Why We Didn’t Vaccinate Our Child

We’re not ashamed to say that there are many vaccines we haven’t given our child. Here’s why…

Pertussis, also known as “whooping cough”, is a bacterial disease that can permanently injure or kill a child. Despite the pertussis epidemic currently sweeping California, we didn’t vaccinate our son against pertussis, because he’s only one month old. And you can’t vaccinate a child against pertussis until he is like two months old. Of course we will when he’s old enough. We’re not morons.

Yellow fever is a viral disease that’s common in Africa and parts of South America. It’s pretty much non-existent in the U.S., so it would be kinda silly to vaccinate our son against it now. No one does that. But if we’re ever going to be visiting those parts of the world, of course we’ll vaccinate him against Yellow fever. We’re not drooling idiots with no regard for the welfare of our child.

Ebola Zaire has one of the highest mortality rates of any disease people get. There’s currently a flare up of the disease in some parts of Africa. There have been a couple of Americans that have had it, but it’s so difficult for Ebola to be transmitted from person to person that there’s not really much risk of a major outbreak in the U.S.. That said, it’s a scary disease. We haven’t vaccinated our son against Ebola Zaire because a vaccine for it doesn’t exist yet. If the disease became more common where we live and researchers developed a safe and effective vaccine, of course we would give it to our child. We’re not completely braindead troglodytes with no understanding of modern medical safety standards.

person vomiting

Ebola is not a fun way to go.

Ebola Reston is a variant of the Ebola virus that first appeared in the United States, in Virginia. Ebola Reston is just as lethal as Ebola Zaire, but gave Americans a bigger scare when the first outbreak of it appeared so close to our nation’s capital. We’re not vaccinating our son against Ebola Reston because the disease it non-pathogenic to humans. It only affects monkeys, and our son, despite his behavior, is not technically a monkey. If it were hazardous to humans, we would have to be as dumb as monkeys not to consider giving our child every resource available to avoid contracting the disease.

Andromeda Strain is a crystalline agent that causes instant death from coagulation and deterioration of one’s circulatory system. In its most recently discovered forms, it has been harmless, but it evolves so quickly that it could easily become fatal again. We chose not to vaccinate our son against the Andromeda Strain because it’s a fictional disease, so it’s very unlikely that he would contract it. Even if it were real, his incessant crying would likely raise the level of CO2 in his blood sufficiently to make it inhospitable for the agent to take hold. However, if it were a real pathogen, and it were common in the U.S., and there were a vaccine for it, of course we would vaccinate our child. We’re not monsters.

Calculus isn’t actually a disease, but many people like to pretend it’s just as unpleasant. We’re not going to vaccinate our son against calculus, because it’s actually pretty useful. We’d love it if our son learned calculus. But if it were a terrible disease, I guess we’d vaccinate our son against that, too. Only a moron would risk their child contracting a known, debilitating illness against unsubstantiated rumors of statistically insignificant side effects of vaccines that have been given to large populations for many years.

487 thoughts on “Why We Didn’t Vaccinate Our Child

  1. Rosemary

    Can I just say, I loved this. When I read the title I was all ready to get huffy behind my desk at another parent choosing stupidity and rumor over science. What I read instead was surprising and made me laugh aloud in my office. Thank you for a fresh look at the disease of calculus, oh, and the justification of some vaccines versus not having others.

    Reply
      1. jc1742

        I didn’t get the calculus vaccine, so I contracted a serious case in high school which lasted for several years, resulting in a college math degree. However, it had few debilitating effects on my life thereafter, since I progressed to computer sciences, which uses mostly digital math, and calculus is hardly ever involved.

        Reply
      2. LiveWire

        Side effects may include inability to do derivatives, physics word problems, not understanding continually changing phenomena, liberal arts degrees, and fewer job opportunities.

        Reply
    1. Jaime Tracy

      My son sent me this and I was all ready to rip him a new one for being so stupid but I have this thing about actually reading a post before putting in my two cents. Loved this. Thankfully in the myriad of vaccines he received as a child, satire was not included. Though I wish there was one for “wiseassery”. He needs it.

      Reply
      1. Ernie Mauricio

        Do let me know if you’ve found a vaccine for wiseassery. My son contracted it a few years ago and is getting exponentially worse with the onslaught of puberty.

        Please.

        Reply
      2. Michael Sweeney

        I actually got a wiseassery inoculation when I was a kid, but my parents misunderstood the intent and it turned out to be a wiseassery booster instead of a vaccine. Worked great.

        Reply
    2. Tricia Ringe

      Agree with every word except the “dumb as monkeys”. It is my belief that if vaccines were were available for monkeys, monkeys would, in fact, take advantage of them. Since some people are actually NOT vaccinating for foolish, selfish, non-existent reasons, they would, in fact, be “dumber than monkeys”.

      Reply
      1. Dezmo

        Beautifully put.
        Jesus said” lest ye become dumber than monkeys thou shalt vaccinate thine offspring. Should ye become this dumb thou shalt become as lemmings and run for the cliffs…”

        Reply
      2. Sarah

        Ha ha, I totally agree. Monkeys would definitely be smart enough to want to avoid getting needlessly sick and perhaps dying from totally preventable diseases.

        Reply
      3. conni

        Ppl that don’t vaccinate are not doing it for foolish or selfish reasons?? They are doing it to protect their child and have done the research and that is why they came to the decision…And the reasons do exist!

        Reply
        1. Terry

          …they are doing it to protect their child and have done the research and that is why they came to the decision…

          I had no idea there were so many clusters of Ph.D. and M.D. scientists and researchers living in wealthy communities! And to think they have ALL hacome to the same conclusion about vaccination? Amazing! Thank you “conni ” for enlightening us! BTW, can I have the URL for the website where you got your own Ph.D.? My resume could use a little punching up.

          Reply
        2. Paul

          The reasons do exist – but only in your head, and without any scientific facts to back them up. Sorry. It isn’t personal. Just science.

          Reply
        3. Killian

          Those reasons are foolish and selfish. Vaccinating your child IS protecting your child, unless that child is has a compromised immune system or a severe allergy.

          Reply
        4. plebim

          You are 100% wrong. The diseases that vaccines prevent against are far more dangerous, far more likely to kill your child, far more likely to cause harm to the community than any of these super rare reactions from vaccines (on the order of one in millions).

          By not vaccinating you are responsible for death. It’s that simple. And if you can’t handle that truth then you aren’t responsible enough to make that incorrect decision to avoid vaccinations.

          Reply
        5. Audra

          Fair enough. “Foolish” or “selfish” may be inaccurate; lets call it ignorant, or uninformed, or lacking critical thinking and reasoning skills. There is no legitimate, scientifically sound reason to avoid mainstream vaccination. Unless these people are scientists or M.D.s specializing in communicable diseases, the “research” they have performed probably consisted of reading tabloid articles influence by Jenny McCarthy.

          Reply
        6. David Hukin

          There are those who believe in a flat earth. They are also idiots. On the one hand there is a vast amount of heavily buttressed evidence that vaccinations are safe and on the other hand there is nothing. Remember that time you got polio? No, you don’t… because your parents got you vaccinated! Even if your parents didn’t, the parents of virtually everyone else did.

          Reply
      4. V

        Vaccines are available for monkeys. =) Being as they can’t speak English, they are technically “dumb;” thankfully those monkeys in the care of human veterinarians are vaccinated, because even “just” animal doctors recognize the important of good public health. Sometimes they’re even vaccinated against diseases that don’t bother monkeys too much, but which could really do some damage to their human caretakers. Thank goodness for those vaccines!

        Reply
      5. Dodie

        So you put the rest of us at risk? So you think you’re smarter than physicians and scientists.

        I hope you don’t continue to hurt your children with you’re oversized ego.

        Dodie Murphy, LCSW

        Reply
    3. Melinda

      Vaccines don’t follow the normal path that your body usually takes to create immunity, they skip the first several steps of a normal immune response. I don’t believe the individual ingredients are really the problem, I think it’s the shock to your nervous system that creates the lingering issues. The evidence to support that theory is that children who receive vaccines are more likely to develop allergies. When a vaccine enters the body and is detected by your nervous system inside your bloodstream (not your digestive tract where it finds the majority of pathogens), it creates a chain reaction that is more damaging than helpful. The brain immediately tries to protect the body by sending white blood cells, but in large amounts because the threat is already in vital territory. This creates chemical and emotional stress within both the body and brain. The brain seeks to protect itself both from the threat of infection and the stress chemical cocktail, and I believe autism is one form of this protection which ultimately continues on just like the fear response that gets stuck in the ‘ON’ position in people who suffer PTSD. The brain would rather be safe than sorry in these cases, and impairs certain brain functions in order to increase protection levels. However, I think some children are more susceptible because their brains are already seeking protection against toxins produced by Candedia overgrowth -something that can damage the brain chemistry and reproductive system in fetuses of mothers who eat Western diets full of simple carbs and sugars. This is one reason autism (especially Asperger’s), obsessive compulsive disorder, Auto-immune disease and the hormone imbalance PCOS (life-threatening ovarian cysts, clinical depression, thyroid dysfunction, infertility, higher risk for cancer and heart disease) seemed at first to be genetic. However, when young women gave up sugar and gluten for one year before pregnancy, their babies had a much lowered risk of these problems. The damage is done through several generations so because I have PCOS I am at higher risk for having children with OCD, even more severe hormone imbalances than I have or Autism unless I cut out sugars. Because of the risk level in my genetics, I also wouldn’t risk vaccinating because of the fragile state of the nervous system of any children I will have. I’d rather my kid get the flu than have a lifetime of chronic disease or brain dysfunction. So, is it safe to vaccinate your kids if you don’t think you have PCOS, OCD, Auto-immune disease or Autism? Most cases of PCOS go undetected because most doctors are not adequately educated about hormones, only a month or less in school is focused on them. Many people in our society are high-functioning Asperger’s suffers, low level OCD sufferers and Auto-immune diseases also often go undetected for decades until symptoms progress to paint a clearer picture for medical professionals. These are not problems that can be easily detected in a blood test. Some hormone specialists estimate 70% of young women have PCOS and don’t know it. Because of the great risk of autism in our country, highest in the world -I don’t think we can risk vaccines. In the UK, their babies are vaccinated half as many times in the first year and they have BETTER infant survival rates, as well as HALF the risk of having a child diagnosed with autism. To me, the science seems very clear.

      Reply
      1. Elisha Moody Corey

        Ok, yes, there is an inflammatory response to a vaccine. All of those white blood cells are used to CREATE the immunity to the disease. Go study up on B cells and T cells. Apparently you have no idea how immunity occurs.

        Reply
      2. Anna

        There has been one study conducted on the relationship between vaccination and autism in the history of medicine, which showed a correlation between the two. However, the afore mentioned was removed from the publishing magazine due to the researchers manipulation of the data, which showed no correlation when tested. Sadly the word spread and many people even now, half a century later try to back up a hypothesis that has no ground. Please do your research, or believe the professionals, and you will discover the benefits of protecting your children against disease that used to kill thousands – the bacteria aren’t eradicated, it is the disease in humans that is.

        Reply
      3. Travis White

        Check any biology book – it is not the nervous system that detects infection, but having that level of science knowledge would certainly explain a lot about accepting the anti-vaccine bull.

        Reply
      4. prolefeed5

        Wow… So much bs in one comment. Kudos.
        No link between autism and vaccines. Fact. You can’t argue against statistics, no matter your gut feeling on the issue.

        Reply
      5. Kelly

        Melinda…you don’t understand immunology at all. Your body has plenty of white blood cells in your blood stream and in the gut and in mucous membranes such as the vagina, anus and nasal passages. Your nervous system is not involved unless the vaccine was incorrectly injected spinally. There is no “shock” or skipping steps. The only difference is the type of memory that the vaccine makes may be less due to the fact that the antigens from the vaccines did not induce a full scale illness. That is why boosters are required for some
        vaccinations.Please stop spreading your pseudo science based on your personal experiences.

        Reply
      6. SK

        “THEY” are not out to get you, mother nature is. When a lot of people decide to not vaccinate for reasons that are not scientifically applicable it is a crime against humanity – wiki search “iron lungs”… Look at the mortality rates for even some of the more benign things we vaccinate against… The numbers are staggering – even if half of what you said is true – those side effects are A LOT better than these things that wipe out humanity. Unless you think “survival of the fittest” means we should just let all the weaklings die out to create super humans who are naturally immune – lemme tell you this right now, not gonna work.

        Reply
      7. karol

        Seriously? You would rather let your child get the flu? In 1962 I came down with the mumps, no vaccine in those days. MUMPS IS A VIRUS. Within a few years I developed type 1 diabetes because of my viral infection\mumps. I am now 61 yr old. Without going into the gorey details of the difficulty life I live, you would risk your child’s health. Do not have children.

        Reply
    4. ryan

      Please edit your comment. You didn’t capitalize ‘Science.’ Show a little piety and reverence, before Science abandons us and the Unenlightened regain Power of the Earth.

      Reply
    5. Lisa

      I think you all are idiots!!!!!! Just keep your unvaccinated kids out of public schools!!!!!!
      The immune system is something you should get yourself educated on!!!
      You don’t want to be responsible for an outbreak or even your own kid’s death!!!!!
      The one year old who just was buried for not getting the measles vaccination. Reallly! Today with all the education that doctor’s offer us and their are still free- thinkers out there who think it is ok not to vaccinate.
      How many kids will have to die that could be saved?

      Reply
    6. Andrea

      Me, too! Me, too! I was squinting through the whopping cough part. What a pleasant surprise! Common sense AND humor.

      Reply
    7. Sharon

      Just – wow — I have not delved deeply enough into this topic to be for or against vaccinating.

      That being said, your assumption that parents who do not vaccinate have not done the required research and made an informed decision is grossly insulting. Your bias that these parents would choose rumors over science reveals a contempt for those who don’t think as you do/make the choices you would.

      Have you conducted research calculating the numbers of non-vaccinating parents who avoided immunizing their children because, “They heard vaccines are bad.”? Or are you choosing discrimination and rumor over science?

      Reply
      1. Audra

        The fact is that these parents have chosen rumor over science, because there is no science that supports not vaccinating children. Tabloid articles with quotes from Jenny McCarthy do not count as research.

        Reply
      2. Paul

        There have been studies done, can’t cite them, that say the majority of anti vaxxers do so in spite of knowing of the science.

        Reply
      3. John

        “That being said, your assumption that parents who do not vaccinate have not done the required research and made an informed decision is grossly insulting. Your bias that these parents would choose rumors over science reveals a contempt for those who don’t think as you do/make the choices you would. ”

        Do you also get upset when people tell you that you should leave your house via the front door and not the second story window? Perhaps you view the idea that they would say it’s stupid that you are an idiot for walking out the second story window as “grossly insulting” and that they are bias in favor of exiting the house via the ground story front door?

        Or maybe you just don’t know what you are talking about, because those parents DO choose rumors over the very real science of Vaccination and put their children at a very real risk. And yes, the parents of these unvaccinated children SHOULD have their children taken away for child endangerment. Period.

        Reply
      4. Susana Castillo

        Sharon, the reason it is safe to assume that parent s who are against vaccination have not done the required research and made an informed decision is that if they had done so they would find that science completely supports vaccination. This wave of anti-vaccination loons largely base their decision on a single report, written decades ago and supposedly linking vaccines to autism, by a physician whose work was entirely discredited for failure to follow proper scientific protocol and outright falsification of data. The “doctor” wanted fame and fortune and Nobel prizes but what he got was the blood of thousands of children who died or suffered horribly (and many thousand if not millions more in the future) because their parents believed that crock of s**t and refused to listen when the scientific community tried to correct it.

        Anti-vaxxers mostly enjoy the benefits of herd immunity but that doesn’t protect everyone.

        If you haven’t delved into the subject enough to make a decision yourself then maybe it’s time.

        Reply
    8. cat

      And yet. .. you still managed to get huffy behind your desk and and find a way to insult parents who might make different choices than you. Tsk.tsk.

      Reply
    9. Rich

      I SO agree with Rosemary! I, too, was expecting the uneducated “non-vaxer” autism-argument but was pleased to see a LOGICAL basis to refusing SOME vaccinations! The article didn’t slam the NECESSARY vaccinations that keep North America safe from proven devastating pandemics! Good job!

      Reply
    10. Yohannon

      Same here; I was ready to pull out the verbal flame thrower on this one. Plus a billion for Andromeda Strain reference (the book/movie freaked me out when I was 14).

      Reply
    11. Ellam

      The reason Vaccines against things such as yellow fever are important, even though its unlikely that you will encounter them is that immunity to certain bacteria can be passed on through genes. An example of this was with the first type of vaccination against small pox, and because enough people were vaccinated small pox is no longer an issue ANYWHERE on the planet. some vaccinations, aren’t just for your son but your future grand children, and great grand children, and great great grand children. Doctors with Degrees in things like immunity’s have suggested that you give your child certain vaccines, why on earth do you think you know better?

      Reply
      1. KAM

        Um, what? Not sure if you’re joking but if you aren’t, you should know that the CDC does NOT recommend the yellow fever for children living in the United States or, for that matter, most of the world.

        Reply
    12. Ellen

      I loved this tongue in cheek response to vaccinations!! LOL Sounds like this parent is actually using his head for something other than to hold his hat up!

      Reply
  2. George

    I am right there with Rosemary. I loved this. I, too, was ready to get huffy at my desk and leave a scathing remark.

    The last sentence was particularly wonderful.

    Reply
    1. Colin

      The ‘unfriending’ of people we disagree with is perhaps the greatest problem on Facebook. It is reasonable to unfriend someone who is very rude to us, but surely we should listen to other views than our own, if only to be better able to challenge those views. Facebook is made up of inward looking silos of self congratulatory, like minded groups. Not good.

      Reply
  3. Peter Ahlstrom

    Calculus is also what dentists call tartar. If there were a vaccine against tartar, I expect you would give that to your kids too. In the meantime, there is tartar control Crest.

    Reply
    1. Kira

      But CREST has FLOURIDE in it! And FLOURIDE IS FATAL IF SWALLOWED IN MASSIVE DOSES! So you would not give your child THAT!! (lol)

      Reply
      1. Justin

        Actually….. Fluoride is almost as toxic as lead. It’s why dentist worth their education won’t let children beneath 6 use fluoride and there are warnings that for young children, no more than 2ppm in water should be permitted. In higher doses there is a clear effect on IQ and on other brain chemistry issues have been found in lab studies with animals… Other than that, fluorosis of the teeth is a disturbing visual side effect of too much fluoride given to children while their adult teeth are forming. This includes excessive discolouration and pitting which looks far worse than the acid etched enamel which it protects against. For adults… Who cares… Already developed… But don’t be too flippant about its effect on children. This isn’t an “anti-fluoride” rant. These are things taken into account by the world health organization. Limit fluoride for children under 6 for their own sake. For adults, even upwards of 10 ppm in fluid is relatively harmless but in cases where people imbibe 2+ litres per day it has caused bone issues. And with people with kidney problems, fluoride does cause bone embrittlement.. All WHO data. And if you have low iodine levels, fluoride above only 0.1 ppm causes thyroid depression.. That’s only about 25ml of water at the typical 4ppm.

        But regarding your joke comment about fatality of toothpaste, a minimum fatal dose of fluoride is only 8mg/kg. That’s equal to about 160mg in a 6 year old child… Toothpaste has average 1500ppm, which is 1500mg/l or 1.5mg/ml So a fatal dose is roughly 106ml of toothpaste. The average toothpaste tube contains 55.5ml so to put it in perspective, a child would need to eat over two full tubes of typical toothpaste in one sitting… Yeah… No worries… (Totally use that against the anti fluoride people). But children can experience excessive gastrointestinal issues with as little as 1-2mg of fluoride… That’s 250ml-500ml of tap water at the 4ppm typical. So only use a pea sized dose of regular toothpaste on children at most.

        To clarify. I’m not anti fluoride, but remember, it does cause some problems if too much is given to children. Some long term, some short term… Some permanent. There is still not enough known about fluoride…

        But to compare lethality: lead lethal dose is 450mg/kg….. Fluoride is 8mg/kg… And there would be an outcry of epic proportions if they started adding lead to the water. And Thallium Rat poison is lethal at 15-20 mg/kg.. See where I’m going with this?

        Reply
        1. Kirstin

          Everything – let me say that again – EVERYTHING is toxic in the right (wrong?) dose. Water, in sufficient quantities, can kill you. The dose makes the poison. Too much fluoride is harmful. Too little fluoride is detrimental to dental health. Dentists don’t like parents to use fluoride on kids too young to spit their toothpaste because it’s possible to get too much in the system, but they DO paint fluoride on the teeth of young children as soon as those teeth erupt (as early as 1-2 years of age).

          From a scientist’s perspective, I’ll say two things: Fluoridation of water is arguably one of the two cheapest and most effective public health measures ever taken, and; The use of fluoride-containing toothpaste and fluoridated water affords humans, for the first time in human history, the opportunity to keep our permanent teeth throughout our lives.

          Reply
          1. Astrocrabpuff

            I recently moved to a city that doesn’t add fluoride to its drinking water. I’m middle aged. My new dentist knew right away that I grew up in a city that had fluoride in the drinking water. My dental bills show that difference as well.

          2. Cecilia Long

            Fluoridation of the water is one of the most harmful things ever that can be done. If someone wants to have fluroide have their Dr or dentist proscive it ina vitamin.

            Dont subject people like me who CANNOT HAVE FLUORIDE because I get very very sick to your idea of this is good for everyone. IF I moved to a place that fluoridated the water I cant even BATHE or wash my hands. I could not use the water without putting it through special fluoride filters.

            You can get your fluoride if you want through other more personal means.

          3. Jenna

            Totally agree with you. In Britain they took the fluoride out of the water and then a couple years later put it back as they seen an excessive rise in cavities. Everything can be fatal if you take to much. The amount in water is only .001ppm and, while tooth paste is more concentrated, it still isn’t enough to cause all the damage it is rumored to do. Some parents are just being silly and putting their child at risk by not getting vaccinated and not using fluoride.

          4. me

            Big difference between calcium fluoride and sodium fluoride. Calcium good . Sodium fluoride toxic. Mercury toxic. Lead toxic.

