Vaccines and Trump: Your stance?

[Paulus]

3 hours ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

I never saw this gem but it's hardly surprising. Any anti-vaxxers here? 

I am not an anti-vaxxer. I will state that anti-vaxxers have caused a diminution of the very real risks of vaccines. As a child I almost died from one vaccine, as my fever was in the 105s. Vaccines DO have risks, and those risks need to be taken seriously. My son is vaccinated.

 

That said, if people can have fever spikes that kill them, perhaps Autism can be caused by the stuff. So, yes! My mind is still open on the possibility, therefore I will not say no. And, if I had to bet, I'd bet that there are probably some cases out there where it has happened. 

 

In sum, vaccinate your kids, but monitor them carefully for the next 48 hours or more, depending on the circumstances.

 

Flame away...

Edited February 21, 2019 by Paulus

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Allergic reactions, don't work, bring on the disease, etc.  

 

Still mostly bull####.  Allergic reactions are usually due to the vaccine media, not the vaccine (similar to how snake antivenin will save most, but kill some allergic to the horse-based serum), "don't work" usually means "not enough time to develop antibodies" or "too much time passed since the vaccination," "bring on the disease" usually means "causes an immune reaction like it's supposed to."  (One of my favorite arguments to have with nurses: if all the symptoms of being "sick" with a virus are immunological responses, then doesn't the vaccine indeed make you sick by triggering that same immune response?  Nurses hate me.)

 

Actual reported cases of serious side effects are usually 1 in 20,000 or greater, depending on the vaccine (flu is about 1 in 250,000, DTaP about one in 15,000.)  Mild side effects are almost certainly overreported because they're so often self-reported through VAERS by idiots who don't understand correlation isn't causation (or who don't understand that "soreness at the site of the injection" isn't a side-effect, it's a feature of having a frickin' needle stuck in your arm, you morons.)

 

I'd be perfectly fine with people opting out of vaccinations, on the principle of "If you're going to be that stupid, you've earned the right to suffer."  But I also understand that purpose of vaccines isn't to prevent illness, it's to prevent epidemics by attenuating transmission, so that sort of attitude would in fact be more dangerously anti-vaccine than your average anti-vaxxer.

[DC Tom]

15 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

I'll just say this, if you've ever had a full blown case of influenza then you'll know and understand how it can kill people because you yourself will likely feel like you want to die.  RSV doesn't do this, nor does the common cold, yet most people think a case of the sniffles during flu season means they had flu.  Influenza kills tens of thousands of Americans each and every year... mostly the very young, elderly and immunocompromised with a few vibrant and otherwise healthy people sprinkled in for good measure.

 

Flu shots make me miserable - yes, they make you sick, because as I say above they provoke an immune response, and many of the symptoms of "being sick" are actually symptoms of the immune response to an infection.  So I'm always sick for a few days afterwards.  

 

But I don't complain.  Because I've had the flu.  And getting sick from the vaccination is absolutely nothing like actually having the flu.  I'd rather have a mild fever and runny nose for two days than feel like hot death for a solid month.

 

Same thing with a tetanus booster.  I get one every eight years (because of my wood shop).  That will put me flat on my back - literally - for 24 hours.  But it beats the ***** out of tetanus.  

 

Which is also why anti-vaxxers are true morons: pathetic risk management.  "But the MMR vaccine means my little snowflake has a one in 70 chance of developing autism!"  Well...okay, but NOT getting the vaccine means your little snowflake has a 1 in 30 chance of never getting autism because they're DEAD.  Do the math.

[Buffalo_Gal]

6 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Still mostly bull####.  Allergic reactions are usually due to the vaccine media, not the vaccine (similar to how snake antivenin will save most, but kill some allergic to the horse-based serum), "don't work" usually means "not enough time to develop antibodies" or "too much time passed since the vaccination," "bring on the disease" usually means "causes an immune reaction like it's supposed to."  (One of my favorite arguments to have with nurses: if all the symptoms of being "sick" with a virus are immunological responses, then doesn't the vaccine indeed make you sick by triggering that same immune response?  Nurses hate me.)

 

Actual reported cases of serious side effects are usually 1 in 20,000 or greater, depending on the vaccine (flu is about 1 in 250,000, DTaP about one in 15,000.)  Mild side effects are almost certainly overreported because they're so often self-reported through VAERS by idiots who don't understand correlation isn't causation (or who don't understand that "soreness at the site of the injection" isn't a side-effect, it's a feature of having a frickin' needle stuck in your arm, you morons.)

 

I'd be perfectly fine with people opting out of vaccinations, on the principle of "If you're going to be that stupid, you've earned the right to suffer."  But I also understand that purpose of vaccines isn't to prevent illness, it's to prevent epidemics by attenuating transmission, so that sort of attitude would in fact be more dangerously anti-vaccine than your average anti-vaxxer.

Well Dr. Tom, I can tell you I've had an allergic reaction. I thank goodness my doctors did not consider it bull#### and actually treated me for what was a life-threatening complication. ?  I'll cross your name off my list of recommended physicians when you get your MD. 

