And no I am no expert so I dont understand all of that, I go by a composite of what I read. I do not totally believe one over the other, as in most arguments, but try to get truth somewhere in between. Yes I have read before on how vaccines are made, but the whole bit about not exposing babies when too young vs exposing them, sorry I start to get lost and neither side seems to have proven itself. And I definitely do not understand the side benefit exposure, only get bits and pieces with my limited knowledge. What I can say about it, what I do understand of it seems to make sense, but will fully admit I do not understand the science behind it.

Sorry but you are the jack ass spreading mis information. I have stated facts and given reasons why one might not get a vaccine. All you have done is given nothing but state blindly that you are an idiot if you dont get vaccines, because there is not a single reason not too. Even though I have stated just a partial list of reasons not too.

And once again, measles was already well in decline for decades long prior to vaccine coming out. But go ahead and continue spreading that miss information as well.

Your reasons and "facts" are not valid when weighed with the consequence. Half of them arnt even relevant to the goal of vaccines. It is as simple as that. You yourself have admitted to not knowing much about how vaccines actually work and yet you feel qualified to tell people to not get vaccinated because you have a friend that had a kid with a bad reaction. Jesus. Hopefully you don't spread your brand of stupidity anywhere near where I live. We have enough of that fluff around here keeping me awake at night.

As for measles, let's go look at statistics and compare them to countries with a high vaccination rate and ones with a low rate. There is no way you are going to sit there and say the measles vaccine us ineffective. I can't handle this stupidity anymore. Kill your kids if you want, but if you endanger my kid we are going to have a problem.

I already said I regretted making the why bother statement. But that was not part of the fact, that was my REALLY BAD argument for the fact.

I never implied nor inferred that flu shots were worthless. I think it is great for high risk people. HOWEVER, I did actually say that tool is being over used and trying to have everyone get Flu shots is a prime example of that.
I also already apologized to Trife about asthma.

I admit when I am wrong, I thought you did as well, but guess you are too caught up in this to think clearly.

The frequency of your admitted incorrectness should tell you something about the rest of your arguments. Than

WHAT!!!!!

I NEVER told anyone not to get vaccinated. You really are not reading AT ALL. I said to do your homework and research it first, not simply get it because some idiot bad mouthed person like Mr Ford said too.

Now shut the fluff up and go look at the graphs for measles deaths. Better yet, go look at how many deaths CDC claimed were in the US when it launched the measles vaccine in 1963.

And how many have there been since the wide spread use of the vaccine?

How many are there in countries that do not use the vaccine in large percentages?

Just because the number of people dying before the vaccine was dropping, doesn't mean the vaccine is ineffective or not worth it. additionally, getting the measles can have terrible consequences other than death. Not to mention transfering it to immunocompromized kids that have a higher chance of dying. One little fluffkid with the measles walks into a pediatric hospital with ALL patients to and the results would be disastrous.

You don't know how any of this works. Stop acting like you do. people might believe you.

Once again you are not reading anything but what you want to hear. I never said it was ineffective. You really need to let your mind take over instead of your emotions, cause I know you are smarter than that.

You dont either, so stop telling people to blindly go get it and you are stupid if you dont.

Let's see

"why bother with vaccines if they don't eradicate diseases"

"Measles was declining before the vaccine"

"big pharma is only out to get money and shouldn't be trusted"

"Vaccines are only a stopgap and weaken our immune systems"

"They arnt a cure"

Yeah man, you never said or inferred they were ineffective. You are a factual monster! I do read what you write, but sometimes my brains stupidity filter gets the best of me. It had been working overtime reading your verbal diarrhea. The problem with the internet is it makes people like you think they have a right to be heard. I wish you couldn't be heard. Honestly.

Actually, a group of CA senators are introducing legislation to remove the personal belief clause. The press conference was just within an hour ago.

I think anyone who believes without a shadow of a doubt about any given topic that their stance is 100% accurate and anyone who disagrees is an "idiot" needs to get off of their high horse.

