Vaccines
(125 posts) (30 voices)-
OnTheBayou
MemberSo natural fluoride is OK, but added to water it is not?
To sweepingly claim that because one - whether and individual, a government, or a corporation - is wrong in one arena, it is wrong in all of them?
"Does not compute."
Again, the fact that the disease that vaccinations prevent aren't around much is the long term proof. But you won't accept that, because you want pro-vaccination people to meet an objective that you set and is unobtainable. "So, when did you stop beating your wife?"
Posted 2 months ago # -
I guess quality evidence is subjective:
Fluoride Toxic:
http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/where-the-yellow-went.html
http://www.thyroid-info.com/articles/shamesfluoride.htm
http://www.wholywater.com/fluoride.htmlSigh.
Site #1 is an online retailer of wellness products, which automatically prompts me to question whether I am reading a marketing blurb or a valid article. But let's leave that point aside; I won't hold it against the site as I suppose the same critique could be said of Mark's blog even though there is a distinct separation between his store and his articles. However, the important difference is that Mark provides links to studies and cites all data referenced in his posts. While I saw the data of several studies referenced in the flouride article, I failed to find any direct references where I could examine the source material myself.
Site #2 is a thyroid patient's blog documenting her personal odyssey with thyroid disease; although she is very invested in the issue, she is not a medical professional or researcher. The particular page you linked is an interview with two doctors promoting (i.e., selling) their book. As with the first article, many studies and incidents are mentioned without providing tangible links to said data. Oh, they did mention that they would "discuss this topic at greater length, and provide multiple references, in our forthcoming book THYROID POWER." I guess I just have to buy the book to get references to the data!
Site #3's article seems to think that throwing a calendar year next to the name of a medical journal qualifies as a valid reference. Nonetheless, let's ignore this transgression (as it just seems to be a given condition), and check out the main page. Huh, it seems that this site "offer(s) pure solutions for specific water problems" and assures me that "the innovative products you see here, you'll find nowhere else." One of these innovations just happens to be http://www.wholywater.com/solution.html , a device that will remove all of that poison from my water for only $274.95! (price list: http://www.wholywater.com/pricing.html#FS-DW )
So, yes, your evidence is quite subjective and falls far short of anything I would describe as "quality." Well, I suppose it could be described as quality marketing since it has apparently been quite successful in convincing you of the validity of its unsubstantiated information, thereby necessitating the existence of various merchandise on each site.
Posted 2 months ago # -
bcreager
MemberIf fluoride is already in the water, why do we need to add more? Water also has Calcium, magnesium, and lime, manganese and iron, why don't we add more of those in as well, if we are on the "more is better" band wagon. After all, think of all the osteoporosis we could cure if everyone drank more calcium, and all the pregnant women that wouldn't have to take an iron supplement because they drank their iron everyday.....wait a minute, not everyone likes drinking water....so maybe we should add fluoride, calcium and iron to the air we breath, because we all breath air!
Here's an idea, instead of treating the symptom (tooth decay), why don't we solve the problem and remove refined sugars and processed food from our diets.
I didn't claim that because they were wrong they are always wrong. I did claim skepticism, not taking it for face value.
If this is true:Some diseases have been wiped out, so vaccines work
Then why not: Some people don't get diseases after refusing vaccines, so vaccines are unnecessary
Why do you only accept one of those statements as true, when the logic is the same. "A" doesn't exist, therefore the action applied, "B", must have caused it and therefore must be true.
-bcreager
Posted 2 months ago # -
bcreager
MemberShine: based on your criteria, this site should change your mind about fluoride, lots of sources, and not selling anything:
http://www.fluoridealert.org/
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/biblio.htmlBut being open minded, could you send me some links that are pro-fluoride that don't reference the CDC?
-bcreager
Posted 2 months ago # -
First off, I am not making any assertions about fluoride. You, however, are. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you, not me.
Please notice that I never said that I supported fluoridating our water supply. I am not fond of the thought of any additives in my drinking water. (Yes, I know municipal water is necessarily sanitized and those chemicals could be considered additives. Fluoride, however, is not instrumental in water sanitation.)
When you post articles filled with unsubstantiated claims and anecdotal sensationalism, you do more detriment to your cause than good.
