Anti-vaxxers

skepticalme

That doesn't answer the question? Did you read up on each vaccine?

ohnonotgmail

skepticalme wrote: »

That doesn't answer the question? Did you read up on each vaccine?

Why does a lay person have to read scientific articles? There are hundreds and hundreds of peer reviewed articles on vaccines. If there was an issue with them the public would know. The only evidence that the anti-vaxxers have is an article by a doctor that was subsequently struck off for fabricating his data.

Guy:Incognito

skepticalme wrote: »

That doesn't answer the question? Did you read up on each vaccine?

Do you read scientific documents on everything you eat? On sun cream? Hair products/make up etc?

ancapailldorcha

skepticalme wrote: »

Read the first few pages and see that most people think anti vaxers are wrong.
Just wondering when you say anti vaxers did research and decided against vaccinating, have most of you pro vaxers done research also, as in read studies about various vaccinations before vaccination or have you just gone along with your doctors plan?

Why are the anti-vaxxers exempt from doing research?

GreeBo

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Some years the vaccine isn't very effective at all, plus the chances of you actually catching it are slim. I don't see the point. I had the vaccine once when I was pregnant, that's it and I've never had the flu. Besides, it's a virus, why would you need antibiotics for it? They aren't going to do anything

Do you think the chances might be slim because prime are taking the shot perhaps?
If no-one takes it and we get an outbreak then your chances won't be slim and is too late to do anything about it.

Pedro K

skepticalme wrote: »

Read the first few pages and see that most people think anti vaxers are wrong.
Just wondering when you say anti vaxers did research and decided against vaccinating, have most of you pro vaxers done research also, as in read studies about various vaccinations before vaccination or have you just gone along with your doctors plan?

Actual proper scientific or clinical studies, or articles by HIV denier doctors, and YouTube videos on regret's website?

skepticalme

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Why does a lay person have to read scientific articles? There are hundreds and hundreds of peer reviewed articles on vaccines. If there was an issue with them the public would know. The only evidence that the anti-vaxxers have is an article by a doctor that was subsequently struck off for fabricating his data.

A lay person doesn't have to read them. I was just wondering if you did.
One small issue. I presume you're talking about the infamous Lancet paper. The Drs weren't struck off for fabricating data and subsequently Professor John Walker Smith won his appeal. It appears that Andrew Wakefield questioning the MMR in his interview was the issue even though in the paper they stated more research was needed.
The UK government at the time had both the single vaccines and the MMR available. Shortly after they discontinued the single vaccines giving people the choice of having MMR or none.
Now they have discovered that children with autism do have more bowel issues which is quite sad that those children were not helped for the last 20 years.

skepticalme

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Do you read scientific documents on everything you eat? On sun cream? Hair products/make up etc?

I don't inject any of those but I do read alot.

skepticalme

Pedro K wrote: »

Actual proper scientific or clinical studies, or articles by HIV denier doctors, and YouTube videos on regret's website?

I was wondering do people read up anything at all or go as far as the scientific studies. Regarding regret, there was a time when doctors listened to their patients.

jh79

skepticalme wrote: »

I was wondering do people read up anything at all or go as far as the scientific studies. Regarding regret, there was a time when doctors listened to their patients.

They have been listened to they just refuse to accept that they are wrong.

The illnesses their kids have has nothing to do with the vaccine.

ancapailldorcha

skepticalme wrote: »

A lay person doesn't have to read them. I was just wondering if you did.
One small issue. I presume you're talking about the infamous Lancet paper. The Drs weren't struck off for fabricating data and subsequently Professor John Walker Smith won his appeal. It appears that Andrew Wakefield questioning the MMR in his interview was the issue even though in the paper they stated more research was needed.
The UK government at the time had both the single vaccines and the MMR available. Shortly after they discontinued the single vaccines giving people the choice of having MMR or none.
Now they have discovered that children with autism do have more bowel issues which is quite sad that those children were not helped for the last 20 years.

Wakefield was struck off and the Lancet has retracted his paper. He had also applied for a patent on a single jab measles vaccine so we have motive.

The issue is that he abused children with horrid and unnecessary medical tests like lumbar punctures and is now making a living spreading ignorance.

