Vaccines

Opposing ideas aren't bad. Just this specific one is in saying that vaccines cause autism and therefore it's okay to not get vaccinated. If not getting vaccinated was only a health risk to the person un-vaccinated it'd be one thing. It'd be like a Jehovah's witness practitioner that is bleeding out from a car wreck in the ER and is refusing a blood transfusion for religious reasons. At least that personal choice would only affect that person opting not to receive all life saving methods available to them. That's not the case with avoiding vaccinations.

A better opposing idea would be one that recognizes the need and benefit to humanity vaccinations have provided for the deadly diseases we do have some semblance of control over and alternative methods to vaccinate that don't use the chemicals you believe can lead to autism even though evidence already says statistically they don't.

If we can manage to read someone's blood glucose level without a diabetic having to prick themselves on the finger to test, we can maybe come up with an alternate method of vaccination to appease the crowd that is fearful over negative side effects from the chemicals inside vaccines.

Sort of a tangent linking this video but I think it relates. Opposing ideas aren't bad. It's just in order to come up with a better idea than the one you oppose, you should offer up an opposing idea that not only agrees with existing data but further improves upon the idea you oppose. You've done neither.

 

I'm not calling you an idiot unless you are someone who thinks chemicals are bad.

Newborns and infants have immune systems that are perfectly capable of processing the vaccines. Of course there can be adverse reactions, but that's a statistically insignificant amount. If 1 baby out of 1 million has a fatal reaction to the vaccine, that's still better than 10,000 babies out of 1 million dying from preventable disease.

And it does sound like you're an anti-vaxxer, plus you've said your kid isn't vaccinated.

 

Embarrassing to actually think there are people who think there is any debate on this. Vaccines save lives and are completely healthy, they do not nor have ever been proven to give people autism. This is no more a sensitive subject than people debating on if hot water is hot and cold water is cold. The science is completely settled on this matter.

 

Anti-vaxers are idiots and every single one of them are less of a person than I am. I feel bad for them because they have to go through life thinking they know something that 100% of science advocates for but that, hopefully, won't be a problem I'll have to deal with. Anti-vaxers

I'll say anyone who is an anti-vaxxer is an idiot, more so, they're less of a person than everyone else. Basically 2nd class citizens in my eyes and if there were some kind of outward label for these people I'd sure laugh at them in public. Keeping my distance though, I don't want them or their grimy, sickly family anywhere near me.

 

Maybe you could list a few of these awesome anti-vax peer reviewed studies published in reputable journals that underpin your statement. Since you are convinced the science is on your side here, I'd love a rundown of all the rigorous evidence you used to reach this conclusion.

 

That's cold dude.

LOL.

 

I will say the term "idiot" has never helped sway an opinion or change a mind. Not very helpful, and people who research the anti-vax phenomenon will tell you that as item #1 on their list of what NOT to do if you want progress.

 

B-Bob, I have no doubt that this is true for every ridiculous idea or political position. But Jesus ****ing Christ it's hard to rein it in. Especially now during the Great Leap Backward.

 

I would never tell an anti-vaxxer that they are an idiot. I think of them as more mis-informed. I agree that disparaging someone in a debate is a sure-fire way to close off any chance of changing minds, which is dangerous with anti-vaxxers because you don't want them to dig their heels more into their ignorance.

But someone who thinks chemicals are bad is an idiot. You'll get a big eye roll from me.

 

I believe the Earth is flat -- please be respectful of my views as there are many studies that support my position.

 

I would said that there are much more people that are misinformed about chemicals and think they are bad than people that are misinformed about vaccines and think they are bad.

 

Anyone with a high school education has learned about chemistry. There's no excuse to think chemicals are bad.

 

What I think your meaning to say is - all chemicals aren’t inherently bad just based on having the classification of being a chemical.

Because some chemicals are extremely toxic to humans, and considering we live in an ultra industrialized world, we encounter many harmful chemicals within our modern lives, and there’s nothing wrong with people being aware and fearful of some toxic chemicals.

 

No. What I'm saying is if you use the word chemical as a boogeyman, then you don't understand chemistry and science. As I've stated already, everything has an LD50. Every chemical is toxic to your health at some point. You will likely not encounter a toxic chemical at harmful dosages unless you completely ignore safety standards or are the rare one in a million reaction.

 

There are chemicals that are so potently toxic that I’m understanding of why people warp the word into a boogie man word even though it’s technically incorrect and not representative of all chemicals.

The second part of your post is a pure opinionated assumption attached with a made up number. The average person is surrounded by a number of highly toxic chemicals at all times In today’s modern age. We can start with the majority of Americans living in houses with lead painted walls and lead solder pipes.

 

You are a giant slurry of chemicals inside a chemical bag. Everything you eat or drink is made up of chemicals. It's like saying, "Atoms are really dangerous. I don't take with atoms in it."

 

I completely understand this, and is why I worded my comment the way I did.

In a comparison, public perception of chemicals and bacteria is similar IMO. Most chemicals, like bacteria, are harmless or even beneficial, but some are absolutely terrible for Humans to be exposed to.

Like it’s understandable for a germ freak to be scared of bacteria, considering all of these scary diseases we know of, it’s also understandable for people to be scared of chemicals, considering the industrialized world we live in and the amount of harmful chemicals the majority of humans come into contact with.

There’s a reason for residents of Flint to be terrified, there’s a reason the residents of pasadena/deer park and Baytown have the lowest life expectancies in Houston and therefor a reason for the residents to be scared of “chemicals”.

 

There is a whole industry around safety and we have the FDA and other government agencies around the world and here having all kind of label warning people about DANGER DANGER of things in our food, our water, our air, even our mind. Heck, California's pro 65 label pretty much everything as cancer causing.

My point was and is simple. A lot more people think, and rightfully IMO, that "chemicals" are harmful vs vaccines. This is of course getting way of topic, but related back to the topic of calling people idiot --- it's helpful to also realize the perceptions in our society, especially if you want to educate or change opinion.

 

Dihydride oxide is a known killer, if taken in quantity, doncha know. Thus chemicals are supper bad and one should stay clear of dihydride oxide.