ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 1st June 2019, 01:43 PM   #201
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,083
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
What's the other side to the story the letter tells?

When you 'argue' with someone, do you present both sides?
1st Bolded: There is not a subject under the sun where only one "side" is the complete sum of the subject.

2nd Bolded:I prefer to review both sides of a question before I come to a conclusion. It's generally accepted by rational parties as the reasonable approach.

You may feel completely comfortable reviewing only the evidence that fits your confirmation bias, but it in no way improves your position. Ignoring the other side of a question does not make contradicting facts vanish.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2019, 01:50 PM   #202
fuelair
Banned
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,582
As to the thread title, probably not - though some will certainly be safer and more effective
than others. This site is one of the best I have ever seen on the overall topic of pharmaceuticals: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/

Derek Lowe is good and interesting and works in the field!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2019, 01:55 PM   #203
fuelair
Banned
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,582
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Short answer: Yes, vaccines are safe.

Longer Answer: Vaccines are safe, and stupid people shouldn't be allowed to make the rules.
And ignorance can be cured - stupid pretty much never can. I am quite certain that is the situation here.

Nor can ******* ery.

Last edited by fuelair; 1st June 2019 at 01:56 PM. Reason: add important note!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2019, 03:03 PM   #204
Itchy Boy
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: CANADA
Posts: 719
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
1st Bolded: There is not a subject under the sun where only one "side" is the complete sum of the subject.

2nd Bolded:I prefer to review both sides of a question before I come to a conclusion. It's generally accepted by rational parties as the reasonable approach.

You may feel completely comfortable reviewing only the evidence that fits your confirmation bias, but it in no way improves your position. Ignoring the other side of a question does not make contradicting facts vanish.
What facts contradict what is said in the letter?
__________________
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled. - unattributed

Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity. - Marshall McLuhan
Itchy Boy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2019, 03:18 PM   #205
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,819
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
https://www.bmj.com/content/338/bmj.b1483.full

"Nine doctors and scientists at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sent a letter to President Barack Obama on 2 April [2009], saying they wanted “to draw your attention to the frustration and outrage that FDA physicians and scientists, public advocacy groups, the press, and the American people, have repeatedly expressed over the misdeeds of FDA officials.”"

"In the letter the scientists and doctors said: “Recent press reports revealed extensive evidence of serious wrongdoing by Dr Andrew von Eschenbach [former FDA commissioner], Dr Frank M Torti [acting FDA commissioner], top FDA attorneys, Center and Office directors, and many others in prominent positions of authority at FDA.""

"The letter added that “many other FDA managers who have failed to protect the American public, who have violated laws, rules, and regulations, who have suppressed or altered scientific or technological findings and conclusions, who have abused their power and authority, and who have engaged in illegal retaliation against those who speak out, have not been held accountable and remain in place.”"
You seem to have a short list of... what exactly? Not what you claim, that's certain.

You need to connect some dots to make this letter meaningful to this discussion:
  • How many management level staff does the FDA have?
  • Of these, how many acted unethically? Who, specifically, were the unethical managers?
  • Of these, were the unethical managers involved with the F (Food) or D (Drug), or the A (administrating) of the FDA?
  • Of these, how many were in the D (Drug) of the FDA,
  • Of these, how many were involved in vaccines? Just for giggles, which specific vaccines?
  • Of these, how did the unethical behavior manifest? Did it affect the vaccines?
  • Of these, how many compromised health of patients?
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']

Last edited by The Greater Fool; 1st June 2019 at 03:45 PM.
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2019, 07:23 PM   #206
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 18,117
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
What facts contradict what is said in the letter?
So, tell me, what's the plan to deal with polio and measles without vaccines? Even if both vaccines aren't as safe as they could be. What is the plan for dealing with these diseases if we don't use vaccines? Both have known, potential side effects but none as bad as getting the disease. What is the public health strategy while we develop risk free vaccines?
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2019, 08:38 PM   #207
wasapi
Philosopher
 
wasapi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,961
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
So, tell me, what's the plan to deal with polio and measles without vaccines? Even if both vaccines aren't as safe as they could be. What is the plan for dealing with these diseases if we don't use vaccines? Both have known, potential side effects but none as bad as getting the disease. What is the public health strategy while we develop risk free vaccines?
Great questions, really. I have no hope of seeing itchy <snip> answer you in any rational way. He will spout in his double-speak, obtuse, ignorant, nonsensical way. And there will be no answer to your rational questions.


