S/O where is the "I dont vax, AMA" thread???

amother

Mauve

Sat, Dec 01 2018, 10:03 pm

amother wrote:

This is literally the first time I heard of this. AFAIK he was a gastroenterologist and his findings came about coincidentally in treating his patients for the gut issues. Do you have a source for this?

Yes. Look up the GMC cases that held against him (12 counts). Look at his dropped libel action against the Times journalist who exposed his faked data, financial conflicts of interest, deceipt and ethical violations in relation to invasive procedures on children.

amother

Lawngreen

Sat, Dec 01 2018, 10:17 pm

Did you know vaccine companies are immune to being sued? People looking for why anti vaxxers are that way will find a lot of info here:

http://www.thrivemovement.com/......blog

amother

Gold

Sat, Dec 01 2018, 10:45 pm

amother wrote:

His name is wakefield, and he wasn't selling anything. In the pro-vaccine choice community there's a term for what happens to doctors who try to open their mouths against the establishment. It's called "wakefielded". Science these days is a dirty business, and just because a journal decided to retract his study doesn't mean anything [about the veracity of his findings]. And for the record, his paper had nothing to do with autism and vaccines per se, it was more about autism and poor gut health, which is a well known thing.

I personally know a family, who have an autistic daughter in her 30s. she is vaccine injured. they made hundreds of thousands of dollars from the govt in their lawsuit. this all happened before the wakefield study of connecting autism to vaccines.
this probably was also before the 1986 legislation act to immune vaccine companies from lawsuits.

yup, before all that, it was proven and admitted that the vaccine caused her autism.

amother

Mauve

Sun, Dec 02 2018, 12:11 am

In the Uk if you can prove vaccine damage you are entitled to a govt payout. Out of 6026 potential cases since 1979, only 931 were proven. Look it up in the BMJ

southernbubby

Sun, Dec 02 2018, 5:19 am

amother wrote:

In the Uk if you can prove vaccine damage you are entitled to a govt payout. Out of 6026 potential cases since 1979, only 931 were proven. Look it up in the BMJ

Unfortunately winning and losing in a vaccine court doesn't always correlate with the merits of the case. IOW, baseless cases have won while compelling cases have lost. It depends on the lawyers, some of whom deliberately flood the courts with cases

imasoftov

Sun, Dec 02 2018, 10:42 pm

Maybe wrote:

AMA , I love a civil discussion

Let's have a civil discussion on whether humans are tastier when roasted alive or if it's better to kill them first so they don't squirm around and cook unevenly.

Sunny Days

Sun, Dec 02 2018, 11:23 pm

imasoftov wrote:

Let's have a civil discussion on whether humans are tastier when roasted alive or if it's better to kill them first so they don't squirm around and cook unevenly.

Taste depends of course if they first had the Mmr vaccine or the actual virus. Tongue Out

momsrus

Sun, Dec 02 2018, 11:41 pm

amother wrote:

Did you know vaccine companies are immune to being sued? People looking for why anti vaxxers are that way will find a lot of info here:

http://www.thrivemovement.com/......blog

I wanted to read this, but it’s extremely biased.

amother

Honeydew

Sun, Dec 02 2018, 11:43 pm

imasoftov wrote:

Let's have a civil discussion on whether humans are tastier when roasted alive or if it's better to kill them first so they don't squirm around and cook unevenly.

When cannibalism is equal to questioning medical protocol, you know that some brainwashing has been done...

I imagine your point is that not vaccinating is so absurd that we may as well debate the martian takeover of the government, but looking at some of the data would reveal that while your conclusion may remain the same, the issue is not as clear-cut as we would like.

Yet this topic remains so heated that civil discussion often seems impossible. Unfortunately.

I'm usually more interested in hearing from someone who actually heard me out before disagreeing, however vehemently.

imasoftov

Mon, Dec 03 2018, 2:08 am

Honeydew amother wrote:

Yet this topic remains so heated that civil discussion often seems impossible. Unfortunately.

