Who is the best for 2016

Measles is one of the diseases which has a lower mortality rate in countries with advanced medical systems but still has crippling side effects. Why don't we look at the before/after with some diseases with higher mortality rates.

Let's summarize again the results of the IOM study you keep pushing - the 2011 Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality report from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) - "Of the 158 causality conclusions, the majority of cases (135 vaccine-adverse event pairs), the evidence was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship. Overall, the committee concludes that few health problems are caused by or clearly associated with vaccines." Only eight of the pairs showed any correlation, and the probability of side effects were minimal compared to the benefit. I have never quoted or pushed a study from the medical industry on this thread, only the ones from the IOM.

Why should a vaccine be forced on kids for a disease that has a low mortality rate in the U.S. due to its advanced medical system but a high mortality rate in less advanced countries - Do you want your kid and their friends to be living as cripples for the remainder of their lives? The three likely medical consequences of measles are:
  • Pneumonia (a serious lung infection)
  • Lifelong brain damage
  • Deafness


They say they cannot conclude whether the vaccines cause or do not cause the serious health problems. Would you mind explaining to me how they go from there to 'few health problems are caused by vaccines?' It is contradictory and makes zero sense. Like i said before. If a trader at GS said something like that, they'd get fired. Because it's their own money. But gov't workers can say anything and get away with it.

And about those measles. There may be a 'likely' consequence of those medical problems in other countries where they have no decent hygiene or medical care, but to say that it is 'likely' to have those things happen to you in the US if you get measles in just plain inaccurate. Not the truth.
 
They say they cannot conclude whether the vaccines cause or do not cause the serious health problems. Would you mind explaining to me how they go from there to 'few health problems are caused by vaccines?' It is contradictory and makes zero sense. Like i said before. If a trader at GS said something like that, they'd get fired. Because it's their own money. But gov't workers can say anything and get away with it.

And about those measles. There may be a 'likely' consequence of those medical problems in other countries where they have no decent hygiene or medical care, but to say that it is 'likely' to have those things happen to you in the US if you get measles in just plain inaccurate. Not the truth.

You can go read the entire study on why they conclude "few health problems are caused by vaccines". This is their results and I am merely quoting it.

While you are at it... you can read up on the number of people in the U.S. who are deaf or brain-damaged due to measles.

Here is the latest information from WHO on deaths from measles world-wide:

"New mortality estimates from WHO show that annual measles deaths have reached historic lows, dropping 78% from more than 562 000 in 2000 to 122 000 in 2012. During this time period, an estimated 13.8 million deaths have been prevented by measles vaccination and surveillance data showed that reported cases declined 77% from 853 480 to 226 722."

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/notes/2014/measles-20140206/en/
 
Last edited:
I find it interesting that the media pushes that anti-vaxxers are a bunch of right-wing anti-science conservatives with a libertarian philosophy.

ALL of the anti-vaxxers I know personally are leftest liberals including my brother-in-law.
It is amusing that these characters believe the "science" behind global warming and push it relentlessly (because it agrees with their politics), but are unwilling to believe the science behind vaccines.
 
There are two issues here. One, obama ushered in untold numbers of people illegally and spread them throughout the country and into unsuspecting schools. A significant number had serious diseases. At least two outbreaks, one of measles, the other of the mystery virus that causes paralysis, ensued. The media had virtually no interest in this story.

The other issue is a few people objected to vaccinations. They are being pilloried and held responsible for the measles outbreak. Perhaps it is their fault, who knows.

The problem is the government and media have a very selective sense of urgency and outrage. Ebola was treated negligently and people were infected as a result. People who raised legitimate concerns were mocked. Same with the illegals.

Would I get my kids vaccinated? Yes of course. Do i trust the government to protect our health and tell us the truth? No, not at all. They have allowed significant risks, eg illegals, immigrants with HIV, Ebola, to threaten us because of politicla interests.

So Jenny McCarthy is well-meaning but deluded, but that doesn't mean the government puts our health foremost. We know under this president it doesn't.
 
I find it interesting that the media pushes that anti-vaxxers are a bunch of right-wing anti-science conservatives with a libertarian philosophy.
ALL of the anti-vaxxers I know personally are leftest liberals including my brother-in-law. It is amusing that these characters believe the "science" behind global warming and push it relentlessly (because it agrees with their politics), but are unwilling to believe the science behind vaccines.
It's true, there is a lot of new age nonsense going around amongst the left.
 
So all the anti-vaxxers here are actually leftist liberals?

Who'd'a thought?
Now that AV has gotten the national spotlight, the issue will quickly resolve into either left or right. Call it "collapsing the wave function".
: )
 
Last edited:
DB, do you think it's logically impossible to accept the necessity and wisdom of vaccines but also harbor doubts about the wisdom of giving the government so much power over our children's health?

Liberals never trust the government's arguments on national security issues. When it comes to our health however, suddenly they take everything at face value. True conservatives, ie not the McCainiacs, have a healthy scepticism of all things government.
 
DB, do you think it's logically impossible to accept the necessity and wisdom of vaccines but also harbor doubts about the wisdom of giving the government so much power over our children's health?

If by "power" you mean requiring vaccinations, yes.
 
Incidentally, when you hear someone from the gov't tell you that this or that vaccine is harmless, maybe you could ask them just what it is that makes them so sure. The most likely answer is that they believe the gov' t wouldn't recommend them and the medical community wouldn't give them if they weren't safe. That's all they'll be able to give you. At least without lying. Because the gov't (Institute of Medicine) actually has done a study of side effects from measles and other vaccines. And what they found was that they were unable to conclude whether a number of major health problems that occurred in conjunction with the vaccines were or were not caused by the vaccines. They don't know. That's the key point. They do not know. They cannot give an honest answer about whether the vaccines are safe or not.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...ccines-are-dangerous-says-the-government.aspx

It is amusing that you are quoting a twisted article from a website that misrepresents government claims about vaccines.

Dr. Mercola, the owner of the website, is a complete fraud. He has been ordered by the FDA multiple times to stop making false claims (http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/mercola.html). He has been sued countless times. And is featured in articles like - 9 Reasons to Completely Ignore Joseph Mercola and Joe Mercola: 15 years of promoting quackery and 4 of the Biggest Quacks Plaguing America with False Claims About Science.
 
Back
Top