          5. Kim Ryan

            Good call. Why are all the educated rational people here and all the “freaks” on the other side of the fence on vaccinations?? People argued to have our fluoride remove from municiple h2o. Now childrens teeth are rotting. How many can afford dental care?? Stupid stupid stupid. Was given fluoride drops as a child. I’m just fine.

          6. Me

            I have all of my teeth…don’t drink tap water…nor do my kids…I have NO fillings. We don’t use fluoride toothpaste either. Fluoride is meant to be used TOPICALLY if it’s to benefit your teeth, not ingested. How do you explain people in this day and age who actually do lose their teeth…if water fluoridation is so effective? Proper, healthy diet from whole foods, flossing and brushing should me more than adequate to keep your teeth strong for your lifetime.

          7. Conorhealth

            Sometimes people educated in “higher” education scare me. Who is writing your text books you pour over and then stand on as the complete and only truth? Where is this science coming from? What methods of science is being used to prove all these claims of safe unsafe products? Is ANYONE questioning or just because you pay an arm and a leg to get this education you just blindly trust. There’s a new/old saying, “what/whose koolade are you drinking?” There are many types of cults and the medical field is one of those that is bitter, mean, self-righteous, and pretty closed minded to any alternative thinking. Compassion for those injured by the “practice” of medicine is low…my family is one of the injured. I quit drinking the Koolade and opened my mind (NOT to rumors) but to things that saved members of my family when (because we were scammed and had no insurance-which ended up being a God-send) we were pushed out of the system when they thought they wouldn’t be paid AND their protocol wasn’t effective. NEXT! (Not us!) There are VERY effective alternatives to Fluoride that are not toxic BUT they aren’t lobbied for and there isn’t the investment in them OR the profit. That’s not science.

          8. Sandy Roman

            No dentists don’t want fluoride on the teeth of young children.

            Fluoride is already in toothpaste, water, bakery goods, and dozens and dozens of foods. Dentists know this and they know that baby teeth don’t need fluoride. If you add fluoride, you get fluoride marks on the adult teeth which are developing and have not yet erupted.

          9. gillian smith

            I’m really not sure that’s a counter argument. And why does no one ever discuss the other nasties in toothpaste? I haven’t used Colegate in years, and the few times I’m forced to it foams up and feels like burning acid in my mouth.

            there just isn’t enough research on long term effects of this stuff, especially as a combination package with all the other junk in our lives. we aren’t getting healthier, despite all these so called “necessary” additives.

          1. Me

            6 months old? Where did you get that info? None of my kids even had teeth until a year. I doubt you’re correct.

        2. Dave

          When looking at the above quoted (without sources) references to lethal doses of lead and fluoride, please remember that there are no health benefits of lead in the human body. It is only a poison.

          Reply
          1. Brianna

            Oooh, I’m gonna have to differ with you. I believe you are the idiot. When people don’t vaccinate their kids, they put EVERYONE else at risk. It’ s all a cost-benefit balance. In the case of vaccines, we already know that we are living longer precisely because we vaccinate against the globe’s most lethal diseases. So, again–you’re an idiot.

        3. Ephraim Lessell

          Generally, I consider fetishes to be private personal matters. However, when people get their rocks off by sounding false alarms, needlessly scaring people, when we all live with an ample supply of legitimate threats of danger, that’s too much to stand idle. The reply above is riddled with misleading claims, faulty logic, and gross abuse of numbers, units of measurement, and technical terms. The author invokes “lead” to raise alarm, comparing the “minimum fatal dose” for fluoride ions with that of lead. Of course “there would be an outcry of epic proportions” if lead were deliberately added to public water. That’s because it has no health benefit, so deliberately adding it to the water supply would be psychotic. Adding lead to the water would make less sense than it made in “adding” it to the argument in the above post.
          Actually, lead has a major use in medicine and dentistry. However, it’s not ingested, it’s worn in various aprons and pads to minimize exposure to radiation in such procedures as X-ray imaging (it’s even used when imaging children!!!).
          This posted reply necessarily made me think of the character Colonel Jack D. Ripper in Dr. Strangelove, who was sure that water fluoridation was a communist plot. But the association with the post ended there; Kubrick was brilliant and the film was funny.

          Reply
          1. steve

            for a greater understanding of this, the Romans DID purposely add lead to their drinking water, though of course they didn’t know about the health effects. Not only was it a contributing factor to the decline and fall of the empire, as the lead poisoning led to lower birth rates, higher infant mortality, and generations of administrators who were a bit batty, it also completely changed dietary preferences because people suffering from lead poisoning lose sensitivity to taste. Hence, the ancient Romans started to put some of the most repuslive sauces on their foods–things like sauce made from rotting fish. They just could no longer taste stuff that was lightly salted.

        4. Jonno

          Stop trying to be smart. You come across like an idiot.

          Lead in small doses causes brain damage and psychiatric illness. Comparing fatal doses is ridiculous. You wish you had been able to study science at university, but no doubt had some other brilliant idea (maybe you knew all of science already).

          Stop it.

          Reply
          1. Brian Adams

            …Are you done? Anyhow, you’re wrong. You should probably check your facts before you start criticizing others. Idiot

          2. Jade

            I wish I could study all the science at university so I could be so many smart like you!!!!. How about YOU stop trying to be smart. You come across as an idiot.

        5. lee

          Another alarmist. Consider this. People live longer now than they ever have. More children survive childhood than ever before..and yes, we keep our teeth longer than ever before. Dental health effects overall health greatly. Bad teeth can actually case damage to your heart. Children, wait, everyone lives longer healthier lives in countries with better water systems..and the better water systems are usually florinated. (Now, having said that its true there are other advantages to a country that can afford the better water system, but lets remember water is among the most important, maybe THE most important
          resource for life and the condition of the water is largely responsible for the
          better health.) Absolutely everything can be improved over time. Everything. So should there be tinkering and improvements with water systems, sure, but is trying to scare people away from floride beneficial. No.The vast majority of DRs and dentists believe the benefits of fluoridated water out weigh possible
          negative effects…and they have the longevity and health of the population to
          prove it. I am no spring chicken and have lived in several parts of this country, traveled to other countries and i have seen fluoride damaged teeth once, in a
          young adult whose family had well water and they used fluoride supplements. Quite possibly at too high a dose. The kids was at Brown
          university so i dont think his IQ suffered terribly. I have 3 of my own kids, on our fluoridated city water they have managed to be GT students, play cello,
          piano, drama -requires great memory as well intellectual multi tasking, and so on. Point is, they are not at all showing a deficit in any way. Again, anything can be improved. I am sure the way we florinate water is no exception, but dont
          lose sight of the fact that it has helped the health and wellness of society far
          more than it may have harmed and we should be grateful that its there..at
          practically no cost. Some people will always find a reason to be worried, with longer, healthier lives something must be going right. In fact, a lot of things are going very right and it troubles me that a generation has come along that has
          lost appeciation for this.

          Reply
          1. migwar

            “affects,” NOT “effects” “Dental health AFFECTS overall health greatly.”

            “let’s,” NOT “lets”
            “… LET’S remember water is among the most important … ”

            “it’s,” NOT “its” “…it’s true there are other advantages …”
            “Its” is the possessive case; you were attempting the contraction for “it is.”

            “don’t,” NOT “dont”

            Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I shall assume that you are posting from a phone on which the apostrophe symbol is difficult to find and use. However, that does not explain your usage error regarding “affect/effect.”

          2. Tracy

            Exactly! We have well water and key dentist actually told us we HAVE TO use ACT with fluoride mouthwash. I’m trilingial and my husband and I both play instruments. Prior to our home w well water we both grew up w fluoride in our water and we are both smart an successful!

          3. Sam B

            Just a little Grammar policing here: Fluorinating and Fluoridating are two very different things. Elemental Fluorine is highly toxic and can cause death in minutes if inhaled as a gas. It’s damaging effects start at a lower ppm than Hydrogen Cyanide, and are lethal at a slightly higher concentration. But Fluoride? Hey man, a little bit of it does wonders for your teeth, just don’t going chugging it, mmm’kay?

          4. Robert D

            Not to be dissing flouride but trying to attribute all the health gains of our civilized society to the flouridIzation of our water systems is totally crackpot science and illogical.

            First off dental health is foremost attributed to adequate nutrition not flouride. People eat better, more frequently and lose fewer nutrients and minerals to excessive labor and physical hardship they ever had and few go malnourished. That is why people enjoy better dental health now. Not flouride. Be rationale. Flouride is useful but it is poisonous. Deal with it. Flouride is poisonous.

        6. Walter Boutwell

          Actual lethal dose of SODIUM FLOURIDE per the CDC for humans is about 5 grams or 625 times the dose mentioned. This is toxic because it becomes hydroflouride acid gas once it hits the acid of the stomach. STANNOUS FLouride is much higher as it is less soluable and does not produce the active poison HF. It does have toxicities and can be lethal if ingested in humdred mg quantites. Once sequestered in teeth and bone it is stable and non-toxic. THAT MEANS you can get an acute poisoning but not a chronic one, no “slowly poisoning” occurs.
          The lethal dose for Thallium is difficult as no human data is available (guess why). But in animal study it is about 3mg/kg or 210 mg human on average.
          The lethal dose for lead is 714mg/kg or 50 gm/human so if you could get rats to cooperate and eat lead, it would be a good rat poison.

          Reply
        7. AlphaCentauri

          People getting as silly as anti-vaxxers.

          He’s just pointing out that there are pros and cons of fluoride. You have to treat fluoride toothpaste a potential poison and lock it away from toddlers AT THE SAME TIME that you are using it to brush their teeth. The difference between a poison and a therapeutic agent is just dosage.

          Maybe he didn’t word it as clearly as you would have liked; maybe you had to READ TOO HARD to get what he was saying, but there is no reason to think he is saying fluoridation is the work of the devil.

          Reply
        8. Ron Ron

          Um…no. that is not how that works.
          Not at all.
          I am a dentist, so I take offense to your speaking for me, a dentist.

          Reply
        9. Susan

          Love this post. As for fluoride, my husband grew up in a region that has natural fluoride in the water. He and his sibs have great teeth, which irks the heck out of me because I tend to my teeth with care and he ignores his, and yet I’m the one getting the cracked molars and requisite crowns. (I predate the addition of fluoride to city water.) I also recall a time when some “patriots” believed that adding fluoride to the water was a Commie plot. Now it’s probably government overreach.

          Reply
        10. Random Realist

          Actually lead is lethal in much much smaller doses than fluoride. You say that a dose of lead can be lethal at 450 mg/kg but my research finds that a dose as little as 65 mg of lead can be fatal in both adults and children. The number can be further reduced in children although studies are relatively limited. General consensus is that the dose could be at least half. Delivery systems haven’t properly been developed to try smaller doses but based on results of higher dose tests I believe it is fair to say that doses as little as 10 mg could easily lead to death in children and may likely lead to death and certainly permanent disability in adults.

          The tests in question delivered these small doses at 1470 fps. I will admit that these tests were not in controlled conditions and likely could have used smaller doses and higher velocities to achieve death.

          Of course I don’t believe anyone would consider a bullet an inoculation, so there’s that.

          Reply
        11. James Lima

          Just a few notes…
          4 ppm is not typical in drinking water, rather that is the federal maximum contaminant level (MCL). Typical fluoride levels are 1ppm where it is added for dental health. While there are areas in the west US that have naturally higher levels, they are not typical.
          You talk about lead toxicity… The cited figures are for how much lead you have to swallow at once to die from that ingestion. But lead is toxic in tiny amounts over time. Its MCL is 0.015 ppm because consuming water with even tiny amounts will slowly harm you and developing children are particularly sensitive, but it takes a lot to kill you all at once.
          While there is some movement in the EPA to lower the 4ppm MCL for fluoride, no significant health effects have been consistently noted in reliable studies. At that level, the only noted effect is cosmetic, namely slight dental fluorosis.

          Reply
        12. Dominik

          Sorry, but there is little sense in comparing flouride to lead.

          Since lead accumulates in the body an intake of more than 0.5 mg Pb/day will already lead to toxic effects in the long run. There is no known benefit of lead intake whatsoever.

          Flouride on the other hand has health benefits in small doses (recommend to be about < 1.0 mg/day for small children).

          It would be more appropiate to compare it to salt (NaCl) that has a toxic level of about 1000mg/kg and is nonetheless commonly added to water (and everything else) – because in fact it is absolutely vital to nutrition.

          Few people are even aware that salt can actually kill you and salt poisoning in small children is not that uncommon.

          Reply
        13. Stan

          “Toothpaste has average 1500ppm, which is 1500mg/l or 1.5mg/ml”
          ————————–
          Go to school already!

          Reply
        14. Josh

          Flouride is harmless because it isn’t a thing. Its an adjective describing a flourine atom’s net negative charge formed with some other element. Fluoride isn’t a thing until it has another element to help a flourine atom become a flouride.

          Please lecture the world on Flouride after you read a chemistry book

          Reply
          1. Ephraim Lessell

            Josh: A New Low. This site is amazing when it comes to know-it-all’s, from pedantic university types to alarmist Luddites armed with freshly Google gleaned statistics. But Josh, you take the cake. Fluoride isn’t a thing!!! Then, what precisely is it? an ion? Yes, in fact it is an ion. But wait, ions are things. Now, Josh, no doubt you have a laboratory at Cambridge or on Mars and have sailed past fools like Bohr and Chomsky and other mere mortals in your discoveries and consequent understanding of language, atomic structure and the properties of elements, but why are you wasting time publishing your genius here? You see, in a forum where people aren’t apt to have read your stellar publications, which are presumably necessary background to getting your gripe, you come off looking like a silly schmuck.

          2. Ephraim Lessell

            Josh, you’re wrong, wrong,, wrong. Fluoride is a noun, not an adjective. No, ordinary nor scientific dictionary of English indicates “fluoride” as an adjective. It is a noun, precisely because it is a thing. Fluoride is one or more anions of fluorine (fluorine atoms with a monovalent negative charge due to an additional electron per atom gained from another atom or molecule. Fluoride ions exist as solely fluoride in solution, and in high concentration, such as in concentrated hydrofluoric acid, they are corrosive and extremely poisonous. Who are you to tell people what license to teach is conferred upon someone by reading a chemistry book. If you’ve opened one, it certainly has not qualified you to lecture to anyone, anywhere.

        15. v carter

          It’s probably the other components of the toothpaste that cause the GI upset. Toothpaste have a mild detergent. Ever eat off of improperly rinsed dishes? You get the trotts.

          Reply
        16. Shirley

          That’s why there’s an important step in the tooth brushing process. The technical term is, “Rinse and Spit”.

          Reply
        17. Kris

          I suppose you’d also say, stop drinking tap water and drink bottled water. Because filling the world with more plastic and funding the oil industry, is really going to keep us around A LOT longer. Haha.

          We die, as we are born. Your body is genetically susceptible to a lottery of things, the only option you have is to enjoy the life you are given and not spend it worrying about this stuff.

          Reply
        18. Simon

          I didn’t think at all alarmist.

          The gentleman quite plainly stated that for Fluoride in toothpaste to be dangerous to a child, said child would have to ingest two whole tubes in one sitting. Not something I imagine any child would be able to even if they tried very hard. 😉

          But Justin did state that Fluoride does have the potential to be poisonous. I don’t have a degree in anything at all but I was more than able to establish the point being made. Which was exactly that too much Fluoride is in fact not very good for us at all, but the levels that are put into the water supply and in toothpaste are perfectly safe. So the point? I thought it was just to give his opinion and the facts as he see’s/knows them. And it certainly didn’t come across as a ‘scaremonger-style’ post. And there’s plenty of those out there 😉

          Seemed like a very balanced post to me. Hoorah to you Justin! 😉

          Reply
        19. Thistle

          I had too much fluoride as a kid. Some in the water, some from doctor prescribed supplements because I don’t know why he did that. Anyway, it DID discolor my teeth. Nothing else, I just have this lovely yellow tint and some streaking that dentists have told me really can’t be fixed. Only lasting harm is I’m a bit annoyed the doctor didn’t think to take the fluoride in the water into account when he told my parents to give us the tablets.

          I mean, the fact I spent prom sitting outside crying into my $10 corsage from Kroger’s because my date stood me up on account of my ugly yellow teeth and now I spend my evenings all by myself in my house with my cats because I’ll never be pretty enough to be loved is ENTIRELY unrelated. (and not actually true)

          Reply
        20. DSchulz

          Thanks for this. My 5 year old has been having stomach aches a lot lately. I don’t think the flouride is doing it but I am willing to switch her back to the flouride free just in case she is ingesting it.

          I hate how the childrens toothpastes all taste like candy. (Side rant).

          -Danielle

          Reply
        21. leslie

          Yes, the pediatric doctor prescribed poly flor drops for my daughter as an infan. Why? I don’t know, but her teeth are terribly pitted and discolor e’s. I think it was a new thing on the market 20+ years ago. Maddening.

          Reply
        22. Andrew

          People like this person should have their fingers super-glued together, preferably to their mouth. I was raised with fluoridated my parents were denied. Unlike my dad, I have all my teeth – and no one in the 3,000,000 metropolitan area where I was raised suffered the non-existent drama this moron screams about. Fluoride has been in use for over 50 years. The documentation is in. Can’t we provide for public floggings for people who run around saying false alarmist things?

          Reply
        23. Venna

          Actually, that isn’t correct. My son has been taking fluoride supplements since he was 3 years old. Not sure where you got the idea that children under 6 don’t get it. At the age of 6 my son’s dose was doubled from .5mg per day to 1mg per day. Nowhere near toxic levels. And again, as someone else already pointed out, anything in a high enough dose, can be toxic so honestly, this little rant was kind of pointless.

          Reply
        24. Melanie

          Thank you!!! I am currently Fighting an ainti water fluoridation group in my city. I keep brining up the toothpaste thing and they never reply. I’m glad someone is in my side

          Reply
      2. Dave

        Water is deadly in massive quantities. So is alcohol. Sugar, Fat, Sodium and Macdonald’s burgers will kill you too.

        Just saying. Nearly everything is poisonous at some point, including oxygen, not air but oxygen. It is called oxygen toxicity. Please don’t let stop your child from breathing because it is toxic.

        Reply
  4. Ernest W. Adams

    Very funny. I’m impressed with the reference to the Andromeda Strain, too — that came out about 50 years ago.

    Reply
    1. CassandraToday

      What?!? Andromeda Strain came out 50 years ago?? That’s impossible — I read it as a teenager!
      Oh…
      Wait…

      Reply
      1. Joyce Z49

        Not quite 50 years, as it came out in 1969, but it’s getting closer to the half-century mark even as we speak/write. Scary, isn’t it — the passage of time, as well as the book itself.

        Reply
    2. IleanaDU

      Not quite 50 years ago. The novel was published in 1969 and the movie came out in 1971. So, 45 and 43 years ago, respectively.

      Reply
    3. Michelle

      Geez…that would make me be around 70 years old as I read Andromeda Strain that in my twenties. But then again, I stopped aging at the age of 15, thanks to all those formaldehyde in the vaccines I was given when I was a child. I am now well preserved.

      Reply
      1. Leslie

        One can dream right? However, there is a 59.2% chance that someone out there will be upset that you are not searching for the Ebola vaccination.

        Reply
      2. Suzi Satterfield

        Yes! It’s only effective, though, if you’ve already come into contact with said individual, so it’s sort of like a vaccine. (You know, one small dose given in order to prevent one from experiencing the full-on plague.) It’s called “block IP.” 😉 Unfortunately, because there are so many different strains out there, each one would require another exposure so that the viral code (or IP address) can be recognized and blocked from further illness from that particular virus.

        Reply
        1. Maya

          Sort of like the common cold that way. You don’t have to suffer the same strain twice, but there are so many strains out there that you’re sure to catch it again and again anyway. And there’s no general cure or vaccine forthcoming.

          Reply
    1. Cory

      I’m curious if you have ever looked at a graph of the disease vs. Time and at what point the vaccines were introduced. Likely not.

      Reply
    1. Clint

      Hi, I’m Ronnie Dobbs, and I’m making this video so that y’all will know about the dangers of entitilitus…

      Reply
  5. Binidj

    I’m not going to vaccinate my children against diseases like measles, mumps, rubella and the like because I don’t have any children. If I DID have children of course I’d get them vaccinated, what kind of cold-hearted, inhuman monster do you take me for?

    Reply
    1. Phyllis Steiner

      Binidj – clever, supportive, all-around terrific comment!
      I wish that every parent would STOP THE RISK-TAKING and get their children vaccinated. Not only are those unvaccinated kids at risk, all their contacts and their playmates are as well. Schools should have a make vaccines mandatory.
      As an older adult, I remember polio. Need I say more?

      Reply
  6. Johne154

    Wow, fantastic blog layout! How long have you been blogging for? you made blogging look easy. The overall look of your web site is wonderful, let alone the content! gadfkgedefag

    Reply
  7. David O

    At first I was ready to be annoyed.. then I started reading..

    Then I was like “Yea that makes sense..”

    Then I was like “Well, yea duh..”

    Then I was snickering…

    Then I couldn’t breathe I was laughing so hard…

    Thanks man.

    Reply
  8. Warren

    What is wrong with you? If we don’t vaccinate against Andromeda Strain now, there is a chance that someone will remake the movie YET AGAIN. Please reconsider you anti-AS stance.

    Reply
    1. Cheryl

      It will be even more virulent now, as Michael Crichton is sufficiently powerful to demand creative control. The horror. The horror.

      Reply
      1. That Guy

        …Michael Crichton is dead. His parents didn’t love him enough to vaccinate against cancer. Those inhuman bastards robbed of us a great writer.

        Reply
  9. Amy K.

    I just laughed so loud my husband came into the room to ask what the hell was going on. I also think I just wet myself. WELL PLAYED, MR. HESTON.

    Reply
  10. Helen

    Is there a vaccine against smug passive aggressive preaching? I’d like to get that for a lot of adults on the internet.

    Reply
    1. Confused

      Are you referring to this blog? Cause if you are, this blog isn’t passive-aggressive. Do you even know what ‘passive-aggressive means?

      It’s sarcastic and satire, but it’s not passive-aggressive.

