Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> Children's Health -> Vaccinations
Question for anti-vaxxers
  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h

mig100




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 8:16 pm
amother [ Wheat ] wrote:
What I can’t understand is why anti-vaxxers are happy to believe YouTube videos and the like from unknown, unregulated sources, but they feel that immunologists and those who study vaccines all day are talking nonsense.


Simple. I figured that out. Because those videos are sensational and build hysteria and get to peoples emotions.

Not everybody is logical.
Back to top

amother
Violet


 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 8:16 pm
amother [ Orchid ] wrote:
I am now finished discussing This with you because this is no longer a civil debate. If you want me to listen to what you have to say don’t discredit me like that. Have a good night.


I'm sorry for my choice of words, but your statements were literally rooted in emotion and not any sense. I did take the time to point out why I made that statement.

FWIW, I discredited your stance, and not you.
Back to top

amother
Violet


 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 8:21 pm
mig100 wrote:
Simple. I figured that out. Because those videos are sensational and build hysteria and get to peoples emotions.

Not everybody is logical.


Even more so when the viewers have no understanding of the science behind it. Lack of scientific knowledge makes it much harder to discern truth from fiction.
Back to top

small bean




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 8:22 pm
amother [ Violet ] wrote:
Not necessarily true. Antibodies are very specific to an antigen. If a mutation changes the specificity, then that antibody is rendered pretty useless. Hence the discussion if we will need booster shots if there is a significant mutation in CV.

The second statement is also not true in its entirety. Some pathogens eventually mutate to become less harmful, but some mutate to become more severe. It's a rolling of the dice. Once a pathogen is loose, the reason it would lose its severity is because we're able to stop it in its track by medical treatments or herd immunity. Measles today is not as severe because we slowed down its progression with treatment and immunity. If let untouched, it would really ravage the population.

All that you've told me regarding antivax is rooted in beliefs or in a lack of scientific knowledge. I haven't seen anything substantial to explain what makes injecting a weakened or deadened virus less dangerous than an all out pathogen attack on a human body.


They've actually moved there on covid. (Especially for those that have had the virus)

The memory in your body, remembers similar viruses and will bring out those antiboides. Sometimes it's enough, other times it's not.

From reading your posts, you have zero interest in the other side of the debate. You have no interest in hearing where they come from. This is a waste of time for both of us.

I vaccinate because I'm comfortable with my decision. Not because I think it's risk free or because the doctor said.
Back to top

amother
Violet


 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 8:30 pm
small bean wrote:
They've actually moved there on covid. (Especially for those that have had the virus)

The memory in your body, remembers similar viruses and will bring out those antiboides. Sometimes it's enough, other times it's not.

From reading your posts, you have zero interest in the other side of the debate. You have no interest in hearing where they come from. This is a waste of time for both of us.

I vaccinate because I'm comfortable with my decision. Not because I think it's risk free or because the doctor said.


I'm assuming you're referring to differing strains of one virus, and not different viruses. The body retain one specific memory cell to each specific antigen. If a strain mutates significantly to the point where it changes the shape of the antigen, the antibody is ineffective. That's when we need to produce different antibodies to go after the new strain.

From where do you extrapolate that I have zero interest in the other side of the debate? Is it because I'm able to pinpoint the incorrect science in every one of their arguments? I have every interest in hearing something substantial that can be discussed and evaluated on merits and not on faulty beliefs or exaggerations.

When the discussion moves to attack the messenger instead of the message, it provides support to the message.
Back to top

small bean




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 8:43 pm
amother [ Violet ] wrote:
I'm assuming you're referring to differing strains of one virus, and not different viruses. The body retain one specific memory cell to each specific antigen. If a strain mutates significantly to the point where it changes the shape of the antigen, the antibody is ineffective. That's when we need to produce different antibodies to go after the new strain.

From where do you extrapolate that I have zero interest in the other side of the debate? Is it because I'm able to pinpoint the incorrect science in every one of their arguments? I have every interest in hearing something substantial that can be discussed and evaluated on merits and not on faulty beliefs or exaggerations.

When the discussion moves to attack the messenger instead of the message, it provides support to the message.


Your attitude screams it and your quickness to identify everything as antiscience.

