Meet the Latest Driver of the Anti-Vaccine Clown Car

[cajuncocoa]

I think it would be a bit easier for you since you are really an anti vaxxer. Rand like most people who believe in voluntary vaccinations are pro vaccination. They just don't believe in forcing everyone to vaccinate.

I am not going to wear any anti vaxx badge cos I am not one. I got my hep series not because anyone told me to but because I needed it.

My Dad was a dialysis patient for several years. He got Hep vaccines too, and I wouldn't have tried to talk him out of it.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I don't care if he is pro-vaccine so long as he is not pro-forced vaccine.

That's the ticket.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

145k children in the US? around the world? And how many of those children were going to die anyway from say the common cold? The truth is that the vast vast majority of the people dying from measles are sick and malnourished people in the 3rd world, the 2nd set are probably sick kids going through chemo or taking some immune suppressing drugs.

Not saying every single one of those children shouldn't be given a chance but its a bit disingenuous when you put up the total number of deaths with no context whatsoever to evaluate it. Also, just about everything is made from chemicals, sugar is a chemical compound so is arsenic but not all chemicals have the same interaction with the human body. I will eat sugar before I ever eat arsenic and yet both are chemicals, imagine that.

You can do better than this

The ones who die, die because they have weak immune systems and are just generally not very fit. If not the measles, then something else. We can't prevent people from dying by eradicating disease. We should focus on making people stronger instead of relying on this "herd immunity" concept that subsequently relies on everyone agreeing that it's good and doing it. That is bound to fail and what we lose from it is a few kids who were going to have a hard time surviving anyway just because of the harsh way nature of the world in which we live.

You want me to vaccinate me or my kids? My answer is come make me.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I also vaccinated my kids. I don't care if anyone else does. If you get measles going to Disneyland, well, that's what you get for going to Disneyland.

I will never vaccinate my kids if I can help it. I only hope that more people like you will learn to question the medical establishment. Is it not inherently fishy that the entire medical establishment is run by the government? Is this not a cause for concern to a liberty-minded person here on RPF? It troubles me that so many people readily trust what the medical establishment tells them when we all know the FDA runs everything and all the research is supported with taxpayer dollars. There's no freedom in medicine, so it really should give a person pause to think that the establishment is pushing this so hard. What is their agenda? Why do we distrust government officials when they talk about taxes and foreign policy, but we automatically trust everything they say when they say it in a classroom or a medical journal?

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Me too!

Me three! I stand proud. I stand in defiance of "conventional wisdom."

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I think it would be a bit easier for you since you are really an anti vaxxer. Rand like most people who believe in voluntary vaccinations are pro vaccination. They just don't believe in forcing everyone to vaccinate.

I am not going to wear any anti vaxx badge cos I am not one. I got my hep series not because anyone told me to but because I needed it.

Not because they told you to, but because they told you that you needed it and you believed them without question.

 

[CPUd]

I will never vaccinate my kids if I can help it. I only hope that more people like you will learn to question the medical establishment. Is it not inherently fishy that the entire medical establishment is run by the government? Is this not a cause for concern to a liberty-minded person here on RPF? It troubles me that so many people readily trust what the medical establishment tells them when we all know the FDA runs everything and all the research is supported with taxpayer dollars. There's no freedom in medicine, so it really should give a person pause to think that the establishment is pushing this so hard. What is their agenda? Why do we distrust government officials when they talk about taxes and foreign policy, but we automatically trust everything they say when they say it in a classroom or a medical journal?

It's not a blind trust, more like a willingness to concur. People are smarter than many of you give them credit for. There's a lot of really cool and nasty stuff out there that is really small, you don't have to be part of the government or in the medical field to be able to see it.

 

[Chester Copperpot]

It's kind of funny how when if we're pro-vaccine then we get labeled as such. But if we're not pro-vaccine then we get labeled as anti-vaxxers. Similar to what we saw with regard to the "truther" thing. It just boils down to being afraid of discussing the criticals, I suppose, and so we tend to rely upon political linguistics to bail out..

I still say that traditional vaccination products are becoming obsolete. And that is honestly what we should be debating. That's how we spin "anti-vaxxers" into scientifically literate people who keep updated with regard to developing technologies relative to fighting virus.

Yeah Im not "Anti-vaxxer"..im "pro-health"

 

[Natural Citizen]

Yeah Im not "Anti-vaxxer"..im "pro-health"

There you go. That's the ticket. Don't let 'em pull the old Frank Luntz rope-a-dope on you. Heh. They will if'n you let 'em, you know.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

It's not a blind trust, more like a willingness to concur. People are smarter than many of you give them credit for. There's a lot of really cool and nasty stuff out there that is really small, you don't have to be part of the government or in the medical field to be able to see it.