      And ‘preaching’? Since when is continually trying to get the word out about the dangers of not being vaccinated ‘preaching’? Especially since the anti-vax movement is the cause for genuine deaths from ignorance? Trying to saves lives by telling the truth is ‘preachy’?

      Honestly, it sounds like you need a vaccine against dumbbrain, cause both of your sentences were just plain stupid.

      Reply
  11. Patrick

    This blog is quite clear in reinforcing the problem. You are arguing from a dichotomy and neglecting to accept the idea that not everything is this black and white. Children get 18 vaccinations and they don’t get vaccinations for thing as extreme as Ebola. You are using an appeal to emotion by trying to align the idea of non-vaccination as being equal to bad parenting and lunacy. But the reality is any person who blindly accepts the cdc as a organization incapable of error is acting blindly and foolishly.

    A parent that actually weighs the pros and cons and does research and makes a logical decision from that analysis is a good parent. The anti-vaccination idea is not based on rumors, by the way. There have been 165, peer reviewed, studies conducted on the safety of thimerosal alone. The cdc inferred it was safe based on 6 of those studies, which happen to be the six it funded and co-authored.

    It would be wise to temper your use of the word rumor and argue in non-fallacious logic.

    Reply
    1. Leila

      Patrick, most non-vaccinating parents do zero research beyond listening to celebrities. Even if they did, it’s difficult to expect a layman to understand the research to begin with.

      Reply
      1. patrick

        You are right. Most people (for or against) do not do enough research or logical analysis. However, if you decide to NOT research and I decide to research, my analysis does not become invalid because of your agnostic approach. People should not listen to celebrities for medical advice, and I never once suggested or propagated that view. I just saw somebody post on Facebook an interview with Morgan Freeman and he said he doesn’t think racism leads to poverty. Morgan Freeman is not a sociologist or an expert on race relations or even economics.

        I think society puts way too much emphasis on celebrities and it leads to a wave of appeal to false authority. I am not arguing for that.

        Reply
          1. Stephanie

            Despite being used most commonly to refer to religious beliefs, “agnostic” merely means not having or suspending belief. Not a non sequitur at all.

        1. That Guy

          Sorry, but unless your research is legitimate, well cited, well performed studies, you’re not researching, you’re reading blogs. And what you’re saying sounds a lot like you’ve read blogs.

          Reply
      2. Cory

        I would completely disagree with this statement. I would bet the vast majority of people not researching this topic would be those who go into the pediatrician, roll up the kids sleeve, and walk out. They likely have no clue how an appropriate immune response should happen, what’s in the vaccines, or likely even care as long as they don’t have to pay a copay for the ‘well baby visit.’ People who are considering not vaccinating or possibly on a reduced schedule are likely the ones who have put in some serious time reading up on why there are concerns from the anti-vax crowd. You (and many on here unfortunately) try to paint those with a differing idea than yours to be unintelligent misguided fools. Those that blindly follow because ‘it is just what they do’ are the fools.

        Reply
        1. Al

          Yeah, man, there are two sides to every debate! There’s peer reviewed science, decades of results, and the elimination of a number of extreme, debilitating diseases on one side, and complete blithering idiots on the other! How dare you discount the blithering idiots, sir? HOW DARE YOU?

          Reply
          1. Gram4

            I would posit that few debates are in fact limited to two sides, except for the debate over whether a debate is limited to only two sides perhaps.

          2. Michelle

            Well said Al… Bravo well said!!!! most people believe the hype of one DR. I repeat ONE DR. He has had his license taken away and must pay huge fines for his false statements and no research to back up his claims.

        2. Sid Plait

          Cory, while you may be correct in where the vast majority is, those people are taking the strong advice of America’s preeminent health research organization. The folks on the other side are listening to Jenny McCarthy or some other non-scientist passing off at best anecdotal information as opposed to real, honest-to-Pete research. They are doing their children and other people harm, and they will eventually pay for it.

          I expect more and more schools to deny entry to kids without vaccinations. Also, I expect that, if an unvaccinated kid dies, or a kid that can’t be vaccinated dies from exposure to a kid that isn’t vaccinated, there will be an accounting and the parents held responsible. That day is coming.

          Reply
        3. conni

          I find that the ppl that argue the fact that it is wrong not to vaccinate are the ones who have done no research and just like you said roll up their kids sleeves and that to me is way more of a bad parent then me not vaccinated my kids because I have done years of research on it…I have read thousands of things on the harm of vaccines and never have I read anything about calling the ppl that vaccinate the names that have been used here…This just pissed me off and it is ridiculous.

          Reply
      3. Chris Hoult

        Of course they research they Google it and look at the first five or so hits. Like the rest of the dimwits thats why is it in the top hits. Its all Googles fault.

        Reply
      4. conni

        that is ridiculous, most parents that don’t vaccinate their kids don’t because of all the research they have done…I think it is more the other way around..ppl vaccinate their kids without even doing any research at all and then sit and argue that you should vaccinate without knowing a damn thing about them…I find it is the ppl that are least knowledgeable about them are the ones that will argue the most

        Reply
    2. doug

      There are plenty of “non-fallacious” arguments refuting every point the homicidally moronic anti-vaccers promote, so the best we can do now is mock them for conspiracy-fueled clowns that they are and hope that they have shame enough to come back to reality.

      Reply
      1. patrick

        Yes, you are correct. The utilitarian argument for vaccinations is reasonable and I accept that and I will argue that by its subjective value theory and meta-ethically, as its fundamentally fallacious to start. But this blog is not utilizing logic. It is using emotional appeal. I take medical decisions for my children quite seriously. It is the ad hominem I have a problem with. How can we ever have a logical and sound debate, with the goal of finding something closer to truth if you have already reasoned I am moronic?

        Reply
        1. Wayne-O

          Your use of the word “logic” is so ironic.

          Your vocabulary is moderate to above average. But your apparent inability to grasp the definitions of a number of the words that you banter about is truly impressive.

          Reply
          1. That Guy

            A moderate vocabulary does not a good argument make. My grandfather was a man with poor grasp of the English language, but great intelligence, and he was fond of saying that only an ass uses a five dollar word when a quarter word will do.

          2. paul

            Bandy about, genius. Not banter about. But don’t worry, I still trust you on vaccinating my kids.

          3. Elley

            That is gold. I think Patrick likes to use big words that he doesn’t understand to sound more “photosynthesis”.

        2. DerpusMaximus

          Because the concept of allowing your child to play in the street is just about the same as not vaccinating. The only problem is, these days, they’re LESS likely to be hit by a car than the measles. There’s no link to autism, no harmful forms of mercury, and the benefits far, far outweigh the risks that DO exist.

          How can we have a meaningful, logical debate? We cant. There IS no debate. Failure to vaccinate is done out of ignorance of science and fear. You don’t debate that, because antivaccs clamp their hands over their ears and scream when you point out the truth. Much like conspiracy theorists, they think that they know the REAL truth, and Big Pharma is lying to them. THAT is what logic is up against in a debate with these people.

          Reply
          1. berman

            Uh, lead is an element and it’s pretty harmful. So just because something is an element has nothing to do with it’s toxicity.

          2. Datdus

            Research
            rɪˈsəːtʃ,ˈriːsəːtʃ/
            noun
            noun: research; plural noun: researches

            1.
            the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions.
            “the group carries out research in geochemistry”
            synonyms: investigation, experimentation, testing, exploration, analysis, fact-finding, examination, scrutiny, scrutinization, probing; More
            groundwork;
            rareindagation
            “a group set up to oppose the use of animals in medical research”
            experiments, experimentation, tests, enquiries, studies, analyses, work
            “he could no longer afford to continue his researches”
            engaged in or intended for research.
            modifier noun: research
            “a research student”

            verb
            verb: research; 3rd person present: researches; past tense: researched; past participle: researched; gerund or present participle: researching

            1.
            investigate systematically.
            “she has spent the last five years researching her people’s history”
            synonyms: investigate, conduct investigations into, study, enquire into, make enquiries into, look into, probe, explore, analyse, examine, scrutinize, inspect, review, assess More
            “the phenomenon has been widely researched”
            study, read, read up on, pore over, delve into, dig into, sift through;
            informalcheck out
            “I researched all the available material on the subject”
            discover or verify information for use in (a book, programme, etc.).
            “I was in New York researching my novel”

            You for one are assuming research is only valid and applicable when it’s used in it’s noun form.

            When you are in school, your education is not solely based on experiments. Remember when you had to research for projects to find more information. To ask 3 sub-questions to answer the main question that you want to address in your project? Whether this was about bunnies or preventing pregnancy. It doesn’t matter research is research, it teaches you when you are trying to answer a main question by finding further information by questioning the sub-questions to get a broader answer that builds for your main question.

            When I started to question the efficiency and the safety of vaccines, I hadn’t even heard of Dr. Wakefield or Jenny McCarthy. I wasn’t even thinking as far ahead as the MMR. I just questioned how well this was actually experimentally proven safe on pregnant women. Guess what I was pregnant and I knew it was a ‘new thing’ to now vaccinate pregnant women against flu and whooping cough. THAT IS WHERE MY DOUBT STARTED. NO AUTISM, NO MMR, The friggin flu jab and the whooping cough jab.

            Simple answers, I took the flu jab now unsure whether that contributed to an entire pregnancy of projectile vomiting, selective eating to an extreme migraines. I then got asked to make the decision to have the whooping cough shot and I said no. Why? It was only very recently in the UK that they are now offering the whooping cough jab to pregnant women.

            Guess what, it’s unethical to provide studies on pregnant women. There have been zero studies to prove whether this is safe for the pregnant woman or the fetus to have the shot. Thus the flu jab too! Then I asked myself the question which exact vaccine do you get. That’s right the one suitable for adults, not babies. So how again does this make me feel like it’s actually safe for my fetus to have this shot how?

            It’s some theory that the pregnant women than passes on her immunity to the baby through the womb, so it has some presumed anti-bodies until they actually receive the vaccine at 8 weeks.. And this is proven how? We just answered the question that it’s unethical to experiment on pregnant women so how do we know these babies actually have anti-bodies passed on from their mother? How does breastfeeding or not breastfeeding influence this? Any studies? No that’s presumed, but we accept that.

            Why am I not allowed to have these questions and have my doubts and why does that mark me an immediate anti-vaxer or anti medicines?

            How is it that I question the fact that these vaccines are being used on animals while we are so strong in feeling our cosmetics shouldn’t be tested on animals but somehow when it’s about vaccines and medicines it’s suddenly becomes okay. And why is my immune system being compared to say a mouse’s say before it is then being tested on humans? I never understood the link when testing on animals became a big thing. We don’t speak animal language, we don’t see or live through their eyes and senses so how can we actually document how these animals experience it anything like we would? Yes to provide it’s efficiency it will have to experimented on humans and yes we will need to have human volunteers for that. And see how those morals all them pro-vaxers had change, suddenly it’s justified to have tests on animals “because it saves lives”. Suddenly it is too hard to find human test, too much risk.. Oh so, the mascara that is now being tested on humans if that scars someone for life than that’s okay? But the same wouldn’t be safe for humans with vaccines and medicines so we can still justify the use of animals when it comes to medicines and vaccines.. Have you got any idea how that is beyond hypocritical that actually is?

            Yes I have questions, I have doubts and I do not for once believe every single “conspiracy” theory out there on the internet. But I have answered my own questions, I have concluded it’s perceived either only black and white. There is no such thing as being allowed to have your own opinion, regardless if you don’t vaccinate you’re an anti vaxer if you do you’re a pro vaxer. People are not comfortable on the grey area.. What a shame..

          3. Neil

            @Justthatguyoverthere – Mercury is an element which is toxic in its pure form. There are many non-toxic forms of mercury found in compounds. Kind of like how pure chlorine (Cl) is toxic, but table salt (NaCl) isn’t.

          4. RK Phx

            I had a friend who died from Mercury poisoning.

            Oddly, it had a tie-in to that whole “playing in the street” thing.

          5. Ben

            Firstly, I’m pro vaccination.

            But I kinda hope you are trolling, because mercury and most of its compounds are extremely toxic. However, the compounds used in vaccinations are non toxic and , therefore that is pretty irrelevant to this
            .

        3. Sarah

          Oh, please let us have some comic relief! There’s nothing wrong with humor! No one was getting nasty until you stepped in.

          Reply
        4. Oku Myo Zai Ren Shin

          Using the word ‘fallacious’, the Latin ‘ad hominem’ and misusing ‘its’ in the same comment seems slightly ironic to me…

          Reply
        5. Nick

          Your air of superiority is completely misplaced – looks like you’ve done maybe a little bit of research on ethics and logic on Wikipedia, decided you’re an expert, and gone off half-cocked without knowing anything further. I have a couple of points for you:

          1) Do you even know what you’re talking about when you say ‘subjective value theory’ and ‘metaethics’? ‘Subjective value theory’ basically covers any number of actual theories within metaethics, and isn’t a theory itself – except perhaps as another term for a recognised theory/position. Further, metaethics (as the term ‘meta’ implies) is about questions one level above first-order, normative ethics. So questions about vaccination would not be argued at the metaethical level, because they’re first-order questions. You may be saying that people can decide what they want about vaccines, as ‘subjective value theory’ would imply, which may be valid from a metaethical level, but then you’d also be wrong for criticising people for criticising anti-vaxxers. Subjectivism is self-defeating.

          2: My word I am sick of hearing semi-educated people on the internet with a massive horn for deductive logic. None of you have ever actually studied logic or philosophy, or you’d know how goddamn stupid you sound. Deductive reasoning does not just mean ‘good’ reasoning or flawless reasoning, it’s just a particular kind of argument.

          Yes, deductive validity is good. It helps an argument a lot of it’s deductively valid, and it does mean that if you accept the premises then you MUST accept the conclusion. BUT there’s nothing wrong with inductive reasoning – you can make a really strong inductive argument, and if you write off inductive reasoning then you write off all of science. You know, science, the thing that has been improving our lives for thousands of years by providing reliable – but never infallible – information about the world. The irony is that most of the people/skeptics who bang on about deductive reasoning are science enthusiasts who want to appear intellectually superior.

          Further, you don’t have to accept the premises in a deductively valid argument. It’s always possible to reject one, unless the premises are prima facie true – and if they are, the argument is unlikely to say anything important or interesting about the world. They’re essentially tautological – you either already accept the premises and thus implicitly accept the conclusion (though it can be illuminating if you didn’t realise you accepted the conclusion) or you don’t accept the premises and thus the deductive validity means squat to the force of the argument. If you need to be convinced of a premise, then it is an inductive argument that will convince you.

          Any logician/philosopher worth their salt understands these things. Don’t go running around on the internet with an air of intellectual superiority unless you do, too.

          Reply
          1. Nick

            Seriously – did you people read/watch Sherlock Holmes and just decide that smart people only use deductive logic? Guess what – Sherlock Holmes uses a lot of inductive logic.

        6. Saint Cynicism

          I’m having a hard time believing you give a toss about logical fallacies when you threw up that blurb about thimerosol out there a few posts up.

          You know, that thing that’s no longer in the vast majority of vaccinations here in the United States (and undoubtedly several other countries that can afford the alternatives to it), and thus shouldn’t really even be involved in the argument. You might as well toss in the part about how Edward Jenner’s early vaccination work (scratching children with pus from a dairy maid’s hand) was incredibly unsanitary while you’re at it, it’s about as relevant to the discussion.

          Reply
        7. Sarah

          Parents who don’t vaccinate their children are not using logic. Worse, they are imposing their illogical and dangerous decisions on the whole community in which they live, and to places they travel. Perhaps it is the case that vaccines could be improved, however, in their current iteration, they are doing an amazing job at helping health and longevity. It is people who disrespect the dangers of the illnesses vaccines are developed for, and who fail to vaccinate, who are acting on emotion rather than reason and intelligence.

          In addition, it is extremely obnoxious of you to pretend that you take your medical decisions for your children more seriously than the rest of us, who vaccinate. Hopefully, you will learn to recognize your responsibility to your children and your community, and get your kids vaccinated. They won’t turn autistic, all of the sudden, promise.

          Reply
        8. Larraby

          “But this blog is not utilizing logic. It is using emotional appeal.” Actually, it’s using satire – something you seem even less versed in than science, which rests on peer-reviewed studies of observable nature and replicable results.

          Reply
    3. helvaroid

      Seriously? And we all know peer review is infallible, YOU make this point with your cdc example. How about numbers and cold hard facts. ‘Logical’ decisions should be made on that, not on what one finds an appealing read.

      Reply
      1. patrick

        If you find peer reviewed science to be infallible then you have to equally reject studies FOR and AGAINST vaccinations…and just toss science out the window. maybe listening to celebrities would be a better suited for you.

        Reply
        1. Patrick (the one who knows science)

          All of your logic and arguments are excellent expect for one tiny little issue. There are no peer reviewed studies which show any links or harm with vaccines or additives in vaccines. So all the logic in the world doesn’t matter since your starting position is invalid.

          Reply
          1. Datdus

            Except for the fact read a patient leaflet/package insert of any chosen vaccine..

            Ever heard of inflammation of the brain also known as brain encephalitis…??

            Perhaps if you would’ve added “in only very rare cases there have been severe reactions to a vaccine which can occur to any vaccine or medicine in general at any given time.” it would’ve made it sound more believable like you know what you’re talking about.. Just saying..

          2. IgnoranceAbundance

            DatDus,

            You cannot be Serious? What you just so condescendingly said, is implied. There is no need to spell it out, unless of course you’re too ignorant to realize that there are inherent risks in everything. Everyone’s chemistry is different and there is always a risk. What is important is that the risks are minimal and rare. What is important is that the benefits far outweigh the risks.

            You are the only one who looks stupid here and your know-it-all tone just makes you look that much worse.

            Look at me. Look at me! I’m so smart, worldly, intelligent, and know far more than you know. You are only providing more evidence for your ignorance.

        2. Franklin

          Franklin:

          Patrick, you’ve apparently ignored the fact that the journal Lancet withdrew and even apologized for publishing the article that was the foundation of the anti-vaccination nonsense. You’ve also ignored the spike in polio in Syria and the refugee camps along the Syrian border because vaccine was unavailable. Measles was just about eliminated when outbreak occurred; I think we can infer that a non-vaccinated carrier caused the present problem. Are there risks of a damaging reaction to shots? Unfortunately, yes, but that’s true of any medical procedure as I found out years ago when I was given a sulfa-based drug to fight an ear infection that ultimately needed surgery. But, weighing the relative risks, there is no question that vaccination is the right way to go.

          BTW, as far as human experimentation goes, once upon a time, that was the only way to test drugs. Only by giving his children the small pox vaccine could Cotton Mather determine whether it worked. In 1954, I was part of the first mass trial of the Salk vaccine, so I have my little footnote in medical history.

          In any event, the only way to protect kids from disease is to give them the appropriate shot; to do otherwise is to commit child abuse,

          Reply
    4. Chris Rapier

      You are right, the CDC does fund studies. In fact, that’s part of it’s job – to provide funding for independent research into epidemiology and disease. They are a tax payer funded government organization that is well respected through out the world for their dedication to disease control. In fact, it is seen as the premier disease research organization in the whole world. Now you are right, there are scores of studies on the safety of thimerosal. If we look at studies that have been published in well respected peer reviewed journals and eliminate those that are based on weak evidence, poor experimental design, and other factors we find that the *vast* majority of the studies find that the levels of thimerosal found in vaccines are entirely safe (partly this is due to the difference between ethyl and methyl mercury). However, this is basically a moot point as there are almost *no* vaccines that make use of thimerosal with the exception of some forms of the influenza vaccines. That’s been the case since 1999 when the CDC asked vaccine producers to phase out thimerosal as a precautionary measure. Do you know what we didn’t see when thimerosal was removed from vaccines? What we didn’t see was a corresponding drop in autism rates. By this point – 15 years on – we’d have seen a drop in autism rates *if* thimerosal had anything to do with autism. As such, there is *no* correlation or causation between thimerosal and vaccines. Not a bit. There simply can’t be as it’s *not* in the vaccines. This has been known for *years* now. So why are you bringing it up?

      Reply
      1. patrick

        Thank you for being the only person (so far) to actually be willing to have the conversation based on science. I brought up thimersol because it weakens the credibility of the CDC. Autism, if I was to make a guess based on the data I have read would be strongly tied to glysophate.

        But lets talk vaccines and science.

        There is also a whole field of study that looks at the ramifications of an overdriven immune response in such a young child. The CDC DOES NOT do comprehensive studies on the vaccinations as a collective, as they assume that if every one is safe (in of itself), then the collective is safe. This is fallacious thinking, in of itself. Qualities of a whole (18 vaccinations) do not automatically take on qualities of their parts (each vaccine)- the quality being “safe”.

        Reply
        1. Lisa

          Your comments are ridiculous, actually the CDC does do studies to ensure the vaccination schedule dies not overwhelm the bodies immune response. They even monitor this schedule to check that it is not given prematurely and thus having an undue effect on the receiver. Because you are unaware if something does not mean that it does not exist. I also see that you are harping on about a secret court and a secret trial, as a healthcare professional I have access to a comprehensive list if all reported adverse effects to vaccines, with a bit of this ‘research’ you pretend to know do much about you could find it and stop scaremongering. Once again Just because your knowledge is lacking does not mean you can make up an argument to bulky people into making an idiotic choice.

          Reply
          1. Cory

            I would think the use of adjuvants would tend to shoot down your suggestion of not overwhelming the body’s immune response.
            Also, as a healthcare professional you should be aware that your list is not so ‘comprehensive’ seeing that generously 10% of adverse events are likely reported.

          2. Erin

            Cory, in re. your claim that only 10% of adverse effects are reported: First, I’d like to see your source for that statistic. Second, a great number of the “adverse effects” that ARE reported have absolutely zero chance of resulting from a vaccination. Unfortunately, proof of any kind, even just correlation, isn’t required for an “adverse effect” to be added to the list of “possible” side effects. Case in point, one of the varicella (if I recall correctly) vaccines actually lists “broken leg” as a “possible” side effect. Why? Because some loon out there decided that her precious snowflake couldn’t POSSIBLY have broken his leg by – oh, I don’t know -playing, like kids are wont to do, and “OMG, little Billy was vaccinated last week! It MUST be why he broke his leg!” Unfortunately, in the interest of the laws that require them to do so, the manufacturers have to list EVERY reported “side effect”, no matter how ludicrous the claim.

