Vaccines don't cause autism (duh)

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by AcGold

No, just curious.

Are you sure?

[Jimmy Stang]

This sums up the vaccine "debate" in a nutshell. Implying a debate when there really isn't one? Check. Shying away from debate when faced with scientific evidence? Check. Questionable sources? Check. Suggesting those that counter an argument (or want to) with science as "vaccine bullies" (paraphrasing, but an actual term used by anti-vaxxers).

Sorry, but if I want to declare that the earth is flat, the onus is on me to prove it.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

food you knife that a fresh pear has hundreds of times the amount of formaldehyde that an injection has?

sorry, this was ambiguous. Can you word it more clearly please?

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

This sums up the vaccine "debate" in a nutshell. Implying a debate when there really isn't one? Check. Shying away from debate when faced with scientific evidence? Check. Questionable sources? Check. Suggesting those that counter an argument (or want to) with science as "vaccine bullies" (paraphrasing, but an actual term used by anti-vaxxers).

Sorry, but if I want to declare that the earth is flat, the onus is on me to prove it.

what debate? but thanks for being condescending and interjecting unnecessarily. It's obvious so quickly who will actually talk rationally. The majority of people in here have their minds made up, what is the point bringing evidence that will only meet rejection and ridicule on a mass scale? There is none so I'll just take what I can from those who are willing.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Just as I will gladly read any credible source that you can present.

AC, it was not I that brought up the articles.

Did you post:




I asked to see the source, hey perhaps I am wrong. If it is reputable, I will would love to read it.


You then posted:




You then don't, but continue to question vaccination. If you are truely interested in finding out the truth about vaccinations, then why not post you articles/source?


Furthermore, you say you are in the "I don't know the asnwer yet......group".

Do you know how you get an asnwer through discussion, and presentation of articles/sources.

Perhaps the source you read/listened to is not reputable.......or is that you concern? Or perhaps it is, who will know until you post that link/article.

I think the "accumulation of preservatives" thing would be people confusing biomagnification/bioaccumulation of mercury in animals vs the mercury contained in the preservative thimerosal. I don't think you'll find a link with proof against a baseless claim like you won't find proof the moon isn't made of swiss cheese. Thimerosal is completely eliminated and does not accumulate

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by AcGold

sorry, this was ambiguous. Can you word it more clearly please?



what debate? but thanks for being condescending and interjecting unnecessarily. It's obvious so quickly who will actually talk rationally. The majority of people in here have their minds made up, what is the point bringing evidence that will only meet rejection and ridicule on a mass scale? There is none so I'll just take what I can from those who are willing.

Sorry. SwiftKey changes words on me all the time.

Did you know that a fresh pear contains hundreds of times the amount of formaldehyde as a vaccination?

[NuclearPizzaMan]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

This sums up the vaccine "debate" in a nutshell. Implying a debate when there really isn't one? Check. Shying away from debate when faced with scientific evidence? Check. Questionable sources? Check. Suggesting those that counter an argument (or want to) with science as "vaccine bullies" (paraphrasing, but an actual term used by anti-vaxxers).

Sorry, but if I want to declare that the earth is flat, the onus is on me to prove it.

Everyone who declines vaccination without a valid medical reason should be put to the sword.

I am not kidding.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Sorry. SwiftKey changes words on me all the time.

Did you know that a fresh pear contains hundreds of times the amount of formaldehyde as a vaccination?

I didn't know either,

is this in gmo pears or all pears?
is the formaldehyde in vaccinations synthetic? How is it derived?

since you seem to have a lot of information;

what causes the reported cases of anaphylactic shock? is it an allergic reaction to something synthetic or organic?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by AcGold

I didn't know either,

is this in gmo pears or all pears?
is the formaldehyde in vaccinations synthetic? How is it derived?

All pears. It is one of hundreds of naturally appearing chemicals that make up a pear.

The point is, chemicals should not be a scary word. There are certainly many to be scared of, but fear of unrecognized names scares people off. Read the article above I posted. It's a blog from a friend of mine.


What is the difference between synthetic and "natural" formaldehyde? It's the same thing in every way...

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by AcGold

what debate? but thanks for being condescending and interjecting unnecessarily. It's obvious so quickly who will actually talk rationally. The majority of people in here have their minds made up, what is the point bringing evidence that will only meet rejection and ridicule on a mass scale? There is none so I'll just take what I can from those who are willing.

People are talking rationally, but are just waiting for you to provide some points for discussion. I apologize if my post was condescending. It just feels like we are going in circles - if you feel strongly about something, talk about it and bring forward some sources to back it up. If the argument holds water, people will acknowledge that. If it doesn't, it will be countered with information that might be helpful.

