For You Anti-Vaxxers...
- Thread starter NoleATL
- Start date
You aren’t in a position as a mandatory reporter, are you?
Last edited:
The lefties are all worked up about anti vaccine folks, which they should be and people should be vaccinated. Yet, when it comes to people coming into the country it is like, meh, who cares if they bring something in or if they have been vaccinated.
Minneapolis had measles problems last year because the folks from Somali would not get vaccinated because of religious beliefs.
Makes no sense to me that you wouldn't want a strong border just for this reason.
Minneapolis had measles problems last year because the folks from Somali would not get vaccinated because of religious beliefs.
Makes no sense to me that you wouldn't want a strong border just for this reason.
Need to build that wall to stop the Somalis, from Somali.
HROT anti-vax hate group starts out threads like:
Then when it comes to debating vaccine safety where anyone and everyone is free to share their brilliant ideas as to why they feel so strongly about this issue everyone is like:
HROT anti-vax hate group starts out threads like:
Then when it comes to debating vaccine safety where anyone and everyone is free to share their brilliant ideas as to why they feel so strongly about this issue everyone is like:
You've been so thoroughly defeated time and time again on this it's become a meme. 'grats, brah.
Hey it's the guy who never posts any productive ideas in the debate threads, rather worthless hateful mud slinging. 'grats, brah.
And you're delusional if you think it's my end that's been defeated. Sorry but the threads are still there, just the way we left them.
Last edited:
Good thing mumps only effects the testicles and sperm production. Fortunately for you,my medical opinion tells me mumps has no impact on dick heat.
Herd immunity? Here, read this (anyone) then come back and tell me what you think is wrong with it.
https://jbhandleyblog.com/home/2018/6/7/herd-immunity-a-dishonest-marketing-gimmick
JB Handley has been discredited time and time again. He has no scientific background and is widely regarded outside the anti-vaxxer community as a crackpot.
I am not against vaccines, I am against the idea of forced and mandatory vaccines.
Go ahead and get yourselves and your loved ones poked silly. The 'science', as naturalborn has repeatedly shown over the years, is nothing more than Marketing 101.
https://slate.com/health-and-scienc...made-it-harder-to-properly-assess-safety.html
Go ahead and get yourselves and your loved ones poked silly. The 'science', as naturalborn has repeatedly shown over the years, is nothing more than Marketing 101.
https://slate.com/health-and-scienc...made-it-harder-to-properly-assess-safety.html
This is completely false. Anyone who even casually follows the debates here should know that Handley has not been discredited. I've posted several articles of his here, and every single time there is no response to them. See your post (exhibit A), and the last vaccination debate thread (exhibit B): https://iowa.forums.rivals.com/thre...now-the-difference.231438/page-3#post-5430542 (post 92). There are more, and nobody ever replies to them. If you folks (or anyone else on the internet) does not have a counter for the specific ideas that are brought to the table, then that is the opposite of "discredited". People, take the time to research it, actually read the article, come back and post ideas that counter what is being said. That is the way debate works and the members of this forum are either too lazy to look into it - or can't counter the ideas. I have a feeling it's a lot of both.
LMAO.................He's been discredited time and time again. Now, he's gone on to say this, "no study shows that vaccines didn't cause my son's autism".........this kind of logic tells me all I need to know about this idiot.
Last edited:
Sometimes I wonder if people are just posting stupid stuff on purpose just for humor's sake, because nobody who's been following the debate could possibly hope to increase their position by posting the above links.
You linked a website that says that MMR doesn't cause autism. MMR....really? Then you linked a video of a doctor who says that the science is settled.
The most amazing part about your post is that you're the very next poster under this post (below) from the last vaccine thread. A post that addressed every one of your links - that you certainly had an opportunity to respond to in the last thread, but didn't:
(Responding to Joe) You are completely delusional. And I'll prove it to you right now. Let's recap what this debate has come to.
First of off, 1 vaccine and 1 ingredient has been "thoroughly" studied (albeit very poorly, as we've learned in previous debates). Let this chart sink in:
Now let's stop right there. What don't you (and others) understand about this chart? It's been posted in several of our last debates, uncontested in this forum and I've seen it uncontested in other debates as well, yet people will still insistthat vaccines are safe and the science is settled. Unconscionable. Settled? Complete rubbish. 95% of it is yet to begin. Until contested, this chart ends the debate about whether the science is settled. Period.