Here's a meta analysis you won't read because it's only the pro-vaxxers (sigh) who have to read evidence for some reason:

https://www.cochrane.org/CD004407/ARI_using-combined-vaccine-protection-children-against-measles-mumps-and-rubella

knipex

skepticalme wrote: »

A lay person doesn't have to read them. I was just wondering if you did.
One small issue. I presume you're talking about the infamous Lancet paper. The Drs weren't struck off for fabricating data and subsequently Professor John Walker Smith won his appeal. It appears that Andrew Wakefield questioning the MMR in his interview was the issue even though in the paper they stated more research was needed.
The UK government at the time had both the single vaccines and the MMR available. Shortly after they discontinued the single vaccines giving people the choice of having MMR or none.
Now they have discovered that children with autism do have more bowel issues which is quite sad that those children were not helped for the last 20 years.

You have a very very narrow interpretation of what actually happened.

Access to alot of the journals is either behind a paywall or limited. For the non medical person (and even to the average medical person) the papers are very very difficult to understand. You woudl need a decent knowledge and understanding of statistics, virology, immunology and laboratory analysis techniques

I saying that I have actually read a number of the vaccine research papers, (I would not claim for a second that I actually understood every lien of them) papers that were published in international, credible, peer reviewed journals.

I have also spoken to (as in a face to face conversation) a number of Microbiologists, virologists, endocrinologists and infectious disease consultants
and GP's regarding vaccines and their usage.

Not one of them would claim that vaccines are 100% side effect free.. All of them, every single one was adamant that the benefits far far far outweigh the risks. All of them vaccinated their children..

But then not everyone is in the fortunate position i was in, where it was possible to meet these people or access these journals. But 99% of people have access to a GP, can see and read the opinion of the vast majority of medical personnel and should have enough cop on to tell the difference between genuine, credible research and quackery on a Facebook page.

Igotadose

Breadsons wrote: »

My niece was born home birth, her mother never allowed her to have vaccinations to this day, she had an impeccable school attendance and now is in collage and still never got vaccinated. I got the flu jab three years ago and was crook the whole winter with colds. Vaccination is a big pharma scam.

So, your niece's parents made her suffer through measles, mumps, rubella... Nice parents, the pain must've been good for her. Scars potentially, too.

Ever have the measles? I did (old enough to predate the vaccine.) Misery for the child, but that's o.k. it's all good. For the parents sense of righteousness, can't compromise on that!

sullivlo

skepticalme wrote: »

Read the first few pages and see that most people think anti vaxers are wrong.
Just wondering when you say anti vaxers did research and decided against vaccinating, have most of you pro vaxers done research also, as in read studies about various vaccinations before vaccination or have you just gone along with your doctors plan?

Yeah. I research everything that I take medically, and any vaccines I take. I’m pro-vaccine by the way.

I’m lucky, in a sense, that I am a scientist so I have access to clinical studies on efficacy and safety. I have worked in vaccine development (not “big pharma” funded), and I have also run human research studies (medical, non-invasive). So I know the work that goes into the studies, the amount of studies that don’t work, the amount of drugs that never actually make it to the market...

I will happily answer any rational questions that people have and I will engage in respectful discussion, however as soon as people start quoting big pharma, regret etc, is unfortunately when I check out, as they are not rational.

But show me accurate, peer reviewed, scientific literature and I will engage. The reason I ask for accurate, peer reviewed, scientific literature is because that’s what I can bring to the discussion. Otherwise it turns into a he-said-she-said dealio of anecdotal “evidence”, and I think we can all agree that there are way more people, like statistically not anecdotally, that have no adverse effects from vaccines than there are people who did have a negative reaction.

jooksavage

skepticalme wrote: »

I was wondering do people read up anything at all or go as far as the scientific studies. Regarding regret, there was a time when doctors listened to their patients.

I have actually read up a bit on this. Not due to any skepticism about vaccines or anything like that (although we had little girl last year who got her vaccines), more just to vindictively counter some of the absolute sh*te that occasionally makes its way onto my Facebook timeline. Resources like https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov have more information than a normal human would digest in 2 lifetimes.

TomSweeney

blanch152 wrote: »

Looks like we could be getting one of those anti-vaxxers as our new President:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/sf-mep-in-line-for-run-at-ras-ruled-out-hpv-vaccination-for-her-daughter-37166082.html

Amazing that she was ever elected as an MEP with those views.

Wait a Sinn Feinn member is an anti vaxxer ????



I am just shocked, cos normally they are so open minded and intelligent.

