Vaccines don't cause autism (duh)

[OldDutch]

I think another round of Polio is in order. Ya, we almost eradicated this disease years ago, but obviously our self centred, anti-thinking, fat gaining, moron praising society has naturally lost their immunity to stupidity.

I would be very interested to see how "convicted" these anti-vax morons are if Polio broke out and all their little organic sun beams started dropping like flies into perm paralysis. I am willing to bet the vitamins go out the window, and they are all standing in line ready to kill someone else to get that sweet needle like when Swine Flu hit in 2009.

The thing that aggravates me most, is that they frankly don't care about you, or your baby, or your immune suppressed kid. They care about themselves, and their poor children who are raised by selfish and dim witted parents. Yet if Polio hits again, they will be the first ones to butt in line and cut you off to get their kids protected. We have seen this before, as I mentioned in 2009, and again this year to a degree.

Yes there are the core nuts that never would get it. However, It is the sheer hypocrisy of the fringe anti-vax that are the worst. They play the line between senselessly causing danger, and clogging up our healthcare system when they realize they're wrong. These are the people I seriously hate the most, like a lot of these "Hockey momma bears" out there.

[edn88]

So couple of things:

1. My kid has been recently diagnosed with being borderline ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder).
2. If he does have it, he had the symptoms (lining things up, needing routine) well before any vaccination
3. Based on how they diagnosed him, I am not surprised that there is an increase in Autism over time - some of things they asked about (eye contact, attention to detail, social awkwardness) would have in the past been chalked up to someone being odd, etc. I would guess looking back that many of the kids that I knew with behavioral issues would now be categorized as ASD.
4. The shrink had put him as being borderline – and could have gone the other way (no Autism) but decided to err on the side of caution
5. By being diagnosed as such we get access to increased school and government support
6. I share many of the traits that my son has, and so took an online quiz which shows that I am possible autistic (http://psychcentral.com/quizzes/autism.htm). It is possible that I am autistic, but it seems like the testing paints introverted people as being autistic.
7. I guess my point is, my feeling is the increase in Autism diagnosis comes from an increased awareness of the disorder, but also I think from overly cautious parents, doctors and teachers.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by edn88

7. I guess my point is, my feeling is the increase in Autism diagnosis comes from an increased awareness of the disorder, but also I think from overly cautious parents, doctors and teachers.

That's the sort of logical thinking that anti-vaxxer's don't really like...

[Knut]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/touch/s...tml?id=9711165

Guess who is helping guide the Anti- Vaccination movement ? None other than Chiropractors. This article links to clinics that promote anti-VAx ideas openly on their websites. Pitchforks ?

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Hesla

http://www.calgaryherald.com/touch/s...tml?id=9711165

Guess who is helping guide the Anti- Vaccination movement ? None other than Chiropractors. This article links to clinics that promote anti-VAx ideas openly on their websites. Pitchforks ?

Jesus wept.

"I took a six week course in the office next to the food court, and now I ask people to call me Doctor and play whale sounds in my waiting room. Accepting new patients, so please bring me your infants and pets."

[habernac]

my wife worked for one of those guys. We called him Dr Quack.

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by edn88

So couple of things:

1. My kid has been recently diagnosed with being borderline ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder).
2. If he does have it, he had the symptoms (lining things up, needing routine) well before any vaccination
3. Based on how they diagnosed him, I am not surprised that there is an increase in Autism over time - some of things they asked about (eye contact, attention to detail, social awkwardness) would have in the past been chalked up to someone being odd, etc. I would guess looking back that many of the kids that I knew with behavioral issues would now be categorized as ASD.
4. The shrink had put him as being borderline – and could have gone the other way (no Autism) but decided to err on the side of caution
5. By being diagnosed as such we get access to increased school and government support
6. I share many of the traits that my son has, and so took an online quiz which shows that I am possible autistic (http://psychcentral.com/quizzes/autism.htm). It is possible that I am autistic, but it seems like the testing paints introverted people as being autistic.
7. I guess my point is, my feeling is the increase in Autism diagnosis comes from an increased awareness of the disorder, but also I think from overly cautious parents, doctors and teachers.

I've taken those online tests too, and It's very likely that I'm somewhere on the spectrum too, but I've never been diagnosed. My mom mentions that my favourite thing to do when I was a kid was line up my toy cars, but I doubt she ever considered getting me tested. Apart from social awkwardness and a tendency to get frustrated I was a pretty normal kid. Doctors never mentioned it either and I was often a sick kid. I bet if I was growing up today I'd be
adding to those statistics too.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Hesla

http://www.calgaryherald.com/touch/s...tml?id=9711165

Guess who is helping guide the Anti- Vaccination movement ? None other than Chiropractors. This article links to clinics that promote anti-VAx ideas openly on their websites. Pitchforks ?