The fourth site that you have posted has actual references to supporting data, lending legitimacy and credibility to your position.
Posted 2 months ago # -
gnosis
Member"However, when proffering factual reality, be prepared to support your claims with QUALITY evidence. Otherwise, you are guilty of spreading the disease of arrogant ignorance which plagues our society. "
I see this all the time on internet forums....I will make any claim I want and post any links I want because I want people to think for themselves.I don't go on the internet to "argue" like a trial lawyer and make my case...that is ridiculous.
What I believe to be factual reality is not the same as you or most people for that matter.So now I am "guilty,diseased and arrogant" because I think kids are over vaccinated and flu shots are a scam full of toxic chemicals.This to me demonstrates what a bizarre space we inhabit.
So members here believe conventional nutritional and medical advice is dead wrong when it comes to diet and heart disease despite mountains of studies and evidence supporting that position but injecting yourself with toxic chemicals and foreign proteins in an unproven vaccine is status quo.Also the fluoride commonly added to water is waste from petro refining/military industrial complex...not naturally occurring.
from WIKI (probably not a good enough source for some of you)but hey if you like mass medication without consent then that's your business.NaF is prepared by neutralizing hydrofluoric acid or hexafluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6), coproducts of the production of superphosphate fertilizer. Neutralizing agents include sodium hydroxide and sodium carbonate. Alcohols are sometimes used to precipitate the NaF:
Originally, sodium fluoride was used to fluoridate water; however, hexafluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) and its salt sodium hexafluorosilicate (Na2SiF6) are more commonly used additives, especially in the United States.
Sodium fluoride is classed as toxic by both inhalation (of dusts or aerosols) and ingestion.[8] In high enough doses, it has been shown to affect the heart and circulatory system, and the lethal dose for a 70 kg human is estimated at 5–10 g.[5]
Posted 2 months ago # -
OnTheBayou
Memberbcreager, the water with flouride in it naturally is limited to large areas in the peninsula of Florida. It's not a question of "Why add more?" For the rest of the US, there is no fluoride in the water.
As to why not cut the sugars instead, I don't think anyone here would argue otherwise. But it ain't gonna happen.
I remember the great fluoride/chlorination/Communists are behind it all paranoia of the sixties and seventies. And yet here we are, just fine, thank you very much.
gnosis, presuming you are correct in your assertions (I'm not wasting my time to check), so what? Sources of things do not therefore make something "bad."
And you just make flat outright claims that vaccinations are scams and full of toxic chemicals. Somehow, those scams and toxic chemicals have saved many millions of lives.
And yes, CW can be correct in one area and wrong in another.
Just like you.
Posted 2 months ago # -
First of all:
What I believe to be factual reality is not the same as you or most people for that matter.
This is a wholly illogical statement. Facts, reality, and the truth are not matters of belief. They are not subjective and do not change from person to person; something is either a fact or it isn't. Like I said before, belief, faith, and speculation are appropriate when discussing existential matters. Controversies over vaccine safety, however, are not philosophical dilemmas. Evidentiary data (as in, immutable facts) are necessary to arrive at a genuine conclusion.
So now I am "guilty,diseased and arrogant" because I think kids are over vaccinated and flu shots are a scam full of toxic chemicals.
Please reread what I actually said as you clearly misinterpreted my words:
Otherwise, you are guilty of spreading the disease of arrogant ignorance which plagues our society.
Perhaps it is my fault for lapsing into obtuse metaphors. I never said that you were diseased or arrogant. What I did say is that by continuing to promote hyperbolic fears about vaccines without any scientific data or evidence, you are guilty of spreading misinformation. You are encouraging others to latch onto these fears without any facts or evidence. I compared this spread of unsubstantiated allegations to an epidemic of ignorance, and I labeled the obstinate insistence with which these allegations are repeated as arrogance. (I know that it's a pitifully trite metaphor, but I think that I had just woken up and wasn't feeling very original.)
Posted 2 months ago # -
gnosis
Memberhey it's me the guilty one here to spread more disease of arrogant ignorance...maybe they should develop a vaccine for that.
http://www.generationrescue.org/studies.html
http://drtenpenny.com/more.aspx
http://www.vacinfo.org/researchers.htm
I mentioned disease that are no longer prevalent yet have no vaccines...I guess no one wants to address that one.