Smoking was the perfect example. EVERYONE knows it's bad. Not one study has proven there to be any benefits to smoking. Yet - people have the choice. People choose to inhale toxic carcinogens 2, 10, 24+ times a day. While the smoking in public laws are getting more strict, it's taking a long time and quite frankly nearly any non-smoker is still subjected to unwanted second hand smoke at least a few times a month or year. How many non-smokers die of lung cancer because they were unwillingly inhaling those chemicals? As a child I grew up in a smoke-filled home and my health has suffered as a result, as many other people whose childhoods were before the 2000's. Even today mothers will smoke during pregnancy. You can't stop them, and children suffer because of this. Do I think all people should stop smoking for their health and for the sake of their children's health? Yes. But it's not up to me. It is THEIR choice.

It just proves that you can show someone all of the facts in the world and yet people will still choose to do what they feel is best for themselves and their family.

Calling peoples "idiots" doesn't make you more correct. It just shows a lack of respect when discussing a topic that has been debated over and over.

I will leave you with this - Science "proved" to us that we shouldn't co-sleep with our babies because of the potential for SIDS. Then science "proved" to us that co-sleeping is best for our children and are now encouraging us to do so. Science, much like everything else in this world, progresses as we all learn and understand more. What was fact to you 20 years ago is not so today; calling something a fact just because there are research papers that agree with you in this moment doesn't mean anything, really. The science of the future disproves the science of the past, and this is called progress - we can only do the best we can with what we have and what we know in the moment. But that is just my two cents. I'm not claiming to be 100% right about anything. Let's put the egos aside and if you continue to debate with each other, let's keep it civil. Calling people "idiots" does not prove your point, it only shows your true character.

Nope I never did, you are reading much more into it than what I ever said. Especially considering only one of those quotes was actually referring to measles vaccine. (The one fact that stats measles was already in decline prior to vaccine) The rest were stated about vaccines in general and are things to take into consideration when reading propaganda or listening to arguments from two sides.


Anyway the point is you are obviously no expert on this matter and yet continue to try and tell everyone they are idiots and there are no reasons not to get vaccinations. There are ALWAYS pro's and con's, are always two sides to every story. And the real idiots are those that do not think for themselves but choose to listen to biased wrong blind blanket statements like you stated with no proof at all. This from the one who claims they know more than most on this topic (inferring that you know what you speak of so do not question what or why I say it, just do it). Which sorry but that is complete and utter BS.

IF there hasn't been a measles death since 2003...how many years do we have to have 100% vaccination before we can stop doing the vaccination?

Eventually, one would think, it would be safe again to allow the population to not need the vaccination anymore, right?

Anyway...trife, you have added absolutely nothing worth value to this debate, which is the definition of trolling.

mrford...when it comes to debating, i can say that i don't have as much respect for you as hawkster claims he has for you. I have seen you call us dumbasses, morons and idiots, but I haven't seen you actually present much proof of anything. Please provide the proof that definitively shows that vaccines have absolutely never caused any side effects that are dangerous to ones health. When you can do that, I will join you in telling everyone to get vaccinated.

Until then, I say everyone has their own choice to make on what vaccines to get and when.

And, personally, if my states were to force me, with no choice of my own, to get vaccines, even if I don't want them, then I would move.

wow, this sure exploded. Should have guessed when it comes down to kids.

Parents should read and know how vaccines work and how they are made. They should know the side-effects. For a small number of kids with compromised immune systems or a history of bad reactions to vaccines, then maybe it isn't wise to vaccinate. That is a conversation to be had between the parent and the doctor. If a doctor agrees it isn't wise, then the requirement for the few vaccines needed to attend public school can be waived.

Part of the conversation has gotten side-tracked, mainly because I didn't frame it really well and general internet forum workings. The main points was that many refrain from vaccinating because they believe that vaccines increase the risk of autism due to some study that has been repudiated as harshly as science can. Indeed, the # of autism diagnoses has increased since the mid 70s when vaccination requirements started going into effect. Put so has the number of TVs/computers in the house, cell phones, wireless internet, and thousands of other things. Are we widely refraining from watching TV or using the computer around kids because autism rates have increased as the # of TV sets/computers have increased? No. That is how silly the arguement of the anti-vaxx crowd is and is endandering kids who can't be vaccines as I wrote above.

i'm okay with medical exemptions.

but what i'm not okay with is heather housewife who has no medical training whatsoever making a large decision that will not only affect her child, but also the community because of some half-assed/bullfluff study/facebook post.

or, if some dumbass parent thinks they know more than the scientific community, sure let them have their choice. but block the kid from schools and whatever else society sees fit.



how i think anti-vaxxers view their kids and other kids:
https://i.imgflip.com/95x88.jpg

also, funny gif about ignant anti-vaxxing dumbasses:

http://i.imgur.com/uZC5fF9.gif

First of all, you're mixing up immunization with eradication. The reason that deaths/instances goes down is because EVERYONE (or near everyone) is vaccinated meaning that anyone who does happen to contract it or bring it into the country/state/region has a much more minuscule chance of passing it on to others -- herd immunity.

