General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsReport: Rich Hollywood Anti-Vaxxers are DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for Deadly Whooping Cough Epidemic
http://aattp.org/report-rich-hollywood-anti-vaxxers-are-directly-responsible-for-deadly-whooping-cough-epidemic/Yeah, the story is complex, but the reality remains: If not for the anti-vaccine movement, much of the resurgence of vaccine preventable diseases would not have occurred.
Anit-vaxers love to pretend otherwise, which is rather odd, in and of itself, since a resurgence appears to be their goal.
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)Just Shut Up. If it weren't for them, more kids would be getting immunized against whooping cough, etc.
Wait Wut
(8,492 posts)Too many people equate fame and fortune with intelligence and believe any damned thing they say.
"I wrote some great books, or some fantastic songs, or acted very well in a few movies, thus, I also understand the science of everything," uh, yeah.
Archae
(46,337 posts)Is be related to the Kennedys or a be a Playboy centerfold.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)And we wouldn't be facing the backlash against "liberals who ignore science." (Well, we would have to have more liberals call BS on the anti-GMO movement, as well, but still...)
Archae
(46,337 posts)Jane Goodall.
Yes. Same woman who made such a name for herself studying chimpanzees, is anti-GMO, supports a TM "graduate" and is a plagiarist.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/26/jane-goodall-s-troubling-error-filled-new-book-seeds-of-hope.html
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Thus, we have Goodall against science, in this case.
Ugh.
Archae
(46,337 posts)Linus Pauling went into a field he had no clue about, nutrition, and claimed that megadoses of vitamin C could cure everything, even a cold.
It didn't work, Pauling himself died of prostate cancer.
He isn't the only one.
There are actual biologists who are creationists.
Astronomers too.
When Jane Goodall gave a glowing review of a Maharishi Yogi graduate's book on GMO's, she lost all credibility.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)until properly tested. It is called the Precautionary Principle.
You can just keep repeating your propaganda, and I will do my best to correct you.
Sort of silly.
Archae
(46,337 posts)I realize that being for actual SCIENCE as opposed to hysterics makes me a "Monsanto shill" in some views, but the fact is the anti-GMO movement is just like the creationist movement and the anti-vaxxers.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)keep repeating this, but it is far from the case. No trained scientist can say that something is safe unless tested properly by parties not associated with the success of the product being launched.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)... you still ignore those studies.
End of your participation in any discussion.
alp227
(32,034 posts)The user hosts the "Astrology, Spirituality & Alternative Healing" board. That's so you have an idea why you're seeing what you're seeing. There's this disconnect on DU between those who accept science vs. those who feign skepticism to justify their anti-GMO biases.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Still, WOW!
Archae
(46,337 posts)It labels the anti-GMO people as a cult.
Just like the anti-vaxxers.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/07/08/the-cult-of-anti-gmo-a-lot-like-the-cult-of-antivaccine/
I had a run-in years ago with an astrology buff here on DU.
I asked for some actual evidence (OHMERGAWD!) that astrology is valid.
I got insulted, said I was "closed-minded," the works.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)Generally one insults and bullies when one feels insecure and lost.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)thinks that they have the right to ridicule a real scientist who is of course against gmo's (as we all are) until proven safe by disinterested parties.
It is called the Precautionary Principle and is held by most all scientists worldwide.
Your attempt here is silly and pretty obvious.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)... is not utilized by any noticeable percentage of scientists anywhere.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)Check your facts, google it.
Posting 1+1 = 11 enough times does not make it come true.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)We would be in the dark ages still, if it was.
You are not being honest, as usual.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)gmo's cannot be considered safe.
It is called the Precautionary Principle.
Archae
(46,337 posts)Not hysterical accusations from a graduate of the Trancendental Meditiation "college."
http://americanloons.blogspot.ca/2014/09/1157-jeffery-smith.html
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)Agree on this, just the one bought off by US industry are for it.
Check your facts.
Archae
(46,337 posts)Creationists use this attack.
So do climate change deniers.
Big Organic (oh, they exist, whether you like it or not,) saw you coming a mile away.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Or are you going to claim that Jeffery Smith is a legitimate scientist?
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)And I think I see a pink elephant flying outside my window!
I think you lose the argument when you jump to statements like that. I don't even know who the fuck that idiot is. I'm just saying you undermine your "I'm all about science" when all you do is link to blogs.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Thus, none of your responses have any validity.
Please try harder.
Thank you.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)If he is not going nuts about vaccines he is picking on organic farmers and defending gmo's as wonder foods. Sad, really. But dangerous, as he is persistent as well as misguided. And gives scientists a bad name.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)That is acknowledged.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)since I don't think he is one.
As I've said, I know many scientists and none are that closed minded. Most hold opinions far removed from what you see here. I'll trust them over some internet personality who post links to blogs as proof.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)And typical of the anti-vaccine crowd.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Thanks for the giggles!
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)I've had a few laughs myself tonight.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)At least mine haven't been promoting people to avoid vaccines.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)But thanks for the kicks!!!!
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)Can't get much more real than a single parent of 4 (fully vaccinated children), newly graduated and now working full time but still under the poverty line. But thanks for feeling sorry for me. Right back atcha!
