Search forums

Forums

Export thread

Vaccinate your children

Nov 2, 2010#1

Necronic

Vaccines are one of the modern miracles of science, and have eliminated or helped contain some of the most dangerous diseases known to mankind. Its hard for people under 40 to appreciate how much things have changed. Most of us don't know someone with polio, or remember what it was like to be afraid of swimming pools. Or the times that parents would have scores of children because many wouldn't survive past 10. Dave knows what I am talking about.

Vaccines have been one of the true success stories of medicine. That story, however, may be getting re-written right now. Partly this is due to increasing costs and decreasing responsibility by the insurance industry, and that's a battle that will need to be fought at the government level. It should have been an easy fight, because the costs of vaccines pale in comparison to the long term costs that infection, or even worse, a wide-spread epidemic can cause.

The other problem has to do with one incredibly irresponsible and unethical doctor: Andrew Wakefield. In 1998 he published a paper linking Autism with the MMR vaccine. In it he used parental anectdotes of dates do determine links for the onset of the illness and the vaccination. The paper was eventually discredited and retracted but the damage was already done.

Since this paper came out there has been a massive drop in the vaccination rates in first-world countries, which has been linked to multiple epidemics. Regardless of how many times the scientific community discredits this link, people are still concerned about getting vaccines for their children. Instead they opt for the risk that their child could catch the disease and then spread it to other children, which is happening more and more.

And now here we are, on the path to loosing one of the greatest medical victories of all time. All due to one highly discredited paper and the irresponsible media that was willing to sew it's poison but unwilling to retract it. In the most medically advanced country in the nation it is appalling to know that we are seeing a reduction in vaccines.

I appreciate that parents have a special right to irrational concerns when it comes to their children. It's not bad parenting that lead to this. Really it is a mix of good parenting, poor education, and gross negligence by parts of the medical community and media.

I guess the reason I am writing this is that I think it is a big enough issue to present it to anyone who may have children, and am willing to thoroughly explain the issues at hand. This isn't to come across as a know it all, but as a person who sees a serious problem and wants to help. If anyone has ANY questions or comments about this please mention them. If you do think that vaccines cause autism or are a bad idea for one reason or another, please say so. I'm not going to "Chaz" you.

Also, in case anyone is interested, Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who started all of this, lost his medical license for this as well as performing chelation therapy, colonoscopies, colon biopsies, and spinal taps on children with autism. Often without the consent. And one of those children almost died.

Nov 2, 2010#2

Krisken

For gods sake, yes, get vaccines.

Nov 2, 2010#3

Frankie Williamson

The next time there's a polio epidemic, people will get their shit together.

Nov 2, 2010#4

North_Ranger

Are you happy now, Jenny McCarthy?

Nov 2, 2010#5

MindDetective

California and Texas have already seen a rise in pertussis (whooping cough): pertussis outbreak - Google News

I am for sure getting my kids vaccinated some day.

I was looking for a great blog somewhere out there wherein the author went over how they researched the topic and concluded they SHOULD get their children vaccinated. Damned if I can find it again, though.

Nov 2, 2010#6

sixpackshaker

The one thing I agreed with Rick Perry on, was he wanted HPV vaccine required in Texas. But the Nutjobs treated it as a sex thing and not a public health issue.

Nov 2, 2010#7

tegid

The bad thing about this is that besides the autism thing, the surreal ideas of vaccine negationists now include that they are not effective altogether. A lot of these people defend that the disappearance of illnesses such as polio, etc. is due to an improvement in hygiene, diet, etc., and they back it up with the fact that their kids don't get infected despite not being vaccinated.

This is the very very bad thing of all this, to me. Their kids don't get sick because other kids that DID get vaccines are protecting them by not letting illnesses spread, but it is equally true that by not vaccinating their children they are putting other people in danger (say, people with especially weak immune systems, or people who for some reason cannot get vaccines).

Nov 2, 2010#8

SpecialKO

tegid said:
the surreal ideas of vaccine negationists now include that they are not effective altogether. A lot of these people defend that the disappearance of illnesses such as polio, etc. is due to an improvement in hygiene, diet, etc., and they back it up with the fact that their kids don't get infected despite not being vaccinated.

wut? :wtf:

Polio, in particular, doesn't work for that theory. Except for possibly Smallpox, it's the most documented and studied worldwide success case for a vaccine, ever.

Nov 2, 2010#9

tegid

I know that theory is bullshit. I'm just reproducing what I've heard... As I said in terrible English in the following paragraph, a number of people in a population being vaccinated can protect the whole population.

Nov 2, 2010#10

Necronic

tegid said:
The bad thing about this is that besides the autism thing, the surreal ideas of vaccine negationists now include that they are not effective altogether. A lot of these people defend that the disappearance of illnesses such as polio, etc. is due to an improvement in hygiene, diet, etc., and they back it up with the fact that their kids don't get infected despite not being vaccinated.

This is the very very bad thing of all this, to me. Their kids don't get sick because other kids that DID get vaccines are protecting them by not letting illnesses spread, but it is equally true that by not vaccinating their children they are putting other people in danger (say, people with especially weak immune systems, or people who for some reason cannot get vaccines).

If anyone ever argues that tell them you have a stone you could sell them that keeps tigers away. Its easy enough to prove, there aren't any tigers around.

Glad to see this isn't an issue that there are many disbelievers about here. This item really drives me up the darned wall. I have a friend whose mom has polio, and it's not cool. At all.

Nov 2, 2010#11

Null

You know what happens when kids who aren't vaccinated come into contact with the disease? THEY CATCH IT. (yes, I know Wikipedia by itself isn't a good source, but this sums it up fairly well)

The Americas

Indigenous measles were declared to have been eliminated in North, Central, and South America; the last endemic case in the region was reported on November 12, 2002, with only Northern Argentina and rural Canada, particularly in the provinces of Ontario, Quebec, and Alberta having minor endemic status.[47] Outbreaks are still occurring, however, following importations of measles viruses from other world regions. In June 2006, an outbreak in Boston resulted after a resident became infected in India,[48] and in October 2007, a Michigan girl who had been vaccinated contracted the disease in Sweden.[49]

Between January 1 and April 25, 2008, a total of 64 confirmed measles cases were preliminarily reported in the United States to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,[50][51] the most reported by this date for any year since 2001. Of the 64 cases, 54 were associated with importation of measles from other countries into the United States, and 63 of the 64 patients were unvaccinated or had unknown or undocumented vaccination status.[52]

By July 9, 2008, a total of 127 cases were reported in 15 states (including 22 in Arizona),[53] making it the largest U.S. outbreak since 1997 (when 138 cases were reported).[54] Most of the cases were acquired outside of the United States and afflicted individuals who had not been vaccinated.