I'm usually more interested in hearing from someone who actually heard me out before disagreeing, however vehemently.

I'm not just uninterested in civil discussion here, I actively oppose it. To do otherwise creates the impression that you have a point of view worth discussing. In the event that you are only willing to discuss this in forums that require people to be civil to you, go find one, this is not going to be it.

Last edited by imasoftov on Mon, Dec 03 2018, 11:37 pm; edited 1 time in total

amother

Goldenrod

Mon, Dec 03 2018, 6:01 am

imasoftov wrote:

And again, I say, as I've said before to another strong proponent of vaccines, so much so that she couldn't utter a single civil word: I hope you are never tested with adverse reactions to vaccinations. I hope you never know the feeling of helplessness that accompanies such a tragedy because nobody wants to hear you out. That's all.

imasoftov

Mon, Dec 03 2018, 9:48 pm

Goldenrod amother wrote:

... That's all.

If only you actually were done.

Last edited by imasoftov on Mon, Dec 03 2018, 11:38 pm; edited 1 time in total

amother

Honeydew

Mon, Dec 03 2018, 11:24 pm

imasoftov wrote:

If only you actually were done.

Imasoftov, I respect you a lot, and am surprised at your stonewalling attitude here.

I hardly think that given a case where both sides agree that there is a risk/benefit calculation both for vaccines and for VPDs, that a rational discussion on what exactly those risks and benefits are, should be so ludicrous.

Both sides have so much in common, unlike flat earth, zombie apocalypse, or moon landing hoax proponents.

- Both sides* agree that measles, mumps, etc. can in rare cases be deadly.
- Both sides agree that vaccination causes severe damage or even death in rare cases.
- Both sides are trying to ensure healthy outcomes.

*I am using the term "both sides" to refer to official CDC data/those who rely on it and vaccine-cautious consumers.

(I have several other statements I think both sides agree on, but some might consider them debatable, so I left them out.)

Why is a civil, rational discussion on the interpretations of data not possible here?

imasoftov

Mon, Dec 03 2018, 11:36 pm

Honeydew amother wrote:

Imasoftov, I respect you a lot, and ...

You will not succeed in baiting me into debating you.

Last edited by imasoftov on Mon, Dec 03 2018, 11:38 pm; edited 1 time in total

amother

Honeydew

Mon, Dec 03 2018, 11:37 pm

imasoftov wrote:

You will not succeed in baiting me into debating you.

Not trying to get you to debate. I didn't invite you to the thread at all Smile

Just wondering why you seem so dead set against the very idea of civil debate on this topic.

imasoftov

Mon, Dec 03 2018, 11:47 pm

Honeydew amother wrote:

Not trying to get you to debate. I didn't invite you to the thread at all Smile

Just wondering why you seem so dead set against the very idea of civil debate on this topic.

To answer your question would invite debate.

Even if you had started this thread instead of cornflower, you still wouldn't get to decide who posts in it.

amother

Scarlet

Tue, Dec 04 2018, 12:12 am

I don't care what other people do, but why do I have to keep my immuno suppressed child home so long? Why shouldn't the ones that don't vax put there children on house arrest this entire time? My child is going out of his skin already! He wants to be a normal kid & go to cheder & learn.

amother

Honeydew

Tue, Dec 04 2018, 12:46 am

imasoftov wrote:

To answer your question would invite debate.

Even if you had started this thread instead of cornflower, you still wouldn't get to decide who posts in it.

Sorry, hadn't meant it the way I see it sounds! I meant that I never dragged you into the thread to begin with, so I'm wondering why you posted here if you had no intention of discussing the issue. To me it sounded kinda like someone asking for the mike at an event and announcing "I have nothing to say on the topic." I get someone saying that if they're HANDED the mike, but why come ask for the mike in order to show us that you have nothing to say?

amother

Honeydew

Tue, Dec 04 2018, 12:46 am

amother wrote:

Do you let him go to Cheder during the flu season?