Now I have to go get my beauty rest as I have to get up for work tomorrow. Hope you can hold up your end here. Toodles.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)point of view and actual distortions are being presented as science.
Response to Tumbulu (Reply #207)
Post removed
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)And you are pretty outrageous in your attacks, which are personal. Keep it up, and you will get banned.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)Last edited Fri Sep 19, 2014, 02:55 AM - Edit history (1)
Easy question to answer.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)The vast majority of actual scientists from around the world know GMOs are safe.
You can pretend otherwise all you want, but it won't change reality on that, or on vaccines.
alp227
(32,034 posts)Because it throws the burden of proof on those who do not make an argument about X rather than actively making an argument about why X is bad.
proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)Dr. Paul Offit Tells Jon Stewart That Caucasian Upper Middle Class Educated are....
By Anne Dachel
June 06, 2014
IMAGE: http://www.rescuepost.com/.a/6a00d8357f3f2969e201a511c7e697970c-pi
<>
So just who isn't vaccinating?
Offit: "They're communities that have large populations of Caucasian, upper middle class residents who are college educated, often graduate school educated, and believe simply by Googling the term 'vaccine' on the Internet, they can know as much, if not more than anyone who's giving them advice."
Bee feigned shock that her neighborhood might contain non-vaccinating parents.
Does this make any sense in the real world? If white, upper middle class, college educated parents are MORE LIKELY not to follow the recommended schedule, then the reverse must be true: lower class, uneducated parents willingly vaccinate their children according to the recommended schedule. This disconnect from reality should raise lots of questions.
MORE: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/06/04/the-daily-show-hilarious-segment-about-vaccines-not-so-hilariously-wrong-about-the-politics-of-vaccine-denialism/
Again, terms here aren't defined and the framing is inane. It's advertising, not science.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)I take it. You are pro GMO food also right?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Yes.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)that you could be wrong.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)I once bought into the anti-GMO arguments. Then I challenged myself by looking at the available evidence.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)Response to upaloopa (Reply #10)
Dont call me Shirley This message was self-deleted by its author.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)it's odd really, even the vehemence directed toward people who have never said they were anti anything but only want to do their own research is sharp and quick. It is odd because this is not liberal in my opinion yet is so widely accepted as the norm on the left in so much that to not accept the claims of pharmaceutical companies and soon, giant food corporations as gospel you are not one of us.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)akin to fundamentalist religion believers.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)and boring.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)And that's why you don't want to know about science.
We all get that.
alp227
(32,034 posts)Not every authority can be compared to religion.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)That has become a classic rant when one is shown the actual reality of the actual research.
Thus, if one says, "Do your own research," it actually means, "I'm right. I have chosen to ignore the actual research, the actual science of the matter."
I'm too old for decades old mantras. Stop. Please.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)You have your opinion but that is all it is.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)The evidence base is not an opinion.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Pretending otherwise is harmful.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)and I also talk to scientists (am related to a couple) and none of them are quite as closed minded as you are. You continuously undermine your argument by being combative. We've had this conversation before. You are capable of not being condescending, I don't know why you still feel the need to be like that. No one is denying any peer reviewed studies. Show me where they are. And it's not a conspiracy to question some scientists ties to the pharmaceutical industry. Here in Canada there was a very huge news story/documentary on the CBC (a very reputable source) that showed many direct and indirect financial ties of large pharmaceutical companies to the biggest names in science in Canada. I wouldn't say that is a conspiracy because it is based in facts, the scientists themselves who were interviewed admitted it. It's always good to be cautious and push those companies to make their products even safer and more effective than they already are. And it's always good to push scientists to disclose where their financial ties are. There have been, in the past, some issues with some vaccines (like with the adjuvant used in some H1N1 vaccines in Europe). Denying those issues ever existed doesn't make it better, it makes it worse (And strengthens the anti-vaxxers). Acknowledging the issues and showing some compassion for those affected (imagined or real) and pushing for better testing and monitoring doesn't hurt anyone, it helps them and it increases vaccination rates.
Both sides have their pretenders. I'm not one of them. Are you?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)And you seem to be fine with pretenders. Heck, it appears that you don't know what a logical fallacy is...
Why is that?
alp227
(32,034 posts)"This phrase is a form of the escape hatch used by a charlatan who wants to win the argument but does not want to bear the burden of proof."
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Of course, you can't, so you go ad hominem instead.
Lame stuff.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)still_one
(92,233 posts)chrisa
(4,524 posts)Why believe in science when you can just make things up and pretend that it's real? That's worked so well before!
xchrom
(108,903 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Irresponsible and fraudulent and since withdrawn by the journal that published it (and Wakefield himself struck off the medical register for his research fraud).
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)There is simply no justification for the horrors they have caused.
Response to HuckleB (Reply #9)
Post removed
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Finding BS on the Internet is not hard. That's not how science works, however.
Stop being conned so easily.
cureautismnow
(1,676 posts)"My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, where I have worked since 1998.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE-AUGUST 27,2014
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM W. THOMPSON, Ph.D., REGARDING THE 2004 ARTICLE EXAMINING THE POSSIBILITY OF A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MMR VACCINE AND AUTISM
My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, where I have worked since 1998.
I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed."
http://www.morganverkamp.com/august-27-2014-press-release-statement-of-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-the-2004-article-examining-the-possibility-of-a-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/
The only BS on the internet I see is your response.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Do you have any peer reviewed evidence on a consensus basis to offer?
If not, well, my point stands quite vehemently.
cureautismnow
(1,676 posts)He released that statement through his attorney. Again, are you calling him a liar?
You really are behind the times, aren't you? Or are you just feigning ignorance?
""I regret that my co-authors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article," Thompson said in a statement sent to CNN by his lawyer. "I have had many discussions with Dr. Brian Hooker over the last 10 months regarding studies the CDC has carried out regarding vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes, including autism spectrum disorders. I share his belief that CDC decision-making and analyses should be transparent."
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/27/health/irpt-cdc-autism-vaccine-study/
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)And it wasn't a study.
And single studies do not change the evidence base all of a sudden. I get that you want to pretend that vaccines cause autism. Alas, it's just not true. The number of studies showing otherwise is overwhelming. Single studies, even when published in peer-reviewed journals do not turn life on its end. It's time to get away from the bad propaganda. You can do it!
cureautismnow
(1,676 posts)Here's the study:
"Age at first measles-mumps-rubella vaccination in children with autism and school-matched control subjects: a population-based study in metropolitan atlanta."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14754936
It is peer-reviewed and IT IS A FRAUD put forth by the CDC.
Oh, let me help you with the authors of the report.
DeStefano F1, Bhasin TK, Thompson WW, Yeargin-Allsopp M, Boyle C.
Now tell me, do you see Mr. Thompson's name on the study? Yes? T-H-O-M-P-S-O-N. Does that help?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)You have to repeat studies. Thousands of studies show vaccines do not cause autism.
Nor does this one, despite your false pretenses about it.
I gave you time to come to your senses. You did not.
I'm too old to play the games you want to play. Vaccines do not cause autism. Studies have made that abundantly clear.
Why do you pretend otherwise?
cureautismnow
(1,676 posts)You said Thompson's study was not in a peer reviewed journal and you said it wasn't a study. It was in Pediatrics, which is a peer-reviewed journal.
Why should I believe anything you say when you don't tell the truth?
You know damned well that this study was used to support the administration of the mmr and now it has been exposed for the fraud that it was.
Show me "thousands" of studies that vaccines don't contribute to autism.
Here's 28 that support the opposite:
The Journal of Pediatrics November 1999; 135(5):559-63
The Journal of Pediatrics 2000; 138(3): 366-372
Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003; 23(6): 504-517
Journal of Neuroimmunology 2005
Brain, Behavior and Immunity 1993; 7: 97-103
Pediatric Neurology 2003; 28(4): 1-3
Neuropsychobiology 2005; 51 7-85
The Journal of Pediatrics May 2005;146(5):605-10
Autism Insights 2009; 1: 1-11
Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology February 2009; 23(2): 95-98
Annals of Clinical Psychiatry 2009:21(3): 148-161
Journal of Child Neurology June 29, 2009; 000:1-6
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders March 2009;39(3):405-13
Medical Hypotheses August 1998;51:133-144.
Journal of Child Neurology July 2000; ;15(7):429-35
Lancet. 1972;2:883884.
Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia January-March 1971;1:48-62
Journal of Pediatrics March 2001;138:366-372.
Molecular Psychiatry 2002;7:375-382.
American Journal of Gastroenterolgy April 2004;598-605.
Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003;23:504-517.
Neuroimmunology April 2006;173(1-2):126-34.
Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol Biol. Psychiatry December 30 2006;30:1472-1477.
Clinical Infectious Diseases September 1 2002;35(Suppl 1):S6-S16
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2004;70(11):6459-6465
Journal of Medical Microbiology October 2005;54 87-991
Archivos venezolanos de puericultura y pediatría 2006; Vol 69 (1): 19-25.
Gastroenterology. 2005:128 (Suppl 2);Abstract-303
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)You pretended that a study showed what it did not show.
You were caught, and you're doubling down.
And you fail to acknowledge that even if a single study did show that, it is overwhelmed by thousands of studies that don't show that.
Why can't you be honest?
cureautismnow
(1,676 posts)You said, "His "study" was not published in a peer reviewed journal. And it wasn't a study."
This was his study.
"Pediatrics. 2004 Feb;113(2):259-66.
Age at first measles-mumps-rubella vaccination in children with autism and school-matched control subjects: a population-based study in metropolitan atlanta.
DeStefano F1, Bhasin TK, Thompson WW, Yeargin-Allsopp M, Boyle C.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
To compare ages at first measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination between children with autism and children who did not have autism in the total population and in selected subgroups, including children with regression in development.
METHODS:
A case-control study was conducted in metropolitan Atlanta. Case children (N = 624) were identified from multiple sources and matched to control children (N = 1824) on age, gender, and school. Vaccination data were abstracted from immunization forms required for school entry. Records of children who were born in Georgia were linked to Georgia birth certificates for information on maternal and birth factors. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs).
RESULTS:
The overall distribution of ages at MMR vaccination among children with autism was similar to that of matched control children; most case (70.5%) and control children (67.5%) were vaccinated between 12 and 17 months of age. Similar proportions of case and control children had been vaccinated before 18 or before 24 months. No significant associations for either of these age cutoffs were found for specific case subgroups, including those with evidence of developmental regression. More case (93.4%) than control children (90.6%) were vaccinated before 36 months (OR: 1.49; 95% confidence interval: 1.04-2.14 in the total sample; OR: 1.23; 95% confidence interval: 0.64-2.36 in the birth certificate sample). This association was strongest in the 3- to 5-year age group.
CONCLUSIONS:
Similar proportions of case and control children were vaccinated by the recommended age or shortly after (ie, before 18 months) and before the age by which atypical development is usually recognized in children with autism (ie, 24 months). Vaccination before 36 months was more common among case children than control children, especially among children 3 to 5 years of age, likely reflecting immunization requirements for enrollment in early intervention programs."
He now says "I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics."
So, this wasn't a study and Pediatrics isn't a peer-reviewed journal? Seriously, you are standing on that? If so, I just want to know what time are visiting hours over in your psychiatric ward?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)You acknowledged that the claim that you made was not a part of any study!!!!
And you have no legitimate source for your claim.
Thank YOU!!!!
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)going back over a decade to find 28 papers that support a contrary position is hardly compelling.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)Why won't you?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Why would you pretend otherwise?
Do you have an honest bone in your body?
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)or perhaps you are a bot.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)that you are a bot? ?? Where? Or do you mean I should hold a poll to create a review of your peers?
Sorry, I couldn't resist joking. That's exactly how the thread reads.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)crazy antivaxxer frauds that belong in your blogs too.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)You are an old-school Internet crack up.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)Come from a family of smart people. My brother's an engineer. I'm an accountant but did take some science in university when I was going for my genetics degree the first time around. My best friend from school now does research and teaches for that same place. I never did finish my genetics degree, but my cousin went ahead and got a PhD in it. She does research for fun while raising her kids. My oldest child will start her Chemistry degree next fall.
Yep, I'm glad I'm surrounded by smart people. It used to be why I came to DU.
No, really, now I'm going to bed because I am feeling my brain atrophy and I have to be sharp for all my investigations at work tomorrow aka the real world.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Oddly, all that intelligence doesn't help you support your arguments in real life.
WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not hideworthy. Sort it out among yourselves...
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Earlier in your argument, you said this: "Why can't you be honest?" to the person you are alerting on. Unfortunately, you brought the comment you alerted on upon yourself. Play nice and stop being confrontational. Thanks.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Save yr sanity by using the "ignore" function when hamstrung by the likes of the guy who is engaging you in his falacious arguments.
He is not going to listen to reason. He is of the "all vaccines, all the time" crowd. He doesn't know a thing about what he rambles on about. If he had been alive seventy years ago, he would quite likely have been on TV talking about his number one favorite health product - cigarettes.
But he can cause some of the more aware on this discussion board pointless hours of spinning our wheels.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Keep promoting the harmful nonsense about vaccines, but only talk to others who promote the same silliness!!!
Where have you have such a plan before?
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)On your hind end.
Even the premise for your OP is flawed.
Here is some truth:
"Vaccinated children may be asymptomatic reservoirs for infection." as well as "Our results indicate that children ages 5-6 years and possibly younger, ages 2-3 years, play a role as silent reservoirs in the transmission of pertussis in the community. More studies are needed to find the immunologic basis of protection against infection and colonization and thus an effective way to eradicate pertussis."- CDC
http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/6/5/00-0512_article.htm
Now, granted that was 12 years ago with the whole-cell pertussis vaccine. So what do they say about the new acellular pertussis vaccine that replaced the whole-cell vaccine?
Baboons vaccinated with aP (acellular pertussis vaccine) were protected from severe pertussis-associated symptoms (NOT TRUE) but not from colonization (infection), and DID NOT clear the infection faster than naïve (unvaccinated) animals, and READILY transmitted B. pertussis to unvaccinated contacts. 2013 NOV 25
MEANING THEY STILL ARE RESERVOIRS OF INFECTION!!! 12 years later! They STILL don't have it right??!?!?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24277828
or
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/publications/search_result_record.cfm?id=48636
Which goes back to my main question. How many times are you as a parent , going to ALLOW them to experiment {on your children!!!!!} and BE WRONG?
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)On Thu Sep 18, 2014, 10:11 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
And what justification does the CDC have for omitting significant data from their 2004 mmr study?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5556631
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Wait...linking to questionable science published by a website whose slogan is "the conservative voice of Arizona"? Problematic enough linking to a right wing site (same as linking to The Blaze, MichelleMalkin.com, Daily Caller, etc.) But even worse posting quackery.
Furthermore, to see how shady "Sonoran News" is see:
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2011-06-30/news/russell-pearce-s-allies-at-cave-creek-s-sonoran-news-slime-an-innocent-woman-in-an-attempt-to-besmirch-the-effort-seeking-his-recall/
http://www.azcentral.com/community/scottsdale/articles/20130731cave-creeks-sonoran-news-facing-lawsuit-by-couple.html
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Sep 18, 2014, 10:48 PM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Complaining about the source, instead of the information given, is a sure sign that you can not argue the information. Thus you have to find another way of winning.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Hide. Hide. Hide. Poster should go to Discussionist with that crap.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)I've given up on sending anything to jury, but only 4-3 for that nonsense is scary at DU.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)You think that scientists the world over are in on a major conspiracy?
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Why are you at DU?
HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)match the outcome desired. Then disseminated as real unbiased science.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Of course, you have yet to prove that vaccines, GMOs etc... fit the bill....
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)bhikkhu
(10,718 posts)Ironically, carefully selecting and interpreting a small bit of evidence and pretending the rest doesn't exist is their main tactic.
Anti-vaxxers ignore all the recent research that supports the genetic origin of autism, beginning in the womb. They also then ignore the studies developed from that showing that behavioral therapies can mitigate most problems, if begun early enough.
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)a product could that scientist have a motive other than contributing to the welfare of the human race?
Thus, one must wonder why people invested in "organic" foods are being dishonest about "conventional" foods.
What do they have to gain?
Hmmmmmmm....
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)What do you care who eats organic foods ?
I think I said this before maybe to you I don't know but many of us do our investigation and make what we feel are the right choices for ourselves. We may disagree with the choices you make for you and that is ok.
But we are free to make those choices and I feel you do no one any good by criticizing their choices.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)People who have the money to spend on worthless products, can spend their money on worthless products.
The problem is that they're now trying to use the government to market those worthless products, at their premium prices.
Some families are cutting out other necessities to purchase those products, despite the lack of necessity. This make the "organic" crowd an unethical entity, aimed at its own profits, and not giving a crap about ethics.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)CaliforniaPeggy
(149,641 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Next.
Duppers
(28,125 posts)Thanks, Peggy!
You always hit the nail....
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Why do you think she touched on anything?
NYC Liberal
(20,136 posts)Having a motivation for your work doesn't mean your work is not legitimate, or flawed.
bvf
(6,604 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)How was that "well said?"
bvf
(6,604 posts)Not much of value there. Care to explain?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)If you can do that, and support it with a consensus of science based evidence, let us know! Thanks!
bvf
(6,604 posts)Troll elsewhere, will you?
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)Please.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Which means he may have had some financial incentive behind his research fraud. Not to mention that he was being paid by a group seeking to bring a lawsuit claiming vaccine injury and thus had a clear conflict of interest.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)But these clowns cannot see anything but black and white, they are just like the republicans the way they post is outrageously rude.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Nevermind that the evidence didn't support his claims.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)They are a super low profit product which is why governments all need to get involved and commit to large scale production and use, and provide liability insurance. They are a loss leader at best, and a public service for the pharmaceutical industry. They would all dump them if they could, I am sure. But are kind of stuck producing them.
You started off making sense, and then you went into bizarro world BS, as usual.
You would love to see diseases return, and they are, so you should be very happy about now!
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)Didn't you read my op about how this topic should be approached? Oh no, you never read, just argue and name call.
But here is a link should you care to read what I have to suggest, except on my ipad it does not link, just copies., so here it actually is:
If you think that issues regarding vaccination should be part of the Democratic Party Platform
then I want to suggest that you discuss the issue in educated and insightful ways.
I recommend that you focus on the many benefits that they give to a civilized society. Such as allowing people to bring infants out into public (a very new concept, actually). Which then allows parents to leave children with caregivers without fear of the deadly childhood diseases that wracked our ancestors, and thinned the ranks of our species, as all pathogens do. Point out how the current lowering of overall herd immunity puts at risk our youngest, weakest and our oldest. Encourage, educate and discuss.
Refrain from ridiculing, bullying, name calling and pretending that you know more about the issue than others who have actually studied it (unless of course you actually do, but then be humble about it at least).
The general discussions on DU regarding this matter are appalling and a complete turn off to most anyone who comes here. The discussions come off as dictatorial and mean spirited. And not intelligent, or interesting. Plus the typical screaming posters appear just as crazed as the conservatives that so many of us on DU enjoy poking fun at. There are an abundance of liberal reasons to support universal and free vaccination of children. The most powerful political way that we as a community have helped increase the childhood vaccination rate has been through the expansion of the healthcare system through the Affordable Care Act. How about patting ourselves on the back a bit about making it FREE to get the vaccines (note each shot that my daughter got as an babe cost me $125 out of pocket- each shot- not each time I took her to the doctor!) So, making it free is a very very big deal.
Focus on what is good, what is important and how we have come to depend upon these conveniences of the day.
You will lose any chance of inclusiveness by ridiculing and accusing people of all the horrid things that you banter about. Your absolute need to vilify people is quite troubling.
8
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)It's not about inclusiveness. It's about people who care. You don't care.
Response to HuckleB (Reply #194)
Post removed
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)You are just pushing the same old fictions you always push.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)How could you not need some help if you concluded that after reading what I had to say? Do you actually think being rude is a way to win an election, or get people on board?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)LOL!
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)That the Affordable HealthCare Act has helped us?
I seriously think you have a reading comprehension problem.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)and was treated to regular tirades by the CEO's CFO's etc about how biologicals only make 8-10% profit compared to 90% on the chemical products.
How is it that you don't know about how expensive biologicals are to produce and what low margins they command?
Why do you think governments have to get involved. The profit margins are too low on vaccines. But they are crucial to a civilized modern society.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)alp227
(32,034 posts)have no problem with Andy W. being "bought and paid for".