Edited by Loss Leader:  Edited for Rules 0/12.
__________________
Julia

Last edited by Loss Leader; 2nd June 2019 at 07:45 PM.
wasapi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2019, 09:30 PM   #208
Axxman300
Illuminator
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 3,800
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
So, tell me, what's the plan to deal with polio and measles without vaccines? Even if both vaccines aren't as safe as they could be. What is the plan for dealing with these diseases if we don't use vaccines? Both have known, potential side effects but none as bad as getting the disease. What is the public health strategy while we develop risk free vaccines?
Just look at how fast measles spreads during an outbreak. They've had to close off entire buildings for days on end. Schools are closed and scrubbed down, I can't imagine the burden on single parents who suddenly have to find day-care.

People don't remember Polio outbreaks, and the terror they caused. Public pools shut down for an entire summer, kids stuck in doors. In the 1970's we had four elementary school teachers with stunted legs caused by the disease, and back then when you saw someone with one crutch, or two with leg-braces you knew they were Polio victims. I was born in 1964, and I think my age group was the last to have Polio casualties. One of the few improvements in our society today is not seeing a 6 year-old with a walker limping off to school.

Who in their right mind would want to return to those days?
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2019, 09:37 PM   #209
fuelair
Banned
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,582
Originally Posted by wasapi View Post
Great questions, really. I have no hope of seeing itchy <snip> answer you in any rational way. He will spout in his double-speak, obtuse, ignorant, nonsensical way. And there will be no answer to your rational questions.
This, indeed this. Anti vaxers/medical treatment avoiders deserve what happens to them. The ones who somehow convince the low knowledge people* that the vaxers feces have no odor need to expire and fertilize the Earth.


*those who listen to fools, tools and ********.



Edited by Loss Leader:  Edited quote to conform.

Last edited by Loss Leader; 2nd June 2019 at 07:46 PM.
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2019, 09:57 PM   #210
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,369
Originally Posted by fuelair View Post
This, indeed this. Anti vaxers/medical treatment avoiders deserve what happens to them. The ones who somehow convince the low knowledge people* that the vaxers feces have no odor need to expire and fertilize the Earth.


*those who listen to fools, tools and ********.
What happens to them I don't care about.
It's what they do to their children, and the effect they have on other people's children by convincing others to follow their idiocies.
Lukraak_Sisser is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2019, 11:57 PM   #211
Itchy Boy
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: CANADA
Posts: 719
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
So, tell me, what's the plan to deal with polio and measles without vaccines? Even if both vaccines aren't as safe as they could be. What is the plan for dealing with these diseases if we don't use vaccines? Both have known, potential side effects but none as bad as getting the disease. What is the public health strategy while we develop risk free vaccines?
Nobody that I'm aware of has ever wanted to ban vaccines.
__________________
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled. - unattributed

Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity. - Marshall McLuhan
Itchy Boy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:38 AM   #212
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 31,027
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
Nobody that I'm aware of has ever wanted to ban vaccines.

How do you tell the difference between someone who actually wants to ban vaccines and someone who just acts as if they want to ban vaccines?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:41 AM   #213
Itchy Boy
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: CANADA
Posts: 719
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
You seem to have a short list of... what exactly? Not what you claim, that's certain.

