Why Don't People Vaccinate?
- Thread starter gudenau
- Start date
- Views 35,338
- Replies 525
Credibility? Like from a random guy on the internet, from a hacking site no less? Gimme a break.
Link to any site that proves vaccines do anything beneficial. I want to see what sources you deem credible.
Last edited by exdeath255,
No, but when there's actual studies, peer reviewed research, and decades of evidence, that makes it true. There's far more evidence pointing to the greater benefits of vaccines compared to the few bad cases.
When it comes down to vaccines, they aren't a matter of belief that people just "agree" work. They are proven to work and to have benefited human society.
Last edited by The Catboy,
Here, have an entire flipping list of peer reviewed resources
http://vaccinateyourbaby.org/safe/research.cfm
ohhh he did it now, are you going to respond with your own list of peer reviewed resources?
Then surely you have a list that wasn't paid for?
Honestly I think you need to take a good look at yourself. How's your family? What are your friends like? Do you have any girlfriend or job prospects? Do you have a career plan? Are you prepared to move forward in your life? Or do you intend to keep taking in cheap thrills like basking in the attention caused by annoying others, all the while ignoring your deteriorating reality?
We are compelled to help you accept facts and reality, but what is motivating you? I really doubt you truly believe what you are saying, or maybe you are simply incapable of considering ideas that conflict with you're own. If it's the latter then you really need help, but if it's the former then you need to grow up. This is not some meaningless discussion such as if team Mystic or team Valor is better, but something that has real world implications. People are actually getting sick from diseases that were eradicated from North America decades ago, and some people are dying. You don't need to blast stupidity over the internet to gain acknowledgment, you can get it from talking to friends and learning to be civil to others. Step away from the computer. Put down the tenders. Hit the gym. Get a girlfriend. Find your sense of accomplishment somewhere else.
Assuming you are not just trying to promote better debate technique then what sort of things are we looking for here?
http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccinations/pages/the-history-of-vaccination.aspx
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/cphorsphc-respcacsp/2008/fr-rc/cphorsphc-respcacsp05b-eng.php
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/p...da-cdi34suppl.htm~cda-cdi34suppl-ExecSumm.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2013/p0619-hpv-vaccinations.html
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/2/07-040089/en/
http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications/Publications/lets-talk-about-protection-vaccination-guide.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4078488/ Covers the history in India. http://www.indianpediatrics.net/jan2013/jan-111-118.htm
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4317636/ Covers some of the stuff in Russia.
http://japanhealthinfo.com/child-health-and-childcare/vaccination/
http://www.economist.com/news/china...ses-reveals-widespread-corruption-dismal-lack , mainly as it covers some of the things that are considered mandatory in China.
http://www.mrc.gm/our-research/themes/disease-control-elimination/ That would be Gambia's research group that covers west Africa, apparently funded privately and by the UK. http://www.mrc.gm/about-us/
http://www.health.gov.za/index.php/...uman-papilloma-virus-hpv-vaccination-campaign South Africa's health department advocating for it.
http://www.nbn.org.il/aliyahpedia/g...ildhood-vaccinations-flu-shots-immunizations/
So that is the UK, Canada, Australia, India, Russia, the US, Japan, China, parts of west Africa, South Africa, Israel and Europe all agreeing on the concept. Several of those would also have a financial incentive not to do things on the scales seen which do not work (several of those are publicly funded after all, and other research groups are also publicly funded and thus at least somewhat immune to the machinations of big pill pushers), and in the case of the US insurance companies fight tooth and nail at times to restrict things which do demonstrably work if they are too expensive, and insurance companies are made to provide such things without so much as a copay http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/adults/find-pay-vaccines.html .
To that end that would be a serious mass delusion for it to be not worth it, and a seriously impressive one too as I doubt you would be able to get all those places around the table, let alone agreeing on things.
So maybe there is that big a world conspiracy. We will do the maths
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/births.htm
About 4 million births a year. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/child-adolescent.html reckons everybody should get some less than 20 but I will round up.
