Andrew Wakefield’s house:
Anti-vax quack Joseph Mercola’s house:
Crime really does pay.
Huh. and anti-vaxxer are always crying “follow the money!!!”.
WE DID!
I don’t care if they are sympathetic or not, it’s the over-reactions and made up stories that not only make them look dumb, but also get in the way of any rational discussions. As in the next post …
I have never said they don’t have a right to exist, not even close. I cannot help it if you think my saying “I don’t like having to put up with screaming, bratty kids” translates to you as “children shouldn’t exist”.
Exactly those same things were said back when it was first theorized that the number of vaccines given to dogs might be why they were having so many autoimmune problems. In dogs, sure all those vaccines were tested with each other and at the time of the vaccinations, but no studies had been done to look at the long term affects of over-vaccination. Have any such studies been done in children?
This is why I don’t give any “concrete statements” on this subject - it isn’t my responsibility to keep any children safe and healthy, nor have I kept up with any research being done on them. Way way back when I first said something on the subject, all I did was point out what happened in dogs and wondered if something similar might be happening in children. The response wasn’t “this study” or “that study” it was, OMG YOU AWFUL CHILDHATING ANTI-VAXER!!! and now months later I’m a troll because I dare to note a connection. Whatever - not my problem.
I have never said they should, that is merely your arrogance reacting to the idea I don’t completely agree with everything you believe. The most I have done is state an opinion - how is that a threat to you?
Huh. I guess since you’ve been doing a good job of ignoring pretty much everything I say …
I did answer it and you responded to it. Proving that you only actually read and respond to what you feel like, not what I’ve actually said.
Show me one place where I have refused to consider or excluded any data on studies in children on the long term affects of vaccinations on their immune systems.
I haven’t said that. This is the problem with making assumptions based on one or two sentences.
Interesting twist there. For one, my inclusion of Thalidomide was in response to the assertion that scientists telling us something is safe always means that something is safe. For another, the only reason the FDA researcher (decades ago, which would have zero to do with the FDA of today) got suspicious of Thalidomide was because of the birth defects that had already happened by the thousands elsewhere. But yeah, use what I said to try to “prove” that the FDA doesn’t ever make any mistakes.
I see. You didn’t want to waste your time with research, so you figured you’d throw out a couple of ideas, just to make sure all the bases were covered, because as, at best, a dilettante on the subject of vaccinations and immunology, you might have a unique perspective on the situation that the fuddy-duddy researchers and scientists paid to think about the actual science might have missed.
Well, allow me to allay your fears. There’s no indication at this time that what you fear is true. Should that change, I will be sure to update you. Sleep well.
I’ve posted links to several studies/review articles just in the course of this thread, so your characterization is ludicrously false. Why would you so blatantly mischaracterize those with opposing views?
That’s certainly a reasonable explanation.
You can’t have your own facts. Vaccinated children in the 80s and 90s were exposed to more antigenic stimulation than children are now.
This is more than a little hilarious:
“Why don’t people study the vaccines and answer all of the pressing questions that are still out there?”
“We have studied them. These are the results. Everything’s fine.”
“Well, of COURSE that’s what they’re going to say. You can’t trust science!”
“OK, well, exactly what do you think is wrong? What would you like us to check on?”
“I DON’T KNOW!! I’m not a vaccine expert!! Why are you expecting ME to know all this?”
“Well, then, if you don’t have a specific concern, your fears are groundless and stupid.”
“YOU ALL HATE ME BECAUSE I’M JUST TRYING TO ASK QUESTIONS! WAAAAAHHHH!!!”
And before you point out that I already said that I’m done here, I am no longer attempting to engage curlcoat or offer any further debate. I’m simply mocking her now. I think I’ve earned it.
The fuck? I mentioned one thing, that’s it. I don’t fear anything so I have no idea what that is about. You really need to quit projecting.
Where did you post anything about studies being done on the long term affects of vaccinations on the immune systems of children? I don’t recall see any.
The fact in question was whether or not I said anything about “overstimulation of the immune system”. I haven’t and I won’t because I don’t know why over vaccination of dogs causes immune system issues down the line.