[DC Tom]

Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:

Well Dr. Tom, I can tell you I've had an allergic reaction. I thank goodness my doctors did not consider it bull#### and actually treated me for what was a life-threatening complication. ?  I'll cross your name off my list of recommended physicians when you get your MD. 

 

An allergic reaction to what?  An attenuated virus?  A live virus?  Or the gelatin used as a stabilizer?  You sensitive to any brands of cosmetics at all?

 

All vaccines carry a risk of allergic reaction...because of how they're made.  It's why there's always epinephrine nearby (whether you see it or not) whenever you get a shot.

[BeginnersMind]

2 hours ago, row_33 said:

Oh, some quote from years ago means what now?

 

That our president is a mayonnaise brain on this and serves as a lighthouse to other mayonnaise brains. I’d say that when the topic is in the news, as it has been this week, it makes sense to weather check the president. 

[Paulus]

43 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Well Dr. Tom, I can tell you I've had an allergic reaction. I thank goodness my doctors did not consider it bull#### and actually treated me for what was a life-threatening complication. ?  I'll cross your name off my list of recommended physicians when you get your MD. 

The old... You're not allergic to the vaccine, just what they put in the vaccine argument. Very valid argument.

[BeginnersMind]

It's a good thing that Trump somehow listened to Bill Gates on vaccines. 

 

The road Trump was headed down with RFK Jr on the anti vaccine campaign was straight out of crazyville. 

[BillsFanNC]

The typical warning for adverse reactions to flu vaccine has historically been for those with egg allergies as the common practice used to be propagating the virus strains selected for the seasonal vaccine in chicken eggs. I know there was a push in recent years to move to a mammalian cell line to grow the virus, but I'm not certain if all manufacturers have moved in that direction or not. There are also excipients and adjuvants (the adjuvants are in there to enhance the immune response) that a small number of people might have trouble with. 

 

There's risk of adverse reactions when we put anything into our bodies, including the off the shelf supplements that people in general have no problem popping after some internet snake oil salesman wearing a white coat tells them all about the wonderful effects that will result.

 

It's all about risk benefit analysis and IMO the potential benefits far outweigh the minuscule risk for the vast majority of people when it comes to the flu vaccine. As Tom said above, an adverse reaction to the shot is a walk in the park compared to a bad case of influenza. 

Edited February 21, 2019 by BillsFanNC

[BeginnersMind]

1 minute ago, BillsFanNC said:

The typical warning for adverse reactions to flu vaccine has historically beenfor those with egg allergies as the common practice used to be propagating the virus strains selected for the seasonal vaccine in chicken eggs. I know there was a push in recent years to move to a mammalian cell line to grow the virus, but I'm not certain if all manufacturers have moved in that direction or not. There are also excipients and adjuvants (the adjuvants are in there to enhance the immune response) that a small number of people might have trouble with. 

 

There's risk of adverse reactions when we put anything into our bodies, including the off the shelf supplements that people in general have no problem popping after some internet snake oil salesman wearing a white coat tells them all about the wonderful effects that will result.

 

It's all about risk benefit analysis and IMO the potential benefits far outweigh the minuscule risk for the vast majority of people when it comes to the flu vaccine. As Tom said above, an adverse reaction to the shot is a walk in the park compared to a bad case of influenza. 

 

And you're just talking about the flu vaccines. I'm more concerned about the people skipping the other vaccines because of the "autism risk" covered up by [big pharma/government/the man]. 

 

Jenny McCarthy, RFK Jr., and Trump could lead an amusing panel on this. 

[Chef Jim]

15 hours ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

This isn't a left-right issue. This is a smart-dumb issue. 

 

Then why did you use a 5 year old Trump tweet?  ?

[BeginnersMind]

13 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Then why did you use a 5 year old Trump tweet?  ?

 

Because he's our current president and his administrations actions this week prompted the current vaccine discussion. 

 

I also threw RFK Jr's son under the same dumb bus. 

 

Relax brother: It's OK to call Trump dumb when he is. It doesn't mean all Rs are dumb, as I said. 

 

Two people answered yes that vaccines cause autism. They should speak up and be heard (unless they are just joking). 

Edited February 21, 2019 by BeginnersMind

[BringBackOrton]

13 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Well Dr. Tom, I can tell you I've had an allergic reaction. I thank goodness my doctors did not consider it bull#### and actually treated me for what was a life-threatening complication. ?  I'll cross your name off my list of recommended physicians when you get your MD. 

We’re doomed.

12 hours ago, Paulus said:

The old... You're not allergic to the vaccine, just what they put in the vaccine argument. Very valid argument.

Even more doomed.

[DC Tom]

13 hours ago, Paulus said:

The old... You're not allergic to the vaccine, just what they put in the vaccine argument. Very valid argument.

 

It is, because not all vaccines are made the same way.  Saying "vaccines" cause anaphylaxis, when it's only certain components of certain vaccines, is a stupid and dangerous fallacy of over-generalization.  Precision matters.

[Paulus]

3 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

It is, because not all vaccines are made the same way.  Saying "vaccines" cause anaphylaxis, when it's only certain components of certain vaccines, is a stupid and dangerous fallacy of over-generalization.  Precision matters.