        2. Brendan

          I’m just going to say what everyone else is thinking…
          Shut the heck up you self-inflated windbag. It’s stunning you ever found time to make kids since you seem so fond of hearing yourself speak.
          The use of a logical fallacy (appeal to emotion) doesn’t make the original post wrong. He’s right, not vaccinating your children IS bad parenting. Advocating for non-vaccination is tantamount to child abuse.

          Reply
        3. That Guy

          Your data is flawed if you tie Autism in to anything other than hereditary factors. And before you trot out that tired old ‘rise in Autism’ trope, I’ll point out that there has been no noticeable rise in incidences of autism.

          Reply
          1. Cory

            The CDC would disagree with your ‘scientific’ theory of no increase in autism rates. 2000:2010 rates go from 1:150 to 1:67. That trope right there is known as an increase in the autism rates….over all of 10 years! Compare the numbers when they increased the vaccine schedule to where it is now. At least you can keep spouting off how ignorant everyone else is while providing nothing of value to the conversation…and your own ignorance. How’s the view with your head buried so far in the sand?

          2. conni

            A good friend of mine had a very healthy child and after receiving the MMR her child now is autistic..

          3. IgnoranceAbundance

            Cory, if you knew anything about science, correlation does not equal causation! I am so tired of explaining this to non science people. You cling to facts and data that have been disproven over and over and over again.

            Why don’t you look at a million other things that have changed during that time period. Your data shows nothing but a more questions.

            Jenny McCarthy should be in jail for what she has done. She has more blood on her hands the most serial killers combined. Oh and the son whos autismn that started her on her death crusade, doesn’t even have autismn. Shocker! Oh and the study that she repeatedly preached from upon was disproven and biased. Oh and the “Doctor”, if you can even call him that, oh wait you can’t, because he was stripped of his titles and rewards for falsifying data and information.

            If after all the overwhelming evidence to the contrary still doesn’t shatter the ignorant belief that vaccines cause autismn and a host of other ailments, then you are part of a very large problem. You are responsible for the reemergence of diseases that have been eradicated. Even the parents who are responsible and vaccinate their children are now at risk because of you idiots. It’s called herd immunity, look it up, its incredibly important.

            If you choose not to vaccinate your children fine, but that decision is tantamount to murder, child abuse, and neglect. Have the common decency to keep your children away from other peoples children, whom are responsible. Do not punish other people’s children for your idiocy.

            This whole situation is a common day equivalent of the Salem witch trials. This is about a society that refuses to accept responsibility. It is always someone else’s fault.

            Use your brain, do actual research. In fact learn how to do research and then do research. Anyone who knows anything about science can see how utterly ridiculous this is. Stop clinging to your outdated and ignorant beliefs and wake up, because this time your idiocracy is fucking killing people! Fin!

            On a side note, I found this article very amusing. And by the way, for the people who continue using the term “logical fallacy,” go back to English class. This is satire. A very useful way to express one’s self and relay information to people in an amusing and thought provoking way. Thank you Jonathan Swift.

          4. Meghann

            That Guy is correct; mainly responding to Cory below but this forum doesn’t seem to allow comment nesting that deep.

            Autism rates haven’t actually risen, they’ve simply been 1) only given a specific recognized diagnosis within about the last 35 years (since 1981) and 2) many conditions that were not previously considered Autism were reclassified to fall under the Autism Spectrum. That is why autism rates have *appeared* to have risen. More things are now considered autism than before. The healthcare community has advanced in recognizing and diagnosing it. That is not the same as more cases of Autism existing.

          5. Julie Corken Zimmer

            in fact, kids who have never been vaccinated have the same rate of autism… so much for that theory….

          6. Michelle

            Yay That Guy!!! They have proven that autism is not caused by vaccines. It was on DR who claimed that and he did not even do any studies to prove it. They have done studies to disprove it and guess what they found…. Yep that is right it DOES NOT cause autism :-).

        4. Erin

          I believe the name of the herbicide you are attempting to blame autism on is glyphosate, not “glysophate”. There have been many studies into the safety of glyphosate, and guess what? Nothing about autism! Why is it that anti-vaxxers and anti-GMOers and other anti-technology folks always want to blame autism on some crazy government conspiracy? Why is it so hard for you all to believe that those with autism are born with it? Yes, there may be environmental influences while in utero, but everything studied so far disproves any correlation, much less causation, between vaccines and autism or glyphosate and autism. So stop it. Just stop. Autism is not some fate worse than death, as the anti-vaxxers would have us believe. I think that’s honestly what disgusts me the most about the AV “movement”: they (erroneously) believe vaccines cause autism and they are more terrified of their child being an autist than of their child dying or being permanently physically and/or mentally damaged by a vaccine-preventable illness. The well-being of their children takes a backseat to their “cause” and their kids and those who, through no fault of their own or their parents, cannot be vaccinated are the ones who are paying for it.

          Reply
      2. JStanley

        Thank you! I see so many posts regarding thimerosal, no one ever mentions the difference between ethyl and methyl mercury.

        Reply
    5. Brett

      What a ridiculous comment. People who oppose common vaccines are the ones using an “appeal to emotion” because they pander to exceptionally, exceptionally low-risk possibilities (“vaccines may harm your child!!!!”) to convince people to avoid a vaccine that can prevent contraction and spread of a disease that has a much higher risk of occurrence.

      Non-vaccination IS equal to bad parenting and lunacy. Period. There is no reasonable argument against it. There just isn’t. The single two reasons I don’t support mandatory vaccination is a) there ARE children for whom the risk exceeds the benefit, and the government shouldn’t be making that decision, and b) I do believe that ultimate individuals should have the right to choose foolishness and lunacy.

      But make no mistake; not vaccinating your children is foolishness and lunacy. And, btw, it puts the REST of us at risk. So it’s not truly just an individual choice with no consequences for the rest of us.

      In regards to the blog post itself …. while I am firmly in the camp of ‘vaccinate’ …. I think the blog post is pretty tone deaf to people who HAVE experienced unfortunate adverse effects from vaccination. I agree that it is a ‘statistically insignificant’ number; in the grand scheme of things FAR more people have been devastatingly hurt by not being vaccinated than have been hurt from an adverse effect …. but to the individuals and their families who have experienced an adverse effect, calling it ‘insignificant’ isn’t very thoughtful or kind. Might want to ease up on the choice of words to at least give a nod to the folks whose lives have been tragically impacted by adverse effects.

      Reply
      1. patrick

        If you believe I have the right to choose, from personal liberty and autonomy, then you can’t call it foolish for adhering to my right.

        The people who have had adverse effects actually are in very odd and questionable area…especially if you want to talk about liberty and freedom.

        If you get sick (or worse) from a vaccine and want to question the government you complaints are heard in a secret court and a secret judge. And, nobody ever wins. Why is this? One of the many fun items in the patriot act included blanket immunity for pharmaceutical firms that make vaccinations from civil/criminal charges, and made it so complaints are handled in a secret court. Conspiracy theory? Its in the patriot act and public domain.

        Why would somebody go through so much effort if it was safe? Why would Pharma want blanket immunity?

        Reply
        1. Wayne-O

          Certainly I can agree to your right to make a decision that I believe to be foolish.

          You keep harping about “logic”. Can you explain, logically, how having the right to make any given decision imparts correctness or wisdom to that decision?

          If you believe that you can, I revert to my previous comment that you are bantering on about words that you do not understand.

          Reply
          1. patrick

            Dear Wayne,

            As I stated:

            “You are right. Most people (for or against) do not do enough research or logical analysis. However, if you decide to NOT research and I decide to research, my analysis does not become invalid because of your agnostic approach.”

            In this statement I was explaining if a person does not want to put in the time to research or do analysis, then they are in essence claiming they do not know, or are not knowing of the answers (science) in regard to vaccinations. As the original post I commented on states: laymen can’t be expected to know.

            Agnostic is generally used as a skeptic religious position, but the root of the word is ‘not knowing’. So if a person claims to not know or understand the science behind vaccinations, they are claiming an agnostic position (‘not knowing’).

            I used this term, as more of a joke– because my position is also agnostic. I am skeptic to all sides: CDC, peer reviewed science, media, you and myself. Without skepticism science would never advance, as the opposite of doubt is certainty, and when you are certain you stop asking questions. The whole ridiculousness of the pro-vaccine movement is the rejection of seeing validity in asking questions. Categorical acceptance of something that is reasoned in inductive utilitarian calculus is dangerous, as it leads to blind dogmatic acceptance (a fortiori, macro propositions).

            I am happy to debate, clarify, explain anything I post. I do not write with the intent of impressing people with my vocabulary. The number one objective of writing is to communicate a thought and that is my focus. I do write slightly more casual in blog comments than I would in a academic paper- mostly out of habit. If you feel I am failing in my use of language or my ‘inability to grasp definitions’, then it would be much more productive to ask for clarification on what I am referencing. I am well aware that some things may seem as improper use, but it is because I am glossing over arguments that would take much longer to type out.

            It would be appreciated if you could abstain from ad hominem, it does not move the discourse positively and just makes this conversation sound childish. Just as me questions, be polite. Its easy. With that said, I appreciate your desire for logical clarity.

            -p

        2. sage-femme

          You’re correct that VICF exists, for the nefarious purpose of streamlining reimbursement for vaccine injury and avoiding lengthy court battles. However, you’re off on tying it the Patriot Act by about 20 years.

          But I’m sure you knew that, since you do your research, right?

          Reply
          1. patrick

            You are correct, I was referencing the following:

            Homeland Security Act of 2002, 107-296. (not the official PA, but it came int shortly thereafter).

            This expands the definition of vaccine ( in regard to the immunity) to include ingredients and components (which may not be part of the vaccination itself).

            Its rather suspect that Thimerosal was removed from vaccines, around the same time blanket immunity was granted to big pharma for things such as preservatives.

          2. Monica

            On this point, I just read a 2012 report “The Case for a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program for Canada” because unlike other countries we don’t have one. This report was conducted by Uof Ottawa Medical Research Dept and Uof Toronto Public Health School so not anti-vacc. They did not consider the reason for the existence of a VICP as nefarious however – it’s purpose was actually to stop the vaccine manufacturers from being sued and, possibly not being able to make the vaccine anymore. This argument I found the most interesting (brackets are my inclusion): “Such a property of immunization programs (herd immunity) means that individuals are not only vaccinated for their own benefit but also the benefit of others – those who do not develop immunity to vaccines, those who are not vaccinated and those who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons. School policies requiring immunization for
            entrance are largely based on this rationale. However, the fact that
            individuals are vaccinated for the benefit of others, and that governments
            justifiably use aggressive policies to maintain vaccination rates to protect the public, strongly supports the argument that in the rare instance that an individual is harmed from a vaccination – which they are receiving partly for the public’s benefit – they should be provided with just compensation for the benefit.”

        3. Daniel Welch

          Nobody wins because 99% of the time, they are wrong about the vaccine causing them harm. Make that 99.99%, actually.

          Reply
        4. James

          > If you believe I have the right to choose, from personal liberty and autonomy, then you can’t call it foolish for adhering to my right.

          This may be the silliest thing you’ve said in this entire thread. Just because you have the right to do something, exercising that right isn’t automatically “not foolish”. Many, many things we have the right to do are foolish. Smoking is foolish, but certainly within your rights. Having unprotected sex is foolish, but your right. Eating and not exercising to obesity; sitting in the sun all day without sunscreen; quitting work at 40 because you want to be a ballerina… All firmly within your rights and all immensely foolish. The list is endless.

          The vaccination issue is all about numbers. There may be adverse effects from some vaccines in certain circumstances, but they are generally orders of magnitude less likely to happen and less severe than contracting the actual disease you’re getting vaccinated for.

          Reply
        5. Meghann

          When you don’t vaccinate you are making a choice for many people other than yourself. Sometimes in this world you have to accept that your actions affect others. See: Disneyland measles outbreak recently, and outbreaks of Whooping Cough that have killed young children.

          The risk of harm from vaccinations is extremely low. The risk of contracting an easily preventable and possibly crippling or even fatal disease when not vaccinated are very high.

          Not vaccinating results in people dying unnecessarily and in people contracting lifelong injuries at rates far far greater than people harmed by vaccines.

          Reply
      2. BoB

        I agree that to ‘families who have experienced an adverse effect, calling it ‘insignificant’ isn’t very thoughtful or kind’. Being 1 in a million is no compensation for suffering.
        As someone who’s daughter’s personality changed completely after a multiple vaccination I must have doubts about it. But her twin suffered no effects, so I don’t know for sure where I stand.
        But I do believe that parents have the duty, and should have the right to make that choice themselves. Otherwise the state is saying we will make decisions, you have to handle the effects.

        Reply
        1. patrick

          Bob,

          That is the exact point I am trying to make. It is a parents choice to choose and nobody should be persecuted for choosing one way or the other. And if they cause adverse impacts then you should be able to take your case to a real court.

          If people want to do what the CDC says, by all means. But if you do not want to, then by all means.

          -p

          Reply
          1. laura

            Could we just start a heated and logical (ha!) discussion on my personal rights to choose driving on the other side of the road?! And what my immediate reaction to such freedom-choosing other-side-driving person would be if it were for instance my child being in immediate danger of death?
            Some people cannot be vaccinated (take chemo for instance). Want to put them in the extra danger just for the heck of it? Conspiracy theories belong in movies and sanatoriums.
            Doing profound and proper scientific research for the average citizen is practically impossible. Most scientific papers are not accessible and certainly not written so just about anyone can understand it. It takes many years and meeting and infitine number of researchers of many countries to be able to say one is even remotely well informed on such a subject.

          2. Mike

            If a child gets pneumonia, and their Christian Scientist parents decide not to take them to the doctor because they’ve plenty of research showing that faith healing is more effective than doctors… are those bad parents?

          3. Sid Plait

            Uh, no, Patrick. NOT by all means. You call yourself a skeptic, but true skeptics follow facts, not conspiracy theories. Are you implying, for instance, that the CDC is lying about the statistics from their real-life implementation of nationally provided vaccinations? The numbers are there and published. Peer-reviewed science is important, and conspiracy belief is ridiculous, but the actual numbers from the actual release of the vaccines and the incredible drop in the number of people suffering from the diseases the vaccines protect us from are available.

            I truly fail to understand how someone won’t take a chance of driving over a bridge (with their kids in the car) that 99.9% of professional engineers who studied that bridge say it is in danger of collapse, but WILL take the risk when it is the same (or close to it) chance (0.1%) of their kids being negatively affected after taking a vaccine.

            You have real world numbers (which we call “facts”), and you say you are still skeptical.

            That is not being skeptical. That is being stupid. Or stubborn. Or something that isn’t rational.

          4. karen

            The problem with using the “personal freedom” argument is that the child of the guy who exercises his right not to vaccinate, can infect others by this negligent act.

        2. Bree

          Bob,

          First, I’m sorry for the change you saw in your daughter but I applaud you for not immediately jumping on the “the vaccine did it!” bandwagon.

          I want to clarify one point. When scientists say “insignificant” its usually following or has an implied “statistically” preceding it. All this means is that the population experiencing a change doesn’t meet the mathematical rigors required to say that the effect is caused (or even correlated with) a specific event. Its not in any way meant to minimize the suffering of your daughter or the change your family is navigating. Its a very poorly named term because of the connotation outside of science, I wish we could change it to be more representative of what “significant” means when discussing science.

          I very seriously doubt whomever said it was “insignificant” to you meant to belittle your experience and, if they did, as I scientist I apologize for their insensitivity. I just wanted to clarify the term since it is something I see mentioned often and I think it would be incredibly helpful if we scientists made a better effort of explaining our terminology. I wish you and your family the best and hope you are all well.

          Sincerely,

          Bree

          Reply
      3. Trevor

        Brett, your reason #2 is negated by the “it puts the REST of us at risk” comment. Mandatory vaccinations should be in place. I know you want to be sensitive to those that have been adversely affected, but I’m sure the policy can build in science-based exceptions.

        Reply
    6. Mike

      Correct me if I’m wrong, but the thimerosol controversy isn’t it now a DEAD controversy, as it was removed from childhood vaccine preparations in 2001?

      Reply
      1. patrick

        This is correct and in 2002 pharma got blanket immunity from lawsuits regarding its safety.

        This is evidence showing lack of credibility of the CDC. This is the organization people are putting faith in and then berate people who are willing to stand and ask for facts.

        Reply
        1. Janice

          I agree. I am a neuroscientist, and after much research and soul searching I stopped vaccinating my daughter in the early 1990 with vaccines that had thimerosol. I privately concluded that no child should be vaccinated with a vaccine that contained Hg (of any kind) unless that child had been given a test for the Hg clearing gene. I probably have it (as I was overexposed to Hg in a lab accident, and now, 30+ years later I am relatively free of symptoms (don’t ask, Loooong story), and my daughter probably has it. And couldn’t the Hg in the vaccines just have been a type of ‘straw that broke the camels back’ regarding the theory that toxins are responsible for autism? I have two step-nephews, both Jewish. (Jewish people seldom have the Hg clearing gene.) Both received vaccinations in the ’80’s with Thimerosol. Both are autistic. And yes, I know the difference between anecdotal and scientific evidence. But it is my firmly held opinion that what passes for ‘scientific evidence’ has merely been bought and paid for by some corporate interest— for the sake of oh, so important ‘bottom line’.

          Reply
        2. Mark

          The CDC is not perfect, but the fact remains that with respect to vaccines, the vast majority of the scientific and medical community agrees with Atlanta’s position. You have to discredit more than the CDC: you have to discredit the entire immunology establishment. This will be more difficult, as it’s hard to discount the eradication of smallpox and near-eradication of polio.

          Reply
    7. Patrick (the one who knows science)

      There are not 165 peer reviewed studies on thimerosal and all the ones which where actually conducted found no link or risk CDC funding or not.

      Reply
      1. patrick

        I did cite my sources to the person who asked me to. If you want to claim thimerosal is safe, then you may do so. But your proposition is not proof in itself.

        Reply
    8. Vicky

      Not vaccinating your child is equal to bad parenting!

      If you have grandparents who are in their eighties you should ask them how serious measeles were back in their day. Besides Death there were other serious consequences that came from contracting this diseases. Talk to someone who had polio, I bet they would have liked a vaccine.

      It is irresponsible people who can’t distinguish legitimate information sources from Joe Opinion with a blog who are going to be the cause of the resurgence of these diseases.

      Reply
      1. Elizabeth O'Rourke, MD

        Would you feel the same way if you realized your autistic child received 300 times the recommended safe dosage of the most toxic heavy metal known to mankind which is a KNOWN neurotoxin that causes the exact symptoms as autism (as long as it doesn’t kill you.) Would you feel so loyal to a government that spends all of it’s time/energy/money on proving what DIDN’T cause this insane epidemic that affected 1:87-150 children in the US, RATHER than try to find out what did cause it???? Would you be so eager to trust a government that was injecting the same material into children at OUTLANDISH doses that they were telling pregnant women to avoid my limiting their intake of certain fish? You are so quick to judge…..try walking in other people’s shoes and open your closed, brainwashed mind just for a second….

        Reply
      2. conni

        As someone else mentioned the decline is diseases had nothing to do with vaccines…Your initial comment is offensive..I have first hand seen the harm from vaccines and because I am a good parent I WOULDN’T PUT MY CHILD AT RISK. I bet you are one of those parents that just blindly takes her kids in and rolls up their sleeve and doesn’t even question or research anything.

        Reply
      3. Sheila Billick

        I am not 80 years old, but I am a boomer. As a child I was never vaccinated because I don’t think the vaccines were available. Consequently, I and my sisters had everything that came along, and my parents considered it as just childhood diseases. Children got sick and managed to get well. I don’t know if my parents even worried about the diseases killing us or making us blind or brain damaged. My sister and I even had polio. I vaccinated my children, and my grandchildren are vaccinated. I think it is great that there are vaccines for my family.

        Reply
    9. Kirstin

      Research. I don’t think that means what you think it means. Research is NOT looking random (opinion-based) crap up on the internet. Research IS either producing original science OR reading primary sources, consisting of well-conducted, peer-reviewed articles in respected journals. If parents bothered to do the latter, they’d find that there are tens of thousands of studies showing that vaccines are safe and effective, and NONE showing that they fail a cost-to-benefit analysis. Incidentally, the many vaccines kids get these days are far more pure than the few we got back in the 60s and 70s, meaning that kids get more protection with exposure to fewer injected substances.

      Reply
    10. Chelle

      Thimerosol is not used in vaccines anymore because of the outcry against it. It hasn’t been used in most vaccines since 2003.

      So I’m less inclined to support parents who use that argument.

      Reply
      1. Michelle

        Yay Chelle :-). There is also not lead mercury in them anymore either so people who use this argument are kinda making themselves seem foolish :-)

        Reply
    11. Elizabeth O'Rourke, MD

      THANK YOU!!!!!!!!! Can you imagine the panic and pandemonium if the government/CDC/NIH really did not know what caused this autism epidemic? They actually might invest some money in FINDING the cause rather than “PROVING” what didn’t cause it. LOL…..(not a laughing matter.)

      Reply
    12. kelly

      I agree with you Patrick. I did end up immunising my son but not before researching my ass off. Unfortunately I found that there was so much nonsense on both sides of the debate to make a proper informed decision without studying the actual case study results and getting a science degree. I’m pretty convinced though that the government and big pharma are in each others hip pocket, so anything they can get away with to promote their products, they will. There’s more fear mongering on pro vaccine than anti.

      Reply
    13. Nita

      I am a registered nurse with years of Pediatric experience. I have seen whooping cough, measles, and have had the mumps and chicken pox and rubella, but not measles. I have also seen old cemeteries with children’s sections and stones reading “died of whooping cough”. Most people from countries with advanced medicine do not have a stream of consciousness with a personal reference for childhood diseases unless they are well over 60. The reason there was such a push to vaccinate was that enough families had experienced children dying from them or suffering lasting effects such as post-polio syndrome, deafness, and other life-changing effects. The question is, does the risk of having a side effect or undesired effect from the vaccine outweigh the benefits of allowing the child to contract the disease. For me the answer is clear. I would NEVER wish what I have seen and experienced because of my age, and because of the children I have cared for in a health care setting. I believe videos of children and adults suffering with these diseases and their effects could educate a vast number of people who do not have enough information to make an informed decision.