Cost for vaccines in the US
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/vfc/awardees/vaccine-management/price-list/ and the US is notably awful at getting drug prices down, don't know if it applies to vaccinations which are more popular (and thus possibly getting those sweet bulk deals, the whole system gets complex there http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2888017/ ) so I will leave that one for now.
Nothing goes over $200 USD and modal is between 10 and 30. $200 it is then. Call it pure profit as well.
200*20 *4000000=16000000000
16 billion a year then. https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/
That is a chunk of change, I am not too proud to walk on by if I saw it sitting on the floor or turn it down should I have it offered. Go down to the $20 range as per most on that list and that is 1.6 billion. So a worldwide conspiracy doing near impossible feats in science, politics and economics to all gain nothing. Speaking of doing nothing then http://www.healthline.com/health-ne...s-on-vitamins-and-herbs-that-dont-work-031915 reckons 21 billion by Americans on herbal supplements per year.
That is just the US though so http://www.ecology.com/birth-death-rates/ reckons 131.4 million born per year. Assuming all got them at US rates we multiply that by 33 to get slightly less than the military budget of the US at the $200 per shot range.
Depending upon the logic twisting if I was to assume it is was all unnecessary and the disease went away because of magic/evolution/better cleaning then OK there is not much more to be said. Assuming they are financially motivated and utterly without morals then they fail at economics because ER visits are expensive http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/02/how-much-does-it-cost-to-go-to-the-er/273599/ is up in the thousands. Complication rates likely to result in a visit http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html reckon 1 in 20, and that was pneumonia was is not an in and out job either.
http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S1.full.pdf reckons 90% infection rate for Americans around 1950 prior to 18, and they definitely knew about isolation and bleach then. Not sure how to slice that one up, how to account for a larger population (this was the baby boom in full swing by the way) in the years since and other stuff like that, none of it is likely to make numbers go down.
That is just one disease as well, not all on that list are truly unpleasant but we get to do get to multiply. I can't be bothered to look it up for all of them though as it is pretty pointless from where I sit.
Oh and that is just using ER visits and assuming they are pure profit for the same company that would have otherwise not pushed a vaccine, we still have ongoing care to consider, let alone something they might ultimately be admitted for.
Maybe they are just doing it for the giggles.
Back on topic, so to speak,
Are population studies a viable thing for you? Not all diseases suddenly had vaccines made and deployed at once. You can then find nice timelines for in the introduction of specific vaccines and their subsequent reduction or elimination from a region. http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S1.long
http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/timelines/polio , perhaps not a suitable source but the CDC does link it http://www.cdc.gov/features/poliofacts/
Meanwhile other things ticked along nicely until something was made for them, or not as the case may be. Isolation and infection control/sanitation has been known for many years and certainly during living memory, said living memory also containing memories of times prior. Seen as much of this happened over 2 generations at most in wildly differing and, for two generations at least, largely genetically isolated populations it is unlikely to be evolution.
Deliberate infections and controls are somewhat unethical, however there seem to be nice groups providing an non vaccinated control for us now, of large enough genetic diversity and often of otherwise sufficiently good health that it would be hard to argue that it is not some poor bastard in Africa that can barely get enough calories to survive working full time, or people that were somehow otherwise susceptible to it. http://www.cdc.gov/measles/cases-outbreaks.html
Are immunological studies more your thing? Vaccinations then consistently resulting in specific antibodies for specific strains of diseases. http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/200/9/1390.full
----
Anyway going back onto something else I have not seen any discussion of what I consider possibly the most loathsome reason I ever saw floated for avoiding them. When the vaccinations for HPV (cervical cancer, and not after a long and productive life, being a common result) were being discussed one of the reasons given against it was "it might encourage people to have sex". Granted that was mainly the US where abstinence only is apparently not something to be ridiculed at every chance.
Wow this is still going? The sad part is that the naysayers provide no evidence that vaccines are bad. Instead they say scream "conspiracy!!!" and leave it at that. We have given you more then enough evidence to prove our points.
There is no 'we'. Fat is the only one who has spent time actually giving links to anything. I personally just dont like depending on the government for things. It gives them all the power if you give in to taking vaccines, and subconsciously you will agree with everything they throw at you once you start doing their programs. All i am doing is being skeptical. If you want to blindly take an injection by the government then so be it. If the vaccine is so good then people shouldnt be worried if some people dont take it. It should only be the non vaccers that die. If not then the vac isnt as good as people think.
the only thing people have to say is that if you dont take it YOU are being selfish. its really the other way around. What if i was forced to take it because you guys couldnt handle me not taking it and i died on the spot right after taking it.
exactly you guys are also being selfish. You are not doing it to help people you are doing it to help yourself just like us skeptics.
Didnt want to have to pull this card but since you all agree with scientists so much, you must all agree that no one has free will as well. So you can blame nature for people like me resisting the vac.
[ i dont agree with the no free will but i bet you guys are the type to ]
Last edited by exdeath255,
While I agree you should be a skeptical of everything this is not one of those times. All FACTS prove beyond a shadow of a dought that vaccines do a lot more good then harm. As for your second part here is a cartoon that explains why people not taking vaccines are a bad thing -
https://medium.com/the-nib/vaccines-work-here-are-the-facts-5de3d0f9ffd0#.tsy263w09 (thanks TotalInsanity4)
But hey keep attacking my character and don't read the links Fat gave you because who needs to read anymore..."feels before reals" that is the world we seem to live in now.
Excuse you I've been providing links too
I feel like you're the person who would rather starve than go on welfare to get back on your feet
I have no problems with being skeptical, in fact I'm glad there ARE people who are skeptical, otherwise, as you said, anyone could really get away with anything. However, I do ask that you provide evidence and reasoning for your skepticality.
If that's how you think vaccines are supposed to work, it's understandable that you take the stance you do. However, it's unfortunately not. It's more of a protective barrier between you and an illness that can be broken if the affliction is powerful enough.
Think of it with this analogy: Assume you own a motorcycle. Every time you ride it, you accept the risk that if you get into a crash, you're probably fucked. You can be as careful as you want, but all the careful driving in the world won't prevent someone else from being dumb on the road and colliding with you.
However, there is stuff that you can do to lessen the damage of an accident; you can wear a helmet to prevent brain damage, leather to prevent cuts, scrapes and burns, and pads to prevent broken joints. In spite of the fact that an accident may be more serious than what protective gear may help with, it still lessens the impact and may help you survive the accident. Should an accident occur, would you rather be geared up, or in a tshirt and shorts?
I can assure you that won't happen
No, we are NOT. Herd immunity has been discussed at length in this thread. However, in case you missed it, this explains the concept very well
That is both hypocritical and a strawman argument, and I don't see how that relates to the topic at hand at all
The world health organisation is not a government group, several others in that were general researchers with no particular incentive to fake data to that extent
Not all related to what you posted but covering some things seen recently in this thread. I highly encourage questioning governments, and even in specific vaccinations (various people keep returning to the corrupt CDC and FDA teaming up with NASA and FEMA to take their apples from the tree, recently it seems the flibanserin (Addyi/female viagra) stuff was a bit of a failure of the system/result of pressure groups which was hardly ideal but that is a far cry from systemic corruption on the levels necessary for vaccination to be a non thing but paid for anyway). The notion that big pharma "keeps them silenced" though is ridiculous from where I sit. If nothing else if the security services in the US can't keep their own house in order despite specifically compartmentalising things and scanning for ability to keep secrets to so much as be let in the door then what chance does anybody have to do it across multinational lines, fake the science (one with hundreds of years of historical precedent), fake the economics, fake the statistics well enough (again diseases reducing significantly in scope in accordance to the introductions of the relevant vaccines) that and all for 16 billion a year for the US or a bit north of 300 billion a year for the world in the very best case scenario) for decades when the entry requirements to be a scientist, medical doctor, economist... are in many ways substantially easier than security clearance.
"If the vaccine is so good then people shouldnt be worried if some people dont take it. It should only be the non vaccers that die. If not then the vac isnt as good as people think."
