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.
...
Do you know how many women die from cervical cancer in the U.S. each year? About 4,000. How many of those cases are caused by the HPV strains that the vaccine targets? Anyone know? Anyone?
That's 4,000 out 150,000,000, which is a 0.00002% LIFETIME risk of dying from cervical cancer. It is absurdly low. There is no reason for this vaccine, and the fact that the manufacturer is marketing it to boys is criminal.
A 0.00002% lifetime risk of dying from cervical cancer....
I'm not a mathematician, but your figures look suspect to me. I'm assuming that you divided the 4,000 women who die from cervical cancer per year by the total U.S. female population of ~150,000,000 (which gives you .00002667, not .00002% but rather .002667%). However, since this is per year, not per lifetime, to get the lifetime risk, you'd have to multiply that figure by an average lifespan... say 75 years. That comes to .2% -- still low, but 10,000 times more frequent than what you're suggesting.
Is my math off somewhere? Maybe. I just want to be sure here, since you're using factual information to make your argument.
I have a neighbor couple, both with college degrees. They are more religious than most but not zealots. They have 8 children. The eldest of which is autistic. Because of that and the likes of the charlatan doctor that made up a link between vaccines and autism and the Jenny McCarthy's of the world they have not vaccinated the other children. They are also anti-GMO organic only proponents.
They also smoke cigarettes. A lot. Frequently drafting into our windows.
How have we as a society managed to produce educated people who are scared of vaccines and GMO food with no scientific basis for that fear but have no problem lighting up something with well documented risks and sharing that second hand with their kids?
I can see both sides of the arguement to be honest.. Autism is getting much worse or was it just a child with learning difficulties before we found the word, I cant answer that... but my youngest son developed a very bad tic only weeks after his immunisation at school age five... I was advised by the school doctor not to have any more done on him in his early school years.. I was worried sick as these tics were so bad all over this body.. but after a few months it calmed down and disappeared... Now I dont know if the injection started it.. Im only saying what I saw at that time and what the doctors advised after he took these tics.. so Ill leave it open on the autism debate...
I have a neighbor couple, both with college degrees. They are more religious than most but not zealots. They have 8 children. The eldest of which is autistic. Because of that and the likes of the charlatan doctor that made up a link between vaccines and autism and the Jenny McCarthy's of the world they have not vaccinated the other children. They are also anti-GMO organic only proponents.
They also smoke cigarettes. A lot. Frequently drafting into our windows.
How have we as a society managed to produce educated people who are scared of vaccines and GMO food with no scientific basis for that fear but have no problem lighting up something with well documented risks and sharing that second hand with their kids?
College degrees don't mean much anymore; they certainly don't guarantee the degree holder is highly logical and intelligent. Your neighboring couple sounds quite low on the intellectual scale--being religious, being smokers, having 8 children, and continuing to have children when the first has autism. So the achievements of society mean nothing to the members of society that are not sophisticated enough to take advantage of them.
Parents who have a disabled child often have very strong reactions to this awful situation, perhaps resulting from the need to place blame somewhere other than on themselves (even when the situation was a result of pure chance or factors still unknown). Hence the unscientific beliefs like vaccines causing autism (not true), or the dangers of genetically modified foods (none known, with many awesome benefits).
As to getting hooked on cigarettes, they may intellectually know that they are killing themselves and their families, but this knowledge is ignored--the instant reduction in discomfort that a cigarette gives them is far stronger than the possibility of health problems in the future. Even if they understood that the discomfort is being caused by the addiction (and most don't), a tobacco addition is just as hard to kick as a heroin addiction. By the time they have to pay the price (cancer), it will be too late.
