• 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]

There are sources all over the place that claim that the flu shots as 60% effective and more... in my age group I would say they are 95%. They are a waste of time for most people accept the elderly.

It is a bit of opinion based off of facts. Think what you like though, all good.
Okay, then show me the facts. Give me the source. Otherwise, sorry, it is just opinion.
 
Okay, then show me the facts. Give me the source. Otherwise, sorry, it is just opinion.

"last year’s vaccine was only 60 percent effective"

Was Your Flu Shot A Waste Of Time This Year? « CBS Denver

That being said I don't really care. I took the shot twice and both times I got the flu within a day or two. Only two times in 11 years or so that I got the flu. Cost me money and made me sick. Nobody I knew was getting the flu shot and I don't recall any of them ever getting the flu. We talked about it that is why I remember... what a waste it was for people of our age group, at least.
 
Judging by your immature rants after every reply to your posts, I don't think you understand what a conversation is any more than you understand vaccines.

:lamo

And yet........
 
"last year’s vaccine was only 60 percent effective"

That's a glib summary of your link.

It's not 60% effective against the flu. It's almost full protection against three strains of the flu, and partial protection against the mutated strain (50/50).
 
I wouldn't say you lack compassion. What you lack is perspective and rationality.

Your child apparently got hit by an adverse reaction that is so rare, her doctors didn't recognize it. Statistically, even given your allegations of underreporting, it is far safer to vaccinate than not.

Oddly enough, however, when the statistically improbable happens, it can change your viewpoint. :roll:
 
You'd consider it? Seriously?

So if there was a resurgence of smallpox, you'd wait until after it reaches epidemic status to consider taking the smallpox vaccine?



Unless they aren't.

This is not an individual health issue, it's also a community health issue. There are many people who are unable to receive vaccines, because their health doesn't allow it or their immune systems are compromised. Vaccines are also highly effective, but not 100%; among other factors, the immunity can wear off. The more people who are immunized, the smaller the vectors for transmission.

Plus, we know that mandatory vaccinations have completely eradicated certain diseases, such as smallpox and polio. I have no doubt that for those diseases, compulsory vaccination was the best available option.



Good news! Flu vaccines aren't all that profitable. The profit margins are lower than other drugs, and they have to destroy all unused stock at the end of the year. They make a lot more money on boner pills and drugs to thicken your eyelashes than flu vaccines.



Please, spare us such nonsense.

Specific diseases are spread by poor conditions -- e.g. cholera will spread in communities without adequate water supplies. Chickenpox, for example, is airborne and highly contagious; prior to the vaccine, it routinely spread throughout otherwise healthy people, including in affluent communities.



You don't get the chickenpox from eating Frosted Flakes. Before the chicken pox vaccine was issued in 1995, and long before Americans were as fat as they are today, chickenpox routinely spread throughout affluent communities.



What is this, the Horatio Alger story?

Polio didn't spread because of sugar, or big waist lines, or video games, or a lack of resources. Polio wasn't stopped by kids exercising outside and eating right. Polio was eradicated in the US because of a vaccine.

Obviously, certain specific diseases are rare today because of better diets (scurvy) and running water (cholera). However, vaccination keeps a disease like the measles in check. The potential harms of the vaccines are extremely small, and vastly outweighed by the harms of a failure to vaccinate.

I never said lifestyle changes would stop a disease in progress, I said they can prevent disease from taking hold. Big difference. It's why countries like China and India have survived throughout the ages. Every time there's a plague, or a famine, millions of people die, but compare that to the hundreds of millions that live because of their age old knowledge about bolstering the body. Modern medicine that is manufactured by the west doesn't know anything about prevention. They need a pathogen to have any purpose at all as a body of knowledge. If a healthy person walks into a doctor's office, they'll just get sent home.

What I'm talking about is frankly beyond your comprehension because it would require you to release the superiority complex you have around your understanding of your current medical model.

Also note that I acknowledged vaccines as part of disease control. I never said they are useless. Get your fingers out of your ears. I'm saying we need a more comprehensive system of prevention because as it stands we just tell people to eat well, exercise, and drink plenty of water as prevention for virtually any disease. Even the American Cancer Society says that crap. It's not doing anything. People have no self-awareness of their own bodies, how they work, their needs, and how to balance things that are out of balance in order to prevent disease.

Anyway, I'm not getting involved in another lengthy argument about this. Do what you want, it really has nothing to do with me. I will never get a vaccine unless there is mortal danger. If a deadly disease were spreading to communities near me I'd get the shot but aside from that I'm happy with my body's immune system as is, thank you.
 