You know exaclty what I mean. I am not articulate. But it is all based on what we do know.

There are risks to vaccines. Real ones. Known and unknown. No one denys this. It is a risk assessment. There is no denying that. The medical establishment goes with the benefits outweigh the risks.

We had a measles outbreak in the US and it really was not that big of a deal. We don't know what would happen in 2021 in the USA if measels vaccine would not exist would be a big deal to get it. Would the statistics stay the same as they were?
Back to top

amother
Violet


 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 8:55 pm
small bean wrote:
Your attitude screams it and your quickness to identify everything as antiscience.

You know exaclty what I mean. I am not articulate. But it is all based on what we do know.

There are risks to vaccines. Real ones. Known and unknown. No one denys this. It is a risk assessment. There is no denying that. The medical establishment goes with the benefits outweigh the risks.

We had a measles outbreak in the US and it really was not that big of a deal. We don't know what would happen in 2021 in the USA if measels vaccine would not exist would be a big deal to get it. Would the statistics stay the same as they were?


I identify something as antiscience when it is precisely so. If you have scientific refutation, please put it forth and lets discuss.

I haven't discounted the risks of vaccines. I've just asked for the understanding of the fear of the much lesser risk of vaccines versus the much higher risk of the disease. That's what I've been asking for in multiple posts, and haven't gotten any thing substantial.

It is precisely that - a risk assessment. Vaccines have a heavy safety record, and the diseases have a heavy heartbreak record. The primary reason why these small outbreaks weren't much of a big deal, is precisely BECAUSE of the vaccinated public. You can't decry vaccines based on the success of the vaccines.! The stance that we no longer have to vaccinate because vaccination has been a success is something I can't understand. If we go down that route, we will lose herd immunity and we will back to the times when these diseases killed & crippled children.
Back to top

amother
Copper


 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 9:00 pm
amother [ Violet ] wrote:
I identify something as antiscience when it is precisely so. If you have scientific refutation, please put it forth and lets discuss.

I haven't discounted the risks of vaccines. I've just asked for the understanding of the fear of the much lesser risk of vaccines versus the much higher risk of the disease. That's what I've been asking for in multiple posts, and haven't gotten any thing substantial.

It is precisely that - a risk assessment. Vaccines have a heavy safety record, and the diseases have a heavy heartbreak record. The primary reason why these small outbreaks weren't much of a big deal, is precisely BECAUSE of the vaccinated public. You can't decry vaccines based on the success of the vaccines.! The stance that we no longer have to vaccinate because vaccination has been a success is something I can't understand. If we go down that route, we will lose herd immunity and we will back to the times when these diseases killed & crippled children.

measles and mumps in school age kids are benign nothing unlike chickenpox. now that theres a vaccine they became dangerous lest an adult whose vax immunity wore off gets any of these and suffers consequences. I honestly know of close to 100 children who had measles during hte outbreak 2 years ago and every single one of them survived healthy and whole and with lifetime immunity to boot. the girls don't have to worry about the future pregnancies or newborn babies (as many vaxxed women did 2 years ago). the vaccines for these diseases, by eliminating them as a CHILDHOOD disease, made them become dangerous (by putting vulnerable adults in harms way) when the outbreaks do inevitably happen.

diphtheria should come off the mandated vaccine list since there were only 2 recorded cases in the us between 2004 and 2015. perhaps it can be mandated for travelers to yemen and venezuela. yes, at a certain point it was maybe necessary (dont know enough about it) but right now shooting up 2,4,6 month olds with a disease they have almost no chance of catching makes people wary of the rest of hte whole schedule.
Back to top

small bean




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 9:02 pm
amother [ Violet ] wrote:
I identify something as antiscience when it is precisely so. If you have scientific refutation, please put it forth and lets discuss.

I haven't discounted the risks of vaccines. I've just asked for the understanding of the fear of the much lesser risk of vaccines versus the much higher risk of the disease. That's what I've been asking for in multiple posts, and haven't gotten any thing substantial.

It is precisely that - a risk assessment. Vaccines have a heavy safety record, and the diseases have a heavy heartbreak record. The primary reason why these small outbreaks weren't much of a big deal, is precisely BECAUSE of the vaccinated public. You can't decry vaccines based on the success of the vaccines.! The stance that we no longer have to vaccinate because vaccination has been a success is something I can't understand. If we go down that route, we will lose herd immunity and we will back to the times when these diseases killed & crippled children.


