I don't vaccinate my child because it's my right to determine which diseases come back
- Thread starter chansen
- Start date
Welcome to Wondercafe2!
A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!
chansen
Still waiting...
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
Not actively worried, no. I'm not qualified or sufficiently informed to decide if they did or did not. The FDA has jurisdiction on that sort of thing.
If you want to argue for greater transparency and openness on the part of regulators, that's great. That's a useful discussion, at the very least.
If you want to argue for greater transparency and openness on the part of regulators, that's great. That's a useful discussion, at the very least.
chansen
Still waiting...
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
Are they? If so, is there a reason for it?
I don't know, and I don't pretend to know.
This is the sort of question that immediately comes to mind when confronted with this sort of accusatory post. Normally, I Google the question and post easily-found answers in reply. I'm going back to work. This time, try looking up the question yourself. See what you find.
revjohn
Well-Known Member
Not overly worried, no.
Merck's problem is that their product is inferior. Their MMR vaccine, for example, is claimed to be 95% effective. Court documents filed against Merck claim that the effectiveness is significantly less than 95% but do not (anywhere I have looked) suggest what the effectiveness actually is.
This is problematic in that those who have received the Merck doses may not be effectively vaccinated. This puts them at risk of contracting the viruses they have allegedly been immunized against.
If proven this would be a clear case of fraud. It may very well be the end of Merck as a corporate entity.
Merck has acquired the exclusive world wide rights to the ebola vaccine created by Newlinks.
The Globe and Mail makes it sound like a good thing....but is it?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life...vaccine-some-big-league-help/article21722861/
The Globe and Mail makes it sound like a good thing....but is it?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life...vaccine-some-big-league-help/article21722861/
chansen
Still waiting...
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
Depends if you want to get through regulatory hoops and then ramp up production quickly to meet the need, or not.
Some company is going to want exclusive rights. No drug company is going to go through the regulatory process, and then see other companies reap the benefits of their legwork.
Regulatory is an entire field that is very complex. You need good regulatory people who know what has to happen. NewLink does not have those people. Merck does. NewLink does not even produce vaccines. Merck produces lots.
Merck will not be doing this deal out of the goodness of their hearts. They will want to make money. But they can stickhandle approvals and scale up production like few others can.
revjohn
Well-Known Member
Waterfall said:
If Merck was the only provider of many vaccines it wouldn't have to falsify any data.
It falsified data in order to gain a competitive edge over their competition. The presence of competition defeats possibility of monopoly.
What it really represents is a huge windfall to the anti-vaccine crowd.
The case against Merck will be how they falsified data and thus put users of their product at risk. This is true of The United States v Merck & Co (a fraud suit) and the class action litigation Chatom Primary Care v Merck & Co.
Both cases rely on two whistleblowers then in the employ of Merck and Co.
A third whsitle blower with the CDC (William Thompson) is actually blowing the whistle on himself and colleagues in the CDC who participated in a 2004 study involving MMR vaccines distributed to African-American boys. Thompson has come forward claiming that not all of the data was reported and that high-rates of Autism appear in this group.
A biomechanical engineer (Brian Hooker) re-analysed the data from the 2004 study Thompson commented on and has claimed to find that among African-American males who received MMR vaccinations prior to being 36 months of age are 3.4 times more likely to be diagnosed with an ASD than their un-vaccinated counterparts.
Hooker's study was published in Translational/Neurodegeneration in August 2014 and retracted in October 2014.
Faster than it took the Lancet to retract Wakefield's farce but embarrassing all the same because the article was single author and not properly peer reviewed.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2...-hookers-reanalysis-of-mmr-data-is-retracted/
and straight from the horse's mouth,
http://www.translationalneurodegeneration.com/content/3/1/22
And yet despite the retraction, or perhaps because of the retraction many Anti-vaccine sites are lifting Brian Hooker up as a hero despite the fact he is not an epidemiologist and really doesn't know much about statistics.
Huzzah!
revjohn
Well-Known Member
That the product cannot be used for commercial purposes. The public Health Agency of Canada purchases the product and may not turn around and sell it to another party.
ChemGal
One with keen eye
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Her
Correlation doesn't equal causation. Many other things have also increased in the last 25 years. I'd also like to see some references for some of these, for example the life threatening affliction stat, and how that has changed over time.
ChemGal
One with keen eye
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Her
It was a popular news story a while ago. The 'outlive' statement was misleading, what they study had said was that for the first time, a generation of kids will have a shorter life expectancy then their parents. The factors were pretty much all diet and lifestyle, mostly lack of exercise. All my info is just from the news reports, I never bothered to look up the study.
BetteTheRed
Resident Heretic
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Her
I've seen some research that suggests a correlation between age of the father and autism.
I posted a cartoon about this a few posts back - that organic food consumption also increased during this time - is organic food to blame for autism?
Ritafee
Is Being Human
information is then the same as advice?
