How the anti-vaxxers are winning

[LMuhlen]

So, he misspoke? Because dose has a meaning, and 0.5 mL is not "massive" by any stretch of the imagination.

Pretty sure that by massive he meant it as a great number of doses and not doses of great volume. It may be poorly worded, but if you are not activelly trying to derail the discussion, you should be able to understand it. Also, 0.5 mL can be massive given the proper context. That dose of a poison can kill you. Many times over.

[Tinykong]

Most people will not end up dead from neither vaccine nor disease. Absolute majority. At least as far as measles are concerned.

They should choose whatever causes least risk at the moment; this evaluation changes with amount of people already vaccinated and how often disease is actually encountered.

Think of it as insurance. Insurance is cheaper if everyone gets insured. But that also means that most people never actually see payout in their lifetime, and in fact lose money.

This kind of thinking is fine if the risk is yours alone. You don't insure your house against flood damage, if it floods and you aren't insured, well you gambled and lost TFB.

That's not how infectious disease works. If you get sick from lack of immunization, you will potentially kill other people.

[Guyv3r]

Their stance is that they would rather their kid die, then be autistic.

Understandable, if it were actually true that vacines cause autism. But no one knows the actual causes yet... so it's just idiotic.

[Tinykong]

Pretty sure that by massive he meant it as a great number of doses and not doses of great volume. It may be poorly worded, but if you are not activelly trying to derail the discussion, you should be able to understand it.

Pointing out stupidity is actively derailing the discussion? My bad.

Also, 0.5 mL can be massive given the proper context. That dose of a poison can kill you. Many times over.

I do enjoy when I see someone being deliberately obtuse to refute an argument. Vaccines are not poison. They aren't administered haphazardly. The dosages have been tested, along with the schedule for administering them.

[Kaibhan]

Have you ever had a child vaccinated? They don't give them all at once, they are spread out over time. This is a classic Trump back peddle.

Many of the vaccines come in shots where 3-4 are in them, many times you can get multiple shots in a single visit. This happens quite frequently actually as people never receive any reminders they just show up at the Dr's office one day and doc is like your child is behind/due for x, y and z we can do all those right now if you like.

[Reek]

100% anti-vaxxers are just as bad as 100% vaxxers who will blindly believe anything the government tosses in their food bowl.

Question everything. The people that control vaccines are the same people destroying our country with opioid prescriptions. It blows my mind people can be such sheep.

[LMuhlen]

Understandable, if it were actually true that vacines cause autism. But no one knows the actual causes yet... so it's just idiotic.

No one knows if sinning will damn your afterlife, but people still go to church. If they believe in something, it's real for them. And poorly written articles like the one in the OP, which clearly try to state uncertainty as absolute truth and also contradicts itself, they may end up backfiring. If it is purposely lying about something to make a point, why should I believe any of it is true? If your position is correct, you shouldn't need to make it more than what it is.

[Shalcker]

This kind of thinking is fine if the risk is yours alone. You don't insure your house against flood damage, if it floods and you aren't insured, well you gambled and lost TFB.

That's not how infectious disease works. If you get sick from lack of immunization, you will potentially kill other people.

Floods also kill and damage indiscriminately to being or not being insured; insurance only limits your losses.

Vaccines are not 100% effective for various reasons - depending on type you might still catch disease if you encounter it but it'll be somewhat more mild, or vaccination might fail totally (rare but A LOT more common then adverse effects from vaccines, something in order of 3-5% of those vaccinated) - that would be same as dying to flood despite being insured.

In case of epidemic, like in case of flood, there are other measures that can be taken to limit damage and spread.

[unfilteredJW]

Ironically every anti-vaxxer I've ever met has been a hardcore full on hippy Liberal.

Let's make this partisan herp derp.

[LMuhlen]

Pointing out stupidity is actively derailing the discussion? My bad.

Are we discussing the effect of multiple vaccines in a short time, or are we discussing semantics and Trump's hability to pass his message through? The later instead of the former, so the discussion has been derailed. If you did it on purpose or not, that's another story.