When you choose not to vaccinate because of "personal belief", you're effectively increasing the group of people who can contract and carry the disease. The bigger that group is, the more likely it is to spread. It's a stats and #'s thing underpinned by widely accepted biomedical science. Like forget the efficacy/side effects of the actual vaccine and ingredients therein; it's about getting the # of people who can contract the disease as low as possible.

Reading the replies in this thread, it seems to me like several anti-vaxxers want the benefits of herd immunity while not wanting to accept any of the "risk" for their children because they're too precious or something. Boggles my mind how they can not see themselves as jerks.

:( oh boo hoo. like i care what some tinfoilhat anti-vaxxer thinks about my posts. anyway - my posts of nothing worth value don't hurt anyone (except dumbass' feelings). people perpetuating the bullfluff science of how vaccines cause autism are hurting children. why do you like hurting children? do you masturbate to news reports of children dying of preventable diseases?

why do you hate children? why?

i'm also kinda curious if the majority of anti-vaxxers subscribe to the side of the political fence that has, in recent times, decided to shun science for some fluffin reason

+1.

As for smoking, smoking is dumb and science has proven it. People smoke because it is their choice. I think it is a dumb decision, but I can't do anything about it. As for second-hand smoke, you can avoid it and I have supported recent laws limiting smoking in public places. But smoking and viruses have one important distinction, you CAN"T see a virus, therefore you can't avoid it outside of locking yourself in your house like you can smokers.

I would not know as I do not consider myself an anti-vaxxer. I consider myself a think for yourself and do the homework first instead of blindly following stupid baseless statements such as there are no reason ever not too. (I as well as my kids have had most all the major vaccinations). There is only one that we did not allow our daughter to get vaccination for, because we looked into it and decided it was not necessary. Nor was it on the list that was required, yet schools still tried to push for it and suggested it be done. Both here and in the US. Not on WHO recommended list either. Dr's said it might be good idea but was not necessary. Yet most kids got it because they didnt question the schools nor bothered to look into it.

And Pang, what I want is for them to find actual causes and cures. Use these tools when necessary, not for every thing that comes up that they have no answers for.

As usual the Buddha is wrong. There are a lot of Buddhas in govt. They think because they think sumtin is necessary, they can tell everyone else they must do something. USA is supposed to b a land of free choice and free speech. with libtards running rampant these days its no wonder that frown ing at someone is against the law. pr any other stupid law thought of by libtards

ciao

If you actually knew me, or read what I just posted about smoking, you would know I rarely agree with governments requiring citizens to do much. This is a big exception because people's irresponsability could have a major impact other's lifes and the life of kids who can't decide for themselves and we are dealing with nasty viruses here that were health scourges for hundreds of years.

no its about someone trying to tell others how to raise their kids. I don't tell them how to raise their family, they aren't going to tell me how to raise mine. Just because you and your group of libtards like or think something is necessary, does not necessarily mean that it is need. It is a choice. Personal Choice. Same with cigarettes, you don't want to not breathe chemicals. Go live in a bubble. Not your choice whether I smoke or not. I don't fluff about you breathing my air, don't fluff about me smoking.

It is not a personal choice when your stupidity endangers others lives. It is as simple as that. If you want to live in a community and benefit from that community you need to make concessions for the betterment of that community.

If not, get the fluff out. No room for selfishness and idiocracy when it comes to deadly, preventable diseases. The consequences are dire. You can have all the freedom you want, as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others. You endangering people's lives falls under the infringing upon the rights of others category if you were wondering.

Catholicism FTW!! Lmao

I'm confused. Home Turf, I think you are agreeing with me, yet you are calling people libtards.

And trife, you are disagreeing with me, calling me an anti-vaxxer (which I am not), and you mention something about "the political fence that has, in recent times, decided to shun science" which I can only assume you mean republicans.

