Vaccines and Trump: Your stance?

[DC Tom]

16 minutes ago, Paulus said:

You're totally an autist. Have you ever seen the Curb Your Enthusiasm episode that deals with assburgers? Yeah. 

 

I'm willing to bet you've seen it. I'm also willing to bet you've told people you have autism to get out of sticky situations.

 

 

I have never told anyone that.  I have told people that "I'm not autistic...I would be by your standards, but your standards are stupid, and mine are better.  And since I'm a genius, if you disagree with me the problem is yours, not mine."

 

More seriously, I'm almost certain that, by today's standards, I would have been diagnosed as being on the spectrum back when I was 4.  But the diagnostic criteria have broadened considerably in that time, basically from "Rain Man" to "weird guy in junior high who collected stamps and never talked to anyone."

[whatdrought]

4 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Vaccines aren't 100%. 

 

But if Almost everyone is vaccinated, and the vaccines work *almost* perfectly, the diseases don't spread (and mutate for that matter) and those for whom the vaccine was ineffective don't get exposed. 

 

Said another way, less people with disease = less chance of infection. More people with disease = more chance of infection. This is one of the reasons vaccines are so effective. It's not that they are 100%. It's that they are just really good. And being really good has increased benefits than just to the vax recipient. 

 

 

There's no rational contest. There are just people who don't want to vaccinate. The problem is that their choice has a much better chance of killing many kids, including mine, than saving their kid from an immunological response. 

 

I don't like the government getting into my right to make ***** decisions. But certain ***** decisions that affect other people's lives and deaths require some more active measures. If you (not you, specifically, whatadrought) want to be stupid and risk contracting polio, that's on your dumb self. If you want to increase the chance that it goes to me and my children, ***** off. 

 

The top of your post is my response to the rest of your post. 

 

And it isn't a cut and dry issue. Perfectly logical people debate the issues of vaccines, and plenty of people have been hurt (some even in this thread) by vaccines. 

Edited February 21, 2019 by whatdrought

[row_33]

12 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

The top of your post is my response to the rest of your post. 

 

And it isn't a cut and dry issue. Perfectly logical people debate the issues of vaccines, and plenty of people have been hurt (some even in this thread) by vaccines. 

 

Measles serum was botched in the mid-60s, I was violently ill from it and have had them 3 times in my life, last time around 1982.

 

 

[BeginnersMind]

6 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

The top of your post is my response to the rest of your post. 

 

No it's not. There is no question that vaccines are a benefit to humans, unless you just want us to have more diseases and illnesses.

 

6 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

And it isn't a cut and dry issue. Perfectly logical people debate the issues of vaccines, and plenty of people have been hurt (some even in this thread) by vaccines. 

 

No, it's cut and dry. If you want to advocate for safer vaccines, so be it that's fine. But the risks are minimal compared with the rewards. 

[whatdrought]

Just now, BeginnersMind said:

 

No it's not. There is no question that vaccines are a benefit to humans, unless you just want us to have more diseases and illnesses.

 

 

No, it's cut and dry. If you want to advocate for safer vaccines, so be it that's fine. But the risks are minimal compared with the rewards. 

 

It's not cut and dry. That's why there are anti-vaccers. That's why people believe in using subjective choice and not falling at the whim of the incestuous government/pharma lobby. 

 

Show me a vaccine that is 100% effective, and 100% risk free and i'm the first in line. Until that mark is reached there is still a conversation to have about the risk and reward. 

 

I also give not a lick of care to the "consensus" of the medical world. Don't forget that in it's time, blood letting was a prominently accepted medical practice. 

[DC Tom]

31 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

It's not cut and dry. That's why there are anti-vaccers. That's why people believe in using subjective choice and not falling at the whim of the incestuous government/pharma lobby. 

 

Show me a vaccine that is 100% effective, and 100% risk free and i'm the first in line. Until that mark is reached there is still a conversation to have about the risk and reward. 

 

I also give not a lick of care to the "consensus" of the medical world. Don't forget that in it's time, blood letting was a prominently accepted medical practice. 

