MMR vaccine keep your kids clear of it
Forums › General Discussion › MMR vaccine keep your kids clear of it-
Here's the results from the above study:
During the decades of the program of vaccination for schoolchildren (broadly, 1970 through 1990), the mortality attributable to pneumonia and influenza decreased by 10,000 to 12,000 deaths per year, and mortality from all causes declined by 37,000 to 49,000 deaths per year.
-
Balmoral wrote:
Before.... After.... Before.... After....Don ♠️ DriZZy wrote: Show me 1 case where someone didn't get the flu because they got the shot.
BACKGROUND
Influenza epidemics lead to increased mortality, principally among elderly persons... When most schoolchildren were vaccinated, it is possible that herd immunity against influenza was achieved in Japan. If this was the case, both the incidence of influenza and mortality attributed to influenza should have been reduced among older persons.http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200103223441204
There ya go!
-
ƈɦɼٱร ɦคกรﻉก wrote:
You can still get the vaccination (single shot) it's the MMR 3 shots in 1 that's dangerous.Globally, 115,000 people die annually of measles. That's a 70% improvement compared to pre-vaccine levels. Of course, if the vaccine was taken by everyone in a timely manner, the virus would be eradicated from the Earth. Is it safe to NOT get the vaccine? Millions of people alive today wouldn't be here without it.
I mean, it's cool if you want to thin the herd and all... Overpopulation is a huge problem. But just come out and say it. Anti-vaxxers want to kill millions of people. That's no exaggeration. You ask why do people get so upset about that? It's obvious to anyone with half a brain cell left.
What part of this are you not getting
-
Mr,Shush wrote: You can still get the vaccination (single shot) it's the MMR 3 shots in 1 that's dangerous.
There's no causal relationship between the MMR vaccine and ASD. Why do you insist there is? Why do you assume "three shots in one" is more dangerous than three shots?What part of this are you not getting
Because you just have to find some fucking dark conspiracy behind everything. You don't really know anything about it, do you? There. I answered it for you.
-
RΛINDᎧG wrote:
Appearantly you haven't read. My children are vaccinatedDon ♠️ DriZZy wrote:
That's what you took away from what I wrote? Ok...won't even try to explain to you the context of my comment. Bottom line- not going to tell anyone how they should take care of their kids, to each their own. Vaccinate or don't, not my responsibility or concern. ✌🏻️Raindog-
you just called my kid "a monkey of a kid?
-
Quoted from a meeting at the CDC about flu vaccines.
“…the number of dose related relationships [between mercury and autism] are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant.” – Dr. William Weil, American Academy of Pediatrics. Simpsonwood, GA, June 7, 2000
-
ƈɦɼٱร ɦคกรﻉก wrote:
There's no causal relationship between the MMR vaccine and ASD. Why do you insist there is? Why do you assume "three shots in one" is more dangerous than three shots?What part of this are you not getting
Because you just have to find some fucking dark conspiracy behind everything. You don't really know anything about it, do you? There. I answered it for you.
That's the whole point of the thread you absolute whopper.
The Wakefield report a guy and others who have nothing to gain what so ever are saying it should be banned. Your right I'm no expert but this guy is.If people in that field of work are saying MMR is not safe. Why would anyone with half of brain give it there children. I understand if they haven't heard of the risks but if they have its crazy.
The thread was put up for those parents with young children go private 1 shot vaccinations
-
Couple things.
1) the place where you got the 1 in 68 stat is the same place that says prevalence hasn't changed in 20 years.
2) you cite Andrew Wakefield and his mmr study. Yet you also posit that the cdc et al are compromised by monetary influences. Wakefield was uncovered as a fraud who did no study and was paid handsomely to write his "research". His fake study only had 12 subjects anyways.
3) you will continue to argue your point in the face of irrefutable evidence, so there is no point in anyone else continuing to argue with you (hint: brown)
-
In case anyone else is interested,
http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-summary.htm
Here's the investigation. He was paid to write a study so they could then use it as a basis for litigation.
