• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Vaccine Critics Turn Defensive Over Measles [W:1210]

Lakryte said:
And there is a lot more to growing healthy crops than giving them water--that doesn't mean water is ineffective. Reality is, if not for vaccines, we would be much worse off today than we currently are.
Click to expand...

Agreed...
 
stonewall50 said:
A typical childhood disease that killed people commonly in the past.
Click to expand...
...could describe something like scarlet fever, but it was never considered "common" to die from measles.
 
paddymcdougall said:
You keep saying the same thing over and over, ignoring the stats that show otherwise. Repeating something doesn't make it true.

The vaccine became available in 1963, fyi. And those of us who got the vaccine in the 60s are advised to get an MMR.
Click to expand...

When you speak to me in acronyms, I have no idea what you are talking about. English, please? What is an MMR, a magic music reward?
 
Let's get down to the nitty gritty of things involving measles. When I grew up in the 50's, you never heard of anyone dying. Please read the following article because it agrees with what I have been trying to explain to you all, a subject I will keep repeating myself over and over until you thick-headed folks get it.

Measles and measles vaccines: fourteen things to consider. ~by Roman Bystrianyk (co-author Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History) | International Medical Council on Vaccination

A killed measles virus (KMV) vaccine came into use in the United States in 1963. What you may not have heard, is that by 1963, the death rate from measles in the United States had already dropped by approximately 98%. - See more at: Measles and measles vaccines: fourteen things to consider. ~by Roman Bystrianyk (co-author Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History) | International Medical Council on Vaccination
Click to expand...

Some New England states had no deaths at all from measles. During this year, the whole of New England (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut) had only 5 deaths attributed to measles. Deaths from asthma were 56 times greater, accidents 935 times greater, motor vehicle accidents 323 times greater, other accidents 612 times greater, and heart disease 9,560 times greater. [4]

In England the measles vaccine was introduced in 1968. By this point measles deaths were extremely rare. The actual death rate from measles in England had fallen by an almost full 100%. [5]
- See more at: Measles and measles vaccines: fourteen things to consider. ~by Roman Bystrianyk (co-author Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History) | International Medical Council on Vaccination
Click to expand...

Here is something else quite interesting about this vaccination that some of you say children must have. No wonder parents don't want their children getting this vaccine.

The early vaccine that was experimented with was a weakened, live measles vaccine. This vaccine resulted in a much higher fever in about half the children that received it. Meaning, they had a 106 degree fever as opposed to the 103 degree fever they might have had with natural measles.

However the vaccine produced a modified measles rash in 48 per cent of the children who received it and fever as high as 106 degrees in 83 per cent of them. [7]

- See more at: Measles and measles vaccines: fourteen things to consider. ~by Roman Bystrianyk (co-author Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History) | International Medical Council on Vaccination
Click to expand...

The rest of this article is here for you to peruse. Please conduct your research.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Just because you do not understand a reason does not make it irrational. Sorry buddy boy...
Click to expand...
The only common rational reason would be that the child is so unhealthy that they cannot be immunized, you are not arguing that is the case...so yeah, whatever argument you come up with is more than likely irrational.



Exposed... good job adding a qualifier and thus changing the argument to fit YOUR criteria. The sign of a feeble debater. :lol:
Click to expand...
That is not a "changing" of anything, the reason for immunization is to reduce/eliminate infection from exposure, it is an essential point, preexisting point of the debate......f'ing duh.



No, you just don't understand what Russian Roulette really is... it is something forced on you like a game. Otherwise EVERYTHING is Russian Roulette and that is retarded. Sticking a needle in a kid not knowing the outcome is Russian Roulette. Living a natural life where you may or may not get a disease, hit by a car or smashed by a meteor is NOT Russian Roulette.
Click to expand...
Your argument is now hinging upon a reaction to immunization, crackpot irrationality popularized by a disbarred Brit Dr. It is.....total BS.



Quite the opposite.... clowns make me laugh. :lol:
Click to expand...
Wow, and you talk about me not getting something.....that wasn't about you being sad, I sarcastically said I was sad for the "insult" I supposedly "cast".

KEK.
 
stonewall50 said:
More likely to die from an asprin complication.
Click to expand...

And complications from surgery.
Guess only an idiot would have that cancerous tumor removed, after all they might die on the operating table
 
bicycleman said:
Let's get down to the nitty gritty of things involving measles. When I grew up in the 50's, you never heard of anyone dying.
Click to expand...
And then he proceeds to list deaths caused by measles....DERP!
 
Gimmesometruth said:
The only common rational reason would be that the child is so unhealthy that they cannot be immunized, you are not arguing that is the case...so yeah, whatever argument you come up with is more than likely irrational.
Click to expand...

I am not anti-vaccine and have repeatedly stated that vaccines are good for society...

That is not a "changing" of anything, the reason for immunization is to reduce/eliminate infection from exposure, it is an essential point, preexisting point of the debate......f'ing duh.
Click to expand...

You added, "Exposed" to the argument. I stated that the majority was not getting the disease. You then said that I was wrong because the majority that are "exposed" to the disease did get it. That is changing the argument.

Your argument is now hinging upon a reaction to immunization, crackpot irrationality popularized by a disbarred Brit Dr. It is.....total BS.
Click to expand...

Tell that to those that had children have an adverse reaction to a vaccine and almost die... like my daughter. My Russian Roulette analogy is spot on. Clown.
 