By July 30, 2008, the number of cases had grown to 131. Of these, about half involved children whose parents rejected vaccination. The 131 cases occurred in 7 different outbreaks. There were no deaths, and 15 hospitalizations. 11 of the cases had received at least one dose of the measles vaccine. 122 of the cases involved children who were unvaccinated or whose vaccination status was unknown. Some of these were under the age of one year old and below the age when vaccination is recommended, but in 63 cases the vaccinations had been refused for religious or philosophical reasons.

Nov 2, 2010#12

Espy

Like I'm gonna trust anyone who doesn't have DD breast implants. Pff.

Nov 2, 2010#13

The Lovely Boehner

if you don't vaccinate you are a monster

Nov 2, 2010#14

Chibibar

I don't understand why people DON'T get vaccinated.

Nov 2, 2010#15

Cheesy1

Vaccines are a conspiracy to poison us all by Bush/Obama/The Illuminati! The aliens told me so last night, so I know it's true!

Nov 2, 2010#16

drifter

The fact that someone felt the need to make this thread makes me sad. And kind of angry. Sangry.

Nov 3, 2010#17

SpecialKO

Necronic said:
Glad to see this isn't an issue that there are many disbelievers about here.

Maybe a majority of lurkers believes it, they're just scared of us and our vitriol.

Nov 3, 2010#18

Ravenpoe

Why the hell would I trust something that's been peer reviewed and carefully studied under scientific scrutiny?

Nov 3, 2010#19

Tress

Vaccinate your kids, vaccinate your wife, and vaccinate your husband, 'cuz they infectin' everyone up in here.

Nov 3, 2010#20

tegid

Ravenpoe said:
Why the hell would I trust something that's been peer reviewed and carefully studied under scientific scrutiny?

It's all a ploy of the pharmaceutical companies to earn lots of money through vaccines!! Actually, most scientists are paid by the pharma industry, so they're not reliable!

---------- Post added at 07:45 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:44 AM ----------

SpecialKO;449088][QUOTE=Necronic said:
Glad to see this isn't an issue that there are many disbelievers about here.

Maybe a majority of lurkers believes it, they're just scared of us and our vitriol.

[/QUOTE]

Luckily, the kind of people who use this site are people with certain interests that usually come associated with a certain respect for knowledge, which usually prevents this kind of ignorance, at least in the long run.

Nov 3, 2010#21

@Li3n

Relax people... it's about time survival of the fittest came back...

Sorry, people that can't get vaccinated, but hey, it's the price we have to pay to get rid of people who are too dumb to understand vaccinations... stuff ain't free you know...

Nov 3, 2010#22

The Lovely Boehner

@Li3n said:
Sorry, people that can't get vaccinated, but hey, it's the price we have to pay to get rid of people who are too dumb to understand vaccinations... stuff ain't free you know...

Yes, the children that don't know any better deserve to die because their parents are stupid shitbirds

Nov 3, 2010#23

MindDetective

Survival of the fittest doesn't bother with "deserving", really.

Nov 3, 2010#24

strawman

People who have not suffered X because of Y done in the past will inevitably stop doing Y until X becomes a problem again.

Don't worry, it'll turn around, and health professionals are educating new parents. The increase in infections will only underscore their plea to have children vaccinated.

Besides, it's not vaccines that cause autism. It's halforums. My kids weren't on the autism scale prior to the creation of halforums, and now nearly half of them are.

Coincidence? I think not!

Nov 3, 2010#25

Chazwozel

Necronic said:
Vaccines are one of the modern miracles of science, and have eliminated or helped contain some of the most dangerous diseases known to mankind. Its hard for people under 40 to appreciate how much things have changed. Most of us don't know someone with polio, or remember what it was like to be afraid of swimming pools. Or the times that parents would have scores of children because many wouldn't survive past 10. Dave knows what I am talking about.

Vaccines have been one of the true success stories of medicine. That story, however, may be getting re-written right now. Partly this is due to increasing costs and decreasing responsibility by the insurance industry, and that's a battle that will need to be fought at the government level. It should have been an easy fight, because the costs of vaccines pale in comparison to the long term costs that infection, or even worse, a wide-spread epidemic can cause.

The other problem has to do with one incredibly irresponsible and unethical doctor: Andrew Wakefield. In 1998 he published a paper linking Autism with the MMR vaccine. In it he used parental anectdotes of dates do determine links for the onset of the illness and the vaccination. The paper was eventually discredited and retracted but the damage was already done.

Since this paper came out there has been a massive drop in the vaccination rates in first-world countries, which has been linked to multiple epidemics. Regardless of how many times the scientific community discredits this link, people are still concerned about getting vaccines for their children. Instead they opt for the risk that their child could catch the disease and then spread it to other children, which is happening more and more.

And now here we are, on the path to loosing one of the greatest medical victories of all time. All due to one highly discredited paper and the irresponsible media that was willing to sew it's poison but unwilling to retract it. In the most medically advanced country in the nation it is appalling to know that we are seeing a reduction in vaccines.

I appreciate that parents have a special right to irrational concerns when it comes to their children. It's not bad parenting that lead to this. Really it is a mix of good parenting, poor education, and gross negligence by parts of the medical community and media.

I guess the reason I am writing this is that I think it is a big enough issue to present it to anyone who may have children, and am willing to thoroughly explain the issues at hand. This isn't to come across as a know it all, but as a person who sees a serious problem and wants to help. If anyone has ANY questions or comments about this please mention them. If you do think that vaccines cause autism or are a bad idea for one reason or another, please say so. I'm not going to "Chaz" you.

Also, in case anyone is interested, Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who started all of this, lost his medical license for this as well as performing chelation therapy, colonoscopies, colon biopsies, and spinal taps on children with autism. Often without the consent. And one of those children almost died.

I will "Chaz" you. If you don't get your kids vaccinated against things like MMR and Polio, you're a fucking idiot. I'm sorry.

---------- Post added at 08:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:57 AM ----------

Ravenpoe said:
Why the hell would I trust something that's been peer reviewed and carefully studied under scientific scrutiny?

I prefer to get my medical information from former Playboy models and douchebag comedians, thank you!

Nov 3, 2010#26

Hailey Knight

I give Chaz too much rep

or other people too little.

Nov 3, 2010#27

@Li3n

Fine said:
Sorry, people that can't get vaccinated, but hey, it's the price we have to pay to get rid of people who are too dumb to understand vaccinations... stuff ain't free you know...

