Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Jay Cutler wont vaccinate kids because of autism (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ldizzle
- Start date
B-Deep
Footballguy
i cannot ever see arguing that natural selection should be consdiered when discussing health issues of HUMAN BEINGS
rockaction
Footballguy
My computer is a little jittery. NCCommish owned to it. My bad and apologies. Not used to not working off of a 24" monitor, so I'm off of a laptop today. Sorry again.
B-Deep
Footballguy
NCCommish
Footballguy
You want your kid to get a preventable disease fine. You're a lousy parent but we allow that. When your idiocy puts an entire community at risk you no longer get to hide behind your individual autonomy. You don't live on an island. You are not here alone. When you make this decision you make it for everyone your child comes into contact with.
rockaction
Footballguy
Like I said back on Page 3, traditional communitarians gonna communitarian, traditional individualists gonna individual. I'm trying for the happy medium.
Chaka
Footballguy
I would argue that finding ways to not die makes us stronger on the whole.
More specifically, evolution is full of tradeoffs. If we select for immunity against measles, we'll likely be selecting against other helpful traits. Humans have flourished by using our brains. We're effective hunters even though we don't have claws or sharp teeth. We can live in any climate even though we don't have natural furs. We have high metabolisms even though we don't have giant guts to process food. We instead have arrows, clothing, and fire. And medicine. When we can use our brains to manipulate our environment instead of evolving biologically expensive physical traits to do so, the tradeoff allows us to make even bigger brains, and a positive feedback cycle of intelligence is established. That has been a tremendously successful strategy in evolutionary terms, as the total biomass of humans is either #1 or #2 among all animals (with antarctic krill the only real competition; ants, collectively, would also be in the running if they were all one species).
Humans have become so successful by using our brains to conquer our environment and avoid death -- not by switching our brains off and giving ourselves up to disease on purpose.
The microorganisms that cause measles and other diseases are much more likely to "find a way" to flourish if we discourage vaccination. That should be self-evident, shouldn't it? Look at pre-vaccination rates of disease compared to post-vaccination rates.
It's the opposite. Vaccination will not only decrease the incidence of the diseases we are vaccinating against, but it will also decrease the virulence of those diseases. Diseases caused by the transmission of microorganisms become especially virulent when the microorganisms can easily infect surrounding humans. If I'm a microorganism and I can jump from host to host quickly, it's okay with me if I kill a given host in short order. But, if because of better human hygiene or vaccination or anything else that makes transmission less frequent, my survival depends on keeping my host alive for a while before I can infect a new host, my species of microbe will evolve to become less virulent. Fascinating book discussing the phenomenon here.
Last edited by a moderator:
I was just being pseudo intellectually snarky. Just trying to fit in, I thought that's what you were supposed to do in threads like these.
I'm also not anti vaccine entirely. Our kids have had all of their traditional vaccines, but we reject things like the flu vaccine. Our kids got H1N1 when that made its rounds, wasn't too worried about it. Last time we were in for a check up the doctor noted how he rarely sees our kids for illness, we're definitely below average. We laughed and told him that we simply let our kids play in the dirt and refuse the flu vaccines he's always pushing. He laughed and said there might be something to that.
Nothing scientific about it, but I think there's some chance my kids will fare better against a super flu than most kids who take this stuff. We'll never know if we just listen to the CDC all day long though.
Nothing scientific about it, but I think there's some chance my kids will fare better against a super flu than most kids who take this stuff. We'll never know if we just listen to the CDC all day long though.
St. Louis Bob
Footballguy
None of these things would have happened if we didn't interbreed with ancient aliens.