You need to connect some dots to make this letter meaningful to this discussion:
  • How many management level staff does the FDA have?
  • Of these, how many acted unethically? Who, specifically, were the unethical managers?
  • Of these, were the unethical managers involved with the F (Food) or D (Drug), or the A (administrating) of the FDA?
  • Of these, how many were in the D (Drug) of the FDA,
  • Of these, how many were involved in vaccines? Just for giggles, which specific vaccines?
  • Of these, how did the unethical behavior manifest? Did it affect the vaccines?
  • Of these, how many compromised health of patients?
The 'claim' was made by the 9 FDA doctors and scientists who wrote the letter. I'm simply bringing it to light as another dot that is of concern to a lot of people.
__________________
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled. - unattributed

Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity. - Marshall McLuhan
Itchy Boy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:46 AM   #214
Itchy Boy
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: CANADA
Posts: 719
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
How do you tell the difference between someone who actually wants to ban vaccines and someone who just acts as if they want to ban vaccines?
Someone who wants to ban vaccines would say so.
How do you 'act like you want ban vaccines' when you don't want to ban them, and why would you act so? It doesn't make any sense.
__________________
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled. - unattributed

Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity. - Marshall McLuhan

Last edited by Itchy Boy; 2nd June 2019 at 12:47 AM. Reason: grammar
Itchy Boy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:56 AM   #215
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 31,027
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
Someone who wants to ban vaccines would say so.
How do you 'act like you want ban vaccines' when you don't want to ban them, and why would you act so?

I have no idea why people might act as if they want to ban vaccines if they don’t actually want to ban them, but there are plenty of people who act as if they want to ban vaccines, for example by setting unattainable standards for vaccines they would consider acceptable.

By the way, how exactly do you define “safe as can be”? Is it an absolute standard, or can it change over time as technology improves?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

Last edited by Mojo; 2nd June 2019 at 12:58 AM. Reason: Clarification.
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 01:05 AM   #216
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 31,027
Itchy Boy, do you think vaccines are currently safe enough to make their use acceptable?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 01:37 AM   #217
Itchy Boy
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: CANADA
Posts: 719
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
I have no idea why people might act as if they want to ban vaccines if they don’t actually want to ban them, but there are plenty of people who act as if they want to ban vaccines, for example by setting unattainable standards for vaccines they would consider acceptable.

By the way, how exactly do you define “safe as can be”? Is it an absolute standard, or can it change over time as technology improves?
'Safe as can be' is simply a turn of phrase. I could have said, "as safe as you think", or just "safe" or something else. It wasn't meant to imply any specific standard.

I'm not aware of anyone calling for specific standards. What people are calling for is more data. For example a proper study comparing the fully vaccinated to the unvaccinated. That kind of thing.

People want choice. For the most part, they're not opposed to vaccines for those who want them.

But they don't want to be forced or coerced to vaccinate.
They don't want religious or philosophical exemptions to disappear.
They don't want medical exemptions to be decided by distant bureaucrats instead of their doctor, as is happening in California.

Anyone who wants to ban vaccines outright hasn't thought things through.

If you were long under the misconception that 'anti-vaxxers' want to ban vaccines, might you have some other misconceptions about 'anti-vaxxers'?
__________________
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled. - unattributed

Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity. - Marshall McLuhan

Last edited by Itchy Boy; 2nd June 2019 at 01:52 AM. Reason: clarity
Itchy Boy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 04:12 AM   #218
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 11,646
You want proper studies? https://www.cochrane.org/search/site/vaccines
__________________
"Your deepest pools, like your deepest politicians and philosophers, often turn out more shallow than expected." Walter Scott.
Wudang is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 04:50 AM   #219
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,597
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
What happens to them I don't care about.
It's what they do to their children, and the effect they have on other people's children by convincing others to follow their idiocies.
^ this.

I do hope we can get to having a discussion, in which IB participates, about the implications of collective living, to coin a phrase.