That's a glib summary of your link.

It's not 60% effective against the flu. It's almost full protection against three strains of the flu, and partial protection against the mutated strain (50/50).

And if the three strains do not pop up this year it is not effective...
 
And if the three strains do not pop up this year it is not effective...

And if they do, and people stop getting vaccines... see the current Measles situation, on steroids. Vaccines don't work retroactively, so you're screwed if you get the flu and it kills you.
 
You listed specific categories of people that are susceptible. We have an ongoing outbreak. I asked if, since you listed the susceptible groups, they are in fact the ones contracting the measles. Wouldnt it have been much more direct and honest for you to have said "you know...I simply dont know the answer to that question"? I mean...that IS what you said...

Is that who has been contracting the measles during this latest outbreak?

The original question asked was this.
How does an unvaccinated person put a vaccinated person at risk? Explain it. No one else has. They just keep chanting a nonsensical slogan.
I answered the question asked. Clear and concise. Rebut my answer.
Dishonest - nope-
Not into BS crap about my being dishonest. Fair or not? Over to you

The only ones who would know that answer are the health authorities.
Call them and ask.
 
And if they do, and people stop getting vaccines... see the current Measles situation, on steroids. Vaccines don't work retroactively, so you're screwed if you get the flu and it kills you.

I am already screwed... I have a crazy ex-wife.
 
I am simply discussing risks real and potential that many here refuse to accept as a remote possibility or that they do exist but are irrelevant and that some parents need to just "take one for the team".
I call shenanigans.

Numerous people have discussed those risks. The more critical point is that the risks are extremely small. Few rational people hesitate to give their children aspirin, or cough medicine, or antibiotics because of the potential risks -- which are greater than those associated with vaccines.


That's all... vaccines should NEVER be mandatory.
Yes, actually, many vaccines should be mandatory.

Polio and smallpox were disastrous diseases, and they were eradicated in the US thanks to.. wait for it... compulsory vaccination.

There should be no question that a sufficiently dangerous disease merits compulsory vaccinations.
 
Those are facts. Additionally the two times I did get the flu vaccine... I got the flu that week. Only two times that I got the flu in that decade.

Did you have a blood test that confirmed actual influenza or did you just get sick?

A large portion of the population routinely misidentifies a cold or a stomach bug as "the flu," as the symptoms are similar. (albeit usually less severe)
 
Oddly enough, however, when the statistically improbable happens, it can change your viewpoint. :roll:
Yes, I'm aware that emotions are powerful. That's why when I observe someone reacting emotionally -- such as cursing out people on a public forum -- I say their opinions are not rational.
 
I call shenanigans.

Numerous people have discussed those risks. The more critical point is that the risks are extremely small. Few rational people hesitate to give their children aspirin, or cough medicine, or antibiotics because of the potential risks -- which are greater than those associated with vaccines.



Yes, actually, many vaccines should be mandatory.

Polio and smallpox were disastrous diseases, and they were eradicated in the US thanks to.. wait for it... compulsory vaccination.

There should be no question that a sufficiently dangerous disease merits compulsory vaccinations.

Polio isn't compulsory... you want to be protected then get the vaccine... which STILL might not work and does eventually wear off
 
I never said lifestyle changes would stop a disease in progress, I said they can prevent disease from taking hold.
Not when it comes to chickenpox, measles, and other highly contagious diseases.

What you said was, and I quote: "The root of epidemic disease is unhealthy populations with inadequate resources." You also blamed disease on American diet. Diseases like chickenpox, measles, polio, smallpox and the like don't spread because of those conditions. You can try to twist around it, but I feel fairly comfortable in my interpretation.


It's why countries like China and India have survived throughout the ages.
I'm sorry, but that's absurd. Humans have survived for thousands of years, all over the globe, despite living without any medications and in unsanitary conditions. The result is high infant mortality rates, people dying younger than they would today, and people suffering for years with painful conditions.


Every time there's a plague, or a famine, millions of people die, but compare that to the hundreds of millions that live because of their age old knowledge about bolstering the body.
I'll stick to the millions that die in those plagues, and who blame the disease on demons and spirits and deities, instead of knowing that it's a bacteria spread by fleas that are carried by rats.


Modern medicine that is manufactured by the west doesn't know anything about prevention. They need a pathogen to have any purpose at all as a body of knowledge. If a healthy person walks into a doctor's office, they'll just get sent home.
I'm sorry to tell you that this is nearly complete bull****.

Vaccines are preventative medicine. Vaccines do work. You haven't presented a stitch of evidence to the contrary.