Wildcat
Footballguy
Sorry, that just doesn't make sense. Why do you reject them? Playing in dirt or whatever really doesn't have any correlation to getting a strain of the flu. Not sure why anyone wouldn't want to protect themselves or their children from some of those nasty flu viruses. I think you hit the nail on the head. There is nothing scientific about your thinking, which is why it doesn't make sense. Your gut feeling or willpower won't stop a flu strain from entering your kids' system.
msommer
Footballguy
Immunity can be acquired, if not there wouldn't be much of a point to any vaccines. I think your body likely does a better job when that happens in response to a live drill as opposed to what you're exposed to through a given vaccine, assuming said illness doesn't permanently harm or kill you.
Chaka
Footballguy
I apologize if I have been too snarky in this thread. But those offended should at least try to understand that an overwhelming plurality of the evidence supports 1) that vaccines help virtually eradicate multiple diseases & 2) don't cause autism. As to the latter, even if vaccines did potentially cause autism in a very small percentage of those vaccinated the former would still be more than enough reason to vaccinate. I am sorry if your child has autism, truly I am and I understand that parents have a desire to know why their child has it, but considering the alternative it is absolutely unconscionable that you would choose not to vaccinate them.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Or, now that the human race exists and dominates primarily by its wits and not by the sweat of its brow in many cultures, the people foolish enough not to vaccinate are being selected out of the gene pool and the intelligent folks are being selected in. On the aggregate, of course.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Politician Spock
Footballguy
I see that "humans + tools" are stronger in natural selection than "humans without tools". What I question is whether humans are weaker today than they were before the development of tools assuming the tools are removed for some reason. For example, oil.
I see, because of oil, Americans have become weak. With oil, we are incredibly strong compared to the rest of the world. But without oil I think we would be one of the weakest countries in the world. We've become fat, lazy, and downright unhealthy over time as we depend more and more on oil to be the tool that makes us strong.
I see vaccinesines in a similar fashion. If for some reason vaccies became unavailable, are we now a weaker species because we relied on them so much. I think yes.
Being in IT sales, disaster recovery is a topic I frequently have to engage in. So naturally I think about how human kind, or perhaps even our nation, would recover from a disaster where our industrial infrastructure that produces and distributes vaccines is significantly impacted. I think the use of them might make recovering from a disaster far harder for humans to overcome because not only have we become naturally weaker, the micro-organisms of diseases that still exist even with vacines are naturally the strongest, with us having eliminated the vast weakness of the kind.
Again, not saying this puts me on either side of the argument. Just saying it's a great question to consider how weak/strong would humans and viruses be if humans one day find themselves recovering from an earth sized disaster, or the country has to recover from a nationwide natural disaster.
So my immune system had to work harder. Yours was lifting 5 lb dumbbells and looking like a pansy - mine was doing the Arnold workout.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Tom Skerritt
Footballguy
Spock, your logic is very very logical, and IMHO, very likely true. And it is my contention that this is the way that our global overpopulation might one day be culled. Nice post.
Last edited by a moderator:
From wiki: Unlike many infectious diseases, recovery from naturally acquired tetanus does not usually result in immunity to tetanus.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Just because there is scientific consensus on an issue does not mean there will not be unintended consequences down the road. Chicken pox is a prime example. A fairly harmless disease which infected millions but only killed a few. Now we have greatly reduced the infection rate, but we lowered our immunity to Shingles in the process which is much more deadly.
Chaka
Footballguy
i can understand why intuitively people would think a larger immune response would lead to greater immunity. There are many reasons why that doesn't hold up to scrutiny (and I don't want to type them out while on a mobile device) but I do understand why people would believe that.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Chaka
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
It's heavily dependent on the type of vaccine we're talking about - and the decision to vaccinate vs. not vaccinate should be heavily influenced also by the side effects of natural vs. inoculation immunity. There's a reason that some innoculations are heavily recommended/borderline required for public school and that some are not.
Also, see the bolded. The actual full text of the article is an argument for Live Attenuated influenza vaccines, not against vaccination.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3209321/
Last edited by a moderator:
The opposite side that thinks he's cool?My old neighbor, the most rabid anti-vaccine nut I know, just compared Obama to Hitler on her facebook page this morning. Guess what side of the aisle she falls on?It would be interesting to see the statistics and political affiliations of those who are anti vaccine. I only know one person vehemently against vaccines, and he is a tea bagger, conspiracy theorist, NRA gun apologist, wacko.
