Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-04-2016, 09:01 PM
 
Location: Chicago
5,559 posts, read 4,615,538 times
Reputation: 2202

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prickly Pear View Post
So when Clinton panders it's ok, but not Stein? Interesting bias you got going on there.

Funny thing, Stein also says they are safe and effective, but she wants an unbiased FDA.

https://twitter.com/DrJillStein/stat...42652243644416

I didn't know I was forced to support pharmaceutical companies completely controlling what gets deemed safe in this country for corporate interests if I also support vaccines. Strange how much the Democratic Party has forced you into believing that corporations have ALWAYS put you first, not their profits. Or am I missing something here?

I'm sure you know that the false autism connection to vaccines was from a doctor who had their license revoked and the study retracted after falsifying data, did that to promote his own version of the vaccine he deemed caused autism, so he could sell more of his own patented "non-autism causing" vaccine which was approved by the FDA not too long before the "study" was published. Pharmaceutical companies in general are a gold mine of corruption and corporate greed, go read about Martin Shkreli if that's not enough proof. I personally think Martin Shkreli, and the guy who did the vaccine/autism study, is enough proof that there is too much corporate greed in our healthcare. And there's probably more corporate greed going on in this industry that we just are not seeing.

Listen I am pro-vaccine myself, but I don't want corporations controlling the FDA. This includes pharmaceuticals AND companies like Monsanto. She shares the same sentiment as I do.



You also said earlier someone in internal medicine would know very little about vaccines. You should tell that to the current Director for the Office of New Drugs in the FDA, who studied internal medicine:

John Jenkins, M.D., Director, Office of New Drugs

BUT WAIT, one other important director in the FDA who also studied internal medicine! And he is actually the director for the office that approves vaccines!



Meet Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D., Director, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research

Should I tell the Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research that he is unqualified to conduct studies on vaccines since he did a residency in Internal Medicine with fellowships in hematology and oncology? I don't know about you, but this guy looks pretty qualified for his job to me! I oughta tell him only people in pediatrics know anything about vaccines.

So if you still think the Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, the division within the FDA that studies the safety of our vaccines, is unfit for his position because he is an internist like Jill Stein and not in pediatrics then you should agree with me that the FDA should have more oversight and be more careful on what it deems safe. But then if you retract your statement about internists about not having good opinions on vaccines and that the guy in the FDA knows what he is doing, then you also have to agree that all internists, including Jill Stein, know something about vaccines and can have a good, educated stance on them.

Looks like you are in between a rock and a hard place here.
I think everyone in the medical industry makes tons of money and what we get in return is the worse life expectancy at twice the cost. That is what corruption buys. A total disgrace. Other countries are simply not as corrupt. It's as simple as that.

Different nations, different "science", different life expectancies.

Why Japan banned MMR vaccine | Daily Mail Online

Vaccination Liberation Information

Note Japanese life expectancy. Note U.S life expectancy.


Last edited by richrf; 08-04-2016 at 09:15 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-04-2016, 09:15 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,475,124 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prickly Pear View Post
Funny thing, Stein also says they are safe and effective, but she wants an unbiased FDA.

https://twitter.com/DrJillStein/stat...42652243644416

I didn't know I was forced to support pharmaceutical companies completely controlling what gets deemed safe in this country for corporate interests if I also support vaccines. Strange how much the Democratic Party has forced you into believing that corporations have ALWAYS put you first, not their profits. Or am I missing something here?

You're missing a lot, starting with your assumptions about me. And who in this thread said that you were forced to support pharmaceutical companies completely controlling what gets deemed safe in this country for corporate interests?

I'm sure you know that the false autism connection to vaccines was from a doctor who had their license revoked and the study retracted after falsifying data, did that to promote his own version of the vaccine he deemed caused autism, so he could sell more of his own patented "non-autism causing" vaccine which was approved by the FDA not too long before the "study" was published. Pharmaceutical companies in general are a gold mine of corruption and corporate greed, go read about Martin Shkreli if that's not enough proof. I personally think Martin Shkreli, and the guy who did the vaccine/autism study, is enough proof that there is too much corporate greed in our healthcare. And there's probably more corporate greed going on in this industry that we just are not seeing.

LOL, the FDA had nothing to do with Wakefield's vaccine. He was living in the UK at the time. There is no such vaccine approved in the US.

Listen I am pro-vaccine myself, but I don't want corporations controlling the FDA. This includes pharmaceuticals AND companies like Monsanto. She shares the same sentiment as I do.

It is axiomatic that anyone who says "I am pro-vaccine myself BUT" is not pro-vaccine. That's what Jenny McCarthy says, too.

You also said earlier someone in internal medicine would know very little about vaccines. You should tell that to the current Director for the Office of New Drugs in the FDA, who studied internal medicine:

John Jenkins, M.D., Director, Office of New Drugs

BUT WAIT, one other important director in the FDA who also studied internal medicine! And he is actually the director for the office that approves vaccines!