Western medicine has figured out how we can avoid all sorts of diseases, such as the aforementioned scurvy, cholera, STD's.... Chinese acupuncturists didn't figure out that germs and bacteria cause disease; South American shamans didn't figure out that washing your hands helps prevent the spread of disease. I know of no evidence that non-Western medicine is actually any good at predicting diseases years in advance, let alone effectively preventing diseases.

Thanks to empirical and scientific methods, we know that viruses exist; that germs exist; that bacteria can be beneficial and harmful; that genes play various roles in medical conditions, and so forth. We also know, using empirical and scientific methods, that non-Western methods generally don't work.

It's not a superiority complex. It's results.


Also note that I acknowledged vaccines as part of disease control. I never said they are useless. Get your fingers out of your ears.
Right, so the reason why refuse to take vaccines unless there's a massive deadly epidemic is because you acknowledge they're a part of disease control. Heck, right in your own response you said you wouldn't get a vaccine unless your life was in mortal danger.

I also find it bizarre that you criticize Western medicine for its alleged de-emphasis of prevention, yet you refuse to actually take one of the most effective tools we have to prevent common diseases.


I'm saying we need a more comprehensive system of prevention because as it stands we just tell people to eat well, exercise, and drink plenty of water as prevention for virtually any disease. Even the American Cancer Society says that crap. It's not doing anything.
The "Western" medical establishment is largely concluding that you should eat well, get roughly 30 minutes of exercise a day, avoid processed food, don't smoke, and this will prevent certain conditions -- like heart disease, diabetes and certain cancers.


Do what you want, it really has nothing to do with me.
Unfortunately, it does. As I mentioned previously, *cough* scientific evidence has established that this is not just an individual choice, it also affects the community around you. By refusing to get vaccinated, you are not only a freeloader on the protection offered by others, you offer those diseases another vector for transmission. You are, in a very small way, causing harm to your community. Since you claim to understand that vaccines work, I don't see how your choice is a rational one, or one to be proud of.
 
Did you have a blood test that confirmed actual influenza or did you just get sick?

A large portion of the population routinely misidentifies a cold or a stomach bug as "the flu," as the symptoms are similar. (albeit usually less severe)

I don't go to the doctor in general. Waste of time and money. Feel free to come to your own conclusion though...

One thing I love is how they say you can't get the flu from the shot but you side effects are this:

Runny nose
Wheezing
Headache
Vomiting
Muscle aches
Fever

And here are the symptoms of the flu itself:

Fever and extreme coldness (chills shivering, shaking (rigor))
Cough
Nasal congestion
Runny nose
Sneezing
Body aches, especially joints and throat
Fatigue
Headache
Irritated, watering eyes
 
Last edited:
Those are facts. Additionally the two times I did get the flu vaccine... I got the flu that week. Only two times that I got the flu in that decade.

Would be possible if you did the kind you inhale because that's a live virus. The shot is not a live virus so it wouldn't be possible for it to cause the flu.
 
Would be possible if you did the kind you inhale because that's a live virus. The shot is not a live virus so it wouldn't be possible for it to cause the flu.

Exactly.

From livescience

Can you get the flu from the flu shot?

"It’s a myth that you can get flu from the flu vaccine," Schaffner said.


The viruses in the flu shot are killed, so people cannot get the flu from a flu vaccine.

However, because it takes about two weeks for people to build up immunity after they get the flu vaccine, some people may catch the flu shortly after their vaccinated, if they are exposed to the flu during this time period.

Some people may also mistakenly attribute symptoms of a cold to the vaccine, Schaffner said.

The nasal spray vaccine contains a "live attenuated" flu virus, but the virus is weakened so that it cannot cause the flu. The viruses in the nasal spray can't replicate in the warm temperatures of the lungs and other parts in the body. However, because temperatures in the nose are colder, the virus causes a small infection in the nose. This infection does not cause symptoms in most people, but in some people, it causes symptoms such as runny nose and sore throat, Schaffner said.

Read more:

Flu Shot Facts & Side Effects (Updated for 2014-2015)
 
What is it about measles vaccines? Vaccines for measles didn't exist when I was going to school. You got the disease, of which there were 2 versions, one lasted for 3 days, and the other, the bad one lasted for about 2 weeks. Then you were immune for life. Our parents and grandparents had all had measles, and nobody worried about it, nor did anybody ever die of it. What has happened? Was measles so eradicated that no one now has any immunity toward it?

wrong. peopled died of it. and others suffered life-long problems from it.
 
Even that research was discredited. Do you have anything else to add?