I do enjoy when I see someone being deliberately obtuse to refute an argument. Vaccines are not poison. They aren't administered haphazardly. The dosages have been tested, along with the schedule for administering them.

How is 0.5 mL even an argument if the volume of the dose was never the issue?

[Tinykong]

Floods also kill and damage indiscriminately to being or not being insured; insurance only limits your losses.

If you don't have flood insurance, your neighbor's life isn't put at risk.

If you aren't vaccinated against infectious disease, your neighbor's life is put at risk.

It's that simple.

Vaccines are not 100% effective for various reasons - depending on type you might still catch disease if you encounter it but it'll be somewhat more mild, or vaccination might fail totally (rare but A LOT more common then adverse effects from vaccines, something in order of 3-5% of those vaccinated) - that would be same as dying to flood despite being insured.

In case of epidemic, like in case of flood, there are other measures that can be taken to limit damage and spread.

Are we going to start down the road of a perfectionist fallacy for why we shouldn't use vaccines? I'm not interested.

- - - Updated - - -

Are we discussing the effect of multiple vaccines in a short time, or are we discussing semantics and Trump's hability to pass his message through? The later, so the discussion is derailed. If you did it on purpose or not, that's another story.

We're discussing how vaccines are not given in massive doses. There is a schedule, and you're supposed to follow it.

You don't walk into your pediatricians office and ask them to give your infant every vaccine they will need over the next 18 years all at the same time. Trump's tweet is hyperbole.

- - - Updated - - -

How is 0.5 mL even an argument if the volume of the dose was never the issue?

Because vaccines are given in a specific dosage. Saying a child has received a "massive dosage" is implying they received more than they should have, which is false.

[Alfador]

The anti vaxxers, though, have a point.

Most of the vaccines have consequences and side effects. While those side effects are rather rare - they are still there.

When there is a lot of unvaccinated people around you - your chances of getting sick are high, and the risk of getting sick outweighs the risk of having the side effects.
When 90-95% of the population is vaccinated your chances of getting sick are very low, while the chance of getting the side effects is the same.

So while those anti vaxxers are not the big part of the population they are gucci.
Low chances of getting the disease, while not having to worry for the side effects.

No they do not. There is no point, and no validity to what they think is their point.
The side effects are not only negligible in likelihood but are far less traumatic than the far more likely diseases they prevent. Their entire platform is based on dog-whistle alarmism, using phrases like "more research" to imply falsely that there isn't enough existing research and taking cherrypicking unsupported anectdotes out of context.


As for the "people around you" stuff you're talking about, the term for that is herd immunity and the simple fact is they're compromising themselves and everyone else because of it. Even if the number across the country stays high, numbers are dropping well below that 90-95% mark in the individual communities and systems in which they matter. Your child's herd immunity from mumps in his or her california grammar school filled to the brim with naturopath whackjobs isn't really bolstered by the fact that a bunch of other cities and towns have a 95% vaccination rate when their classmates are vaccinated at an 80% rate or worse.

[pathora44]

No one knows if sinning will damn your afterlife, but people still go to church. If they believe in something, it's real for them. And poorly written articles like the one in the OP, which clearly try to state uncertainty as absolute truth and also contradicts itself, they may end up backfiring. If it is purposely lying about something to make a point, why should I believe any of it is true? If your position is correct, you shouldn't need to make it more than what it is.

So by your standard because someone really believes 2+2=5 then that is just as true as 2+2=4 or because they truly believe the Earth is flat it is just as true as the Earth being a sphere. Vaccines do not cause autism that has been proven over and over again the information that tried to prove otherwise was found to be so absolutely fabricated and false the man lost his medical license. The rise in Autism has nothing to do with Vaccines but everything to do with Autism being better understood by the medical community and being diagnosed correctly. People shouldn't listen to a quack doctor trying to in fact patent his own vaccine and a bimbo who got famous for showing her tits on Playboy.