Initech
(100,081 posts)I personally have zero interest in contacting deadly diseases that were supposed to be eradicated 50 years ago.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)are immune to it.
FourScore
(9,704 posts)Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)they are pretty pathetic this group.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)The only ones in jeopardy are those who made the CHOICE not to. Choice should matter in all things especially when dealing with their own bodies and what goes into said bodies. We must be on the side of choice more then when in agreement of a topic. My children would vaccinated. However if my neighbor decided to make the choice not to, why should I get all upset over it?
NYC Liberal
(20,136 posts)It's not a choice. Your "choice" not to vaccinate affects society at large.
There are people who cannot, for various medical reasons, receive one vaccine or another. But if the other 99% of the population is vaccinated, they are protected because the virus won't spread in the community. Herd immunity. Then we have assholes who refuse, by choice, to vaccinate, and it destroys that herd immunity. They bring these viruses back into the population and it spreads to those who couldn't get vaccinated.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Sorry but it is and I will never go against choice in any way shape or form. Very slippery slope going on there.
NYC Liberal
(20,136 posts)If you will "never go against choice in any way shape or form", then you'll want to abolish almost all laws.
FourScore
(9,704 posts)I live in a town where many people do not vaccinate. Four years ago, whooping cough came through here with a vengeance. It had mutated, so even the kids who got vaccinated got sick. My kids were among them.
If the majority is vaccinated the virus can't survive and mutate like that. It's just a fact. So your decision not to vaccinate is like smoking. It's doesn't just affecting you.
HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)If I choose to murder someone (which the anti-vaxers are facilitating), that's my choice and no problem for you?
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)I can't stand bullying. Notice the others were respectful even though they don't agree with me. I have no time for bullies.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Your post was bullying. It actually advocated putting people at risk.
http://shotofprevention.com/2011/04/12/why-worry-about-the-unvaccinated/
Response to geek tragedy (Reply #58)
Rex This message was self-deleted by its author.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)zappaman
(20,606 posts)Freedom!!!!
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)well gosh darn...that is your choice and who am I to say otherwise!?
zappaman
(20,606 posts)AND IF I WANT LEAVE IT OUT ON THE PORCH ON HALLOWEEN....IT"S MY CHOICE!!!!!
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)nt
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)step all up in your business! Umm...gonna go lay down, feel kinda sick.
chrisa
(4,524 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)chrisa
(4,524 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)I CHOOSE to kept lots of unsecured radioactive material on my front porch. It's MY choice.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)and I let them play in the neighborhood.
IT'S MY CHOICE!!!!
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Who has time for sarcasm? Especially the foul words.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)defense is mute when your idiotic choices endanger others.
You know this.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)When it comes to communicable diseases. Also, when their kids get these diseases, health care workers are exposed and medical costs go up.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)It does happen, for whatever reason. The body may not develop the antibodies correctly. Kind of like people who get the chicken pox multiple times. It's rare, but it happens.
This is not a case of choice. If you are unable to vaccinate because of underlying health causes, fine. If you refuse to vaccinate because you're an asshat, you're now putting your life, your child's life, and my life at risk. Herd immunity only works when those able to be vaccinated are vaccinated. There is no choice in public health.
Rex
(65,616 posts)You certainly out did yourself with that one!
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Which makes it funnier imo, since he can't see what I am saying.
Mariana
(14,858 posts)Also, some people are unable to take the vaccines. What about them?
Vaccines immunize MOST people who get them, but no vaccine is 100% effective. They don't work for everyone. Someone who is spreading one of those diseases around is indeed endangering some people who've had vaccinations - as well as those who can't have them for medical reasons.
I was properly vaccinated for measles, and yet a few years later I got measles from an unvaccinated person. One of my classmates, also vaccinated, got it as well.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)The unvaccinated are a danger to all.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)The more people in a population that are vaccinated, the less a virus can spread.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)A given individual can get the flu vaccine and still get the flu, or even get the smallpox vaccine and still get smallpox (that's rarer but not unknown). Vaccines work at the level of the population more than at the level of the individual: if nearly everybody has the rubella vaccination, it's incredibly difficult for a rubella outbreak to start to begin with. But, even if I am vaccinated, I am more safe if my neighbors are too.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)suppressed people at risk. disgusting.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)diseases have been eradicated. Smallpox for sure, and I know that polio is more or less moving in that direction.
All the other diseases we have vaccinations for are still out there, easily spread, and eager to jump into available humans. It is possible the anti vaccination people don't quite understand the germ theory of disease, or how viruses move around.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)I have a masters in English literature so my years of college make me better qualified than actual doctors.
Entire families wiped out by diphtheria is such a distant memory, it has in effect been forgotten. Show anti vaxxers pictures of Iron Lung Wards of Yore and they don't know what to make of them.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)All children should be vaccinated.
The pharmaceutical companies bear the responsibility to provide vaccines which are SAFE and effective. A major concern of the anti-vaccine crowd is that the drug companies are adding too many unsafe additives and not effectively purifying the end product. This may cause serious illness or death in sensitive individuals, which is vehemently denied by the drug companies as they wish not to bear any liability.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)It is about the epidemic in LA, but the underlying point is blaming of the epidemic on the rich Hollywood anti-vax crowd.
Many kids who have had the vaccine are also getting the disease.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Do you think kids should be vaccinated?
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Although, the pharmaceutical companies are for free-market, no regulation. They are not making a high quality vaccine, only that which just barely passes the mark. And the FDA will approve anything that has enough dollars attached to it. Clean up the vaccines and take out the Themerasil.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)'Since 2001, with the exception of some influenza (flu) vaccines, thimerosal is not used as a preservative in routinely recommended childhood vaccines.'
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Mercury is toxic in any amount to humans and mammals.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Since you're paranoid, know that it's not in vaccines for kids or pregnant women.
Please stop pretending otherwise. Thank you.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Robert Kennedt Jr and Mike Papantonio
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Are you really that out to lunch?
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)It's form is very important to how it is metabolized and Thiomersal was never the boogey man it was made out to be.
bhikkhu
(10,718 posts)...its only currently still used in the flu shots. There's been an abundance of research on it, pretty conclusively showing it to be harmless in the quantities given. They took it out anyway.
Autism begins in the womb, not when a kid is vaccinated.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)We mopped the ceilings and walls in our work areas.
We ran our HVACS at higher turn over rates than required
We went beyond every regulation and test parameter the FDA set
We ran our equipment washers 20 minutes longer than needed
We had to run TOC checks on the rinse water for EVERY piece of equipment we cleaned
We steamed and autoclaved all items at higher pressures and lengths of time than the FDA stated.
We washed everything with Water for Injection. 5000 liter 316L SS vessels rinsed with thousands of liters of WFI to get a conductivity of less then 3 micro siemens (FDA only requires 30 yet we took it down a factor of 10)
WE TOOK EVERY REQUIRED PARAMETER AND INCREASED THEM
We had little plastic coated magnets for mixing solutions for post use testing of filters and even though they would never see product contact, we still soaked them for an hour in 20% 12N NaOH, submitted rinse samples and autoclaved them.
I am sorry to be so blunt but you have no idea what you are talking about. There is nothing to clean up.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)the biggest threats are not fundies who are antivaccine, but rich hollywood crazies.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Vaccines are safe and effective.
If you want to believe in conspiracy BS, that's your choice.
The evidence against those theories is astounding.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)They are concerned that pharm companies are adding eye of newt and pixie dust.
I worked on a process development team for purification of clinical phase monoclonal antibodies. The products were safe and purified. Our standards were above ANY OTHER INDUSTRY. I will bet my left testicle that the ground up roots and berries from the local "All Natural" voodoo store are no where near as pure nor as rigorously tested.
The concern is manufactured and idiotic.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)(Venice, to be precise), but it has a fairly good record according to that interactive chart. I know he has his shots, anyway, so he doesn't have much to worry about. I really don't understand the anti-vax mentality. I know I didn't get polio after being directly exposed to my very sick aunt because we were given the vaccine while it was still in its trial stages back in 1952 or '53.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)since I was quite young at the time, but I remember him meeting us in his office at night, after we learned that my aunt (who we had been visiting in Florida) had polio instead of the flu, and shooting us up with the vaccine. As a kid, of course, I didn't care for the shot, but polio would have been ever so much worse. The sugar cubes were a great invention.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)just before I entered 1st grade.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)been one of the people who spent a lifetime in an Iron Lung.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)It was very common when I was a kid. My mother always made me take a nap or at least a rest in the afternoon even when I was five and six years old because she thought it would make me stronger to resist the disease. My aunt almost died her first night in the hospital but made what her doctors called a "miraculous" recovery - so much so that her local newspaper in Bradenton, Florida, did a multi-page story on her.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Not quite. They're convinced that VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM MONKEY BRAINS WHARGARBLE!!1!!!11!1!!
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)their zeal to find an explanation as to why their child is autistic. It is true that in 1980 only about one in 10,000 children were diagnosed with autism - now about one in 88 children eight or younger are identified as having an Autism Spectrum Disorder. Even from 2009 there is 23% increase. On the surface one could think an epidemic is rapidly spreading. IN reality - few people knew anything about autism back in 1980. Most children that today would be diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorders back then where frequently diagnosed as retarded, childhood schizophrenic, or some other condition or they were thought to be either a behavior problem or just weird. This increased awareness about the Autism Spectrum has resulted in a dramatic increase in diagnosis which is being misinterpreted as an explosion of an epidemic.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)... it's mostly people who have bought into the fear that their kid might develop autism because of vaccines that has caused the resurgence in disease.
That fear is not necessarily derived from the majority of parents who have kids on the spectrum. Most of them are quite knowledgeable.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)are not buying into this. In fact many find the whole thing very offensive.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)chrisa
(4,524 posts)^ The same logic that's used by anti-vaxxers. Everybody who doesn't buy into their nutty bullshit is a paid shill, and science itself is nothing more than corporate propaganda.
Note that these are the same people who are prone to believing in bull crap like healing crystals and homeopathy.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)Luke E. Taylor,
Amy L. Swerdfeger,
Guy D. Eslick,
The Whiteley-Martin Research Centre, Discipline of Surgery, The University of Sydney, Nepean Hospital, Level 3, Clinical Building, PO Box 63, Penrith 2751, NSW, Australia
Received 29 November 2013, Revised 16 April 2014, Accepted 23 April 2014, Available online 9 May 2014
Highlights
There was no relationship between vaccination and autism (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.06).
