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.
I'm not hypersensitive for Obama. I'm hypersensitive for the truth. I'm not falling for anything. What I posted is factual. Back at that time *I* thought there might be a link between these vaccines and autism but when it came out the research was total *******s, guess what I did? I changed my mind because that is what intelligent, mature people do when the facts change.
Per the liberal Washington Post and even your own link - scientists had a conclusion in 2008 when Obama denied science. The liberal Washington Post have Obama 2 Pinocchios for trying to cover his rear by saying that the science wasn't settled in 2008.
I haven't had the flu since my 40's, unlike Trump who has said never. Impossible? Slept in the same bed with my husband who had flu, been around my own children and kids in school with the flu, picked up many a dirty tissue and wiped noses, but never caught it from any of them. Science does not want to know WHY NOT. That will not promote the flu shot for all.
If I do not have the flu, or measles, mumps, etc. (had ALL of those myself), I cannot give it to anyone else.
On size fits all medicine, does not work.
Nobody is forced to get a flu shot. You are free to go without it. I skipped the vaccine myself this year and paid a hefty price for it. I will never miss it again. Guaranteed.
Per the liberal Washington Post and even your own link - scientists had a conclusion in 2008 when Obama denied science. The liberal Washington Post have Obama 2 Pinocchios for trying to cover his rear by saying that the science wasn't settled in 2008.
What does Obama's ignorance then have to do with Trump's ignorance NOW?
It isn't Obama who is going to be making appointments to HHS, etc. is it?
That's something that many people don't understand, is that our bodies can fight even some of the more worrisome illnesses...
And sometimes they can't. Sure, we can shrug it off and take a death toll from measles or smallpox, but why should we? We have the smarter option of introducing weakened versions that lets our immune systems produce the antibodies when faced with the full-strength version going forward.
I heard he supports vaccines, just that he wants to verify they're safe and get everybody informed about them. An open mind and transparency is such a foreign idea in government these days that its bound to be strange and frightening.
Anyone who says the bold IMO is a nut job.
Vaccines are much safer to get than the disease of which they are designed to protect against.
Not even sure why people keep bringing this up. Smallpox was eradicated due to vaccines. I always ask anti-vaxxers - what would you rather happen - get a shot or get smallpox? Both you have a chance to survive with no issues, both have side effects, both have lifelong immunity if you survive the shot/disease, one requires you to suffer with the disease, the other doesn't - which is better??
Same can even be said of less deadly diseases, would you rather get measles or chicken pox and be feverish/itchy for a couple weeks, or would you rather take a shot and not get sick and still have immunity to the disease. Both have side effects and a risk involved, which is riskier? Prior to varicella vaccine being implemented about 100 people died a year as a result of chicken pox in the US, over 100,000 people still die every year from Measles wordwide. We don't even know how many have complications due to surviving measles. Which chance do you want to take?
On Measles and various anti-vax sites VAERS reports that there were 397 claims made that involved deaths associated with MMR. Per the WHO, there are 376 deaths EVERY DAY from measles. Which one has the most risk.....? I'd say measles itself has the most risk
Vaccines are much safer to get than the disease of which they are designed to protect against.
Not even sure why people keep bringing this up. Smallpox was eradicated due to vaccines. I always ask anti-vaxxers - what would you rather happen - get a shot or get smallpox? Both you have a chance to survive with no issues, both have side effects, both have lifelong immunity if you survive the shot/disease, one requires you to suffer with the disease, the other doesn't - which is better??
Same can even be said of less deadly diseases, would you rather get measles or chicken pox and be feverish/itchy for a couple weeks, or would you rather take a shot and not get sick and still have immunity to the disease. Both have side effects and a risk involved, which is riskier? Prior to varicella vaccine being implemented about 100 people died a year as a result of chicken pox in the US, over 100,000 people still die every year from Measles wordwide. We don't even know how many have complications due to surviving measles. Which chance do you want to take?
On Measles and various anti-vax sites VAERS reports that there were 397 claims made that involved deaths associated with MMR. Per the WHO, there are 376 deaths EVERY DAY from measles. Which one has the most risk.....? I'd say measles itself has the most risk
Good post.