[cubby]

So I read this opinion piece and was wondering what you guys thought about this? Could we see an epidemic soon because of people's unwillingness to protect not only their child but the rest of the population?



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/o...ning.html?_r=0

It seems the United States, for whatever reason, is moving farther and farther away from science. It's hard to understand, at least for rational, logical people, why we are moving this way.

The anti-vaxx movement gaining momentum is another ridiculous sign of the "our opinion is more important than fact/science" which has already brought us so many gems.

The ignorance and stupidity of the voting population of the United States is mind boggling. We're not even discussing differences in policy - we're arguing if science is right or not.

[Shalcker]

If you don't have flood insurance, your neighbor's life isn't put at risk.

Generally, like in case of flood, you're not the source of problem, you're victim like everyone else.

If you aren't vaccinated against infectious disease, your neighbor's life is put at risk.

To be problem you have to encounter disease carrier and then to encounter non-vaccinated neighbor. Thus you're creating scenario where risk is mutual.

And this risk can be measured and actually be reasonable. Reasonable despite being potentially deadly. Lots of things are potentially deadly, cars, for example.

Are we going to start down the road of a perfectionist fallacy for why we shouldn't use vaccines? I'm not interested.

If risk of adverse effect from vaccine is one in a million and risk of adverse effect from disease is one in ten thousands, your lifetime chance of encountering disease has to be just 1% or lower for vaccine to be more dangerous.

Do you know actual chance of encountering disease nowdays?

[Alfador]

When you actually watch a child become horribly sick for an extended period of time after a vax cocktail it will change your opinion. Alot of kids here with no adulthood responsibilities.

No it won't, because as a scientifically educated person I understand simple concepts like statistical outliers and probabilities. You're trading a tiny fraction of a fraction of a percent chance of your child having a reaction for a much much larger chance of them getting a life threatening disease. What you're suggesting is basically the equivalent of not going to the hospital to get your cancer treated because you're worried that car accidents happen.

[Symphonic]

So by your standard because someone really believes 2+2=5 then that is just as true as 2+2=4 or because they truly believe the Earth is flat it is just as true as the Earth being a sphere. Vaccines do not cause autism that has been proven over and over again the information that tried to prove otherwise was found to be so absolutely fabricated and false the man lost his medical license. The rise in Autism has nothing to do with Vaccines but everything to do with Autism being better understood by the medical community and being diagnosed correctly. People shouldn't listen to a quack doctor trying to in fact patent his own vaccine and a bimbo who got famous for showing her tits on Playboy.

2+2 can equal five. You just have to go to the decimals. 2.4 + 2.4 = 4.8 which would round up to 5. Lets rewrite it using just the rounded numbers.

2 + 2 = 5. Weird!

[McFuu]

Their stance is that they would rather their kid die, then be autistic.

But if their kids get autism they will have one more thing in common with them, a mental disorder.

Anti-vaxxers concern me for one reason, there are people who would have vaccinated, but can't, they don't deserve to be subject to diseases that they can't protect themselves from.
If it weren't for that one small point, I wouldn't give a shit about the anti-vax crowd, eventually the problem would work itself out.

[Alfador]

It seems the United States, for whatever reason, is moving farther and farther away from science. It's hard to understand, at least for rational, logical people, why we are moving this way.

The anti-vaxx movement gaining momentum is another ridiculous sign of the "our opinion is more important than fact/science" which has already brought us so many gems.

The ignorance and stupidity of the voting population of the United States is mind boggling. We're not even discussing differences in policy - we're arguing if science is right or not.

I will agree that it's really bad in the US but it's a global problem. Vaccine denial is extremely big in Africa, and the biggest, most harmful anti-vax personality of all was in fact a UK doctor who has thankfully now been barred from practicing medicine thanks to his proven lies.

[Felya]

Do you know actual chance of encountering disease nowdays?

That's is a great question, because the answer is variable, not static. Your actual chance of encountering diseases that vaccines are eliminating, is exactly proportional to the amount of people who chose not to get vaccinated.