Posted on 06/26/2016 12:53:24 PM PDT by Pining_4_TX
If there’s one thing I’ve learned about the antivaccine movement, it’s that its members dislike being criticized. Oh, hell, let’s be honest. The really, really hate criticism and react very, very badly to it. Whereas you or I or other skeptics might react to criticism by trying to address it using facts, science, and reason, the first reaction of many antivaccine loons is to attack, attack, attack.
(Excerpt) Read more at scienceblogs.com ...
> it is completely appropriate for me to use my position as a bonafide authority to explain why vaccines are beneficial
Is the HPV vaccine beneficial?
Is an untested flu vaccine for the wrong strain beneficial?
This is more fallacious argumentation from you, and your revelation of vested interest weakens your position on this matter rather than supports it. That you cannot even be honest enough to admit that some vaccines may not be beneficial simply makes you untrustworthy and does exactly zippo and squat to convince any skeptic.
Show me some honesty and admit that a vaccine isn’t necessarily beneficial just because it’s a vaccine, and then we can perhaps have a real conversation on the issue.
His attack was caused by a video? Just like Benghazi???
When they dox 12-year-old kids and bully high-schoolers who disagree with them, well, yes, they are.
Somehow, I get the feeling that if God Almighty himself came down from Heaven and discussed things like herd immunity and dangers of non-vaccination with you, you would renounce Christianity.
Meh.
Yea right...most folks in America that do not get vaccinations do so for religious reasons. They bully no one. The comments on that site remind me of crazed leftists trying to create a faux crisis.
The other part of it is that there is a strong implication that they'd be perfectly fine (or even would advocate) with forced vaccinations - and even if these things were divinely sent, I would have to oppose that on principle.
Full disclosure: I’m not fine with forced vaccinations, but I am fine with institutions, such as schools and universities, requiring vaccinations for admission, so that there won’t be diseases spreading like wildfire in these institutions. Like other people here have said, this is a public health issue.
And no, I’m not hysterically advocating for everybody to get mundane, routine things like the flu shot, either. I would urge them to do measles, pertussis, etc., however.
If those kinds of distinctions were made routinely I’d have a lot less objection to the arguments of vaccine proponents.
It’s when those absolutist arguments are used to say, push forced HPV vaccination on whole state’s population of teenage girls because the manufacturer greased the right palms, where I have to put my foot down.
If proponents of vaccines want their arguments to be accepted they should be at the forefront protesting abuses like that, but they are often completely absent, so questions of motive and integrity become impossible to dispel.
Absolutely.
Is an untested flu vaccine for the wrong strain beneficial?
Untested flu vaccines are not licensed for sale by the FDA.
The flu vaccine is an extremely complex and nuanced subject. When the CDC, WHO, etc., get together twice a year--once for the northern hemisphere, and once for the southern--they use current data to predict what will be the circulating influenza strains something like 9 months in the future. That is analogous to trying to predict the weather next year based on the weather this year. However, despite the fact that they are trying to predict the future, they actually do a pretty good job at it. Yes, influenza is highly prone to mutation--but even when it mutates away from the predicted strains, it is still similar enough that the vaccine has partial effect. So a person receiving the vaccine might still get sick, but not as seriously. That can make the difference between life and death.
This is more fallacious argumentation from you, and your revelation of vested interest weakens your position on this matter rather than supports it. That you cannot even be honest enough to admit that some vaccines may not be beneficial simply makes you untrustworthy and does exactly zippo and squat to convince any skeptic.
So you, like most anti-vaxxers, would rather dismiss everything as some sort of logical fallacy, instead of discussing anything on its merits. That is a typical response of someone who knows the facts are not on his side, but cannot bear to adjust his opinion. Plus, you claim I am "untrustworthy" because I do not "admit" anything about your unscientific assertions. Not only is that a highly illogical "gotcha" argument, it is a technique frequently used by liberals.
Show me some honesty and admit that a vaccine isn’t necessarily beneficial just because it’s a vaccine, and then we can perhaps have a real conversation on the issue.
There it is again--making an unscientific assumption, and then saying that we can't have a "real" conversation because I do not accept your premise from the get-go.
Are all vaccines beneficial? That depends on the context. A better question would be, are all FDA licensed vaccines beneficial? Certainly, all of the recommended vaccines are. And other vaccines are very context-specific. For example, if you never plan to travel to a country where yellow fever is endemic, then a yellow fever vaccine is useless. (Caveat: I have been vaccinated against yellow fever and since immunity is probably lifelong, I am protected if I ever do go.) In the not distant future, I am going to Asia, where I will be exposed to diseases I have never encountered--you can bet that I will get vaccines I've never received before prior to going, for the simple reason that I don't want to die of something preventable.
Now, instead of demonstrating that you are adept at dismissing as a logical fallacy every idea that challenges your unscientific belief system, why don't you put some of your beliefs out there for examination? (That is a rhetorical question--I do not seriously expect you to present various anti-vax memes, since you already know I will rip them apart.)
I stopped reading at the very first word of your post and the rest of it was 100% a waste of your time.
If you wish to be staggeringly naive, you can do so without me.
Oh and don’t tell me it is settled science for those who actually know something. I have graduate degrees in science and teach at a Big 10 University.
Good for you, I know it can be hard to find a job that does not challenge your anti-vaccine religion. I am a microbiologist, by the way, so I also “actually know something” about vaccines. I make my science related decisions based on peer reviewed science, not conscience or faith in junk science. I agree with you, it is a great country we live in to have the freedom to make up our own minds based upon scientific facts or conscience. I have the freedom to tell you it is settled science, and you have the freedom to ignore me. Wonderful, is it not? Have a great holiday.
Great, as long as we live and let live. You force me with violence, then we have a problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.