Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because its the same group of people being referenced over and over again, one anti-vaxxer will cite another and that one will cite that guy and on and on it goes, the problem is that many of these people are extremely lacking in their particular fields, don't have much research experience or credibility to support their claims. I keep seeing the same exact names pop up repeatedly and many of these "expert" sources have been laughed out of their fields or are considered to be quacks.
Having an education of some kind doesn't mean a whole lot on its own. You can have a PhD and still be lost in the sauce and largely incompetent, we see people like this showing up in courtrooms as "rent-an-experts", testifying to things that even they should know simply aren't true. There's plenty of educated people out there happy to claim all sorts of things if the price is right. The vast majority of the body of scientists across the world support the idea of climate change, with an overwhelming body of data behind it but you still find quite a few scientists using shoddy research, often taking funding from...."interested parties" who will deny it to their last breath.
The Godfather of the anti-vax movement, Andrew Wakefield, was happy to peddle study results to try and cash in on legal fees.
Actual research is hard, it isnt always profitable, people with over a decade of higher level education will often struggle to get by, but hey, you can always make a quick buck by playing up to peoples fears, claiming things that you know aren't true and then selling a book, a video or demanding hefty speaking fees, taking money from law firms, all the better to cash in with.
Actually, research takes grants. Most grants are from BIG SPENDERS like pharmaceutical companies or Gov't. Why should you think they would debunk any science? Um they don't because they want to keep their grants. If they come up with something other than what the company/Gov't wants then they have zero money to put in the bank and continue research. That is the problem with research today. Either you come up with the conclusions they want or they don't fund your research!
Depends on what the PhD is in and what work the person has done. The latter is ditto for the MDs, too. A doc Who has absolutely NO experience in vaccines is not the one to go to for vaccine information, any more than you'd ask a ped for advice about Alzheimers.
And no, engineers don't know about vaccines unless they have done some special studies outside of school.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
LOL! You have seriously misread my posts!
How did I misread? Let me know because I'm not perfect.
You said there are people (like me and engineers) that can't possibly know about vaccines... Are you saying we can comprehend the immunological consequences of vaccines?
I have never eaten fish... not once in my life... I don't do seafood either. No one in my family eats tuna.. ever.
I do have family members that once or twice a year love to eat crab... not me.
Back to my point... why did the hospital go to the trouble and expense to remove any item with mercury and state there is no safe level for mercury exposure???
They cannot have it both ways... and I called them on it.
The amount of mercury in the childhood vaccination schedule recommended by the CDC exceeded all national and global maximum safety limits, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the United States Public Health Service called for the immediate removal of Thimerosal from all vaccines on July 7, 1999. But, with the new vaccines I think there is more in them now then before the removal. HINI I believe has it. You have to check and make sure you get the ones without it.
They are still recommending vaccines with Thimerosal to pregnant women and young children which young children by weight should not be having in conjunction with any other mercury. Plus mercury can cause birth defects, levels to be determined by patient prior. I've never heard a doctor say to a pregnant woman about to get a shot with Mercury, "have you tested to see how much Mercury you are already getting from your diet?" So, people have to take their health into their own hands, which is expected of the consumer.
And, I might add like others have said it all depends on how much they already have stored in their bodies if they will be injured from it or not. Last time I checked they don't test for that before vaccinating children with H1N1 or any other Thirmerosal containing vaccine. It's pretty much left up to the consumer now (I guess in CA they aren't consumers anymore) to determine safety for them individually for the each product they consume.
In a perfect world it would be the only exposure you're getting but..........no such world.
Actually, research takes grants. Most grants are from BIG SPENDERS like pharmaceutical companies or Gov't. Why should you think they would debunk any science? Um they don't because they want to keep their grants. If they come up with something other than what the company/Gov't wants then they have zero money to put in the bank and continue research. That is the problem with research today. Either you come up with the conclusions they want or they don't fund your research!
That's the beautiful thing about science, any findings made in one study, should easily be replicated by researchers pretty much anywhere else across the globe. If data is manipulated, the truth will come out, like in the case of Wakefield and his fake austim connection or the case of the South Korean geneticist who made up a bunch of data in his stem cell research and was swiftly exposed.
What the vast majority of medical institutions and scientists from all across the globe have found is that vaccinations are A. helpful and B. safe.
That's the beautiful thing about science, any findings made in one study, should easily be replicated by researchers pretty much anywhere else across the globe. If data is manipulated, the truth will come out, like in the case of Wakefield and his fake austim connection or the case of the South Korean geneticist who made up a bunch of data in his stem cell research and was swiftly exposed.
What the vast majority of medical institutions and scientists from all across the globe have found is that vaccinations are A. helpful and B. safe.
However, I am a scientist... I studied extensively in microbiology and biochemistry. Can I replicate the study? No... why? No funding. Even if I wanted to, I don't have the funds. This is a problem with studies. The one who has the most money has the studies.
I can say that when I do the comparison of methyl mercury breakdown in the body due to digestion that it can be safely excreted 90% of the time and I can say that ethyl mercury injected cannot be safely excreted at all, especially when combined with a known brain-blood barrier crosser like polysorbate 80. But who cares what I say... I don't have funding. Funding will never be granted to someone likely to disprove that vaccines are safe and effective.