Gina said:
In answer to your slippery slope, I think we can safely say that mandatory vaccinations are not blazing a trail for the practice of eugenics.
Click to expand...

Eugenics is an extreme, but giving the govt authority to proscribe medical treatment ends where?
 
Deuce said:
The government restricts your ability to endanger society in a lot of ways. Sorry this bothers you.

Tell us more about how vaccinations are similar to sterilizing the genetically inferior.
Click to expand...

That not getting vaccinated threatens society is an assumption. One may not get vaccinated and never contract or spread any disease. The idea that the govt is allowed to proscribe any medical treatment, or force anyone to receive any medication or chemical in their body is a dangerous idea.
 
Gina said:
Lots of things could lead to others, but it's highly unlikely mandatory vaccinations could lead the government from practicing eugenics.
Click to expand...

No, but it's very likely that the precedent could lead the government to force other things upon it's citizens.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I am not anti-vaccine and have repeatedly stated that vaccines are good for society...



You added, "Exposed" to the argument. I stated that the majority was not getting the disease. You then said that I was wrong because the majority that are "exposed" to the disease did get it. That is changing the argument.
Click to expand...
Good grief, exposure is how one contracts the disease, we have little exposure because immunization has caused a near elimination within the US (why the f am I having to explain this simple chit to you?).



Tell that to those that had children have an adverse reaction to a vaccine and almost die... like my daughter. My Russian Roulette analogy is spot on. Clown.
Click to expand...
And now, you change your story from "we don't know what she reacted to"...to...she almost died from the vaccine.

You remind me why I have so little interaction with you, you cannot, will not debate in an honest matter, your method is to distract to absurdity.
 
Bodhisattva said:
You don't understand my argument... as most don't when they jump in half-assed.
Click to expand...
Apparently you cannot state how I misunderstood anything, open ended argument is the weasel way.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Indeed, it is truly laughable that anybody would make that kind of an argument. Scary that anybody could be so blindly doctrinaire as to think that freedom of choice is applicable to vaccinations. From a truly libertarian perspective, you have the same "freedom of choice" to vaccinate as you have "freedom of choice" to set of explosives or otherwise cause harm to others. Choosing not to vaccinate is a form of assault.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't it be applicable to vaccinations? Either one has personal sovereignty over their own body, or they don't.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Good grief, exposure is how one contracts the disease, we have little exposure because immunization has caused a near elimination within the US (why the f am I having to explain this simple chit to you?).
Click to expand...

Then how were people not getting sick prior to vaccines? Not a lot of exposure obviously...

And now, you change your story from "we don't know what she reacted to"...to...she almost died from the vaccine.
Click to expand...

She had an adverse reaction to the MMR vaccine. I haven't changed my story. The doctors were not sure how or why it happened.

You remind me why I have so little interaction with you, you cannot, will not debate in an honest matter, your method is to distract to absurdity.
Click to expand...

You just can't follow a story and you choose to have little interaction with me? :lol:

Apparently you cannot state how I misunderstood anything, open ended argument is the weasel way.
Click to expand...

Was I required to explain to you your error, or something? No. When you misunderstand something but assert that you are, in fact, correct, it is not my job to explain it to you... just to point out your error and see how you apply your problem solving skills... which appear to be not much to write home about.
 
mac said:
Why wouldn't it be applicable to vaccinations? Either one has personal sovereignty over their own body, or they don't.
Click to expand...

Apparently not once the "greater good" argument is applied... of course that opens up Pandora's Box, but they ignore that.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Then how were people not getting sick prior to vaccines? Not a lot of exposure obviously...
Click to expand...
Of course there was exposure, FFS....WTF is wrong with you?



She had an adverse reaction to the MMR vaccine. I haven't changed my story. The doctors were not sure how or why it happened.
Click to expand...
As i said, you don't know, they don't know....so the reaction was undetermined. You still want to get them immunized....so your "RR" is.....wait for it....pointless.


You just can't follow a story and you choose to have little interaction with me? :lol:
Click to expand...
Again, you can't get anything straight....I did in fact follow along, you just confirmed that, but I am reminded that you do not debate honestly....which is why I don't bother most of the time to respond to your posts.



Was I required to explain to you your error, or something? No. When you misunderstand something but assert that you are, in fact, correct, it is not my job to explain it to you... just to point out your error and see how you apply your problem solving skills... which appear to be not much to write home about.
Click to expand...
We just determined that I was following along, so that claim by you was incorrect and merely a distraction.
 
Bodhisattva said:
None of that is forced on a person... don't drive. Don't be a pilot or fly. Grow your own food. Don't work at a nuclear power plant.
Click to expand...

Don't attend public school.
 
The ebola thing was not that long ago, and the people that argued that closing borders would make the outbreak worse, that quarantines are pointless, and has a 50+% casualty rate of those infected.

They are the same people getting all fluffy when 90+% of people are already vaccinated, they are "protected", from a disease that has a 99.993% survival and recovery rate.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Of course there was exposure, FFS....WTF is wrong with you?



As i said, you don't know, they don't know....so the reaction was undetermined. You still want to get them immunized....so your "RR" is.....wait for it....pointless.


Again, you can't get anything straight....I did in fact follow along, you just confirmed that, but I am reminded that you do not debate honestly....which is why I don't bother most of the time to respond to your posts.




We just determined that I was following along, so that claim by you was incorrect and merely a distraction.
Click to expand...

:lol: Oh My god...

... This has moved well beyond retarded.

:2wave:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom