Make It Difficult for People in Their Lives and They Get Vaccinated » All Comments

    • Igaf on 11/07/2024 - 10:46

      That wouldn't be hard to believe IF you understood the science associated with viruses (especially) and vaccines, and bothered to do some basic reading about how human bodies fight pathogens - and sometimes itself. While you were gazing longingly into your mirror or possibly re-arranging your navel fluff collection medicine has been developing wonderful new things like anti-virals and targeted seasonal flu shots, for example.

      As a general observation, every human on earth can benefit from ongiong upgrades, and most do. Those upgrades can come in many forms - sustenance, exercise, relaxation, opening your mind, learning to get perspective and at least a semblance of balance. As the saying goes, with knowledge and experience comes wisdom. Obviously that wisdom varies hugely, as even a cursory perusal of comments here show only too well.

      • mrdean on 11/07/2024 - 11:03

        That wouldn't be hard to believe IF you understood the science associated with viruses (especially) and vaccines,

        "Thus, we cannot reject the assumption that the effect of the filtered lymph is not due to toxicity, but rather to the ability of the agent to replicate." F. Loeffler 1898 Principles of Virology 4th edition Flint, Skalka et al. 2015.

        Yeah champ, IF people actually knew the history of virology, & had the basic intelligence to revisit or at least question the basic ASSUMPTIONS underpinning the field, then we would probably be, as a society, in a far better place.

        • Igaf on 11/07/2024 - 17:31
          -1

          Sure champ. Your understanding of virology is no doubt commensturate with your knowledge of the history of medicine and vaccines. When you grow up you might learn about perspective and balance but as I'm sure I've said already you'll need to drop the arrogance and learn to open your mind first.

          • mrdean on 11/07/2024 - 18:16

            @Igaf: How can anyone have "perspective & balance" without knowledge of both sides?

            https://romanbystrianyk.substack.com/p/three-medical-maveric…

            "Dr. Charles Creighton, a distinguished professor at the esteemed University of Cambridge, is widely recognized as the pioneer of British epidemiology…….In around 1884, Dr. Creighton was invited to author an article on vaccination for the 9th edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica. Rather than settling for ordinary stock statements, he extensively explored pro- and anti-vaccination literature from various countries. Initially aligning with the prevailing views on vaccination, as did most medical professionals of his time, Dr. Creighton’s rigorous investigation gradually led him to diverge from the conventional wisdom held by his peers."

            "Things have now come to such a pass that anyone who undertakes to answer for Jenner and his theories, must shatter his own reputation for scientific and historical knowledge. Most of those who have a reputation to lose decline the challenge."

            "The public at large cannot believe that a great profession should have been so perseveringly in the wrong. The present attitude of the public may be said to illustrate the truth of a maxim of Carlyle’s: “That no error is fully confuted [refuted] till we have seen not only that it is an error, but how it became one.” The task which I set before me when I began this book was to explain to myself how the medical profession in various countries could have come to fall under the enchantment of an illusion. I believe that they were misled most of all by the name of “smallpox of the cow,” under which the new protective was first brought to their notice. For that grand initial error, blameworthy in its inception, and still more so in the furtive manner of its publication, the sole responsibility rests with Jenner. The profession as a whole has been committed before now to erroneous doctrines and injurious practices, which have been upheld by its solid authority for generations."

            Dude, if you ever "open your mind", you'll realise you're on the wrong side.

            • Igaf on 11/07/2024 - 19:06
              -1

              @mrdean: Both sides of what? Modern medical science has always acknowledged the deficiencies of medicines and medical knowledge, that human bodies can have hugely varying reactions to medications, that there are very rarely if ever universally safe medications, that drugs are a panacea.

              What exactly are you implying by that post Dude? That opinions never vary from within medical circles? That we knew everything there is to discover about the natural world a century ago? That there aren't charlatans in modern medical science - despite the fact that you've quoted plenty already, ironically while ignoring their obvious drivers.

              He's a stark pointer to your problem. You apparently have no problem accepting - without any qualms or even moderate skepticism - anything, even obviously tainted opinion (and that's all it is in most cases), which fits your extreme and hyperventilated views. You place your trust (note that word well) in anything which suits your blinkered narrative while totally dismissing anything which doesn't.

              I'm repeating myself but it's necessary in your case because in your own mind you actually believe that you're a paragon of reason and impartiality. Fanaticism - be it medical, political, religious, environmental…. - is by nature blinding, debilitating and dangerous. It leads to irrationality and a disconnect from reality. It is very distant from reasoned skepticism and acceptance of human imperfection, foible and failure. Fanaticism leads to puerile notions - very evident among anti-vaxxers - that we should throw the baby out with the bathwater.

              • mrdean on 11/07/2024 - 19:29
                +2

                @Igaf:

                Fanaticism - be it medical, political, religious, environmental…. - is by nature blinding and debilitating.

                That's exactly what "safe & effective" is, bro. They are the "charlatans", & they rely on people with your education & worldview to protect them.

                I'm pointing out resources for people to educate themselves. I encourage people to read textbooks like Principles of Virology, or Plotkin's Vaccines, & then read the other side of the argument, the "both sides of what" as you derisively say. Clearly you've only settled on one "side", the side you've assumed is right, without bothering to think critically about any of it, just automatically jumping to its defense.

                You really think that modern medical science has acknowledged the deficiencies of medicines?
                https://historyofvaccines.org/history/vaccine-timeline/overv…
                Yeah buddy, a couple of sentences admitting to "contamination" & "allergic reactions" to anti-toxin/toxoid vaccines, & that's that. No mention of harms or deaths or sickness from inoculation or injecting.

                Here's just one example of many of the reality:
                https://romanbystrianyk.substack.com/p/deadly-vaccination

                "Of these dogmas I believe the practice known as vaccination to be the most absurd and the most pernicious. I do not believe that a single person has ever been protected from smallpox by it, while I know that many serious bodily evils and even deaths have resulted from its employment. The whole theory is founded upon assumption, contrary to common sense, and entirely opposed to all known principles of physiology. Every physician of experience has met with numerous cases of cutaneous eruptions, erysipelas, and syphilis, which were directly traceable to vaccination, and if these cases could be collected and presented in one report, they would form a more terrible picture than the worst that has ever been drawn of the horrors of smallpox.
                Professor Robert Alexander Gunn, MD, New York Medical College, New York

                Not exactly something you're gonna see on the WHO site, on any government site, or any of the thousands of pro-vaccine websites shamelessly promoting these poisons anytime soon.

                Get up to speed champ.

                • Igaf on 11/07/2024 - 20:17
                  -1

                  @mrdean: There's an simple reason why you won't read that obviously out of date misinformation on modern medical websites buddy/dude/champ, most notable among them being that credulous fanatics will read them without understanding the obvious context and limitations, and like you, make ludicrous and ignorant conclusions about what they mean in a modern context. The same reason you won't find hysterical and ignorant links between vaccines/illnesses and cause of death without detailed analysis of cause/effect and statistically valid risk assessment. The irony that you'd pick a quote about one of the most successful vaccines in medical history is palpable. Did I mention that fanaticism is blinding?

                  • mrdean on 12/07/2024 - 17:12
                    +2

                    @Igaf:

                    There's an simple reason why you won't read that obviously out of date misinformation on modern medical websites buddy/dude/champ, most notable among them being that credulous fanatics will read them without understanding the obvious context and limitations, and like you, make ludicrous and ignorant conclusions about what they mean in a modern context.

                    But why not oh-so-wise-and-humble-one? It's the perfect opportunity for the authorities to clearly & simply explain the "misinformation". It might even foster some public trust by giving them both sides of the issue, rather than the sanitized public relations propaganda messaging for simpletons they currently use.

                    Ahhhh, but wait, you fall into the "you don't debate cranks because it gives them legitimacy" camp, don't ya?

                    • Igaf on 12/07/2024 - 20:32
                      -1

                      @mrdean: No I'm firmly in the "don't give platforms to extremists and don't waste valuable expert resources constantly rebutting their lies, pseudo-science and disinformation" camp, if such a thing exists. Bioethicist Arthur Caplan says far more needs to be done by public health agencies to vehemently support vaccines but that doesn't suggest to me that he thinks engaging with extremists and giving them even a tiny level of false equivalence is a good messaging strategy.

  • mrdean on 11/07/2024 - 11:24
    -3

    Do not trust these people & the agencies they work for: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2402379

    Reduce ignorance by understanding what Aaron Siri is saying here: https://aaronsiri.substack.com/p/and-like-that-the-claim-vac…

    • Igaf on 11/07/2024 - 17:34
      -2

      You advising anyone about ignorance is a classic dunning-kruger exemplar should anyone need one.

      • infinite on 11/07/2024 - 19:57
        +1

        Says the user still spreading Covid misinformation in 2024……………

        • Igaf on 11/07/2024 - 20:28
          -1

          For example?

          Unlike you I don't pluck clearly unsupported arrant garbage from my nether regions.

          Having trouble finding data to back up your anti-vax bs? I'm not surprised given your obvious self-imposed searching debilities

          • infinite on 11/07/2024 - 23:20

            @Igaf: You are in here promoting medicines that have been barred from use world-wide. Who are you to be making claims about anyone else ?

            • Igaf on 12/07/2024 - 15:37
              -1

              @infinite: I'll ask again since your intellect seems to be stuck on level 25.

              For example?

              Your puerile misrepresentations are well documented, as is now your blatant and self-serving lying. Can't quite put my finger on why /s but hoist by your own petard seems an apt outcome in yiur case. Lucky for you it's an anonymous forum eh?