      Reply
    14. Amanda R

      And there are Millions of people who are alive today because past generations were vaccinated against polio. The numbers FOR being vaccinated are greater than the numbers against.

      Reply
    15. V

      Yet the CDC removed thimersol anyway.

      Thimersol, it turns out, was used to help keep multidose bottles of vaccine sterile. As a result of removing this particular ingredient, some vaccines were forced to be packaged in single dose vials, upping production costs, which up costs to the doctors and, ultimately, to the users. In areas where insurance is available to cover the cost of these vaccines, that’s not such a bad deal; in developing countries – which, arguably, could benefit the most from some vaccinations – insurance isn’t available, and now we’re back to excluding entire communities on price point alone.

      All because the CDC – a veritable funding powerhouse for a number of scientific studies of all flavors, not just safety (that’s why peer review exists)- decided to keep the ignorant public happy.

      Reply
    16. sally

      Patrick, one thing which is black and white is that almost all vaccines on the childhood schedule no longer contain thimerosol and have not done so for quite some time. Despite the fact that exhaustive research showed it was not harmful it was removed as a precaution. As someone else commented, the poison is in the dose. People concerned about vaccines also often quote the risks associated with aluminium in vaccines – a six month old baby who has been fully vaccinated will have received about 4.4mg of aluminium, a breast fed infant will get about 7mg, while a formula fed infant will get around 38mg. That’s about as non-fallaciously logical as I can be. It’s not about good and bad parenting, I believe all parents make choices they believe to be in their childrens interests but unfortunately the decision NOT to vaccinate is rarely one based on solid science.

      Reply
    17. Rebecca

      Amen!!! Yes, yes, yes! So relieved to read a post that makes sense. It’s people like you who make our world a better place and more understood. Issues this controversial are never black and white. Ask all the parents who have vaccine injured children or children who have died from the vaccines. The blatant ignorance of the person who wrote this article and of the people who applaud the writer prove they cannot think outside the box.

      Reply
    18. Cass

      The problem with “peer reviewed” studies and surveys is that it really doesn’t mean a whole lot. I (an expert on absolutely nothing) could do some research and write an article, paper, what-have-you on absolutely any topic under the sun. You, another non-expert also interested in my particular topic, can read and review my work…this makes it peer reviewed. In my research I could knowingly or unknowingly use information that only supports the opinion I have already formed on this particular subject matter.
      Rumor is a perfectly good word, as it is neither found to be true or false indefinitely.
      I am both a medical professional as well as a parent. I have done considerable research on my own as too whether I would vaccinate my own children. After all, if I am not going to vaccinate my own children how can I encourage parents to do the same?! As with absolutely everything that a person can put in their body there are risks. We ask parents and medical professional must way those risks. Of the millions of vaccines administered to children every year, there are many who experience fever, pain at injection site, swelling and rash. There are some who experience an allergic reaction or some who may, with certain vaccines, experience mild flu-like symptoms last up to 3 days. To my way of thinking, aside from an allergy, these are not good enough reasons to not choose vaccination. The other, more serious reactions or side effects that you hear about are rare to the point of miniscule. To the families living through them probably not so much. Many of these reactions such as autism have, through some researchers, been “linked” to vaccinations. They are perhaps linked, if that is your way of thinking, but there are many other things “linked” to the cause of autism.
      My eldest son is autistic, he is the love of my life and because of that he is vaccinated. As are my other 6 children in my care. I have 2 young ones with Down syndrome and the immunocompromising afflictions that follow, they are completely up to date on their vaccinations and will continue to be. I tend to get angry when I find out that another child in their school, daycare or playgroup has not been vaccinated. It doesn’t take much for them to get sick and their weaker immune systems have a very hard time fighting off infection.
      I think every parent is entitled to make their own decision regarding vaccination using proper research materials that look at both sides of the argument and making a smart, informed decision. I would also want them to keep in mind that the world is made up of billions of people, our decisions cannot purely be based on the good of a few, but the good of a community and more. Take your children into account of course, I am not asking otherwise. I am asking that you also think of my children and your neighbors children and your childrens friends and classmates.

      Reply
    19. João Pedro Oliveira

      I’m sorry Patrick.

      The official CDC stance regarding Thimerosal doesn’t consider it to be safe. The official CDC website states “there is no convincing evidence of harm caused by the low doses of thimerosal in vaccines” which is different then saying it’s “safe”. It means there are, so far, no substantial evidences (quoting more then the 6 articles you mentioned) to support major side effects.

      Either way “in 1999, the Public Health Service agencies, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and vaccine manufacturers agreed that thimerosal should be reduced or eliminated in vaccines as a precautionary measure.”

      Which, since 2001, “with the exception of some influenza (flu) vaccines, thimerosal is not used as a preservative in routinely recommended childhood vaccines.”.

      Similar measures where adopted in the EU. In my country (Portugal) there seems to be a small anti-vaxxer movement starting and they as well point to the use of thimerosal as a source for their concern. I took some time to review the ingredients on the vaccines that make up the national inoculation plan (I sourced the National Health Service website) and, if I recall correctly, none had thimerosal (or other “mercury based” preservatives) as an ingredient.

      The relationship between vaccines and autism has been widely and thoroughly discredited so I won’t waste much time on that. Their effectiveness is also well established.

      I have yet to hear one half-decent reason not to vaccinate. You raised only one point so I won’t hold you against the others because, as far as I know, you wouldn’t use them. But as far as your argument goes it has mostly been a non-issue for over a decade.

      Reply
    20. jenn

      pretty sure that if vaccinations where as dangerous as you seem to think they are we’d all be dead but hey look at me I’m alive I’m 31 and I’ve never had any of the serious and deadly illnesses because I was vaccinated I don’t have autism and I’m not brain damaged (as far as I know lol) how about you look around you and tell me if you see any proof that vaccines cause more damage than good maybe you should stop being such a hypochondriac and I hope to god that if you have children you make the best decision for them and for the rest of society and not for your self serving belief’s

      Reply
    21. RN

      Thimerosal has been eliminated or reduced to trace amounts in almost all vaccinations, yet it is still the most frequent argument that I hear people use when deciding not to vaccinate. These parents’ research doesn’t seem to extend beyond the alarmist websites tweaking numbers to fit their agenda.

      Reply
    22. Amy

      Eighteen vaccinations? Dear me. I was trying to be a sheeplike follower of the evil CDC and jab my daughter with as many deadly diseases as possible, and I still only managed 14. Did I leave out Ebola?

      Reply
    23. Kate

      well, whats funny about that is he’s using a positive emotion to highlight how sick many of us are about the use of negative emotion – fear – that anti vacciners beat to death without sufficient science. and no, those 165 are not sufficient :)

      Reply
    24. gmkjr

      Patrick, I assume that you also embrace the perspective that if their un-vaccinated children die or become permanently disabled by a preventable disease, its a worthwhile exercise in parental autonomy.

      There is “blindly accepting the cdc [sic],” and there is accepting the judgement of professionals with substantial expertise. It IS possible for parents to do research, but basing one’s view on information from the internet, or on the opinions of other people without expertise in the field does not qualify as research, and the result is prejudice, rather than expertise. It appears that most of the opponents of vaccination base their views on prejudice, rather than expertise, coupled with cynical dependence on others being vaccinated for the herd immunity that will protect their children from contagion.

      Reply
  12. LBlaidd

    Patrick–
    You are not supporting your argument when you commit the same fallacious errors you apparently see in this (humorous) column.
    In addition, using thimerosal (for example) to support your entire premise was perhaps not the wisest choice. I could cite far more than six studies, but I’ll settle for pointing out that, in general, it is quite possible to vaccinate your child without thimerosal exposure even if we all agreed it was an issue.
    http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/idepc/immunize/hcp/thimerosalfs.html

    Reply
    1. patrick

      I did not argue from emotional appeal. And thimersol was used as a case study to show that the CDC shouldn’t get categorical acceptance. I posted other arguments in other threads.

      Reply
    2. Cory

      Just to clarify, thimersol isn’t the only substance that is toxic in vaccines…it’s just the one that gets all the press.

      Reply
    1. patrick

      It would be quite labor intensive to dig up 165 studies. But here is the citation to the study I referred, which is a study on the methodology of thimersol studies dating back 75 years.

      Brian Hooker, Janet Kern, David Geier, et al., “Methodological Issues and Evidence of Malfeasance in Research Purporting to Show Thimerosal in Vaccines Is Safe,” BioMed Research International, vol. 2014, Article ID 247218, 8 pages, 2014. doi:10.1155/2014/247218

      I can’t link you directly, as i accessed it through a membership to a medical database.

      If you fail to find it, I can find it again and DL the PDF.

      Reply
      1. Jay Kanta

        Brian Hooker? You’re a troll.

        Hooker isn’t credible. His research is a study in how to use data incorrectly, fail to provide for all analysis and how to hide inconvenient research that doesn’t match his preconceived notions. His literature reviews are almost non-existent. He’s not a real scientist at all.

        Reply
          1. Tennoseki

            “….

            IF, thimerosal was safe then why did the CDC remove it from vaccines given to children under 6 in 2001?”

            That’s ridiculous fear-mongering. It’s from a point of ignorance. It doesn’t matter what your personal position is toward vaccinations. The fact that you’d say this is fear-mongering.

          2. Mimi

            It was to placate anti-vaxers. It has been proven that the amount in vaccines is completely harmless. But at this point the hysteria at reached dangerous levels so it was removed as a PR move.

      2. Jay Kanta

        Not to mention the Geiers that have lost their license to practice medicine in every state in the US due to their fraudulent “research” and practices.

        Reply
        1. IgnoranceAbundance

          Finally! Thank you Jay! Watch how fast he changed his tune. We all knew he was full of shit from his very first post, but he finally posts quite literally the worst example, but best for us because it just shows how ignorant he is. He is going off of the exact data and “researchers” that added to this ridiculous mess in the first place. Thank you. I wanted nothing more than for him to shut the hell up. He writes in a manner that makes him think he sounds so intelligent and well read, but in reality just made him look like a bigger idiot. He contradicts himself constantly and has no grasp on the meaning of half of what he is saying. All I can say is thank you for deflating this windbags overinflated sense of self and fallacious arguments.

          Reply
      3. kelly

        Seriously, this post shows that people are as oblivious now as they were 50 years ago to the fact that science is always disproving itself ¡! If you were to write this post back in the 50’s you’d be saying that “I’d get my children’s teeth filled with mercury cos what parent wouldn’t save their kids teeth over pulling them ?” or in the 70’s: “phalidamyde is great. Why wouldn’t it want my wife to be vomit free during her pregnancy ” oh oh or “agent orange and DDT is going to save our country and make life so much better!”

        I just wonder how pathetic and ignorant you might feel if/when vaccines are eventually proven to contain chemically damaging substances that should never have been administered to anyone let alone our babies?

        The vaccines used 40 years ago are even now considered to have been dangerous.

        Reply
      4. M

        I am fascinated by the statements on this issue driven by fear and emotion. Parents who take pause to dive more deeply in the issue, are selective about what vaccines to give their children, ask questions, and formed opinions about what is excessive are not irresponsible. I want to be clear: I am not anti-vaccination. However, this is not a black and white issue – there are a number of questions that merit inquiry, exploration and research. I’m disheartened because the fear on both sides of the issue dampen insight and the pursuit of truth. I’ve appreciated some of the comments in this tread that have raised questions with respect without resorting to pot-shots and non sequiturs. I don’t have my opinions on this subject fully formed, I am not a scientist, so it’s overwhelming to say the least. The more I dig, the more questions seem to surface. I’m absorbing many different sources on this issue, one I came across recently revealed a number of new questions: http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/dr-suzanne-humphries-on-vaccine-safety-they-dont-want-you-to-hear-the-other-side/

        Reply
      5. Amy

        The Geiers are certainly authorities in covering up inconvenient data.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Geier

        http://web.archive.org/web/20030604060812/http://aap.org/profed/thimaut-may03.htm

        Look up the chemical castration medicine Lupron if you want to know why the Geiers are so intent on proving that autism is caused by thimerosal.

        I’m suspicious of mercury too, but I’m not going to rely on these clowns for evidence. No, I can’t call them clowns. They recommend the chemical castration of autistic children. That’s not funny.

        Reply
  13. Adriano

    Cute but calculus is actually a kidney stone. Wouldn’t mind being vaccinated against that one. I say this as an M.D.

    Reply
    1. Another MD

      A calculus is any hard object or substance formed in the body. e. g. Renal calculus, salivary calculus, tonsillar calculus. So stating that only kidney stones are calculi is incorrect.

      Reply
    2. Kirstin

      Suggestion: words – especially medical/scientific words – can have multiple meanings. To avoid embarrassing yourself, particularly if you plan to use your degree to suggest that you speak from a platform of knowledge, look the multiple definitions up before disagreeing with another commenter.

      Reply
  14. chaturbate cheat

    Hey there, I think your blog might be having
    browser compatibility issues. When I look at your website in Ie, it
    looks fine but when opening in Internet Explorer, it has some overlapping.
    I just wanted to give you a quick heads up! Other then that,
    awesome blog!

    My webpage chaturbate cheat

    Reply
  15. Ruthie

    I’ve had calculus, and it is no fun. If there had been a vaccine against calculus, I would have had it and my GPA would have been a lot healthier.
    Thanks for the chuckle after a hard day!

    Reply
  16. patrick

    I appreciate all the comments and feedback.

    I am not pro-vaccination or anti-vaccination. I am not pro-war or anti-war, i am not pro-gun control or anti-gun control.

    Categorical acceptance of something that is reasoned in induction is foolish and dangerous for all parties.

    I accept that 1+1=2 and anything that can be reasoned in deduction.

    In addition to vaccinating your child you may also teach them things like: if you want to have a productive conversation with somebody, the adult way to do it is to abstain from calling the other person a moron.

    My wife is the one who brought up the conversation of vaccinations, and from her asking, I started doing tons of research in medical journals. I had no idea that celebrities had a view and were making waves until I asked a friend their view and they said i was a fool for following celebrities, and i responded with- what celebrities? what are you talking about. I had to google that to understand.

    There may be idiots who follow celebrities, but on the other side of the coin are idiots who will do everything the CDC says. Its all induction and all capable of error, equally so.

    I was only asking to temper the discussion.

    Reply
    1. Dave

      So Patrick, are you saying that as a result of all your tons of research, you have failed to come to any specific conclusions in regards to vaccinations? Perhaps you could share your actual position.

      Reply
    2. Not you

      Hiya, not wishing to get into arguments over vaccinations/agnosticism/skepticism/logical fallacies etc.

      Just wanted to point out that 1+1=2 is a rather poor example of something that can be reasoned in deduction. This is because “2” is the label we give to the number found by adding 1 to 1. That is the definition of 2 as a natural number. Therefore the deductive steps are very few/short/simple (depending on how in-depth one wishes to go).

      For sure this doesn’t affect the validity/whatever of what you’re saying and the example you gave is indeed a usefully brief one.

      Other than that, I provide here a piece on the phrase “I was only asking” (or similar). Note that I am not claiming that the information is relevant to the actual context that this phrase was presented in, nor do I wish to attach undeserved negative attributes to the phrase as used here or the person making it. Furthermore I do not claim to agree with any points raised in the webpage I link below (nor do I make a claim to disagree). I believe it to be an interesting read and was reminded of it by the aforementioned phrase.

      http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions

      Reply
      1. IgnoranceAbundance

        Not you,

        Well, I was going to respond to this, but by God how could I retort any better than you have? Haha…I chuckled quite hard. This may be the absolute best response I have ever seen to this type of particular troll.

        I don’t really have the balls to have an opinion on anything and actually back it up, so I am going to continually post specious arguments in the hopes that I sound intelligent, worldly, and well versed on any and all subjects, but in reality I am just a coward who hides behind his computer in his basement while in between masturbation sessions decides he is bored and the process begins all over again.

        Reply
      2. Royce Buehler

        Actually, in the most widely regarded development of the foundations of arithmetic (there are several), 1+1 = 2 is a theorem, not a definition. The Peano postulates for natural numbers begin with some axioms about “successors”. 2 is actually defined as the successor of the successor of 0. Then the operation of addition gets defined inductively. From there, the theorem 1+1 = 2 falls out pretty easily.

        Not to say that in all other respects Patrick hasn’t been playing the role in this forum of a self-satisfied and slightly dangerous blowhard. I’m still boggled over his astonishing declaration that no one has a right to do anything which is foolish. (He stated it in its contrapositive form, but F -> ~R is logically equivalent to R -> ~F.) If true, that would invalidate a vast portion of my life, and the lives of my nearest and dearest.

        Reply
  17. Mike

    What are your recommendations on vaccanation against zombiism? Is the multi-strain vaccine really effective against both slow and fast zombiism, or does it, as some have claimed, offer only limited protection while leaving one open to the scourge of liberalism?

    Reply
    1. Young CC Prof

      According to the CDC’s zombie preparedness division, it is vitally important to avoid contact with dead and undead bodies, study proper disposal techniques, and remain prepared to evacuate your residence or temporary shelter if it becomes necessary.

      However, while the vaccine is not 100% effective, it significantly reduces the risk of infection through casual contact or minor bites and scratches suffered while foraging for supplies. Ensuring that your entire family or secured compound receives all booster shots on time is the best way to protect against the walking dead.

      Reply
  18. Manabozho

    I’m starting a second career, teaching writing to upper division college undergraduates. I’m taking this for them to read. It’s got a premise. It’s got rhythm. It’s got purpose. It doesn’t repeat but it rhymes. Even has a punchline. Well done, sir. I’ll be sure to include your byline.

    Reply
  19. Ariel L.

    Just came to look at the satire and browse the comments to see anti-vacs get their ass handed to them. I was not disappointed. Thank you. lol

    Btw, to the people who are anti-vacs….I disagree with you. Plain and simple..siting your “research” doesn’t change my mind. Bringing up your conspiracy theories makes me look at you like Scully did to Mulder 90% of the time. So yep, deal with it.

    This author is teh awesome.

    Reply
    1. patrick

      Ariel,

      Actually i am not anti-vaccination and I never made any claim otherwise. Its amazing how people do not actually read things sometimes.

      -p

      Reply
      1. IgnoranceAbundance

        Patrick,

        Your hubris knows no bounds. You were not the only person on the blog who posted anti vaccination opinions. She made a blanket statement towards anti vaccers and did not mention you at all, yet here you are responding to her as if she posted about you. A certain song comes to mind, I think it goes something like, “you’re so vain, you probably thing this post…er song is about you…” Shall I go on, nah, I think we know all the lyrics.

        As far as you saying, ” Its amazing how people do not actually read things sometimes.” Maybe you should take you own advice, first of all, because the irony of this statement is sadly hilarious. Second of all, since you actually have no stance, according to your own statements, how does someone’s ability to read have anything to do with anything? And lastly, considering you contradicted yourself constantly and wrote in a way, even you couldn’t understand what you’re saying, I don’t think you have any business criticizing anyone else’s ability to understand your specious arguments.

        I said good day sir.

        Reply
    2. Achsel

      So, Factor VIII for hemophiliacs. The CDC’s own scientist discovered the blood supply was tainted with AIDS he screamed to save them. Nope, doctors were lied to, told it was safe, the American public was lied to, hemopheliacs here and abroad were lied to. Doctors told their patients that the CDC and the producer were saying “it is safe.” But it wasn’t and the CDC and the manufacturer knew it. But they didn’t want the entire U.S. public to panic and think the blood supply wasn’t safe, even though it wasn’t. They knowingly gave AIDS to tens of thousands of hemophilliacs here and around the world, and because of the lies and cover-up those people passed it to their loved ones before they even knew. Ask most doctors and people on the street and they will say “I never heard of that”. . Conspiracy, nope not necessary, just business as usual.
      SV40 found by NIH Dr. Eddy in the Polio vaccine. Simian Monkey virus #40. No vaccines recalled, none destroyed, didn’t want the U.S. population to think that the vaccine was not safe, though it was indeed not safe. 90% of all children in the U.S. and millions around the world were given vaccines with a virus in them that is used to cause cancerous tumors in labratory animals in order to test cancer drugs. The CDC wants us to believe it is unsure if it can cause cancerous tumors in humans. Huge groups of scientists and doctors say this is crap, and that SV 40 is being found in millions of cancers, including children that should have not received tainted vaccines. So how is that happening. The guess is that they used the tainted vaccine as the seed in the new strain or we are now passing the virus to our babies through our own altered DNA. Either way, not good and with children’s cancer rates skyrocketing it is a question that needs to be asked. Ask most doctors and people on the street, never heard of it. But fact. Easily researched online. Was it a conspiracy….nope….just business as usual. Protect the industry and the reputation of the program, even if it is indeed dangerous.
      I find the conspiracy theory quite specious. As if humans have never acted in concert to protect their own reputations and interests with ill intent! It is estimated that close to 40,000 people lost their lives because of the Factor VIII debacle. You really think that people that did not care about signing the death warrant of tens of thousands of people, would care about causing a few million cases of Autism.

      Reply
  20. Wayne-O

    Patrick,

    Your comments are circular and, in general not informative. You are arguing both sides of the argument. You are assuming a position of infallible correctness which tends to demand a dogmatic response from other readers, i.e. “Of course he is correct.” Your excessive verbiage is being used as a tool of obfuscation rather than one of clarification. If you get cornered, you introduce a new item to the discussion. You are pedantic.

    Your use of the word ‘agnostic’ is muddled. In common American English, it means someone who is not sure about the existence of God. You incorporate the religious content but then go on to use it in the more English English manner meaning that the essential nature and ultimate knowledge of a thing cannot be known. In so doing, I think that you confuse your audience who are, I think, mostly American English speakers and thinkers.

    Consider your intended audience. They are not your students whose education is your duty. You are not here to mold the thinking process of the other readers. That may be your intent, but your stance is insulting. This is not a debating society. No one will “win” this discussion.

    As a general statement, it is rude to high jack another person’s thread and make it your own. You have successfully turned this comment section into a rambling conversation about you and your arguments. That is unfortunate. Don’t bother saying that it was never your intent to do so. At some point, intention and reality must become inseparable, particularly in the face of continued action.