 

Smallpox.  Effectiveness: 100%.  Reward: The disease no longer exists.  Risk: 1.5 in one million chance of potentially fatal reaction.  

 

Now have that conversation about risk vs. reward.

 

[KD in CA]

I agree, let's ban all the vaccines and get the global population back under control.

 

[DC Tom]

2 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

I agree, let's ban all the vaccines and get the global population back under control.

 

 

No, because - again - the purpose of vaccines is not to protect people, it's to prevent epidemics.

 

I'd rather reintroduce large predators into their historical ranges.  Saber-toothed tigers in downtown LA, for example.  Same effect, but much better television.

[whatdrought]

3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Smallpox.  Effectiveness: 100%.  Reward: The disease no longer exists.  Risk: 1.5 in one million chance of potentially fatal reaction.  

 

Now have that conversation about risk vs. reward.

 

 

https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/vaccine-basics/index.html

 

95%.

 

The argument that eradication obviously proves the effectiveness of a vaccine is a false equivalency. Many epidemics have flared up and died off throughout human history without vaccines being available. 

 

That being said, I'm not arguing against smallpox vaccination. I'm saying all vaccinations need to be addressed with thought and care and that the government shouldn't be able to legislate such things without a complete and total system of proof, which does not exist for modern vaccines. 

 

 

[DC Tom]

6 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/vaccine-basics/index.html

 

95%.

 

The argument that eradication obviously proves the effectiveness of a vaccine is a false equivalency. Many epidemics have flared up and died off throughout human history without vaccines being available. 

 

That being said, I'm not arguing against smallpox vaccination. I'm saying all vaccinations need to be addressed with thought and care and that the government shouldn't be able to legislate such things without a complete and total system of proof, which does not exist for modern vaccines. 

 

 

 

Again, misunderstanding vaccines as preventing disease, when they prevent epidemics.

[whatdrought]

5 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Again, misunderstanding vaccines as preventing disease, when they prevent epidemics.

 

Oh please, you're the one that argued the usefulness of the vaccination based on the eradication of the disease. 

 

Epidemics are widespread occurrences of the disease. Of course it's one and the same. 

Edited February 21, 2019 by whatdrought

[BeginnersMind]

25 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

Oh please, you're the one that argued the usefulness of the vaccination based on the eradication of the disease. 

 

Epidemics are widespread occurrences of the disease. Of course it's one and the same. 

 

He did that to counter your silly point that the only good vaccine is one that is 100% effective and riskproof. So he pulled out the smallpox vaccine as an example of close to 100%. 

 

Repeating: If almost everyone is vaccinated, and the vaccines work *almost* perfectly, the diseases don't spread and those for whom the vaccine was ineffective don't get exposed. Controlling epidemics is a worthy result of vaccines. 

 

Get vaccinated. Get your kids vaccinated. 

 

If you don't, you put my kid at risk, and that's not OK. And since there are no so many anti-vaxxers whose "knowledge" is completely wrong, it's turning into time for the government to take steps to ensure that people don't kill each other because of their wanton stupidity. 

 

If all you did was kill you and your kid by refusing vaccines, I'm cool with that. If the Jehovah's Witnesses want to refuse medical treatment, god bless 'em. But when your refusal to take advantage of simple medicine increases the chance of global epidemic, ***** you. 

 

Want to work to make vaccines safer? OK fine. But get vaccinated. 

Edited February 21, 2019 by BeginnersMind

[DC Tom]

46 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

Oh please, you're the one that argued the usefulness of the vaccination based on the eradication of the disease. 

 

Epidemics are widespread occurrences of the disease. Of course it's one and the same. 

 

No, epidemics are the widespread transmission of disease.

[whatdrought]

1 hour ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

He did that to counter your silly point that the only good vaccine is one that is 100% effective and riskproof. So he pulled out the smallpox vaccine as an example of close to 100%. 

 

Repeating: If almost everyone is vaccinated, and the vaccines work *almost* perfectly, the diseases don't spread and those for whom the vaccine was ineffective don't get exposed. Controlling epidemics is a worthy result of vaccines. 

 

Get vaccinated. Get your kids vaccinated. 

