A baby died in my area a year or two ago from whooping cough because of the high percentage of brainless hippies here not vaccinating their kids. Things like whooping cough take hold here because so many clueless dolts don't vaccinate, this woman dropped her other child off at school and the baby obviously got coughed on at the school gates and died a horrible choking death. The parents took on the local anti vax loons which eventually lead to them having to change their name from the impartial sounding to anti vax so people wouldn't think they were getting impartial advice.

I've just had a daughter and we basically kept her inside or in a covered pram for the first 3 months because of this. Now she's had her vaccinations we can finally take her out without worrying about all the inconsiderate fucks (and that includes people with the flu not covering their mouths when they sneeze).

I didn't let her get the Hep B shot when she was born though. There wasn't a lot of pressure and even though I'm very pro vaccination, I ran the numbers and came up with something like a 1:10,000 chance or her getting it just based on the general population and even less because we're proactive.
I guess that's the thing, vaccinations are of immense benefit. They are probably a top 3 human invention. But they do have rare side effects and people are stupid, ignorant pattern seeking idiots who can't see that whatever the small risks, the things it protects you against have far far higher risks.

Somehow they can look at their little angel and think measles with it's 1 in 300 death rate, it's 30% complications rate, it's 20% hospitalization rate, 8% diarrhea rate, 6% pneumonia rate (and death from that), 7% ear infection rate and of course blindness, encephalitis (1 in 1000) deafness and retardation (all in the US, not third world rates) and not think "side effects" but look at the vaccine and go "oh noz" when it has jack all side effects except a mild fever in 5-15% of cases.
I think it's because as a parent you make the decision to introduce the vaccination whereas the virus in the wild isn't guaranteed and is fate or god's plan or something so you don't stress about the side effects of the decision to not do something.

I'm particularly worried in 30 years when we no longer have so many blind, deaf or infertile people from pre-vaccination times that we really lose that societal memory of what it was like. At least now there are still plenty of people that can pipe up and say"I'm deaf because of measles when I was a kid" vaccination has made that so rare now that a generation of people don't understand the risks of the diseases and like the retard in chief here think "measles is perfectly safe".

luckily the antivax morons only make up 1-2%, and whilst they're killing and maiming innocent people, mostly babies, they're not actually growing.

The single largest factor in the increase in life expectancy has been medical advances. Things that once killed people are now easily treatable. The combination of medicine and medical techniques have aided greatly in our life expectancy.

You could make the argument that we eat worse now than we did 150 years ago. At least then everything wasn't packed full of refined sugar and chemicals. Nutrition plays a role, but this country is not healthy nutritionwise.

According to this piece the infant mortality rate from 1700-1750 in London was around 35%. 350 of every 1,000 babies died before the age of 2. As a comparison today in the UK the infant mortality rate is 4-5 per 1,000 babies.

That's the problem, I'm not talking retard here specifically as he's basically just a troll, but overall it really polarises things and helps prevent real debate. Plenty of people that are pro vaccine like myself know that not all vaccines are equal, more testing is always good and things like an anaphalaxis test for the one in a million that has a proper "going to die from vaccination" reaction would be good. Also genetic testing to determine what type of vaccine they should get (ie no live virus for the people that will react to that) would all be good. But you can't have a rational conversation with someone who believes kill switches are put into vaccines and Bill Gates is giving out vaccines that will control the population in 30 years. When I had my baby in the covered pram (was middle of winter didn't want people sneezing on a brand new baby without a fully functioning immune system) I was almost as worried about hormone mimicking chemicals leeching from the plastic as it has a very plastic smell she was cocooned in. There are risks stemming from the medical, oil and food industry. And it's good to have a sound knowledge of potential issues so we don't eat lead paint chips, bathe in DDT or breathe lead in gas fumes, but when you can't have a reasonable conversation there is just no point.

do you have a doctorate in any of those fields? researcher? or did you just gumshoe your way through it?

Studies show that the more vaccines we have the worse the infant mortality rate

Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170075/

More Vaccines Equal More Infant Deaths: Study Documents
http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/201...udy-documents/

The babies who used to die before age 2 were malnourished and living around poor sanitation :2 cents:

The general public are overconfident of their understanding on this topic, they've simply absorbed years of propaganda :2 cents:

fair enough. I was more trying to figure out to what level of 'reasonable' he was referring

well it is a fucking good job you are here to make sure us poor dumb fucks are on the right track !

You are a fucking weapon.

I'll agree with you on that :1orglaugh

Troll level :1orglaugh

You see there you go again. Your world view is so maladjusted that you are unable to actually take in information that does not agree with your religion.

Lets take a look at your claim; "Studies show that the more vaccines we have the worse the infant mortality rate."

Ok what studies ?