-
λΙΙuviøη wrote:
So what you are saying is that Wakefield is a shyster. Huh. Wow. Who knew? Someone ought to sue him for killing babies. Might be worth something, yeah?In case anyone else is interested,
http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-summary.htm
Here's the investigation. He was paid to write a study so they could then use it as a basis for litigation.
-
λΙΙuviøη wrote:
I believe we are making progress with Shush. Slow, painful progress. We are also giving those vulnerable to this contagious disease a fighting chance to live a normal life.3) you will continue to argue your point in the face of irrefutable evidence, so there is no point in anyone else continuing to argue with you (hint: brown)
Truth be told, I've dabbled in several conspiracy theories in my youth. It's not that they aren't intelligent. They are just prone to fear and doubt. I know these people CAN be helped, and that's why I bother so much. Even if Shush is too far gone... Think of the children!
-
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/24/new-evidence-refutes-fraud-findings-in-dr-wakefield-case.aspx
-
λΙΙuviøη wrote:
This is old news when they tried discrediting him.In case anyone else is interested,
http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-summary.htm
Here's the investigation. He was paid to write a study so they could then use it as a basis for litigation.
Lost his job got struck off the health care.
Try watching the first link -
Dr Thompson he's making it up as well then hey ???????? Lunatics
-
ƈɦɼٱร ɦคกรﻉก wrote:
Anti-vaxxers aren't politically affiliated. I have a bachelors in fine arts degree, am a raging liberal and am super pro-vax. In fact, most liberals are pro fact/pro science. Statistically people with post graduate degrees are liberal - those most educated. So, I'm not sure what you're trying to say here but it seems biased and wrong. ;)This is fascinating:
"14% of those with a high school diploma or less believe that vaccines are unsafe, compared with just 6% of those with some college experience or more."
Why is it that a higher education level makes you less likely to believe vaccines are unsafe?
The 6% must be liberal arts majors. (to be fair, maybe the 6% are mostly people that took two classes at a community college and then stopped going.)
-
On September 27, 2012, the Human and Environmental Toxicology Journal (HET) published a study by Dr. Gary Goldman reporting a 4,250 percent increase in the number of miscarriages and stillbirths reported to VAERS in the 2009/2010 flu season. [4]
-
https://vactruth.com/2013/02/01/8-damn-good-reasons/
-
YOU wrote:
I knew there were a lot of morons on turf wars, but holy shit.
-
Mr,Shush wrote:
No, don't give us mercola. Give us science. There's a difference.http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/24/new-evidence-refutes-fraud-findings-in-dr-wakefield-case.aspx
-
★Λddi★ wrote: Anti-vaxxers aren't politically affiliated. I have a bachelors in fine arts degree, am a raging liberal and am super pro-vax. In fact, most liberals are pro fact/pro science. Statistically people with post graduate degrees are liberal - those most educated. So, I'm not sure what you're trying to say here but it seems biased and wrong. ;)
I would say the typical establishment liberal is very pro-vax. They demand mandatory vaccination for the greater good at the expense of personal liberty, (as per usual), and you know what? I'm 100% behind them in this case.What I'm saying here with the college thing is the less exposure to critical thinking a person has, the more likely they are to fall for bullshit like anti-vax. (And at the same time I'm taking a jab in good fun at the touchy-feely side of university education, LIBERAL ARTS, which is decidedly less science oriented.)
-
If you people would just shut up about MMR vaccines, and help get the rest of the world on it, the Earth would be completely MMR free, and nobody would have to worry about any of this. BUT NO! "It's not safe, wah,wah,wah! 🚑🚑🚑💨"
You'd rather kill a million people than have your first world kid have a tummy ache. It's sickening. Even if it did contribute to autism, which there is ZERO evidence it does, MMR is worse.
Nobody likes to play the numbers game with mortality. Kill a thousand or kill two thousand? Make your choice a-hole. It IS your choice. Don't puss-out on us.