But Iím not sure this SSM&T board is the place to have such a discussion, as it would be far more about ethics, social obligations, etc than about the safety, efficacy, etc of this or that particular vaccine.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 04:51 AM   #220
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,597
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
Nobody that I'm aware of has ever wanted to ban vaccines.
And you made that clear in the OP.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 04:54 AM   #221
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 18,117
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
Nobody that I'm aware of has ever wanted to ban vaccines.
So you're comfortable going on record saying the current vaccines should continue being used until someone comes up with safer vaccines?
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 05:04 AM   #222
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,597
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
'Safe as can be' is simply a turn of phrase. I could have said, "as safe as you think", or just "safe" or something else. It wasn't meant to imply any specific standard.

<snip>
Thanks for the clarification.

Iím curious: why did you wait so long to make this clarification?

I mean, it was obvious, from even the second post in this thread, that it would derail what we now see you had intended to say; that it would create confusion; etc.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 06:44 AM   #223
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,597
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
'Safe as can be' is simply a turn of phrase. I could have said, "as safe as you think", or just "safe" or something else. It wasn't meant to imply any specific standard.

I'm not aware of anyone calling for specific standards. What people are calling for is more data. For example a proper study comparing the fully vaccinated to the unvaccinated. That kind of thing.

People want choice. For the most part, they're not opposed to vaccines for those who want them.

But they don't want to be forced or coerced to vaccinate.
They don't want religious or philosophical exemptions to disappear.
They don't want medical exemptions to be decided by distant bureaucrats instead of their doctor, as is happening in California.

Anyone who wants to ban vaccines outright hasn't thought things through.

If you were long under the misconception that 'anti-vaxxers' want to ban vaccines, might you have some other misconceptions about 'anti-vaxxers'?
I'm trying to understand this.

Here's my current revision of the OP, written to be more in line with this latest post of yours.

I'll start by saying that

I don't oppose vaccines for anyone who wants them for themselves or their children.

and

I have never and would never advise anyone to not vaccinate.

A more accurate moniker than 'anti-vaxxer' would be 'vaccine safety awareness advocate', but I guess that's too much of a mouthful.

I will present evidence that the regulatory agencies responsible for vaccine safety are not properly doing their jobs. Cronyism and conflicts of interest abound.

A study by Harvard estimates that only 1% of vaccine adverse reactions are reported. Even if they're off by a factor of 10, that would still mean 90% of reactions go unreported.

How can safety be properly monitored if only a tiny fraction of reactions are reported?

NOTE: I do not know what the source of this "Harvard estimates" is, and so cannot say anything about its veracity etc.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 07:20 AM   #224
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,819
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
The 'claim' was made by the 9 FDA doctors and scientists who wrote the letter. I'm simply bringing it to light as another dot that is of concern to a lot of people.
The letter, nor the authors, connect their claims to vaccines. YOU made this claim, thus it is your burden to support your claim. Your claim that you have utterly failed to support with anything resembling evidence or rational thought.

One might invoke the oft used "What has this got to do with the price of tea in China" meme to impress upon you that the letter as written bears no link to vaccine safety in the reality that, until recently, one would have assumed we all share.

It is apparent that this thread should be moved to a new forum which allows us to discuss the intricacies of alternate realities where this letter would be of great import while still having no connection to vaccines nor invisible pink rainbow farting unicorns.

But really, are invisible pink rainbow farting unicorns as safe as the could be?
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 07:37 AM   #225
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,185
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
Someone who wants to ban vaccines would say so.
Not unless he fears that by doing so he would be summarily and prejudicially rejected. No, better in that case to make an argument that seems superficially valid and can be eased gently, if necessary, into a more radical stand. One could, for example, purport that there is or ought to be a universal standard of safety that we all agree on, but not define it in concrete terms. Instead use weasel words like "as safe as can be" and ignore all the discussion of what that might really mean. If you get people to agree to that while you keep it nebulous, you can then gradually introduce the concept that the universal standard we've all agreed upon is, in reality, completely unattainable. And therefore that no vaccine meets the standard.