Yes, the children that don't know any better deserve to die because their parents are stupid shitbirds[/QUOTE]

While i can theoretically sympathise with the kids going through unnecessary suffering the fact is that they are the bearers of the DNA of idiots... from nature's perspective it doesn't really matter at which point those genes stop being passed on... they simply are. *

* of course if intelligence was nothing but genes stupid people would have been the first thing to go extinct

Nov 3, 2010#28

Necronic

Its not stupidity that keeps people from vaccinating. Its ignorance, misplaced trust, and misinformation, something we are all capable of. It is hardly different than the belief in homeopathy, chiropractics, vitamin mega-doses, magnet therapy, ear-candling, traditional chinese medicine, ayurvedic medicine, naturopathy etc..

In fact its almost more acceptable because it was so widely promoted in the media and had a peer-reviewed article supporting it. So don't write off people who believe in stuff like this as being morons. More than likely that list above ticked someone off on this board, and I can tell you that every thing on that list has as little if not less real scientific data backing the true nature of it.

What special KO said is exactly why issues like this bother me, and why its necessary to approach them with a gentle hand, not brute force. With topics as serious as this it is far more important to actually spread the message than it is to punish people for their beliefs.

Nov 3, 2010#29

Chazwozel

@Li3n;449148][QUOTE=Fine said:
Sorry, people that can't get vaccinated, but hey, it's the price we have to pay to get rid of people who are too dumb to understand vaccinations... stuff ain't free you know...

Nov 3, 2010#30

strawman

It will only take a few sensational news media stories about kids who have to use ventilators for the rest of their life due to polio caused by parents who didn't vaccinate to get people going back to the doctor.

Although I vote they simply put an iron lung on display at each doctor's office, and tell parents it's either the vaccine, or the iron lung in a few years.

But the reality is that the parents are making a cold calculation:

The chance of becoming infected is very, very, very low. One in a million, right now. So while the consequences are severe, the overall equation is that driving their kid to school and back is more dangerous, and even the 1 in a million deaths due to vaccination is just as dangerous.

The problem with that equation is that it's selfish. It doesn't recognize the societal benefit to everyone when we are all vaccinated, and the reality is that the more people choose not to be vaccinated, the higher risk the unvaccinated face of getting the disease, not to mention the vaccinated getting it if the vaccination didn't "take".

Nov 3, 2010#31

Necronic

It's called Herd Immunity

Also, just wanted to make sure that I didn't imply that Flouride in the drinking water isn't used to control the American public. That's totally true and vetted by Sciense (not to be confused with Science. Sciense is a not for profit watchdog group maintained by Alex Jones and his other freedom loving friends. Down with the Bohemian Grove! Down with Moloch!)

Nov 3, 2010#32

Necronic

Good call on that, I was a little heavy handed with the TCM.

Nov 3, 2010#33

Calleja

Intelligence is not genetic. The kids of idiots of make bad decisions are not necessarily bad for the gene pool too.

Nov 3, 2010#34

strawman

Calleja said:
Intelligence is not genetic.

Really? That's very interesting, I'd like to find out more. What terms should I be searching for?

Nevermind. The search "Is intelligence genetic" pulls up enough information to show you are wrong. However, the intelligence, as measured by IQ and similar tests, is so dramatically changed by environmental factors that while genetics plays a role, environment completely swamps it, making it of little importance.

Nov 4, 2010#35

Calleja

Which is my point. Genetics might give you some tendency, but unless some genetic defect affects the way your brain develops, it's how it is stimulated in the formative years that really makes a difference.

Geniuses are born in families that talk about little else than NASCAR, and mediocre idiots are born in even the most intellectual, museum-visiting, debate-loving families.

Furthermore, no matter how much you have have googled, no information shows I'm wrong. At most, you can dispute what I said as not being conclusive yet, which is as far as they've gotten. The point, as you said, is moot, though. The kids of anti-vaccination parents are not to blame.

Nov 4, 2010#36

@Li3n

Necronic said:
Its not stupidity that keeps people from vaccinating. Its ignorance, misplaced trust, and misinformation, something we are all capable of.

I like how you're implying that we're not all capable of being stupid.

Which is my point. Genetics might give you some tendency, but unless some genetic defect affects the way your brain develops, it's how it is stimulated in the formative years that really makes a difference.

Geniuses are born in families that talk about little else than NASCAR, and mediocre idiots are born in even the most intellectual, museum-visiting, debate-loving families.

That's actually not really true... nutrition and education do play a big part in your formative years, but the difference in IQ isn't that large, and when it is it's simply a fluke that happens very rarely.

But natural selection doesn't really care about that, if you screwed up passing on your genes (by getting your kids killed) you're not worthy of survival...

Just because someone's parents are idiots doesn't mean they'll be idiots. There are plenty of kids who are good kids despite the fact that they're raised by morons.

Interesting how you use "good" instead of "smart"... >

Seriously though, i'm not really a fan of involuntary eugenics, i was just pointing out how there are other ways to look at this.

Nov 4, 2010#37

tegid

@Li3n;449468][QUOTE=Necronic said:
Its not stupidity that keeps people from vaccinating. Its ignorance, misplaced trust, and misinformation, something we are all capable of.

I like how you're implying that we're not all capable of being stupid. [/QUOTE]

Dude, what he's saying is very simple: even the most intelligent person can be misinformed.

On the natural selection part, I insist that even if you look at it this way, you wouldn't be selecting off the children of stupid people but also people who can't be vaccinated or have low defenses. (I won't get into the genetics discussion. For the sake of the argument, I'm assuming that the genetic component of intelligence is dominant over environmental factors as a working hypotheses. It's not even important.)

Nov 4, 2010#38

Calleja

No dude, we really aren't evolving in the traditional sense of the word, for one simple reason: there's no more natural selection. As harsh as it may sound, the minute civilization decided the defective deserved to live, we lifted ourselves right out of that. The genes that are surviving don't belong to people that pass their genes "more so than somebody else"... cause NO ONE is passing their genes more than the next guy. Everyone gets to reproduce now. Defective or weak traits aren't getting weeded out.

In a planet with six billion+ people, even the ugliest and dumbest get a mate.

Nov 4, 2010#39

strawman

You guys can argue semantics all day long, but before you continue it might be useful for both of you to define "evolution" and "natural selection" so that you can at least stop shouting across the chasm between your points of view.

Nov 4, 2010#40

Necronic

tegid;449472][QUOTE=@Li3n;449468][QUOTE=Necronic said:
Its not stupidity that keeps people from vaccinating. Its ignorance, misplaced trust, and misinformation, something we are all capable of.

I like how you're implying that we're not all capable of being stupid. [/QUOTE]

Dude, what he's saying is very simple: even the most intelligent person can be misinformed.

[/QUOTE]

On the nose, thank you. It's not that hard to figure out. Even the most intelligent of us can be obtuse I guess.

But as an aside, since the thread has shifted, let me say:

Intelligence is not linear. Period. The whole concept of intelligence being a linear variable is so completely stupid that the irony might actually cause a head-splode.

Why would ANYONE think intelligence is a linear variable? There are so many different aspects of it. Memory. Willpower. Intuitiveness. Ability to Extrapolate. Creativity.

The idea that there is a single number, IQ, that has any bearing on what someone's intelligence is is sad and, frankly, pretty stupid. One of the researchers whose work was used to create the IQ scale vehemently disagreed with it as a concept:

Alfred Binet said:
The scale, properly speaking, does not permit the measure of intelligence, because intellectual qualities are not superposable, and therefore cannot be measured as linear surfaces are measured.

Nov 4, 2010#41

sixpackshaker

Vision correction, plastic surgery, hairclub for men, and the beauty industry has damaged natural selection.

Nov 4, 2010#42

Hylian

I don't really have anything to say that has not already been said but when has that ever stopped someone here from saying something anyways?

I completely agree that children should be vaccinated. I know there is a small chance that things can go wrong but I think the benefits far outweigh the negative aspects and it is just plain irresponsible of the parents not to get the children vaccinated.

Nov 4, 2010#43

@Li3n

Necronic;449526][QUOTE=tegid;449472][QUOTE=@Li3n;449468][QUOTE=Necronic said:
Its not stupidity that keeps people from vaccinating. Its ignorance, misplaced trust, and misinformation, something we are all capable of.

Evolution is not a gradual increase in good things, it's an increase in strategies that help you have more babies that will have more babies.

Nope... having 300 babies doesn't matter if they all die of the same disease while the sole child of someone else survives because he's been vaccinated...

A better definition would be an increase in strategies/traits that help you and your progeny survive and spread their genes.

No dude, we really aren't evolving in the traditional sense of the word, for one simple reason: there's no more natural selection. As harsh as it may sound, the minute civilization decided the defective deserved to live, we lifted ourselves right out of that.

No, see, what we did was find the best strategy to help us survive, it's called helping each other.

See, natural selection has only 1 way to determine who's defective, something kills them before they can breed (or their offspring all die etc.)... our concept of fitness doesn't really come into it (better odds notwithstanding).

Nov 4, 2010#44

strawman

I think the salient point is that natural selection pressures are now pushing humans to be able to survive in the world we have created for ourselves. The idea that there is an absolute measure of "fitness to survive" is inadequate. We must take into account that fitness is relative to the environment one is attempting to survive and reproduce in.

Nov 4, 2010#45

Necronic

sixpackshaker said:
Vision correction, plastic surgery, hairclub for men, and the beauty industry has damaged natural selection.

I think those items have simply changed the goal of natural selection. Natural selection is now working on reducing genetically predisposed diseases, specifically those that will make it impossible for you to reproduce (due to early death etc.) Genetic counseling, when it becomes more common, will accelerate that natural selection, which will allow us to produce less faulty devices. I mean children. Apply Lean/Toyota Production System philosophy to birthing. Don't let your offspring be one of the seven muda.

Nov 4, 2010#46

Covar

Calleja said:
Geniuses are born in families that talk about little else than NASCAR, and mediocre idiots are born in even the most intellectual, museum-visiting, debate-loving families.

Because NASCAR is only for poor and stupid people :rolleyes:

Nov 4, 2010#47

strawman

Hey, if it weren't for our ability to categorize and classify things instantly based on appearance, we'd have died out long ago.

Prejudice isn't ideal, but it is useful.

Nov 4, 2010#48

Necronic

Or how about:

Stereotypes are wrong, but generalizations are useful. Damned if I know the difference.

Nov 4, 2010#49

strawman

Speaking of vaccinations, I just spent 20 minutes on the phone with the CDC doing a survey about the flu vaccine. Interesting...

Nov 4, 2010#50

strawman

mr_thehun said:
that annoying British guy

Oh, well gee, that certainly narrows it down... :rolleyes:

Nov 4, 2010#51

Krisken

Nov 4, 2010#52

strawman

Nothing like centuries of royal inbreeding to set oneself apart from the masses...

Nov 5, 2010#53

Necronic

mr_thehun said:
Apparently before getting themselves inoculated to small pox by sniffing pox blisters, the British Royal Family decided it was better to have their physicians experiment on the general populace first.

Well, I know I support animal testing.

....

Sorry, been playing Empire Total War and the lower class are just making me furious.

Nov 8, 2010#54

@Li3n

mr_thehun said:
"babies that will have more babies." if your 300 babies have 300 babies your genes will be out there to a much greater extent than that one child could ever do (unless that one child than develops the ability to create broods). While this may not be a good strategy for humans due to the energy intensive nature of what we are, it is easily observed in our daily lives by insects that will probably be around this world long after humanity is forgotten.

As far as vaccination is concerned, please point out where I said getting vaccinated is a bad strategy for survival? If those three hundred babies get vaccinated as well as that one child and they both survive to reproduce their genes than those three hundred babies have more relatives in the great grand scheme of the overall human gene pool.

I have a friend who is a millionaire, well educated, person who practices vaccination, with 6 children. I also have a pair of friends who are both PhD's, have a good amount of money, do vaccinate their child but only have one male child. The millionaire has an equal amount of male and female children. Who has created the better situation to pass on their genes?

Natural selection is not the only form of selection having an effect on the evolution of anything, it's the most common but it's not the only thing that Darwin or any of the other evolutionary researchers have been talking about. There is also the fact that Humans/things don't just have sex with anyone they come across. People still make the active choice (true, rape does happen but there are still choices surrounding this situation) to attempt to reproduce.

Some books about Evolution I would highly recommend are:

Evolution for Everyone (David Sloan Wilson),

Darwins Cathedral (David Sloan Wilson),

Homicide (Foundations of Human Behavior) by Margo Wilson and Martin Daly (Paperback - Jan 1, 1988): a husband and wife couple who investigate the reasons why people kill each other and try to interpret it through a variety of evolutionary filters such as Kin Selection etc),

Why humans Cooperate (Henrich, title may be different can't really remember. Author is a really cool guy, I had the opportunity to work for him in an evolutionary/ cultural psychology lab. It's a bit technical and if you're not familiar with Anthropological techno babel it may be a bit hard for you to understand),

Just about any paper by W.D. Hamilton,

Sociobiology by E O Wilson

and then read about a quarter of each book by that annoying British guy and ignore the hatred. Though the Selfish Gene has some good ideas in it. Richard Dawkins, the drunken frat boy who wont shut up at the evolution party.

Did i miss write something?! Or did you just not read any of my previous points?!

The idea was that there's more to evolution then having more kids, they and their progeny also have to survive... so i was talking about the parents that shun vaccines and have lots of kids vs 1 kid that had a vaccine. They both increase their chances by different methods...

But the % being better for more kids is only a %, useful for you when using math for your anthropology work, but not so much for when you get eaten by a bear or die from some disease together with thousands of your close and not so close relative while some lone guy who's got the right gene survives...

It's all a toss up, and nature (which is why it's called natural selection, and not just sexual, so i was including other stuff besides whatever you though i was limiting myself to) only care about the end result, not how you get there...

BEWARE, THIS POST WAS ABOUT MY POINT OVERALL, NOT JUST YOUR POST, WHICH WAS BASED ON A MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHAT I SAID.

Nov 8, 2010#55

Norris

I can see where parents with autistic kids would want to believe the anti-vaxxer hype. There is truly something comforting about being able to say "this what caused the bad thing to happen". I'm even sure that most of them have totally honest beliefs and intentions.

Which doesn't make them any less wrong or harmful.

Nov 11, 2010#56

Azurephoenix

So am I bad because I think the flu vaccine is a bullshit vaccine that is generally unecessary? I catch flak from a lot of people about not getting vaccinated for the flu.

Note, I am vaccinated against damn near everything else and so is my wife and my son has everything he can at his age (except the flu shots).

Nov 11, 2010#57

Chibibar

Azurephoenix said:
So am I bad because I think the flu vaccine is a bullshit vaccine that is generally unecessary? I catch flak from a lot of people about not getting vaccinated for the flu.

Note, I am vaccinated against damn near everything else and so is my wife and my son has everything he can at his age (except the flu shots).

me too.

Nov 11, 2010#58

Mountebank

Chibibar;451548][QUOTE=Azurephoenix said:
So am I bad because I think the flu vaccine is a bullshit vaccine that is generally unecessary? I catch flak from a lot of people about not getting vaccinated for the flu.

Note, I am vaccinated against damn near everything else and so is my wife and my son has everything he can at his age (except the flu shots).

me too.[/QUOTE]
It's generally unnecessary if you have a good immune system, few risk factors and the time to spend being ill for a short while.

If you're in an at-risk group to whom influenza has a far greater chance of being fatal, then it's far from a bullshit vaccine. It's also quite useful if you're in a job which brings you into contact with a large cross-section of the public (including those at risk) and it would be detrimental to be infected and pass it on to them (such as health professionals).

Nov 11, 2010#59

Dave

That and the chicken pox vaccines are the only ones I'll give anyone a pass on.

Nov 11, 2010#60

Dave

mr_thehun said:
someone in my office just got the chicken pox at 35. It's a deadly flu if you don't catch it when young.

Good point.

Nov 11, 2010#61

strawman

The flu vaccine is strongly recommended for those with weak immune systems, respiratory diseases (asthma, emphysema, etc), the elderly, and also if they come into contact with at-risk groups such as infants and toddlers.

Beyond that, there are good reasons to not take it. You chances of dying from the flu are less than dying from the vaccine (it's all statistics though, so there's a lot of hand waving in there). Further, the flu vaccine is a best guess - there are many flus that it will not cover each year.

I have asthma. I carry an inhaler, but only need it once or twice a year. If I were normal, the flus and colds of the season would last their normal period of time, and then life would go on. However my asthma is aggravated by respiratory illness such as the flu, and many of these illnesses turn into 2-3 week long bouts where I no longer have the flu, but I can't function at even 50% mentally or physically.

Further, I have 5 kids, 4 of which attend two different schools. I will be exposed to and catch every single flu and cold in this area. Last flu season was just bad. Bad, bad, bad. We even ended up having to take our 8 year old to the hospital, and he was admitted for 3 days while they helped him breath - and he doesn't have asthma.

So, yeah, the vaccine was created for people like me. It won't stop everything, but if it only saves me from one or two weeks of illness throughout the season it will have been more than worth it.

Whether we get the kids vaccinated depends on a variety of factors, but typically we don't because we give them a choice, and as miserable as they are when they're sick, they would rather be sick than get a shot.

Nov 12, 2010#62

Calleja

Not getting vaccinated because you don't get sick yourself is irresponsible and immoral, you can still carry the virus around and infect those around you with weaker immune systems.

Nov 12, 2010#63

Azurephoenix

Calleja said:
Not getting vaccinated because you don't get sick yourself is irresponsible and immoral, you can still carry the virus around and infect those around you with weaker immune systems.

I knew someone was going to saunter in here with this argument... didn't think it would be you though Calleja.

I'm sorry but I will never get the flu vaccine... and saying that I'm irresponsible and immoral because I don't want to get a shot for a virus that has an extremely low mortality rate is a gross overexaggeration. There's a big difference between the common flu and something like polio.

Nov 12, 2010#64

Calleja

The flu kills people. Even if it has a low mortality rate, some people with weakened immune systems die because of it. Think about people going through Chemo or with AIDS or even just sick with something else, the extra infection could very well be what sends them under.

How is a 2 second shot "gross overexaggeration" again? What are the risks you're afraid of? Why are you so against it?

Nov 12, 2010#65

Azurephoenix

The gross overexaggeration is calling people like me irresponsible and immoral. Irresponsible would be not getting your child vaccinated against polio.

Flu vaccines aren't even very effective for what you are talking about. The flu vaccine is more about preventing hospitalization and death than stopping you from getting the flu... so guess what. Vaccinated people can still easily be carriers of the virus too.

Nov 12, 2010#66

Mountebank

Calleja said:
The flu kills people. Even if it has a low mortality rate, some people with weakened immune systems die because of it. Think about people going through Chemo or with AIDS or even just sick with something else, the extra infection could very well be what sends them under.

How is a 2 second shot "gross overexaggeration" again? What are the risks you're afraid of? Why are you so against it?

People with severely compromised immune systems shouldn't be in the general public - it will likely kill them. Even a regular cough or cold could finish them. If you have regular contact with those at-risk groups, then by all means get the vaccine. Otherwise getting everyone a flu shot "just because" is unnecessary.

Nov 12, 2010#67

Calleja

What I don't get is why you seem to think that getting a 2-second, free, painless shot is going so much out of your way you REFUSE to do it. You don't have to have DIRECT contact with people with compromised immune systems to affect them by proxy... even if it's a tiny, infinitesimal chance that you may get someone killed... isn't it still worth a gorram shot?

Nov 12, 2010#68

strawman

Mountebank said:
getting everyone a flu shot "just because" is unnecessary.

Doesn't the flu evolve more quickly in well-vaccinated groups? Doesn't the argument against continuous streams of anti-biotics also apply, in some small degree, to vaccines?

Nov 12, 2010#69

Calleja

I don't think so... vaccines boost your immune system by giving you the antibodies to fight the infection off. Virus don't become immune to your immune system, they become immune to antibiotics. Which is why antiobiotics are supposed to only be used when necessary and vaccines are preventive.

Nov 12, 2010#70

Azurephoenix

First Lady Puffinstuff said:
Doesn't the flu evolve more quickly in well-vaccinated groups? Doesn't the argument against continuous streams of anti-biotics also apply, in some small degree, to vaccines?

That's a possibility... but I don't have any sources to back it up (it does seem logical though).

Calleja said:
What I don't get is why you seem to think that getting a 2-second, free, painless shot is going so much out of your way you REFUSE to do it. You don't have to have DIRECT contact with people with compromised immune systems to affect them by proxy... even if it's a tiny, infinitesimal chance that you may get someone killed... isn't it still worth a gorram shot?

It's not free first of all... it costs taxpayers millions of dollars for those things. Secondly... severely immunocomprimised people are more likely to contract and die from things like rhinovirus and norovirus than influenza based on the widespread distribution of those viruses. Also, there's a tiny chance I could have an anaphylactic reaction to the vaccine and die... sucks to be me?

---------- Post added at 10:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:01 PM ----------

Calleja said:
I don't think so... vaccines boost your immune system by giving you the antibodies to fight the infection off. Virus don't become immune to your immune system, they become immune to antibiotics. Which is why antiobiotics are supposed to only be used when necessary and vaccines are preventive.

That's not how a vaccine works against something like the flu. It's a totally different type of virus... we need someone like Chaz in here to explain it better than I can.

Nov 12, 2010#71

Mountebank

Antibiotics don't work on viruses at all, which is why all those people bugging the doctor for antibiotics when they've got a cold/flu are wasting time & resources. And if the doctors eventually cave to the parents of kids who think they know best ("Of course I know what's best for him! I'm his mother! Plus I have access to google, which means I have better medical knowledge than any mere doctor. Why yes, I do use homeopathy, why do you ask?") then they're doing a lot of harm, and absolutely no good.

Vaccines are best used to control and eradicate disease. Flu is so widespread and changes so fast that any flu is, at best, a temporary fix. It doesn't completely remove the risk. Any person wanting to argue that vaccines are just a scam used by big pharmaceutical companies would be better off using the flu vaccine as an example because it's not essential for most of the population, but is marketed as such.

Nov 12, 2010#72

Chibibar

Virus neutralization by antibodies

some actually do.
BBC News - Virus breakthrough raises hope over ending common cold
BBC NEWS | Health | Antibodies 'may aid HIV jab hunt'

now of course I am looking at Antibodies = antibiotics.. I could be totally wrong on this one. (which will NOT surprise me)

Nov 12, 2010#73

Mountebank

Chibibar said:
now of course I am looking at Antibodies = antibiotics.. I could be totally wrong on this one. (which will NOT surprise me)

Yep, antibodies aren't the same as antibiotics.

Nov 12, 2010#74

Azurephoenix

Chibibar said:
now of course I am looking at Antibodies = antibiotics.. I could be totally wrong on this one. (which will NOT surprise me)

Antibodies do not equal antibiotics. Antibodies are the body's own personal defenses that bind to and neutralize viruses. Those articles you quoted... though promising... are talking about increasing the body's own immune response to take advantage of the fact that antibodies can identify and neutralize viruses that have already entered a cell (previous thought was once a virus was in a cell it was untouchable).

Vaccines are what makes the body produce the correct antibodies so that the immune system has a better chance of fighting off a virus than if it had to produce the anitbodies from scratch. The flu virus is extremely mutable and it is nigh impossible to produce solid vaccines for it. That's why the yearly flu shot is based on statistics of which strains scientists think will be the most prevalent that year. Some years it can be quite effective... others... total utter crap.

Nov 12, 2010#75

Chibibar

ah. I stand corrected. I guess I misread somewhere you could get antibiotic that can be use against virus.

Nov 12, 2010#76

ThatGrinningIdiot!

I don't get the flu vaccine either. I prefer that my body uses it's own defenses to overcome illness and injury whenever possible. When said illnesses or injuries are too grave, I seek medical attention right away.

Forgot to mention, I will be vaccinating my little ones as soon as they are born. Polio, tetanus, scarlet fever etc. can disappear.

Nov 12, 2010#77

Necronic

I'll be honest, I don't get the flu vaccine either, but its because I am lazy, no other reason. Even if you don't get sick, you can transmit it to children and the elderly, and it can definitely kill them. And for anyone who seriously used the term "low mortality rate" with regards to the flu....

1918 flu pandemic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

50 million dead in 2 years. Yeah, there's a reason people freak out about the flu. And if anyone wants to know the name of that flu, it was an H1N1 breed. Don't underestimate the flu.

Nov 12, 2010#78

Azurephoenix

That was me that said the flu had a low mortality rate... and the vast majority of flus do have extremely low mortality rates. The Spanish flu was a very specific strain that developed. I also never said that the flu couldn't evolve into something deadly.

Also, just so you know... your typical flu vaccine will do absolutely jack diddly squat against a virulent and deadly strain of H1N1 or avian flu. So when one of those strains hits... I'll be right there for vaccinations when they come up with one that will work.

Nov 12, 2010#79

D

Dubyamn

First Lady Puffinstuff;451855][QUOTE=Mountebank said:
getting everyone a flu shot "just because" is unnecessary.

Doesn't the flu evolve more quickly in well-vaccinated groups?[/quote]

In the same way that any population getting routinely cut down to 1% of the total population will evolve quicker than a population not getting cut down as much. Doesn't mean that the population that undergoes a massacre every couple of years will do any better than another.

Evolving =/= thriving.

Doesn't the argument against continuous streams of anti-biotics also apply, in some small degree, to vaccines?

No not at all. The problem with anti-biotic overprescription is that most of our common anti-biotics are variations of the original penicillin and other natural bacteria killing compounds. There are only so many of those and we are more and more having to start making completely synthetic anti-biotics which will also eventually lose their effectiveness. These new anti-biotics are taking more and more money to create.

Vaccines on the other hand are infinite. New strain comes along scientists will culture it, weaken it and re-inject it into the population as the vaccine. It doesn't change no matter what. That is why we had a vaccine for the swine flu within weeks of it becoming a big deal.

Nov 12, 2010#80

Necronic

Azurephoenix said:
That was me that said the flu had a low mortality rate... and the vast majority of flus do have extremely low mortality rates. The Spanish flu was a very specific strain that developed. I also never said that the flu couldn't evolve into something deadly.

Also, just so you know... your typical flu vaccine will do absolutely jack diddly squat against a virulent and deadly strain of H1N1 or avian flu. So when one of those strains hits... I'll be right there for vaccinations when they come up with one that will work.