Willingness to concur? If you are telling me that you have done the research, seen the science and made your own conclusion that matches up perfectly with what the scientists say, well, I don't believe you. So, yes, it is trust you are using to make your conclusion. You did not do the science. I happen to believe that you CAN, but let's be honest, who really does? Who of the people who go around preaching about how the scientific establishment has the right answers have actually researched the topic in any depth? You don't have to be smart to evaluate the claims of scientists. You don't have to have a PhD to examine the science as many people claim. However, we are NOT talking about stuff you can plainly see and if you have to go around telling people to believe the scientists, then you are not having a rational discussion. You are, in fact, employing blind trust.

We think we know how it works because we have been fed a useful soundbite that is supposed to sum up all of the research that has been done, but we don't actually know if that's really how it works because we have not done the science. I think we should take a neutral approach if we don't know and stop saying, "I am an ignoramus so I am not worthy to question the scientists!"

 

[Rothbardian Girl]

I will never vaccinate my kids if I can help it. I only hope that more people like you will learn to question the medical establishment. Is it not inherently fishy that the entire medical establishment is run by the government? Is this not a cause for concern to a liberty-minded person here on RPF? It troubles me that so many people readily trust what the medical establishment tells them when we all know the FDA runs everything and all the research is supported with taxpayer dollars. There's no freedom in medicine, so it really should give a person pause to think that the establishment is pushing this so hard. What is their agenda? Why do we distrust government officials when they talk about taxes and foreign policy, but we automatically trust everything they say when they say it in a classroom or a medical journal?

I think we can both agree that unquestioning acceptance of authority generally has detrimental effects. However, this does not make the converse true; unquestioning defiance is, at its core, no different from unquestioning acceptance. Sometimes the government happens to be correct about a particular set of claims. The "medical establishment" consists of countless immunologists, pediatricians and public health experts (just to name a few) who all know things that the general public does not. Plenty of these experts have given and will give vaccines to their own children, and there does happen to be a broad consensus on the vaccine issue, making the probability of one giant conspiracy that spans several disciplines highly unlikely.

By no means do I intend to suggest that 100% of vaccines are necessary, nor do I think vaccines are safe 100% of the time (some people have them administered in potentially harmful ways, such as getting several of them in one doctor's visit). I just would caution against the attitude that some "anti-vaxxers" seem to have, which is that being contrary is objectively beneficial. For them, it becomes an ego thing rather than a viewpoint based on scientific reasoning. It's the difference between, on the one hand, people simply declining a doctor's advice - and on the other, joining movements literally defined by contrariness, buying products shilled for by the leaders of these movements, and becoming preachy to others from a moral superiority angle. The latter suggests a need for self-justification.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I think we can both agree that unquestioning acceptance of authority generally has detrimental effects. However, this does not make the converse true; unquestioning defiance is, at its core, no different from unquestioning acceptance. Sometimes the government happens to be correct about a particular set of claims. The "medical establishment" consists of countless immunologists, pediatricians and public health experts (just to name a few) who all know things that the general public does not. Plenty of these experts have given and will give vaccines to their own children, and there does happen to be a broad consensus on the vaccine issue, making the probability of one giant conspiracy that spans several disciplines highly unlikely.

I am not advocating unquestioning defiance. I am not telling anyone to disbelieve the scientists no matter what they say. I am simply asking people not to believe unquestioningly. If you don't know, then admit you don't know and stop trying to get people to believe the scientists. I have never said to defy scientists at all costs, so I think you should understand that.

What I am saying is that you should be suspicious of claims made by the government and investigate them. If you do not know, then don't take somebody else's word for it, even if they happen to be a supposed "expert." WRT the "conspiracy" you mentioned, it's not that hard to get a "consensus" when you control all of the funding and law regarding medical research. We have the FDA controlling who gets in and who gets published in the journals. It's not "unlikely" to have a manufactured consensus just like it's not unlikely that the Soviet Union had a manufactured consensus that communism was a great system. If a Soviet professor had publicly denounced communism during communist rule, he would've been shoveling snow in Siberia if he even lived. It's easy to manufacture a consensus when you control who gets in and who gets published and, most importantly, who the people believe by controlling the narrative with the state-run media. There's evidence of government control all over the place, so it's only natural to be skeptical of claims that come from the establishment. That doesn't mean you should automatically disbelieve them. That just means you should question them before accepting what they say.

By no means do I intend to suggest that 100% of vaccines are necessary, nor do I think vaccines are safe 100% of the time (some people have them administered in potentially harmful ways, such as getting several of them in one doctor's visit). I just would caution against the attitude that some "anti-vaxxers" seem to have, which is that being contrary is objectively beneficial. For them, it becomes an ego thing rather than a viewpoint based on scientific reasoning. It's the difference between, on the one hand, people simply declining a doctor's advice - and on the other, joining movements literally defined by contrariness, buying products shilled for by the leaders of these movements, and becoming preachy to others from a moral superiority angle. The latter suggests a need for self-justification.