This is a rhetorical technique that lawyers call "extensional pruning." You're not very good at it, because you go caught almost immediately.

Quote:
How do you 'act like you want ban vaccines' when you don't want to ban them, and why would you act so?
To make one's position seem more reasonable than it really is.

Quote:
It doesn't make any sense.
It makes quite a lot of sense considering that your first post in this thread was concerned about being inappropriately labeled. And then in the middle of the thread you expressed a hope that your performance would help others see that ant-vaxxers were reasonable people. Then when a flaw in your reasoning was found, you got all hot and bothered and made scurrilous accusations that everyone else was misrepresenting you, thus trying to push the blame for your failure elsewhere.

You clearly care more about how your argument comes across than about whether it is sound or sensible.
JayUtah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 09:23 AM   #226
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 5,631
It's amazing how people hate and reject good things just because they don't like some authority figure telling them it's good. I'm not saying that is necessarily Itchy Boy's reasoning (I wouldn't know, IB, I personally have a great deal of trouble following your posts), but it IS a driving force behind a massive portion of the anti-vaxx movement and other similar "movements." Oh, authorities are putting fluoride in the water? **** that, then, I'll take my chances with cavities. Oh, they say I have to get my kid a vaccine to join this class? Homeschooling time, I guess - nobody tells ME what to do!

My boyfriend is like this, a little. He's not an anti-vaxxer, but he's paranoid of everything else - fluoride, preservatives in food, psychiatry in general, chemotherapy. We actually almost came to blows once fighting about chemotherapy (well, I was way more worked up than him, I'll admit lol). He brushes his teeth with charcoal. His daughter has all her shots, but I'm not actually sure how he felt about that. I didn't meet him until much later. Maybe it was all the mom's doing. Maybe he IS an anti-vaxxer. I've never been able to get him to directly say that vaccines are cool with him. In fact, he's always adding little caveats like, 'People shouldn't be forced to do anything" instead of answering my questions.

Oh man...
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 10:06 AM   #227
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,598
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
'Safe as can be' is simply a turn of phrase. I could have said, "as safe as you think", or just "safe" or something else. It wasn't meant to imply any specific standard.
It implicitly implies some standard which you are reluctant to identify. Because you know where that leads.

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
I'm not aware of anyone calling for specific standards.
Really? then why do such standards exist if nobody called for them and why do you ignore them?

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
What people are calling for is more data.
And ity matters not how much data is supplied, they will continue to cry for more data. How much more data do you need than the eradication of smallpox by means of vaccinations? Do you understand why a worldwide campaign if smallpox vaccination resulted it the elimination of smallpox to the extent that smallpox vaccinations are no longer necessary or even mandated?

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
For example a proper study comparing the fully vaccinated to the unvaccinated. That kind of thing.
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
People want choice. For the most part, they're not opposed to vaccines for those who want them.
Which would be fine if such a choice only affected themselves, but it doesn't. It affects their children and the children of others. I do not want myself or my children to suffer the "pro-choice" idiocy of the anti-vaxxers. My families health is far more important to me than some internet warrior's mad CT. They can go to hell, directly to hell, do not collect salvation.

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
But they don't want to be forced or coerced to vaccinate.
They don't want religious or philosophical exemptions to disappear.
They don't want medical exemptions to be decided by distant bureaucrats instead of their doctor, as is happening in California.
Sorry, somebodies crank beliefs do not have the right to mess up my kids or anyone else's kids or even their own kids in slavish obedience to stupidity. If some loon decides they do not want vaccinations then as an adult they have every right to so decide. What they don't get is the right to impose that on anyone else. Not me, not my kids, not even their own kids.

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
Anyone who wants to ban vaccines outright hasn't thought things through.
No kidding.