King of Kings

firstly not all vaccines are the same....so to be blanket pro vaxx or anti vaxx is silly.
although I can see where anti vaxx people come from with a general point.

I dont think the HPV one is worth the risk...From my reading I dont know if it's dangerous but I dont see the benefit considering what HPV strains it prevents...and how long the vaccine is active for...
What worries me is the push for this vaccine and the demonisation for anybody who questions it...you should always be suspicious if people biteback when you question something...the proponents can claim its safe but people like the FG Td kate o'connell (to name one) have only read literature and marketing blurb on it...only the actual testers know for sure..you dont get the same level of comfort from a peer review .

tbh and it beggars belief that given what a ****hole the HSE is that people would trust their word.

Not once have I heard a HSE offical outline what research they have conducted on behave of the people of ireland. My belief is they have done nothing...once its approved they believe its good in their eyes.

Its not like big pharma havent been caught out faking results in.the past and pushing drugs on people that were dangerous

Take as an example glaxosmithkline were hammered in court for false results for their anti depressant paxil.

take your medicine if you want...but dont rely on the words of a marketing depart or a civil servant. I wont be betting my kids future on the HPV.

Ashbourne hoop

I had an anti vaxxer in work tell me she didn't get her child vaccinated as "measles is just a childhood illness"....I told her that in 2016 around 90k people died from measles and that's before you even mention all the life changing complications it causes. She then switched the topic to the amount of vaccines kids get, and "its worse in America, they get loads more there". They don't, the get the same plus the chicken pox vaccine. Subject got quickly switched to The Handmaids tale...

whisky_galore

I'd believe the HSE, however bad they are, before I'd believe the postings of Facebook Mummy.

Cabaal

Ashbourne hoop wrote: »

I had an anti vaxxer in work tell me she didn't get her child vaccinated as "measles is just a childhood illness"....I told her that in 2016 around 90k people died from measles and that's before you even mention all the life changing complications it causes. She then switched the topic to the amount of vaccines kids get, and "its worse in America, they get loads more there". They don't, the get the same plus the chicken pox vaccine. Subject got quickly switched to The Handmaids tale...

did the handmaids tale go any better though? or did they wish that Ireland was more like Gilead? :pac:

Ashbourne hoop

Cabaal wrote: »

did the handmaids tale go any better though? or did they wish that Ireland was more like Gilead? :pac:

Not really. She compared Trump's America to Gilead, and as bad as that is I thought more Saudi Arabia....we don't talk that much....

PlaneSpeeking

Ashbourne hoop wrote: »

Not really. She compared Trump's America to Gilead, and as bad as that is I thought more Saudi Arabia....we don't talk that much....

During the 8th campaigning a colleague said "we currently live in Gilead people, let's make a change".

Jesus wept.

Grayson

sullivlo wrote: »

Yeah. I research everything that I take medically, and any vaccines I take. I’m pro-vaccine by the way.

I’m lucky, in a sense, that I am a scientist so I have access to clinical studies on efficacy and safety. I have worked in vaccine development (not “big pharma” funded), and I have also run human research studies (medical, non-invasive). So I know the work that goes into the studies, the amount of studies that don’t work, the amount of drugs that never actually make it to the market...

I will happily answer any rational questions that people have and I will engage in respectful discussion, however as soon as people start quoting big pharma, regret etc, is unfortunately when I check out, as they are not rational.

But show me accurate, peer reviewed, scientific literature and I will engage. The reason I ask for accurate, peer reviewed, scientific literature is because that’s what I can bring to the discussion. Otherwise it turns into a he-said-she-said dealio of anecdotal “evidence”, and I think we can all agree that there are way more people, like statistically not anecdotally, that have no adverse effects from vaccines than there are people who did have a negative reaction.

My brother in law, who's a consultant doctor, put up a snippet of research on his FB page. Cancer patients who use alternative medicines have higher mortality than people who use traditional medical treatments. People who use both have the same mortality rates as people who use the traditional approach (When I say traditional I mean chemo etc).
His friend, a consultant oncologist replied saying people need to educate themselves about alternative medicines.
One of my sisters friends, who believes in aura's etc and is anti vax said that people should treat themselves based on their own experience.
She has access to two extremely smart doctors and she trusts her "feelings" more than their knowledge.

sullivlo

King of Kings wrote: »

firstly not all vaccines are the same....so to be blanket pro vaxx or anti vaxx is silly.
although I can see where anti vaxx people come from with a general point.