Meet Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D., Director, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research

Should I tell the Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research that he is unqualified to conduct studies on vaccines since he did a residency in Internal Medicine with fellowships in hematology and oncology? I don't know about you, but this guy looks pretty qualified for his job to me! I oughta tell him only people in pediatrics know anything about vaccines.

So if you still think the Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, the division within the FDA that studies the safety of our vaccines, is unfit for his position because he is an internist like Jill Stein and not in pediatrics then you should agree with me that the FDA should have more oversight and be more careful on what it deems safe. But then if you retract your statement about internists about not having good opinions on vaccines and that the guy in the FDA knows what he is doing, then you also have to agree that all internists, including Jill Stein, know something about vaccines and can have a good, educated stance on them.


Looks like you are in between a rock and a hard place here.
No, you are. This Peter Marks also has a PhD, which Ms. Stein does not, and his job is working with vaccines. Hers wasn't. She was seeing adult patients, at a time when adults got very few vaccines. You can't compare him to her.

(Mine in blue)

She's pandering.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2016, 09:18 PM
 
Location: PHX -> ATL
6,311 posts, read 6,770,956 times
Reputation: 7167
Quote:
Originally Posted by richrf View Post
I think everyone in the medical industry makes tons of money and what we get in return is the worse life expectancy at twice the cost. That is what corruption buys. A total disgrace. Other countries are simply not as corrupt. It's as simple as that.

Different nations, different "science", different life expectancies.

"Japan and Britian both proved that less vaccination of infants results in lower overall mortality figures in that age group."

Vaccination Liberation Information
I think it is a public duty as part of being a humane person or ethical corporation (by all technicalities, you don't have to be humane or ethical) that you strive to make healthcare as cheap and as effective as possible if this is the industry you choose to work in. Otherwise you are inhumane and unethical. To make America healthy again. However what goes against being a for-profit pharmaceutical company is that if you are too good at that, you have less people using your products and thus meaning less $$$ rolling in. So I guess you have to be good enough, but not too good.

I don't agree with your anti-vax sentiments that you have made clear in this thread. I strongly dislike those who will not vaccinate their children and/or themselves. I support the government requiring children to be vaccinated if they want to go to public school, and so on.

Obviously it would be ideal if we had less vaccinations to get overall to achieve the same immunity, however it is important that we still get them. To protect young infants and our society. I don't want polio coming back here.

We should note that Britain and Japan are both islands, therefore geographically safer from infectious diseases than the United States for being more insular. This is becoming less of an advantage as technology and globalism progresses, but I feel that this is important to note. They have an easier time controlling what goes in and what goes out than those sharing a large land mass with other populated countries like the United States. Australia also sees a benefit from this as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2016, 09:18 PM
 
Location: Chicago
5,559 posts, read 4,615,538 times
Reputation: 2202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
No, you are. This Peter Marks also has a PhD, which Ms. Stein does not, and his job is working with vaccines. Hers wasn't. She was seeing adult patients, at a time when adults got very few vaccines. You can't compare him to her.

(Mine in blue)

She's pandering.
The Japanese are much smarter at keeping their children healthy. Japan banned MMR. Anyone who knows anything about vaccines knows this and they know why.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2016, 09:23 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,475,124 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by richrf View Post
I think everyone in the medical industry makes tons of money and what we get in return is the worse life expectancy at twice the cost. That is what corruption buys. A total disgrace. Other countries are simply not as corrupt. It's as simple as that.

Different nations, different "science", different life expectancies.

Why Japan banned MMR vaccine | Daily Mail Online

Vaccination Liberation Information

Note Japanese life expectancy. Note U.S life expectancy.
Yes, Japan banned the MMR, autism rates there continued to rise, and they had an outbreak of congenital rubella syndrome.

https://www.newscientist.com/article...-ban-in-japan/
https://www.interhealthworldwide.org...emic-in-japan/

Vaccination Liberation Information is an anti-vax website.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2016, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,475,124 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by richrf View Post
The Japanese are much smarter at keeping their children healthy. Japan banned MMR. Anyone who knows anything about vaccines knows this and they know why.
And their autism rates continued to rise, as did their congenital rubella syndrome rates. (See post above this.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2016, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Indianapolis
2,294 posts, read 2,653,225 times
Reputation: 3151
She was asked straight out if she believes vaccines cause autism and her response was "I’m not aware of evidence linking vaccines to autism."

Talk about an answer you would expect from a politician. She lost my vote that day.