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
If you were long under the misconception that 'anti-vaxxers' want to ban vaccines, might you have some other misconceptions about 'anti-vaxxers'?
Why no. Anti-vaxxers don't want to ban vaccines. They simply want to impose unattainable standards of perfection to them. Surely this is not the same as a ban, right?

You simply will not consider the evidence.

So what evidence do I have? Well, my long deceased mother was one of the final cohort to recieve the smallpox vaccine. Last, because she was at the back of the queue being a member of a low risk cohort. Said vaccine left a permanent scar on her arm. She was permanently scarred by the vaccine. And her opinion of that? "totally worth it." because she witnessed smallpox deaths. She knew at first hand.

Thus she happily went along with the program to eradicate smallpox.

You want to prevent such programs. We could have similarly eradicated polio were it not for people like you. As a matter of fact, polio is resurgent because of people who believe as you do.

That is just a sad indictment that you will simply have to wear as long as you cling to such superstitious nonsense.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 10:18 AM   #228
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,369
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
'Safe as can be' is simply a turn of phrase. I could have said, "as safe as you think", or just "safe" or something else. It wasn't meant to imply any specific standard.

I'm not aware of anyone calling for specific standards. What people are calling for is more data. For example a proper study comparing the fully vaccinated to the unvaccinated. That kind of thing.

People want choice. For the most part, they're not opposed to vaccines for those who want them.

But they don't want to be forced or coerced to vaccinate.

They don't want religious or philosophical exemptions to disappear.
They don't want medical exemptions to be decided by distant bureaucrats instead of their doctor, as is happening in California.

Anyone who wants to ban vaccines outright hasn't thought things through.

If you were long under the misconception that 'anti-vaxxers' want to ban vaccines, might you have some other misconceptions about 'anti-vaxxers'?
If I re-wrote the highlighted bit for people who want the choice to whip their children as a philosophical debate, do you then also believe some 'distant bureaucrat' should not interfere if their local doctor agrees that scarring doesn't kill people?

If not, why is exposing your children to preventable, potentially lethal and/or disfiguring diseases ok?
Lukraak_Sisser is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 10:18 AM   #229
Itchy Boy
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: CANADA
Posts: 719
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
So you're comfortable going on record saying the current vaccines should continue being used until someone comes up with safer vaccines?
Yes.
__________________
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled. - unattributed

Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity. - Marshall McLuhan
Itchy Boy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 10:22 AM   #230
Itchy Boy
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: CANADA
Posts: 719
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
The letter, nor the authors, connect their claims to vaccines. YOU made this claim, thus it is your burden to support your claim. Your claim that you have utterly failed to support with anything resembling evidence or rational thought.

One might invoke the oft used "What has this got to do with the price of tea in China" meme to impress upon you that the letter as written bears no link to vaccine safety in the reality that, until recently, one would have assumed we all share.

It is apparent that this thread should be moved to a new forum which allows us to discuss the intricacies of alternate realities where this letter would be of great import while still having no connection to vaccines nor invisible pink rainbow farting unicorns.

But really, are invisible pink rainbow farting unicorns as safe as the could be?
If you don't think the systemic problems at the FDA can affect vaccine safety, fine.
Others don't share your optimism there.
__________________
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled. - unattributed

Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity. - Marshall McLuhan
Itchy Boy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 10:35 AM   #231
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,598
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
It's amazing how people hate and reject good things just because they don't like some authority figure telling them it's good.
This is something I struggle with personally. My eldest will be 17 in August. Nevertheless, my ex confiscates his phone a 9:30 pm. Every night. WTF? So just yesterday, I asked when mom is going to stop with this nonsense and his response was "Never. In her eyes, I will always be a child."

So I asked why the hell don't you stand up to that ********? And he said "Because she has said she would chuck me out on the street if I did."

To which I replied, "Err, you know you have a bed in my place anytime you want, right?"

And his reply? Mom would be offended.

Now, like myself, he is an outright atheist. Not any of my doing, it simply happened by dint of sheer logic.

But one can observe how religiosity sneaks into every thought.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 10:54 AM   #232
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,732
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
If you don't think the systemic problems at the FDA can affect vaccine safety, fine.
Others don't share your optimism there.
You haven't established that there are systemic problems at the FDA. Given that everything you've ever posted as been some kind of lie (cherry picking, quote mining, outright lying by simply making stuff up have all appeared in your posts) we have no reason to believe you've represented this letter accurately.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 11:56 AM   #233
Elvis666
Critical Thinker
 
Elvis666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 377
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
So what evidence do I have? Well, my long deceased mother was one of the final cohort to recieve the smallpox vaccine. Last, because she was at the back of the queue being a member of a low risk cohort. Said vaccine left a permanent scar on her arm. She was permanently scarred by the vaccine. And her opinion of that? "totally worth it." because she witnessed smallpox deaths. She knew at first hand
I still have a smallpox scar on my upper arm. It is very faint, but it's there. Everyone in my age group that I know had one, it was very much visible when we were kids.
__________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
Elvis666 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:03 PM   #234
Itchy Boy
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: CANADA
Posts: 719
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
This is something I struggle with personally. My eldest will be 17 in August. Nevertheless, my ex confiscates his phone a 9:30 pm. Every night. WTF? So just yesterday, I asked when mom is going to stop with this nonsense and his response was "Never. In her eyes, I will always be a child."

So I asked why the hell don't you stand up to that ********? And he said "Because she has said she would chuck me out on the street if I did."

To which I replied, "Err, you know you have a bed in my place anytime you want, right?"

And his reply? Mom would be offended.

Now, like myself, he is an outright atheist. Not any of my doing, it simply happened by dint of sheer logic.

But one can observe how religiosity sneaks into every thought.
Many, including social/psychology experts and ex Silicon Valley leaders, are speaking out about cell phone addiction, and how phones and social media are destroying the fabric of society and rewiring people's brains [ed: especially the young].
__________________
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled. - unattributed

Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity. - Marshall McLuhan

Last edited by Itchy Boy; 2nd June 2019 at 12:06 PM.
Itchy Boy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:17 PM   #235
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,597
I think I've allowed enough time to pass for you, IB, to respond.

The first part of your post (that I'm quoting) I've already responded to. This is about the second part.

Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
<snip>

People want choice. For the most part, they're not opposed to vaccines for those who want them.
I really do not know what you intend by this. On the one hand it seems totally anodyne; on another, a waste of words.

Quote:
But they don't want to be forced or coerced to vaccinate.
Well, clearly this is total nonsense. If only because some people are quite happy to be so forced or coerced.

Is it worth having a discussion about the some people who do not wish to be forced or coerced?

Quote:
They don't want religious or philosophical exemptions to disappear.
They don't want medical exemptions to be decided by distant bureaucrats instead of their doctor, as is happening in California.

<snip>
As above.

I have no doubt that some people don't want religious or philosophical exemptions to disappear, and some people don't want medical exemptions to be decided by distant bureaucrats instead of their doctor.

Fine.

Those people live in the US (nowhere have I read, in all your posts IB, that you have any concern about people who do not live in the US). Like everyone who lives in the US, their freedom is not absolute.

When it comes to vaccinations, it may be that they are free to decide to not get any vaccine.

However, with such a decision comes consequences ... perhaps they will not be permitted to board an airplane flying to another country? A Greyhound bus going to a different state? Perhaps they will be treated very differently if they turn up at an ER (with symptoms of Ebola, say, or smallpox) than everyone else?

But perhaps we're not even discussing the main thing ... perhaps what you intend has to do with some parents not wanting to let their kids get this or that vaccine (whether due to religious or philosophical considerations, or pure whim)?