"But is it SAFE?"
Say that again.
Say that one more god damned time.
I dare you. I double dare you.
😂😂😂
-
Fine don't vaccine your kids. Then they can catch a disease from the 50s! That'll stick it to big pharma! Power to the people bro!
-
My argument is the flu vaccine. I know enough tonot get it. The MMR or others I dont know.
Some of you people are fucked enough to call my littleprincess a monkey child or call me names, but I vaccinate my children, and when they are older I wll let them decide for themselves.
Fact is though, NOT getting the flu shot does NOT mean you automatically get the flu and spread it everywhere. My immune system sucks an I have not gotten the flu in a decade probably, nor have I had the shot in as long.
-
Don ♠️ DriZZy wrote:
I'd just like you to consider that the flu shot is a herd immunity thing. It's not about protecting you individually from the flu. There is solid evidence that mortality declines sharply when a population makes flu vaccination universally mandatory. That's really it. End of story. Your fears aside, the population has a net benefit when everyone who is able gets their vaccine. You are harming the herd. Of course they will call you names....
Some of you people are fucked enough to call my littleprincess a monkey child or call me names, but I vaccinate my children, and when they are older I wll let them decide for themselves.
Fact is though, NOT getting the flu shot does NOT mean you automatically get the flu and spread it everywhere. My immune system sucks an I have not gotten the flu in a decade probably, nor have I had the shot in as long.
-
I havent gotten the flu ever since I stopped taking it a decade ago. How exactly am I harming anyone? I would have to have the flu to spread it. I havent had the flu. Explain this sorcery to me pls.....?
-
Don ♠️ DriZZy wrote:
I am trying to get you to think statistically instead of selfishly. It has nothing to do with your sample size of 1. If you get your vaccine every year, and it stops or reduces your infection even once in your life, you are doing your tiny bit to stop the spread of the disease. If everyone did what you do, we'd be back to 1918 and 21 million people dead over a flu virus.I havent gotten the flu ever since I stopped taking it a decade ago. How exactly am I harming anyone? I would have to have the flu to spread it. I havent had the flu. Explain this sorcery to me pls.....?
Even if it never helps you prevent the flu, there's a 6 in 10 chance it will help the guy next to you, which will stop the spread from him to you and yours, and statistically saves lives.
Why this perfectly plausible and scientifically backed fact isn't getting through to you by now, I'm not sure. But hopefully it will help the people around you.
-
Ok, here's a question. Do you know how they decide which vaccines to push each year?
They guess. They make an educated guess as to which strains will be prevalent that year.
Have you looked at the ingredients? Mercury, formeldehyde, etc.... It MIGHT help those who have an semi ok immune system, but not those who have a good or bad immune system for the reasons I listed long ago.
-
Don ♠️ DriZZy wrote:
Explain how 8 years turned into a decade in the course of 1 thread? Get vaccinatedI havent gotten the flu ever since I stopped taking it a decade ago. How exactly am I harming anyone? I would have to have the flu to spread it. I havent had the flu. Explain this sorcery to me pls.....?
-
Don ♠️ DriZZy wrote:
It's an educated guess that gets very close most years. If the data supports the success of the vaccine in general, what does it matter that they can't magically predict the exact strain 100% of the time?...
They guess. They make an educated guess as to which strains will be prevalent that year.
Have you looked at the ingredients? Mercury, formeldehyde, etc.... It MIGHT help those who have an semi ok immune system, but not those who have a good or bad immune system for the reasons I listed long ago.
The "scary" ingredients are there to preserve the vaccine so that it can be globally distributed. More people would die from not getting it than would from reactions to these trace elements, of which you get more in a tuna sandwich anyway.
Your "good and bad" immune system theory is also flawed. The science says the effectiveness is reduced; not eliminated.
These sound like excuses to me.
-
(Me personally, I haven't had a flu shot in 6 years. But that's just because I'm a firm believer in thinning the herd by eliminating the weak. 🖕🏻)
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC