The debate "Vaccinations are harmless except for the very rare occasions someone has a reaction." was started by
March 15, 2016, 7:29 pm.
18 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 8 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
MrShine posted 1 argument, PsychDave posted 11 arguments, ototoxic posted 3 arguments, Sosocratese posted 5 arguments to the agreers part.
Maximus posted 9 arguments, ProudAmerican888 posted 1 argument, historybuff posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
ototoxic, MrShine, PsychDave, Sosocratese, RyanWakefield, danielle, ChemicalReject, YMayy, cancer_wins and 9 visitors agree.
fadi, ProudAmerican888, historybuff, Maximus, rob5998 and 3 visitors disagree.
A number of comments seem to have been removed. Now my responses are orphaned and make no sense.
feeding of trolls has been shown to produce headaches as a result of nonsense....don't be another victim.
Why do you feel entitled to tell me what to do? Pipe down yourself.
I have long since posted my arguments on this thread but at this point it would take you a while to scroll back through all of your non-aguments to read them.
less singin' more bringin!
history buff.. again, your info????
i get the feeling that you don't let anyone tell you anything that you don't want to learn about. you clearly don't understand science, grammar, or politics very well. and probably many other things too. but somehow convince yourself you're an expert. I guess ignorance IS bliss.
I'd say we've pretty much established that Maximus is just a troll or borderline intellectually challenged. I'm resorting to flagging his posts as spam/inappropriate. I suggest you guys do the same. Hopefully he'll get banned soon
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that you can in any way prevent me from telling you to be silent. You are polluting the app with garbage and have succeeded in turning all of its active members against you with your failure to actually debate. You are right that I cannot make you be quiet, but similarly you cannot stop me from telling you exactly what I think if your failed attempts at debate.
Dave, you gotta stop acting like you brought the thunder. And never tell me to be silent. You have underwhelmed and actually i'm offended that you feel like you are gonna tell me anything.
I thought you said you were done. What happened?
all you have to do is find a source who isn't a crackpot on the internet. someone with a medical background who actually takes credit for their work would do. but just a random website with no references is unacceptable.
You aren't very good at being a troll, so why do you continue this farce?
history buff.. yiu have effectively just told me that you can write off anything because anyone could do anything. So now, why do you need me to reference something for you again?
again with the ad hominem.......I'm really disappointed that with all the pseudoscience websites out there, this is as good as you were able to do.....and to top it all of you were lame in your insults.....Scratcheese? really? that's the best you could come with?
The link you provided is simply a link to the US federal claims court. It's a provisional court which was mandated by the vaccine act of 1986. How does this further your point at all? Just because something gets put into a bill doesn't mean it has scientific merit. I know you may not understand that concept, but your sources should at least be relevant and based on primary sources.....
you provided am unsourced website that literally anyone could have written. a source with no references or fact checks of any kind. why would we take that source seriously?
Again, provide an argument or be silent. I criticize what arguments you provide. If they have no substance I have nothing but the arguments themselves to rebut.
i've provided info. You show bias as i choose not to be dumbed down(seemingly like that of yourself). Then when all else fails, GRAMMAR POLICE TIME! Aint that right ol' Dave?
I'm willing to contain the name calling as well if you want this to be a logical debate. but you will still need to provide credible sources.
At this point you are getting attacked somewhat because that seems to be your debate style.
With sosocratese I debate using logic and peer reviewed articles because that is what he prefers to deal in. With Alex it extends to be some of those plus media articles and religious texts because those are his preferred sources.
You don't seem to have any references that couldn't by whipped up by a bored high school student and instead resort to personal attacks. Your arguments have been soundly debunked, leaving only your replies which contain no argument, logic, or anything but personal attacks and self aggrandizing rhetoric. If you would prefer this to be a more logical and reasoned debate, make logical and reasoned arguments and we will respond in kind.
and dont try to explain and posture in a formal manner dave, all i need to do is scroll and we can see your previous rants so lets just settle down with now acting like we are formal.
no i am getting attacked dave, by you and your little progressive zombie, trendies. A fair fight of 4 on 1 that you are losing.
because you have yet to provide any credible information. you have only given one completely unsourced website that any crack pot could make. the use no credible information. only their opinion.
I attack your information because it is not sourced or peer reviewed. it is pure internet garbage. if you want to debate on this app you need to provide credible sources for your information, not internet rumors.
and that government website was for any side effects. like all medicine there are occasionally side effects. but all medicines have them. you can die from taking Tylenol. it should not be surprising that the government has such a website.
