Anti-Vax movement, Climate change denial, flat earthere.. whats with this trend? (ethics, drugs)
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 there is SOMETHING going on with vaccines and the extreme spike in autism. And the research into global warming has been called into question and much of it has been found to have been manipulated to support desired conclusions.
As for the flat earthers, you know that there is evidence that was concocted by our own government to try to discredit other conspiracy theories.
And with all the fake news being pushed by the MSM and even our own government, isn't it wise to be a little skeptical of what we're being told is fact?
Life is worth killing for, not jackets on breezy days.
A person's life can be threatened by the denial of goods and services, not just force.
This is the best argument for the second amendment I can imagine. People exist who think they have a right to others' property and skill because they need it.
Quite so. It's exactly why slavery existed, and still does in Africa, the Middle East, and the US in the form of an onerously punitive progressive tax system.
The rest of the developed world DOESN'T operate on the "disproportionately punish the responsible and therefore successful" model. How do we know that for sure? The Washington Post ran an article on this very issue. Excerpt, here:
Be sure to read the scatter plot chart and understand what it is telling us. There IS a distinct correlated pattern in regards to method of taxation (regressive vs. progressive) and resource redistribution in the form of social programs spending.
There's even a link to the research on which that Washington Post article is based. It includes numerous additional citations.
Last edited by InformedConsent; 09-15-2019 at 08:38 AM..
Complete freedom of association, freedom of movement, and respect for private property would greatly reduce measles outbreaks and other communicable diseases like we saw in NYC.
Would it completely eradicate it?
Nope.
But you'll have to take that up with Jesus, the Easter Bunny, or mother earth. Ultimately, nobody can cheat pain/disease/wrongs/death by having the government regulate/tax their way out of it. I know most folks, nearly all folks actually, will continue to try but my life experience says otherwise.
Actually, free association is what caused the measles outbreak in NYC. Unvaccinated people were out spreading measles disease.
Because there is SOMETHING going on with vaccines and the extreme spike in autism. And the research into global warming has been called into question and much of it has been found to have been manipulated to support desired conclusions.
As for the flat earthers, you know that there is evidence that was concocted by our own government to try to discredit other conspiracy theories.
And with all the fake news being pushed by the MSM and even our own government, isn't it wise to be a little skeptical of what we're being told is fact?
It certainly is irrational to fear vaccines, which have been with us since 1798.
It is certainly irrational to be afraid of 1-1 RCT of each individual vaccine compared to an unvaccinated population to prove vaccine safety. With appropriate followup of course.
Which have never been done. But there are some very vocal posters who are absolutely terrified of the results of such studies. It's like they know what the results would be. /shrug/
It certainly is irrational to fear the results of scientific study.
And to fear people who don't get vaccinated.
I would suggest anyone with such fears to seek medical advice, as it can't be good to live with such irrational fear and the obsession and compulsion to tell others how they should behave. Probably kills your adrenal gland.
I mean, it's been proved that secondhand smoke KILLS 41,000 Americans every year. Why aren't they afraid of that?
It is certainly irrational to be afraid of 1-1 RCT of each individual vaccine compared to an unvaccinated population to prove vaccine safety. With appropriate followup of course.
Which have never been done. But there are some very vocal posters who are absolutely terrified of the results of such studies. It's like they know what the results would be. /shrug/
It certainly is irrational to fear the results of scientific study.
And to fear people who don't get vaccinated.
I would suggest anyone with such fears to seek medical advice, as it can't be good to live with such irrational fear and the obsession and compulsion to tell others how they should behave. Probably kills your adrenal gland.
I mean, it's been proved that secondhand smoke KILLS 41,000 Americans every year. Why aren't they afraid of that?
The study you want is unethical. It violates the Declaration of Helsinki. If you do not know what that is, I suggest you look it up.
There has been much study of vaccines. You wouldn't have time to read all the available literature.
It's survival instinct to be afraid of people who don't vaccinate. I don't want my little six week old granddaughter around someone who may be contagious for flu, for example.
People are afraid of second hand smoke. That's why there are laws against smoking in many public places. Citation for these 41,000 deaths, please.
The study you want is unethical. It violates the Declaration of Helsinki. If you do not know what that is, I suggest you look it up.
There has been much study of vaccines. You wouldn't have time to read all the available literature.
It's survival instinct to be afraid of people who don't vaccinate. I don't want my little six week old granddaughter around someone who may be contagious for flu, for example.
People are afraid of second hand smoke. That's why there are laws against smoking in many public places. Citation for these 41,000 deaths, please.
It does not. If someone willingly does NOT want to be vaccinated, they have not been harmed in any way. But it's a nice curtain to hide behind so the scientific data is never known, right?
Those studies have NEVER been done.
Survival instinct to be afraid of unvaccinated people? Wow. That's a BIG stretch. What are the statistics that a person interacts with an unvaccinated person 1 time and then dies? Please provide a source.
Why aren't smokers banned everywhere?
Why aren't they fined to stop smoking? How is this product allowed for sale when it INTENTIONALLY without a doubt 100% KILLS people who don't even use it?
It does not. If someone willingly does NOT want to be vaccinated, they have not been harmed in any way. But it's a nice curtain to hide behind so the scientific data is never known, right?
Those studies have NEVER been done.
Survival instinct to be afraid of unvaccinated people? Wow. That's a BIG stretch. What are the statistics that a person interacts with an unvaccinated person 1 time and then dies? Please provide a source.
Why aren't smokers banned everywhere?
Why aren't they fined to stop smoking? How is this product allowed for sale when it INTENTIONALLY without a doubt 100% KILLS people who don't even use it?
It is unethical for health care providers to refuse to vaccinate someone, even for research, even if they don't want to be vaccinated. That you do not understand medical research and ethics is a problem.
A vaccine for a disease which doesn't have a current vaccine, say for strep throat, can be tested against placebo. Once a vaccine is found to work, YOU CAN'T DENY A PERSON THAT TREATMENT, even if they agree to it.
Politics is why smokers aren't banned everywhere and cigarettes are allowed to be sold.
It is unethical for health care providers to refuse to vaccinate someone, even for research, even if they don't want to be vaccinated. That you do not understand medical research and ethics is a problem.
A vaccine for a disease which doesn't have a current vaccine, say for strep throat, can be tested against placebo. Once a vaccine is found to work, YOU CAN'T DENY A PERSON THAT TREATMENT, even if they agree to it.
Politics is why smokers aren't banned everywhere and cigarettes are allowed to be sold.
I'm not "terrified" (love how you misuse that word) of smokers who aren't smoking. It's something you can immediately see.
Thank you for the link.
You could study the population that chooses not to be vaccinated and compare them to the population that chooses to be vaccinated. No one would need to refuse to vaccinate people in order for this to be done. This absolutely could be done and would not be an ethical violation of any kind because everyone involved would be exercising free will.
It would be unethical to vaccinate someone against their will.
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.