So I click your first link and low and behold a scientific paper written by real life scientists published in a govt site. Not a real study with new data, but a rehash of lots of existing work. However it is a study of sorts.

The basic claim of the paper is that some countries have better infant mortality rates than the US, yet they have lower inoculation rates. Ok the paper does not offer any evidence to suggest any thing other than a statistical correlation, so a tenuous link at best. But it allows loons like you to claim all manner of scary shite as being proven fact.

Fortunately I have the mental capacity and education to know that any evidence needs scrutiny before you can decide how much credence to allow. So I look a bit closer and low and behold a link at the top of the page that states the article has since been corrected.

So you click on the link and you find that the good doctors that wrote the article were forced to make an apology for misleading the site that published their "paper". It turns out that they claimed they were independent researchers when in fact they were paid to write the paper by anti vaccine pressure groups with which they were closely affiliated.

The following link is accessed from the top of the page.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3463891/

So as a piece of evidence to back up the garish claim of WHP, the conflict of interest and subsequent apology by the good doctors, renders it completely void.

However our good doctors should count themselves lucky that a correction and apology was all they suffered. The scoundrel that started the autism/mmr bullshit had his life and career destroyed when his lies were found out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield

For me this is the worst part :

Wakefield's study and public recommendations against the use of the combined MMR vaccine were linked to a steep decline in vaccination rates in the United Kingdom and a corresponding rise in measles cases, resulting in serious illness and fatalities.

So children actually died because this twat lied. Do you follow ?

You spout this nonsense and it causes real genuine harm.


So WHP, if you want to be taken seriously stop jumping on every single conspiracy bandwagon. Some might even be true, but the fact that the same halfwits rant on about them ALL just make you look stupid. Also I would advise that you present evidence with fewer holes. If you put forward a piece of evidence, make sure you have actually read it.

Finally I would stay clear of conspiracies like the crap you spout about Sandyhook. Us normal folks with children have real empathy for the parents of the victims. I am not sure what you are trying to achieve with that one, but it really is quite sick.

I know you're one of the in-house TrollBots, but I'll reply to your bait anyway for some reason :upsidedow

That's what Big Pharma do, they fight people who speak out against their products. What they don't tell you is they'd have paid him 100 times that amount to prove vaccines are necessary, effective and safe. Anyone who wants money would clearly go to the $Trillion Pharma industry. They even pay you $50,000 per annum just to post pro-vaccine comments on social media. (I know that because I'm related to a guy who has to recruit them)

Of course, it doesn't matter whether we trust that researcher or not as all of the data is freely available, it doesn't take Einstein to see that he's right; compare the number of vaccines in countries schedules against the infant mortality rates, such information is freely available for all. (I know I've checked it all out and written articles using the data)


Keep in mind that Wakefield was only pulled up on ethics, his results still stand. Also now his results have been replicated around the world, the man has been vindicated. He should be Sir Wakefield :2 cents:

Whatever.

You put forward evidence which turns out to be bullshit, but that does not matter because you are right anyway. Then you call me a troll !

Wakefield's results still stand ? Ha. You are a funny guy.

The man and his work has been completely discredited. He was found to have been paid over £400k by lawyers trying to build a case against the MMR manufacturers. He was also found to have patented his own "cure" 6 months before releasing his made up study.

He has been struck off the medical register. I see a glorious future for him. Please show me an INDEPENDENT study that replicates his work and vindicates him.

what education level do you have that tells you he did this for 'kicks'?

you ask for an independent study, while talking about the 'lies' of one scientists, about non conclusive findings, regarding a subject not yet proven

i hope you didn't spend a lot of money

What a strange reply.

Who mentioned kicks ?

Are you talking about Wakefield ? Or are you referring to my previous post where WHP offered up "evidence" from a couple of scientists who failed to disclose who was paying them to re-hash a load of statistics as proof of a link between infant mortality and vaccination.

Or perhaps you are talking about something else. Who can say.

So yes WHP claimed that Wakefield had been vindicated and that his work had been independently repeated around the world. I believe he even suggested a knighthood was in order. Patent nonsense.

Are you going to help WHP out and tell us something of value ? Looks unlikely as your last post made as much sense as the average JohnnyClips rant.

one of the many scientists who suffered hatchet jobs for doing their jobs.

I can only assume you think this scientist did this for 'kicks'. It certainly wasn't money or fame

actually, if you are unable to understand this:

hard to expect you to understand what a 'hatchet job' is

my apologies

Ok so you are agreeing with WHP ?

Or just arguing for the sake of it ?

TrollBots are the ones who argue for the sake of it, I've provided extensive evidence to back up my side, none of the pro-vaccine bunch even know the basics.

I hereby declare victory :pimp

does your world always work in black and white?

Well I thought it was a simple enough question.

Shame your evidence was a fraud, and the purveyors had to apologise for their deception.