting vaccinated against the Bubonic Plague?
Yeah, it's a bacteria (and if we're being honest do you really think he was differentiating between the two), but there are eight cases per year reported in the US, most recently in Oregon and (I believe?) Illinois, which classifies it as a potential threat, right? :^)Sorry to be pedantic, but bubonic plague is neither viral nor life-threatening (in developed countries).
The bIg phARmA is silencing those mothersHmm. Seems that unwatching a thread does not disable like notifications.
I simply do not have the energy for one of my comprehensive rants at the moment, but I will say this: No matter all of the technical details, no matter who said what, no matter what the evidence is; if vaccines caused autism, wouldn't we be hearing from the mothers?
Vaccines are very, very prevalent. Nearly 100% vaccination rates in some countries. If it caused autism, then nearly all children should be autistic. I have never heard of a single case of a mother coming out as declaring the vaccinations she gave her child has made him or her autistic, yet nearly every mother should be talking about this if it were true. No global censorship can fully block these mothers talking about this on social media. Hell, they can barely block Isis recruiters. We should be hearing stories every day about someone's child who has gotten autism, and we should be hearing about close friends and relatives whose children have become autistic due to vaccines.
But we haven't. Not a single fucking one of us. We don't need statistics, science, belief, or even the voucher of Jenny McCarthy trying to stay relevant after her tits started to sag in order to come to the truth. Vaccines do not cause autism. Case closed. Now stop being an idiot and join the real world.
"The big pharma" cannot silence mothers across the nation. How do you propose they silence mothers, anyway? All you need to do is sign into, say, Facebook, and type "my son got autism because of a vaccine", then click post. "Big pharma" can't do shit to stop millions of mothers from spreading their message across social media.The bIg phARmA is silencing those mothers
When I was a child I used to really like riding my bike. One day my bike was stolen and thrown into a tree. When I tracked the thieves down, it turned out to be worse than I thought."The big pharma" cannot silence mothers across the nation. How do you propose they silence mothers, anyway? All you need to do is sign into, say, Facebook, and type "my son got autism because of a vaccine", then click post. "Big pharma" can't do shit to stop millions of mothers from spreading their message across social media.
I can't exactly tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me.When I was a child I used to really like riding my bike. One day my bike was stolen and thrown into a tree. When I tracked the thieves down, it turned out to be worse than I thought.
They were Big Pharma and Vaccines! They stole my bike because the act of of riding it was making me healthy without them! Now I have nerve damage!
I thought the random capitalization would show the sarcasm, guess not"The big pharma" cannot silence mothers across the nation. How do you propose they silence mothers, anyway? All you need to do is sign into, say, Facebook, and type "my son got autism because of a vaccine", then click post. "Big pharma" can't do shit to stop millions of mothers from spreading their message across social media.
I noticed the random capitalization, but I guess I thought you were having difficulties typing or something. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯I thought the random capitalization would show the sarcasm, guess not
Well it was very hard for me to force myself to type out "big pharma" so you aren't far offI noticed the random capitalization, but I guess I thought you were having difficulties typing or something. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Having fun I got bored.I can't exactly tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me.
He isn't ready to listen. We're going in a circle here. Our arguments have been laid out, and have been returned with what is essentially "Nuh uh!"I totally see your point of view here. However, I don't think that ignoring these arguments is the way forward. Knowledge is developed through intelligent debate. While I agree that some people responding here are repeating subjective opinions or anecdotal experiences, it is their choice to bring this information to the discussion. Failure to respond to it risks being seen as 'backing down' or accepting their position.
My view is that illogical or unsubstantiated arguments should always be challenged. We progress as a society by questioning each other. That is exactly what peer review is for - coming at all findings with a sceptical mindset and attempting to fault others' reasoning. It's only by doing so that we make discoveries, refute out of date information, and posit new theories which drive research. As long as these arguments are somewhat civil and rational I don't see any need to ignore one side or another.
The problem comes where only one side is listening to reason, and the other(s) are simple repeating dogma. That's what we're seeing here. But even if you don't get through to that individual, others will see the reason in what you are saying and the majority will benefit from the reasoned arguments.
Sometimes though you just can't get through, especially to those who were raised by terrible parents who told them that they were always right so shut up. And then those people grow up and raise kids the same way. The only way to break the cycle is to take a page out of Hitler's book.We can lay out the same arguments and counterarguments ad nauseum and people who don't want to listen or refuse to listen will still do just that; this is very akin to animal activists who go after videos of foxes and other exotic animals. The same mentality really, and frankly, we can only do our part and hope someday they can listen.
I don't think you would need to go that far. You would just need to separate all of the anti-vaxxers and move them to their own population with 0% herd immunity. Nature would would do the rest for you.Sometimes though you just can't get through, especially to those who were raised by terrible parents who told them that they were always right so shut up. And then those people grow up and raise kids the same way. The only way to break the cycle is to take a page out of Hitler's book.
Yes, but then you would need to keep them contained. And there will be some that hide among the pro-vaxxers, so you would need to recruit the youth into an organization responsible for ratting out those that do not comply.I don't think you would need to go that far. You would just need to separate all of the anti-vaxxers and move them to their own population with 0% herd immunity. Nature would would do the rest for you.