There was no relationship between vaccination and ASD (autism spectrum disorder) (OR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.20).
There was no relationship between [autism/ASD] and MMR (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.01).
There was no relationship between [autism/ASD] and thimerosal (OR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.31).
There was no relationship between [autism/ASD] and mercury (Hg) (OR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.07).
Findings of this meta-analysis suggest that vaccinations are not associated with the development of autism or autism spectrum disorder.
Abstract
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X14006367?np=y
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)"Differences in the way individual immune systems react to a vaccine account for rare occasions when people are not protected following immunization or when they experience side effects."
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccine_monitoring/history.html
If the CDC is ready to admit that vaccines are not 100% safe and effective, and damage awards have been rolling out at a brisk clip since Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) in 1986, which established the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program that "compensates individuals who have been injured by vaccines on a 'no-fault' basis," possibly DU can acknowledge the sad fact that some vaccines are dangerous to some children?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)The thing about the NCVIA, is that it gives awards with minimal evidence of cause. It exists because we live in a litigious society, and we know that vaccines prevent illness and death.
Can you admit that?
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Read all about it:
The program covers all routinely recommended childhood vaccinations. Settlements are based on the Vaccine Injury Table, which summarizes the adverse events caused by vaccines. This table was developed by a panel of experts who reviewed the medical literature and identified the serious adverse events that are reasonably certain to be caused by vaccines. Examples of table injuries include anaphylaxis (severe allergic reaction), paralytic polio, and encephalopathy (general brain disorder).
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccine_monitoring/history.html
So it seems a US government panel is "reasonably certain" that vaccines can and do cause "general brain disorder."
That's from the CDC.
Can you admit that?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)If not, you really need to get a better hobby. You're causing harm.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)And I don't expect they'll get any better.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Or with anything that matters.
End of discussion.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)On October 1, 1988, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-660) created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). The VICP was established to ensure an adequate supply of vaccines, stabilize vaccine costs, and establish and maintain an accessible and efficient forum for individuals found to be injured by certain vaccines. The VICP is a no-fault alternative to the traditional tort system for resolving vaccine injury claims that provides compensation to people found to be injured by certain vaccines.
http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html
Please let this sink in: the USG "provides compensation to people found to be injured by certain vaccines."
That's "people found to be injured by certain vaccines."
Are you starting to get the picture?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)That's why this system was created. It's there to ensure that diseases are held at bay.
Are you getting the REAl picture!?????
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Are you that clueless about how science works?
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)HuckleB
(35,773 posts)... because vaccines save lives and prevent disability.
Try again.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)Of course there will always be a susceptible individual, and this is why they have come up with this system.
If you actually studied biology, this would not be a foreign concept.
But bullying is much more fun, I take it.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)You've never been able to do so.
Yes, anyone who wants to do so, can Google away, and note that reality!!!!
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)Or reading help, or something.
Just wow!
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)If you think that issues regarding vaccination should be part of the Democratic Party Platform
then I want to suggest that you discuss the issue in educated and insightful ways.
I recommend that you focus on the many benefits that they give to a civilized society. Such as allowing people to bring infants out into public (a very new concept, actually). Which then allows parents to leave children with caregivers without fear of the deadly childhood diseases that wracked our ancestors, and thinned the ranks of our species, as all pathogens do. Point out how the current lowering of overall herd immunity puts at risk our youngest, weakest and our oldest. Encourage, educate and discuss.
Refrain from ridiculing, bullying, name calling and pretending that you know more about the issue than others who have actually studied it (unless of course you actually do, but then be humble about it at least).
The general discussions on DU regarding this matter are appalling and a complete turn off to most anyone who comes here. The discussions come off as dictatorial and mean spirited. And not intelligent, or interesting. Plus the typical screaming posters appear just as crazed as the conservatives that so many of us on DU enjoy poking fun at. There are an abundance of liberal reasons to support universal and free vaccination of children. The most powerful political way that we as a community have helped increase the childhood vaccination rate has been through the expansion of the healthcare system through the Affordable Care Act. How about patting ourselves on the back a bit about making it FREE to get the vaccines.
Focus on what is good, what is important and how we have come to depend upon these conveniences of the day.
You will lose any chance of inclusiveness by ridiculing and accusing people of all the horrid things that you banter about. Your absolute need to vilify people is quite troubling.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Then get back to us. Hypocrisy is not cool.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)utilizing your crazed approach? Get real mister. Your bullying approach turns sensible people off.
But I suspect that you do not really care about getting people to see the value in vaccinations. Or having any political impact. This is a political board, you know, don't you?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Interesting.
Tumbulu
(6,291 posts)This is not a way to discuss or educate.
Ridiculing people and belittling them engender resentment and do not open any minds.
If you actually cared about the subject matter you would consider your style of communicating.
But it just must be too fun to bully and demean.
You suffer from the very problem that you accuse the anti vac people of.
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)Got it.
A Little Weird
(1,754 posts)arikara
(5,562 posts)n/t
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Fuck the anti-vax asshats, wherever they're from.
Sid