How do you know that unvaccinated population would suffer from measels today like prevaccination?
Back to top

#BestBubby




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 9:31 pm
Since the CDC QUADRUPLED (4x) the vaccine schedule in 1990, we have the sickest children
in the history of USA.
I consider vaccines HIGHER risk than measles, mumps or chicken pox.

1:5 teens had episode of mental illness

1:6 children are learning disabled

1:6 children are allergic (can be FATAL)

1:8 children have IBS

1:10 children have ADHD

1:13 children have asthma (can be FATAL)

1:25 children have Epilepsy/Seizure Disorder

1:45 children have AUTISM and keeps increasing

1:250 children have Tourettes Syndrome

1:400 children have Diabetes

1:775 babies die of SIDS

1:1,000 children have Celiac Disease

1:5,560 children have CANCER

ZERO deaths from Measles, Mumps or Chickenpox (in USA).

432 deaths reported to VAERS in 2016

4,000+ deaths from Covid Vax in Just FOUR MONTHS in USA

10,000+ deaths from Covid Vax in Just FOUR MONTHS in Europe


Last edited by #BestBubby on Tue, Jun 01 2021, 9:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top

Laiya




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 9:33 pm
mig100 wrote:
Simple. I figured that out. Because those videos are sensational and build hysteria and get to peoples emotions.

Not everybody is logical.


It goes both ways. Fear and hysteria were necessary to the success of the lockdowns. And to the vaccine drive for that matter.
Back to top

amother
Maroon


 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 9:36 pm
mig100 wrote:
Simple. I figured that out. Because those videos are sensational and build hysteria and get to peoples emotions.

Not everybody is logical.


And the media didn't sensationalized covid? CNN admitted they rounded up the numbers to drive up the fear factor and build hysteria.
Back to top

amother
Jade


 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 9:55 pm
small bean wrote:
We are talking about all vaccines. Antivaxxers don't take any vaccines.

We have something called annimmune sysytem. That's science. The immune sysytem is designed to fight all illnesses. If you're healthy, your body should fight all illnesses well. That means you eat healthy, healthy weight, excercise etc. The immune system works, every minute you have thousands of bacteria and viruses trying to enter your body mad fights it off.

The common cold used to kill people, now it's no big deal for most people because our bodies have some sort of barrier there. It can borrow similar antibodies.

Do you drink boiling tap water? I assume not because were afraid of ingesting lead. Do you eat aluminum? I assume not, it can cause cancer. Science tells us that certain ingredients are harmful to ingest. Therefor knowing all ingredients that go into vaccines, one can wonder what tge impact is.

I'm not antivax so I have some rebuttals. But there is definitely truth to what they're saying even if I have a different risk assesment.
I’m vaccine hesitant and this information is lacking nuance. Many seemingly healthy people have issues with their immune systems. And even healthy immune systems are far from perfect. And none of us are perfectly healthy in today’s world, thanks to environmental toxins, depleted soil, and soon. And sometimes the way pathogens do damage via other organs, circumventing or outrunning the immune system. And sometimes the damage is the immune system itself, like with cytokine storms. So this whole immune systems are perfect the way they are ribs me the wrong way a little. There’s more, but I don’t have the head for it now.

And the concern with vaccines isn’t just the other ingredients. It’s primarily the immune activation that’s most problematic. At least with standard vaccines. With covid mRNA vaccines, the spike proteins seem to be a biggie. And the antibody cascade as well. Antibodies are double edged swords.
Back to top

amother
Jade


 

Post Tue, Jun 01 2021, 10:03 pm
smss wrote:
So, we can talk about aluminum and mercury and all that stuff another time.

But it seems like you're talking about the covid vaccine. Besides for mRNA, the other ingredients in the Pfizer vaccine are sugar, salt, and lipids (fat). Moderna is similar.

