Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c
I am not anti vaccine just came in here to be a devils advocate but its obvious you guys just started this so you could be smug and smell your own farts so I will leave you to it.
the effectiveness of the flu shot is debatable and many doctors think vitamin D is at the very least as effective as the flu shot with ZERO side effects. I have never gotten the flu shot in my life and have had the flu maybe one or two times in my life...I know people who get it yearly (the flu and the flu shot) maybe I am just lucky
Here is a study by a doctor...just to get your blood boiling, vitamin D FTW!
http://preventdisease.com/news/13/10...ting-Flu.shtml |
If you think that this thread is about the pro-vaccine people tooting their horns and smelling their farts, then you don't understand what being a devils advocate is.
Devils Advocate is to argue the opposite side of an issue. In order to do that you have to present a credible argument.
I can't say "You shouldn't vote for Barak Obama because he's an alien from Neptune sent from the future to kill John Connor." Yes it's an argument to not vote for Obama, but it isn't a valid one. Just like you can't say "Flu vaccines aren't effective" and misquote studies and cite unreliable sources.
I didn't point out that the NVIC article was full of holes because I like how my farts smell (I do like how my farts smell, but that's neither here not there). I did it because the article cited studies as fact when the studies stated found the results inconclusive.
That's dangerous, and the author of the article is either unethical or stupid. Either way, their argument is invalid as it isn't based in fact.
When assessing medical studies, they should be done by doctors and be peer reviewed. Joe Blow conducting a study in his backyard isn't necessarily accurate science. Therefore we shouldn't treat it as such.
Also, when arguing devils advocate, people will argue back. The devils advocate doesn't get to present one side of the story at the end. The devils advocate position can be countered. In this case it was as there were major holes in your argument. Pointing them out doesn't mean I am not listening to what you have to say. In fact it means I am listening, paying attention and considering your argument. Just because the argument is wrong (not to be confused with your conclusion necessarily being wrong) doesn't mean I'm only here to dismiss it out of hand.
I'll be the first to admit I'm no scientist. What I can do is read and think critically.
You'll note I haven't touched the vitamin D issue with regard to the flu. There's a reason for that… I'm still considering it.
I will continue to consider it for a while yet but in the meantime Dutch Oven baby!