Also to clarify I don't think all vaccines are scams...just extremely over used and flu vaccines are scams IMO.the fluoride issue is too silly for me to even try to convince anyone that is is a bad idea...if you think the public should be medicated without consent,possibly with industrial waste, then I think you are crazy or maybe you have just accumulated to much mercury and fluoride in your brain.
http://www.mercola.com/article/links/fluoride_links.htm
IMO reality is subjective because all sensory data is nothing more than each persons brain interpreting....we have never actually "seen" sunlight...only neurons firing in the brain. If you lost sight or hearing I would say that your version of reality would be different. Every ones mind works through a filter of imprinted experiences from their environment and therefore may interpret data differently.
Posted 2 months ago # -
SerialSinner
MemberThe Amaz!ng Meeting 7 Panel discussion about the Anti Vax movement. The benefits of vaccination far outweigh the supposed risks. The panel talk gave many examples of how vaccines have helped eradicate diseases that caused millions of deaths around the world.
Steve Novella an American clinical neurologist, assistant professor and Director of General Neurology at Yale University School of Medicine. Novella is best known for his involvement in the skeptical movement.
Posted 2 months ago # -
hey it's me the guilty one here to spread more disease of arrogant ignorance...maybe they should develop a vaccine for that.
Too bad you wouldn't take it, even if presented with mountains of evidence from repeated trials that confirmed the efficacy and safety of said vaccine.
More to the point, such a thing already exists. It's called critical thinking; I highly recommend trying it out sometime.
Then again, I understand how the rush of excitement which one gets from reading apocalyptic hyperbole on the internet can become quite addicting. Perhaps some cliff diving or the latest Saw movie could serve to terrify you in the absence of sensationalized "news?"
IMO reality is subjective because all sensory data is nothing more than each persons brain interpreting....we have never actually "seen" sunlight...only neurons firing in the brain. If you lost sight or hearing I would say that your version of reality would be different. Every ones mind works through a filter of imprinted experiences from their environment and therefore may interpret data differently.
Well, not really...the beauty of conclusive scientific data is that it is not subjective and can be reproduced repeatedly to achieve similar results. However, if you are positing the philosophical argument that reality is subjective due to individual variation in sensory perception, then you only succeed in exposing the futility of your post. Why continue to tirelessly promote the veracity of your argument if you then conclude that such a veracity is neither existent nor relevant?
Posted 2 months ago # -
SerialSinner
MemberVaccine Paranoia
http://tinyurl.com/yatfgz7Posted 1 month ago # -
SerialSinner
MemberDo Vaccines Cause Autism? Correlation vs. Casuation
Part 1: http://bit.ly/HFl31
Part 2: http://bit.ly/3ioJAd:D
Posted 1 month ago # -
JamieBelle
MemberI vaccinated my son and would not dream of doing otherwise. The only vaccine to date he has not/will not receive is H1N1. I simply don't think it's necessary, and I believe he and I already had the swine flu a few months ago. He will be getting the regular flu shot this year, as he has every year.
He got his shots according to the AAP schedule and never had a problem with any of them.
Personally I think people who don't vaccinate their children are personally irresponsible and also irresponsible from a society-at-large standpoint. Every unvaccinated child puts all of us and our children at higher risk.
I would like to see no unvaccinated children attending public schools, regardless whatever BS excuse they give them (like "religious exceptions"). The thought of unvaccinated kids running around on the playground with my son makes me extremely angry, knowing they are putting my child at risk and also taking advantage of the herd immunity around them.
Posted 1 month ago # -
I'm irresponsible because I researched the CRAP outta dis stuff. Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah!
Let's see, I've been call 'irresponsible', 'ignorant' and everything else in the book.
Geez, y'all sound like I'm a hated CW-touting mongrel!
This intolerance of my beliefs on my own widely researched health aspects, including not immunizing my children, by calling me irresponsible is inexcusable.