How can your immune system simultaneously be so powerful and invincible that no illness can get past it, and so weak and fragile that a vaccine will destroy you?
Im not the poster you’re quoting but I am another vaccine hesitant poster. I don’t believe immune systems are invincible. At all. Nor do I think a single vaccine will “destroy you” necessarily. But immune systems are delicately balanced between activation and regulation, and vaccines are designed to activate unnaturally, and circumvent the regulatory arm in a way that natural infections generally don’t. Yes, many people seem to do fine with vaccines, and yes, there are people who’s immune systems get activated by infections and then don’t down regulate properly, but with vaccines you’re deliberately tripping your immune system that way. You can read up on vaccines and th1/th2 skewing.
Back to top

Ema of 5




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jun 02 2021, 8:56 am
amother [ Seagreen ] wrote:
This is not the case at all.

If you say so.
Back to top

Ema of 5




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jun 02 2021, 8:58 am
amother [ Seagreen ] wrote:
This discussion isn't about the covid vaccine. It's about the regular vaccines given to kids.

The covid vaccine is a vaccine, therefore it can be discussed.
Back to top

Ema of 5




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jun 02 2021, 9:03 am
amother [ Violet ] wrote:
BECAUSE THEY NEED THE LARGE NUMBERS TO ACHIEVE HERD IMMUNITY.

I'm using all caps - because this has been repeated countless of times.

Ok, so pro-vaxx can publicize their stance because the numbers are needed, but anti-vaxx can’t publicize their stance? It’s a two way street- both sides should be able to share. Anti-vaxxers being vocal and trying to educate pro-vaxxers or those who are on the fence doesn’t harm anyone. I certainly hope no one is making their decision based on discussions here, but rather after they speak with their own doctors.
Back to top

Ema of 5




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jun 02 2021, 9:07 am
amother [ Violet ] wrote:
Well, that is the goal of the this vaccination effort. The goal is to get herd immunity, so life, school and work can resume to normal. But until we don't have herd immunity, the restrictions are still in play. But for those who are helping push the herd immunity effort forward, the exemptions are given.

Once the goal is reached, life should return to normal. Until then, everyone has to do their part. You can choose to do your part in either getting vaccinated, or you can choose to do your part by abiding by the restrictions. That is the choice nowadays, regardless of our opinions of it.

This is what I don’t understand. Her immunity doesn’t exist for vaccines that are needed yearly. If herd immunity is the goal, why is this vaccine going to be an annual or biannual vaccine? If it is going to be annual or biannual, why are they discussing herd immunity? No one discusses herd immunity when discussing the flu shot, because it’s not about herd immunity. So which is it?
Back to top

southernbubby




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jun 02 2021, 9:56 am
Ema of 4 wrote:
This is what I don’t understand. Her immunity doesn’t exist for vaccines that are needed yearly. If herd immunity is the goal, why is this vaccine going to be an annual or biannual vaccine? If it is going to be annual or biannual, why are they discussing herd immunity? No one discusses herd immunity when discussing the flu shot, because it’s not about herd immunity. So which is it?


For whatever reason, NY now has less than a 1% test positivity rate while India and Malaysia are imploding from positive cases. It seems like we may have herd immunity.
Back to top

Ema of 5




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jun 02 2021, 12:13 pm
southernbubby wrote:
For whatever reason, NY now has less than a 1% test positivity rate while India and Malaysia are imploding from positive cases. It seems like we may have herd immunity.

But if we (I live in NY) have herd immunity, then why the need for a yearly or twice yearly vaccine in addition? Diseases for which we have acquired herd immunity occasionally may require a booster, but certainly not so frequently. If it’s herd immunity, then no need for the yearly vaccine. If it’s not herd immunity, then why say it is?
Back to top
Page 5 of 6   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Children's Health -> Vaccinations

Related Topics Replies Last Post
Facial moisturizer- anti-aging, sensitive, dry skin
by amother
1 Tue, Mar 05 2024, 12:29 pm View last post
Has anyone tried AHAVA skin care products- anti aging?
by amother
6 Sun, Mar 03 2024, 12:16 am View last post
Anti-Semitism in hiring
by amother
2 Tue, Feb 06 2024, 9:35 pm View last post
Anti-aging cream for 30 yr old?
by amother
1 Mon, Jan 08 2024, 11:11 am View last post
Are you taking anti depressants while on Ozempic?
by amother
1 Sun, Dec 17 2023, 10:02 pm View last post