You really don't understand how debates work, do you?
Sosocratese provided arguments and links so you could verify if you thought he was being dishonest. If you have a counterargument, please give it. If not, please grow up.
history buff.. same thing.. i provide info you attack it. You are never going to learn, you have a very low potential of showing there is a capability of taking on new info.
scratcheese.. did i make up that vaccine court link? Are you looking to get my attention like a little puppy dog?..cute
nobody thinks what? that the vast, overwhelming amount of evidence proving vaccines are safe are correct? or that you lost a debate after providing virtually no evidence at all and then degenerated into name-calling? either way it is very believable.
You have so much nonsense in one paragraph it's incredible...
First, let's talk about the mercury nonsense. The mercury in vaccines is an organomercurial. It is NOT methylmercury. If you don't understand why that is an important distinction you need to read up on the two. Secondly, most vaccines don't contain any form of mercury anymore. The ones that do have such trace amounts which have never been linked to any sort of developmental disease. There is actually more methylmercury in breastmilk than there is organomercuial in vaccines.
In fact, one study looked at what happened when they completely eliminated Thimersol (the mercury compound in vaccines) and found that removing the Thimersol from the vaccines had no impact on Autism rates. In fact, it found that autism rates went up regardless of the change, leading to the conclusion that the rise in autism is likely environmentally related rather than related to vaccines.
Most of the Polio nonsense comes from a guy named Russell Blaylock. He has written a number of books/articles on the subject. However, he is generally dismissed by the scientific community at large as he has been shown to be quite dishonest. While there are many areas to attack Russell on, I think the most relevant here is the fact that he has repeatedly conflated death rates with incident data in order to skew the raw data in his favor. Now, there may be some truth to the fact that Polio was on the decline, but you can't credit eradication of a disease to things like banning pesticides.
The better disease to look at would be measles.
It's pretty obvious that the measles vaccine helped....
---I know this is a wikipedia image, here is the supporting data though
Now, your source......man....
you know that on their entire website you can't find a single long terms study, you can't find a single peer reviewed article which would support their claim, you can research the president of their organization, Ingri Cassel, and find that this is far from a scholarly source and that the author of the website has a vested interest in keeping opposing information from coming to light.
hey, look. lol... nobody thinks that unless they are double digit IQ maroons, that are drooling.
lol I did. you lost, and bad. I mean REALLY bad. but I'm not particularly proud. it wasn't in the least bit difficult.
I think that's the first statement you have made on this thread that I can agree with.
lol, you showed me mighty good! be proud.
by the look of it you never got started. you've yet to make any argument at all other than childish name calling and an unsourced website that any 15 year old could make.
lol, ok. well look, i'm done. good luck.
the reason you don't know anyone with diphtheria is because the whole modern world vaccinated against it, almost wiping it out. why are you arguing against yourself?
why? who do you know with diptheria.. dipshit?
every person, other than those who for valid medical reasons cannot be vaccinated, should be vaccinated.
ok, it's your lie, tell it how you like.
vaccines have been proven over and over again to be safe. safer than most other medicines. there are occasionally complications as there are with all medicine, but for every person who does have complications, many lives are saved. the pros vastly outweigh the cons.
right, well, the good part is that in spite of what you said. i brought facts and its hear for people to see. what's funny is your conduct and how you truly feel you are proving a point.
hey maximus you are anti vaccine right? i think you gonna die from some disease that are not know. ha ha gotcha. LOL DO NOT BLAME BUFF YOU FOOLISH MAXIMUS
please don't call me a fool. To answer your question, in time, yes. Genetics play a part in how short or long it takes, but ultimately yes. It's a slow kill and your kidney's fail as well as other health issues.
well since idiots like you convince people not to get immunized it is likely just a matter of time before they become mandatory. there are already outbreaks of diseases that were virtually unheard of 5 or 10 years ago. anti vaxers are putting their lives and lives at others at risk. people like you are killing people.
you may need to utilize this one.. LOL!
in singapore all crops are gmos . they eat those. are they sick fool?
well, look, go be a pin cushion, eat your gmo, sound good?
that website is an absolute joke. it looks like it was made by a highschool student. there is no information about the author. they actually say they are not doctors. they have no Medical experience at all as far as I can tell. why would I take anything they say seriously?
take a look at polio rates by year. the numbers went up and down in big spikes. prior to the polio vaccine there happened to be a alike down. after the vaccine it dropped all together. and other than one odd spike, it woukd never go up again. are you really so delusional as to think that is coincidence?
yeah he's a lazy zombie and the saddest part is that he has no clue and authentically feels like for some reason, he is smarter than most. It's incredible.