**Smeghead ** too bad for you that I haven’t said any of that, huh?
Overstimulation of the immune system = too many vaccines = safety of the number of shots given at once. The concepts are equivalent with the first being slightly more explicit about the proposed mechanism.
You are saying that somewhere it’s been proven that too many vaccines at once cause overstimulation of the immune system?
You are completely unaware of the fact that those diseases CAN become very severe?
Your statement here is exactly equivalent to saying “I don’t know anyone who’s been hurt in a car accident, so I guess there’s no point in anyone wearing a seat belt.”
I was but I guess given the number of anecdotes, it appears that they can become severe. Since I don’t have any children, I haven’t looked any further than what I’ve been told here.
For anyone who is not curlcoat and therefore not stupid, the amount of immune stimulating material in vaccines today is less than it was a generation ago. This means that kids today are getting more shots (and thank god fewer cases of nasty diseases like hib) but amazingly they’re actually getting less immune stimulating material.
Hurray, we have two glaring examples of stupid for the price of one.
First, Dr. Kelsey of the FDA did not hold up approval of thalidomide as a sleep aid because of reports of birth defects in children of mothers who’d taken it. That news did not emerge until after Kelsey had raised other questions about the drug:
*"Even though it had already been approved in Canada and over 20 European and African countries, she withheld approval for the drug, and requested further studies. Despite pressure from thalidomide’s manufacturer, Kelsey persisted in requesting additional information to explain an English study that documented a nervous system side effect.
Kelsey’s insistence that the drug should be fully tested prior to approval was dramatically vindicated when the births of deformed infants in Europe were linked to thalidomide ingestion by their mothers during pregnancy. Researchers discovered that the thalidomide crossed the placental barrier and caused serious birth defects in infants. She was hailed on the front page of The Washington Post as a heroine for averting a similar tragedy in the US. Morton Mintz, author of The Washington Post article, said “[Kelsey] prevented … the birth of hundreds or indeed thousands of armless and legless children.”*
Again, it is dumb to crow about the thalidomide disaster while bashing the FDA.
And neither I nor anyone else here has ever said that the FDA “doesn’t ever make any mistakes”*. You have however presented no justification for terming FDA vaccine approvals “mistakes”.
I think you’re onto something.
*this is another classic woo comeback, a.k.a. “Science/medicine wuz wrong before, therefore my crackpot beliefs have validity!”
Well, since you are the one doing it I don’t know why you a showing everyone. Nitpicking as to why one person who worked for the FDA decades ago decided that approval should be held up is stupid. Whether it was because of a nervous system side effect or birth defects, it is still because information abroad indicated that the drug might be dangerous. If I wanted to mirror the stupid, I’d nitpick that thalidomide wasn’t used for just a sleep aid, but since it has nothing to do with the point, I won’t. (Not that you care about the point … )
I didn’t crow of course, but whatever floats your boat.
And, I haven’t said that the FDA made any mistakes while approving any vaccines. It’s amazing what you make up when you only see what you want.
And, the trifecta! I don’t have any beliefs either way on the subject, all I have is the one observation. That it has come to this from that one thing says FAR more about you than it does me.
No, I am saying that the phrases “overstimulation of the immune system”, “too many vaccines” and “safety of the number of shots given at once” are all the same idea and complaining that someone accusing you of a “too many shots” mentality makes you look stupid because that’s exactly what you were doing earlier in the thread when you worried that children are given too many shots at once.
Only if it’s been proven that “too many” vaccines overstimulate the immune system. You are really making a wild leap here - as I said before, I have no idea what the cause(s) are behind dogs who end up with immune problems due to having been given too many vaccinations. It could be over stimulation, it could be depression of the immune system, it could be the phase of the moon for all I know since I’m not a scientist. All I do is look at the research, see how it fits with real life and make a decision, which is never cast in stone.
Meanwhile, the Vaccination Antichrist herself is on The View. In a just world, she’d have no career at all until she apologized and made amends.
You SAID that one of your concerns was that no one has addressed the safety of the number of shots given at the same time and everyone explained that the too many vaccines argument has been severely debunked. You complained that you’d said nothing of the sort and I am attempting to explain to you the concept of synonymity.