    By my responses I am guilty of some of the very same offenses that I have attributed to you. Because of this, I will refrain from further response to someone secure in the knowledge that they are correct.

    Reply
    1. Troy

      Hey there! Now being an American gives us the rights to change the meaning of words iffin we want. It makes us sound light we got bigger brains! Freedom Jack! Freedom to get fat, stay poor and argue over who gets to clean out Pa”s gun and who drives the beer home. I can read that fancy talk the Brits have cuz I have a it in a giant pop Up book.
      It’s to bad stereotyping.

      Reply
  21. HFY

    As for Calculus, the fear of it is a wide-spread disease, and we should vaccinate our children against that fear. We should expose our children to small doses of math and increase it gradually as they grow to keep them immune to the fear of math.

    Reply
  22. Jim

    My view on vaccines has nothing to do with celebrities. I don’t follow or like them.
    I am simply constantly sickened by the fact that we think every child and person should live without disease and that nobody should ever die. Disease is supposed to kill people. You know? We have around seven billion of them.
    Some of us have to die. Sure, fine, treat diseases. But eliminate them entirely? No.

    If any of my non-existent children died because of a disease (which they wouldn’t, because I’m intelligent about food and can actually keep an immune system healthy as opposed to feeding it shit that the lovely FDA calls ‘food’), then that is how it is supposed to be. I’ll be awfully sad, of course, but humans are supposed to die. It has to happen in order for humans to continue to exist.

    I put the well being of the entire planet over the well-being of the individual, or even half of the human race. Sorry for actually caring about the environment. Disease exists in nature for a reason. Trying to eliminate it with vaccines is selfishly trying to go against nature, and we’ve seen where that has taken us so far. Humans are not special snowflakes that can shit on this earth every which way they please. I’m sorry.

    Also, your sense of humor is not really funny. Monkeys are not stupid.

    Reply
      1. Jim

        Ah. Insulting my intelligence because you don’t agree with me. Does that make you feel good?
        I suppose you couldn’t think of a better argument so you just attacked me personally. Very witty.

        Reply
    1. Wade

      This is actually the most sense from an anti-vaxxer. “it’s nature and we are suppose to die”. However, the comment about “I know about diet to improve immunity” (paraphrased) bollocks you do.

      Reply
    2. Andy

      Nothing in nature has a reason in the sense that reason means purpose.
      Things can have an effect, such as disease killing disease prone individuals, but there is no goal in nature beyond the apparent goal of the tautology that genes that promote their own reproduction get copied more than gense which do not.

      Reply
    3. Leigh

      So then I suppose you don’t drive a car or use public transportation or buy your clothes from manufacturers or eat food from grocery stores, right? That would selfishly go against nature!

      Reply
    4. kelly

      I love your way of viewing life Jim. And yes, the shit that people consume definitely has a role in our ill health as a 1st world society. America has the worst food ethics in the world. just the fact that half of what is “allowed ” by fda is often banned in most of Europe is alarming in itself. But the sheeple gotta eat and they simply cannot grow their own veggies….. That’s so primative. They don’t make maccas trees any more. But seriously, food is probably the biggest problem in this world. Just as many people are dying due to food related auto immune disease such as diabetes as they are dying of malnutrition in third world countries. Why they send a ton of vaccines over to starving nations that could be brought the basic things like FOOD astonishes me

      Reply
    5. Janice

      Like & agree, Jim. So hard to have a rational discussion about disease, & death & dying. I like to focus on quality of life issues. I find myself in sympathy with the young woman who brought her own death about rather than go through the debilitating effects of the last months of her terminal cancer. Not sure why Americans especially seem so afraid & freaked out about death. Probably the over effects of all the fundamentalist religions emphasizing Hell (sorry to get so off topic!)

      Reply
    6. Zym

      A healthy immune system does not protect against all disease. I’m sure plenty of Native Americans who were killed by smallpox had healthy immune systems, but as their immune system had no familiarity with the disease they still succumbed.

      And I want all children to grow up healthy and strong because social security is a pay-as-you-go system, and I’ll need them all working hard and earning to support me when I’m old! j/k :)

      Reply
  23. patrick

    Hey everybody,

    This will be my last comment, as the insults are a bit ridiculous.

    @Wayne, You are right I am arguing for both sides, because I think neither side is right. I believe dogmatically rejecting vaccinations is equally as foolish as dogmatically accepting all vaccinations. The reasoning for vaccinations is inductive, meaning the safety is not reasoned in certainty, but in probability. If your doctor recommends 18 vaccinations for your children, that is 18 individual decisions, and saying yes to all 18 without doing the bare minimum of a google search and some simple research is akin to being dogmatic. I am not sure why anybody would accept being dogmatic about medical decisions for their kids. I feel both sides should temper their position, as there are reasonable concerns on both sides.

    My intent was not to hijack this thread, by any means. And if you want to talk about insults— read some of the comments written towards me. The only thing I am doing is trying to have an open discussion. And, as I have seen, most people do not want to. That is their decision, but my decision to have open discourse does not invalidate my position.

    I was not changing my position or topic when cornered, the majority of the people I was commenting with completely missed my point. If you look at all the chemicals in food, the increased use of pharmaceutical drugs (medical & mental illness), the increase in vaccinations and also the overwhelming increase in diseases (all in the last 30 years), it would be foolish not to be skeptic and I think asking questions is reasonable.

    My use of Thimersol argument and how it was removed in 2001 and then given immunity against lawsuit in 2002 was shown as a case study to show that the CDC credibility is not perfect. Perhaps they removed it for PR or because people complained too much, but that is the not the only example.

    There are other case studies:

    —Polio. Because of increased nutrition and sanitation when the polio vaccine came out in 1953, polio was already on a significant decline. And as early as 1951 there were studies suggesting that the vaccine actually causes polio (The medical journal of australia). In fact, there were 47,500 reported cases of polio in 2010 from children who received a polio vaccination from Bill Gates polio campaign, and the mortality rate was 2-fold of naturally contracted polio. (Indian journal of medical ethics)

    —Whooping Cough. Between 1900 and 1935 it declined 79% in the United States, even though the vaccination did not come out till 1940. And even today, people who are vaccinated have a higher chance of catching it. In studies of recent outbreaks (2009) 95% of patients who became infected received 5 doses of DTaP. (the Atlanta journal constitution)

    —MMR. In 1957 they began this vaccination and the CDC predicted complete elimination by 2010. However, between 1983-1990 there was a 423% increase in measles cases and in a outbreak (2006), 63% of patients were immunized against MMR (Neil Miller). Or as the Journal of Infectious disease stated, “Vaccine failure accounted for a sustained mumps outbreak in a highly vaccinated population”.

    —FLU vaccine. In 2007 the CDC reported that FLU vaccination had “no or low effectiveness” and would only work for 14% of the people who took it.

    ……

    Like I have said over and over, I am not anti-vaccination or pro. I dont listen to celebrities. And I dont think insults are very nice. I think people these day get bombarded with chemicals and drugs and vaccinations and there is nothing wrong with raising your hand and asking questions.

    I personally was fully vaccinated as a child. I have only been sick twice in the last 15 years and that was from a flu vaccine and a typhoid fever vaccination ( i contracted typhoid fever and almost died), and the vaccination was not necessary (only suggested). The nurse at Kaiser, literally grabbed my arm and stuck me with it as I was asking her questions— that was intrusive and unethical.

    Like I said, I am not anti-vaccination. Like smallpox, for example, I think is fine. It is 18 unique decisions, it should not be seen as all or nothing. There is a reasonable stack of CDC failures to show their credibility is not perfect.

    ….And yes, we do not live in a debate society. We live in a society of strong ideological forces and anything that opposes it, seems to get beat down. But ideology is not ‘true’ by definition.

    And yes I was quite liberal with my use of the word agnostic, but I was using the word correctly (look it up). The guy who coined the term did not make it an ‘ism’ because he wanted to make the point that it was a position of reasonable scientific skepticism and not a belief system. As the word really just means ‘i dont know’. Do you believe in god? I dont know. Do you believe in vaccinations? I dont know. et al.

    Being skeptic is not unethical.

    -p

    Reply
    1. Jason

      Is there any evidence to show that “medical advice plus some google searches” yields more effective outcomes than medical advice alone?

      Reply
    2. Cory

      Patrick! Thanks for looking at those graphs of disease prevalence and vaccine introduction that no one want s to look at, especially if your theory is that vaccines wiped out all of these diseases.
      I will say your replies and comments have been well spoken and civil. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for many others on here.

      Reply
    3. Ritchie Annand

      Your sources flip between percentages and absolute numbers depending on what sounds right for the sound bite. “95% of patients who became infected” sure sounds a lot better than 17 out of 18, doesn’t it? “423% increase in measles cases” with an implication that this somehow means it all don’t work when the trend is still from hundreds of thousands to tens of thousands to thousands to under a thousand.

      That’s what drives me crazy about sources like that. Dis-in-gen-u-ous.

      It’s as honest as quote mining.

      Reply
    4. Naomi

      Thanks, Patrick. It’s disheartening and frustrating to see how few people seemed to understand your points, even though you articulated them very clearly (and repeatedly!). I have been fully vaccinating all my kids on schedule in part because it has been hard to find what I consider a balanced and nuanced approach. I would love to watch a debate between Drs. Paul Offiitt and Neil Miller (or others from their respective camps) because so much of what everyone says is either beside the point at best or childish insults at worst. Maybe you can write the balanced book! I would absolutely do the research myself but honestly, I am lucky if I get time to shower, so I rely on my doctors and hope they’re right (or right enough). I did do some research but it seems that for every study showing one thing, there is another showing its opposite. I just wanted to add my voice to the side that acknowledges that it’s more complicated than either “side” makes it out to be.

      Reply
    5. cardine

      Your information about polio in 2010 is absolutely misleading. Those aren’t even the number of new cases of WPV in 2010.

      http://www.polioeradication.org/Portals/0/Document/Data&Monitoring/Wild_poliovirus_list_2000_2010_30Nov.pdf

      and

      http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6115a4.htm

      This reminds me of one time when someone tried to tell me that polio was made up and fabricated by the government to make money. It was their reason to not get the vaccination. Please do not subscribe to suspicions. It’s okay to be skeptical, but you are beyond skeptical and into suspicious when you are only willing to believe what you want to see. You really need to be open to all research. I tried to find that article you spoke if in the Indian Journal by searching the number you provided, but I was unable to find it. Did you actually read that article or are you perpetuating someone else’s alleged source without confirming it? If you read it from the actual Journal, could you provide a screen shot of that statement? Also, I don’t know how reputable that journal or its writers or the source where they got their information. Surely they should have sourced their numbers, as well. That is what I would be most interested in. The actual source of the numbers. I was unable to find a legitimate source of the data you provided.

      The reality is that the places where polio is still endemic are the places where the vaccines have not been widely received by the populace of those countries (the vaccine causing polio is virtually nonsense). Polio has only remained endemic in Afghanistan, Nigeria, and Pakistan. In the case of Nigeria, it isn’t country-wide, but the areas in which polio is still a problem are the areas where the religious leaders have said that the polio vaccine is of the devil or other such suspicious nonsense. The Nigerians who I have spoken to (that’s my only source) about the issue are very concerned about these areas in their country, as those small areas provide a real risk for the rest of the country. It is the only area in all of Africa that remains a large problem. Imagine a world where polio doesn’t exist anymore. It’s an achievable goal, and the world is on the verge of achieving it. How sad it would be if it’s not achieved purely due to misinformation or suspicion.

      In other words, polio is a vaccine that I would choose, especially if I travel at all or live in any area close to the endemic countries. I did choose it. And I got the booster (there are changes in vaccines over time). But I don’t get every vaccine out there. I only get the ones that I feel are necessary depending on my travel. I didn’t get the Japanese Encephalitis vaccine, for example, as I was only there for three or four days. However, if I moved to Japan, I would likely be vaccinated for it, depending on the region where I would be.

      In other words, I agree with you that you should be educated about vaccines, like pretty much any life choice there should be some kind of education. But I would like to encourage you to pick vaccination. From my research, I have come across overwhelming evidence to support a large number of vaccinations, including whooping cough, polio, and MMR.

      Reply
    6. M

      Hi Patrick – Thank you for your thoughtful approach to this discussion, withstanding a wave of insults and coming into the discussion with respect. I don’t agree with all of your statements, but I appreciate the questions you raise, how you raised them and your persistence in the discussion to clarify without reacting with too much emotion. I rarely participate or comment in these types of threads, but as I noted above, this is not the black and white issue.

      Reply
    7. Janice

      Agree, Patrick. Well written & well thought out. I, too was unnecessarily vaccinated — a nurse gave me an MMR shot while I was trying to explain to her that I had had all of them as a child. My immunity didn’t show up on the ELISA test (so what? The test is not fool proof, and as a medical researcher I knew that.) But she stuck it in me anyway, without my agreeing to it. I spent a very miserable week, not only mourning the miscarriage I’d had (which was how I’d been in a position to have my antibodies checked) but sick and in pain from the vaccination. Where once I had wanted to be a Dr., I now spend my time avoiding them and their many unnecessary (for me, given my family health history and risk factors) tests.

      Reply
    8. julia

      hi, im from germany and read your comment, our grandson got today his first vaccination. he is 18 month
      old and his brainborder functions. i read many books about the subjekt. we have a very good doctor.
      that helped thru all the yes and no’s. everybody has to deside himself. with all the medical terms its hard
      for many parents to decide. in germany you do not have to vaccinate, but wont get a kindergarden place
      if the child is not. we know children that are disabled from vaccination. so i think its hardbreaking anyway.
      sorry for my english.

      Reply
    9. Kat

      Okay…so for those of you who saw him cite things and went “wait, what’s the story behind these” here’s what I can tell you (keep in mind I am not a medical expert but I’m at least as much of a medical expert as he was).

      Polio: This stat is just…I don’t even know where these numbers came from. 47,500 cases in 2010? No, polio is pretty gosh darn close to gone. We are talking a handful of countries have a few hundred cases per year (those cases include people who haven’t gotten the vaccine yet). Polio is nearly extinct and once it is the vaccine issue won’t even be there because why vaccinate for something that doesn’t exist?
      http://www.cdc.gov/polio/updates/

      Whooping cases were all over the place before the vaccine. If you look pre 1940s it looks like this giant ragged line, the only constant being that there were a lot of cases every year. After the vaccine was introduced those cases started going down. They were consistently in the 6 digits in the first half of the 20th century but by 20 years after the vaccine was introduced we were only seeing a few thousand per year
      http://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/images/incidence-graph.jpg
      http://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/surv-reporting/cases-by-year.html

      As far as the measles thing goes, guess what he was right, there was a huge 423% increase in that time period because the drug being used was less effective. New strains mutate, immunities build up, things happen. The problem with the ineffective vaccine was corrected and everything went back to normal with rates dropping 400ish% .If you only click on one of these links click on this one.
      http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/graph-us-measles-cases
      The basis of the anti-vax argument is twisted facts like this, if you look at the big picture…well it sort of speaks for itself.

      The flu thing: the flu mutates a lot, every year there’s a new strain, that’s why you get shots yearly (it’s not like the shots just magically wear off, you’re still immune to the previous strain of the flu). It is becoming harder and harder to treat. This is major sucks-ville but it is not some inherent flaw in the vaccine. As long as the shot has some effect it will keep being released while we wait for a medical breakthrough of crazy awesome proportions.

      So yeah, I’m not an expert on these by any means but seriously dudes, don’t just look at these crazy numbers and think that vaccines are bad. I know there are a lot of people on the internet screaming about it and after a while even the sanest of us start to doubt. But seriously, trust me, the anti vax argument has little substance behind it.

      Reply
  24. Michelle

    I do not vaccinate my children according to the schedule they are supposed to follow. After each vaccine, both of my children will gain a fever of over 100 degrees. My new once a month vaccine technique has worked well, and my children are healthier. It isn’t hard to be informed, because typically the doctors office will provide information on each vaccine, including side-effects. Some (as many people will know) only had mild side-effects, while others can be as severe as fainting, fevers, deafness, seizures, and permanent brain damage. My feelings towards vaccines really are just whether or not I am doing what is right for MY children. I think any parent would think twice after hearing that those effects could happen to their own child or children. Once I found out my own are not immune to the severe side-effects, I took action and decided I would decide on WHEN they should be vaccinated.

    Reply
  25. Agnostic

    Patrick, I hear you. I find it disturbing that most of the commentators here are unwilling to engage in rational debate. The essential point here is: Should we unquestioningly follow the advice of others, whether they are conspiracy theorists, celebrities, the CDC/government agencies, pharmaceutical corporations, individual researchers, or the general public? There are extremist positions on both sides of the vaccination debate. I am also not completely anti-vaccination myself, but I do believe in the importance of doing your own research and thinking critically. It is quite interesting to compare the vaccination stats of first world countries. For example, http://www.lifehealthchoices.com/the-center/education/vaccines/what-others-do
    The US has the highest number of mandated vaccines for children under 5, but also has the highest infant mortality rate and the highest rate of autism in the developed world. It certainly does not have the longest life span or lowest rate of disease either. Sure, these facts may be completely unrelated. However, I think it would be wise to look at why certain vaccines are NOT used in other countries like Canada, Japan, Australia or in Europe. The pharmaceutical industry is big business and naturally has its own agenda. Medical journals are not inaccessible to those who are eager to learn more for themselves: they are available online or at university libraries. For ‘optional’ vaccines in particular, I would read up on the pros and cons of each vaccine and make my own decision. Where possible, I would go to the original source instead of relying on other people’s/agencies’ interpretations of those sources. Fortunately, we live in an age where specialist information (and misinformation) is increasingly becoming available to the layman. Why not take advantage of it for your own health and the health of your children? It would be much more productive than making fun of each other, especially since in the end we all hope for the same things don’t we?

    Reply
    1. Meghann

      Autism is genetic. It’s also detectable before birth. America has a high rate of infant mortality largely because it also has one of the highest rates of poverty and lack of universal healthcare.

      Reply
  26. M

    Just check your history book and find out about the work of Pasteur and Béchamp, that might clear out some of the questions you have to decide to vacinate or not-vaccinate

    Reply
  27. Pingback: It’s Hard To Argue With This Reasoning Against Vaccinations » scrooks stuff

  28. Michael C.

    We vaccinated our daughter against Andromeda Strain, but it turned out she was just epileptic. There’s $15 I’ll never see again.

    Reply
  29. Aaron

    Wow you have me convinced. I’m glad you used logic to make your arguement. Good job. You sound like you’ve really done your homework.

    Reply
  30. Slowcooker

    I’m glad you think vaccine injured kids are funny, with all of their pain and suffering. The measly bit of money they get from the government who admitted it was from the vaccine, will never make these children feel better, or make them walk again, or allow them to care for themselves. But I’m glad you smug parents have the choice to make fun of them and their parents, who also blindly listened to their pediatrician the way you guys are. PS: My child is fully vaccinated without a chronic injury per se, we were of the lucky ones like you….but no one knows what chicken pox vaccine that has only been around for 20 or so years will look like in them in 40 years when adults exposed to the real virus start getting shingles, because, yeah, no one studied it that long before injecting it into my child. PS: My pediatrician couldn’t even diagnose a hernia correctly, but i trusted him to inject all kinds of chemicals in to my child. Shame on me.

    Reply
    1. gmkjr

      You might be a concerned parent, but in your screed about pediatricians, you come across as a Chicken Little, worrying that the sky is falling. In my experience, most of them are dedicated professionals who have dedicated years to the study and treatment of children and their diseases. I’m glad to hear that your children are vaccinated. Hopefully, that will protect them and others from a broad range of preventable diseases. I am old enough to have had chicken pox, measles, mumps, and German measles. None of these were any picnic, especially for mom, who was dealing with five sick children at the same time. Fortunately, none of us have had lifelong problems from these diseases, other than one sister who had a bout with shingles. However, we have a cousin who has suffered all her life from heart problems, reportedly from scarlet fever.

      One fortunate thing about the health care infrastructure in this country is that one does not need to be able to diagnose a hernia in order to safely give injections. As far as I know, the herpes zoster virus is relatively stable, but immunity fades over time, so don’t forget to ask about a shingles vaccine next time you go to the doctor. Likewise whooping cough, so many doctors are recommending a booster to fortify immunity from pertussis for adults.

      Reply
  31. Lorraine

    Is Saba Button ‘statistically insignificant’? Or do you believe the pharmaceutical company’s line that the brain damage she experienced shortly after receiving was just a coincidence? Saba’s parents vaccinated her following advice from the health department so I guess at least they are can’t be considered ‘drooling idiots’ with no regard for the welfare of their child.

    Reply
    1. Some dude

      Hear hear.

      There’s another drug out there that has been linked to the following problems:

      Skin reactions (possibly fatal)
      Asthma
      Cancer
      Nausea
      Headache
      Stomach pain
      Jaundice (poor liver function)
      Swollen tongue
      Trouble breathing
      Inflammation of the air passages
      Fatal liver damage
      Hives
      Hyperglycemia
      Pulmonary aspiration

      Wow, holy crap. This is such a dangerous drug! We should stop giving it to our children immediately!!

      You may have heard of it: Tylenol.

      Reply
    2. Some dude

      Also, to answer your question, yes, one bad reaction is statistically insignificant. Tragic, yes, but statistically insignificant.

      Reply
    3. Simon

      Yes… so let’s polio come back or any other of those diseases just because 0.0005% will get some adverse effects. Then let’s spend decades trying to control a virus that will have mutated and become resistant to any intervention. How selfish. It is not just about YOUR kid and YOUR choice, but about future generations that may not want to deal with polio, and the others.