I assure you all..I am not a republican, not a conservative, not a liberal, and not an anti-vaxxer.

I am a registered democrat, who has a much stronger association with libertarian ideas and I am "allow individuals to choose what is best for them".

Nowhere did I ever say that noone should get vaccinated. I never said that everyone should refuse it. What I said is that people should make informed decisions. This is a good thing for you sheep, because the herd will follow, just as you do. Those of us who prefer to know what is going into our bodies will do a bit of research first to find out if we will allow it.

So, keep being sheep if you want, just stop trying to push your sheep mentality onto me.

it isnt a sheep mentality, it is a disdain for people like you making all the effort of vaccines less effective by making hasty decisions that are not backed up by facts. vaccines are positive by such a wide margine that any serious side effects are well worth the risk. i guarantee you that you feed your children wose fluff than is in these vaccines. that is selective and stupid. we all "risked" getting our children vaccinated (the ones i could get vaccinated anyways) and you fluff on all that because you are so special you do not have to participate in herd immunity. you feel that letting everyone else do the work is okay. you feel that just because you have doubts you have the right to risk my child's life. that is selfish no matter how you slice it bro. heaven help the anti-vax flufftard that infects my daughter with a preventable disease because she has no choice. thank GOD i dont live in that hippy fluff state of california. i would have moved long ago.

You are right, i dont have two kids one of which who has been getting her shots here recently. First words the doctor said, her immune system isstill weak. There is still a possibility she could contract this disease/'s. So dont tell me anything about not knowing. Keep spewing your retardness, idiot.

Here's something you all should read, ESPECIALLY the anti vaccination crowd!!

http://www.forbes.com/...oint-in-the-vaccine-wars/

I think its clear that vaccines do work. But sometimes there are bad reactions to them, such as an allergic reaction, and thats why you have to wait in the office for 15 minutes after getting a flue shot. Also, not all vaccines are effective. I read that this year's flue shot was only about 22% effective because they didn't predict the mutation of the virus wall correctly.

This year my vet called me to come in for annual booster shots for my dog. Now that is a racket. I asked what was the decrease in vaccine efficacy with time for the rabies, parvovirus and lyme disease shots, and could they point me to a reputable study with that information. They couldn't, but they did say that with older dogs they often decrease the frequency of the vaccines. But they won't tell you that while they are busy trying to sell you a set of shots and an annual checkup so they can bring you in and try to frighten you to death with pictures of tapeworms so they can sell you more fluff you don't need.

So, vaccines are good, but they don't work 100%, they have risks of side effects, and big pharma and others have an interest in lying and are quite prepared to lie to you to sell you more of them.

Of course babies immune systems are weak and developing, I think even my kids can figure that out. So what the heck does having two kids having anything to do with your initial statement. And you had to have a Dr tell you that babies immune systems are still developing and weak and yet you call me the idiot lol. Like I said you really didnt think your statement through very well.

At no time has anyone, or science ever shown proof that babies still might contract the disease is due to that though. Like I said before you have not done any research, instead all you have done is add a statement from Dr (which you should have already known) with a possible prognosis of what may happen and try to make that sound like proof that B was the cause due to A. If you had done some research you would know that yes babies still might contract the disease after being vaccinated. But it is not just babies, sometimes its kids, pregnant women, sometimes just women or even all adults. The chances for different groups still being to contract the disease after being vaccinated varies depending on which specific vaccine you are talking about.

OH wait I am the idiot. I am just spewing retarded facts. Something hardly anyone else has done, give facts. I guess next you are going to tell me adults are contracting the disease because their immune systems are still weak and developing too LMAO.

Guess what else, most of the side affects listed for these vaccines are symptoms of the actual disease too. Imagine that, just thought I would state the glaringly obvious for your benefit just in case you didnt know or the Dr didnt tell you.

http://i.imgur.com/p8QP2mu.jpg

Lol what's next, the TSA?

You mean kinda like all that you have done so far. Disdain anyone that does not fully agree with you. Most everyone here agrees with you to a point as far as I can tell. But no that is not good enough, we need to simply just agree with everything just because you simply say it is. Giving out miss information with no facts at all to back up anything you have said.
"vaccines are positive by such a wide margine that any serious side effects are well worth the risk."
Miss information with no facts to back it up. THat is simply just your opinion. Yes most vaccines are positive, but no not all of them are by such a huge margin that they would EVER be worth having 50% chance of dieing. They wouldnt ever be worth the risk of 20% chance of dieing either. Maybe in your eyes it might. But sorry I dont think everyone else would agree with you. And do not tell me there are no such examples either. Every case and each person is different, you have no clue what all conditions or issues someone may or may not have. You are not even a Dr, yet you deem it ok to call everyone a moron and an idiot because they actually decided to think for themselves or decided to look into something or decided to actually ask an expert instead of just naively listening to your rubbish speel of baseless crap and simply follow the herd, do what Mr Ford says or else you are stupid and putting me at risk.

PLEASE. People put others at risk every single day. I could come up with a big list of stuff you probably personally do every day that puts this whole planet at risk. Yet I do not try to tell you stop. No one has fluff on you and or anyone for getting vaccines nor does anyone think they are more special than anyone else, all anyone has done is fluff on you for giving bogus BS crap and expecting us to blindly follow suit. You feel that just because you say so, that I am risking YOUR child, that is complete utter rubbish, you child has not been impacted by a single thing I have said at all. To make an informed choice will NOT put your child at risk, if anything it will actually put your child at less risk. I never said to go out and make a hasty choice, I said an informed researched one. If they really make an informed choice than for the most part you will not have lost out on anything, because they will come to their own conclusion that yes for most people getting vaccinated is the wise choice. There will be those few that will arrive at conclusion that no its not the best thing for them, whether that be due to their conditions or whether that be due to uneccessary vaccines or w/e reason.

But NO, you expect those people just to listen to you and put themselves at risk just because you say so and so your kid isnt at risk. You are the one that seems to think you are more special than someone else. It is completely ok in your eyes for someone to put themself at risk as long as your kid isnt. Go ahead and kill yourself, so long as my kid gets to remain healthy.

what fluffing vaccine is 50%, or even 20% lethal? what the actual fluff are you talking about? jesus christ.

you are a dumbass, i dont need facts to back that up, i just need to read your posts. hell, vaccines dont eradicate diseases, so why bother, right? who cares about hundreds dying, at least the POSSIBILITY of side effects are eliminated!

you greately overestimate the intelligence of the general population. look, you are a tard, and you are smarter than most of the anti-vaxxers out there. tell me, why has instances of measles skyrocketed in the UK since that dreadful paper was published? the one that has been debunked in every conceivable way? is it because people went out and made well informed decisions? yeah, ok.


and this isnt just because i say so. every reputable scientific organisation agrees that vaccinations are beneficial, and should be taken by all who are able. i dont need to google and post links for you, you have the internet yourself. motherfluffing use it. form your own opinion. just stay the fluff away from my kid. it is a FACT that if you do not get vaccinated you are putting others at risk. there is a reason practices and schools are banning unvaccinated kids. it isnt just for fun dude.

oh, and just so you can have some "facts"

http://www.ovg.ox.ac.uk/measles

http://www.ovg.ox.ac.uk/...files/Measles%20Graph.png

http://www.ovg.ox.ac.uk/...s/Measles%201996-2013.PNG


is oxford good enough for you? jesus....

Try using CDC just for quick and reputable source. Once again though you do not read everything I say so I do not know why I keep bothering.

http://www.cdc.gov/.../vac-gen/side-effects.htm

There you can see just basic facts and percentages, but what I actually said is per each case by case scenario, depending on what conditions a person may have. I am no expert nor never claimed to be, but there you can plainly see that high fever is common side effect, sometimes 1 in 5 cases. IF you have done any research you will find a common theme, quite often Dr's will not recommend that babies have that particular vaccine if one of the symptoms is high fever. They are the ones likely to have 20% fatality rate.

Now look under DTaP vaccine side-effects "High fever, 105 degrees Fahrenheit or higher (about 1 child out of 16,000) " that high fever risk is not that high. But continue reading it and you will see this "Controlling fever is especially important for children who have had seizures, for any reason. It is also important if another family member has had seizures." Once again I am no expert and do not know what the actual risk is, but clearly the risk just went up for those children.

You can do the same thing for example of seizures listed as side effect. Most of them are higher than 1 in 1000, but guess what, if they have had seizure OR another family member has history of seizures, their risk will be much higher. I highly doubt most Dr's will strongly suggest and tell the parents there kid must get vaccinated or they are idiots. Nope sorry but I am sure most Dr's even if they still do recommend it, will give strong warnings along with it, IF they actually do recommend it.

Now look under Adenovirus vaccine side-effects where all severe problems are only 1%:
"blood in the urine or stool
pneumonia
inflammation of the stomach or intestines"

Once again low for MOST people, but lets say someone has lung or upper respiratory problems. I am betting their risk went over 20% with pneumonia listed as a side effect.

So go on and keep spouting how much a dumbass I am. I have actually done quite bit of reading about this. No I dont understand it all and am far from an expert, but I am not trying to tell everyone what to do or what not to do with NO facts to back it up with.

Just like Measles for example, their are two types you know. One the fatality rate is extremely rare. But just following your blindly blanket statement, you seem to think by not having vaccinations for both types that it will put your kid at risk. WRONG. Your kid has higher chance of dieing from a fire than from the other type of measles. Do you even know if the UK cases involve just one type or both types? I will be honest I dont know. I havent been curious enough to find out as most will either have vaccinations done or not. Yet only one type is it really necessary. I just disproved your so called fact btw.

Oh and as a side note, I did work in a hospital in Los Angeles mainly in accounting and billing. However I also did back up role for Guidance counselor. Both jobs entailed working with high risk kids, mostly paid for by medicaid and state of CA, which was my primary task. These kids got a vaccination (sadly I dont recall the name after all these years) every year, that was mostly donated by our hospital due to the exorbitant cost. (1 vial was like $20k that would vaccinate 7 kids). The Dr DID recommend to several of these kids NOT to have it as they were way too high a risk being over 50%. Some parents still chose to have their kids vaccinated anyway even with such a high risk, because yes this vaccine helped them tremendously. But I can tell you it was NOT fun having to talk to the ones that chose not too.

So you are right *sighs* once again, you dont need facts like this, because I am dumbass that has no clue what I am talking about. Mr Ford, get a clue, this is not the right decision for everyone, as there ARE pro's and con's for vaccinations, just as there are with everything else. STOP blindly just telling everyone they need too so that your selfish pompous ass' kid is not at risk.

it is amazing how you read the data, and come to these conclusions. you are doing a wonderful job at proving my point that people are too stupid to come to an educated decision themselves. thanks for that i suppose.


there isnt a single vaccine with a 20% mortality rate. you are assuming that people who would be warned away from vaccines like my daughter would have a higher mortality rate, how is that relative data? your interpretations of this are baffling. there is a reason they ask for family history and try to identify risk factors in vaccines. the DOCTOR can make that decision for you, not you. a 1/6 chance of a fever (MMR says fever, not high fever. reading is good!) does not mean you are going to die. literally how are you coming to this conclusion? i cant understand this. clearly it says in the sevear cases it is a 1 in a million chance.

oh, and 1 in 16,000 is a 0.00625% chance. little off from 20% i think.

you are literally supporting ignorance and slapstick decisions by hippie fluffs that dont want to vaccinate their children because they are convinced that big pharma is out to brainwash america. please stop. please stop defeating the entire purpose of group immunity. please stop using your limited brain power to try to understand something that is clearly over your level of comprehension. if a doctor says you are a candidate for a vaccine you need to get that vaccine. period.

Oh freaking hell, why cant you READ. You keep saying things that I never said. I NEVER said there is a vaccine with 20% mortality rate. And I bloody well know you know the freaking difference. You arent stupid, so stop trying to put words in my mouth to make it sound like rubbish. If those are the only ways you can dispute what I am saying than I am done.

I NEVER said I am Anti-vaxxers, in fact I am pro vaccine.
I Never told nor implied that anyone NOT get a vaccination at all.

I have simply said there are reasons why one wouldnt. For christ sakes get over yourself already.

no, because im willing to fight ignorance and stupidity in order to attempt to make my daughter safer. maybe you are right, i have no clue what you are saying, because you have no real point. you are all over the place, and when you do zero in on a point it is something stupid like vaccines arnt worth it because they arnt cures and someone might have a 1:16000 chance at an adverse effect so they shouldnt take part.

like i said, there is a reason people who voluntarily choose to not get vaccinated are being banned from public schools and pediatric practices. if you have somehow morphed your point into kids with preexisting conditions shouldnt get vaccines, then i dont know why the fluff you have been wasting your breath, my daughter is in that category. of course i agree with that. my point is people who get permission to not vaccinate because of "moral reasons" or "personal preference" are assholes, and it is not a valid reason. it is a choice that puts everyone else in danger.

i await your next morphed point.