My biology knowledge isn't that strong, but if I understand correctly, the more viruses you have active in the population the bigger chance you have of it mutating. Take the recent H1N1 scare. As it stood, the virus wasn't that bad, but it was clasified as a pandemic because it had spread so far. Influenza has the rare and frightening ability to mutate incredibly fast, which could lead to something innocuous becoming something much worse. Simply put, the bigger your population, the more risk you have for the really bad epidemics.

And I'm not sure what you mean with your last statement. Flu Vaccines are all made in the same way, and generally take the same amount of time from discovery to vaccination. The deadly strains can be vaccinated against just as well as the less nasty ones. At least that's how I understand it.

Edit: Been reading over previous comments. I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the purpose of the flu vaccine. Yes, its about preventing hospilization and death, but you do that by preventing as many people as possible (even those that wouldn't be hospitalized by it) from getting the flu.

Also, some numbers I ran across which surprised me:

250,000 - 500,000 people die from influenza worldwide each year.
3500 - 50,000 Americans die from influenza each year.

Nov 24, 2010#81

phil

Just today my friend (who buys into a lot of conspiracy theories about toxins in everything) posted about this shit. thankfully I had this thread to fallback on for info.

Thank you, halforums, for allowing me to call people bad parents for once in my life.

Nov 24, 2010#82

Espy

I would love to have seen that conversation.

Nov 24, 2010#83

phil

I'm currently going through a list of chemicals he posted and explaining why they're in vaccines at all, and why that's ok.

Nov 24, 2010#84

Espy

Have I ever told you that you're my hero?

Nov 24, 2010#85

phil

this list includes

aluminum; formaldehyde; phenoxyethanol; gluteraldehyde; sodium borate; sodium chloride; sodium acetate; monosodium glutamate (MSG); hydrochloric acid; hydrogen peroxide; lactose; gelatin; yeast protein; egg albumin; bovine and human serum albumin;
antibiotics; unidentifi ed contaminants.

I stopped on Sodium Borate for now. I'm trying to find sources for everything too. Help would be appreciated.

Nov 24, 2010#86

Espy

If I wasn't about to sit down for a giant crab leg dinner I would help. But thats what I'm about to do. I think the PEnn and Teller Bullshit episode on it has lots of that info though... might be worth looking up...

Nov 24, 2010#87

D

Dubyamn

phil said:
this list includes

aluminum;formaldehyde; phenoxyethanol; gluteraldehyde;

It's a medical disinfectant as well as a preservative. Glutaraldehyde - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

sodium borate;

It's an anti fungal as well as a PH buffer to ensure a certain PH. Don't know what it's used for specifically in the vaccine but either use could be why it's in the mix. Borax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

sodium chloride;

Sodium chloride is salt just plain table salt probably part of the saline solution.

sodium acetate;

It's a buffer used to keep a solution at a certain PH range. would be common in a laboratory.
Sodium acetate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

monosodium glutamate (MSG); hydrochloric acid; hydrogen peroxide; lactose; gelatin; yeast protein; egg albumin;

The vaccine is made by injecting virus into eggs and then purifying out the virus that survives. AFAIK that's how it's made. This is why people with egg allergies are told not to get the vaccine.

bovine and human serum albumin;
antibiotics;

Chickens are treated with antibiotics to avoid a plague wiping out the flock. The vaccine industry doesn't buy fucking organic eggs to make the vaccine.

unidentifi ed contaminants.

Doe he have a problem with the fact that he probably ate bug parts and rat droppings when he ate his corn flakes this morning? Or is he concerned with the fact that the ice machine at McDonald's has e-coli in it?

There is a reason why the government allows a certain amount of bugs in our grain and a certain amount of e-coli in our everything and that's because it is literally impossible to ensure no contaminants. The pasta we cook in our metal pans will have traces of metal in it, our eggs will have teflon in them. These are the facts.

I stopped on Sodium Borate for now. I'm trying to find sources for everything too. Help would be appreciated.

I didn't really have much time but I've provided what I could for now. Can't say I really like your friend. Saying salt like it's a contaminant is just plain ignorant.

Nov 24, 2010#88

phil

He doesn't even buy bottled water. He get's it from some place that says that they don't put florid or anything into it. To him a glass of tap water is poison.

I keep him on my friends list for entertainment purposes, but almost pruned him because I was shaking with rage when I read his rant and his friends commenting about how they don't vaccinate their kids.

Nov 24, 2010#89

D

Dubyamn

phil said:
He doesn't even buy bottled water. He get's it from some place that says that they don't put florid or anything into it. To him a glass of tap water is poison.

Well at least he isn't a complete hypocrite. An idiot but one who clearly practices what he preaches I suppose there is some nobility in that.

I keep him on my friends list for entertainment purposes, but almost pruned him because I was shaking with rage when I read his rant and his friends commenting about how they don't vaccinate their kids.

Sounds like you're tilting at windmills with this argument. The truth is that the vaccine probably has trace amounts of all those things not in any amount that would hurt anybody but even admitting that it has these things will give him enough ammo to justify his belief in his own mind.

Nov 24, 2010#90

phil

I know that he's probably a lost cause. If though someone with a kid who has bought into the hype looks at things like this and realizes that there's more mercury in tuna, or there's more aluminum in breast milk, then maybe they'll think twice.

In retrospect I should not have called them bad parents.

Nov 24, 2010#91

phil

*sigh*

latest comment by one of his friends:

"Human beings have been surviving on their own naturally and healthy. We don't wanna inject our selves with some experimental metals. Humans DON'T NEED VACCINE PERIOD."

Nov 25, 2010#92

tegid

Ugh! We've created a society in which it's perfectly okay to be willfully ignorant, since it doesn't provide any disadvantages. That's wrooooong and I'm so angry!!!!

Nov 25, 2010#93

Math242

Some vaccines you need, some vaccines you don't really need but they can't harm you either way

Why is it always so black and white for stupid people.

Nov 25, 2010#94

tegid

Well, some vaccines DO have a possibility of harming you, but anyway.

Nov 25, 2010#95

Chazwozel

Necronic said:
I'll be honest, I don't get the flu vaccine either, but its because I am lazy, no other reason. Even if you don't get sick, you can transmit it to children and the elderly, and it can definitely kill them. And for anyone who seriously used the term "low mortality rate" with regards to the flu....

1918 flu pandemic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

50 million dead in 2 years. Yeah, there's a reason people freak out about the flu. And if anyone wants to know the name of that flu, it was an H1N1 breed. Don't underestimate the flu.

It still has a high mortality rate among young and old people. People die from pneumonia associated from the Flu. It's not a joke.

