Author Topic: Not Vaccinating Your Children is Crazy  (Read 105542 times)

gaja

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1681
Re: Not Vaccinating Your Children is Crazy
« Reply #450 on: April 19, 2015, 01:49:02 AM »
The funny thing is, the anti-vaxers are in a way, helping the vaccine companies. For example if we vaccinated everyone today against polio, it would be eradicated. (Nearly was too). Because of the anti vaccine movement in nigeria (i think it was nigeria) polio was not eradicated meaning we still need to vaccinate for it, therefore continuing to supply customers for the vax companies. We don't vaccinate for smallpox because that vaccination effort worked.
And that way, even if the vaccines did have side effects, it wouldn't matter, because we wouldn't need to use them again.

In addition, big pharma makes substantially more money on treating the diseases than on preventing them. The conclusion must therefore be that big pharma is the force behind the antivax movement.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7335
Re: Not Vaccinating Your Children is Crazy
« Reply #451 on: April 19, 2015, 09:07:02 AM »
The funny thing is, the anti-vaxers are in a way, helping the vaccine companies. For example if we vaccinated everyone today against polio, it would be eradicated. (Nearly was too). Because of the anti vaccine movement in nigeria (i think it was nigeria) polio was not eradicated meaning we still need to vaccinate for it, therefore continuing to supply customers for the vax companies. We don't vaccinate for smallpox because that vaccination effort worked.
And that way, even if the vaccines did have side effects, it wouldn't matter, because we wouldn't need to use them again.

In addition, big pharma makes substantially more money on treating the diseases than on preventing them. The conclusion must therefore be that big pharma is the force behind the antivax movement.

Genius.

gaja

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1681
Re: Not Vaccinating Your Children is Crazy
« Reply #452 on: April 19, 2015, 04:47:05 PM »
The funny thing is, the anti-vaxers are in a way, helping the vaccine companies. For example if we vaccinated everyone today against polio, it would be eradicated. (Nearly was too). Because of the anti vaccine movement in nigeria (i think it was nigeria) polio was not eradicated meaning we still need to vaccinate for it, therefore continuing to supply customers for the vax companies. We don't vaccinate for smallpox because that vaccination effort worked.
And that way, even if the vaccines did have side effects, it wouldn't matter, because we wouldn't need to use them again.

In addition, big pharma makes substantially more money on treating the diseases than on preventing them. The conclusion must therefore be that big pharma is the force behind the antivax movement.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sence. I have always wanted to belong to some conspiracy theory gang, but have never found a theory that makes sense at all. But this one really does! When one measles patient costs $10 000, imagine the loss of revenue if measles get eradicated? We already know that Wakefield recieved bribes from that industry to discredit vaccines, someone must have seen something that might imply that some of the other prominent figurines in the antivax movement also have gotten their purses lined?

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1381
Re: Not Vaccinating Your Children is Crazy
« Reply #453 on: April 20, 2015, 12:56:27 PM »
Presenting both sides of an issue as being reasonable isn't an example of critical thinking

Agreed.

I was trying to say that the post reflected -or was a good example of- the results of one person's critical thinking. Why? Because to me critical thinking is not "read statistics, apply the numbers" (e.g., "If a vaccine kills only 1/1000 people, and some people said it's best, then do it.") To me, critical thinking would be the process of honestly, objectively, and openly exploring as many factors as possible. In this thread's example, perhaps questions like:
  • What is the range of numbers presented by all parties presenting numbers?
  • How accurate and reliable has each party been in other presentations?
  • What interests does each party have?
  • What testing was involved? How rigorous was it? What parties was it substantiated by?
  • Is there common ground between parties? Is that common ground being honoured or circumvented? If the latter, why?
  • Over what duration have records been kept, and what records?
  • What is the effect of that 1/1000 death?
  • What injuries, to the vaccinated person and to those around him, are possible?
  • What injuries, to the unvaccinated person and to those around him, are possible?
  • What injuries in either are the norm?
  • What are the personal, community, and financial costs of injuries?
  • Are vaccines more relevant in some environments than others?
  • Are there factors even more useful and safe than vaccines?
  • Does the use of vaccines interfere with other approaches?
  • What factors impact the safety of vaccines? Which of these have been implemented? Where? When?
  • What other factors have been studied/dismissed/ignored to date?
  • Where does my belief that the 999 are more important than the one, or that the one is more important than the 999 come from? Is my belief sound?
Where critical thinking is applied, it's very difficult to anticipate what each person's ultimate determination will be. i.e., It's unlikely that all person thinking critically will arrive at the same conclusion.

And oh, man, I know...Good luck to any parent or doctor in such an exploration!! (Which might lead one to a critical thinking process around: Who does one trust? On what basis? And so on.)