Now we've been focusing on one of those ingredients that hasn't been thoroughly studied - aluminum. It is a fact that regulatory agencies are using oral rodent models to determine the safe levels of aluminum for pediatric dosing. As indicated in the study I posted earlier in this thread, the study that the FDA references (Mitkus's) has several major flaws in it, thoroughly explained in the interview of the lead author that was also posted. In other words, the Mitkus study is complete garbage and so is any study that uses an oral model to determine safe dosing for pediatric intramuscular injection. It's intuitively not legit because not only are methods of entry completely different, but you'd also expect other differences in the mechanisms involved in the exit as well. A child in elementary school will know that's not good science. Now- not only is this intuitively completely bunk, but there is recent science that indicates that unlike oral dosing where the body excretes everything but a small fraction (.03% or so) of the aluminum rather rapidly, injected aluminum hangs around for much longer periods of time and absorbed by macrophages at the injection site and from there can and does go to the brain. All of this is very thoroughly explained here, complete with all links to all studies:https://jbhandleyblog.com/home/2018/4/1/international2018
Joe- if there is anything I said here is "disinformation", then you need to 1) identify any of those items and 2) provide scientific proof that it is/may be incorrect. In other words, rather than pointing out how stupid I am for not being able to navigate the AMA website, how about you focus on something that is relevant for a change. Also, quit hiding behind your old lie that you've already explained it because you never have - not once. If your next post quoting this post is garbage as usual and doesn't counter the above information, then this information stands and cannot be labeled as "disinformation". In addition, if you or anyone else on the planet can't contest this then there is no debate. That means: 1) the science is not settled, rather highly questionable and, 2) aluminum adjuvant (amongst other things) may be causing damage in our children's brains, thus putting millions of children at risk.
Here, allow me show you what child abuse is. Watch it and then I'd love for you to come back here and let us know how important mandatory vaccination really is. 01:45 to 29:40:
And then there's this CDC website link you provided. It's featured in this video. Check this out:
5:20 - 7:23
https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/vaccine-safety-project-video-trailer/
Last edited:
There's a pattern developing here that needs to be addressed.
1) Someone starts a vaccine thread and HROT is like....
2) Then I (and others) come in to try to challenge the ideas of the mass of rowdys and we get this....
And a little of this....
3) Notice the ideas are left standing, with absolutely no answer to them at all. The threads are still there, go back and look for yourselves. There are so many examples of points that are completely untouched and extremely damning to the idea that vaccines are safe. I could probably point out about 10-15 of them in the last vaccine thread alone. Here: https://iowa.forums.rivals.com/threads/hiv-and-hpv-does-trump-know-the-difference.231438/
Some are in the post above in post # 62, specifically. Someone challenge me and I'll post them all here for you nice and neat for you all to sit and look at them like gif # 2 again.
4) The links provided by anyone in gif #1 are addressed. Example: Post #s 62 and 64 of this thread. Notice again, we have no answer, like gif #2.
5) Then comments like this are/will be made:
Rubbish. You are lying. Untouched. Every. Single. Time. If not, then your next post should be able to provide examples of points that I've posted regarding vaccine safety that have been discredited.
People grow tired of your Gish Gallops.
I posted the correct data of your "measles" mess, convoluting British with American data to try and make your case. I got utter crickets. Nothing.
Doctors vaccinate their own kids. Pediatricians, more importantly, do too. And all major medical organizations assert it is safe and it is necessary.
Maybe some people are tired of this debate, but I was paged here man.
This is not vaccine safety related. You had a huge list of things to choose from to try to discredit, but you keep going back to this, which speaks volumes about the legitimacy of the safety concerns. You keep going back to it because it's your one lone catch out of a 9 page article, out of 15 or so debate threads probably averaging 7-8 pages each. Well done Joe.
Oh so just....trust. How many times have people been burned throughout history because they just trusted the authoritative position?