Anybody that says a simple vaccination confers 100% immunity in the taker does not know the science of immunisation or epidemiology -- things are very very very effective but you need viable hosts to spread things, if there are statistically low chances of transmission because most people are immune then a nasty disease does not become an epidemic or an outbreak. Equally among those not having vaccinations are those which would really like the effects of it but can not have it for whatever reason (people with immune deficiencies for one, people not yet able to take it thanks to age for another), also those which might consent to it if they knew what goes (I can't fault a 14 year old which has to live with the choices its parents make, and 14 is about the time many places would hold you criminally responsible for things http://www.unicef.org/pon97/p56a.htm ) and there are other variations on such things.
From where I sit it is no less wrong than arguing "everybody else has car insurance so why do I need it?".
"What if i was forced to take it because you guys couldnt handle me not taking it and i died on the spot right after taking it."
Assuming it was a direct cause and you had no other indicators worth testing for that would show you could not take it then that would be an unfortunate event. Fortunately there are a whole host of very acceptable things which have a far higher casualty rate both in numbers and in percentages of people which engage in them than the combined total of every case of unknown contraindication, malpractice, unknown fault and probably non things like increased cases of autism even if we assume older periods when diagnosis was less common were actually the baseline. As already covered the alternatives are 90% infection rates (maybe less if we want to isolate people from work/school for given periods and really go in for it) with 1 in 20 chances of serious complications. "for the greater good of society" is a notion which underpins most laws, philosophies, religions, evolution of biological groupings*. If absolute individualism is your chosen philosophy then so be it, it is however not a popular or well accepted one.
Spin it another way though. What if you became the demonstrable source for a pocket of disease in which several people were killed and/or seriously impaired, even if only losing a few months of work, for your wilful negligence. There is scope under the law for a charge there http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/policies/law/states/exposure.html
People are also increasingly mobile.
*even apex predators hang around in groups.
As for free will then though I would say humans have some pretty decent tells and traits (as iffy as a lot of psychology and the like are they do provide things which you can in turn exploit against most humans, regards of ethnicity, almost regardless of level of education, most types of training, most religions (apparently Buddhist monks do well against microexpressions https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17723885-100-the-word-liar/ ) but when all is said and done simple entropy and most of what is known about biology would argue for some measure of organism derived selection of actions. Similarly twin studies would seem to indicate environment has a factor in things. Could it be that the universe's cycle has led to this point and was predictable by some greater than universe style computer. Why not, there are more improbable things which are believed.
Such an introduction to the debate is better than "the conspiracy" but still probably falls under several fallacies, first of all probably some flavour of strawman. That said I am slightly curious as to the prevalence of free will or not among groupings now.
Not all related to what you posted but covering some things seen recently in this thread. I highly encourage questioning governments, and even in specific vaccinations (various people keep returning to the corrupt CDC and FDA teaming up with NASA and FEMA to take their apples from the tree, recently it seems the flibanserin (Addyi/female viagra) stuff was a bit of a failure of the system/result of pressure groups which was hardly ideal but that is a far cry from systemic corruption on the levels necessary for vaccination to be a non thing but paid for anyway). The notion that big pharma "keeps them silenced" though is ridiculous from where I sit. If nothing else if the security services in the US can't keep their own house in order despite specifically compartmentalising things and scanning for ability to keep secrets to so much as be let in the door then what chance does anybody have to do it across multinational lines, fake the science (one with hundreds of years of historical precedent), fake the economics, fake the statistics well enough (again diseases reducing significantly in scope in accordance to the introductions of the relevant vaccines) that and all for 16 billion a year for the US or a bit north of 300 billion a year for the world in the very best case scenario) for decades when the entry requirements to be a scientist, medical doctor, economist... are in many ways substantially easier than security clearance.
"If the vaccine is so good then people shouldnt be worried if some people dont take it. It should only be the non vaccers that die. If not then the vac isnt as good as people think."
Anybody that says a simple vaccination confers 100% immunity in the taker does not know the science of immunisation or epidemiology -- things are very very very effective but you need viable hosts to spread things, if there are statistically low chances of transmission because most people are immune then a nasty disease does not become an epidemic or an outbreak. Equally among those not having vaccinations are those which would really like the effects of it but can not have it for whatever reason (people with immune deficiencies for one, people not yet able to take it thanks to age for another), also those which might consent to it if they knew what goes (I can't fault a 14 year old which has to live with the choices its parents make, and 14 is about the time many places would hold you criminally responsible for things http://www.unicef.org/pon97/p56a.htm ) and there are other variations on such things.
From where I sit it is no less wrong than arguing "everybody else has car insurance so why do I need it?".
"What if i was forced to take it because you guys couldnt handle me not taking it and i died on the spot right after taking it."
Assuming it was a direct cause and you had no other indicators worth testing for that would show you could not take it then that would be an unfortunate event. Fortunately there are a whole host of very acceptable things which have a far higher casualty rate both in numbers and in percentages of people which engage in them than the combined total of every case of unknown contraindication, malpractice, unknown fault and probably non things like increased cases of autism even if we assume older periods when diagnosis was less common were actually the baseline. As already covered the alternatives are 90% infection rates (maybe less if we want to isolate people from work/school for given periods and really go in for it) with 1 in 20 chances of serious complications. "for the greater good of society" is a notion which underpins most laws, philosophies, religions, evolution of biological groupings*. If absolute individualism is your chosen philosophy then so be it, it is however not a popular or well accepted one.
Spin it another way though. What if you became the demonstrable source for a pocket of disease in which several people were killed and/or seriously impaired, even if only losing a few months of work, for your wilful negligence. There is scope under the law for a charge there http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/policies/law/states/exposure.html
People are also increasingly mobile.
*even apex predators hang around in groups.
As for free will then though I would say humans have some pretty decent tells and traits (as iffy as a lot of psychology and the like are they do provide things which you can in turn exploit against most humans, regards of ethnicity, almost regardless of level of education, most types of training, most religions (apparently Buddhist monks do well against microexpressions https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17723885-100-the-word-liar/ ) but when all is said and done simple entropy and most of what is known about biology would argue for some measure of organism derived selection of actions. Similarly twin studies would seem to indicate environment has a factor in things. Could it be that the universe's cycle has led to this point and was predictable by some greater than universe style computer. Why not, there are more improbable things which are believed.
Such an introduction to the debate is better than "the conspiracy" but still probably falls under several fallacies, first of all probably some flavour of strawman. That said I am slightly curious as to the prevalence of free will or not among groupings now.
There's a big difference between being skeptical and indiscriminately rejecting information. The issue of vaccines is not solely connected to the government, and there are a lot of independent researchers to back up the benefits of vaccines. And what does no free will have to do with anything? You think it's free will to be able to stab others with no repercussions? You think your free will is void in order to protect the community? Have you ever stopped to wonder why every single civilized country has a form of government? The answer is simple: Anarchy does NOT work on a large scale. The basic theory behind anarchy is that you are free to do whatever you want, and so are those around you - and that includes killing you in your sleep so they can take your food. You think you can simply "defend" yourself? Then they will try poison or something else you weren't expecting, like going after close friends and family members who are unable to defend each other. You can hire a guard, but how do you trust the guard? Even if you can establish a community where everyone has a gentleman's agreement to not hurt each other for food, a stranger from outside the community - or someone experiencing wilted crops - may disregard that agreement. And anarchy requires you to be fully self sufficient. Hard times? You're relying on the mercy of others to survive - and maybe the only ones who can help are someone like a loan shark who does not have your best interest at heart. The Quantum Vibe webcomic universe has in previous arcs studied the theory of anarchy, and even then they have every citizen employed by megacorporations that function quite similarly to a standard government. Governments exists to protect the people and represent their wills, and although some do not respect that focus that is still their purpose. If there's a government you don't like you can't just tear it all down and expect everything to work - that just creates a sudden vacuum that the most heavily armed members fill as a tyrant. You should focus more on identifying how the government can be improved to better serve the people - instead of being some random debatist that argues for tearing down what keeps them safe.
You're a Canadian citizen too. You really think our government is shit? Try taking a visit to Venezuela or North Korea - and see how well you actually have things. If there is something you currently disagree about on how the government works, maybe focus on that and how to change it - instead of blindly hating everything that's related to the government.
ignored
This thread really is a great resource for weeding out people not worth wasting your time communicating with.