Sometimes, I think you might be too smart for your own good, old man. Just as long as we agree that some vaccine competents might cause some types autism, we're good. 8-P

 

Seriously, there would be less autistic people if vaccines didn't exist, simply because there would be less people alive. Checkmate.

Edited February 21, 2019 by Paulus

[DC Tom]

34 minutes ago, Paulus said:

Sometimes, I think you might be too smart for your own good, old man. Just as long as we agree that some vaccine competents might cause some types autism, we're good. 8-P

 

Seriously, there would be less autistic people if vaccines didn't exist, simply because there would be less people alive. Checkmate.

 

But most of the time I'm too smart for your own good, because you're an idiot.  

 

"Fewer" vs. "less" is the fallacy of rate vs. amount.

[whatdrought]

https://www.foxnews.com/health/nebraska-daycare-warns-non-vaccinated-children-to-stay-home-after-staffer-contracts-rare-potentially-life-threatening-infection?fbclid=IwAR3jm5VF_ce1EZxFPjcCHH7v1ScX0Hrv1oJE2ok3n-3PHTLO9B5R7326fNU

 

Saw this article today.

 

- Daycare employee (who was vaccinated against this disease) contracts rare disease.

- Daycare doesn't close facility for cleaning, instead asks parents to keep un-vaccinated children at home to prevent them from being exposed.

- Vaccine will protect children in care of daycare but failed to protect adult daycare staff? 

 

I'm confused by the flow of things here.

 

 

The biggest issue about vaccines (or at least the issue on center stage right now) is whether or not the government has the right to dictate what a parent puts into their child. There is a certain degree wherein child protective services exist for the well-being of Children (which, as someone who see's first hand in the non-profit world, is a joke), but in a clearly contested issue such as this, should the government be able to dictate such arbitrary standards? I say no.

[Paulus]

11 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

But most of the time I'm too smart for your own good, because you're an idiot.  

 

"Fewer" vs. "less" is the fallacy of rate vs. amount.

You're totally an autist. Have you ever seen the Curb Your Enthusiasm episode that deals with assburgers? Yeah. 

 

I'm willing to bet you've seen it. I'm also willing to bet you've told people you have autism to get out of sticky situations.

 

[dpberr]

After personally being injured by a flu vaccine, I'm obviously biased about the subject.  I'm not against vaccination.  However...

 

I don't think otherwise healthy people need to expose themselves to the risk of the flu or pneumonia shots year after year.  I'd rather be sick for a week instead of how I've spent the last 20 years of my life battling a debilitating nerve condition as a result of a nasty reaction to the shot.  

 

I also don't think the CDC/FDA/Corporations are really researching these vaccines carefully.  I think that's why you have a growing group of children all of a sudden with acute flaccid myelitis.  I suspect it's due to a bad batch of vaccine that somebody missed.  

 

I also don't think it's right the government protects the vaccine business with its own no-fault drug court.  The government will pretty much write you a check to go away.  

[BeginnersMind]

18 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

https://www.foxnews.com/health/nebraska-daycare-warns-non-vaccinated-children-to-stay-home-after-staffer-contracts-rare-potentially-life-threatening-infection?fbclid=IwAR3jm5VF_ce1EZxFPjcCHH7v1ScX0Hrv1oJE2ok3n-3PHTLO9B5R7326fNU

 

Saw this article today.

 

- Daycare employee (who was vaccinated against this disease) contracts rare disease.

- Daycare doesn't close facility for cleaning, instead asks parents to keep un-vaccinated children at home to prevent them from being exposed.

- Vaccine will protect children in care of daycare but failed to protect adult daycare staff? 

 

I'm confused by the flow of things here.

 

Vaccines aren't 100%. 

 

But if Almost everyone is vaccinated, and the vaccines work *almost* perfectly, the diseases don't spread (and mutate for that matter) and those for whom the vaccine was ineffective don't get exposed. 

 

Said another way, less people with disease = less chance of infection. More people with disease = more chance of infection. This is one of the reasons vaccines are so effective. It's not that they are 100%. It's that they are just really good. And being really good has increased benefits than just to the vax recipient. 

 

Quote

 

 

The biggest issue about vaccines (or at least the issue on center stage right now) is whether or not the government has the right to dictate what a parent puts into their child. There is a certain degree wherein child protective services exist for the well-being of Children (which, as someone who see's first hand in the non-profit world, is a joke), but in a clearly contested issue such as this, should the government be able to dictate such arbitrary standards? I say no.

 

There's no rational contest. There are just people who don't want to vaccinate. The problem is that their choice has a much better chance of killing many kids, including mine, than saving their kid from an immunological response. 

 

I don't like the government getting into my right to make ***** decisions. But certain ***** decisions that affect other people's lives and deaths require some more active measures. If you (not you, specifically, whatadrought) want to be stupid and risk contracting polio, that's on your dumb self. If you want to increase the chance that it goes to me and my children, ***** off. 

Edited February 21, 2019 by BeginnersMind