CDC, Vaccines and Autism

[Raglefant]

I reject vaccines because - even though the benefits of vaccines are great - there is a small risk present.

I accept penicillin because - even though there is a small risk present - the benefits of penicillin are great.

A hypocrite is defined as "a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings".

Now you can certainly claim that they have "weighed the risks" but if the risks in two cases are equitable and you reject one but accept the other...you're not really weighing the risks, are you? So it's not the risk...yet that's what Shank has spent many posts arguing. If he wants to argue that the govt shouldn't be "forcing" people to vaccinate, that's a completely different argument. The govt "forces" us to do all kinds of things for the greater good - some of them entail a high level of risk.

Call it whatever you want...but those two stances above are in complete opposition to each other.

Holy shite... the risks are never identical and no matter how bad you are at admitting you're wrong, there will never exist a magical combination of words that make your assertion correct. How similar or even identical the risk may be between any 2 treatments that you cherry pick, the assertion that rejecting one due to your perceived risk requires that you reject all treatments that pose a risk, otherwise you're a hypocrite, is nonsensical.

I'm not saying you're wrong about anything else. You might be right every other time you've ever spoken or written words... but on this specific point you are wrong, and it's not a borderline, could go either way, agree to disagree scenario. It's just dumb. Don't worry, it happens to the best of us. You'll be ok.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Holy shite... the risks are never identical and no matter how bad you are at admitting you're wrong, there will never exist a magical combination of words that make your assertion correct. How similar or even identical the risk may be between any 2 treatments that you cherry pick, the assertion that rejecting one due to your perceived risk requires that you reject all treatments that pose a risk, otherwise you're a hypocrite, is nonsensical.

I'm not saying you're wrong about anything else. You might be right every other time you've ever spoken or written words... but on this specific point you are wrong, and it's not a borderline, could go either way, agree to disagree scenario. It's just dumb. Don't worry, it happens to the best of us. You'll be ok.

Let's play a game. It's called Russian Roulette. You MUST choose between two guns - identical in every way but one. The first gun has one shell in ten chambers. The other has one shell in 1,000 chambers.

Now....play again. The first gun remains the same. The second has one round in 50 chambers.

Give me a scenario where you can claim you have examined the risks in each case and you choose the first gun in one and the second in the other. How does the relative difference in risk matter? If Shank wants to claim that the risks of vaccination outweigh the benefits...and he is...he's flatly wrong. Not up for debate, as you say. But then he turns around and claims he's NOT opposed to vaccines, he just doesn't like the idea of the govt "forcing" them on people.

How about this...a common retort from those who refuse to vaccinate their children is that their children are protected because everybody else's children ARE vaccinated. Hypocrite? No?

As I said, you can call it whatever you want.

 

[Raglefant]

Let's play a game. It's called Russian Roulette. You MUST choose between two guns - identical in every way but one. The first gun has one shell in ten chambers. The other has one shell in 1,000 chambers.

Now....play again. The first gun remains the same. The second has one round in 50 chambers.

Give me a scenario where you can claim you have examined the risks in each case and you choose the first gun in one and the second in the other. How does the relative difference in risk matter? If Shank wants to claim that the risks of vaccination outweigh the benefits...and he is...he's flatly wrong. Not up for debate, as you say. But then he turns around and claims he's NOT opposed to vaccines, he just doesn't like the idea of the govt "forcing" them on people.

How about this...a common retort from those who refuse to vaccinate their children is that their children are protected because everybody else's children ARE vaccinated. Hypocrite? No?

As I said, you can call it whatever you want.

I think I'm FINALLY understanding. You're a retard.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

I think I'm FINALLY understanding. You're a retard.

Golly gee...I'm hurt. Probably best that you bailed.