Your list is incomplete but illustrates perfectly what is wrong with the anti-vaccers: the diseases the vaccines are supposed to prevent don't really figure much in their deficient thought process.
Your list doesn't include the need for detailed knowledge about the diseases either, and that is typical.

I suggest to start your list with:

What is known about the disease in question, in particular regarding the history of the disease?
Is there evidence that the historical narrative regarding a disease has changed from one of widespread suffering and tragedy to a discussion of vaccines?
If yes, get the shot - it's a winner.
Repeat for every disease for which a vaccine is available.
One does not have to be an expert to do this because it's mainly history of Medicine.


I also got problems with a thread titled "Not Vaccinating Your Children is Crazy" because it's trolling, pure and simple.
But a thread titled "let's reintroduce measles in our community" wouldn't get the anti-vaccers out of the woodwork, would it?

scrubbyfish

  • Guest
Re: Not Vaccinating Your Children is Crazy
« Reply #454 on: April 20, 2015, 06:41:48 PM »
Your list is incomplete...

This is correct. It wasn't intended to be complete, though. These were examples of questions re: a critical thinking process in relation to the topic of vaccines. You added additional ones, which is great. In a true critical thinking process, there are near-endless possibilities.

You shared some valid concerns about the language opening this thread, etc, but then used some equally concerning language ("typical", "deficient", etc). These demonstrate some of the same dismissiveness represented in the thread's title.

My only vote is for actual conversation, and I despair over how little there is of that in conversations about vaccine (as well as religion, and often in politics, etc, too). Too many people assume they know what "all" [anti-vaxxers/selectiver vaxxers/vaccinators/Republicans/Muslims/church-goers/robot-vacuum-users/child-free-people/nanny-employing-people/men/etc] think, and how each arrived at the imagined places. That firm a stance pretty much kills any option for true discourse, with the person next to us in real life or any person on the forum. I think there's a great loss in those cases.

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4929
Re: Not Vaccinating Your Children is Crazy
« Reply #455 on: April 20, 2015, 06:54:48 PM »
Your list is incomplete...

This is correct. It wasn't intended to be complete, though. These were examples of questions re: a critical thinking process in relation to the topic of vaccines. You added additional ones, which is great. In a true critical thinking process, there are near-endless possibilities.

You shared some valid concerns about the language opening this thread, etc, but then used some equally concerning language ("typical", "deficient", etc). These demonstrate some of the same dismissiveness represented in the thread's title.

My only vote is for actual conversation, and I despair over how little there is of that in conversations about vaccine (as well as religion, and often in politics, etc, too). Too many people assume they know what "all" [anti-vaxxers/selectiver vaxxers/vaccinators/Republicans/Muslims/church-goers/robot-vacuum-users/child-free-people/nanny-employing-people/men/etc] think, and how each arrived at the imagined places. That firm a stance pretty much kills any option for true discourse, with the person next to us in real life or any person on the forum. I think there's a great loss in those cases.
But the problem with conversation is that many people are not educated enough to participate in that conversation.  And by pretending that they are, we give credibility to absurd falsehoods in the minds of those who again, are not educated.  This would not be too much of a problem is the result only harmed those making those decision, but it does not.  Those decisions risk children that cannot speak for themselves, which we as a society have a history of saying we are responsible to protect them, even from their parents.  In addition it harms other individuals who are unable to avail themselves to the treatments or for whom the treatments do not work.  Is the right of the ignorant to make a choice higher than the right of another to remain unharmed?  That is the question.  Our society has a historical basis of stating that your rights end when they harm another, why is this any different?

scrubbyfish

  • Guest
Re: Not Vaccinating Your Children is Crazy
« Reply #456 on: April 20, 2015, 07:04:30 PM »
But the problem with conversation is that many people are not educated enough to participate in that conversation.  And by pretending that they are, we give credibility to absurd falsehoods in the minds of those who again, are not educated.  This would not be too much of a problem is the result only harmed those making those decision, but it does not.  Those decisions risk children that cannot speak for themselves, which we as a society have a history of saying we are responsible to protect them, even from their parents.  In addition it harms other individuals who are unable to avail themselves to the treatments or for whom the treatments do not work.  Is the right of the ignorant to make a choice higher than the right of another to remain unharmed?  That is the question.  Our society has a historical basis of stating that your rights end when they harm another, why is this any different?

Now, THAT is a delicious post! :)   Thanks, Gin1984. (And now I get to ponder the questions you intelligently raise.)

Bob W

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2942
  • Age: 65
  • Location: Missouri
  • Live on minimum wage, earn on maximum
Re: Not Vaccinating Your Children is Crazy
« Reply #457 on: April 21, 2015, 08:45:46 AM »



 
“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. These are things we do not know we don’t know."