Jim Carrey Posts on Vaccines at Huff Post

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Shazam

No, you're not an expert. I wouldn't even consider you even close to informed.

Did you know that the doctor that did the study linking vaccines to autism admitted that he made up that study? No, you find the damned link.

I didnt quote any study, but I am sure you are an expert on the issue so lets not discuss it anymore....well maybe just a little bit more.

I am sure you can quote a study that says no combination of vaccines cause any problems 100% of the time. I am waiting.....

What next, are you going to claim that no one is allergic to milk, or sunlight, peanuts, etc etc etc. And those are created by nature, not men/women looking to make money.

This is the last I will post as I have not had a CP infraction in over a year and if I were to get one, it would be about politics and not this.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Peanut

Wait... what? Caffeine is an insecticide?! So do they just inject insecticide into pepsi or...

Yes, it's an insecticide.

Here's a handy link I give out whenever I have to deal with the whargarbblers typical of these sorts of threads.

http://www.acsh.org/publications/pub...pub_detail.asp

Tower's only solution will be to stop eating, which I hope he does soon.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Tower

Do you honestly believe that vaccines are the sole reason for a decrease in Polio?

Yes.

Therefore, interruption of person-to person transmission of the virus by vaccination is the critical step in global polio eradication.[2] The two vaccines have eradicated polio from most countries in the world[3][4] and reduced the worldwide incidence from an estimated 350,000 cases in 1988 to just over 1300 cases in 2007.[5][6][7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio_vaccine (yes, it's wikipedia, so consider the source, but it's a hell of a lot more credible than the wingnut conspiracy theory site you linked earlier)

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

I didnt quote any study, but I am sure you are an expert on the issue so lets not discuss it anymore....well maybe just a little bit more.

I am sure you can quote a study that says no combination of vaccines cause any problems 100% of the time. I am waiting.....

What next, are you going to claim that no one is allergic to milk, or sunlight, peanuts, etc etc etc. And those are created by nature, not men/women looking to make money.

Did you even read my post? The one where I said I'm allergic to shrimp??!?

This is the last I will post as I have not had a CP infraction in over a year and if I were to get one, it would be about politics and not this.

Ah, typical.

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by OBCT

Vaccines, eh? I've wondered about 'em for years. Everyone's opinion seems to differ just a bit as to how important they are.

My (mostly uneducated) opinion probably lands somewhere near Jim's. I believe that vaccines "work" and I "like" them in principle. They've halted the spread of numerous deadly epidemics - that's huge, that's amazing.

I just get the feeling that doctors (or the medical community at large) have tended to approach vaccination with blinders on, seemingly ignoring the possibility of negative side effects. My perception is that medical professionals often try to convey to patients and the general public this notion that the pros of vaccination so vastly outweigh the cons in every single circumstance that you'd be idiotic not to vaccinate your kid and yourself with every available formula -- just to be safe. I don't know what the "official stance" of the WHO (or Canada/U.S.) is on vaccines, but I think more studies into the potential dangers of each type of vaccine are needed, and then subsequent warnings to go with them.

How dangerous can vaccines be? I really don't know. I'm somewhere between the two extremes in terms of what I suspect is the truth. I do think there are potential risks, though, and I think they should be treated as such ... much in the same way allergy medicine on TV ads are treated with a list of side effects, I suppose. Why haven't many more intense clinical studies on the subject already been performed? To me, this is the key... as Jim said, do more independent drug research, get a whole slew of reliable data (that even Mr. Carrey will accept ), and empower the public with three things: 1. all relevant information about a vaccination upfront; 2. 100% free vaccinations for all (for those strains of disease targeted as a danger to the community at large, especially within certain age groups); and 3. the right to decide whether or not they (or their child) should be vaccinated.

I'm sure this is an ideal view of the whole situation to some degree, so I'm open to hearing what the practical difficulties are, or how others' opinions differ.

actually, the pros do outweigh the cons to such an extent that it is negligent to not vaccinate children. this is well established. look up any studies performed to actually get a vaccine to market. it's not like companies are putting out random mixtures of chemicals that will be administered to millions of infants. the protocol to get these out to the public is rigorous beyond belief.

[Tower]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Dude, you've got nothing.

I really suggest you look at the phlalates problem. It should feed your paranoia quite nicely. Hopefully it'll keep you away from any sort of electronic device for a while.

Well, each post you make has an angry tone towards me.... That is not nothing... (see double negative).

Funny thing is almost everyone loves me in person.... Oh well.

[Thor]

I'd be much more concerned about the ever increasing number of chemicals getting into our water and food supply.

Assuming vaccinations are such a big problem when we've got much bigger fish to fry is just nuts.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/poisonedwaters/

A vast array of pharmaceuticals — including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones — have been found in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans, an Associated Press investigation shows.
To be sure, the concentrations of these pharmaceuticals are tiny, measured in quantities of parts per billion or trillion, far below the levels of a medical dose. Also, utilities insist their water is safe.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...ap-water_N.htm

I just think when science has to look at vaccination, its a complex issue since if people are worried about a few shots for children, how does that compare to what those children will grow up with or have been exposed to in the womb.

If the waterways are mutating frogs which are a canary in the cole mine for our water supply, what other possible harmful affects are these new runnoff contaminants doing to the health of all people and especially the development of children.

But a hot hollywood actress takes focus off bigger problems and turns it into all about her and her child, which helps no one.

[joe_mullen]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

So whats the consensus, that no vaccines anywhere are harmful to anyone?

Isnt it possible that doctors are so against the idea that they dont even consider it? And that they are willing to "live" with the 1/million chance of something bad happens.