People/organizations in authority have said:
Lead isn't unhealthy
tobacco is not unhealthy
asbestos is not unhealthy
margarine is healthy
The food pyramid is correct
cell phones are completely safe (that one's for you Joe)
This is just a fraction from the laundry list of health related items off the top of my head. Only a complete fool will ignore the history and just trust authoritative position w/o knowing why, especially when the stakes are so high, you have good correlations, and such massive amounts of supporting evidence. The wise will know their history and know that it took years to sort out every single one of the above controversial topics, some are still being sorted.
And those Pediatricians. Have they taken the time out of their busy schedule to look into all this for themselves, after having gone through school and continuing education telling them nothing but vaccines are 100% safe? Looks like the survey you were quoting from a couple threads ago is older than some of the new science that's come out implicating a possible connection between autism and aluminum adjuvant. Or, maybe they realized the dangers, but felt the survey wasn't/might not be completely anonymous? I don't know any of these things for sure, so I sure as hell am not going to just trust all these things are shooting completely straight.
Google definition: Gish Gallop is a technique, named after the creationist Duane Gish who employed it, whereby someone argues a cause by hurling as many different half-truths and no-truths into a very short space of time so that their opponent cannot hope to combat each point in real time.
Shouldn't the term gish gallop be reserved for oral communication since you have the freedom to take what bits you want and address them as you have time on the message board format? Even though you don't do it....
Not being confrontational. The anti-vax people I know personally also go to a chiropractor to cure a common cold and rub oregano oil on their feet for health or something. Are you a homeopathy guy across the board or just anti whatever on this specific subject. This is an important distinction.
I understand that all of this is easily refuted. Can someone provide the link to that thread, source, or nutshell it here? Tia.Sometimes I wonder if people are just posting stupid stuff on purpose just for humor's sake, because nobody who's been following the debate could possibly hope to increase their position by posting the above links.
You linked a website that says that MMR doesn't cause autism. MMR....really? Then you linked a video of a doctor who says that the science is settled.
The most amazing part about your post is that you're the very next poster under this post (below) from the last vaccine thread. A post that addressed every one of your links - that you certainly had an opportunity to respond to in the last thread, but didn't:
(Responding to Joe) You are completely delusional. And I'll prove it to you right now. Let's recap what this debate has come to.
First of off, 1 vaccine and 1 ingredient has been "thoroughly" studied (albeit very poorly, as we've learned in previous debates). Let this chart sink in:
Now let's stop right there. What don't you (and others) understand about this chart? It's been posted in several of our last debates, uncontested in this forum and I've seen it uncontested in other debates as well, yet people will still insistthat vaccines are safe and the science is settled. Unconscionable. Settled? Complete rubbish. 95% of it is yet to begin. Until contested, this chart ends the debate about whether the science is settled. Period.
Now we've been focusing on one of those ingredients that hasn't been thoroughly studied - aluminum. It is a fact that regulatory agencies are using oral rodent models to determine the safe levels of aluminum for pediatric dosing. As indicated in the study I posted earlier in this thread, the study that the FDA references (Mitkus's) has several major flaws in it, thoroughly explained in the interview of the lead author that was also posted. In other words, the Mitkus study is complete garbage and so is any study that uses an oral model to determine safe dosing for pediatric intramuscular injection. It's intuitively not legit because not only are methods of entry completely different, but you'd also expect other differences in the mechanisms involved in the exit as well. A child in elementary school will know that's not good science. Now- not only is this intuitively completely bunk, but there is recent science that indicates that unlike oral dosing where the body excretes everything but a small fraction (.03% or so) of the aluminum rather rapidly, injected aluminum hangs around for much longer periods of time and absorbed by macrophages at the injection site and from there can and does go to the brain. All of this is very thoroughly explained here, complete with all links to all studies:https://jbhandleyblog.com/home/2018/4/1/international2018
Joe- if there is anything I said here is "disinformation", then you need to 1) identify any of those items and 2) provide scientific proof that it is/may be incorrect. In other words, rather than pointing out how stupid I am for not being able to navigate the AMA website, how about you focus on something that is relevant for a change. Also, quit hiding behind your old lie that you've already explained it because you never have - not once. If your next post quoting this post is garbage as usual and doesn't counter the above information, then this information stands and cannot be labeled as "disinformation". In addition, if you or anyone else on the planet can't contest this then there is no debate. That means: 1) the science is not settled, rather highly questionable and, 2) aluminum adjuvant (amongst other things) may be causing damage in our children's brains, thus putting millions of children at risk.