I'd love to read the research that discredits this. Please provide.
 
They build a superior artificial resistance to that particular virus. Natural =/= better.

I mean, you're not trying to suggest that exposing people to three viruses naturally is better, are you? Because I got a scoreboard for you to look at.

Wrong. Natural immunity is far superior to the artificial resistance provided by vaccines. It's not even close.

I'm not suggesting anything. I stated a fact. Vaccines do not afford the same immunity as actually getting the disease.

Now, I'd love to see this scoreboard you're talking about.
 
"last year’s vaccine was only 60 percent effective"

Was Your Flu Shot A Waste Of Time This Year? « CBS Denver

That being said I don't really care. I took the shot twice and both times I got the flu within a day or two. Only two times in 11 years or so that I got the flu. Cost me money and made me sick. Nobody I knew was getting the flu shot and I don't recall any of them ever getting the flu. We talked about it that is why I remember... what a waste it was for people of our age group, at least.
You said 95% ineffective. Your source says 60% effective...aka 40% ineffective. You were way off.
 
Wrong. Natural immunity is far superior to the artificial resistance provided by vaccines. It's not even close.

I'm not suggesting anything. I stated a fact. Vaccines do not afford the same immunity as actually getting the disease.

Now, I'd love to see this scoreboard you're talking about.
In some cases, the vaccines provide even better immunity. The Hib (Haemophilus Influenzae type b) and tetanus vaccines actually provide more effective immunity than natural infection.

Natural immunity can last longer, but it requires getting the infection in the first place. What good is being naturally immune to polio if you already lost your legs to it? Sure, you can brag that your immunity to future polio infection is better than those vaccinated, but you're the one who can't walk.

Furthermore, people who get the chickenpox are immune to getting it again, but often develop shingles as a result later in life. Not so for people who were vaccinated.
 
Not when it comes to chickenpox, measles, and other highly contagious diseases.

What you said was, and I quote: "The root of epidemic disease is unhealthy populations with inadequate resources." You also blamed disease on American diet. Diseases like chickenpox, measles, polio, smallpox and the like don't spread because of those conditions. You can try to twist around it, but I feel fairly comfortable in my interpretation.



I'm sorry, but that's absurd. Humans have survived for thousands of years, all over the globe, despite living without any medications and in unsanitary conditions. The result is high infant mortality rates, people dying younger than they would today, and people suffering for years with painful conditions.



I'll stick to the millions that die in those plagues, and who blame the disease on demons and spirits and deities, instead of knowing that it's a bacteria spread by fleas that are carried by rats.



I'm sorry to tell you that this is nearly complete bull****.

Vaccines are preventative medicine. Vaccines do work. You haven't presented a stitch of evidence to the contrary.

Western medicine has figured out how we can avoid all sorts of diseases, such as the aforementioned scurvy, cholera, STD's.... Chinese acupuncturists didn't figure out that germs and bacteria cause disease; South American shamans didn't figure out that washing your hands helps prevent the spread of disease. I know of no evidence that non-Western medicine is actually any good at predicting diseases years in advance, let alone effectively preventing diseases.

Thanks to empirical and scientific methods, we know that viruses exist; that germs exist; that bacteria can be beneficial and harmful; that genes play various roles in medical conditions, and so forth. We also know, using empirical and scientific methods, that non-Western methods generally don't work.

It's not a superiority complex. It's results.



Right, so the reason why refuse to take vaccines unless there's a massive deadly epidemic is because you acknowledge they're a part of disease control. Heck, right in your own response you said you wouldn't get a vaccine unless your life was in mortal danger.

I also find it bizarre that you criticize Western medicine for its alleged de-emphasis of prevention, yet you refuse to actually take one of the most effective tools we have to prevent common diseases.



The "Western" medical establishment is largely concluding that you should eat well, get roughly 30 minutes of exercise a day, avoid processed food, don't smoke, and this will prevent certain conditions -- like heart disease, diabetes and certain cancers.



Unfortunately, it does. As I mentioned previously, *cough* scientific evidence has established that this is not just an individual choice, it also affects the community around you. By refusing to get vaccinated, you are not only a freeloader on the protection offered by others, you offer those diseases another vector for transmission. You are, in a very small way, causing harm to your community. Since you claim to understand that vaccines work, I don't see how your choice is a rational one, or one to be proud of.

In order to really have this discussion properly with you it would take hours and hours of educating you, and even then you probably wouldn't even listen.

The medical system is broken. If vaccines are the only thing standing between us and epidemics then we're pretty S.O.L. because the vaccines won't last forever.
 
Back
Top Bottom