Cipro is pretty standard as a treatment, when I deployed to Iraq, along with a NAAK kit,I was given a Costco-sized bag of Cipro.....it came in beautifully when we all came down with cholera.
It's standard for anthrax because when they were making a list of what Cipro could do, someone at Bayer added 'anthrax' to the list, which wasn't done for penicillin or doxycycline. Because of that, the FDA approves Cipro only for anthrax, despite the fact that penicillin and doxycycline will treat it better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj
Cholera can be treated with fluids and nutrition. There is also a vaccine for it... did you not get the vaccine?
You still don't understand the difference between treating the disease and treating the symptoms, do you? When you treat cholera with fluids, you are treating the symptoms and only giving supportive care, not treating the disease. This is fine, as long as the disease isn't especially virulent and continues to attack the person faster than you can rehydrate them. If that happens, the person with cholera is going to die, no matter how much fluid you give them. And if they're that sick and have that much diarrhea, they're sure not going to feel like eating, so that puts paid to your nutrition attempt.
Try to keep in mind that supporting care was all that was available for the first three or four thousand years of our fight with disease. Think about it: if all your natural remedies work so well, why did we turn to antibiotics and vaccines to begin with? Answer: because they DIDN'T work that well. Thousands of people died. All the time, every day.
And why are you asking if he got the vaccine? Aren't you the one who thinks vaccines are evil?
Last edited by rodentraiser; 07-17-2015 at 09:40 PM..
I have a problem believing that. Most scientists respect the work other scientists do. From what you say, it seems the only work you respect is your own. Not one of the thosands of other scientists who have found vaccines safe and effective make an impression on you? And as a "scientist', you can't tell the difference between junk science and real science?
As I asked earlier, if I brought in a physicist who could show you the equations and chemical changes the sun goes through during nuclear fusion, would you believe them? Or would you believe someone who told you that the sun contains a bazillion cords of wood and aliens lit the fire. Trust me, I could find thousands of physicists who could prove the sun is heated by nuclear fusion, but if I had one crackpot who believed someone lit a fire in the sun with matches and twigs, I'd never be able to convince him about nuclear fusion because he'll always be able to find that one 'scientist' who supports his theory. Problem is, it doesn't make his theory right.
It's standard for anthrax because when they were making a list of what Cipro could do, someone at Bayer added 'anthrax' to the list, which wasn't done for penicillin or doxycycline. Because of that, the FDA approves Cipro only for anthrax, despite the fact that penicillin and doxycycline will treat it better.
You still don't understand the difference between treating the disease and treating the symptoms, do you? When you treat cholera with fluids, you are treating the symptoms and only giving supportive care, not treating the disease. This is fine, as long as the disease isn't especially virulent and continues to attack the person faster than you can rehydrate them. If that happens, the person with cholera is going to die, no matter how much fluid you give them. And if they're that sick and have that much diarrhea, they're sure not going to feel like eating, so that puts paid to your nutrition attempt.
Try to keep in mind that supporting care was all that was available for the first three or four thousand years of our fight with disease. Think about it: if all your natural remedies work so well, why did we turn to antibiotics and vaccines to begin with? Answer: because they DIDN'T work that well. Thousands of people died. All the time, every day.
And why are you asking if he got the vaccine? Aren't you the one who thinks vaccines are evil?
Treatment is sometimes all you can do with viruses. In fact, that is mostly all you can do with viruses. Let them run their course.
I asked about the vaccine because there IS a vaccine for it. I wanted to know why he/she didn't get it or if it was a vaccine that not many people get. Seems to me that if we give vaccines for innate diseases like chicken pox then he/she should have had that vaccine.
Problem is that vaccines sometimes don't work and sometimes they cause other things... like ... well... anyway, you get the idea.
Treatment is sometimes all you can do with viruses. In fact, that is mostly all you can do with viruses. Let them run their course.
I asked about the vaccine because there IS a vaccine for it. I wanted to know why he/she didn't get it or if it was a vaccine that not many people get. Seems to me that if we give vaccines for innate diseases like chicken pox then he/she should have had that vaccine.
Problem is that vaccines sometimes don't work and sometimes they cause other things... like ... well... anyway, you get the idea.
Huh? Cholera is bacterial, which is why it can be treated successfully with antibiotics.
I have never eaten fish... not once in my life... I don't do seafood either. No one in my family eats tuna.. ever.
I do have family members that once or twice a year love to eat crab... not me.
Back to my point... why did the hospital go to the trouble and expense to remove any item with mercury and state there is no safe level for mercury exposure???
They cannot have it both ways... and I called them on it.
I'm having fried fish tonight. It's delicious. And I have shrimp about 30 times a year, not to mention tuna melts. What I can't believe is someone wants to take absolutely no chances with fish or mercury, but would run a bigger risk of their child dying of a disease that could have been prevented with a vaccine. That's sort of like putting your child in a car wrapped in armor, but not paying attention to whether the driver is drunk or not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