I'm a homeopathic guy to a certain extent because I've witnessed first hand its value, but on the other hand I understand that modern medicine has it's place and I understand how vitally important it is in those many areas. I'm going to keep my posts focused on vaccines, however.
Last edited:
Nope. There were DOZENS of lies and inconsistencies.
That's why it's a Gish Gallop.
Same thing with the "safety" issues.
The science of testing safety these drugs is based on absolute fraud - the vast majority of researchers don't even disclose what's actually in their placebos. Also, from Slate article I posted above, test subjects that suffered debilitating side effects from their Gardisil injections had these symptoms added to their 'medical history' and were not included as verified reactions to the shots. Fraud.Sometimes I wonder if people are just posting stupid stuff on purpose just for humor's sake, because nobody who's been following the debate could possibly hope to increase their position by posting the above links.
You linked a website that says that MMR doesn't cause autism. MMR....really? Then you linked a video of a doctor who says that the science is settled.
The most amazing part about your post is that you're the very next poster under this post (below) from the last vaccine thread. A post that addressed every one of your links - that you certainly had an opportunity to respond to in the last thread, but didn't:
(Responding to Joe) You are completely delusional. And I'll prove it to you right now. Let's recap what this debate has come to.
First of off, 1 vaccine and 1 ingredient has been "thoroughly" studied (albeit very poorly, as we've learned in previous debates). Let this chart sink in:
Now let's stop right there. What don't you (and others) understand about this chart? It's been posted in several of our last debates, uncontested in this forum and I've seen it uncontested in other debates as well, yet people will still insistthat vaccines are safe and the science is settled. Unconscionable. Settled? Complete rubbish. 95% of it is yet to begin. Until contested, this chart ends the debate about whether the science is settled. Period.
Now we've been focusing on one of those ingredients that hasn't been thoroughly studied - aluminum. It is a fact that regulatory agencies are using oral rodent models to determine the safe levels of aluminum for pediatric dosing. As indicated in the study I posted earlier in this thread, the study that the FDA references (Mitkus's) has several major flaws in it, thoroughly explained in the interview of the lead author that was also posted. In other words, the Mitkus study is complete garbage and so is any study that uses an oral model to determine safe dosing for pediatric intramuscular injection. It's intuitively not legit because not only are methods of entry completely different, but you'd also expect other differences in the mechanisms involved in the exit as well. A child in elementary school will know that's not good science. Now- not only is this intuitively completely bunk, but there is recent science that indicates that unlike oral dosing where the body excretes everything but a small fraction (.03% or so) of the aluminum rather rapidly, injected aluminum hangs around for much longer periods of time and absorbed by macrophages at the injection site and from there can and does go to the brain. All of this is very thoroughly explained here, complete with all links to all studies:https://jbhandleyblog.com/home/2018/4/1/international2018
Joe- if there is anything I said here is "disinformation", then you need to 1) identify any of those items and 2) provide scientific proof that it is/may be incorrect. In other words, rather than pointing out how stupid I am for not being able to navigate the AMA website, how about you focus on something that is relevant for a change. Also, quit hiding behind your old lie that you've already explained it because you never have - not once. If your next post quoting this post is garbage as usual and doesn't counter the above information, then this information stands and cannot be labeled as "disinformation". In addition, if you or anyone else on the planet can't contest this then there is no debate. That means: 1) the science is not settled, rather highly questionable and, 2) aluminum adjuvant (amongst other things) may be causing damage in our children's brains, thus putting millions of children at risk.
http://www.academia.edu/2947098
/Whats_in_placebos_who_knows_Analysis_of_randomized_controlled_trials
No, it's not.
What you find on random internet sites is 'fraud'.
What is on the AMA and other medical sites is legit. Learn the differences.
You're absolutely right. I don't get what people don't understand about not using true placebos. Those studies should be immediately taken out of the category of science and into the category of stupid. The fact that they don't even disclose what's in the placebos is outlandish.