I can see both sides of the arguement to be honest.. Autism is getting much worse or was it just a child with learning difficulties before we found the word, I cant answer that... but my youngest son developed a very bad tic only weeks after his immunisation at school age five... I was advised by the school doctor not to have any more done on him in his early school years.. I was worried sick as these tics were so bad all over this body.. but after a few months it calmed down and disappeared... Now I dont know if the injection started it.. Im only saying what I saw at that time and what the doctors advised after he took these tics.. so Ill leave it open on the autism debate...
I'll post this again because you are the almost exact situation the meme is warning against:
Scientific method, much like people here like to believe, didn't prove safety of neither GMOs nor vaccines, and tobacco company researchers successfully used scientific method to "prove" healthy effects of smoking. Scientific method just employs experiments to validate this or that theory, and as such it was never deployed to validate safety of GMOs or vaccines. You are guinea pigs in this case. Whatever potential harms are, it is believed that social benefits overweigh harm real and potential of GMO and vaccines. What's more insulting is summary dismissal of those concerns by powers that be who know it best. Why do people envoke "scientific method" to discredit outlandish, as they believe, concerns of other people without actually employing scientific method to prove their point? I guess "scientific" became a sorta spell word. Besides is there an experiment that can show that accelerated herbicide use due to GMOs is actually good for you? Or that vaccines accelerating evolution of deadlier viruses do mankind a favor?
Last edited by RememberMee; 07-15-2016 at 06:07 AM..
Actually I was posing questions. According to Albert Einstein, an intelligent person can think about an idea. You know THINK? Reason. Seek out ALL evidence. Question authority. Learn. Identify facts. Identify propaganda. Identify TRUTH.
And because countries ban all sorts of things, then reasons and evidence for everything that is banned must be outright dismissed collectively without further inquiry? How did you come to THAT conclusion? Sounds "pseudoscientific" to me.
And per the moderator's request, can anyone define "pseudoscience"? Can anyone define "science"? Are you aware that we are at a most closeminded crossroads, where most intelligent thinkers are calling science a religion because it is blindly followed with no substantial inquiry?
For instance: HPV cures cancer ... but we won't know for at least 10 years ... but it cures cancer .... and was tested in teens for safety ... but it's OK for 9-year-olds .... it wasn't tested on them, but they will be fine... and boys can get the vaccine too, even though they DON'T GET CERVICAL CANCER ... sounds like perfectly sound science to me ... very well-researched and thought out, many years of follow-up data to prove conclusions ... SMH.
The words addiction and disease have negative meanings in our language and culture - but who is to say they are "bad" in all cases?
For some reason we exalt those "addicted" to money, to power/fame/celebrity and even to killing (American Sniper, etc.).
Many of the most creative people in history - as you are alluding to - used substances of various kinds to enhance their art and lives. Steve Jobs called LSD one of the biggest influences in his life...
These words are often "value judgements" based on culture, tradition and/or out-of-date ideals. We might call someone who enjoys smoking dope, drinking beer or popping some pills a slacker...good for nothing. But if he starts selling Real Estate (joining MILLIONS of other RE pumpers), we'd say he was "productive". Or, if he raised money for nonprofits that spent most of their money....raising more money....we'd say he had a fine career.
I think flexibility in thought is perhaps the most important quality we can nurture. Things truly are different today and we have to come to grips with it. Instead of 10,000 people being needed to spot-weld car bodies in a factory, now it is done by robots with perhaps 1/100th of the number of humans. What are the rest supposed to do? Sell Real Estate or Copy Machines? Multi-level marketing?
I remember hearing a podcast about how France pays those who play music on the streets or in a Cafe a certain monthly stipend...because, in fact, such a person may be more valuable to society than someone trying to hustle another quick buck through selling Amway.
Anyway - being straight - IMHO, is way over-rated. My kids and grandkids...from the time they were able to, enjoyed spinning around, going on rides and similar things because it was an altered state.
Someday science will accept that the human mind desires such things...and that roller coasters, skydiving, and bungie jumping aren't the only ways to get there.
Steve Jobs is hardly a role model. He thought he knew more than his doctors.
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.