There was a support group for parents I was going to for a little while, I quit when they brought in a Chiropractor to discuss ADHD. The parents were all very enthusiastic to hear what he had to say.

I honestly don't blame parents though, our minds need to attribute everything to a cause, even if it is a made up one. We want to see patterns where none exist. We want hope and easy answers when reality can't offer them. I totally get it and have some sympathy for parents that latch on to vaccines or something else.

[photon]

Originally Posted by edn88

I guess my point is, my feeling is the increase in Autism diagnosis comes from an increased awareness of the disorder, but also I think from overly cautious parents, doctors and teachers.

Could be, the article I linked a bit ago talked about differences in diagnosis in the US between races, which implies (assuming biology between races is the same for autism) some of the difference is socioeconomic factors influencing diagnosis rates, and that in some places like Korea there's a more stable diagnostic rate which is probably the actual prevalence in society.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Hesla

http://www.calgaryherald.com/touch/s...tml?id=9711165

Guess who is helping guide the Anti- Vaccination movement ? None other than Chiropractors. This article links to clinics that promote anti-VAx ideas openly on their websites. Pitchforks ?

That's so awesome. Guys who are med school dropouts/failures and who practice pseudo-science giving advice on actual science and medicine?

[Harry Lime]

First of all, I would like to thank MarchHare for answering my question. I asked an honest question, and got an honest answer, which is usually the basis of a rational dialogue. I have not been following this issue as closely as many of you have.

I did look into the history of the banning of Thimerosal, and it was interesting that before the Jenny McCarthy incident, the discussion was primarily between scientists under the pay of "Big Pharma" and scientists questioning the composition of the vaccines themselves. This led to the limiting and elimination of heavy metal aluminum in vaccines and and inquiry into the presence of mercury and squalene. A slow process, encumbered by legalities, but one that eventually seemed to be forcing the production of safer vaccines.

Questioning science shouldn't be confused with rejecting science, or discouraged. If an answer isn't already out there, it's an opportunity to find one.

Originally Posted by strombad

Question Science
Claim to be of a pro-vaccine stance while preaching less criticism of the anti-vax crowd and more criticism of science. Claim critical thinking is important, but can't be bother to think critically about both sides of the argument, so they sit essentially in the middle. Generally untrusting of 'Big Pharm' or regulated bodies that may profit. Science is secondary to critical thinking.

I don't know what I find more bothersome, the anti-vaccine crowd or the pseudo intellectual crowd that praise critical thinking and 'what if' over cold, hard evidence. On one hand, you have the anti-vaccine crowd. Their a fun bunch, similar to (as previously stated) the 'world is flat' group, and 'cigarettes aren't bad at all!' group. Both looked on historically with laughter. On the other? The great 'voices of reason'! Capable, apparently, of greater critical thinking than the general population. Ironically, these people are only actually critical of science, and take a stance that (while not directly defending anti-vaxx) looks more favourably on a position where absolutely no critical thinking is utilised to come to their conclusion (anti-vax) over a position that is the most logically sound with or without critical thinking.

In short, yeah, we get it, you don't trust big pharm but you get vaccinated anyway, clearly you're misunderstanding the conversation if you think you're some how more intellectually sound than pro-vaxx. If anything, you're much closer to the anti-vaxx crowd than the crowd that can ACTUALLY use critical thinking and scientific information to come to their conclusion.

I swear, the "Wow you pro-vaxxers are mean!" crowd would pipe down if we were making fun of someone who said "The sun isn't hot," which, frankly, is about as sound of a claim as "vaccines are more dangerous than not getting them (autism!!!!)".

This sort of thing is non-productive. My distaste for what you coin 'Big Pharma' comes from my own inquiry into the current research and treatment of cancer. An unrelated subject, but with many of the same players.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

This sort of thing is non-productive. My distaste for what you coin 'Big Pharma' comes from my own inquiry into the current research and treatment of cancer. An unrelated subject, but with many of the same players.

I think you missed part of what strombad is saying.

If you question science, think critically and accept the research and evidence you actually fall into the Pro Science camp as questioning and critical thinking are necessary components to scientific research.

If you ask questions and dismiss the answers. If you use logically fallacies under the guise of critical thinking then you fall into the Question Science group.

The question science group is the people who ask questions but ignore answers and claim to think critically.

Those that ask questions and listen to answers and evidence fall into the pro-science crowd.

Perhaps Question Science is a poor descriptor. More like Pretend to be Scientific would be better.

[AC]

Originally Posted by Minnie

Do you and AC need a paper bag?

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

AC, how about you post some of ther articles you talked about.