 

If you don't, you put my kid at risk, and that's not OK. And since there are no so many anti-vaxxers whose "knowledge" is completely wrong, it's turning into time for the government to take steps to ensure that people don't kill each other because of their wanton stupidity. 

 

If all you did was kill you and your kid by refusing vaccines, I'm cool with that. If the Jehovah's Witnesses want to refuse medical treatment, god bless 'em. But when your refusal to take advantage of simple medicine increases the chance of global epidemic, ***** you. 

 

Want to work to make vaccines safer? OK fine. But get vaccinated. 

 

I didn't say the only good vaccine is one that is 100%. I said that unless one is 100%, theres a conversation with two sides- which you seem happy to ignore. Tom countered with an example that is not 100%, even though he stated it is. 

 

Explain to me this, if vaccines work why is your vaccinated kid at risk by unvanccinated kids? 

 

Your entire argument is that because you're right, the government should act. 

 

My argument is that because there is not a consensus (and there isn't, even if you want to discredit the other side) then the government shouldn't force things.

 

I'm not anti-vaccine, i'm anti government overreach and "almost" from bull#### opinions like yours isn't enough to change my mind on that. 

 

 

52 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

No, epidemics are the widespread transmission of disease.

 

I don't know what distinction you're arguing, but in order to prevent the epidemics, you must prevent the disease, which is what you argued against in the first place. 

 

 

[DC Tom]

5 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

I don't know what distinction you're arguing, but in order to prevent the epidemics, you must prevent the disease, which is what you argued against in the first place. 

 

 

 

What, is the word "transmission" invisible?  

 

TRANSMISSION.

 

Does that help?  In order to prevent epidemics, you must prevent the of TRANSMISSION disease.

 

[whatdrought]

1 hour ago, DC Tom said:

 

Again, misunderstanding vaccines as preventing disease, when they prevent epidemics.

 

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

What, is the word "transmission" invisible?  

 

TRANSMISSION.

 

Does that help?  In order to prevent epidemics, you must prevent the of TRANSMISSION disease.

 

 

 

And preventing transmission of the disease comes from preventing the disease!!! An epidemic is not an outbreak of the transmission of the disease, but rather it's an outbreak of the disease! 

 

 

[BeginnersMind]

13 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

Explain to me this, if vaccines work why is your vaccinated kid at risk by unvanccinated kids? 

 

Vaccines prevent disease at a high rate, but more importantly, they prevent the SPREAD of disease to those people who might otherwise be in the low percentage of people for whom they are ineffective. How hard is this to understand? 

 

Quote

 

Your entire argument is that because you're right, the government should act. 

 

My argument is that because there is not a consensus (and there isn't, even if you want to discredit the other side) then the government shouldn't force things.

 

I'm not anti-vaccine, i'm anti government overreach and "almost" from bull#### opinions like yours isn't enough to change my mind on that. 

 

I, too, am against government overreach. But if your stupidity goes so far that you think it's your right not to vaccinate your kids and that action along with the other morons who think similarly, OF COURSE, leads to epidemics that kill and infect lots of other people, then yes, I'm for government intervention. 

 

I'd prefer that people were just plan smarter and got vaccinated...like they used to. But Jenny McCarthy has won and the Internet can give echo to any kooky belief, so people read that if they get a vaccine, their kid will get autism and go with that. And now we have polio outbreaks in America. Polio FFS.  

Edited February 21, 2019 by BeginnersMind

[Foxx]

1 minute ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Vaccines prevent disease at a high rate, but more importantly, they prevent the SPREAD of disease to those people who might otherwise be in the low percentage of people for whom they are ineffective. How hard is this to understand? 

 

 

I, too, am against government overreach. But if your stupidity goes so far that you think it's your right not to vaccinate your kids and that action along with the other morons who think similarly, OF COURSE, leads to epidemics that kill and infect lots of other people, then yes, I'm for government intervention. 

 

I'd prefer that people were just plan smarter and got vaccinated. 

the government has no right to tell me to vaccinate my kids. absolutely none.

[BeginnersMind]

14 minutes ago, Foxx said:

the government has no right to tell me to vaccinate my kids. absolutely none.

