Anti Vaxxers are toast x

Post Reply New Topic

The scope of the discussion implies that commissars can declare people legally-incompetent and inject them with strange substances.

Although there are strong differences of opinion, I would still like to think that all of the adults, here, are still passably-intelligent, so have a right to their own medical decisions.

It seems self-defeating, to politicize the fact, that you had ought not be participating in politics.

I would say Fidgeting/Stimming is not a disease. Many people would disagree saying because you distract other people it impairs your ability to communicate. ABA therapies have traditionally been based on the idea of Autistic stimming as an impairing behavior.

In American society, while the words "disease" and "impairment" are not used to describe introversion in the real world it is treated that way.

Wakefield met up with #45 and he got support from the anti-vaxxers. Wow. I'm not happy at all, to put it gently.

Even if vaccines did cause autism, there's a minimal chance of them doing so anyway. If you're a strict anti-vaxxer, you're against autistic people existing, don't lie to yourself.

I want to leave the possibility open, that it could work or be useful, in an ideal situation, but am deeply uncomfortable, have no plans of using it.

I see autism as a personality trait, probably juxtaposed to ADHD. I think, there are extreme examples, among hundreds of millions of people, but question whether it is pathological.

imho, it's not broken. There's no need to fix it. If there's a word for it, that's fine by me.

Regardless, they're still discredited.

Just one short list, from a goofy remix, made for minute and a half attention span --




I find more credibility, in the side which cares what are the ingredients, being injected into their bloodstream. Even when you put it, into an autotuner.

They can say, it's not even real dissidence; a sluggish schizoid is having an adverse reaction to common, everyday additives.

Despite fear of those ingredients, it's irresponsible to avoid vaccinations for children, as you may not be only causing your own child's death from any of the viruses out there, but you could be responsible for the death of someone else' child, as well.

You didn't know the ingredients, so were not afraid.

They come with side effects.

Now, name those cons, in specific detail. if you are really practicing informed consent. (Or, don't.)


(guilt-inducing, subjective language)


Even under the most conservative possibility, you're telling me that it's just plain, viral material. What is the scientific difference between a virus, being dead or alive.


Are complications reported, by sources, which you consider to be credible.

Herd immunity

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity

It won't be the wealthier, better educated anti-vaxxers who suffer the worst effects; they can get good medical care. The poor mothers who have to choose food and rent over vaccinations will watch their children die of preventable diseases.

Say what you will, but the result of not vaccinating children would be catastrophic. That alone is reason enough to vaccinate.

More guilt-trip subjectivity.

Is it because they are well fed, less crowded, and have better hygiene -- vaccine or no vaccine?



So far, noone can say when a virus is dead, or you're just injecting someone with a virus.

Patient zero, in the Disneyland measles outbreak might have been vaccinated.

You're injecting people with viral material, bodily fluids, toxic chemicals, and saying that everyone else has the problem.

I asked you to tell me what it is, you were injecting into yourself, and you have seemed to have a problem with identifying it.

But, you're qualified to make health decisions for other people.

Before it's good or bad, what is it. What are we talking about, at all. You don't seem to mind.

My problem with freevaxxers, who say you should be able to choose either way --
They can choose to inject toxic waste into the children, elderly, and poor. They can choose to inject contagion, and spread it aruund crowded places.

Given the established benefits of vaccination, you actually have the burden of proof. Granted, I'd rather have most of your alleged ingredients on a plate rather than in a syringe.

You didn't even know what was in it. The benefits of what.

I thought it was already established what goes into vaccines.
There is little chance of a vaccinated person developing whatever he or she had been vaccinated against. There is a far greater chance of unvaccinated persons contracting and spreading viruses that can kill. Ergo, I have zero regrets having my daughter vaccinated.
And yes, I, and the rest of the community, have a right to make health decisions for others, if there is a health danger to others in said community. By your logic, we shouldn't be able to enforce drunk driving laws, because who are we to tell someone else how much they can drink then drive!