Jill Stein’s anti-vax game: How and why the Green Party candidate is pandering to the anti-vaccination crowd - Salon.com


Quote:
“Dr. Stein uses a common anti-vaccine dodge in which she denies that she’s anti-vaccine, but then repeats anti-vaccine tropes about vaccines not being tested the same way as other drugs (if anything, they’re tested more rigorously), corruption in big pharma, etc.,” David Gorski, a surgical oncologist and pro-science blogger explained to me. “She even walked back a Tweet from saying ‘there’s no evidence’ that vaccines cause autism to ‘I’m not aware of evidence linking vaccines to autism.’ Talk about an antivaccine dog whistle!”

Even LaCapria admits, in her Snopes article, that Stein’s words “echo language used by vaccination opponents”. But, for some reason, she didn’t feel this very important caveat requires a more responsible Snopes rating.

Gorski issued a lengthy rebuttal to Snopes at his ScienceBlogs blog, which is recommended reading for anyone interested in the particulars of this debate. His criticism of LaCapria is that she takes “Dr. Stein’s denials at face value”, while blowing off Stein’s jabbering about the supposed corruption of the system or claims that we need “an agency that we can trust to sort through all of those concerns”.

(For the record, we have two such agencies: The FDA and CDC. But of course, Stein insinuates they are corrupt. Why a third agency wouldn’t receive the same insinuations is a mystery.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2016, 09:34 PM
 
Location: Chicago
5,559 posts, read 4,615,538 times
Reputation: 2202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
And their autism rates continued to rise, as did their congenital rubella syndrome rates. (See post above this.)
https://childhealthsafety.wordpress....3/japvaxautism

"Science" is very malleable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2016, 09:48 PM
 
Location: PHX -> ATL
6,311 posts, read 6,770,956 times
Reputation: 7167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
No, you are. This Peter Marks also has a PhD, which Ms. Stein does not, and his job is working with vaccines. Hers wasn't. She was seeing adult patients, at a time when adults got very few vaccines. You can't compare him to her.

(Mine in blue)

She's pandering.
Let me take your statements point by point, but first I want to start off how little you replied to me. What a shame, I must've stumped you otherwise you would have said more to refute me. The fact that you also replied so quickly only proves you barely read what I said.

1. You did, when you said Jill is anti-vax and I gave you a tweet coming from her own account which you can click on and show you on Twitter itself. Her tweet says that she supports vaccines but she doesn't support corporate control of the FDA. Meaning that to be against corporate control of the FDA, like Stein, means you are anti-vax. Your quick short reply... maybe you should've took more time reading. Do you want pharmaceutical companies having control on our regulatory agency for drugs? I personally don't like the bias and the lobbying that comes from that, makes me a little concerned. It appears that you are ok with that, however.

2. Why don't you link that information to me then and prove it. Prove to me that it wasn't about earning more money on his own patented vaccine. I noticed that you didn't address my point about Martin Shkreli either, you must support him huh.

3. If all you can refute is semantics then I'm afraid you lost your argument.

4. Do you mind telling me what Dr. Marks did before he got hired into the FDA? I don't recall it saying anything about vaccine research, but working in hematology and oncology. Can you tell me how studying blood and cancer, with no work in vaccines, makes him more relevant to vaccines than just unspecialized internal medicine?

Quote:
He then moved on to work for several years in the pharmaceutical industry on the clinical development of hematology and oncology products prior to returning to academic medicine at Yale University where he led the Adult Leukemia Service and served as Chief Clinical Officer of Smilow Cancer Hospital.
If you read this and assumed that, it was clinical development of HEMATOLOGY AND ONCOLOGY PRODUCTS, not vaccines. Prior to being hired by the FDA, he had no vaccine experience at all outside of his medical rotation in pediatrics like Stein.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
Stein (I refuse to call her "doctor", BTW) hasn't worked in pediatrics since she did her rotation in medical school. I already explained, she had little reason to know much of anything about vaccines, and no reason to know anything about childhood vaccines.
Here is you again saying that only someone who works in pediatrics knows something about vaccines. Just so we are clear that you are failing to address that you are losing the argument, I am going to keep quoting this until you flat out say the director is unqualified for vaccine research because he hasn't worked in pediatrics OR until you admit you were flat out wrong and you retract your previous statement that someone with a residency in internal medicine can have an educated opinion about vaccinations. I can't find a single source for the guy who is the director of the division within the FDA who studies the safeness of vaccines actually did vaccination work before being hired as a Deputy Director of the same division. He is very well-qualified with an impressive resume, don't get me wrong, he was heavily specialized in oncology and hematology before being hired in the FDA.

He spent his time at Yale studying more about hematology as part of the medical oncology faculty:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clinical Cancer Program at Yale
Peter W. Marks, MD, PhD was recruited in 2006 to run the clinical program. He earned his M.S., M.D. and Ph.D. degrees at New York University and had his resident and fellowship training at Harvard’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital and he spent a few years working in the pharmaceutical industry. His research interests are in the treatment of leukemia, and problems in thrombosis and hemostasis, but his broad and deep knowledge in the entire eld is respected and he works longer and harder than anyone I know. He has done an incredibly good job of patient care and combines the latest therapy with a sensitive and compassionate approach to patients that serves as a model for house staff and fellows, who feel that he is one of the best educators on the staff. He is also active in nursing education and is associate clini- cal professor of nursing in addition to associate professor of medicine. In addition, Marks is chief of the leukemia service and was recently appointed Chief Clinical Officer of the Smilow Hospital.
pg. 78

https://medicine.yale.edu/cancer/abo..._284_12060.pdf

Still not finding where he has experience in vaccines specifically and in pediatrics like you say he is qualified to know about in order to know about vaccines. If he has that experience then you should source it to me. Google is making it very tough on me, I tried to find his thesis.

Also, can you state why Hillary pandering in 2008 to the anti-vax community is OK but Stein doing it is not ok? If you are pro-vaccination like you claim you should be against a candidate who panders to the anti-vax. Meaning you should be against Clinton as well.

The bias and $hill brainwashing is strong with you.

Last edited by Prickly Pear; 08-04-2016 at 09:51 PM.. Reason: fixed quote
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2016, 11:01 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,475,124 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prickly Pear View Post
Let me take your statements point by point, but first I want to start off how little you replied to me. What a shame, I must've stumped you otherwise you would have said more to refute me. The fact that you also replied so quickly only proves you barely read what I said.

1. You did, when you said Jill is anti-vax and I gave you a tweet coming from her own account which you can click on and show you on Twitter itself. Her tweet says that she supports vaccines but she doesn't support corporate control of the FDA. Meaning that to be against corporate control of the FDA, like Stein, means you are anti-vax. Your quick short reply... maybe you should've took more time reading. Do you want pharmaceutical companies having control on our regulatory agency for drugs? I personally don't like the bias and the lobbying that comes from that, makes me a little concerned. It appears that you are ok with that, however.

Be careful when you assume.

2. Why don't you link that information to me then and prove it. Prove to me that it wasn't about earning more money on his own patented vaccine. I noticed that you didn't address my point about Martin Shkreli either, you must support him huh.

If I don't respond I support something you don't? Ever take a logic course? The fact that you're arguing against me so vehemently tells me I've got you worried.

3. If all you can refute is semantics then I'm afraid you lost your argument.

4. Do you mind telling me what Dr. Marks did before he got hired into the FDA? I don't recall it saying anything about vaccine research, but working in hematology and oncology. Can you tell me how studying blood and cancer, with no work in vaccines, makes him more relevant to vaccines than just unspecialized internal medicine?

I don't know, nor do I care. He seems to be more of an administrator.


If you read this and assumed that, it was clinical development of HEMATOLOGY AND ONCOLOGY PRODUCTS, not vaccines. Prior to being hired by the FDA, he had no vaccine experience at all outside of his medical rotation in pediatrics like Stein.

You don't know as much about hematology and oncology as you think you do to say that.


Here is you again saying that only someone who works in pediatrics knows something about vaccines. Just so we are clear that you are failing to address that you are losing the argument, I am going to keep quoting this until you flat out say the director is unqualified for vaccine research because he hasn't worked in pediatrics OR until you admit you were flat out wrong and you retract your previous statement that someone with a residency in internal medicine can have an educated opinion about vaccinations. I can't find a single source for the guy who is the director of the division within the FDA who studies the safeness of vaccines actually did vaccination work before being hired as a Deputy Director of the same division. He is very well-qualified with an impressive resume, don't get me wrong, he was heavily specialized in oncology and hematology before being hired in the FDA.

I did not say that. Your quote of my words does not say that. I said Miss Stein did not need to know much about vaccines because she wasn't working with them. Quit misrepresenting me.

He spent his time at Yale studying more about hematology as part of the medical oncology faculty:



pg. 78

https://medicine.yale.edu/cancer/abo..._284_12060.pdf

Still not finding where he has experience in vaccines specifically and in pediatrics like you say he is qualified to know about in order to know about vaccines. If he has that experience then you should source it to me. Google is making it very tough on me, I tried to find his thesis.

Also, can you state why Hillary pandering in 2008 to the anti-vax community is OK but Stein doing it is not ok? If you are pro-vaccination like you claim you should be against a candidate who panders to the anti-vax. Meaning you should be against Clinton as well.

The bias and $hill brainwashing is strong with you.
At least you admit Miss Jill is pandering. Ms. Clinton has at least publicly changed her mind. I never said I was a Clinton supporter. (If you are going to refer to Ms. Clinton as "Hillary", I will refer to Miss Stein as "Jill".

If you have to resort to calling someone a shill, you're admitting defeat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:16 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top