 

Don't kill my kid. 

 

And hopefully the government and every school denies unvaccinated kids access to any contact with anyone where legal. 

 

But it's Trump's administration that is considering mandatory vaccination [for school students] because there is an outbreak of stupidity, which unfortunately can't be cured. 

 

[edited for clarity]

Edited February 21, 2019 by BeginnersMind

[Foxx]

4 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Don't kill my kid. 

 

And hopefully the government and every school denies unvaccinated kids access to any contact with anyone where legal. 

 

But it's Trump's administration that is considering mandatory vaccination because there is an outbreak of stupidity, which unfortunately can't be cured. 

stay the ***** out of my life.

[BeginnersMind]

4 minutes ago, Foxx said:

stay the ***** out of my life.

 

Don't kill my kid, or me, or other people and I'll be happy to stay out. 

 

You can be as stupid as you want and lather up in the conspiracy pool all day, but I have those boundaries. 

 

 

Edited February 21, 2019 by BeginnersMind

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, whatdrought said:

 

And preventing transmission of the disease comes from preventing the disease!!! An epidemic is not an outbreak of the transmission of the disease, but rather it's an outbreak of the disease! 

 

 

Define "outbreak."

 

No, I'll do it for you: it's the transmission of an infectious disease through a population over a given period of time.  An "epidemic" of an infectious disease is literally the transmission of that disease.

 

Hell, you yourself said that vaccines aren't 100% effective.  With that constraint, the only way they would work is if they prevented transmission, because you certainly couldn't argue they prevent disease.  That's exactly the argument anti-vaxxers use, in fact: that vaccines aren't effective at disease prevention, because they're not 100% effective.  And it's exactly why they're wrong: because they are completely effective at stopping epidemics, by blocking the transmission of disease.  For example: smallpox.  Also, in the US, polio, rubella, and - once upon a time - measles.  

 

Measles is, in fact, the perfect example of the concept I'm trying to pound in to your thick skull.  Measles ceased to be an epidemic disease in the US in 2000 - there were still cases, imported from other countries, but which didn't spread.  There were no native cases of measles in the US in 2000.  Now, 20 years later, with vaccination rates low in some communities, those communities are seeing the transmission of measles.  

[BeginnersMind]

California, Washington have lax to no school requirements...this is, as I mentioned earlier...an interesting intersection of the fringes of Ds and Rs coming together. Conspiracy "think" overlap.

 

The measles thing is incredible. 

[DC Tom]

Just now, BeginnersMind said:

California, Washington have lax to no school requirements...this is, as I mentioned earlier...an interesting intersection of the fringes of Ds and Rs coming together. Conspiracy "think" overlap.

 

The measles thing is incredible. 

 

What's funny is seeing the anti-vaxxers migrate over the past 30 years from being fringe leftists to fringe rightists.  

 

Best evidence I've seen that when you get to the fringe, there is no "left" or "right."  Just loons.

[Wacka]

I'm all for a vaccine against TDS!

[Foxx]

15 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Don't kill my kid, or me, or other people and I'll be happy to stay out. 

 

You can be as stupid as you want and lather up in the conspiracy pool all day, but I have those boundaries. 

 

 

typical liberal mindset.

 

stay.

the.

*****.

out.

of.

my.

life.

[BeginnersMind]

Just now, Foxx said:

typical liberal mindset.

 

stay.

the.

*****.

out.

of.

my.

life.

 

Don't.

Kill.

Other.

People.

(Stupid-head.)

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, Foxx said:

typical liberal mindset.

 

stay.

the.

*****.

out.

of.

my.

life.

 

Then keep yellow fever out of mine, and never leave your house.  

 

You want to be completely uninfluenced by others?  Fine.  Don't associate with anyone.  But if you're going to, then adhere to a minimum requirement of responsibility in social interaction, which should include not giving me yellow fever.

[Foxx]

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Then keep yellow fever out of mine, and never leave your house.  

 

You want to be completely uninfluenced by others?  Fine.  Don't associate with anyone.  But if you're going to, then adhere to a minimum requirement of responsibility in social interaction, which should include not giving me yellow fever.

i never said i wouldn't vaccinate (nor that i would for that matter). those who would have the government tell me that i have to, are idiots. governmental intervention is rarely the correct answer.