Sorry! I guess I'm not done being feisty today! :-D
Posted 1 month ago # -
kateri17
MemberI delayed vax for my kids, but they were fully vaxed later. The only thing that bugs me about the whole anti vax thing is the supposed links to autism. Two of my kids were diagnosed with autism before they were vaxed at all, yes that is anecdotal but there is a wide and varied community of autists and parents of autists who have had the same experience.....you'd be amazed at the reaction I get when I tell people who don't vax that, I've been called a liar many times :)
While I've made a different choice, I think all parents should have the right to decide what's best for their children and I will throw in there that government should not interfere with those parental rights. As long as you're not citing Jenny McCarthy as 'research' then I'm ok with it :)
Posted 1 month ago # -
SerialSinner
MemberSassa, I don't know any, not one, person belonging to the scientific or medical community who shares anti-vaccination beliefs. This includes post-docs in epidemiology, pharmacology and the like.
So it all comes down to either trusting the experts in the subject instead of the anti-vaccination activists (who, as far as I know, and at best, are usually not very versed in science or formal research), or thinking they are all part of a world conspiracy against us.
I would think the videos above make an excellent case about interpreting research and therefore demolishes the core arguments of the anti-vaccination movement.
Posted 1 month ago # -
I'm irresponsible because I researched the CRAP outta dis stuff. Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah!
Not meaning to sound snide, but could you share the research that you found?
It is not the erroneous nutrition principles for which "CW-touting mongrels" are primarily criticized. Rather, it is the mongrels' obstinate adherence to these principles, complete resistance to new evidence, and tireless efforts to promote misinformation which earn them the labels of "ignorant" and "irresponsible."
Personally, I feel that actively discouraging childhood vaccinations when one is not a trained medical professional or scientific expert is highly unethical. I apologize if this qualifies as inexcusable intolerance towards your healthcare beliefs, but I find the portrayal of beliefs as evidenced facts to be far more intolerable.
Posted 1 month ago # -
klcarbaugh
MemberHmmmm....
1. I agree that vaccinations to prevent serious disease are extremely important. In fact, they were and still are necessary if were are all to continue living in a society where we aren't confined in bubbles.
2. I also believe highly that all people should have the freedom to choose to vaccinate their children or not. If the government has control over what goes into a child's body, etc. then I would worry they would require parents to also fee their children a low-fat whole grain diet.(becasue after all, there is also significant evidence that The Government Diet cures heart disease...though heart disease isn't contagious...)Unfortunately, those two points of view overlap a bit in that the second one somewhat prevents the first one from working to its full potential.
The holocaust existed. Chemical fluoride is bad... (but iodized salt is good... hmmm. This might also a "freedom of choice problem") Flu shots aren't as helpful or necessary as the ones that I was referring to previously. I chose to never get a meningitis vaccine becasue my DOCTOR thought that it was unnecessary. The big thing in vaccine advertising now is Gardasil to protect form HPV. I would never get that either. Not becasue it is dangerous, but becasue If I wanted to have sex with someone I would want their whole STD panel in front of me anyways. So you can prevent getting HPV by getting a simple blood test.
I'd like to think that I always think rationally and look at the facts. But to err is to be human. We are all guilty of illogical or irrational thinking at some point... let's not tear each other apart for it. I did enjoy reading the entire thread though.
Posted 1 month ago # -
Maleficarum
Memberhaving left this post a long time ago... I am slightly sad that I ever started it.
I truly do not blame Mark for never chiming in on this. Obviously this was significantly more emotional than I expected it to be.
I do not understand how it degenerated into Holocaust denials and anti-floridinators.
I was able to gleam some useful information, so for that I thank all of you. Now, I am scared to start any new posts. LOL
Posted 1 month ago # -
mom500
Memberi haven't taken the time to read through this whole thread, so this book may have already been mentioned, but i highly recommend 'the vaccine book' by dr. robert sears. he objectively goes through the vaccines and lists their ingredients, lets you know which ones are have animal products, mercury, aborted fetuses (crazy, but true), etc.
you could read this book and decide to vaccinate on schedule, to use an alternate schedule, or not vaccinate at all (our choice), but it at least empowers you to have information:
http://www.amazon.com/Vaccine-Book-Decision-Parenting-Library/dp/0316017507
Posted 1 month ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.