I'm not going to sit here and pretend to be an expert on the topic. But I want to see articles and discussion - it is how we mold and evolve our opinions on an issue. Scrutiny is important.

[AcGold]

^I feel strongly that even if you are right being condescending and arrogant about it is shameful. Even if I agree with someone and I see them speaking with that self-righteous tone it just makes me nauseated (not that I'm accusing you of that). That's the big issue I've had and why I didn't bring any sources. Anyways, I think we can move on, I want to see all information and opinions from all sides of the spectrum without having to defend something to a group of people.




I'm not afraid of chemicals, I'm educated so I know what it means. Anyways, my real fear is of things that are synthesized and unnatural. Chemicals from a lab, industrial processes involving high concentrations, synthetic materials in general.

While your willing to talk do you know much about autism

http://autismspeaksblog.files.wordpr...nce-graph1.jpg

are rates really climbing that much? Is it being caused by something in society, multiple factors or a misdiagnosis? Not saying I believe everything you say, but I like being to the point.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by AcGold

It's not hard to find sources on either side of the argument if you want your viewpoint to be confirmed, it really isn't. I won't post anything because I know it will instantly be torn to shreds by a biased audience, I know you are asking because you want something to tear down so no I won't give any sources to such a biased group of people in here.

When there are such posts as people recommending anti-vaccers die a horrible death and people want that to happen, I'm not joining in on that mob attack by posting anything. I'd rather be considered a troll than get ganged up on by 20 people.

I'll gladly read anything anyone has in support of it with logic, Rathji's or Photon's post for instance. Those guys don't condescend as far as I can see and it makes exponentially easier to read through.

There are a few things I think you're missing.

1) This isn't personal. Posters HERE aren't looking to attack you personally, or want to put you down. Those that do are rightfully chastised by the rest. Posters here like myself, Street Pharmacists, FlamesAddition, etc will attack the arguments and studies, but not you.

2) You believe that posters will simply just attack and year down the articles. Actually that's a good thing. If the articles and studies have issues and problems they can't be trusted. The reason why the pro-vaccine articles don't have anyone tearing them to shreds is because they follow the scientific method and have been attacked from multiple angles before publication.

Questioning the studies is a good thing. Questioning both sides is a good thing. The issue comes when you question but don't listen to the answers.

If you want to question the answer, again go ahead but you have to listen to te responses.

3) If you're worried about the other side not holding up to criticism, isn't that a flag for you? The pro-vaccination aren't worried about having the studies questioned. When you're correct you have no issues with being questioned because you have the answers.

If you don't have the answers keep researching.



As for food, here's a link to foods that naturally have formaldehyde:

http://www.cfs.gov.hk/english/whatsn...rmaldehyde.pdf

Here's a link that outlines how much formaldehyde is in vaccinations given to children:

http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/201...ients.html?m=1

If your child gets all their proper shots they will be injected with a TOTAL of 1,824μg, or 1.824mg, of formaldehyde. That's what, about as much as an apple or banana? A child will consume hundreds of time more formaldehyde in a day from just eating meals than they will from all their vaccines combined.


Again, hearing there is formaldehyde in vaccinations, YES question the safety. However, when evidence shows it's harmless, you can't ignore it.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by AcGold

^I feel strongly that even if you are right being condescending and arrogant about it is shameful. Even if I agree with someone and I see them speaking with that self-righteous tone it just makes me nauseated. That's the big issue I've had and why I didn't bring any sources.




I'm not afraid of chemicals, I'm educated so I know what it means. Anyways, my real fear is of things that are synthesized and unnatural. Chemicals from a lab, industrial processes involving high concentrations, synthetic materials in general.

While your willing to talk do you know much about autism

Spoiler!

are rates really climbing that much? Is it being caused by something in society, multiple factors or a misdiagnosis? Not saying I believe everything you say, but I like being to the point.

That is an alarming rate.

However, vaccinations aren't the cause. Could it be how we as a society diagnose, or perhaps we're better at identifying now, where we misdiagnosed in the past.

Perhaps it's something else? Increase in carbon consumption, BPA, I honestly don't know.

What I do know is when you eliminate one possible cause, you have to keep looking, ignoring the evidence and beating a dead horse doesn't help anyone.

[photon]

Originally Posted by AcGold

I won't post anything because I know it will instantly be torn to shreds by a biased audience, I know you are asking because you want something to tear down so no I won't give any sources to such a biased group of people in here.

What's the appropriate response to a source of information then? How do you tell the difference between a rejection of something based on bias or a rejection of something based on reason?

Just credulously accept what it says with no thought of criticism? Would you only post stuff if everyone agreed with what you post?

Because that's the only two responses I can think of to a source of information.. accept it without question, or evaluate it on its merits.