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, Foxx said:

i never said i wouldn't vaccinate (nor that i would for that matter). those who would have the government tell me that i have to, are idiots. governmental intervention is rarely the correct answer.

 

I also never said you had yellow fever.  It's called "illustrating a point."  

[BeginnersMind]

1 hour ago, Foxx said:

i never said i wouldn't vaccinate (nor that i would for that matter). those who would have the government tell me that i have to, are idiots. governmental intervention is rarely the correct answer.

 

Here’s the thing. The pursuit of life and happiness gets ***** up when you (apparently not you personally but the you of this argument) contribute to the spread of polio, measles, etc. 

 

So if you want to send your kid into a school, where disease transmission is on hyperdrive, the government can require you to vaccinate your kid. So they don’t help kill other kids. 

 

And if you don’t like it, homeschool that kid up, live in the compound bubble, and please order your deliveries by drone. Don’t use hospitals. Don’t go to movies. Never leave and re enter the US. And on and on.

 

There will be moments when the government will give you a choice: vaccine and some privilege (like school) vs life in a bubble in Colorado. Make the better choice. 

Edited February 22, 2019 by BeginnersMind

[ExiledInIllinois]

Who are the the two idiots?

 

Too bad not public.

[ExiledInIllinois]

On 2/20/2019 at 3:56 PM, LABillzFan said:

I look forward to the election when some idiot starts a moronic thread like "Smollet and Harris: Your Stance," followed by "Smollet faked his attack, blamed it two black men, and Kamala Harris called it a modern day lynching. Do you agree with Harris or are you not a completely freaking moron and realize that Smollet pulled a Kaepernick to hide the fact that he is about to lose his job!"

 

 

Let me guess?  You're one of the 2 idiots.

 

WTF does this have to do with vaxxing.  Holy ExiledInIllinois non-sequitur Batman! You've out did me!

 

Okay Rain Man... I will try and follow. Wopner coming on, you got your Fruit of the Loom's on?

Edited February 22, 2019 by ExiledInIllinois

[whatdrought]

2 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

Define "outbreak."

 

No, I'll do it for you: it's the transmission of an infectious disease through a population over a given period of time.  An "epidemic" of an infectious disease is literally the transmission of that disease.

 

Hell, you yourself said that vaccines aren't 100% effective.  With that constraint, the only way they would work is if they prevented transmission, because you certainly couldn't argue they prevent disease.  That's exactly the argument anti-vaxxers use, in fact: that vaccines aren't effective at disease prevention, because they're not 100% effective.  And it's exactly why they're wrong: because they are completely effective at stopping epidemics, by blocking the transmission of disease.  For example: smallpox.  Also, in the US, polio, rubella, and - once upon a time - measles.  

 

Measles is, in fact, the perfect example of the concept I'm trying to pound in to your thick skull.  Measles ceased to be an epidemic disease in the US in 2000 - there were still cases, imported from other countries, but which didn't spread.  There were no native cases of measles in the US in 2000.  Now, 20 years later, with vaccination rates low in some communities, those communities are seeing the transmission of measles.  

 

And the concept that I'm trying to pound into your thick skull is that your original assertion: 

 

4 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

Again, misunderstanding vaccines as preventing disease, when they prevent epidemics.

 

Is ridiculous because you cannot prevent epidemics without preventing the disease! You're being stupid and splitting hairs! If the disease spreads it becomes an epidemic, ergo, stopping the disease stops the outbreak/epidemic! 

 

 

2 hours ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Vaccines prevent disease at a high rate, but more importantly, they prevent the SPREAD of disease to those people who might otherwise be in the low percentage of people for whom they are ineffective. How hard is this to understand? 

 

I, too, am against government overreach. But if your stupidity goes so far that you think it's your right not to vaccinate your kids and that action along with the other morons who think similarly, OF COURSE, leads to epidemics that kill and infect lots of other people, then yes, I'm for government intervention. 