      Reply
    4. Adele

      Anecdotal evidence, like what you just presented, is not considered statistically significant. For something to be significant, you’d ideally need a sample size of more than just 1 person. Furthermore, you’d need two different groups of young children so you compare the incidence of neurological disease. After you’ve done that, you should adjust your study for confounding factors (things that may look like they’re related but are obviously not). Eventually, you’ll get a study that is statistically significant, but you’ll have to realize that since it’s an only observational study (rather than a double blind study), and you cannot establish causality. You can only say ‘X may/may not be associated with a lower/higher incidence of Y.’ A well-conducted observational study is statistically significant, while ‘OMG my grandmother has rabies and she touched a doorknob the day before she developed symptoms, so those two must be related,’ is not. Unfortunately, regardless of what I can tell you about vaccines, you probably won’t change your opinions about vaccination. So I won’t trouble you with legitimate (i.e. not Andrew Wakefield-esque) scientific evidence about the safety of vaccines. I will trouble you to use big words like ‘statistically significant’ correctly. Thank you!

      Reply
    5. Troy

      That case, while horrible and tragic, was caused by an adverse reaction to a vaccine that worked but was improperly studied. The vaccine was completely safe, meaning little to no side effects at all, for those over 5 years with healthy immune systems. Saba was 11 months old at the time of her trauma. Because of her, the vaccine is banned for use on children under 5, restudied and remade thus saving more lives later.
      No her parents are not ‘drooling idiots’! They did what was right and we’re blindsided by all of this. My heart goes out to them. That being said, children did not get a flu vaccine till over 2 simply because of incidents like this in the past and because the modern influenza stain is no where near as fatal as before. They have recieved all the others vaccinations available to protect them and others around them and guess what… they are perfectly fine.

      Reply
    6. gmkjr

      The story of Saba Button is tragic, but it should be considered aganst the statistics for mortality from seasonal flu. In the US, it is estimated that anywhere from 3,000 to 49,000 people die from flu every year. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5933a1.htm That is a lot of people. Many, many others become severely ill. So its a balancing issue.

      As an 11 month old child, she could also have died of the flu, but herd immunity may have protected her from that dire outcome. Fortunately, the state (Western Australia) has stepped up and provided funds for her future care, and presumably will also adopt a regimen of stricter scrutiny over the development and manufacturing of vaccines to prevent future adverse reactions.

      Reply
    7. John

      Lorraine, “statistically insignificant” does not mean that the harm was not serious, nor the situation of the affected girl is unimportant.

      Statistically insignificant instead refers to how often something occurs. If 1,000,000 people are given an vaccine, and one person has serious mental damage afterwards and the other 999,999 do not, the severe mental damage is not statistically significant.

      The usual cut off for significance is usually 5%, so if 1,000,000 people were vaccinated and 50,000 of them or more suffered from extreme side effects, the results would be statistically significant. Sometimes the cut-off is 10% (100,000 people) and in some cases 1% (10,000 people).

      I hope this helps. When people call it insignificant, they are not writing off the suffering and tragedy.

      Reply
  32. Pingback: The Four Questions You Need To Ask To Get the Most Out of Your Data - Dataconomy

  33. Merryworld

    Ugh, I came down with a terrible case of Calculus my freshman year in college. And, I had Statistics on top of it. My GPA was almost completely destroyed. Fortunately, it was saved by a huge dose of Shakespeare.

    Reply
  34. David

    Bravo, my good sir, bravo! From the facebook link, I expected to see another uninformed diatribe against vaccines. You made my day. I shall attempt to stop smirking before my next meeting.

    Reply
  35. CC

    I’m autistic and anti-vaxxers enrage me. Yes, it’s dangerous, but it also actively contributes to the stigmatizing and death of autistic people. If we are seen as “injured” instead of born with a different neurology, it means that we are not in theory capable of making decisions or having a say in our own lives. When that happens, more of us die. Autistics are routinely murdered by parents and caregivers – because they see us as burdens, not people.

    Thank you for making me laugh instead of cry.

    Reply
  36. J

    I love this post. It is satirical and tickles me in just the right way. I completely understand the hesitance of many parents in their decisions regarding vaccination, being a biologist myself I am very strongly in favour of vaccination as most vaccinations these days are attenuated, synthetic or fragment based vaccines and for the majority of individuals will have no severe side effects. While this is true for the statistically significant proportions of those who receive modern vaccine regiments, the potential for an atypical hyper immune response can occur and ultimately it is each parent’s individual choice.
    However, having said that the majority of the comments for both camps that have followed have been an uneducated or poorly referenced disappointment. Making uninformed claims or citing illegitimate scientific articles as fact is just bad form. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but if you try to pass off opinion as fact, at least use peer reviewed, highly cited and more current research. I cannot stress the current part enough, a lot of the articles used as evidence in the above arguments have been from before the 21st century. These are unreliable as both science and technology have taken vast leaps and bounds and allow for greater and more thorough analysis of biochemical systems and their interactions. The only thing this fear mongering and undeserved inaccurate personal attacks on both those for and against vaccinations does is cause more confusion, dissention and mistrust. For those in support of vaccination like myself, try and take a more tactful approach in discussion, you will catch more flies with honey than vinegar as the idiom goes. For those against vaccination, if you have an educated opinion excellent, if you are just there to sprout scripted over used and inaccurate facts, papers and cases you should really reconsider making your opinion public as it is part of the problem and not the solution.
    Cheers
    J

    Reply
  37. Pingback: Recent reads for your infotainment. | perry street palace

  38. EmpiricalPierce

    Ideally, the day will come when no one will vaccinate at all – because usage of vaccines before that point reached sufficient levels to make all these illnesses go extinct, and there’s no longer any need for them.

    Reply
    1. Brianna

      This is highly unlikely, due to the unavailability of vaccines in underdeveloped countries. This is how smallpox is making a comeback. That, and the ignorant people in the US who think that it’s eradicated and so don’t choose to vaccinate. Do you realize that 300 million people died from smallpox in the 20th century alone? Now, compare that to the number of injuries from the smallpox vaccine, and it starts to seem like a no-brainer.

      Reply
  39. Katie

    When I saw this reposted by one of my husband’s relatives, I was angry and on the verge of telling her that I will not be attending any family functions where her children would be. I will do everything in my power to keep my children away from those with incredibly stupid parents. Then I clicked on it to see the likely ridiculous rational behind your choice. Hilarious! Love this post! :)

    Reply
    1. Cathy

      Here here
      Yep that last comment says it all. There are films and stories about puritanical bigot driven witch hunts in your country – seems nothing’s changed on the ground either.

      Reply
  40. James kent

    but what about Playboy’s/MTV’s Dr. Jenny McCarthy saying how vaccines cause autism? I mean, anyone with tits like that can’t be wrong!

    Reply
  41. Natalie

    As a person old enough to remember polio, and as someone who has travelled to countries where children die because parents can’t afford vaccines, I thank you for this post!!!!

    Reply
  42. Johnny Angel

    Totally hilarious post! Antivaxxers shouldn’t be allowed to have kids, or if they already have them, they should be taken into care. They are nothing but child abusers, IMHO. For some reason, society allows them to keep on publicly ‘advising’ others to risk their kids without any legal comeback. After all, if some f*cktard went around saying ‘feed your kids powdered glass, it makes them healthier’, they’d be banged up pretty damn sharpish. Ho hum. Over time, antivaxxers will, of course, ‘Darwin Award’ themselves out of existance, problem is, WE will have to pick up the tab for the consequences of their retard-like beliefs until they actually stiff it.

    Reply
  43. Abchasi23

    Actually, Israel came up with a huge number of ebola vaccines that they were reasy to give to the US aa soon as we needed it. But apparently Israel doesn’t count…..

    Reply
  44. Leon T

    I looked up Patrick’s first claim through Google because he provided no links to actual journal papers. All my available evidence suggests it is bogus misinformation promoted by ‘the refusers’. Here is the refutation I came across after passing the usual anti-vax suspects in the search list http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/vaccine-denialists-hate-bill-gates/

    This is where the anti-vaxxers bang on about redefinition about what is and is not caused by polio and where I get bored and turn off because they are moving their goalposts and making claims based on unresearched speculation. Cite peer reviewed journal papers and provide links, not reworked agenda-peddling nonsense or what could be simply made up.

    I haven’t bothered looking up the other claims. As for the comments suggesting Patrick is well researched, my sampling, although limited, suggests otherwise.

    My advice for anyone looking into this subject is go to the source journal papers and get a crash course in statistics, especially what is and what is not significant. A good place to start are the little bits of paper you get when you get a vaccine. Often they cite the research, talk about the issues seen and compare the rates to the general population.

    I put my faith in people that have actually studied this stuff i.e. doctors and, if I do find information online which seems to be contradictory to what I am being told I either talk to the doctor about it or seek a second opinion for an equally qualified medical professional. In my experience they are more than happy to email or print journal articles for me to review.

    Whether your source is the CDC or Natural News, go to the original paper and read it yourself. If there is no link, google it. If you can’t obtain it, consider the information no more than hearsay.

    Reply
  45. Hanne

    As a former anti-vax mom (I managed to pry myself away from the sirens early, thank goodness), I really appreciate how this post is framed and I was also all ready to unfollow the person who retweeted it! Well played.

    Reply
  46. Allison Hart

    I somehow missed this when it originally went around. Thankfully someone posted it to my wall. I was ready to read it and get crazy angry but it was like a vacation from the Internet Stupids instead, so thank you. I needed that vacation. I can only imagine the comments you received on this one! I can’t bring myself to read them, because I’m still enjoying this little vacation you provided. I love this post. Brilliant. Calculus just about killed me. Perfect.

    Reply
  47. Ritchie Annand

    I’m not going to vaccinate my children against diseases like measles, mumps, rubella and the like because I don’t know how to administer them myself. That’s why I am going to bring them to a clinic instead and let a health worker do it instead. I’m not an adjective describing intelligence noun describing primitive humans or apes with no gerund of noun.

    Reply
  48. Maja

    Here is a suggestion for any one in the anti-vaccine-bubble: Come visit me in Bangladesh. Here you can actually see the benefits of vaccines on the streets. People above thirty deformed, maimed from polio begging on the streets in make-shift wooden wheelchairs. All over. Guess what? Kids don’t go through that these days. They don’t get polio here anymore. Guess why? Successfull, brilliant vaccine campaigns. None of your normal other explanation (imroved sanitary and living conditions and bla bla bla). Kids are still desperately, dirt poor. But they don’t get maimed from polio. And that is just one of the benefits evident here. Pick any disease, you dangerously dumb morons. Step out of the priveliged bubble just for a day. It’s a dare.

    Reply
  49. Chris

    Love all the pro-vaxxers on here espousing how relieved they were when they realized this article was a joke. The VICP (National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program), however is not. Big Pharma lobbied congress to establish this court to shield Vaxx manufactures from potential vaccination lawsuits. VICP was established in 1988 and to this day, a family or individual CAN NOT SUE a pharmaceutical company for an injury or illness related to a vaccine. This is unprecedented in medicine. And guess what happened when Big Pharma received “immunity” from lawsuits? Vaccine development went into overdrive, and the vaccination schedule more than doubled. It defies logic to think that a universal medicine injected into millions of people with different microbiomes, genetics, etc, would work just fine. Consider the abundance of allergies, ADHA, Autism, Asbergers (all projected to steadily rise over the next 20 years) and really ask yourself how healthy is the younger generation today.

    Reply
  50. doc

    If all the Patricks of the world did a Bachelor of Science or Biomedical Science, and learned:
    – how the polio vaccine was changed back to the Salk type instead of the Sabin due to the small risk (to address his ‘causing polio’ argument)
    – how statistics on ‘rates of whooping cough in those vaccinated’ is all about misinterpretation of data
    – how to tell which sources were credible, and not accept every journal article as equal
    …the world would be a better place.

    As for the woman who is choosing her own vaccination schedule for her child, she clearly doesn’t understand how vaccines work. Yes, your child may develop a slight fever post-vaccine. That’s because vacciens work by inducing an immune response (part of which is fever). Your child feels a bit off from the vaccine as their body learns to protect itself. It’s better than how sick your child would be if it contracted the disease first go instead.
    Vaccine schedules are timed to the best of scientific knowledge and change as our information gets better. Your ‘once a month’ theory is very poorly informed.

    Yes, we should always have long term research on vaccination outcomes. But every argument of the anti-vaxxers has been disproved many, many times.

    Reply
  51. Melissa

    this just showed up on my facebook. As a mother my children are vaccinated. Think that it is odd that they will never have the life experience of chicken pox; also hope that they will never have shingles. I do not; will not ever get a flu vaccine again, as I had a terrible reaction. I have a very good friend with 5 children. She has chosen not to vaccinate her children as problems runs in her family. She also has done her homework and understands how this affects her plan for her children’s health and future. I am Rh- and during my second pregnancy I chose not to get Rogam (?) shot. I understand the dangers and am making responsible life choices.
    My biggest problem with this article is how much name calling and put downs in regards to choosing not to vaccinate we all have the right to make choices. No one should be made stupid for not wanting something made from an aborted child injected in them. Or someone with family history of bad reactions to vaccines. Or something derived of blood such as Rogam.
    I think that if I didnt know someone who has chosen a vaccine free life for her children, I would be laughing with the rest of you k maybe not laughing cause I dont like putdowns… But liked the Andromeda reference.
    On the other hand, most people who choose not to get vaccines have researched it and have good reasons for their choice. When I told my Dr. I was not taking Rogam, he questioned me three times and my reasons were firm. The same is true with my friend and her children’s Dr. and school or daycare. Which is a good thing because someone choosing not to vaccinate because this celebrity is doing it is unsafe. There are dangers to not vaccinating as well as vaccinate. Everyone should research what there Dr. is suggesting you take. The pharmaceutical companies push unneeded products through Drs. Research what you put in your child’s body! I know I said I dislike putdowns; however, I think that way about parents (Ignorant etc.) when I think about the poisons in our food such round up and Gmo… We all have our opinions but I dont think being mean is funny

    Reply
  52. Pingback: Fractal poetry, and other links | The Outer Hoard

  53. Pingback: The Becoming SuperMommy Sunday Blogaround: 1.11.15 | Becoming SuperMommy

  54. susan

    With the advent of the common core curriculum there is no need to vaccinate your child against calculus. They will never be exposed to advanced mathematics that impacts the rest of the world; indeed it is estimated that by the time your child graduates from high school (and completed the requirements of common core) they will be at least 2 years behind the rest of first world countries in both math and science. And may have never been exposed to technological advances at all!!!
    Therefore it obvious it is important to focus on Ebola, Andromeda, and anything else that might precipitate the Zombie Apocalypse. It will be more important to destroy the brains of zombies than ensure our children learn to use their brains to help solve the problems of the world.
    Your satiric discussion on vaccinations was great and I am just hoping to contribute to that – LOL

    Reply
  55. Allie

    Just one serious note on pertussis; My baby didn’t get the vaccine, I did, a couple of months before she was born. This conveys immunity to her, which is vital. While a newborn can’t be vaccinated, she can catch it. There’s a brutal video on YouTube in which they interview the mother of a baby that died of pertussis when he was just three or four weeks old. Mom had not been vaccinated. :(

    Reply
  56. travis

    If everyone was committed to convincing people to vaccinate their children, they would drop the “stupid”, “selfish”, “ignorant” comments. Name calling devalues your argument. If you just want to continue to complain and hold your holier than thou attitude, you can expect others to be anti-vax just to spite. If someone disagrees with you it doesn’t make them stupid. You only look at the scientific evidence that supports your opinion. Here’s an idea: open your mind to others thinking and they might just consider yours.

    Reply
  57. alison hill

    loved this sensible and witty article!!! The only thing I didn’t like was the cartoon of Ebola. We work in Africa and it truly is a horrible way to die

    Reply
  58. Mike Chavez

    I have not read all the comments but it should be noted that the mother while pregnant can get the shot late in pregnancy for Whooping Cough, Flu etc. and the immunity is passed on to the child. It was likely mentioned but I am too damn lazy to read all the comments. THANKS FOR A GREAT POST!

    Reply
  59. LynnP

    Beautiful. When I saw this, I was expecting that I would most likely see a story about a child with an immune deficiency or some other health condition that negates the ability to vaccinate. I was holding out hope that it would not be anti-vax stuff.

    This was an entertaining way to avoid doing work. Thank you.

    Reply
  60. Lynne

    Oh, man, I saw the title and was so looking forward to a big bowl of judgement and self-righteousness, and then you threw me a curve ball. Well played, my friend.

    Reply
  61. Suzanne

    If you are not going to immunize your children, then please stay away from places like Disneyland where non-immunized international visitors are present. Your children may contract diseases and then spread them to other children too young to be immunized. My daughter contracted measles at Disneyland in the 70s. She was too young to be immunized. So I would highly recommend also that parents not take their children who are too young for immunizations to high risk places such as Disneyland either. Why take the risk?

    Reply
  62. Andrea

    I am a huge advocate of vaccines! Now with that being said, I have had a child that was doubled dosed with two vaccines and have since decided that I will no longer immunize my children. Doctors are supposed to be the people we can trust with our health and that of our children as well and this is not always the case. Doctors are human and therefore make mistakes. Again, I have nothing against immunizations but I do have something against the people administering them. I understand the controversy and why people get so upset when people do not immunize their children but it is there choice in my humble opinion. And with that being said, if your children are immunized then your children should not be in harms way right? Also, the people who argue for the children not being immunized, I hear ya… however, there are people who have suffered horrible, long-term effects from being immunized and as a person who believes in God and his will, I can honestly say that if my child was going to die from something, I would much rather it be natural rather than man made. Again, just my humble opinion.

    Reply
  63. Craig

    Lets just hope parents care as much about their kids eating sticks of butter and drinking gallons of mountain dew.

    Reply
  64. Eric

    I SO wanted to like this when I saw it on facebook. The only reason I didn’t is that I’m pretty sure that facebook would show that like to my anti-vaccine sister-in-law. While I find lots of truth in this, I don’t really want to be accused of calling family members stupid at the next get-together. Good job though!

    Reply
  65. Cristian

    All the vaccines believers out there should stop being “morons’ for once. If your child is vaccinated why in the world are you scared of a child that’s not? Isn’t the vaccine supposed to protect from diseases? The not vaccinated parent should be afraid, right? So, it’s time to stop being irrational and use your calculus vaccines and think. Let the parent who decided that vaccines are not good alone. They did not came to this conclusion out of the blue but they did their research. And maybe things happened in their families (due to vaccines) that triggered all kinds of diseases. So, if you went for vaccines, good for you. If no, good for you too.

    Reply
  66. Brenda

    One of my cousins, who is a few months older than I am, suffered brain damage from a high fever brought on by the measles when she was 4 years old. She cannot do much of anything for herself. My aunt is now 80 and is trying to outlive her, because she is concerned about what will happen to my cousin after she dies. When my aunt disappears for a day or two, my cousin sits on a chair and cries and screams the entire time that my aunt is gone. People passing by the house wonders why she is screaming, and we just say “Because her mother is not here.” Needless to say, none of us wants to take her when my aunt passes. None of us can handle her. And she is extremely vulnerable. I’ll hate to put her in an institution. She will not understand it when my aunt dies.

    Reply
  67. Christine Vara

    I only wish there was a vaccine that would prevent people from falling prey to the enormous amounts of vaccine misinformation that is so commonly shared on the internet. As I work diligently to help people to understand the dangers of infectious diseases and appreciate the science behind vaccines, I’ve realized that one of the biggest obstacles is in getting people to recognize reputable resources. I’m so tired of (otherwise) intelligent people sending me links from Dr. Oz, Mercola or Natural News. Instead I like to refer people to Every Child By Two (http://www.ecbt.org), Vaccinate Your Baby (https://www.facebook.com/VaccinateYourBaby) and CHOP’s Vaccine Education Center (http://vec.chop.edu/service/vaccine-education-center/). I only hope that we can try to do better at educating our youth so that they will make well-informed decisions for themselves and their children when they are old enough – decisions based on scientific evidence and not rumor, lies or fear.

    Reply
  68. Judy

    You do have one error in your otherwise wonderful post. Crying actually LOWERS the CO2 level in the blood. Trust me, I’m a NICU nurse. If we want a truly accurate blood gas, we have to get it quickly before the little buggers blow off too much CO2 or use an invasive device like an arterial catheter for the most accurate results. Since you’re only talking about a fictional disease, the error is pretty insignificant.

    Reply
  69. Sharon Richardson

    I firmly believe that parents should have the ability to block their children from receiving vaccines (although I find this to be child abuse.) If they should choose to not receive vaccines, they should also agree that their children will not be in any public place. This includes school, the park, the playground, restaurants, the mall, etc., so they will not endanger any who have legitimate reasons for not getting vaccinated (such as severe reactions or medical reasons beyond their control…does not include those who just choose not to vaccinate.)

    Reply
  70. april

    Have any of you ever had a child that had a serious neurological reaction to a vaccine? Have any of you watched your 1 year old lay on the floor seizing uncontrollably while you stand by, helplessly waiting for the paramedics? Have any of you held your babies hand while they underwent excruciatingly painful spinal taps or screamed in fear while they went through MRI and CT Scans? Have you spent weeks with your baby in isolation in a tiny hospital room, not able to take them outside to play or just breathe fresh air, not able to go home and see your husband or the rest of your children? I have. And after all of these tests, after all of these weeks in isolation, after all of the poking and prodding to her innocent little body, the result was that my daughter has to spend a lifetime on very powerful anti-seizure medications because I made the choice to blindly listen to our pediatrician and let them inject her with these vaccines. These vaccines that it has been SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN were the cause of her seizure disorder, as well as 47 other children who had serious neurological side effects following vaccination with the same lot number. I guess I’m the lucky one, though, because I still have my daughter. Two of those other 47 sets of parents had to bury their babies after this. So I did my research. I didn’t listen to the pediatrician. I didn’t listen to celebrities. I didn’t listen to the CDC. I went to the libraries at local research hospitals and medical schools and I read and researched and I spent the next year of my life trying to understand WHY our government, why our pediatrician, who I trusted completely, would tell me this was safe for my daughter when it clearly wasn’t. I learned about the risks and the side effects and the contraindications and the benefits. And I now have 6 very healthy, unvaccinated children. And not one of them has ever had measles, mumps, rubella, polio, small pox, pertussis, diptheria, ebola, andromeda, or even chicken pox! Although my 16 year old college student has recently had to suffer through a horrible case of calculus! My point is this: I don’t judge you for choosing to vaccinate your child. If you have done your research and feel that the benefits outweigh the risk then more power to you. I don’t think that makes you a bad parent. But you haven’t walked in my shoes. You haven’t been through what I’ve been through. You haven’t watched your child go through what my daughter did. Making healthcare choices for my children based off of research and our own experiences does not make me a bad parent either. So you decide what’s best for your child and I will decide what is best for mine. No need to resort to name calling and judgement when you clearly have no clue what you are talking about.