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

All pears. It is one of hundreds of naturally appearing chemicals that make up a pear.

It's also naturally occurring in the human body, without it we'd die. The body makes it itself.

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

What is the difference between synthetic and "natural" formaldehyde? It's the same thing in every way...

Exactly, molecules don't remember where they came from.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by photon

Because that's the only two responses I can think of to a source of information.. accept it without question, or evaluate it on its merits.

I was more thinking of the aggressive rhetoric that borders on hate that builds up when a group of people disagree with an individual. If you were to ask me whether vaccines cause autism or not I would say unsure leaning towards probably not. Just felt like being the devils advocate as I was seeing a mob mentality growing. I know how to scrutinize data, I've taken 3 stats courses and have 2 degrees so I know all about the scientific method.

[Rick Wamsley]

Originally Posted by NuclearPizzaMan

Everyone who declines vaccination without a valid medical reason should be put to the sword.

I am not kidding.

I agree. Also anyone who rejects the Führer should be gassed.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by AcGold

It's not hard to find sources on either side of the argument if you want your viewpoint to be confirmed, it really isn't. I won't post anything because I know it will instantly be torn to shreds by a biased audience, I know you are asking because you want something to tear down so no I won't give any sources to such a biased group of people in here.

When there are such posts as people recommending anti-vaccers die a horrible death and people want that to happen, I'm not joining in on that mob attack by posting anything. I'd rather be considered a troll than get ganged up on by 20 people.

I'll gladly read anything anyone has in support of it with logic, Rathji's or Photon's post for instance. Those guys don't condescend as far as I can see and it makes exponentially easier to read through.

That's the issue here.

You made up your mind and then started looking for articles.

At one point, I was willing to let my wife not vaccinate our kids, because her mom and her homeopath had convinced her it was a bad idea. I talked with the homeopath to get her reasoning. I went to websites for anti-vaccination groups to see their reasoning. I took that information, digested it and wanted to find out for myself what this mercury was they were so scared of.

I looked at articles I pulled from the UofC library, not cherry picked from one website or another that supported the answer I wanted to believe, to determine what it actually did. I went to (non vaccine related) websites to figure out what the properties of the chemical were and how the body processes it. I figured out all the things it is used it, and how often it is actually even used.

The end result is my kids are vaccinated, because, contrary to my opinion of them when I find my son is hiding a jar of urine in the basement so he doesn't have to come upstairs to pee, I do actually love them and want them to survive.

That's just my opinion though. I work with computers, so don't take my word for it, actually do the research yourself.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by Rathji

You made up your mind and then started looking for articles.

No I did not, at all. It's so much to the contrary that I couldn't read past this.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I think the "accumulation of preservatives" thing would be people confusing biomagnification/bioaccumulation of mercury in animals vs the mercury contained in the preservative thimerosal. I don't think you'll find a link with proof against a baseless claim like you won't find proof the moon isn't made of swiss cheese. Thimerosal is completely eliminated and does not accumulate

edit: nm, completely misread your post.

I agree entirely

[strombad]

Originally Posted by AcGold

I was more thinking of the aggressive rhetoric that borders on hate that builds up when a group of people disagree with an individual. If you were to ask me whether vaccines cause autism or not I would say unsure leaning towards probably not. Just felt like being the devils advocate as I was seeing a mob mentality growing. I know how to scrutinize data, I've taken 3 stats courses and have 2 degrees so I know all about the scientific method.

Do you? It hardly seems like it.
You're defending not vaccinating children on unfounded and questionable grounds, not showing any of your evidence, and presenting misdirection when it suits your argument.

I'm willing to bet that neither of your degrees are in the medical or natural scientific field.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by AcGold

I didn't know either,

is this in gmo pears or all pears?
is the formaldehyde in vaccinations synthetic? How is it derived?

since you seem to have a lot of information;

what causes the reported cases of anaphylactic shock? is it an allergic reaction to something synthetic or organic?

The anaphylaxis is usually caused by the actual antigen (inactive virus or pays off the virus depending on the vaccine). It may be caused die to egg allergy as the antigens are produced in eggs. Extremely rarely the trace antibiotics used to prevent bacterial contamination may cause it. The reaction is because as the immune system learns to deal with any larger immune responsive substance (viruses/bacteria/proteins/etc) it may cause an overreaction.

A few important points to consider:
1) Anaphylaxis is often a natural reaction to the naturally occurring antigen regardless of how it was produced.
2) It is extremely rare. About 0.05% of people will experience it and most of that is food/insect. On top of that, fatality is even rarer. When people get vaccinated they are instructed to stay by the healthcare practitioner for this reason
3) The rates of anaphylaxis to a vaccine are always orders of magnitude lower than morbidity from the disease.