If this is even a small part of what you intend, please be honest enough to say so. Explicitly.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:22 PM   #236
Itchy Boy
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: CANADA
Posts: 719
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
It's amazing how people hate and reject good things just because they don't like some authority figure telling them it's good. I'm not saying that is necessarily Itchy Boy's reasoning (I wouldn't know, IB, I personally have a great deal of trouble following your posts), but it IS a driving force behind a massive portion of the anti-vaxx movement and other similar "movements." Oh, authorities are putting fluoride in the water? **** that, then, I'll take my chances with cavities. Oh, they say I have to get my kid a vaccine to join this class? Homeschooling time, I guess - nobody tells ME what to do!

My boyfriend is like this, a little. He's not an anti-vaxxer, but he's paranoid of everything else - fluoride, preservatives in food, psychiatry in general, chemotherapy. We actually almost came to blows once fighting about chemotherapy (well, I was way more worked up than him, I'll admit lol). He brushes his teeth with charcoal. His daughter has all her shots, but I'm not actually sure how he felt about that. I didn't meet him until much later. Maybe it was all the mom's doing. Maybe he IS an anti-vaxxer. I've never been able to get him to directly say that vaccines are cool with him. In fact, he's always adding little caveats like, 'People shouldn't be forced to do anything" instead of answering my questions.

Oh man...
Many, if not most of the technical and social advances throughout history have been the result of questioning 'authority'.
__________________
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled. - unattributed

Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity. - Marshall McLuhan
Itchy Boy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:25 PM   #237
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 5,631
Deleted, thought I was responding to a different person

Last edited by isissxn; 2nd June 2019 at 12:26 PM.
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:29 PM   #238
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 5,631
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
Many, if not most of the technical and social advances throughout history have been the result of questioning 'authority'.
There's a difference between an "authority" like a mighty, bossy king and "authority" as in a massive body of agreeing scientific research. Questioning stuff like the first is great. Questioning stuff like the second often leads you into the realm of the unrealistically paranoid.
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:32 PM   #239
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,819
Originally Posted by Itchy Boy View Post
If you don't think the systemic problems at the FDA can affect vaccine safety, fine.

Others don't share your optimism there.
"Can" <> "Does."

"Others" is a very thin veil under which to express your own opinions.

Let's strip away the veil of ignorance here:

Have you actually read the letter?
No, you haven't.
Further, as you are proud to admit, you have no grasp of medical science to understand the letter contents. This, however, does not stop your opinions, does it.

We're talking about the Food & Drug Administration, right? So, this letter criticized the FDA based on food, right?
Nope, not food. No surprise there, right? We are talking 9 Doctors, after all, not 9 Grocers.

So, it's drugs [and Vaccines], right?

Let's get down to it... Which drugs were specifically mentioned in the letter?
The first drug is.... Plan B

What medical aspect of this drug that was problematic, and how large was the health risk?
There was no medical issue.
It was political pressure from the previous Republican administration that the FDA gave in to.

Which other drugs, either individually or as a group, were raised as issues?
None.
Really, NONE.

Which vaccines were issues?
None. Is anyone surprised?

So, if it wasn't food, drugs, or vaccines, what raised the ire of these 9 medical professionals?
Devices. The 3 or 4 examples are of medical devices.

Obviously, not one issue was the medical harm of drugs [or vaccines]. Should this letter cause any rational person to be concerned about vaccines? The obvious answer is "No", except for young men who scratch.
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 12:37 PM   #240
Itchy Boy
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: CANADA
Posts: 719
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
There's a difference between an "authority" like a mighty, bossy king and "authority" as in a massive body of agreeing scientific research. Questioning stuff like the first is great. Questioning stuff like the second often leads you into the realm of the unrealistically paranoid.
True. And it's precisely the second that leads to major advances.
The first really only affects people on a personal level.
__________________
It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled. - unattributed

Only the small secrets need to be protected. The large ones are kept secret by public incredulity. - Marshall McLuhan
Itchy Boy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:34 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.