Ritafee
Is Being Human
"What the hell, UnDef? Declared by whom?"
"This is complete and utter garbage" ... declared by @chansen
"I mean, this is complete crap you're pasting to this site." ... declared by @chansen
"just like not getting immunized is the stupid play" ... declared by @chansen
"Any real science on VRAN is not being compiled by individuals with any kind of scientific credentials. I don't claim to be a scientist at all. I do claim to be able to read a study." ... declared by @revjohn
I too can read a study but that does not necessarily mean I understand it ... when I was dutifully bringing my daughter to the pediatrician I do not remember once being given the option of vaccinating or not vaccinating ... and I feel guilty about not asking questions back in those days ... now I ask questions ... informed consent should be just that ... how often does a Dr reccomend to parents bringing in their children for vaccinations to read and understand the MMRII vaccine insert before they consent to the vaccination ... open link below ... it's only 11 pages ... the last 2 of which list 61 additional references 'scientific' (approved by government & big pharma) studies.
M-M-R II
and that link I found through the VRAN website ... the VRAN website that you @revjohn and @chansen seem to be 'advising' the readers on this thread to dismiss as conspiracy ... look no further people @revjohn and @chansen will do the censoring for you ... if it comes from a source posted by @UnDefinitive ... dismiss it ... she has no credentials to direct your search for information ... there is a lot of pro-vaccine information links through that website as well as testimonials from people with their own well-researched reasons for being anti vaccination ... the reason I recommended the site for people who are really interested in finding out more is because it is independent and non-profit and Canadian.
Magicians destroy anti vaccine movement ? More like magicians provide an entertaining demonstration on why you should trust in the 'magic' of vaccines ... spend 90 seconds of your life watching 'viral' videos and presto ... no need to look further!
"This is complete and utter garbage" ... declared by @chansen
"I mean, this is complete crap you're pasting to this site." ... declared by @chansen
"just like not getting immunized is the stupid play" ... declared by @chansen
"Any real science on VRAN is not being compiled by individuals with any kind of scientific credentials. I don't claim to be a scientist at all. I do claim to be able to read a study." ... declared by @revjohn
I too can read a study but that does not necessarily mean I understand it ... when I was dutifully bringing my daughter to the pediatrician I do not remember once being given the option of vaccinating or not vaccinating ... and I feel guilty about not asking questions back in those days ... now I ask questions ... informed consent should be just that ... how often does a Dr reccomend to parents bringing in their children for vaccinations to read and understand the MMRII vaccine insert before they consent to the vaccination ... open link below ... it's only 11 pages ... the last 2 of which list 61 additional references 'scientific' (approved by government & big pharma) studies.
M-M-R II
and that link I found through the VRAN website ... the VRAN website that you @revjohn and @chansen seem to be 'advising' the readers on this thread to dismiss as conspiracy ... look no further people @revjohn and @chansen will do the censoring for you ... if it comes from a source posted by @UnDefinitive ... dismiss it ... she has no credentials to direct your search for information ... there is a lot of pro-vaccine information links through that website as well as testimonials from people with their own well-researched reasons for being anti vaccination ... the reason I recommended the site for people who are really interested in finding out more is because it is independent and non-profit and Canadian.
Magicians destroy anti vaccine movement ? More like magicians provide an entertaining demonstration on why you should trust in the 'magic' of vaccines ... spend 90 seconds of your life watching 'viral' videos and presto ... no need to look further!
I don't think either vaccines or organic food are the direct correlation to autism ... what I do think is that people are looking for answers to questions that have been posed around the validity of mass vaccinations ... and so they should!
Last edited:
chansen
Still waiting...
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
What you've been posting isn't crap because you posted it. It's crap because it's crap. It would still be crap if I posted it, so I'm pretty thankful that I didn't.
And Penn and Teller did a very good job of explaining it - even if vaccines caused autism, the vaccinated kids would still be far better off than the unvaccinated group.
Parents today have no perspective. They grew up in the age of vaccines. I never saw a case of polio. I never saw diphtheria up close. I bet most people in their 20s and 30s and early 40s haven't seen those diseases, either. They don't understand why their grandmothers were so worried about them getting sick. For most new parents, sickness is something that might knock you off your feet for a day or two, tops. In your grandmother's and great grandmother's day, some people who got sick, never got better. You knew people who died from diseases we now have all but eradicated. You lost friends. Your cousin needed an iron lung to breathe. Sickness was serious business.
Now we have anti-vaxxer dumbasses screaming about autism and other terrible "side effects", with nothing but a discredited study in their back pocket. No evidence, just hunches and suspicions and mistrust.
As a result of these proudly ignorant dumbasses, little kids are getting measles at Disneyland. Measels. In 2015.
You linked to a site that has "testimonials". Anecdotes. They are worth nothing. Zero. As someone once said, the plural of "anecdote" is not "data". It is also not "evidence". There are rules to collecting data and deriving evidence from it. And when we follow those rules, and don't just listen to a random sampling of people who may or may not have witnessed a side-effect of a vaccine, we see that vaccination is the only good choice if we want our kids, and especially our infants, to not get 19th century diseases that your great-grandmother worried about.
I think some people probably do have adverse reactions to vaccines. Most are mild, we know that. Some may not be, but the chances of that happening to you or your child are very, very small. The chances of an unvaccinated child contracting a preventable illness, or even passing it on to an infant, are far greater. It's an irresponsible decision. It's not a skeptical decision, because skepticism is about asking questions. The answers are out there. This is denial, similar to evolution denial or round Earth denial. And while normally people who have no use for evidence are a source of amusement for me, this is serious when kids are getting very sick.
And Penn and Teller did a very good job of explaining it - even if vaccines caused autism, the vaccinated kids would still be far better off than the unvaccinated group.
Parents today have no perspective. They grew up in the age of vaccines. I never saw a case of polio. I never saw diphtheria up close. I bet most people in their 20s and 30s and early 40s haven't seen those diseases, either. They don't understand why their grandmothers were so worried about them getting sick. For most new parents, sickness is something that might knock you off your feet for a day or two, tops. In your grandmother's and great grandmother's day, some people who got sick, never got better. You knew people who died from diseases we now have all but eradicated. You lost friends. Your cousin needed an iron lung to breathe. Sickness was serious business.
Now we have anti-vaxxer dumbasses screaming about autism and other terrible "side effects", with nothing but a discredited study in their back pocket. No evidence, just hunches and suspicions and mistrust.
As a result of these proudly ignorant dumbasses, little kids are getting measles at Disneyland. Measels. In 2015.
You linked to a site that has "testimonials". Anecdotes. They are worth nothing. Zero. As someone once said, the plural of "anecdote" is not "data". It is also not "evidence". There are rules to collecting data and deriving evidence from it. And when we follow those rules, and don't just listen to a random sampling of people who may or may not have witnessed a side-effect of a vaccine, we see that vaccination is the only good choice if we want our kids, and especially our infants, to not get 19th century diseases that your great-grandmother worried about.
I think some people probably do have adverse reactions to vaccines. Most are mild, we know that. Some may not be, but the chances of that happening to you or your child are very, very small. The chances of an unvaccinated child contracting a preventable illness, or even passing it on to an infant, are far greater. It's an irresponsible decision. It's not a skeptical decision, because skepticism is about asking questions. The answers are out there. This is denial, similar to evolution denial or round Earth denial. And while normally people who have no use for evidence are a source of amusement for me, this is serious when kids are getting very sick.
If they do a half-assed job so they can ramp up production quickly - when somebody can do a more thorough job, and there must be a way to ramp up production on a more effective product. Why compromise or take the chance that tons of money is being spent distributing a product that isn't too effective, people aren't really protected but somebody's getting rich anyway? Something seems wrong with that. Really wrong. And if it's the FDA's jurisdiction maybe something's wrong with what they're doing. I don't get, either, why vigorously push a flu vaccine that is only 20% effective if it's not about money? I didn't get it because I asked for it two weeks ago but I had to take antibiotics for a week and they wouldn't give it to me at the same time. Then I read it was only 20 effective and I thought "why bother". I think my husband got it when in hospital - but I was more worried about giving something to him while he's still recovering than I was about me getting the flu.
Last edited:
ChemGal
One with keen eye
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Her
That is for the main strain of the flu that's currently circulating. There are other ones that are still going around. Also, it wouldn't be unexpected for a new strain to circulate later in the season, the shot might be a better match to it.
When it comes to the non-seasonal vaccines, I think we can do much better. There's some research out there that doesn't seem to be acted on, further examined quickly enough, although that's true for much of medical science. As someone who pretty much always had a stronger immune response to vaccines that average it bothers me on a personal front. I think we can individualize vaccines much better. There's some data to suggest women react more to vaccines than men, and the paper suggested that when there's vaccine shortages women could get smaller doses. Why not just all the time? I haven't looked into it recently, but what about people with asthma, allergy, certain immune disorders - I wouldn't be surprised if similar results were found. I think eventually we will see certain groups having different doses, differing adjuvants, dosing schedules, etc. It's being done on a very small scale already - people who do seem to have an abnormally strong reaction can get their titres tested and base when to get boosters based on those results. Eventually, I think we'll be much more individualized, where things like that can be determined quicker and cheaper. Right now it's about avoiding those really strong immune responses - what about the opposite? When people don't get a fever, soreness, etc. they aren't getting tested to see if they actually are protected, I think that might change too. At one point, a scar had to develop for the smallpox vaccine, as far as I know there's no current indicator commonly used as verification that immunity developed (the scar was a bad one IMO). For certain occupations it is done, but not for the general population.