There was nothing contrarian about what I said. You read that into my statements because you have a sort of programmed reaction to what I'm saying as going against an established opinion, but what I'm really saying is not to be contrary at all costs, but to not take anyone's word for anything if you haven't done your due diligence in finding the truth.

 

[Weston White]

I also vaccinated my kids. I don't care if anyone else does. If you get measles going to Disneyland, well, that's what you get for going to Disneyland.

...Sort of like a sailor complaining about getting the clap after porting for liberty-call in Thailand.

 

[Weston White]

It's not a blind trust, more like a willingness to concur. People are smarter than many of you give them credit for. There's a lot of really cool and nasty stuff out there that is really small, you don't have to be part of the government or in the medical field to be able to see it.

Most people have no clue that air is composed of a dozen different gases, including carbon dioxide and water vapor—and yet you can actually petition the majority of the population to establish a governmental ban on carbon dioxide over carbon monoxide, simply for that the former has the threatening sounding word “die” in it, even though the latter will kill you if enough of it is breathed in within a short period of time.

Heck, you can even persuade people into banning made up gibberish ‘dihydrogen monoxide’ (i.e., oxidane), which is actually harmless water. This was actually accomplished over the years by several students as an experiment on public gullibility and misplaced fears and published in a April Fool’s edition of a newspaper (i.e., “dihydrogen oxide had been found in the city's water pipes, and warned that it was fatal if inhaled, and could produce blistering vapors.”):

Dihydrogen monoxide:

is also known as hydroxyl acid, and is the major component of acid rain.
contributes to the "greenhouse effect".
may cause severe burns.
contributes to the erosion of our natural landscape.
accelerates corrosion and rusting of many metals.
may cause electrical failures and decreased effectiveness of automobile brakes.
has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients.

Despite the danger, dihydrogen monoxide is often used:
as an industrial solvent and coolant.
in nuclear power plants.
in the production of Styrofoam.
as a fire retardant.
in many forms of cruel animal research.
in the distribution of pesticides. Even after washing, produce remains contaminated by this chemical.
as an additive in certain "junk-foods" and other food products.

The average person has no clue what a “vaccine insert” is left alone ever seen a MSDS; neither have they ever been informed about the resulting effects of thimerosal or squalene or made capable of conceptualizing the function of adjuvants.

Americans are as the Chinese emperor Qin Shi Huang, while their own government serves them as did Qin Shi Huang’s own physicians—here just ingest these mercury tablets and you will become immortal.

 

[Acala]

I think we can both agree that unquestioning acceptance of authority generally has detrimental effects. However, this does not make the converse true; unquestioning defiance is, at its core, no different from unquestioning acceptance. Sometimes the government happens to be correct about a particular set of claims. The "medical establishment" consists of countless immunologists, pediatricians and public health experts (just to name a few) who all know things that the general public does not. Plenty of these experts have given and will give vaccines to their own children, and there does happen to be a broad consensus on the vaccine issue, making the probability of one giant conspiracy that spans several disciplines highly unlikely.

By no means do I intend to suggest that 100% of vaccines are necessary, nor do I think vaccines are safe 100% of the time (some people have them administered in potentially harmful ways, such as getting several of them in one doctor's visit). I just would caution against the attitude that some "anti-vaxxers" seem to have, which is that being contrary is objectively beneficial. For them, it becomes an ego thing rather than a viewpoint based on scientific reasoning. It's the difference between, on the one hand, people simply declining a doctor's advice - and on the other, joining movements literally defined by contrariness, buying products shilled for by the leaders of these movements, and becoming preachy to others from a moral superiority angle. The latter suggests a need for self-justification.

An EXCELENT post.

I studied microbiology and immunology at the University. I actually understand the way vaccination works. The general ideas are not that hard to understand. The scientists who discovered it - Jenner, Pasteur and others - were not part of some evil illuminati plot to kill off the human race. They were actually brilliant scientists trying to HELP people. And they did. The fact that government got involved does not destroy the scientific basis for the practice. Nor does it destroy the effectiveness of vaccination when done correctly anymore than the intense regulation of airline travel makes human flight impossible.


I also worked in the health care industry for several years and the people who work in that industry are NOT part of a global conspiracy to kill everyone. They are like most everyone else - trying to make a good job of the work at hand and make a living. The fact that the health care industry is dominated by crony-capitalists does not turn the people who work there into sinister murderers.