If Trump makes any move on vaccines (actual actions not involving peoples imaginations) then I will join you in going knee deep in my butt kicking of his decision.
It's just like seatbelts. For every thousand lives they save, one poor soul gets stuck and gets burned or drowned etc. You cannot make these things 100% safe and it's a fallacious argument otherwise.
Not to mention the anti-vax crackpots will lie like crazy citing things like deaths due to trials in India where if you dig you find out that the deaths were due to things like car accidents, drowning and even snake bite portrayed as being death by vaccine.
Vaccines are much safer to get than the disease of which they are designed to protect against.
Not even sure why people keep bringing this up. Smallpox was eradicated due to vaccines. I always ask anti-vaxxers - what would you rather happen - get a shot or get smallpox? Both you have a chance to survive with no issues, both have side effects, both have lifelong immunity if you survive the shot/disease, one requires you to suffer with the disease, the other doesn't - which is better??
Same can even be said of less deadly diseases, would you rather get measles or chicken pox and be feverish/itchy for a couple weeks, or would you rather take a shot and not get sick and still have immunity to the disease. Both have side effects and a risk involved, which is riskier? Prior to varicella vaccine being implemented about 100 people died a year as a result of chicken pox in the US, over 100,000 people still die every year from Measles wordwide. We don't even know how many have complications due to surviving measles. Which chance do you want to take?
On Measles and various anti-vax sites VAERS reports that there were 397 claims made that involved deaths associated with MMR. Per the WHO, there are 376 deaths EVERY DAY from measles. Which one has the most risk.....? I'd say measles itself has the most risk
I try to stay out of these arguments because I do have a vested interest - I help/ed make the vaccines. I just wanted to say that I helped make the smallpox vaccinations back in the late 1960's. I forget when; because I left the industry for more money; but we stopped making the vaccinations in the 1970's or maybe 1980's. But we have saved millions of lives from one terrible disease. Polio is one other terrible disease that has almost been eradicated; they are very close (I never worked on that disease).
Many, at least on this forum, have turned their backs on vaccinations. On the other hand, if there is another pandemic like the Spanish flu of 1918 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1918_flu_pandemic); it would not surprise me if some do not lose their conviction.
Vaccines are much safer to get than the disease of which they are designed to protect against.
Not even sure why people keep bringing this up. Smallpox was eradicated due to vaccines. I always ask anti-vaxxers - what would you rather happen - get a shot or get smallpox? Both you have a chance to survive with no issues, both have side effects, both have lifelong immunity if you survive the shot/disease, one requires you to suffer with the disease, the other doesn't - which is better??
Same can even be said of less deadly diseases, would you rather get measles or chicken pox and be feverish/itchy for a couple weeks, or would you rather take a shot and not get sick and still have immunity to the disease. Both have side effects and a risk involved, which is riskier? Prior to varicella vaccine being implemented about 100 people died a year as a result of chicken pox in the US, over 100,000 people still die every year from Measles worldwide. We don't even know how many have complications due to surviving measles. Which chance do you want to take?
On Measles and various anti-vax sites VAERS reports that there were 397 claims made that involved deaths associated with MMR. Per the WHO, there are 376 deaths EVERY DAY from measles. Which one has the most risk.....? I'd say measles itself has the most risk
We actually have a good handle on the risks of the various vaccine preventable diseases. Data has been collected on them for along time. To use your example, measles, we know that 1 in 1000 cases will result in encephalitis, potentially causing mental disability or deafness. About 1 in 100,000 cases - though new research suggests the number may be higher - will result in sclerosing subacute panencephalitis, a fatal brain disease. Very young infants who get measles are at higher risk to get SSPE, and the first dose of measles vaccine is not given until 12 to 15 months of age. Infants under that age are a big reason everyone who has no medical contraindication should be vaccinated against measles.
Measles also damages the immune system, causing it to lose its memory for infectious diseases the person had before getting measles. That effect is now known to last up to three years.
The anti-vaxers love to misuse VAERS. Anyone can report to VAERS, and such reports do not and cannot prove causation. The fact is there are no confirmed deaths from MMR vaccine. The disease itself kills one or two out of 1000 who get it. You are exactly right: the disease itself is far more dangerous. We would not use any vaccine if it were more risky than the disease it protects against.
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.