I dont think the HPV one is worth the risk...From my reading I dont know if it's dangerous but I dont see the benefit considering what HPV strains it prevents...and how long the vaccine is active for...
What worries me is the push for this vaccine and the demonisation for anybody who questions it...you should always be suspicious if people biteback when you question something...the proponents can claim its safe but people like the FG Td kate o'connell (to name one) have only read literature and marketing blurb on it...only the actual testers know for sure..you dont get the same level of comfort from a peer review .

tbh and it beggars belief that given what a ****hole the HSE is that people would trust their word.

Not once have I heard a HSE offical outline what research they have conducted on behave of the people of ireland. My belief is they have done nothing...once its approved they believe its good in their eyes.

Its not like big pharma havent been caught out faking results in.the past and pushing drugs on people that were dangerous

Take as an example glaxosmithkline were hammered in court for false results for their anti depressant paxil.

take your medicine if you want...but dont rely on the words of a marketing depart or a civil servant. I wont be betting my kids future on the HPV.

You were doing so well, and I was preparing a nice response to match your nice post.

But then big pharma bad so..... nah.

sullivlo

Grayson wrote: »

My brother in law, who's a consultant doctor, put up a snippet of research on his FB page. Cancer patients who use alternative medicines have higher mortality than people who use traditional medical treatments. People who use both have the same mortality rates as people who use the traditional approach (When I say traditional I mean chemo etc).
His friend, a consultant oncologist replied saying people need to educate themselves about alternative medicines.
One of my sisters friends, who believes in aura's etc and is anti vax said that people should treat themselves based on their own experience.
She has access to two extremely smart doctors and she trusts her "feelings" more than their knowledge.

I had a very close friend who stopped her chemo and other cancer therapies on the advice of a cancer nutritionist who advised a very strict diet to stop feeding the cancer cells.

You’ll note the word “had”.

Neyite

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

During the 8th campaigning a colleague said "we currently live in Gilead people, let's make a change".

Jesus wept.

When you've got a government controlling your reproductive organs and the contents with the threat of a prison sentence some may feel it's not a million miles away from a fictional Gilead.

PlaneSpeeking

sullivlo wrote: »

I had a very close friend who stopped her chemo and other cancer therapies on the advice of a cancer nutritionist who advised a very strict diet to stop feeding the cancer cells.

You’ll note the word “had”.

I work in a medical school and had (that word again lol!) a FB friend who wanted me to tell the lecturers about the "secret for cancer big Pharma don't want you to know about".

I think it involved honey and cayenne pepper but tbh I ignored most of it!

I concur with the learned poster and reference Dara O'Briain's excellent line about homeopathy, "they tested everything and what worked they called 'medicine'"!!

PlaneSpeeking

Neyite wrote: »

When you've got a government controlling your reproductive organs and the contents with the threat of a prison sentence some may feel it's not a million miles away from a fictional Gilead.

Not to go back to the 8th debate but having to wait 6 days for an MRI in case I was pregnant is a million miles away from forced rape and the abandonment of free society.

Guy:Incognito

skepticalme wrote: »

I don't inject any of those but I do read alot.

So if they give you oral vaccines you'll take anything you're given?

skepticalme

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Wakefield was struck off and the Lancet has retracted his paper. He had also applied for a patent on a single jab measles vaccine so we have motive.

The issue is that he abused children with horrid and unnecessary medical tests like lumbar punctures and is now making a living spreading ignorance.

Here's a meta analysis you won't read because it's only the pro-vaxxers (sigh) who have to read evidence for some reason:

https://www.cochrane.org/CD004407/ARI_using-combined-vaccine-protection-children-against-measles-mumps-and-rubella

I have to disagree with this. Wakefield simply referred the children. The co author of the paper Professor John Walker Smith one of the worlds leading gastroenterologists did all the clinical tests. All were medically indicated and he's been cleared of any wrongdoing.
And now bowel issues are being discovered in association with autism. Almost 20 years before Drs would go there again which is very sad for affected children, who were being treated for behavioral issues when in fact they were in agony and lashing out because of that.
The motive point, it was the Royal Free hospital that had a patent and it wasn't a vaccine.
I don't expect anyone to read anything, I was just wondering if anyone did.