    Reply
  71. Bone of Dragon

    I want to thank Patrick for his restraint and tolerance when responding to the comments made against him. Whatever his personal style, he never claimed anything which he could not back up when asked to, and he did not descend to personal insults as did so many of his critics. This thread has been a good example of the kind of blind mob justice which characterised mediaeval witch hunts.

    Before replying to this comment, please observe and be clear that I have not mentioned whether or not I agree with vaccinations in their administration to children, adults or other animals. That is MY business and no-one else needs to comment as they do not know my circumstances. I do, however, support anyone who can state their opinion, whatever it is, without trying to denigrate that of other people.

    Reply
  72. Chad

    I heard the speculative science community is kicking around vaccine ideas for the Andromeda Strain since most of them got into science because they wanted to be scifi writers but failed all their English courses.

    Reply
  73. Jenny

    I’m judging you so hard right now, ‘Dad.’ You’re putting my child at risk against a future calculus infection, which most certainly will rear it’s ugly head sometime during my kid not understanding Algebra which will obviously make the whole thing your fault. *tsk tsk.* Thanks for putting yourself out there and exposing your shortcomings- made for a good read :)

    Reply
  74. Erik

    Just for the fun of it I thought I would logically reduce Paticks statments.

    As I stated:

    “You are right. Most people (for or against) do not do enough research or logical analysis” – [Fallacy = Argumentum ad populum]

    [. However, if you decide to NOT research and I decide to research, my analysis does not become invalid because of your agnostic approach.” – [Fallacy = Ad ignorantiam]

    In this statement I was explaining if a person does not want to put in the time to research or do analysis, then they are in essence claiming they do not know, or are not knowing of the answers (science) in regard to vaccinations. As the original post I commented on states: laymen can’t be expected to know. [Fallacy = Stawman]

    Agnostic is generally used as a skeptic religious position, but the root of the word is ‘not knowing’. So if a person claims to not know or understand the science behind vaccinations, they are claiming an agnostic position (‘not knowing’). [Fallacy = ‘No True Scotsman’ and strawman continued]

    I used this term, as more of a joke– because my position is also agnostic. I am skeptic to all sides: CDC, peer reviewed science, media, you and myself. [Fallacy = Tu quoque]

    Without skepticism science would never advance, as the opposite of doubt is certainty, and when you are certain you stop asking questions. The whole ridiculousness of the pro-vaccine movement is the rejection of seeing validity in asking questions. [Fallacy = Strawman]

    Categorical acceptance of something that is reasoned in inductive utilitarian calculus is dangerous, as it leads to blind dogmatic acceptance (a fortiori, macro propositions). [Fallacy = Non-Sequitur]

    I am happy to debate, clarify, explain anything I post. I do not write with the intent of impressing people with my vocabulary. The number one objective of writing is to communicate a thought and that is my focus. I do write slightly more casual in blog comments than I would in a academic paper- mostly out of habit. If you feel I am failing in my use of language or my ‘inability to grasp definitions’, then it would be much more productive to ask for clarification on what I am referencing. I am well aware that some things may seem as improper use, but it is because I am glossing over arguments that would take much longer to type out. [Fallacy = Appeal to Authority]

    It would be appreciated if you could abstain from ad hominem, it does not move the discourse positively and just makes this conversation sound childish. [Fallacy = Sanctimony ]

    Just as me questions, be polite. Its easy. With that said, I appreciate your desire for logical clarity.

    – Editors note. For a person who tries (badly) to use debate terms you are piss poor at it. I could further reduct your logic down to even more fallacious arguments, but for the benefit of everyone here I will leave it at this.

    You may be impressed by your intellect, but you shouldn’t be and you can take that ad hominem to the bank.

    Reply
  75. Jesus Freak

    Dear Friends … vaccinating your child or yourself is a potentially life-altering MEDICAL PROCEDURE. These links provide studies and research done by doctors, scientists, and medical researchers. They also provide first hand accounts of damage and death by vaccines from parents who have unfortunately experienced it. I have learned from experience that when you “click” on these links, you will be taken to “page not found”. that is because the pro-vax powers that be/hackers do everything they can to prevent this information from being shared. If you really want the information, you will have to type the address into your url. or google “damage from vaccines” or “anti-vaccine websites” Please educate yourself about the dangers of vaccines so that you may make an INFORMED DECISION. I am anti-vaccine and I am PRO CHOICE. Everyone has the RIGHT to make the CHOICE they believe is best for their loved ones and themselves. Peace, Love, and Good health to all. God Bless #hearthiswell Think Twice Global Vaccine Insitute thinktwice.com http://www.vacfacts.info vaccines.mercola.com vaxtruth.org http://www.vaclib.org http://www.nvic.org vaccineliberationarmy.com vaccine-injury.info http://www.educate4theinjured.org http://www.whale.to/vaccines.html http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/30-scientific-studies-showing-the-link-between-vaccines-and-autism/ https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/09/02/vaccines-cause-brain-damage-the-mothers-know/

    Reply
  76. Heather

    I’ll assume you live in the USA. Correct? If you lived elsewhere, would you vaccinate according to the standards in that country or in the USA? Do you agree more with Japanese vaccinations or French? Who is the end source for determining/choosing between the differences in vaccinations seen among the “developed” countries of the world. Is there room for debate and difference of risk/reward?

    Reply
  77. Kirsty Lamont

    Choosing to only vaccinate when planning to travel relies on no-one from affected countries travelling to yours… just saying.

    Reply
  78. Katie

    There are some legitimate reasons to not vaccinate some kids that are getting grossly overlooked. Our daughter has not gotten several vaccines because she is allergic to eggs and some vaccines use eggs as preservatives. Let’s not be too quick to judge others without all of the facts.

    Reply
  79. m h

    Soon one of these un-vaccinated people will bring polio back to their family. It will lead to serious crippling of their family, and probably only at that point will they wake up. They seem to just lump all vaccines together, since the flu shot has some chemical in it now ALL vaccines are bad. Skip the flu shot, sure. The flu probably won’t kill you, leave you blind, infernal, etc. Measles, polio, etc CAN seriously mess people up though.

    Reply
  80. Tre Kramer

    I know I’m late to this conversation but I wanted to get a word in.

    Patrick, if you can send me a link to these 165 studies on the health risks of thimerisol, I promise you I will read every one of them. And if only six find it to be safe (while the rest find it unsafe or inconclusive, as your comment implies) then I will eat a vaccine.

    Good parents try to do right by their kids, you’re right. Being a good parent doesn’t make you a good scientist though. One of the things I respect the most in a person is when they can admit they don’t know something. When you really delve into a field (formal training) then you realize that there are intricacies you never dreamed of. Pretending that your many hours of research mean a thing without the foundational training is egotistical in the truest sense of the word.

    Reply
  81. Lisa

    I honestly do not believe in the parent’s right to choose rather to vaccinate their child or not. Vaccination is not a personal issue, it is a communal issue. If someone does not vaccinate their children. they put all children who cannot vaccinate because they are too young, or allergic at risk . There is precedent for forcing vaccinations as we did in the smallpox campaign. In this country and around the world, officials entered houses, held unwilling people down and vaccinated them against smallpox. Guess what…no more smallpox. It works. Even today, you are not allowed to choose to urinate and defacate on the street because it is a public health issue. Though it is your bodily functions, it impacts society therefore you do not have the freedom to choose to do it. I know this is controversial in America but vaccination is a public good and there is no scientific evidence to support not doing it.

    At the very least, you should not be allow to enter schools, communal groups, camps, sports teams, and be employed without vaccination. Again, there is precedent for this as employers can mandate flu vaccinations, smoking cessation etc. I think we need to put our foot down as a society and science community on this issue

    Reply
  82. jim

    All of those diseases that “were annihilated in the US years ago” are now appearing again because illegal immigrants with those diseases are sneaking across the border without being checked, and are mixing in with our kids.

    Reply
  83. Amy

    I see vaccines like a strong man with a wooden arm. If he pushes your kid out of the road, it might bruise and give him some splinters. If he leaves your kid in the road with oncoming traffic, he/she might die. Which would a good parent choose? I fir one am not willing to risk the saccident.

    Reply
  84. fred

    If people are concerned about the effect ion a very young child of multiple vaccines, this seems an understandable if emotional fear. why don’t they then get them vaccinated at a slower pace? The people who refuse, aren’t just delaying the sequence. Can the child have the MMR at 6? 10? What if s.he only gets one vaccine at a time? Their refusal to vaccinate doesn’t make sense to me since the ones you see interviewed are NEVER going to DO THAT to their child. A reasonable person would get their child vaccinated over time, at least.

    Reply
  85. Lisa Jones

    Not funny at all.
    There are too many morons that will not vaccinate their children based on ridiculous theories.

    Reply
  86. Pingback: Why Measles Isn't Just An Anti-Vaxxer Problem - Public Health

  87. freereel

    Anti-vaxxers are so silly. How can they question statements made by politicians and government officials. Don’t they know how reliable political statements are? I don’t trust my own brother, but I ALWAYS trust the government.

    Reply
  88. Sandy Roman

    Here’s a question for the smug self assured author.

    Did you circumcise your male child? If so, at what age and why? Was he healthy? Was he at substantial risk?

    Please elaborate at length about your situation, so we have the whole picture and nothing significant or critical gets left out.

    Thank you in advance for your reply.

    Reply
  89. David

    Dude,
    You are so irresponsible not vaccinating your kid against calculus. Small doses of mathematics, starting with arithmetic when they’re young and building their immune system with algebra and geometry when they’re strong enough to handle it is the only way to insure that their brains aren’t suddenly and irreparably harmed later in life when some creationists kids who couldn’t be bothered to learn to count because it’s not in the bible starts using words like ‘incremental’ and ‘exponential’.
    Don’t let your kid be the only one who can’t drink and derive. Those of us with compromised math educations depend on this herd immunity.

    Reply
  90. Amy

    Vaccines do protect the herd which is a very good thing. Keeping the herd alive is awesome! Vaccines are good for human kind but I do not know for sure if vaccines are good for each and every human being. What I wonder is if vaccine studies account for differences in individual genetic makeup?

    My neighbors child came home from a series of vaccinations, got a high fever and the next day lost the ability to speak. The ensuing months saw regressive personality changes that were stunning. This child, now a teenager has not regained the ground that she has lost. Her behavior is erratic and violent and while she has regained some language, she is far from normal. It is tempting to think that the vaccines were the causal but there is no hard fast proof. If not the vaccines, is there some other syndrome that causes irreparable regression like this?

    In thinking about this, I am wondering if the vaccine studies account for individual biologies and how variations in genetics might cause adverse reactons? I have recently been diagnosed with a methylation defect (genetic) which does not allow me to detox as efficiently as someone who does not have this defect. I have abnormally high (off the charts) levels of heavy metals in my body and my sister, raised in the same environment does not. I have some other problems related to low levels of glutathione as well. With these defects, If I received a vaccine with thimerosal, would I react differently than someone who can detox better? Since I already have a high metal load, might there be something in the vaccine that would combine with these metals to push me over the edge?? (mad hatter?)

    I believe that some of the doctors who treat autism have found that their patients have a some different “biologies” (genetics or toxic load) than other patients without autism. Does the toxic burden in one patient trigger inflammation that is not seen in the masses?

    As for the CDC, I have had to deal with some horrid long term problems from a case of lyme disease that did not get diagnosed for years after the initial tick bite. CDC studies show that there is no such thing as chronic lyme. A study out of Columbia University shows persistence of the lyme bacteria, despite what the CDC calls adequate treatment. The CDC acknowledges that the people may have symptoms, they just don’t call it lyme disease. The doctors in the lyme trenches treat the “chronic” people with continued antibiotics. Many patients with chronic symptoms seem to improve on continued treatment and relapse without. (this brings up another point about herd immunity and antibiotic resistence but I will stay out of that for now) Who is right? Should the patients be treated until they feel better or should CDC guidelines be followed? I do not believe that all the info is in about lyme disease and I also believe that there is no one size fits all….

    By the way, there used to be a vaccine against lyme disease which was pulled from the market. Smith-Kline said that there was no interest in the vaccine (which is hard to believe given the rampant nature of lyme disease) but there were also several law suits against SK from people that got horrible arthritis after receiving the vaccine. As I understand it, it was not a live vaccine but I heard that a subset of those receiving the vaccine had a certain genotype ( can’t remember the exact haplotype – something about a HLA 4, I believe) that reacted to the vaccine. The vaccine seemed to trigger an auto immune reaction in this small set of those vaccinated. I am pretty sure that neither Smith-Kline or the CDC has much published on this. It does seem telling that SK gave up the vaccine that they had spent so much money developing….. and yes, this is just a deduction- not hard fast science. I think that individuals are still trying to raise money to do more studies. I think that we are naive if we believe that all the answers are found in a few studies.

    My thought is that Individuals may respond differently according to their individual biology. Cases of lyme in people with the methylation defect seem to get hit harder than those without. Yes, vaccination is important for the overall health of our population but I propose that it is not an all or nothing scenario. I postulate that there are individuals that cannot tolerate vaccines, perhaps there are some infants that have a normal immune system but are just too young, there might be some genetic glitches, or the mother might have passed on her toxic burden in utero. I would bet that there are genetics (that we may not yet understand) that cause problems. I am sure that we can’t imagine all the possible scenarios so for now, we do the best that we know. To say we know it all is dangerous. We need more info.

    (I am pretty sure that leaches and poultices were an amazing modern medicine in the time of King Henry the 8th. The idea that contaminated water caused dysentary was unheard of. Concepts of public health and safety have developed over time) We have lots to learn as they did then. It was not long ago that AIDS was refered to as a “gay cancer”. We know better now.

    AND YES, my kids are vaccinated and I feel tremendously lucky and graetful that they were just fine……(except for the older one in the teenage years…if I could only blame that one on vaccines!)

    Reply
  91. Pingback: Face the Vax - Dad and Buried

  92. RoboCop

    This article is dumb. I don’t mean that in the sense of it being incorrect. I just mean it is an unfunny piece of garbage that should be removed from the internet before more people waste their time with it.

    Reply
  93. Troy

    Welcome to America! My home since birth and I’m so very proud of this country and what it used to represent to the world. There is one side effect with being living here with all our intellectual “freedom”, well one I’ll rant on now at least and thats Severe Ostrichosis. It’s unfortunately not rare but not studied much.
    What does it do? Well it thickens the skull, lowers ones ability to hear, removes the ability to process new information that conflicts with ones personal opinion. This in turn cause the unfortunate victim fits of rage to get its feathers ruffled, attacking anyone who tries to help the victim. If attacking doesn’t stop their helper then our victim screams and yell nonsense until it’s last option of burying it’s head in the dirt is taken. This last option both blinds and deafens them temporarily so they can relax and forget why they were angry.
    Long winded joke I know but honestly, it is a shame that people like my son and nephew joined the Armed Services in different ways to protect this country only to see it undermined by a movement spearheaded by the once “Queen of Spring Break!” My son is outraged by faulty gun control laws that force worse laws which now strip us that right, not taking a moment of pain from any tragedy involved there, ignorant bohemian parents who believe one source verses hundreds and don’t vaccinate their children allowing their illnesses to spread to the others thus risking more lives and when a school system allows subjects to be removed from books because the truth upsets the Holy Rollers, which I pray for constantly, plus enacts this learning and development halting idiotic movement call Common Core. He is outraged that if he gets the call to go… that when he gets home all he might come back to is a nation that was left to sick, weak and stupid to defend itself. Yet he gets up happily when needed, with a pride beyond my comprehension, and does his duty as a United States Marine. A small piece of an armored machine that defends our rights to ignore facts and risk the future. This includes calming his true phobia of needles while being vaccinated more times than most because his job requires it. He knows they work, he knows I was allergic to the shot as a child and vaccinations around me kept me protected, so guess what… his future kids will be vaccinated, taught true gun safety and math done the right and simple way. Vaccinating them from Ostrichosis.

    Reply
  94. Pingback: Daily Kos Radio is LIVE at 9 am ET! | My Liberal Life

  95. Bob

    This may seem a humorous matter to the author and many who commented on the article. To the parent of a child who contracted measles from a non-vaccinated youngster, the humor is difficult to appreciate.

    Reply
  96. John Ferman

    Oh, that Calculus – remember its two varients: Differential and Integral. Also, lets not ignore them pesky quantums, photons and phonons. Where is my pillow – I gotta get under.

    Reply
  97. Pingback: link love | Grumpy Rumblings (of the formerly untenured)

  98. Pingback: Measles — 2015 Update | The PediaBlog

  99. Ann-Marie Meyers

    I wish they hadn’t vaccinate me against calculus, but, hey, it was the 1960’s and I was a girl. They vaccinated us all against all forms of mathematics. I even had my own system of numbers as a child, but they cured me in third grade. They gave me New Math, and it inoculated me against ever being able to think of math in a positive light again.

    Reply
  100. Jake M

    Love all the pro-vaxxers on here espousing how relieved they were when they realized this article was a joke. The VICP (National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program), however is not. Big Pharma lobbied congress to establish this court to shield Vaxx manufactures from potential vaccination lawsuits. VICP was established in 1988 and to this day, a family or individual CAN NOT SUE a pharmaceutical company for an injury or illness related to a vaccine. This is unprecedented in medicine. And guess what happened when Big Pharma received “immunity” from lawsuits? Vaccine development went into overdrive, and the vaccination schedule more than doubled. It defies logic to think that a universal medicine injected into millions of people with different micro biomes, genetics, etc, would work just fine. Consider the abundance of allergies, ADHA, Autism, Asbergers (all projected to steadily rise over the next 20 years) and really ask yourself how healthy is the younger generation today.

    Reply
  101. Cara

    If the point you are trying to make is so solid, then why do you need to resort to ad hominem? If you want to convince parents of the validity of vaccination then insulting them isn’t gonna win them over to your cause.

    Reply
  102. Pingback: Bring me your children.. it’s immunisation time mwah haa haaaa | OLLE the blog

  103. Pingback: Herd Immunity and Theological Anthropology: A Catholic Case for Vaccinating Your Children | Catholic Moral Theology

  104. Mark G. Meyers

    Oh, if only people knew what kind of power they have, and are trying to increase. I’m 50 years old, and my whole generation is a smashing success story. Most of us had around 9 vaccinations in our childhood, and then we came to find out, in recent years, that no known vaccine stays in the body for more than 2-10 years. So, we found out that there has never been a “herd immunity”, and we did great. We found out that sanitation (clean water, food), access to nutrition, and education were the greatest eradicators of disease in the 20th Century. We also checked before vaccines, and found things like Yellow Fever and Tuberculosis were “cured” withut them, really the same way. We found sanitation to be the real way to end smallpox, when the WHO called it eradicated in countries with only 10% vaccine coverage at the time (1977). BUT NOW, we have US children scheduled for 70 vaccinations, and we find college students and adults being asked to take regular boosters, and they’re even making up vaccines for things like PTSD, because, well, just follow the money and the corruption.
    http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2012/02/18/the-deadly-impossibility-of-herd-immunity-through-vaccination-by-dr-russell-blaylock/

    Congressional Briefing on the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (45 mins)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4CwROrKG8A
    “Over half of US children suffer chronic disease and debilitation”

    CDC Epidemiologist Whistleblower Confirms New Review Showing Vaccine Autism Link:
    Admits Agency’s Data Manipulation and Concealment of Research Findings on Initial 2004 MMR Vaccine Study That Found a Strong Statistical Association Between the Timing of the MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella) Vaccine and Autism Incidence in African-American Boys
    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/cdc-epidemiologist-whistleblower-confirms-review-141700853.html?soc_src=mediacontentsharebuttons

    There are 2 other MMR vaccine whistleblowers https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2014/09/24/there-are-2-other-mmr-vaccine-whistleblowers/

    NEJM editor: “No longer possible to believe much of clinical research published”
    http://ethicalnag.org/2009/11/09/nejm-editor/

    Break out your pads and pencils for this film…
    “Silent Epidemic” – Film – vaccine intensive; medical sources
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1m3TjokVU4

    86 Research Papers Supporting the Vaccine/Autism Link http://www.scribd.com/doc/220807175/86-Research-Papers-Supporting-the-Vaccine-Autism-Link

    Dr. Suzanne Humphries Lecture on vaccines and health (part 1)
    (Find out what they are teaching in medical school)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFQQOv-Oi6U

    There is a (searchable) database on disease and vaccination over the past 200 years http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/graphs/

    Expert statistical analysis: What happened to Polio
    http://www.thinktwice.com/Polio.pdf
    A half-dozen diseases previously diagnosed as polio were also later reclassified.

    Reply
  105. dot

    I wish my self esteem were so healthy that I dis-regard truth and declared I am correct based on my feelings or someone else’s feeling that felt “correct” to me. How nice it must be not to question my own ideas because everyone else is wrong. This must be how that Keyan? Konya? West dude goes through his day feeling…

    Reply
  106. Pingback: Vaccines, Measles, And You | Richer Ramblings

  107. Derek

    You brainwashed sheeple and your government-advancing agenda! Every day I log onto social media from my desk at work, someone has posted more of this braindead, party-line BS.

    Calculus is not unpleasant. It was the most fun I ever had in math class. Every kid should take it.

    But that stuff about vaccines is cool.

    Reply
  108. Pingback: Why we didn’t vaccinate our child – Quartz

  109. Pingback: Vol. 2 / No. 20.2 — Why Anti-Vaccine “Mothers”? | ThisWeekInTomorrow

  110. B Gregory

    Childhood illnesses were one of God’s creations. We do our best to provide a good environment so our children will be healthy. If they get sick, it is wonderful to have medical treatments, and if a child dies, he died a natural death. If, on the other hand, we vaccinate a healthy child knowing that there is a risk however small and that child dies, we are guilty of murder. God did not make a mistake when he created us or disease. We make a mistake when we try to play God.

    Reply
  111. Pingback: TV-Debatte „Impfmuffel und Globulischlucker“ bei Puls 4 @ gwup | die skeptiker

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>