Hey now, don't drag me into this argument with AcGold.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by strombad

In short, yeah, we get it, you don't trust big pharm but you get vaccinated anyway, clearly you're misunderstanding the conversation if you think you're some how more intellectually sound than pro-vaxx. If anything, you're much closer to the anti-vaxx crowd than the crowd that can ACTUALLY use critical thinking and scientific information to come to their conclusion.

I swear, the "Wow you pro-vaxxers are mean!" crowd would pipe down if we were making fun of someone who said "The sun isn't hot," which, frankly, is about as sound of a claim as "vaccines are more dangerous than not getting them (autism!!!!)".

Actually it goes like this; anyone under any circumstances that speaks from a condescending, self-righteous place loses all credibility instantly.

If a professor is walking in front of a class teaching about relativity and he is insulting people for their stupidity in believing Newtonian mechanics he loses all credibility, same thing here. So go ahead with your rhetoric, slander and condescension as it only closes off all forms of communication between parties.

The only people that are going to listen to you are those who already believe you, even if the pro-vaxxers are 110% correct about everything it doesn't matter if they speak with condescension, they are just about as useful as the illiterate. If you can't speak your opinion without the slander then it's not thought out well enough.

If someone says the sun isn't hot explain fusion reactions, thermal energy and radiation. If they disagree then you tried your best, if you start slinging insults then the conversation is over and it's going to become purely bickering.

People want me to post articles but what's the point? Seriously, anything I post will just be torn apart and I'll be insulted, why in the world would I engage in that? Regardless of their legitimacy there's just no point, your minds are already made up.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by AcGold

Actually it goes like this; anyone under any circumstances that speaks from a condescending, self-righteous place loses all credibility instantly.

If a professor is walking in front of a class teaching about relativity and he is insulting people for their stupidity in believing Newtonian mechanics he loses all credibility, same thing here. So go ahead with your rhetoric, slander and condescension as it only closes off all forms of communication between parties.

The only people that are going to listen to you are those who already believe you, even if the pro-vaxxers are 110% correct about everything it doesn't matter if they speak with condescension, they are just about as useful as the illiterate. If you can't speak your opinion without the slander then it's not thought out well enough.

If someone says the sun isn't hot explain fusion reactions, thermal energy and radiation. If they disagree then you tried your best, if you start slinging insults then the conversation is over and it's going to become purely bickering.

People want me to post articles but what's the point? Seriously, anything I post will just be torn apart and I'll be insulted, why in the world would I engage in that. Regardless of their legitimacy there's just no point, your minds are already made up.

Actually it works like this.......

You came in and said:

Originally Posted by AcGold

Here's my question, and I'd like to know if the vaccine proponents can answer it without insulting me; is it true that the preservatives in the vaccines are cumulative within the body and it is the successive injections that cause problems and not each individual injection? I've heard the argument from atleast a moderately reputable source and want to know if you guys that support vaccines understand and agree/disagree with the idea of cumulative effects. (I'm in the I don't know the answer yet and have an open mind to discussion about it group)

I ask to see the source and you never provided it.


It is you sir, with respect, that is being a Richard.

[burn_this_city]

People who are flagrantly anti-science deserve nothing but derision. Why should we care about hurting their feelings, it's pretty evident they are dangerously stupid.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by AcGold

People want me to post articles but what's the point? Seriously, anything I post will just be torn apart and I'll be insulted, why in the world would I engage in that? Regardless of their legitimacy there's just no point, your minds are already made up.

Then stop, just stop.


Nothing you have said is supported by any evidence, nothing, nothing at all.

[AcGold]

^and I did stop, it wasn't me stirring the pot. Yeesh

I'm not going to give you a reference from a professor because well I don't want anyone contacting him and telling him to die. Go ahead insult me, I really don't care. I'm a dick, you're all correct, I get it. Why don't you just move on? Or you going to post for 20 pages about how wrong I was?

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

People who are flagrantly anti-science deserve nothing but derision. Why should we care about hurting their feelings, it's pretty evident they are dangerously stupid.

because insulting them only emboldens their incorrect beliefs

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by AcGold

^and I did stop, it wasn't me stirring the pot. Yeesh

I'm not going to give you a reference from a professor because well I don't want anyone contacting him and telling him to die. Go ahead insult me, I really don't care. I'm a dick, you're all correct, I get it. Why don't you just move on? Or you going to post for 20 pages about how wrong I was?

Move on from what? A thread with the title I agree with?


You came into this thread, trying to stir up ####, got called and now are upset.


Good, perhaps you might review your position on the subject.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by AcGold

because insulting them only emboldens their incorrect beliefs

Really, because people being polite has not changed yours.....