Of course not; every person who died of the swine flu was very sick at the time of death. With the flu.
The time you spend thinking up smart ass responses would be better spent learning a thing or two about economics. I love how you laugh off the fact that your savings are being eroded in secret by private bankers to bailout their buddies on Wall Street and fund overseas wars which are killing innocent children as we speak.
You should be pissed off at the Federal Reserve and the politicians and be marching in the streets along side the Tea Baggers.
What you don’t know CAN hurt you.
If that’s true you are in serious danger.
I respect you Sam Stone, as one of the only libertarians on this board, but you misunderstand my positions. What I am saying is this:
I am not a firm believer in homeopathy. I tried in once and got good results. I believe that people should be ALLOWED to seek treatments like homeopathy, whether it is bogus or not. Thats what freedom is all about.
Its more about health freedom than a belief in homeopathy.
As for vaccinations, I am not against them either. I think people get too many and am concerned about the long term effects of the adjuvents, thimerisol, and other toxins contained in many vaccines.
And I believe, like the Pharmaceutical industry with prescription drugs, makers of the vaccines are looking to make a buck opening the door for abuse and pushing unnecessary vaccinations on people.
All of these things are helpful tools in medicine: vaccines, prescription drugs, diet, supplementation and exercise. AND complementary medicine.
Don’t you think there is a valid discussion to be had on whether or not we are relying too much on one “tool” while neglecting others? Vaccinations (the number of which have risen dramatically in the last fifteen years) beg long term cost-benefit analysis and rational discussion on when or if we can go too far seeking to vaccinate against any possible illness, no matter how low the changes of contracting that disease.
This is a very valid discussion and certainly not “quackery”.
You are correct, however, that this aside about vaccines in no way reflects on the work of Austrian economists and the merit of the school of thought. I have said before I am not an expert in medicine but I have read a lot of Austrian economics and understand it very well. And no one, not even Keynesian economists dispute the tremendous contributions to economic thought that Mises and the Austrians have provided. It is well known in the field of study.
It is fallacious to think that because a school of thought has been out of vogue for a few decades it is somehow “discredited”. I see this is nonsense and you clearly do as well.
I would be interested, if you are willing, for you to elaborate a little on what you think of the ongoing economic crisis and what principles of Austrian economics you would recommend our leaders to follow? Should we cut spending? Should we audit the Federal Reserve?
Since you clearly know your stuff, it would be great for you to add a little more to the pro Austrian side of the argument.
And your proof of this? You had it pointed out to you that the H1N1 virus affects people aged 10-60, and some 18,000 people died of the swine flu pandemic worldwide. You want to tell me none of them were ‘healthy’?
Then you’re gonna have to prove that, and no, bragging about your health won’t cut it.
Do you believe the Founders erred in giving the Supreme Court the authority to interpret the Constitution? Should we repeal Article Three of the Constitution, or should we simply ignore it?
Criticisms about the focus of the debate is valid and has been addressed before. I am running with it for now, because I don’t want to start a new thread at present. But I am convinced in my beliefs given my study of the various subjects.
I am sure most of you are not likely to change your opinions either. That doesn’t mean nothing good can come from debate, however.
I will be sure to start a more reasonable, focused debate in the future and I hope you respond then.
Don’t compare myself, von Mises, and Ron Paul to Young Earth Creationists, that is completely out of line.
Then they sure are doing a lousy job of it. The number of pharmaceutical companies producing vaccines has dropped dramatically over the past few decades. There just isn’t much money in it, and the controlling of prices makes them almost not worth the effort. In 1967 the number of U.S. vaccine manufacturers was 37, now we are down to 3. The number of vaccines on the market has also dropped in that time from over 350 to a few dozen.
[quote=“Mr.Miskatonic, post:699, topic:550784”]
Wrong. You are free to use them if you want. You are not free to claim they have any medical value whatsoever. Nor should you or anyone else make money on snake oil.
I’ve heard the same stupid ‘freedom’ arguments used to squeeze religious teachings and creationism in school. The simple fact is no matter how much you try to weld the word ‘freedom’ to something it is still bullshit that has no place in certain fields.
Because when people like you promote quackery and snake oil it gets into the area of borderline murderous behavior, or waste of money and time at the very least. Think of it being beyond the point of where your right to swing your fist ends.
That is completely and utterly wrong and a perfect example of someone who overestimates their abilities. You have demonstrated multiple times in this thread that you don’t know anything about vaccines besides your hysterical reactions to them and what you cut and paste from anti-vax liar sites.
[QUOTE]
You make this leap that if I believe in alternative medicine or am skeptical about mandatory vaccination, that somehow invalidates my views on economics or social policy.
Lets leave aside homeopathy for a minute. How about the larger market of alternative doctors, chiropractors, acupuncturists, nutritionists and others?
How is it criminal to peacefully offer me a treatment that doesn’t harm me and I choose to pay for? And what gives you (or anybody) this notion that you have complete knowledge and can say with certainty that any alternative doctor is a quack and a charlatan? Maybe you know nothing of the subject?
Here is the point:
If I saw a homeopathy doctor a couple years ago and felt in improved in my symptoms considerably after treatment and I was happy to pay for it, why should you deny me that right?
If the doctor or practitioner doesn’t harm anyone then it is none of the governments business period.
In a larger sense, there are many alternative and cutting edge medical treatments that the government is resisting because they cut into the profits of the drug companies! Even though there is tons of research supporting it.
This really isn’t about homeopathy.
Let me give you another example. There is an alternative treatment for healing injuries and joints called prolotherapy. It is a series of injections that stimulates the growth of new ligament tissue and collagen that cures chronic pain and can return athletes to a high level of play in a short amount of time.
I got this done a couple years ago for a chronically strained and weakened ankle. Within three visits the pain was gone and I could go back to full time athletic competition. There is numerous scientific studies to support the effectiveness of the treatment, but it invalidates the need for drugs and surgery, so the medical establishment resists it.
Insurance won’t cover it and it is not well known, even though it is a true miracle treatment. It is being suppressed because it threatens people who make money off knee surgeries, back surgeries and pain drugs.
ALL doctors who practice it have medical degrees and years of specific training.
Don’t dismiss the notion of medical freedom. It is one of the most important liberties we (used to) have.
Nope. That is NOT the governments job. What about the people who experienced improvement from Homeopathy (like me) and the many people who got help from alternative doctors and are more than happy to pay the fee? As long as I am not hurt, I can pay anyone to do anything they want in an effort to positively effect my health.
Whether you think it is a placebo or not is irrelevant to my right to spend my money how I see fit.
Leaving aside homeopathy for a minute, how can you fail to see the abuse that a government with that much power over medical care can cause?
You really think the government is always looking out for you? Maybe they are protecting the drug companies profits? Ever think of that?
What do you mean by “the medical establishment resists it?” What does you mean by “it is being suppressed?” Clearly it is available. I see Medicare doesn’t cover it, and so major insurance carries don’t cover it. And they may be wrong to do that (I’m trying not to roll my eyes at your statement that it’s “a true miracle treatment”). But your argument that this is being covered up does not hold water. It’s true that it hasn’t been widely adopted.
No one believes that. The vast majority of your comments about mandatory medications in schools have been regarding vaccinations. Do not even try to argue otherwise.
As I have made absolutely no statements about Ritalin, etc., how would you know? Besides, there are no laws that make Ritalin or other mood altering drugs mandatory to send your kids to school.
No, you are misunderstanding me. People are not forced to work for any salary. They can choose their place of employment and unless there is a monopoly (usually government granted) nobody has to remain in horrible working conditions and companies would not want to purposely drive away workers. The pay of certain jobs is valued in the marketplace at what that job is worth.
I gave the example earlier of why we don’t have people pumping our gas for us in gas stations anymore. The reason is because the minimum wage eliminated that job. Very, very low skilled labor jobs pay very little but there is always someone who is willing to do that job. When the minimum wage is raised, it destroys low skilled jobs and the people who HAD a job are now unemployed.
See, money has value. If it maintains its value and buys more, people are wealthier even if they don’t have more money. Their money buys more.
A critical point was made by Jacob Hornberger:
http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2008-06-23.asp
When you compound the fact that the minimum wage never rises at the rate of inflation you see how it hurts the very people it is designed to help. I wouldn’t eliminate welfare, by the way. Only FEDERAL funding for welfare. Local governments, charities and local communities will be tasked with helping the poor and homeless. And they will be doing a whole lot better than the federal government.
Don’t you see that it doesn’t improve the living conditions of anyone to raise the minimum wage? Prices adjust, jobs are lost and the people that remain employed are doing no better than before.
Libertarian policies are GOOD for the poor and middle classes. In fact, countries with a vibrant market economy are the only nations as a rule to have a healthy middle class and very low rates of poverty.
How about we don’t steal from the poor through inflation? Why enrich the government and the bankers at the expense of everyone else?
You and many liberals focus on feel good concepts like “ending poverty” through redistribution and helping the poor without understanding the harm done through the actual implementation of said policies.
It requires an understanding of money and the creation of wealth.
Sigh. I don’t know of anyone who defends the lamentable fact that slavery wasn’t abolished during the revolution. But many founders were against slavery, and some were not. They had their faults, but they were still ahead of the rest of the world in their thinking and writing on liberty. It has been argued that the founders (not all of them) truly abhorred slavery and understood the contradiction with the documents they authored but lamentably knew that not a sufficient percentage of the populace would accept an abolition of slavery at that time.
No this was not libertarian to allow slavery to continue. But their views on liberty was followed up with the true abolition of slavery and the expansion of their libertarian views.
We should still head the words they wrote and respect the documents that they gave us. They established the greatest nation in all of history and provided a blueprint for human liberty for the entire world, despite being products of their time and despite their contradictions and personal faults.
Homeopathy is not fraud. Many people sincerely believe it is effective and have dozens of loyal customers who swear to the success they feel they get from the treatment. YOU may think it is bullshit, but it should be legal. It has a long history of use for hundreds and hundreds of years.
Fraud is the knowing deception and extortion of money from unsuspecting victims.
Thus homeopathy does not count. You are right that the government does not restrict a persons right to use homeopathy YET. But there are many who would go in that direction.
I want COMPLETE medical freedom, no exceptions. And can’t you conceive for a second that there may be something to homeopathy of acupuncture that you don’t know? You act as if there is some big conspiracy to knowingly screw people through pushing a fraululent scam on people.
Most people come from a long line traditions of homeopathy and naturalistic medicine with scores of people who swear by the results they get.
Who are you to make such a blanket accusation that there is no health value to any of these things? You can be skeptical, but don’t be close minded.
Personal freedom ends when you become a danger to others. People not getting vaccines or otherwise walking around with treatable diseases are a danger to everyone around them. It’s like drunk driving. Sure many, maybe even most, drunks make it home okay. Many people will go their entire lives without getting into an accident with a drunk driver. That still doesn’t stop them from killing thousands every year.
That’s the biggest failing with Libertarian philosophy. It ignores that all of human history is people being bastards to others. Sometimes it’s for fun, sometimes it’s out of fear, sometimes it’s through indifferance, sometimes it’s to gain an advantage, and sometimes it’s all those reasons and more.
There’s always a big complaint about how government should stick to repairing the roads and let people just go about their lives. But there is never an explaination for how you’re going to prevent things like exploitive child labor, exploitive 70 hour work weeks, unsafe work enviroments, rampant pollution, or grossly unfair wages from returning. All of that has happened throughout history and only stopped once government regulation started. (Heck, it still goes on even now. There’s a Pit thread about a Hawaiian company that was exploiting it’s workers)
There’s always the magical handwave of, “That just wouldn’t happen.” But I’ve never seen a good reason why. And it’s not just for labor issues. It’s the same for things like education and health.
Libertarians seem to believe in a fantasy world where nobody is ever selfish and thinks only of themselves. It’s a great fantasy really. I’d love to live in a world like they describe. It’s also not that different from one described by Communists either. The only real difference between the two is why they feel everyone is going to be nice to each other.
Too bad the real world just doesn’t work that way.
I’m speechless (almost).
No I didn’t cherry pick the quotes. I have read their writings extensively. Many founders had faults and they didn’t always govern according to their principles they expressed in their writings either.
They believed in small government (there was some debate over HOW small)
They were against a central bank and favored Gold money
They favored a strict interpretation of the constitution and a Republican form of government
You can nitpick and show contradictions all you want, but on the whole they believed in human liberty and that is what they wrote about. I know of no scholar alive who disputes the fact that the founders advocated very small government and human liberty.
Why you would attempt to argue the contrary position is beyond me.
People believe a lot of things. They believe that Obama was born in Kenya. They believe aliens came and after a trip of light years decided the best thing to do was create some funny circle is our food.
Posting a birth cerificate certified by Hawaii didn’t help Obama. Having the people who created the crop circle come out and explain how they did it didn’t stop the true believers. And no amount of medical studies will convince some people that sugar water and food coloring won’t cure anything.
And appeals to history are problably not the best choice. Hundreds and hundreds of years have been spent believing that maggots spontaneously form in meat, the sun revolves around the earth, and eating a rhino’s horn will give you a boner. Dumb ideas have a way of sticking around.
I hate to wade in here, but I have to respond to this.
The swine flu (H1N1) “outbreak” in 1976 killed one person, and as far as we know was limited to Fort Dix. An attempt was made to vaccinate everyone, and three elderly people died not long after getting inoculated. There was never any reason to think that the deaths were caused by the vaccine, but that’s how it was portrayed in the media at the time, and that’s how it gets quoted by vaccine alarmists today.
The universal vaccination program seems like overkill in retrospect, since the virus was successfully contained. But remember that the flu pandemic of 1918-19 killed tens of millions of people worldwide. If the vaccinations were unnecessary in '76, it’s only because we got ridiculously lucky. If Patient Zero had been someone who rode the subway to work instead of a soldier on an Army base, we’d have a whole different story.
In my eight or so years as a physician, I personally have been involved in the care of three very healthy people in their late 20s/early 30s who got the flu, developed a secondary infection, and died. Probably ten times that many have been in the ICU on the ventilator but managed to pull through, though many of them will never recover completely. That’s just young people; I couldn’t even begin to count the old folks who’ve suffered similarly.
jrodefeld, you’re right to be skeptical, and to not automatically believe the prevailing opinion. But being an independent thinker means looking at all the available evidence, and not just the pieces that sound convincing.
Evaluating and processing medical information and separating the good from the bad isn’t easy. I make a living (in part) teaching young doctors to do it, and even after medical school they struggle with it.
So I’m asking you to keep an open mind and consider that you have collected and cut-n-pasted is, by and large, not good information. At best, it’s been misleadingly written and/or out of date, and at worst it’s outright falsehood.