 

I'd prefer that people were just plan smarter and got vaccinated...like they used to. But Jenny McCarthy has won and the Internet can give echo to any kooky belief, so people read that if they get a vaccine, their kid will get autism and go with that. And now we have polio outbreaks in America. Polio FFS.  

 

You're arguing for the wholesale conscription into a system that is "good enough." If you believe in vaccines then vaccinate your kids and they'll be safe. 

 

 

So what you're saying is you don't like government overreach when it doesn't line up with your opinion and your views. 

 

The reason we're discussing this is because it isn't a cut and dry situation. There are two sides to this debate and you like to pretend that there isn't instead of having the actual conversation. 

 

[whatdrought]

2 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

Then keep yellow fever out of mine, and never leave your house.  

 

You want to be completely uninfluenced by others?  Fine.  Don't associate with anyone.  But if you're going to, then adhere to a minimum requirement of responsibility in social interaction, which should include not giving me yellow fever.

 

Or, how about you never leave yours? That coin has two sides. 

[BeginnersMind]

Vaccines work. 

 

Except when morons don’t vaccinate and kill people. 

 

Can I make it any simpler? 

 

Are we really doing this in 2019? This isn’t rocket science people. There’s no grand conspiracy. Vaccines just work. But to prevent transmission for many diseases, they need mass adoption. 

 

Please read up on the measles comeback. It was 100% preventable. And then came the anti vax make beleive non science. 

Edited February 22, 2019 by BeginnersMind

[Paulus]

The push against anti-vaccers gets so absurd that they lose all touch with reality and tend to make more folks anti-vaccers. 

 

Just acknowledge there are potential-side effects which we should prepare ourselves for, just in case. Even the medical staff does after I get my son's shots updated. Why is it so hard to do, without adding some smarmy comment? Knowledge is power.

 

Man, if not getting vaccines weren't so stupid, I'd consider doing it myself just because of how annoying the anti-anti-vaccers are. You guys do a disservice to society by being so daft. More bees with honey, dipshits.

 

Half of PPP right there. So content to be unaware.

Edited February 22, 2019 by Paulus

[DC Tom]

2 hours ago, whatdrought said:

 

And the concept that I'm trying to pound into your thick skull is that your original assertion: 

 

 

Is ridiculous because you cannot prevent epidemics without preventing the disease! You're being stupid and splitting hairs! If the disease spreads it becomes an epidemic, ergo, stopping the disease stops the outbreak/epidemic! 

 

 

The difference is that you're a moron, and I'm correct.  I've given you objective examples of my being correct, and you being a moron.  

 

But by all means, keep being a moron.  

2 hours ago, whatdrought said:

 

Or, how about you never leave yours? That coin has two sides. 

 

No, it doesn't.  Your unvaccinated ass puts the entire public at risk.  My vaccinated ass doesn't.  They're not equivalent.  

 

That's the crux of your stupidity: you can't differentiate between public health and individual health.  You're not alone in that regard, of course...but your persistence in remaining completely ignorant of it whilst having it explained to you is somewhat unique.

[Paulus]

For Tom...

 

 

[BringBackOrton]

1 hour ago, Paulus said:

The push against anti-vaccers gets so absurd that they lose all touch with reality and tend to make more folks anti-vaccers. 

 

Just acknowledge there are potential-side effects which we should prepare ourselves for, just in case. Even the medical staff does after I get my son's shots updated. Why is it so hard to do, without adding some smarmy comment? Knowledge is power.

 

Man, if not getting vaccines weren't so stupid, I'd consider doing it myself just because of how annoying the anti-anti-vaccers are. You guys do a disservice to society by being so daft. More bees with honey, dipshits.

 

Half of PPP right there. So content to be unaware.

That's because most, if not all of "anti-vaxxers" are morons.

 

You don't get to cry persecution from being called a ###### when you're acting ######ed.  Furthermore, moron bees think the honey is poisoned. 

 

How do you "prepare" yourself for "potential side effects?"  Do you even know anything about the talking points you're spouting?

 

EDIT: this site's word filter sucks.  Mentally ######ed is blocked?

Edited February 22, 2019 by BringBackOrton