Nov 25, 2010#96

Chazwozel

Necronic;451970][QUOTE=Azurephoenix said:
That was me that said the flu had a low mortality rate... and the vast majority of flus do have extremely low mortality rates. The Spanish flu was a very specific strain that developed. I also never said that the flu couldn't evolve into something deadly.

Also, just so you know... your typical flu vaccine will do absolutely jack diddly squat against a virulent and deadly strain of H1N1 or avian flu. So when one of those strains hits... I'll be right there for vaccinations when they come up with one that will work.

The gist is that these eight segments can mix and match to become virulent in pigs, fowl, and humans. What is non-virulent in one can be in the other. Every season a new strain crops up that is virulent in humans, it can invade you cells and cause immune response. The seasonal vaccines are comprised of heat killed virus or attenuated live virus. Depending on how fast it can be cranked out it may or may not be the current strain. H1N1 vaccination is available right now, and it's been for a while, so yes, vaccination does protect against it. I got my H1N1 last November. Vaccines use a mix and mash of various strains of influenza. The designation H1N1 for example dictates what proteins and how many that virus expresses on its protein capsid, and what is ultimately recognized by cell receptors. The H number in the name refers to the viral hemagglutinin protein, while the N refers to the type of neuraminidase enzyme on the surface of the virus. Influenza has this going on for it coupled with high density population areas like southeast asia where people interact closely and unhygenically with fowl and swine is the reason why the seasonal flu always starts in that region.

I just want to point out that azure is 100% dead wrong in what I have in bold. The current vaccine may help especially if the current seasonal virus is the same subtype as H1N1, but the fact is there is a specific H1N1 vaccine that you can receive along side the seasonal one.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5e/AntigenicShift_HiRes_vector.svg

Nov 25, 2010#97

Azurephoenix

Chazwozel said:
I just want to point out that azure is 100% dead wrong in what I have in bold. The current vaccine may help especially if the current seasonal virus is the same subtype as H1N1, but the fact is there is a specific H1N1 vaccine that you can receive along side the seasonal one.

Nov 25, 2010#98

Chazwozel

Azurephoenix;455043][QUOTE=Chazwozel said:
I just want to point out that azure is 100% dead wrong in what I have in bold. The current vaccine may help especially if the current seasonal virus is the same subtype as H1N1, but the fact is there is a specific H1N1 vaccine that you can receive along side the seasonal one.

I shouldn't have said what I said as an absolute... but I was getting irritated at being called immoral and an irresponsible parent because I don't recieve the flu vaccine or give it to my kid. Thanks for getting the facts out there.[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't call you either. Unless you're around elderly and children all day I don't think it really matters. If you get sick or your kid gets sick from the flu, just stay home. Don't feel bad over it.

Nov 28, 2010#99

strawman

Chazwozel;455029][QUOTE=Necronic said:
I'll be honest, I don't get the flu vaccine either, but its because I am lazy, no other reason. Even if you don't get sick, you can transmit it to children and the elderly, and it can definitely kill them. And for anyone who seriously used the term "low mortality rate" with regards to the flu....

1918 flu pandemic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

50 million dead in 2 years. Yeah, there's a reason people freak out about the flu. And if anyone wants to know the name of that flu, it was an H1N1 breed. Don't underestimate the flu.

It still has a high mortality rate among young and old people. People die from pneumonia associated from the Flu. It's not a joke.[/QUOTE]

My otherwise healthy 8 year old boy was hospitalized for 3 days last year due to respiratory complications associated with the flu. No pneumonia. The urgent care center doctor called an ambulance to take him to the hospital because even though he was breathing, his blood oxygen level was so low they were worried about the 15 minute ride without oxygen.

In other words, as concerned as we were about his flu symptoms, we did not see or understand just how bad he was doing - we were honestly thinking we'd get some antibiotics and perhaps something to treat his symptoms and get sent home.

Don't take the flu lightly, and not just because of its association with pneumonia.

Nov 28, 2010#100

strawman

Espy said:
Have I ever told you that you're my hero?

That you're everything he would like to be?

Nov 28, 2010#101

Espy

I have been waiting FOREVER for someone to run with that. Thank you Adam. Thank you.

Jan 5, 2011#102

Cheesy1

In more news on the subject:

Journal: Study linking vaccine to autism was fraud

Jan 5, 2011#103

Dave

Shocked! SHOCKED I SAY!!

Jan 6, 2011#104

Covar

Air Pollution Causes Autism

Correlation is the same as Causality right?

Jan 6, 2011#105

strawman

Wait, air pollution causes atheism? Well no wonder people have turned their back on God! The Amish are right!

Jan 6, 2011#106

Espy

I hear that often kids who have autism drank water so... I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

Jan 6, 2011#107

Piotyr

One thing I don't understand is, having a school-age child myself, every school I looked into doesn't allow a child to enroll without proof of immunizations. How are these parents getting away with it? I can't imagine they're all home schooling them.

Jan 6, 2011#108

strawman

Piotyr said:
One thing I don't understand is, having a school-age child myself, every school I looked into doesn't allow a child to enroll without proof of immunizations. How are these parents getting away with it? I can't imagine they're all home schooling them.

They must simply state it's against their religious beliefs. Some states allow schools to question parents on their religious beliefs to determine if it's just a homeopathic lifestyle rather than a religious belief, but you just have to "answer correctly" and they can't deny your children a public education. You don't have to belong to any particular church of faith, but you do have to declare that you believe in a God or deity that will hold you accountable if you allow vaccination on your children.

Jan 6, 2011#109

Mathias

Espy said:
I hear that often kids who have autism drank water so... I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

Well duh. Have you seen what they put in our water?!?!

Jan 6, 2011#110

Dei

Piotyr said:
One thing I don't understand is, having a school-age child myself, every school I looked into doesn't allow a child to enroll without proof of immunizations. How are these parents getting away with it? I can't imagine they're all home schooling them.

When I was just enrolling my daughter for Kindergarden a few weeks ago, I was told "We either need her immunization list, or you need to sign a waiver about her not having them." That was it. In fact, since I had to call the doctor's office to get said immunization forms faxes, the secretary told me I could just sign the waiver instead of bothering. So yeah.... public school immunization requirements? Not so much apparently. (That didn't happen when I enrolled my son in the same school a few years ago, but then again I think I had the immunization list with me at the time.)

Jan 6, 2011#111

Calleja

Mathias said:
Well duh. Have you seen what they put in our water?!?!

Dihydrogen monoxide is dangerous, dangerous stuff, dude. I mean, there's studies that show that it was actually hydroxic acid that made the Grand Canyon! Imagine what that would do to your system!!

Jan 6, 2011#112

Krisken

You fellas are silly.

Forums