Okay, fact remains that there is scientific evidence that some vaccines that aren't as effective as just plain getting sick. And in the article's own words "may have potential drawbacks that have previously been underappreciated" including making you more vulnerable to a super flu.
And I'm sure there's more of this stuff. That's not quite the consensus on the topic that people attacking my flu vaccine stance have suggested exists out there.
And in regards to what you bolded HF, yes, there's information in there that supports both sides of this. I can cherry pick the parts that suit me, you can cherry pick the parts that suit you. But realistically I shouldn't even have anything to cherry pick if everything was as certain as you guys are acting.
Well, according to what I just posted, not every place makes the recommendation to get these annually. They cite the Netherlands as an example. So not everyone accepts these reasons.
sn0mm1s
Footballguy
He isn't cherry picking. If you look at the graphs - and read the conclusion the vaccinated kids have equal or better results in all but 3 of the measurements. The group doing the study even says they aren't recommending not to vaccinate. One of the articles referencing this study (and this one as well) mention ways to improve the vaccination technique.
By no means do we suggest halting annual vaccination of children ---- taken from the article you posted.
rockaction
Footballguy
THINK PROGRESS!!! Awesomely unbiased material!
Yeah, that's what this was all about.
"There were scenes of policemen holding down men in their night robes while vaccinators began their work on their arms," Willrich tells Fresh Air's Terry Gross. "Inspectors were going room to room looking for children with smallpox. And when they found them, they were literally tearing babes from their mothers' arms to take them to the city pesthouse [which housed smallpox victims.]"
The vaccination raid was not an isolated incident. As the smallpox epidemic swept across the country, New York and Boston policemen conducted several raids and health officials across the country ordered mandatory vaccinations in schools, factories and on railroads. In Pox: An American History, Willrich details how the smallpox epidemic of 1898-1904 had far-reaching implications for public health officials — as well as Americans concerned about their own civil liberties.
"110 years ago, vaccination was compelled by the state," he says. "But there no effort taken by the government to ensure that vaccines on the market were safe and effective. We live in a very different environment today where there are extensive regulations governing the entire vaccine industry."
At the turn of the 20th century, explains Willrich, there were little to no regulations governing the pharmaceutical industry. Many people were forced to receive the vaccine — most of the time against their will.
"There was one episode in Middlesboro, Ky., where the police and a group of vaccinators went into this African-American section of town, rounded up people outside this home, handcuffed the men and women and vaccinated them at gunpoint," says Willrich. "It's a shocking scene and very much at odds with our daily-held notions of American liberty."
People infected with small pox would also be quarantined against their will in large isolation hospitals called pest houses.
"People would literally dragged there against their will," he says. "Some of the most poignant scenes are when mothers are fighting with health officials to keep their children in their own homes rather than have them be taken off to a pesthouse. People at the time rightly associated pest houses with death. That's where someone was taken to die."
eta* your links are actually akin to pestilence to people who have studied the social implications of forced vaccinations. Thanks.
Last edited by a moderator:
joffer
Footballguy
Its a story about a court ruling
Thought it was relevant. Sorry I didn't check theblaze for confirmation
Last edited by a moderator:
rockaction
Footballguy
My bad. Got heated over seeing Think Progress and the general tenor and tone of this thread. I hope my apology suffices. Not your fault. Mine.Its a story about a court ruling
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I feel like you think I'm saying there are no possible aide effects or downsides to vaccination. That's not the case. I'm saying that the potential downsides to vaccination are, on the aggregate, so vastly outweighed by the upsides that not vaccinating at all is monumentally stupid and dangerous.
And that the idea that getting sick for natural immunity purposes as opposed to getting vaccinated because natural immunity is just better for you "because you get sicker" is flat out wrong.