I have no problem ignoring what the government proclaims. I do it constantly. But, as Rothbardian Girl says so well, knee-jerk opposition to anything government or industry says is exactly as mindless as knee-jerk acceptance of same. I prefer to evaluate on a case-by-case basis.

 

[Acala]

Most people have no clue that oxygen is composed of a dozen different gases,

I think you mean AIR is composed of several gases. Oxygen, an element, is one of the gases found in the air.

 

[Weston White]

I think you mean AIR is composed of several gases. Oxygen, an element, is one of the gases found in the air.

Oh yes, the air we breathe.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

An EXCELENT post.

I studied microbiology and immunology at the University. I actually understand the way vaccination works. The general ideas are not that hard to understand. The scientists who discovered it - Jenner, Pasteur and others - were not part of some evil illuminati plot to kill off the human race. They were actually brilliant scientists trying to HELP people. And they did. The fact that government got involved does not destroy the scientific basis for the practice. Nor does it destroy the effectiveness of vaccination when done correctly anymore than the intense regulation of airline travel makes human flight impossible.


I also worked in the health care industry for several years and the people who work in that industry are NOT part of a global conspiracy to kill everyone. They are like most everyone else - trying to make a good job of the work at hand and make a living. The fact that the health care industry is dominated by crony-capitalists does not turn the people who work there into sinister murderers.

I have no problem ignoring what the government proclaims. I do it constantly. But, as Rothbardian Girl says so well, knee-jerk opposition to anything government or industry says is exactly as mindless as knee-jerk acceptance of same. I prefer to evaluate on a case-by-case basis.

As I said before, I am not advocating knee-jerk opposition. You MUST understand that. I am advocating that people actually be skeptical and not make up their minds based on what they're told. Wow, radical concept!

Anyone who got the idea that I was advocating that is deliberately misunderstanding me because that is obviously not what I'm doing and yet you and RothbardianGirl are reading that into my posts and assuming it's true. It just isn't.

 

[donnay]

An EXCELENT post.

I studied microbiology and immunology at the University. I actually understand the way vaccination works. The general ideas are not that hard to understand. The scientists who discovered it - Jenner, Pasteur and others - were not part of some evil illuminati plot to kill off the human race. They were actually brilliant scientists trying to HELP people. And they did. The fact that government got involved does not destroy the scientific basis for the practice. Nor does it destroy the effectiveness of vaccination when done correctly anymore than the intense regulation of airline travel makes human flight impossible.


I also worked in the health care industry for several years and the people who work in that industry are NOT part of a global conspiracy to kill everyone. They are like most everyone else - trying to make a good job of the work at hand and make a living. The fact that the health care industry is dominated by crony-capitalists does not turn the people who work there into sinister murderers.

I have no problem ignoring what the government proclaims. I do it constantly. But, as Rothbardian Girl says so well, knee-jerk opposition to anything government or industry says is exactly as mindless as knee-jerk acceptance of same. I prefer to evaluate on a case-by-case basis.

Just like the war stories are written by the victors, so are the medical stories. There is plenty of information out there to make the point that Jenner was wrong about his theories but somehow it became the fact and people have ran with that ever since.

Most diseases were simply going away with good nutrition, good hygiene, clean water and sanitation.

Some good references:

JENNER AND VACCINATION
THE POISONED NEEDLE
“Herd Immunity.” The flawed science and failures of mass vaccination
In the Wake of Vaccines
Calling the FDA, AMA and Big Pharma: What the Term “Medical Mafia” Means

 

[Peace&Freedom]

As I said before, I am not advocating knee-jerk opposition. You MUST understand that. I am advocating that people actually be skeptical and not make up their minds based on what they're told. Wow, radical concept!

Anyone who got the idea that I was advocating that is deliberately misunderstanding me because that is obviously not what I'm doing and yet you and RothbardianGirl are reading that into my posts and assuming it's true. It just isn't.

Yes, the "knee jerk refuser" they posited is a strawman, to keep the supporters of choosing natural immune health on the defensive, while continuing to foster the "we've got to support more vaccines" framework. The cable news networks have been horrible this week, acting as Big Pharma's enforcers of "the science is clear, there is no other side" dogma that any expression of opting out of vaccines should be frowned upon. Ten tons of the 'knee jerk' absolutism is coming from the mainstream direction, but we're supposed to sweat over an ounce from the other direction? Please.

The dogmatism is clear, and that is what is being knee-jerk objected to. The MSM tells us point blank that 'there is no debate,' while anybody who researches the alternative media for ten minutes can find out the opposite is the case. The MSM, particularly the 24/7 news channels, have all the time in the world to present doctors and scientists who are critical of the current vaccine regime, but devote their segments on the issue to pushing only the medical industry narrative. It is this no-choice authoritarian propaganda onslaught that is being knee-jerk rejected, not the individual choices of millions of informed parents.