Jim and Jenny might be Kooks, but that doesnt mean they cannot be right.

all medications have a chance of something bad happening (including "natural" medications). however, the chance that they will do something good vastly outweighs the chance of something bad happening. heck, there is a chance of something bad happening if you cross the street, but you still cross it.

[Tower]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Yes.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio_vaccine (yes, it's wikipedia, so consider the source, but it's a hell of a lot more credible than the wingnut conspiracy theory site you linked earlier)

You can actually find all that stuff in the wingnut article in medical journals. But this topic is getting old. Thisa would be great beer discussion! lol

[Shazam]

Know what's really sad?

I work with an industrial hygenist. So I actually work with someone that has very good knowledge of chemicals that actually do cause real harm to humans.

A big class of them are isocyanates used in car paint (and the clear coat). This is a real problem. Car paint wear offs, and those isocyanates end up in the air, and you breath them in, and they are proven to cause respiratory problems (including asthma). Yet, you never hear anything about this. The car manufacturers have lobbied governments for years to allow them to keep using these chemicals.

There's a whole faction of really rich, powerful people that are really, really happy that "issues" like "VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM" hog the spotlight, thus keeping real problems quiet.

[Tower]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Know what's really sad?

I work with an industrial hygenist. So I actually work with someone that has very good knowledge of chemicals that actually do cause real harm to humans.

A big class of them are isocyanates used in car paint (and the clear coat). This is a real problem. Car paint wear offs, and those isocyanates end up in the air, and you breath them in, and they are proven to cause respiratory problems (including asthma). Yet, you never hear anything about this. The car manufacturers have lobbied governments for years to allow them to keep using these chemicals.

There's a whole faction of really rich, powerful people that are really, really happy that "issues" like "VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM" hog the spotlight, thus keeping real problems quiet.

That's a conspiracy...

For one I never said they cause Autism. I only state that this crap they put in the needle is a danger. If they stopped putting this stuff in the solution I'd be all for it.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Tower

You can actually find all that stuff in the wingnut article in medical journals. But this topic is getting old. Thisa would be great beer discussion! lol

Are you disputing the fact that polio has been all but eradicated by vaccination, or are you conceding the point?

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Peanut

I tend to agree with OBCT. There are risks associated with vaccines, as there are risks with basically all medical interventions. The question seems to be defining the risk (research ongoing but obviously a controversial debate), and then deciding if the benefits outweigh the risks. I think unless some groundbreaking evidence comes out about the side-effects vaccines, it seems the benefits definitely outweigh the risks. Obviously some people feel risks have not been properly identified and therefore outweigh the benefits, so they choose not to vaccinate at all.

Anyways, my point is I don't see the harm in confirming within the medical community what exactly the potential risks are from vaccines. And if basically every kid in North America is being injected with the stuff it can't hurt to double or triple check!

As an aside, I've always been vaccinated for everything but found out recently that I'm still not immune to Rubella for some reason. Odd.

The MMR vaccine is one that has the lowest % of good coverage, at least that is what my pediatrician had told me. He had advised to have my children get the initial vaccination at 1 year, the second in grade school, a third at the end of highschool.

My children never had mumps, measles or rubella.

[driveway]

Prognosis for illnesses and conditions:

Mumps: Painful swelling of the salivary glands and potentially testes. Males infected may become sterile. Death is unusual as the disease is self-limiting.

Measles: Fever, cough, runny nose and rash. Complications are common and range from diarrhea to encephalitis and pneumonia. Death rate is around .3% in developed nations, but approaches 30% in undeveloped nations. Highly contagious (90% of people sharing a house with an infected person will become infected).

Rubella: Rash, joint pains and headache. Contraction by pregnant women is a particular concern as up to 20% of foetuses in these cases will spontaneously abort and congenital rubella syndrome is common in others. Rubella caused over 11,000 miscarriages in the United States during an outbreak in 1964-65. Also, 20,000 cases of CRS which resulted in 2,100 neonate deaths, 12,000 children born deaf, 3,580 blind and 1,200 with a range of cognitive disabilites.

Autism: Impaired social interaction and communication, restricted and repetitive behavior. "Autism" is a broad term which includes a large range of severity and symptoms.

[Tower]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Are you disputing the fact that polio has been all but eradicated by vaccination, or are you conceding the point?

It has not been eradicated

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Tower

That's a conspiracy...

For one I never said they cause Autism. I only state that this crap they put in the needle is a danger. If they stopped putting this stuff in the solution I'd be all for it.

I suspect that if they used water as the base, you'd still be against it.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Tower

It has not been eradicated

That's why I said "all but eradicated". As per that wikipedia link, it's estimated that only 1,300 people worldwide have polio now.

And you didn't answer my question.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Call them kooks all you want and dogpile, but she basically "saved" her kid when the doctors refused to think outside their preconcieved box. Doctors are not perfect, to think they are is "silly".

She says she "saved him". She believes it, but that doesn't make it true.

She also believes that both herself and her child are psychic, advanced human beings on a mission from god.

[Bobblehead]

If you really want to decrease the chances of your kids getting athsma, give them lice.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by Tower

Ha ha ha you crack me up. This topic is not new but you would know that if you did some research... But instead you keep bringing up youtube which I have not linked to in the thread.... Wow.... Nuclear fart, put your head under some blankets and breath deep.

Sigh. I think I gave you too much credit in understanding some of the basic issues here, as it is clear you really don't know what you are talking about.

For your childrens sake, I hope you finish high school biology and then go out and actually read the original papers published on the issue. Rehashing someone else's unfounded webpage opinions as your own certainly doesnt constitute research, and is downright negligent if you are basing the health care decisions of others upon it.