Good job Maximus. Notice how histroybuff always says "provide some evidence or continue being laughed like a (insert insulting name or term here)."
WHO'S GRADE A BULLSHIT NOW?!?! HOW ABOUT SOME MORE?!?!?
you are the most braindead person ever. i promise you, if you want i will destroy you here as well!
i just TOTALLY DESTROYED YOU in another thread(GMO, GO LOOK PEOPLE!), you nobody. Want some more???
again, wow.... that is some grade A bullshit. vaccines have saved millions and millions of lives. there is massive amounts of data to back this up. provide evidence or continue being laughed at as a rediculous nut job.
ffs! look up Bill and Melinda Gates and how they want to lower the population. His old man was a Eugenisist. How is Mr. IBM all of the sudden the vaccine guru?!? Don't take my word look the video up on youtube! There is mercury and formalahyde in aot of vaccines along with all kinds of other stuff. Also, polio was dying out as human immunity began to fight it out of existance.. the vaccine came into play after the disease naturally was on decline. A man gets a vaccine for polio, gos home.. coughs the anitgen into the air, the child ends up with polio.
Nope, not Greek. Came from a name is used on another website since the proper spelling of Socrates was taken....I'm a philosophy nerd, so hence the name.
Socrates was a Greek philosopher. I'm not sure that means he is Greek.
the predominant scientific literature on Vaccines causing harm is based on the Lancet study. The Lancet study was later dismissed and the author admitted to manipulating the data in order to support the conclusion that vaccines cause autism.
There is another factor why many believe vaccines could cause autism despite scientific evidence. The chemical thimerosal, a preservative that contains a form of mercury, is contained in many vaccines. This form of mercury however, is an organomercurcial, not methylmercury. Organomercucial are not linked to autism in separate studies....Furthermore, this type of mercury is only present in a very small percentage of the pediatric vaccines, and in only trace amounts in the ones that it is in.
Now, many "anti-vacciners" will argue that it's not so much the content of the vaccine that causes problems, but rather the frequency at which they are administered. There are some that will claim that the sheer number of vaccines given to children will overwhelm their immune systems. There is however, no scientific data to substantiate this claim. In fact, states with laxer vaccine laws tend to have higher number of diseases preventable with vaccines than those that don't. States with stricter laws also don't show any statistically relevant data to suggest a detrimental effect of early childhood vaccination.
So I would say this is one of those Pseudo-science things that don't have any footing in the real world.
hmmm i understand sailor. salute!
Because (ironically) I like the sound of the word. If something is "Ototoxic" it means that it damages your hearing. Like some medications can be ototoxic to some people.
why is 'toxic' present in your username?
The risks are MUCH smaller than that.
its probability is 1/100. so take the risk or stay infected with the disease
I'm very happy with your responses.
I understand people being concerned because they don't know what is in vaccines and what the reactions might be, but if that is the case, do the research. Don't just rake people at their word that they are good or bad, look into it yourself. There are mountains of research on vaccine safety, and all if it points to them being safe barring reactions, which are rare. You can look up the reaction rates for each specific vaccine, and decide for yourself if the disease is better or worse than the 1 in 10 000 chance of am adverse reaction. For some people, it might not be, but an informed decision is always better than an ignorant one based on fear.
I am fully in favor of vaccination and my daughter is vaccinated. I did look up the rates of complications and reactions and couldn't justify risking her dying or being permanently injured by the diseases they prevent. So far she has never had more then a mild fever as a reaction.
True, I am completely in favor of vaccinations, even if supposedly or certainly bad reactions happen... When I was a little boy, I had Guillane Barre syndrome, which apparently was an adverse reaction where the white blood cells do not recognize nerve cells, paralyzing me from the waist down. I have been told the issue was linked with vaccinations, although I can never seem to say something stupid like it causes autism, it is true that it isn't without the smallest chance.
The chance is too small and a good exchange to make. Rather than having old diseases resurface or the population unprepared for constantly changing strands, take the shot.