I did not say any vaccine has 20% fatality rate. What I said for the forth time now, is I KNOW for a fact that one vaccine had well OVER 50% for couple of these high risk kids that were due to get vaccinated every year. The vaccine itself overall was not 20%, but for those set specific kids, the Dr would only say OVER 50%. All the rest of the kids it was fine and low risk. The DR can NOT make that decision for you, it is NOT there job too, go ahead and ask them. Most will tell you that, the ones that dont, I wouldnt be seeing them. Their job is to diagnose you and tell you what will work and inform you of guess what the PRO'S and CON's of such recommended treatment.

0.00625% ??? I never said that was over 20% now did I. READ MATE.

Yep you are right and Dr was wrong. Guess where the Dr got those over 50% fatality rate from (give you a hint, he didnt make it up, it came from the experts).

how you have twisted you original argument is impressive. you are literally arguing that my daughter, who i have already said cant be vaccinated, shouldnt be vaccinated. do you have to remind yourself to breath at times?

you went from "some ingredients in vaccines are hidden and can randomly cause complications" and "vaccines are overused and they dont cure diseases anyways" to "well some patients have ALL and have a 50% chance of dying from a vaccine!"

what the actual fluff dude. you wonder why i dont understand what the fluff you are trying to say.

And there is reason they do not force EVERYONE to have vaccinations either. Thank god, mr selfish dictator who knows absolutely no facts about any of this topic.

dont know how to deal with stupidity on your level mister accountant/grief counselor.

i said everyone able to get vaccinated should be vaccinated. that is my point, that is my core belief. the key word there is able.

clearly this doesnt include kids like my daughter, or other immunocompromised kids, i have said this many times. how the fluff have you not seen this? are you so desperate now hat you are just grabbing at straws?

my target, asshole, are the hippiefluff people that are ignoring vaccines for reasons other than sound medical advice. if you cant understand this, then there is no point in continuing this.

and i love how you keep saying i know no facts when i in fact have an immunocompromised daughter. i assure you me and the wife have researched this in detail, and have a TEAM of doctors advising us on vaccines for our other children and the risks of a low immune system. maybe these doctors arnt as capable as your extensive internet and accounting experience, and i apologize for my shortcomings in that area, but im going to go with the science. the science that proves vaccines are beneficial to the population as a whole when every capable person receives them. the science that proves that when the percentage of vaccinated people drop, outbreaks rise.

Wrong yet again. All things I have never said yet again.

I never said anything about ingredients in vaccines but one thing.
I clearly do not READ anything about vaccines having hidden ingredients in MY post.

Nor did I ever say vaccines are overused, shall I go back and search for that bloody post as well. (god I hope not). What I said was that Dr's are quick to jump on bandwagon of a new Dx / Disease and they are also often too quick to just prescribe a medication which is then being overabused, along with anti-biotics. I did also say (or alluded too maybe) that the tool of vaccinations could potentially be overabused in general. A specific vaccine for a specific relevant disease of course would not be overabused.

STOP trying to put words in my mouth and actually read them for once.

"well some patients have ALL and have a 50% chance of dying from a vaccine!"
Sorry but I dont even understand that statement. Best I can come up with, is what I have been saying in tons of posts now. SOME cases the risk for fatality of using a certain vaccination for a certain set person or type of person WILL outweigh the risk of possibly catching the disease in first place. What are the odds or what is the risk getting Adenovirus. If it less than 20%, than a person with upper respiratory problems will be at far GREATER risk of dieing from the vaccine than from the actual disease.

THIS IS A SIMPLE CONCEPT THAT YOU SEEM TO FAIL TO COMPREHEND.

I think the problem is that it has been too long that mass vaccinations have been in place. As a result, much of the general populous does not realize how bad things were before.

Many of us would not be here today if vaccines didn't exist (because either we would have died at a young age, or one of our parents/grandparents/great grandparents would have). Vaccines were one of the greatest public health achievements, but people don't appreciate it now because they don't know any different.

Look at Africa...do they have a Dr. Martin Luther King? NO. Thats their problem.